Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter gambinosyn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Justice2006:
The following Questions and answers are from Catholic Catechism:

Question 1. Is there a Catholic translation of the Bible in English?
**Yes, it is the translation known as the Douay-Rheims Version. It was translated from the Latin Vulgate. **

Question 2. Why is it called “Douay-Rheims”?
Because it was begun at Rheims and finished at Douay in 1582-1609 by a group of English priests exiled in France.

Question 3. What happened in the sixteenth century to cause the publication of a reliable and accurate translation?
During the Protestant “Deformation” in England many false translations had been made, hence there was great necessity of placing in the hands of Catholics a reliable and accurate translation.

Question 4. Is it true that the Bible was never translated into vernacular languages before the Protestant Deformation?
**It is not true; the first translation known in England was the translation into Anglo-Saxon made by Venerable Bede in the eighth century. There is a Gothic translation, made by a certain bishop Ulfilas around 380. The first German translation predates [Martin] Luther by a good fifty years. **

Question 5. Why do Protestants assert that the Bible was never translated before the Deformation?
**Through a mixture of ignorance and bad ** faith.

Question 6. What is the most well known of the false English Protestant translations?
**It is the version called the “King James,” ** named after the King who commissioned it in 1604. It was finished in 1611. It is still the most popular of the Protestant Bibles in the English speaking world.

Question 7. What is wrong with the “King James” version?
**Like all the Protestant Bibles, it is incomplete ** and poorly translated. It is a “Pick and choose” version. Such is the real lack of respect of the “Reformers” for the word of God!

{ drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson11 ]
Click to expand...
why are you digressing again? i know all this…it is about translation bro, just like the quran translation into English…you still have the arabic and we have the Latin and Hebrew…thats why we refer to them…

But to make things easier for you, the translations do not affect the meaning by any way…these are found is whatever Bible you read:
The Deity of Jesus Christ.

The Incarnation.

The Triunity of God.

The Divine Personality of the Holy Spirit.

The Virgin Birth.

Christ’s Vicarious Atonement.

Christ’s Physical, Bodily Resurrection.

Christ’s Ascension to Heaven.

Christ’s Visible Return to Judge the Living and the Dead.

Please go back to our previous discussion.
 
40.png
inJESUS:
why are you digressing again? i know all this…it is about translation bro, …
the translations do not affect the meaning by any way…
Click to expand...
Mr. inJesus,
You are wrong, there are two types of problems you have with your Bible:
  • Problem with the so-called “Originals” manuscripts of your Bible. Because actual true original message of Jesus Christ does not exist in his native/mother tongue.
  • Problem with the translations of the so-called "originals of your Bible
Now, please read the following:

Lesson 16: From Catholic Catechism
Differences Between Catholic And Protestant Versions
  1. Does the Catholic version of the Bible differ from Protestant versions?
    **Yes, in many ways. **
  2. What is the most noticeable difference?
    The most noticeable difference is the absence of seven whole books and parts of two others from the Protestant versions.
  3. What books are not contained in the Protestant version?
    The Deutero-Canonical Books (See lesson 6).
  4. Why are the Deutero-Canonical Books Omitted by Protestants?
    **Because the Protestant versions of the Bible follow the late Palestinian version of the Bible, which also omits these books ** (See lesson 8).
  5. Name another difference between the Catholic and Protestant versions.
    **Many important arbitrary changes are found in the texts of the Protestant Bible. According to some scholars, the most popular Protestant Bibles have literally hundreds of mistranslations, additions and omissions. **
  6. To what do such changes of text lead?
    **They lead to an entirely different interpretation from the one intended by the Sacred Writer. **
  7. Give an example of this change of text.
    **St Paul says, “… Being therefore justified by Faith …” (Rom. V, 1), and Luther inserted the word “alone” so that the text reads, “Being therefore justified by faith alone.” **
  8. Why were the Reformers so anxious to change texts?
    **They were anxious to change texts to give force to the particular doctrine of their choice. **
  9. Should that behavior of the Reformers raise some questions in our mind?
    **Yes, what did they believe exactly concerning the Bible? Either they did not believe it was the Word of God, and therefore felt free to change it any which way; or if they did believe it was the Word of God, it took a lot of pride and presumption to correct God’s word. In either case, they should be called “Deformers” rather than Reformers. **
  10. Name other differences between the King James version and the Douay version.
    **The King James version has a preference for words of Anglo-Saxon origin whereas the Douay version freely uses words of Latin origin. The Douay version latinizes the name of some books while the King James gives what they thought at the time to be the Hebrew name. Many Protestant versions other than King James omit the Epistle of St. James. **
drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson16 ]
 
Bro, the Protestants have the same NT with the same things i posted earlier…do you think your digression is meaningful? i told you i know all this…but by your logic, i must believe the Ahmadiyya more that 1400 years of sunni islam? ahmadiyya have another prophet just like the nation of islam have one…the Protestants at least believe in the divinity, crucifixion and resurrecton of Lord Jesus so you are proving nothing here am afraid…stick to our topic please.
 
Cyber Knight:
I enjoy myself among the muslims right at moment.Waiting in my lifetime, to see these people, little by little try to eradicate other faiths fm their land. :). Easy for you to speak about peace which you live in a secular country at the end and pretend you also know what we feel to live as dhimis. Just talking about peace is cheap afterall… 🙂
Click to expand...

Talking of dhimmis - here’s a dimmy in the UK, the Mayor of London, no less, who is on good terms with folk in the Muslim Brotherhood:​

Ken Livingstone Hosts Muslim Brotherhood Propaganda Exercise

"Ken Livingstone is hosting, and speaking at a press conference tomorrow, ahead of a grand “Rally against Islamophobia” to be held in Trafalgar Square on Saturday:

The aim of the press conference and rally is to explain the views of the mainstream Muslim community in condemning the publication of the Islamophobic cartoons, and dissociating the mainstream Muslim community from the tiny minority of extremists who have been given media coverage out of all proportion to their numbers.

The speakers are:
  • Anas Altikriti, a RESPECT candidate and the former Pressident of the Muslim Association of Britain: which is the alias of the falangist and theocratic Muslim Brotherhood.
  • Intissar Khreeji, Federation of Societies of Islamic Students: another Muslim Brotherhood front organisation;
  • Habibur Rahman, Islamic Forum Europe: the hosts of the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, Ken’s pal Qaradawi
I don’t know that much about Dr Daud Abdullah; although he did give a “tribute lecture for Hamas’s guru, Shaykh Ahmad Yassin”, entitled “Not in vain, o Shaykh Yassin”. Still that’s a pretty impressive Muslim Brotherhood lineup!

The Muslim Brotherhood are a gradualist Islamist organisation which seeks to ‘islamise’ south asian and arab society in Europe as well as in the Middle East. Islamisation is see as a necessary precondition to the development of political Islam into an effective political force.

…In particular, Al Muhajiroun loathes the Muslim Brotherhood’s willingness to play political footsie with politicians in liberal and secular societies. “Vote today, hellfire tomorrow” was their slogan against the Muslim Brotherhood when it joined with the Socialist Workers’ Party to create RESPECT…"

hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/2006/02/08/ken_livingstone_hosts_muslim_brotherhood_propaganda_exercise.php

That was posted on the 8th - just ten days ago. And on the 9th, there was this:

"Press conference to support rally against Islamophobia

Event: Press conference

Date: Thursday 9 February 2006
Time: 3:30pm – 4pm
Venue: London’s Living Room, City Hall, The Queen’s Walk More London, SE1 2AA

A press conference will be held tomorrow (Thursday 9 February), ahead of Saturday’s rally in Trafalgar Square against incitement and Islamophobia. The aim of the press conference and rally is to explain the views of the mainstream Muslim community in condemning the
publication of the Islamophobic cartoons, and dissociating the mainstream Muslim community from the tiny minority of extremists who have been given media coverage out of all proportion to their numbers…"

A phobia is an unreasonable fear of a thing. Fearing something which threatens and carries out all manner of violence in many countries, often, is not unreasonable.

Will there be Muslim rallies in Saudi Arabia (say) against Israeliphobia such as ? ##
 
Mr. inJesus,
Read very carefully what I posted from your Catechism. This is all to show that Books of the Bible are corrupted/doubtful to the extent that they are not acceptable to your Church any version of the Protestants Bibles, not even their logic and reasoning or Bibles which have less books than yours. And you too have no reliable message.

As far, The Koran, it is the Original Arabic Text which called The Koran and not the translations. Translations are words of translators and not the words of Allah. And Arabic is same throught 14 hundred centuries.

Your don’t have any Message of Jesus (obuh) in his original language.
 
40.png
Justice2006:
Mr. inJesus,
Read very carefully what I posted from your Catechism. This is all to show that Books of the Bible are corrupted/doubtful to the extent that they are not acceptable to your Church any version of the Protestants Bibles not their logic and reasoning or Bibles which have less books.

As far, The Koran, it is the Original Arabic Text which called The Koran and not the translations. Translations are words of translators and not the words of Allah. And Arabic is same throught 14 hundred centuries.

Your don’t have any Message of Jesus (obuh) in his original language.
Click to expand...
Bro it is a matter of translation…the quran is translated in all the languages…translations differ a bit, but they give the same meaning…furthermore i told you what protestants believe in…as for arabic, it is absolutly not the same 14 hundred centuries ago…do you even know arabic? the Greek and Hebrew texts are there for any reference so dont worry about translation stuff…translation has absolutely nothing to do with corruption.

Stick to our points coz i know all this and its boring to me…
 
Bro, i can give you translations of the quran where translators added words that do not exixt in arabic just to hide some absurdity…does it mean the quran is corrupt? likewise, the protestants added some words to suit their doctrine, like adding the word"alone" next to faith to suit their doctrines…this does not mean that the Greek or Hebrew Bible is corrupt.
 
40.png
inJESUS:
Bro it is a matter of translation…the quran is translated in all the languages…translations differ a bit, but they give the same meaning…furthermore i told you what protestants believe in…as for arabic, it is absolutly not the same 14 hundred centuries ago…do you even know arabic? the Greek and Hebrew texts are there for any reference so dont worry about translation stuff…translation has absolutely nothing to do with corruption.
.
Click to expand...
Mr. inJesus,
You are wrong again.

You cannot deceive sincere truth-seekers with your sheer-misunderstanding or deliberate misleading statements about the real problem with your various VERSIONS of the Bibles.

I am talking about VERSIONS and not translations.

Versions and translations are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

There are two types of major problems you have with your Bibles:
  • Problem with the so-called “Originals” manuscripts of your Bible. Because actual true original message of Jesus Christ does not exist in his native/mother tongue.
  • Problem with the translations of the so-called "originals of your Bible
Now, please read the following:

Lesson 16: From Catholic Catechism
Differences Between Catholic And Protestant Versions
  1. Does the Catholic version of the Bible differ from Protestant versions?
    **Yes, in many ways. **
  2. What is the most noticeable difference?
    The most noticeable difference is the absence of seven whole books and parts of two others from the Protestant versions.
  3. What books are not contained in the Protestant version?
    The Deutero-Canonical Books (See lesson 6).
  4. Why are the Deutero-Canonical Books Omitted by Protestants?
    **Because the Protestant versions of the Bible follow the late Palestinian version of the Bible, which also omits these books ** (See lesson 8).
  5. Name another difference between the Catholic and Protestant versions.
    **Many important arbitrary changes are found in the texts of the Protestant Bible. According to some scholars, the most popular Protestant Bibles have literally hundreds of mistranslations, additions and omissions. **
  6. To what do such changes of text lead?
    **They lead to an entirely different interpretation from the one intended by the Sacred Writer. **
  7. Give an example of this change of text.
    **St Paul says, “… Being therefore justified by Faith …” (Rom. V, 1), and Luther inserted the word “alone” so that the text reads, “Being therefore justified by faith alone.” **
  8. Why were the Reformers so anxious to change texts?
    **They were anxious to change texts to give force to the particular doctrine of their choice. **
  9. Should that behavior of the Reformers raise some questions in our mind?
    **Yes, what did they believe exactly concerning the Bible? Either they did not believe it was the Word of God, and therefore felt free to change it any which way; or if they did believe it was the Word of God, it took a lot of pride and presumption to correct God’s word. In either case, they should be called “Deformers” rather than Reformers. **
  10. Name other differences between the King James version and the Douay version.
    **The King James version has a preference for words of Anglo-Saxon origin whereas the Douay version freely uses words of Latin origin. The Douay version latinizes the name of some books while the King James gives what they thought at the time to be the Hebrew name. Many Protestant versions other than King James omit the Epistle of St. James. **
drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson16 ]
 
40.png
Justice2006:
Mr. inJesus,
Read very carefully what I posted from your Catechism. This is all to show that Books of the Bible are corrupted/doubtful to the extent that they are not acceptable to your Church any version of the Protestants Bibles not their logic and reasoning or Bibles which have less books.

As far, The Koran, it is the Original Arabic Text which called The Koran and not the translations. Translations are words of translators and not the words of Allah. And Arabic is same throught 14 hundred centuries.

Your don’t have any Message of Jesus (obuh) in his original language.
Click to expand...

Then you lot shouldn’t try quoting the New Testament (or the OT) at us to show that:​

  • Jesus was not God
  • or that Moe is promised by Jesus as the periclytos(so-called: instead of paracletos)
  • or that Mo is mentioned in the Song of Songs
  • or that the "valley of Baka - that is, “weeping”, is really Makka.
If the text is so corrupt - you can’t use it against us.

So much for the nice words in the Koran about the “Peoples of the Book”. ##
 
oh i see…so you are arguing the fact that protestants eliminated stuff? first, what they eliminated is in the OT…second, protestants are the fruit of the century 16, unlike the Catholic church…so what protestants do is irrelevant to me…yet they still believe the divinity of Jesus ecc…can you please stick to our discussion?
 
Justice, so far , my questions are unanswered…please answer them to be able to continue our discussion…go thru theposts again to see the many points you did not answer…

Others who are reading my posts to which Justice did not reply can quote them if they feel like it 🙂 (just to help him out)
 
40.png
inJESUS:
oh i see…so you are arguing the fact that protestants eliminated stuff? first, what they eliminated is in the OT…second, protestants are the fruit of the century 16, unlike the Catholic church…so what protestants do is irrelevant to me…yet they still believe the divinity of Jesus ecc…can you please stick to our discussion?
Click to expand...
Even the TWO BIBLES of Catholics, Douay Rheims Latin Vulgate and New American Bible are not alike, let alone Orthodox or Protestants Bibles.

You all have different VERSIONS of BIBLES which lead you all to GO IN DIFFERENT directions, by blaspheming eachother and excommunicating eachother through your “Holy Spirit” from your Chuches. All this is done with the aid of same “Holy Spirit/Ghost” which you all claim to have got.

Catholic’s view is the most illogical because they believe that Holy Papacy/Magisterium is the only one who is under the direct guidance of Holy Spirit and infallible.

And this “infalliblity” has mass massacred so many God’s choosen people (Children of God-Jews) in the past when this Sacred infallible Papacy has political power in her land of “civilised” Christiandom.
 
40.png
Justice2006:
Even the TWO BIBLES of Catholics, Douay Rheims Latin Vulgate and New American Bible are not alike, let alone Orthodox or Protestants Bibles.

You all have different VERSIONS of BIBLES which lead you all to GO IN DIFFERENT directions, by blaspheme eachother and excommunicate eachother through your “Holy Spirit” from your Chuches. All this is done with the aid of same “Holy Spirit/Ghost” which you all claim to have got.

Catholic’s view is the most illogical because they believe that Holy Papacy/Magisterium is the only one who is under the direct guidance of Holy Spirit and infallible.

And this “infalliblity” has mass massacred so many God’s choosen people (Children of God-Jews) in the past when this Sacred infallible Papacy has political power in her land of “civilised” Christiandom.
Click to expand...
i see that our muslim brother has run out of answers so he starts attacking something of which he has absolutely no clues. I’ll leave our bro to refresh his mind in order to answer again all the questions that he did not answer…and it seems i have to remind our friend a thousand that this thread is about Islam and that digression doesnt work here and that he should open a different thread if he needs answers. Waiting for your answers bro.
 
It is the devil who devides, do not blasphem the holy spirit, God will forgive thoughs who speak wrong of jesus, but holy spirit is a different matter all together. you Are walking on dangerous ground my freind, Be carefull. Peace be with you.
 
Lesson 17: From Catholic Catechism:

Materials Used In Composing The Bible
  1. What has become of the original copies of the Bible?
    **They have been either destroyed or lost. **
  2. What were the causes of destruction or loss?
    **Many, particularly persecution and the fragility of the materials used, which did not withstand the ravages of time. **
  3. How was persecution a cause for the loss or destruction of the originals?
    **Sometimes the Christians themselves destroyed the original to prevent profanation at the hands of the pagan persecutors; some other times they were found and destroyed by the pagans. The persecution of Decius (Roman Emperor from 249 to 251) was particularly vicious in this regard. **
drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson17 ]
 
40.png
freesoulhope:
It is the devil who devides, do not blasphem the holy spirit, God will forgive thoughs who speak wrong of jesus, but holy spirit is a different matter all together. you Are walking on dangerous ground my freind, Be carefull. Peace be with you.
Click to expand...
correct bro…i was about to warn him so thank you…
Satan will do his best to attack the church, but as our beloved Lord Jesus said : nothing can stand agaisnt his Church 👍
 
40.png
Justice2006:
Lesson 17: From Catholic Catechism:

Materials Used In Composing The Bible
  1. What has become of the original copies of the Bible?
    They have been either destroyed or lost.
  2. What were the causes of destruction or loss?
    Many, particularly persecution and the fragility of the materials used, which did not withstand the ravages of time.
  3. How was persecution a cause for the loss or destruction of the originals?
    **Sometimes the Christians themselves destroyed the original ** to prevent profanation at the hands of the pagan persecutors; some other times they were found and destroyed by the pagans. The persecution of Decius (Roman Emperor from 249 to 251) was particularly vicious in this regard.
drbo.org/catechism.htm#lesson17 ]
Click to expand...
bro yes, we are nuts, we do not have any evidence about the Bible…the thousands of manuscripts are not very important. Now can you stick to the discussion? 🙂
 
By the way, Uthman burnt the original quran 😉 after we settle our discussion, we will start the compilation of quran stuff 🙂
 
40.png
inJESUS:
By the way, Uthman burnt the original quran 😉 after we settle our discussion, we will start the compilation of quran stuff 🙂
Click to expand...
Caliph Uthman did burn those copies of the Koran which were not according to the original dialect of the Koresh which was revealed.

He retained the Originality of pure and actual recitation and dialect.

It is amazing that you are using such incredible event which proves actually the ORIGINALITY of the Koran we have now thus the Koran was and is preserved in ORIGINAL pure form.
 
40.png
Justice2006:
Caliph Uthman did burn those copies of the Koran which were not according to the original dialect of the Koresh which was revealed.

He retained the Originality of pure and actual recitation and dialect.

It is amazing that you are using such incredible event which proves actually the ORIGINALITY of the Koran we have now thus the Koran was and is preserved in ORIGINAL pure form.
Click to expand...
sure bro sure we’ll talk about this after you answer my questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top