Islam

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Justice2006:

The Bibles are unreliable and not the Word of God, not because of the variant translations but because of these following reasons:

1. The Original Message in pure form in Jesus’ mother tongue is either destroyed or lost for various reasons.

Why should that be the case? If one believes in the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the omnipotence of God, why should He limit His message to one language? Can’t your God speak other languages?

Consider the case of Islam. How many Muslims speak and understand Arabic? Only about 250 million out of 1.2 billion Muslims. And of those 250 million Arabic speakers how many can understand Clear or Qurayshi Arabic? Not many. So, if you want to go down that path, one can make the case that Allah has failed in his intention to propagate his message in the original tongue. Preservation is meaningless without understanding.

In contrast, the Christians can claim that the message of Jesus Christ is UNIVERSAL and transcends linguistic boundaries. Everyone can understand His message. You don’t have to learn Aramaic to do so.

Justice2006:

1. What Christiandom now has in the name of Holy Bibles is written out of oral traditions/stories, centuries after Jesus’ departure from this world.

This isn’t strictly true as the Gospels are dated to the 1st century AD.

Even St Paul was a contemporary of the disciples of Jesus.

Justice2006:

1. In these Bibles the New Testament books are mostly in Greek and they are divided in two groups:ancient and most ancient manuscripts. There are contradictions, inconsistencies, improbabilities in all of them. Then no two copies of these are alike.

Really? I don’t think Biblical scholars share your view. Don’t forget word variations are not important – what is important in Christianity is the message, not the words. It is claimed that 99% of all textual variations is not significant. home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Manuscript.html

Justice2006:

1. When Christians made translation of these copies, the translators added further their own mistakes/errors willingly or unwillingly or upon Church’s specific instructions to accomodate their dogmas/distinct views. In these translations the various versions of the Bible became more unauthentic. No two translations of Catholic church alone, are alike. For example Douay Rhiems and New American Bible are not same in terms of their contents. Revised Standard Version and King James Version Bible are not alike. King James Versions itself has gone through many MAJOR revisions.

Yes, but you’re selling Biblical scholars very short indeed. When doctrinal issues arise they are not decided on the basis of individual translations but the entire body of scripture – which means they already take into account the variations and translational errors. At least in the Catholic Church.

You also confuse doctrinal changes. There are two ways to look at it: 1) the church progresses; or 2) the church doesn’t progress.

Even in Islam, there is much debate on doctrine. For instance, the total prohibition of suwar is not held today as it was in Muhammad’s day. Some things are incompatible with modern life and have been expunged from Islamic teachings. The fact that you are unaware of these doesn’t mean they don’t exist. It is just that the Christians choose to reflect these in their Bibles, all the while knowing their Bibles are nothing more than working models with their doctrinal basis in the entire collection of scripture, not on their latest model of the Bible.

Justice2006:

Rodrigo:

In a sense, I would say that Christians try to preserve and teach the message rather than the words.

Ofcourse…Christians should do that becasue thats the only option left for them because they have lost the Original Message of Jesus Christ.

This is not even debatable: you are clearly mistaken. Christ’s message of love and forgiveness and Salvation is unchanged. All else are details.

Justice2006:

But whether they really preserved and taught whatever “message” they have, thus far, just look back when Holy Papacy had full power in her hand in the Dark Ages of “civilised” Europe, how she behaved with her own subjects, especially with the God’s Choosen people–the so-called “Christ-Killers”–Jews. This Holy Papacy under the “guidance” of Holy Spirit, did preserve what she really believes.

And now…is Vatican in the Rome or Rome is in the Vatican?

Humanity is imperfect. Do not cast stones in glass houses.

cont

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Justice2006:

Rodrigo:

In contrast, Muslims preserve the words at the expense of the message, in my experience.

Your experience is not a right observation.

Muslims with God’s Grace, not only preserve the Word of God in it’s original pure form but they try their best level to implement it in their daily lives also. Thats why despite all kinds of false propaganda against Islam and the Muslims, Islam is growing faster than any other religion.

I have several observations:

1. The comparison is wrong – the point is not that Islam is growing faster than any other religion but is it growing faster than all other religions put together.
2. If you make apostasy punishable that is an unfair comparison.
3. It’s quality, not quantity, that matters.
4. Conversion rates are rather low, at least in Western countries. Most Muslims become Muslims because they are born into it.
5. Estimates of future growth, in my opinion, are unrealistic. The growth rate of Islam has merely been that of population growth and that cannot be projected in a straight-line like present estimates.

PS Christians: how am I doing defending your faith? Please feel free to add to my scant knowledge.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[Justice2006]

Rodrigo Bivar:

I suspect Christians have thought more deeply on this issue than Muslims who deem all babies to be Muslims, even without saying the shahada, even babies of non-Muslims. Again, without scriptural basis.

For Muslims, it is not an issue because all babies are born sinless because there is no such a thing as “original sin”. Thus all babies regardless of what religion/faith their parents have are born in a state of Islam. Islam is FITRAH. Islam means submission. Thus they go to Paradise. Now why should Muslims think deeply on this issue when matter is already settled from the beginning and there are no TWO opinions in this regard.

As far Catholic’s doctrine/hypothesis is concerned this issue contradicts their self-adopted view of “original sin”. When someone adopts a nonsensical view, this kind of complications arises. So lets take a look briefly what had happened/happening in Catholic world:

Pope Benedict’s predecessor, John Paul II, gave the commission the task of looking at the issue in 2004 and there has always been speculation that he wanted to drop the concept after he wrote his own papal document which gave no clear answer to the question of what happens to children who die before being baptised.

The late pope had written: **“The Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God. In fact the great mercy of God, who wants all men to be saved, and the tenderness of Jesus towards children allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who die without baptism.” **

That view was in contrast to what Pope Pius X had declared in 1905: **“Children who die without baptism go into limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either, because having Original Sin, and only that, they do not deserve paradise, but neither hell or purgatory.” **

The fate of children who die before baptism has interested Christians since the religion’s earliest days.

The idea was first suggested by St Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390 AD), who believed that the unbaptised would neither be punished nor access the full glory of God.

This was dismissed by St Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD), who insisted instead that baptism was necessary for salvation and that even babies would be consigned to hell if they were not baptised.

He did, however, concede that once in hell their torment would be the mildest of all its residents. This torture of the innocent was unacceptable to St Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274 AD), who was the first major theologian to speculate about the existence of a place called limbo, whose name is derived from the Latin limbus which means “hem” or “edge”. There, on the edge of heaven, the unbaptised would exist in a state of what he described as “natural happiness”.

John Haldane, a professor of philosophy at St Andrews University and a consulter to the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Culture, recently said that the issue of limbo was “something of a medieval curiosity” that no longer preoccupies people. He said that the reason the Catholic Church was clarifying its position was that people still wrongly perceived heaven as a place and not as a state of being.

**"The idea of limbo conjures up the image of God as some kind of government bureaucrat who says to people, not just babies, ‘Sorry, you don’t have your passport stamped with baptism, you’ll have to wait over there’.

“Instead, God’s powers are such that He can overcome the issue of Original Sin as He chooses, according to special circumstances.”**

*courtesy: * [Will the Catholics Ever make Up Their Minds?]](Will the Catholics Ever make Up Their Minds?])

This issue is very important because it’s solution demolishes the very foundation of one of the basic tenets of Christianity.

How?

**If Christians say babies don’t deserve paradise then:

common sense tells us that it makes no sense thus Christian faith cannot be from a God who is Just, Most Merciful and Love.

If you say babies do go to Paradise, then:
all babies are not born with the so-called Original Sin then cruci-FIXION becomes cruci-FICTION. The so-called “death” of Jesus as God becomes meaningless. **​

Thus in either case, Christianity, willingly or unwillingly or knowingly or unkowingly, comes closer to the Islamic point of view.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew 15:9-10
9 And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.
10 **And having called together the multitudes unto him, he said to them: Hear ye and understand. **

{ drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=47&ch=15&l=9&f=s#x }

 

[Reuben_J]

Justice2006:

So only those babies killed by Herod are considered martys or any other baby of any faith who either killed by most sphisticated bombs such as* Daisy cutter * dropped on Afghan innocent civilain villagers or die due to any other reason in his/her infacy?

Then…when you consider them as martyrs, their martyrdom is due to the unjust killing by Herod or merely the death itself?

How about those babies who die an unknown natural death in their infancy, will they go to Paradise or Hell?

.

I’m sorry brother that you don’t get the hint. So you don’t see the intent. Never mind.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I’m sorry, Mr Justice2006, you really need to take off your Islamist eyeglasses. If you can’t see the Muslim idea of all babies, even non-Muslim babies, being automatically Muslim is distastefully chauvinistic to non-Muslim, I’m really astonished.

How would you like it if the Christians claim that all babies and children of Muslims who haven’t uttered the shahada are automatically Christians and that Muslims are nothing but Christians who have fallen?

It is akin to stealing the afterlives of other people’s children.

I hope you can see this, bud.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Justice2006:

If Christians say babies don’t deserve paradise then:
common sense tells us that it makes no sense thus Christian faith cannot be from a God who is Just, Most Merciful and Love.

Exactly how just, merciful and loving is Allah? I don’t want to be unkind to you but Allah is pretty much unjust, unmerciful and unloving from the non-Muslim perspective.

Justice2006:

If you say babies do go to Paradise, then:
all babies are not born with the so-called Original Sin then cruci-FIXION becomes cruci-FICTION. The so-called “death” of Jesus as God becomes meaningless

How does original sin correlate with the crucifixion?
.

Justice2006:

Thus in either case, Christianity, willingly or unwillingly or knowingly or unkowingly, comes closer to the Islamic point of view.

What are you trying to say? It is clear that Christianity and Islam are diametrically opposite. Just compare the behavior of their respective founders.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[Reuben_J]

Rodrigo Bivar:

PS Christians: how am I doing defending your faith? Please feel free to add to my scant knowledge.

Chau,
Rodrigo

Borther Rodrigo, you are doing fine. May God bless you .

As I mentioned to Justice2006, he needs to clear certain perception first - get it right on what Christinaity is. Get out of that Islamic shell. We don’t asked for agreement but understanding. Then go discuss from there. Otherwise too much time is wasted in clarifying obvious misunderstandings. Maybe some Christians may want to go in, if it’s worth their while.

Of course we notice that there are more questions than answers about Islam. This is certainly a disadvantage to Muslims trying to debate Christians in this inter-religous forum.

Peace.

Reuben .

 

[Justice2006]

Rodrigo Bivar:

I’m sorry, Mr Justice2006, you really need to take off your Islamist eyeglasses. If you can’t see the Muslim idea of all babies, even non-Muslim babies, being automatically Muslim is distastefully chauvinistic to non-Muslim, I’m really astonished.

Mr. Rodrigo Bivar,
Since you are asking me to take off my Islamist eyeglasses, when I am actually trying to see the THINGS AS THEY ARE, I will reciprocate your advice to you because it is you who is unable to see Islam from Islamic point of view.

As far babies of any natiion/faith/relgion/race being born as Muslims, according to Islam, I will explain it to you later in little bit detail since this thread is about Islam.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Justice2006:

Mr. Rodrigo Bivar,
Since you are asking me to take off my Islamist eyeglasses, when I am actually trying to see the THINGS AS THEY ARE, I will reciprocate your advice to you because it is you who is unable to see Islam from Islamic point of view.

Thanks and I was a little harsh. But I assure you I can see Islam for what it is.

Justice2006:

As far babies of any natiion/faith/relgion/race being born as Muslims, according to Islam, I will explain it to you later in little bit detail since this thread is about Islam.

Much obliged. Take your time. I’ll be off the forum until tomorrow.

Ciubate,
Rodrigo

 

[Justice2006]

Rodrigo Bivar:

What are you trying to say? It is clear that Christianity and Islam are diametrically opposite. Just compare the behavior of their respective founders.

Yes, Mr. Bivar, if time allows me, I will compare the behaviour and show you the result, God-willing. One thing at a time. You are jumping up and down.

 

[freesoulhope]

deb1:

Mary was not just anyone. She was the bearer of God. Her womb held Jesus, our savior.

This post is for Justice. This is the last time i will explain this. please read it from top to bottom before replying. Original sin.

From my understanding.
Adam and eve where perfect and with out sin. However, this did not stop them from commiting Sin, nor did it stop a third of the angels from fallen from heaven. Mary was born in the same state as Eve before Eve sinned. Mary was perfectly full of grace, being born with out the stain of are first parents, because no sin can be before God. This doesnt neccerary mean that she was incapable of sinning, but through the grace and love of god she didn’t,. Eve helped to bring deaf in to the world, so i guess it would be fitting for mary to bring life in to this world “jesus Christ”. There for God made made her full of grace, she was born with out the stain of original sin. ( The stains of are first parents is not the same as commiting sin, even though we share the same fallen state). The idea that this is unfair, is not true. To think that it is, is to fall under the illusion of the devil. We have life through jesus Christ, God wants us to love him through Christ are lord. We can only be with God if we love him, we have to freely choose. Gods love for us covers are sins. Mary loved God, and allthough she was full of grace, she made a “choice” to love God. She was not a robot programed to do Gods errens. God made us with free will and free thought.

Adam and eve chose not to love God, they disobeyed him, unfortunatly the human race where in the reproductive care of adam and eve. There for we share in thier sin, not willingly by choice, but by inheritence of adam and eves fallen state. But That doesnt stop us from being with god, we have to freely choose whether we want God in are lives or not, rather then him forcing his will upon us.

Thats the mercy of God, and hell is to be with out him, since the gifts of happyness and joy and love are from God, and out outside of him these things Dont exist. The only thing that exists is God because he is “existence” he is ultimate reality. He is the limits, but he him self is not bound by any limits. Any thing else, is the things that he creates.

Original sin only effects us because we allow it to. Yes we are born with a horrid stain, but god wants us to be cleaned through jesus, because thats his will. Thats how he wants us to come back to him, through the love of jesus Christ. thats why he is called the “son of God” because “jesus” is who the father wants us to be like. Jesus is the model son.

As for sin, we commit sin because we want to sin. Being born with the sin of your parents and commiting sin is two different things. To be born with out grace, is to be born dead. Sin is deaf, to be born with sin, is to be born in to deaf. Jesus is life, in him we survive. When we commit sin, we choose not to be with God. But you can Choose to be with him through Christ and his church, the holy roman Catholic church, founded on peter the rock.

 

[freesoulhope]

Everybody please ignore above message, two my embarassment, and admmitence, there are errors in what i have written. I apoligise to justice, justice has been served!

we are actually free from original sin through baptisom, which i didnt explain in the above.

There are also, illogical ramblings that come not from god but from my own ignorance.

How ever.

Justice, let this be a example that, its okay to admit when your wrong.

 

[inJESUS]

Shalom,

I already explained to Justice about the compilation of the Gospel & that the authors had no idea it will end up to be our Bible,you can look at the thread " trinity refuted by Jesus himself" to see his “deep” responses…
Justice, if you are here to tell us the Bible is corrupt, my response is : we are not stupid to believe in something corrupt; furthermore , a god that allows that his message be corrupted is not God. So if you are here just to argue this point, am sorry dude, you wont have any effect here…maybe we should tackle the issue of quranic compilation after you answer my questions that you still did not answer.

Rodrigo, indeed he has islamic eyeglasses and mindset…he just does not understand what the Bible is.
maybe we should tackle the point of the Bible truthfulness during mohammads time and the rest of my answers;

By the way, muslims quote from the Bible to prove whatever they want; but when they are refuted, they say: but the Bible is corrupt they even go to look for the false prophet in the corrupt Bible

So Justice, just save us your comments on the Bible…let’s tackle Islam…your turn now to answer my question

PS: Rodrigo, you are Christian by FITRA

Jesus’ blessing to all

 

[Booklover]

Justice2006:

One thing at a time. God willing, I can answer your questions, if you allow me some time.

No I am not accusing Allah. If the scritptures of the previous Prophets of God were not saved properly by their respective followers/nations then it is not Allah’s problem
The ample proof is no two “original manuscripts” of Bibles are alike. And as I said, most authors of the New Testament books are still unknown. You are basically following books written by unknown people.

When Jesus was on the cross, all of his disciples left Jesus alone and fled.

Mr. inJesus, you could have even ask, why God/Jesus did not convey his message to the whole world individually the moment he created man? Did Jesus gave hs message to all Chinese/Japanese/Indians/Americans/Arabs personally?
Was he actually sent to the whole world or mere children of Israel. Were all Gentiles included?

Mr. inJesus, your questions are nonsensical. You have no idea what you are talking about. You picked some verses of the Koran from anti-Islam deceptive websites by thinking they must be real objections, and start inserting them in your posts which are full of hatred and ignorance. You make me laugh. You are a bad name to your own faith and your Church. I don’t think even your Pope will accept your evil behaviour.

Now as to the description/mention about Christians/Jews/Sabaeens (The People of the Book) in the Koran:

Go to islamicity.com/QuranSearch/

then press P from the Topic indexwhich is at the left hand side, then press People of the Book. in the list. Then to see all these verses press one by one each of:

**People of the Book:**among them are those who believe (13)

among them are Unbelievers (4)
differed among themselves (11)
do not take them for friends and protectors (2)
exceed you not the bounds (1)
People of the Book (21)
relationship to Muslims (31)
treachery of (5)

islamicity.com/QuranSearch/

By what authority do you think that you can interpret the Bible better than the Church to whom it was entrusted? Are you some “authority” on our Bible? It’s your posts that are full of inconsistencies and absurdities! Our Church does not teach hatred but we know that Islam does. The problem with you Muslims is that you can’t accept the idea that there are many people out there who are not taken in by the lies of Islam!

Where do you get your information on our Church? From Catholic sites? I doubt it! You’re getting it from anti-catholic sites or from the lies concocted about it from so-called Muslim “scholars”.

Your remarks about InJesus are pretty offensive, so if you want us to respect you, you’d better accord us the same courtesy!

Vickie

 

[Shadowcry]

Booklover:

By what authority do you think that you can interpret the Bible better than the Church to whom it was entrusted? Are you some “authority” on our Bible? It’s your posts that are full of inconsistencies and absurdities! Our Church does not teach hatred but we know that Islam does. The problem with you Muslims is that you can’t accept the idea that there are many people out there who are not taken in by the lies of Islam!

Where do you get your information on our Church? From Catholic sites? I doubt it! You’re getting it from anti-catholic sites or from the lies concocted about it from so-called Muslim “scholars”.

Your remarks about InJesus are pretty offensive, so if you want us to respect you, you’d better accord us the same courtesy!

Vickie

i wonder where you get your lies from? “Our churchdoes not teaches hatred but we know Islam does” Very absurd especially when you have no proof to back up any of your ridiculous statements.

 

[inJESUS]

she said our church DOES NOT teach hatred!

 

[Myangel]

Rodrigo Bivar:

PS Christians: how am I doing defending your faith? Please feel free to add to my scant knowledge.

Chau,
Rodrigo

:clapping: :yup: :tiphat: Doing a great job! I am actually learning a few things too!

 

[inJESUS]

:clapping: :yup: :tiphat: Doing a great job! I am actually learning a few things too!

have you read his thread “parallelism in quran” on page 2 or maybe 3 ?

 

[Myangel]

inJESUS:

have you read his thread “parallelism in quran” on page 2 or maybe 3 ?

I have seen a few and I have to say WOW he is a walking talking Encyclopedia!

 

[Justice2006]

:clapping: :yup: :tiphat: Doing a great job! I am actually learning a few things too!

But you need to learn a **lot **, Mr. Myangel and not from other people’s eyes but from your own eyes…to see the THINGS AS THEY ARE.

If you are a Catholic, here is a verse from your BIble - The New American BIble. Lets see if you can learn something from this verse too:

** Isaiah 7:Verse 20 **
From The New American Bible

20 9 ** On that day the LORD shall shave with the razor hired from across the River (with the king of Assyria) the head, and the hair between the legs. It shall also shave off the beard.**

Footnote : 9 God will use the Assyrians from across the River (the Euphrates) as his instrument (razor) to inflict disgrace and suffering upon his people.

Note: The above verse and it’s footnote#9 is taken from Catholic’s The New American Bible.

usccb.org/nab/bible/isaiah/isaiah7.htm ]
usccb.org/nab/bible/isaiah/isaiah7.htm#foot9 ]

---

PS: I didn’t qoute this verse (Isaiah 7:20) from ***The Message Bible * ** because I assume you are a Catholic thus you may disagree with other versions of the Bibles. But if you think you can accept The Message Bible, I will qoute from it but you have to have lot of patience while reading it.

.