Why should I become a Muslim, and why you should become a Christian.

[inJESUS]

Refusing to be a Second Wife

Hudâ Wasfî says: “I refuse to get into a polygamous marriage, since women are not prepared to put it into practice. Some women accept polygamy on a theoretical level, but when it comes to actually living in a polygamous marriage, the first wife will do everything in her power to fight the second marriage. I refuse to live with all that enmity and hatred.”

Salwâ al-Sanâdîlî says: “I refuse to accept a polygamous marriage, because what I will not accept for myself I would not impose upon someone else.”

Munâ Hâmid says: “I refuse polygamy, because most of the time it is the first wife who has to make all the sacrifices. She has to live through the difficult times under tight economic circumstances. She has to make a lot of sacrifices during the early years of marriage. Then when the husband becomes financially secure and has a stable family life, he goes and marries another woman who can reap what the first wife has sown. This is not fair.”

What does the Islamic sharia respond? you have to accept it whether you like it or not?

 

[Xiaahmad]

to be honest I dont see much difference between God in chrstianity (as they believe God became flesh) and God in like roman and hindus tradition.

and Islam give the true concept of GOD the Absolute Monotheism.
with the Way of life.

unlike in christianity that you just have to believe that jesus died for sins thats it.

Islam gives the complete way of life. and that is what attracting most of non muslims towards Islam in EU and USA specially.

Peace

www.youtube.com/ozzycda
www.youtube.com/qwertyfshg
www.youtube.com/irqproductions
www.thetruecall.com

 

[Xiaahmad]

Refusing to be a Second Wife

Hudâ Wasfî says: “I refuse to get into a polygamous marriage, since women are not prepared to put it into practice. Some women accept polygamy on a theoretical level, but when it comes to actually living in a polygamous marriage, the first wife will do everything in her power to fight the second marriage. I refuse to live with all that enmity and hatred.”

Salwâ al-Sanâdîlî says: “I refuse to accept a polygamous marriage, because what I will not accept for myself I would not impose upon someone else.”

Munâ Hâmid says: “I refuse polygamy, because most of the time it is the first wife who has to make all the sacrifices. She has to live through the difficult times under tight economic circumstances. She has to make a lot of sacrifices during the early years of marriage. Then when the husband becomes financially secure and has a stable family life, he goes and marries another woman who can reap what the first wife has sown. This is not fair.”

What does the Islamic sharia respond? you have to accept it whether you like it or not?

Quran clearly tells that if you cant do Justice marry only once, plus if there are issue in Islam there is choice of getting seprate.

**and I would like any christian here to show me any where in bible where POLGAMY is CONDEMEND or PEOPLE WHO PRACTICED it are CONDEMEND **

Remeber most of converts to Islam are female:

like these:

www.youtube.com/kimdonesia
www.youtube.com/americanmuslimgirl
in.youtube.com/user/LMartella

 

[inJESUS]

I asked about the women’s right to say no.

 

[dzheremi]

to be honest I dont see much difference between God in chrstianity (as they believe God became flesh) and God in like roman and hindus tradition.

and Islam give the true concept of GOD the Absolute Monotheism.
with the Way of life.

unlike in christianity that you just have to believe that jesus died for sins thats it.

Islam gives the complete way of life. and that is what attracting most of non muslims towards Islam in EU and USA specially.

Peace

www.youtube.com/ozzycda
www.youtube.com/qwertyfshg
www.youtube.com/irqproductions
www.thetruecall.com

Who cares what EU or USA convert Muslims think about anything? The most gullible among us do not make for the best testimonials. Duh. Should I send you links to youtube videos of ex-Muslims converted to (usually) evangelical Protestant Christianity? Would that convince you that Christianity is right and Islam is wrong? I don’t think so. You’d probably say “Well these people are obviously fools to have believed in the lies of the Christians”…wellllll? How is what you are doing any different? I’ll say the same thing about these converts. If they want to follow a 6th century Arab nationalist into the gates of hell, then they are free to do so. I won’t be taken in by such testimonials, and frankly I’m amused that this is the best you can do. Hmm…let’s see…the holy sacrificial blood of Christ which takes away the sins of the world, OR a youtube video? I DON’T KNOW WHICH ONE TO CHOOSE! ARGHHH!

And pardon my French, but absolute monotheism, my a**! Take Muhammad out of the Shahada and every other place where he is set up alongside Allah, then talk to me about the purity of your monotheism. I am not buying that for a second.

 

[planten]

The concept of the trinity makes perfect sense to me, and to the 2 billion other Christians on the face of this earth.

We have had numerous muslims come on this forum asking the same questions you have already asked and have attempted to find ‘holes’ with the trinity. Yet, they all have been defeated and none have been able to find any untruth with the trinity.
I doubt if you have the cranial capacity to be able to do this, as no other muslim has been able to either.

DiL, please subtract the many hundred million of those name sake christians who are drinking and dancing and gambling and sex machines, in the christian dominated western countries. That is because every time we raise their question, you people disown them.

Also subtract the many million Protestants (and other non-catholics) from your estimate of two billion christians. Then you will be left with just a few christians, most of whom do not pray (go to church). So please do not count on your two Billion any more.

 

[planten]

Well, no, it doesn’t, but if it did then you might even be in worse shape than you are now. Who can understand God? Only God. Not you or I or anyone. Show me someone who claims to understand God or have “made sense” of Him, and you’ll see only a man who has deluded himself in the worst way possible.

dzhereme, we do not need to understand God. We need to believe in Him and act according to His commands.

I am proud to worship God in the way of those who followed Him in Galilee two thousand years ago, but I will never say I understand Him. I have a Christian understanding of Him, which is built upon our Sacred Tradition and Scripture (to the extent that I can understand those things), but He will forever remain only partly illuminated for us here on Earth, not because He is only partly enlightening, but because we see so dimly with our very human limitations, of which He Himself has none. This is the way it was, is, and always will be, and this is the way I joyfully accept it to be, because acceptance of this is a means of true submission to God (something I think Muslims like, too).

You may be proud. But I do not see any christian following (living) in the way of Jesus, the way he lived, the way he ate and the things he used to eat. I hope he never danced and drank much and did any sexual activity and gambling.

So you are only name sake christian using the name of Jesus.

Do you not accept that it should be this way? Does Islam offer you a God that is understandable and makes inherent sense to you, so that you have Him all figured out and nothing bothers you about Him like the Christian concept of God? If so, why does the Islamic Allah make more sense? I do not understand, and simply claiming it to be so based on Islam’s preceived superiority in your own mind will not make it so any more than my claiming that Christianity is better because it makes “more sense” to me will make that a fact and somehow not my opinion.

WE do not have a man-God. On the one hand you say that no one can understand God. On the other hand you have a man God walking and talking and eating and sleeping. Such cannot be a god. Then you have multiple status for your god. That is he is perfect man and a perfect God. Not understandable at all. Quite impossible.

 

[dzheremi]

dzhereme, we do not need to understand God. We need to believe in Him and act according to His commands.

That’s good. Now tell the Muslim friend I was responding to who claimed that Christians should be Muslims because Islamic Allah makes “more sense” than the Christian view of Allah.

You may be proud. But I do not see any christian following (living) in the way of Jesus, the way he lived, the way he ate and the things he used to eat. I hope he never danced and drank much and did any sexual activity and gambling.

Of course you don’t see it. You don’t see anything that you don’t want to see. May Allah remove your blindness. Generalizations about the lifestyles of the West do not have anything to do with Christianity or any other religion, and for your information Muslims in the West may also do those things too. Please see a thread I’ve started called “The Corrupting Influence of the West” where I discuss one such situation. It happens, and it is another thing that you want to claim is not there just because you refuse to see it.

So you are only name sake christian using the name of Jesus.

Better to be a Christian in name than an intolerable bigot in behavior towards others, eh Planten? You’ll never see me saying you aren’t a Muslim, that’s for sure, and to the people that matter in deciding such things (The Church, vested in authority given to it by Jesus Christ), I am very much a Christian. So your opinion is secondary at best.

WE do not have a man-God. On the one hand you say that no one can understand God. On the other hand you have a man God walking and talking and eating and sleeping. Such cannot be a god.

Why? Because you say so? Well I say that the Islamic Allah cannot be the True Allah because I do not think Allah is a schemer or plotter, and that He does not do any of the questionable things that the Qur’an says He does (abrogating verses, challenging humanity with silly challenges He knows they can’t meet, etc). Do you see the problems with asserting our own opinions as facts, when it comes to theological matters?

Then you have multiple status for your god. That is he is perfect man and a perfect God. Not understandable at all. Quite impossible.

“Multiple status” how so? Please. You want God to have only one attribute at a time because it makes Him easier for YOU to understand! And you claim that you don’t need to understand God! Well, then why don’t you act like it and stop declaring that He can’t do this or that! At least try to be consistent within your own line of argument, Planten.

The more I post here the more I see some Muslims as being spiritual Goldilocks’: This porridge is too hot, this porridge is too cold, but what Muhammad serves is JUST RIGHT for their preconcieved notions!

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

no

So when the Son incarnates, neither do the father nor the holy spirit incarnate, this means that they are NOT one in action which is a clear separation, at the time the son incarnates, the other 2 persons don’t incarnate with him.

depends on what you mean by God’s Word is a follower . What is the problem exactly? that the Father and His Word cannot be called the same God?

The word follower can be concluded through what Jesus says that he cannot do anything by himself, but what the father does, he also does, which means that he is a follower to God.
The problem with the word follower is that it gives the impression that he is a minor compared to the Father who is the main.

where does it conflict? it is submissive that is why Jesus says “not my will but yours”. To say that Jesus did not have a human will is to deny His humanity.

Whether it is submissive or not, it’s different from God’s will, he may will something, God wills something else, at the end he will submit to what God wills, but this wasn’t his will from the beginning. So when Jesus has a different will than God, this creates a separation in the Trinity as the son wills something else than what the father wills.

please explain the bold part.

Look again at what Theophilus wrote:
For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word,

So when the word was with God as a counsellor being His own mind and thought, it hasn’t been begotten yet.

because to beget does not always mean that it didn’t exist before, as you said.

I don’t know why you are insisting on telling that this is what I think, the word begets means that a change occured, he was present in God’s bosom, then God begot Him, a clear change, does God change?

how not if the Word is eternal and uncreated? can anything be eternal and uncreated beside God?

The Word is an attribute of God, the same as His sight, His hearing, His knowledge, His power, His mercy, you don’t consider each of these attributes a person, otherwise, it won’t have been a trinity, it would have been a polynity. So when you try to explain the Trinity by using the example of the Quran, it doesn’t match, because God’s word is an attribute of Him, doesn’t mean it’s a separate God, it’s an attribute as all other attributes, and I will give a script you used before as an example:

Isa 55:11 so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

How do you consider God’s mouth when it is eternal and uncreated? Do you consider it another person of the Trinity?

you can call it attribute, we call it The creative Word because it speaks, creates, guides. What matters in this regard is that the Word is not different from God in nature.

So you cannot call it an attribute, which means that your example of the Quran doesn’t match, still I have a problem with the Trinity.

what does this mean according to you? that the Father has a hand? sitting at the right hand means authority, and all authority in heaven and earth is for the Word who is God.

Well, I cannot see a relation between sitting on the right hand and authority, otherwise, the holy spirit will lack authority since it is not sitting on the right hand of the father, if you want to interpret it figuratively, I haven’t seen it used that way before, it may mean helper, but I don’t know how it relates to authority. And was Jesus sitting on the right hand of God before incarnation?

your approach means that Jesus had to utter this or that to explain this or that but Jesus said who is is by how He saw fit to say, step by step, until after the resurrection.

Well, I actually see that Jesus didn’t say that he is God, even when the Jews accused him of blasphemy, he cited this verse:
Psa 82:6 I said, Ye are gods, And all of you sons of the Most High.
Which tells that as these were called gods (of course figuratively), he was also called son of God figuratively. Why didn’t he quote a verse which you use to prove that the Messiah is God as Isaiah 9:6 or 7:14 which would have been a clear refutation to the Jews as well as Muslims now?

i cannot explain the 2 natures of Jesus because i don’t know, am not Him nor can i know how he does things.

Well, I didn’t ask you to explain them, you have said before:

we cannot say “but Jesus ate food yet God does not”, because here we are not discussing the Trinity anymore **but Jesus’ second nature **, the Incarnation.

So you actually said that eating food refers to the second nature which is supposed to be the human nature. Otherwise, this would mean that the divine nature would contribute in eating, which means that God eats.

the Word/Wisdom/Son are used interchangeably. You are nit-picking the human language used to express abstract ideas instead of understanding what the passage is saying.

Well, this human language was correctly used in the NT, using the word “with God”, if it really meant what the NT means, it would have also used the same word. Why didn’t the wisdom say" I was with God" instead of saying “God possessed me”?
A very clear difference, as the word possess means that the wisdom which is supposed to be God is possessed and set up by God. God is not possessed nor set up. This has nothing to do with not existing eternally, I haven’t even mentioned it, but the passage in Proverbs has nothing to do with your trinity.

You still didn’t tell me what you think about the new formulation of the Trinity made by Theophilus, God, His word and His wisdom?

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

actually he called the Quranic aya a legend to be understood figuratively.

No, he didn’t call the verse a legend, he called the Christian story a legend and he had his interpretation. There are many differences between the events of the Quran and this other story, and it could have been the case that the Christian version was taken from the origin with modifications as it is clear that the Quran doesn’t point out to the Christian version, since it was the Jews who asked him about it. And you can see that the Quran tells that people will say they are 3 or 5 or 7 while it is God who knows how much they are and some few people. This is also clear that this Quranic story has nothing to do with myths made from the original story but with the original story.

well even if i tell you Plato created it, you’ll tell me Allah revealed it to Plato so what’s the point?

And what is your evidence that it was Plato who created it?

i differentiated between inspiration and verbatim revelation. An inspired author can use a myth to teach something, but a verbatim revelation means a myth is attributed to the one who revealed it.

So what?

why should i throw it away?

Because corruption was proven in it. You still cannot address my argument about Justin and Chrysostom which proves that corruption occured in the Bible. Your church belief is something else which we will talk about in the other thread. I am now talking about the Bible which is both OT and NT as your main source, is it really corrupted or not? So as you cannot defend the corruption of the Bible, throw it away and stick to the church beliefs, then we will talk about it.

because you said that people can believe their book is miraculous for different reasons.

This could happen, but to determine whether they were proven true in their belief or not, this refers to the surrounding environment. And this was what I said in the last post and all the posts before.
Anyway, I think that we have talked a lot about this miracle, and nothing new will be added. Let’s see another miracle, and this time, it’s a scientific one, God says in the Quran giving a parable on the heart of the infidel:
40- Or a world of darkness similar to that found in the depth of an ocean where billowy waves are superimposed upon billowy waves topped by dark clouds creating a coat of darkness superimposed upon coats of darkness (Sura 24)
A very recent discovery just last year about this was given:
Deep ocean waves discovered by scientists
telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3318477/Deep-ocean-waves-discovered-by-scientists.html

The writing of the heretics exist among the refutations of the church fathers.There are whole treaties against heresies. Just as you know who taught heresy in Islam and who didn’t, you can do the same in Christianity.

And how could I know that they really represented the heretic beliefs the right way? And how could I know that the heretics were refuted? The Roman Empire had already suppressed the heretic books.

no, i asked why would someone die in place of someone else, something Muslims usually are against.

This is according to the circumstances, a man can sacrifice for his leader to live if there is an importance for the life of the leader, and also the leader can sacrifice his life for the life of his followers, don’t forget that Issa (Peace be upon him) will return again to Earth. So this may have been the reason for him to come back.

maybe you know more that the apostles’ disciples, being given the “gnosis” that no follower of Jesus or the apostles had

I don’t know if your writings are really referred to the apostles’ disciples or not this is another issue, neither do I say that I say that gnostic belief is the right one, but it may have had some truth as the Quran is the judge.

read the infancy gospel, it is there.

I know, but this doesn’t mean that it is the source for the Quran, the truth was already scattered within different sects and the Quran collected it.

doesn’t the Quran say we follow by “conjecture”? yet isn’t he who made this trick in the first place? how are people supposed to know it was a trick made by Allah and that the one being crucified (who miraculously had no tongue as well) isn’t actually Jesus? and all this to prove what? that Jesus cannot be killed like other prophets? why?

Some people have already knew as what is written in the gospel of Judas, which means that this was a matter of dispute, you of course follow conjecture, especially when we find lots of contradictions in the story of crucifixion between your gospels which tells that there is something wrong with the whole story.

please give me the reference to see how exactly it applies to the crucifixion trick.

I am telling this because you are keeping on using the word “trick” which I smell a mock from, that’s why I gave the story of the Pharaoh as an example, see Exodus 14:17

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

what miracle? did Jesus’ reply prove He was born without a biological father? and go back before this cradle thing, why did the miracle occur in the first place long time before Jesus spoke in the cradle? in other words, why did Jesus need to be born as such? in order to speak in the craddle???

First to show Lady Mary’s piety as I outlined, secondly to prove God’s power. And people already saw both things when Jesus (Peace be upon him) spoke in the cradle after the Jews accused Lady Mary with adultery.

in other words, there is no answer.

When you answer my questions which I posed as an example and some of my questions in the first point, and that you know the full Wisdom of God, you may have a point, otherwise, you cannot object on why God does so and not so.

no one is questioning that it happened.

Because no one mentions it. Please tell me where did the Jews or the heathens or even the other gospels mention it? A huge evidence like this must have been mentioned extensively. See, you lack historical evidence for it. You say that you have lots of external evidence for crucifixion, where is that event?

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

i think what said is very clear. If you don’t consider Genesis and Jesus refering to it as a proof of what marriage is, i can do nothing, and i don’t think there is need writing again that it was condoned because we all know it.

It may have been clear if polygamy was forbidden in the OT which is not the case, so saying “wife” here is not against polygamy, but it is just talking about marriage in general, when Jesus referred to it, he was talking about divorce since they became one body and can’t be separated, divorce separates that body while polygamy doesn’t, as the marriage is still held, and what Jesus told after proves my point when he says that what God joins can’t be separated by a man. So this is actually irrelevant.

Jesus refered to Genesis when talking about both marriage and then divorce.

Jesus was just talking about divorce, and you admitted this when we talked about the harshness of the hearts, why did you separate it from marriage there? Either he was talking about both in all context or not, but that way you are picking what you like from the scripture.

as far as i know, Jews outlawed polygamy. In any case, if the Jews wants to follow Jesus, why wouldn’t he follow what Jesus taught in His covenant?

May be did the Jews outlaw it, and I don’t know how they outlawed it from themselves, but if he converted to Christianity, I am not sure he will follow the Jewish traditions. As for the second question, it’s irrelevant since you have already said that he can follow the law since he was a Jew, so he has no problem since Jesus said that none of the law will be abolished until everything comes.
Let’s forget about polygamy now, could a Jew treat the gentiles the way he was ordered to treat them in the OT?

yes Jesus talked about fulfillment and Paul called it “shadows of things to come”.

Explain more.

so the women should accept it despite themselves? can you please give me a source because i know that a woman has the right to ask for divorce if she cannot accept polygamy unless the woman had no say but to accept men’s business.

The hadith as I remember was in Al Tirmithi, I don’t know whether it is present in English online or not. If the woman refuses polygamy, she can ask her husband that before marriage, and this will be a right of her.

the shia say it was Umar, not Allah.

The Prophet (Peace be upon him) forbade it:
Book 008, Number 3255:

Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon hm) he said: 0 people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women, **but Allah has forbidden it (now) until the Day of Resurrection.** So he who has any (woman with this type of marriage contract) he should let her off, and do not take back anything you have given to then (as dower).

As for the hadith of Ibn Massoud, it has been the case that some people didn’t know that it was forbidden, but it was later known. And it was clear from the different hadiths that it was for necessity as in jihad for long times that Ibn Massoud asked the Prophet (Peace be upon him) to castrate.

this isn’t the issue as the issue is abolishing something “because it may be misinterpreted” yet Allah did not ablosh too many things that are misinterpreted, so i am replying to your argument. The Sunni simply call it an immoral thing, yet Allah once call it “good things”.

The harms caused by Mut’a which can be much easily misinterpreted under the desire stress are much much more than anything else since its consequences much more severe against the whole community while this is not the case for wife beating which can be against some women.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

you gave examples of grammatically different markers. I gave examples of different meanings. Are you telling us, different Qurans with different spelling and different meanings are all the preserved words of Allah? was it Allah who revealed different meanings in different Qurans, and you tell us not one dot is changed from the original Quran? it seems there wasn’t an original Quran but different ones with different variations and meanings and words and all happen to be the “unchanged” words of Allah?

You are confused in the meaning of corruption, you may have been right if I said that these recitations were man-made, which is the case of your textual variants present extensively in the Bible and in the core of Christian beliefs, this is not what I am talking about as these are corruptions by MEN not revealed as they are by God. In case of the Quran, these are all recitations revealed by God and they are all original Qurans, to give the verse more than one meaning but all these meanings have no conflictions, so it has nothing to do with changing the words of Allah as they are all the words of Allah unchanged.

i didn’t sat there is a problem. I asked who picked one name over another to use it in the present Quran? and is there a proof that all the names were uttered by Muhammad?

You can use all names given to the Sura, and some Mushafs give the other names of the Sura. No problem in that. These names were mentioned by the Prophet (Peace be upon him) of course as the Quran was transmitted by extensive (mutawater) Isnads through the sahaba, and they have taught it to their disciples including the Suras names.

the sahaba were kind of infallible?

The sahaba by individuals are not infallible, but their consensus is infallible.

am not saying it isn’t found, am replying to the wisdom behind Allah revealing a verse in his book, then suddely it is not there, and Muslims say “to test us”. When i used to correct my teacher’s mistake, the answer was always “to test you”; as a kid, i believed it. If you really believe that a verse is missing in the Quran because Allah wants to “test” you, i’m afraid you will believe anything when it comes to the “miraculous” Quran.

Those who reject the verse have no point for that because it has been extensively present in the Sunna, so the one who rejects the verse is actually disobeying the Prophet (Peace be upon him), and that’s a kind of test to our faith, that we should obey what the Prophet (Peace be upon him) whatever we see it strange.

whole surah abrogated, forgotten and not found anymore (so lost), abrogated verses from the Quran but found in the hadith, abrogated verses and meaning in the Quran yet still in the Quran, abrogated verse yet retaining their meaning in the Quran, goats eating chapters of the Quran and lost…but yes the Quran is preserved and miraculous. Bro, you will believe in absolutely anything if you believe these things.

Again, you are confusing the concept of corruption as this could be valid if MEN did it, not that it was by God who abrogates some verses because we needed it for a while and we no more need it. You can see the verses lost, added and replaced by men in the Bible as well as no solid evidence for the Bible except for late manuscripts and late quotes of church fathers, who had many heretics within them, I think that you are the one who need evidence for your Bible. The Quran has solid evidence for being well transmitted unlike your Bible.

 

[trdchubi]

Blessings of believing in God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Correct if I am wrong, I think the Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants has the same stand on this)

Here is my take.

As Christians, our lives are put back together; we are able to live out of God’s Grace. Past sins are forgiven! The burden of living in bondage is taken away and we have life because we were made right through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ.

As Christians we have the privilege of prayer. We can ask God to help us with every problem, and know He will answer. We serve a mighty God who is the Great Solution Provider.

As Christians our aim is to live to honor God. To be a Christian and live by the teachings of Christ is to live successfully for the Glory of God.

To neglect the great salvation offered to us is to fail in our mission on earth. Jesus came to earth to redeem us from sin. He died for us that we might live. He has gone to prepare a place for us in Heaven. If we obey Him he will come again for us that we might be with Him eternally!

This is why you should be a Christian!

 

[inJESUS]

So when the Son incarnates, neither do the father nor the holy spirit incarnate, this means that they are NOT one in action.

not one in action if you are insisting they are seperate, something we do not teach.

The word follower…

 

[inJESUS]

First to show Lady Mary’s piety as I outlined, secondly to prove God’s power. And people already saw both things when Jesus (Peace be upon him) spoke in the cradle after the Jews accused Lady Mary with adultery.

so according to you Jesus had to be born as such to show the virgin mary’s piety?

When you answer my questions which I posed as an example and some of my questions in the first point, and that you know the full Wisdom of God, you may have a point, otherwise, you cannot object on why God does so and not so.

 

[Charlotte2008]

Muslim Woman and Ibn Tamiya - this is not an appropriate place for an Islamists (yes, that is what you are - you intentionally signed up on a Catholic board to preach to people and that is against the rules anyway). Brainwashing your children into memorising the Quran (phonetically) is not what God would require (I suppose you have to in case they want to know about Jesus Christ). It isn’t even written in the Quran that you have to cover yourselves up - that is in Hadith (i.e. written by a human who just wants to control women because he cannot control himself). How is that Godly behaviour? I hope one day God removes your blindness to the evil in that religion. Muslims could never be “better Christians” (and frankly even saying that is insulting to all of us) when you insult Jesus Christ every day by demeaning him to being just a Prophet who is below mohamed. Any religion that says “There is no compulsion in religion” and then says “Kill non-believers and apostates” is not from God. Please realise this.

 

[inJESUS]

No, he didn’t call the verse a legend, he called the Christian story a legend

is that why he said the Quranic verse is to be understood figuratively?

And what is your evidence that it was Plato who created it?

 

[inJESUS]

You are confused in the meaning of corruption

of course , because when you say not one dot was changed, you actually mean not one dot in the differentQurans, all revealed by Allah differently to give *different *meanings! add to them God knows how many abrogations, forgotten chapters, chapters eaten by goats, and effaced verses to “test” you and although the differing Qurans existed because of Allah, still Uthman decided to burn the different Qurans that Allah intented to reveal as such .As i told you, if you believe in this, you will believe in absoutely anything because you already put in your mind that there is no corruption when any non-Muslim will see clearly that your arguments are corruption of men attributed to Allah. You call it a masterpiece, we call it incorehent chaos.

The sahaba by individuals are not infallible, but their consensus is infallible.

 

[Ibn_Taymiya]

not one in action if you are insisting they are seperate, something we do not teach.

So when the Son incarnate, and neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit incarnate, but they are still not separate. How? Didn’t you say that what the Father does, the Son also does?

yes Jesus can do nothing except if the Father does it because they are inseperate, this is why whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise. Why do you keep ignoring the second part?

I didn’t ignore it. But all the Bible gives that impression, for example do you have a verse telling that the Father can do nothing by Himself except by seeing what the Son does? No, all the verses give the impression that Jesus is a follower and that the Father is the main God which is a clear separation since there is a main God and Jesus follows Him, they can’t be one.

Regarding “minor”, do you think the Word of Allah is a minor to Allah just because it isn’t Allah in position? "the word ‘Kalām’ is usually applied to the beginningless attribute of Allah present with His being referred to as His ‘Speech.’

I think I have been explaining this from the beginning, you are totally ignoring what I say, God’s Word is an attribute as His all other attributes, His sight, His Hearing,.…etc. This is not your case as you don’t say that God’s sight or God’s hearing is a person.

you are again mixing the Trinity with the Incarnation. The Word, because of the Incanation, took a human body and human will that did not oppose but were submissive to the Divine will .It is like saying , Jesus has a body, the Father does not, it means the Trinity is wrong when in fact you are talking about the second nature called Incarnation.

I am not talking about incarnation, but when you are saying that the son incarnates as a man, and this man has his own will other than the son which is supposed to be the son himself. I see it illogical, because even if the son has 2 natures, he should have one will, because this will is not something physical, but it is rather referred to what the person wants, so when a person wants 2 different things, this is illogical.

yes, but it wasn’t the word belly that he used. He wrote:

God, then, having His own word internal within His own bosom, begat him, emitting him along with His own wisdom before all things.

Fortunately, I found what he said, but he didn’t say bosom, I am not sure of the source of your translation, as he said bowels:
God, then, having His own Word internal36 within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting37 Him along with His own wisdom before all things.
ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.x.html
So Actually Theophilus says that the word was in God’s bowels, is God pregnant?

ok, since we are not able to communicate this point with each other, do you read in these words any reference to “creation”? no, the Word is the Father’s own mind and thought. In other writings, he adds after “begat Him”, emitting His Word.

Did you see me even refer to creation? You are dressing me an argument then answering it. I am saying that before the word being begotten, it was unbegotten when it was in God’s bowels.

because you are insisting on putting on his lips things he did not write. Where did he write about a change in God’s nature? If God emits His Word, did God change? how so?

When God emits His word, His word which is supposed to be God changed from unbegotten to begotten which is a change.

The Word was and is eternally an attribute of God the Father, not seperate from Him. The difference is that the Word is Creative, that is why we refer to it as “person” as the Bible reveales in OT and NT. You do not believe in neither, so be it, but that’s what God revealed.

So you backed-up again with saying that it’s an attribute of God when you refused that expression last post. You are keeping on contradicting yourself every post which is a clear proof that your doctrine cannot be digested. Again, God hears and sees, why don’t you consider God’s hearing and sight as person? Your Bible tells you that God has a mouth, why don’t you consider God’s mouth as a person?

we consider the Word of God that goes "from the Father (begotten), God. Isn’t this what i’ve been saying all along?

I am not asking you about God’s Word, I am asking about God’s mouth.

so just because this passage does not speak about the authority of the Holy Spirit, it means it isn’t about authority? yes the Holy Spirit is called the comforter, but this isn’t the only thing mentioned about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit creates, speaks, guides, convicts. Since when do we base a belief on one passage as if the rest do not exist or explain?

You are saying that sitting on the right hand of the father just means authority, which I see so bizarre, as I don’t know when did an expression like this mean authority? It may just mean that he is helping God if we wanted to use it figuratively, and even this has no evidence within the verse telling so, it just tells that he was received up to Heaven and sat on the right hand of God, what does this have to do with authority? Of course if we wanted to talk about the Holy Spirit, this would be a great issue, but let’s stick to the subject.