Islam has copied (say the Christians and the Jews)

[Hiroshi]

you are always wellcome my respcetd brother...

what I meant that there is no phrase such as fell from only two as written :

1_Matthew 27:5 says that Judas Iscariot when he died he hung himself

2_Acts 1 says that, no he jumped off a cliff head first.

and those two (to a normal person who has a sound brain) are impossible to be gathered to make an end for one story ...with all my respect...

anyway , who wants to know the truth would strive sincerely to find it and would open his/her eyes mind and heart to be able to understand ...and as I said before Allah Is The Only One Who Guides and Misguides , got nothing in my hand as a slave and servant of Allah but to show others the way as Allah taught me...

May Allah guide us All...Ameeeeeen

Can you show me any translation of the Bible that says that Judas "jumped" at Acts 1:18?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Can you show me any translation of the Bible that says that Judas "jumped" at Acts 1:18?

I'll make you a bet that when he looks the word he finds will be some form of the verb "to fall". (Though Wycliff uses "hanged" in Acts 1:18.)

 

[Grace Seeker]

Reason requires the infallibility of the Prophets, upon them all be peace, because: As already explained, the Prophets came to convey to people the Message of God. If we liken this Message or the Divine Revelation to light or pure water, as the Qur’an itself does (al-Ra’d, 13. 17; al-Nur, 24.35), it is absolutely necessary and indispensable to the nature of the Revelation that both the Archangel Gabriel who brought the Revelation, and the Prophet himself who conveyed it to people, should be absolutely pure. Otherwise, that Divine light, the Revelation, would have been extinguished or dimmed, or that ‘pure water’ polluted.

I just don't find this arugment to be at all convincing. The infallibility of the message might be guaranteed by the infallibility of the prophets, but it does not necessitate the infallibility of the prophets.

If P, then Q. Means that if you have P (an infallible prophet, or rain), then you know you also have Q (an infallible message, or clouds). But just because you have Q (clouds, or an infallible message) does not mean that it is a certainty that you also therefore have P (rain, or an infallible prophet).

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

^If you dont sincerely find the argument to be convincing i doubt anything we muslims will say to you will either

Its basically called "wasting time" and speaking of that, we seem to be wasting each others! and in getting no where.


In conclusion i feel Islaam isnt for you or it isnt for you right now! But we shall try to answer any Qs you have to the best of our knowledge

peace

 

[M.I.A.]

I just don't find this arugment to be at all convincing. The infallibility of the message might be guaranteed by the infallibility of the prophets, but it does not necessitate the infallibility of the prophets.

If P, then Q. Means that if you have P (an infallible prophet, or rain), then you know you also have Q (an infallible message, or clouds). But just because you have Q (clouds, or an infallible message) does not mean that it is a certainty that you also therefore have P (rain, or an infallible prophet).

I just don't find this arugment to be at all convincing. The infallibility of the message might be guaranteed by the infallibility of the prophets, but it does not necessitate the infallibility of the prophets.

If P, then Q. Means that if you have P (an infallible prophet, or rain), then you know you also have Q (an infallible message, or clouds). But just because you have Q (clouds, or an infallible message) does not mean that it is a certainty that you also therefore have P (rain, or an infallible prophet).

lol you made that a lot more complicated than needs be,
im sure even in imperfection they were within the will of god, they erred on demand lol
just trying to understand what is within gods power.
also i cant seem to seperate P and Q, to me they may not be seperate variables.

 

[Grace Seeker]

In conclusion i feel Islaam isnt for you or it isnt for you right now! But we shall try to answer any Qs you have to the best of our knowledge

peace

You are right. Islam is not for me, or perhaps, I'm not for Isalm. I believe there is a verse that refers to how Allah calls to Islam those created for it and the rest of us are as doomed as a doubly ****ed predestinated Calvinist would **** someone. (I hope those words about dam - nation don't get bleeped, I used them in the completely proper and appropriate sense of the word.) But don't think of it as a waste od time. I have learned things about Islam and the realities regarding how some Muslims view others of us outside of the Ummah, that I probably never would have learned any other place.

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

^Thank you as i honestly believe there was no need to swear/curse in the matters of religion!

I have a Q, since i am quite curious to asking you, what is the reason you joined this forum? Was it particularly to learn about Islaam?

And if so, what have you learnt about Islaam and what is that you agree upon and also what is it that you disagree upon regarding Islaam, maybe we can clarrify any Qs you have properly instead of getting in to geeky discussions

And i have no intention to be harsh or rude with anyone, maybe my text seems so, i apologise if it does.

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

also i cant seem to seperate P and Q, to me they may not be seperate variables.

Go here to learn about logic.

 

[tango92]

I just don't find this arugment to be at all convincing. The infallibility of the message might be guaranteed by the infallibility of the prophets, but it does not necessitate the infallibility of the prophets.

If P, then Q. Means that if you have P (an infallible prophet, or rain), then you know you also have Q (an infallible message, or clouds). But just because you have Q (clouds, or an infallible message) does not mean that it is a certainty that you also therefore have P (rain, or an infallible prophet).

in words you can understand maybe: in christianity you blindly believe. in islam We use our brains. if a prophet is a sinner (and in the bible amongst the worst of people) how can he be taken seriously?

lol if the message cant even inspire the chosen messenger of god to be good what hope for the rest of us?

if it is necessary to believe in the bible you must believe 1=3 then what hope is left for logic? is there even a point discussing anything with a christian?

 

[Amat Allah]

Peace, Amat Allah.

1 Timothy 4:1-3 says: "the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry ..."

So the reason that priests in the church do not marry is that they follow the teachings of devils.

All Praise and Glory Be to Allah , I never ever heard a Christian say so (the reason that priests in the church do not marry is that they follow the teachings of devils)...

Can you show me any translation of the Bible that says that Judas "jumped" at Acts 1:18?

no, I am not the one who supposed to show you, I am a Muslim and only seeking the knowledge of Qur`aan and Sunnah the knowledge of Allah`s religion which He perfected for us...

you are the one my respected brother who supposed to show me any translation of the bible that says Judas "fell from but not jumped off"... you are the Christian one who supposed to have the knowledge of the Christian books not me... it is your duty to prove for me that your books are right not me...with all my respect...

another 2 Qs:

What was the calling of the prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) and was he a Christian or Jewish?

 

[M.I.A.]

Go here to learn about logic.

sure im going to do that when i get time,

i just find it funny that you would think the message and the prophet as distinct seperate entities. after all we cannot have one without the other.
as for not needing the prophet to be infallable i agree, but even in error they were perfect and that is not a discussion of logic moreso understanding.
the message was not passed to there tongues, it was engraved within there very being....actually that sort of thinking would change your very view of the world and understanding of god.

im sorry


i followed your link, i failed to see the logical use of iff in this case, it seems highly innapropriate and im not sure what you were trying to prove.
even given the uses of iff i would say that you did not use it suitably.
as far as formulas go, you picked and overly complicated and not that usefull one.

 

[Grace Seeker]

^Thank you as i honestly believe there was no need to swear/curse in the matters of religion!

Nor I, and I didn't. The proper term for someone being condemned to spend eternity in hell is to say that they have been dam*ed. In that usage it is not a form of swearing or cursing at all, any more than it is to say that those that have been so dam*ed are "going to hell".

I have a Q, since i am quite curious to asking you, what is the reason you joined this forum? Was it particularly to learn about Islaam?

No. Originally, it was because I was participating in another forum where the view of many of the posters was that all Muslims, even if they weren't themselves involved in terrorism, were in agreement with the aims of those who did commit it. From personal experience I knew that it wasn't true, and I had hoped to come here and be resources with information and links to published material by which I could refute those allegations against Islam.

And if so, what have you learnt about Islaam and what is that you agree upon and also what is it that you disagree upon regarding Islaam, maybe we can clarrify any Qs you have properly instead of getting in to geeky discussions

Well, I've learned that while not all are into terrorism, there are more who stand on the sidelines cheering on their efforts than I had from my own personal experience imagined.

I learned that many Muslims have no idea the truth with regard to Christianity and rather than actually read for themselves, read anti-Christian tracts for what they care to learn and prefer to use cut-and-paste methods to engage in futile debate rather than actual conversation to pursue fruitful discussion.

I learned that many see the world through one set of lenses and are unable to even try to consider things in any ways different from what they have always be taught, that most will get more entrenched in their position rather than thoughtful when a non-Muslim disagrees with them and doesn't immediately see things the "true" way.

Of course, this type of personality is something I already knew well from conversations with other Christians, but through this board I learned that religion doesn't change the basic tendencies of human personality.

Lastly, I've learned not to judge a faith by what you encounter online, that actually caring for and being involved in one another's life comes out of face-to-face interactions; whereas, internet friendships may not even be as real as the paper they aren't printed on.


Oh, and I almost forgot, I learned that everything that is wrong with the world, from the source of evil to the lostness of our decadent culture from the prlifieration of Apple computers to the music of ZZ Topp, has at its roots either the USA or all things Christian.

 

[Grace Seeker]

in words you can understand maybe: in christianity you blindly believe. in islam We use our brains.

You see, that is just an arrogant statement that shows that after all of this time you have yet to take Christianity seriously or even consider what it says. Not that you should have to. But it just becomes comical when you say "in Christianity you blindly believe" and deny the possibility that anything of the sort could happen within Islam.

 

[M.I.A.]

Of course, this type of personality is something I already knew well from conversations with other Christians, but through this board I learned that religion doesn't change the basic tendencies of human personality.

this is a very important concept in my eyes and something we could talk about for a very very long time.

 

[tango92]

You see, that is just an arrogant statement that shows that after all of this time you have yet to take Christianity seriously or even consider what it says. Not that you should have to. But it just becomes comical when you say "in Christianity you blindly believe" and deny the possibility that anything of the sort could happen within Islam.

i have considered christianity extensively. do you agree that you must simply believe without proof? furthermore just recently you have said you must believe without even understanding key christian concepts to get into heaven. the fact is intellect is the only thing seperating us from animals. in islam we quote "hear and obey". what we hear we verify it is from Allah (in part this also means checking it actually makes logical sense)

 

[جوري]

I just don't find this arugment to be at all convincing. The infallibility of the message might be guaranteed by the infallibility of the prophets, but it does not necessitate the infallibility of the prophets.

If P, then Q. Means that if you have P (an infallible prophet, or rain), then you know you also have Q (an infallible message, or clouds). But just because you have Q (clouds, or an infallible message) does not mean that it is a certainty that you also therefore have P (rain, or an infallible prophet).

well, I am not expecting someone who worships a man, thinks three equals to one, that a man can spend the night in prayer then self-immolate to eat sins, or that a man sent to warn people against lewd sins to commit a very similar kind of sin if not worse convincing. Apparently you are in need of some sort of convolution to be convinced, thus the problem dear member lies with your standards and your understanding of the message of God. The rest of what you have written is nonsensical drivel, lay off the Irish in your coffee, there is no need to confabulate with something so simple and clear!

all the best

 

[Hugo]

in words you can understand maybe: in christianity you blindly believe. in islam We use our brains. if a prophet is a sinner (and in the bible amongst the worst of people) how can he be taken seriously?

If you read the Bible you will find that we are constantly made to think about what it says so belief is anything but blind. I cannot see the same in Islam, I doubt you can even admit that anything in Islam or its history is troublesome. You have decided, that is the right word, that God cannot use anyone but the absolutely righteous so you have put limits on what God can do? Truth is not the sole preserve of the absolutely righteous is it? A simple question, can you critically examine Islam and its history or are you conditions to accept it all without question?

 

[جوري]

If you read the Bible you will find that we are constantly made to think about what it says so belief is anything but blind.

Then what exactly is your belief based on if not blind acceptance without a single critical thought?

I cannot see the same in Islam,

Well of course you don't!

I doubt you can even admit that anything in Islam or its history is troublesome.

Why not? if the prophet himself already spoke of troubling times in Islamic history in many of his prophecies!

You have decided, that is the right word, that God cannot use anyone but the absolutely righteous so you have put limits on what God can do?

The only limits on god are put by christians, for certainly a god that is human and dies for not being able to take on a couple of provincial oafs is not at all capable is he?

Truth is not the sole preserve of the absolutely righteous is it?

and we have said so much on the previous page.. have you read the story I posted on Moses (the prophet) and zhu ilkhidr who was wiser but wasn't chosen for prophet-hood.. or like usual only interested in the look of your own writing?

A simple question, can you critically examine Islam and its history or are you conditions to accept it all without question?

A simple question is, are you willing to read any comprehensible account or only wish to inject your own conclusions which in fact aren't even your own since you can't quote verses you desire to argue against correctly!

all the best

 

[M.I.A.]

If you read the Bible you will find that we are constantly made to think about what it says so belief is anything but blind. I cannot see the same in Islam, I doubt you can even admit that anything in Islam or its history is troublesome. You have decided, that is the right word, that God cannot use anyone but the absolutely righteous so you have put limits on what God can do? Truth is not the sole preserve of the absolutely righteous is it? A simple question, can you critically examine Islam and its history or are you conditions to accept it all without question?

god uses everybody, just not in the way we expect most times.
absolutely righteous can be replaced by pious and better serve the purpose and its a more humble term, for humble people.
as for history, well you could turn to any book and gain insight into a moment of time but i doubt any capture the picture as a whole with any reliability. no matter how detailed the explanation of event the fallability of man will mean an incomplete picture.
im not saying history is bogus, im just saying if we all gave an account of the very same day we would all differ.
before you use the last two paragraphs to question the authenticity of the quran, it is not a historical account by anybody other than the prophet muhammed peace and blessings be upon him...and god.

 

[tango92]

If you read the Bible you will find that we are constantly made to think about what it says so belief is anything but blind. I cannot see the same in Islam,

oh hold on. you thought about it and came to the conclusion that 3=1. for some reason i dont think youve been thinking.

I doubt you can even admit that anything in Islam or its history is troublesome.

i see nothing wrong with any of the quran or hadith. humans will always be subject to mistakes. i know THAT is a major excuse for the discrepancies of your bible but that just reiterates the point. it is MAN MADE!

You have decided, that is the right word, that God cannot use anyone but the absolutely righteous so you have put limits on what God can do? Truth is not the sole preserve of the absolutely righteous is it?

wait a second your wording should be fixed here. i have come to the conlusion through logical reasoning OF WHICH YOU HAVE GIVEN NO REPLY, and reading my MIRACULOUS scripture that god WOULD not do such a thing. not that he CAN not do such a thing.

by your line of reasoning. do you believe god is good or evil? dont limit God by saying he is good now!

A simple question, can you critically examine Islam and its history or are you conditions to accept it all without question?

you know nothing of who i am or the journey i have made in life. truth is, if i werent 100% convinced islam was the truth i would not be sitting here.

can you say the same for yourself?