Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Amalek

Unregistered
  • Content Count

    116
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Amalek

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member
  • Birthday December 31

Profile Information

  • Location
    your mom

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Assalamu aleikum

    Yes I am a convert, but in reality I am revert, you know. :)

  2. Gosh ta mit bur dim alahu shadim kafiem aladin shamati falumik

  3. yeh i am.... wut made u ask?

  4. ^^The four links in my signature have answers for most of these questions you might also consider this: General Articles on Christianity
  5. TSK but once again you reply only to a small portion of what I have said both here and on the previous pages What do you think selective replying wins you? To me it says you have no rebuttals How do the other verses you pointed absolve Paul. The verse still shows him pretending to be a Jew in order to "win" Jews, pretending to be one under the law to "win" those under the law In each case he changes his message for particular audience in order to convert them. Today christian missionaries in fact use this same verse to justify outright lieing in order to convert everything that moves. With Jews they pretend to be Jews in order to convert Jews, with hindus they pretend to be hindus to convert hindus, and on and on it goes In the case of Jews for instance, outright lieing about select passages such as Isaiah 7:14 which were never prophetic to begin with And you didn't deal with all the other verses where Paul admits to lieing, not with all the geneology arguments, or the cases in Mathew where the gospel writers distort contexts in the jewish books in order to create prophecies that never existed, or the plethora of other arguments raised in this thread and this after I caught you red-handed propagating a search engine created by christian missionaries in order to convert muslims. You are a shameful breed! But the muslims here are free to read what was said in the other pages and judge for themselves Luckily for you I am busy and may not have time to reply, as essays and assignments are calling me. I ask that everyone here go back to the beginning of this thread and start reading the arguments and notice how the majority of what I have said has not even been rebutted, and the pitiful replies I have gotten so far are so nonsensical in thought that the question of wasting anymore time with the hopeless is rearing itself with me. If people still wish for more thorough elaborations of all the points I presented, such as how the genealogies in the NT are false, here are a few sources to get started: For complete refutation of the Christian lies of allege "prophecies" in the Corrupted Bibles (that they use to try to justify Christian beliefs): Links to use: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim...prophecies.html http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/the...ange/bible.html http://jewsforjudaism.org/index.php?option...&Itemid=234 http://jewsforjudaism.org/index.php?option...&Itemid=228 http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/1551/contents.htm (Shomrai ha-Brit Orthodox Jews refuting Christian lies about alleged "prophecies" in the Corrupted Bible) http://www.theskepticalreview.com/ http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/the...y/prophecy.html Also the links in my signature will be an asset as well
  6. This is the wrong forum to ask these question in bro/sis
  7. Well they are sacred places There aren't any resources like oil or coal for any person to use. So there is no reason why a non-muslim would even want to be there Its mostly just a place for muslim rituals There are places in India where non-hindus for instance are not permitted, for instance in temples The sikhs have a holy spot for sikhs only as well. Almost every religion has a place where the "other" isn't permitted Though there are cases of christian missionaries who disguise themselves as muslim pilgrims who enter Mecca in order to create subterfuge And actually I think its good advice. We go through a lot of purification rituals for instance, and it be useless to have a non-muslim mess it up You are there to bask in the unity/brotherhood that islam brings and to worship God as an ummah, so why have a non-believer there to mess that vision up
  8. As usual you rant away with presuppositions but since you too are illiterate on any of the quranic sciences, don't think your views are gonna get you far here You are after all the guy who told us that we need the torah to understand the quranic stories, which is ridiculous :squeez: I too watched "Learned" totally dismantle you in the Lebanese thread. For the rest of us you are a source of good stage comedy :!!!: Anyway as has been repeatedly explained the Quran is a collection of surahs, each written at a different time because they were addressing a different event in Mohammed's life. Hence why they talk about different scenarios, which is why you shouldn't read the Quran without the Sunnah because then you get really confused. What people like you do is read the Quran like one reads a story book, which is not how it is to be read at all The reason YOU are confused is because you are reading the Quran alone without any relevant tafsir, which wouldn't have been a problem had you some basic knowledge in quranic sciences the other mistake you make is that you assume the Quran is arranged in order of revelation, which it is NOT for important theological reasons If you are honestly interested in learning about why the Quran is arranged the way it is, then here is some reference: http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/AnIntroductio...cExcellence.pdf http://www.theinimitablequran.com/uniquegenre.pdf http://www.theinimitablequran.com/eloquenc...eralkawthar.pdf And even though you don't deserve it, I'll give you a good place to start learning why the Quran is arranged the way it is: http://www.missionislam.com/quran/revealationorder.htm I do question if you honestly will give any of them much thought, but hey at least I tried ;) yeah yeah you have said time and time again about contradictions, but still fail to cite any Or perhaps the best you can do is what you did on the previous page, which is cite a missionary website, which the brother refuted already If all you have on your plate are christians websites then I can give you a 1000 muslim websites that refute these accusations: http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/christianity www.islamic-awareness.org http://www.muslim-responses.com/christianity http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/ www.answering-christianity.com http://www.geocities.com/noorullahwebsite/index.html http://www.hizmetbooks.org/Could_not_Answer/ http://examinethetruth.com/ Most of them have search engines which you can use to look up these so-called contradictions Your precious enlightened society can kiss my ass. We aint westernizing if that's what you want. I have no idea what you mean by ÃõÎúÊó or what point you are making by citing it I'll let Pooya explain the matter Aqa Mahdi Puya says: Many Christian scholars have failed to understand the term "O sister of Harun", although, according to the Bible, Maryam and Zakariyya's wife were related to each other, and Zakariyya's wife was a descendant of the house of Harun. Generally any female belonging to a family is described as a sister or daughter of the head of the family. The Quran and the Bible assert that Maryam and Zakariyya's wife were the descendants of Harun, the brother of Musa, a prophet of God, and through him belonged to the tribe of Levi, noted for virtue and piety, and not to the house of Dawud. In order to remove the discrepancies between the two genealogies, given in Matthew and Luke, the Christian Church wrongly tries to establish that one refers to Maryam and the other refers to Joseph, the alleged husband of Maryam, which is entirely based upon conjecture and is against the clear wordings of the Quran and the Bible. When Isa was born the people of the town declared that Maryam had fallen and disgraced the name of her progenitors.
  9. Are you a convert to islam?

  10. Are you a convert?

  11. one of the million plus contradictions in the bible is that it cannot even agree on what the borders of the holy land are. there are different borders in different books. So how can jews tells us god gave them this land, when their own holy books don't even agree on what that holy land is Here is just one example of a one contradiction between Deuteronomy and Ezekiel for example:
  12. And how does that prove exclusivity to Jews exactly In fact this contradict verse 15 The promise that is the basis of the term is contained in Genesis 15:18-21 of the Hebrew Bible: On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates - the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girga[Edited Out]es and Jebusites." Notice it says to Abram's (Abraham) descendents who are both jews and arabs Then again one of the million plus contradictions in your bible is that it cannot even agree on what the borders of the holy land are. there are different borders in different books. Here is just one example of a one contradiction between Deuteronomy and Ezekiel for example:
  13. The Jamesian books almost completely confirm the islamic viewpoint of Jesus The vid has an ancient book purposely not included in the bible; a book older than even the four main canonical gospels check it out some other stuff for jokes:
  14. If you want to know the real miracles of the Quran, then go here: Linguistic miracle http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/AnIntroductio...cExcellence.pdf http://www.theinimitablequran.com/uniquegenre.pdf http://www.theinimitablequran.com/eloquenc...eralkawthar.pdf
  15. Anyway I should get this out of the way, how the gospels misuse jewish prophecies: The gospels are divided into two groups -- the "Synoptic Gospels" (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and "John". Many of the stories in the synoptics agree with each other, while "John" introduces concepts not found in either text. In addition, John contains many passages that are regarded as forgeries, such as the story of the adultress. Although they are presented as an historical account of the events surrounding Jesus's life, none of the significant events in the gospels are supported by independent historical accounts by contemporary historians. For example, QUOTE Mat 2:16 ¶ Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. which is called "The Slaughter of the Innocents", is not found in any text, Jewish, Roman, Greek or otherwise. And modern historians of Herod of course do not record the said event, contrary to how today's historians do indeed use the Sunnah to record everything that went on in Median during the rise of Islam. Another problem with the gospels is the misuse of Jewish prophecy. For example, when Jesus supposedly rides into Jerusalem on "Palm Sunday", he is supposedly fulfilling this prophecy -- QUOTE Zec 9:9 ¶ Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. However, while he supposedly fulfilled that prophecy (everyone rode donkeys back then lol), the next verse remained unfulfilled -- QUOTE Zec 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion [shall be] from sea [even] to sea, and from the river [even] to the ends of the earth. It is clear that Jesus never had "dominion" from sea to sea. When verses such as this remain unfulfilled, the Christian response is either that the verse is symbolic, or that it will happen during a "Second Coming". A primary theme of the Gospels is bringing a "new law" and they cite numerous instances where Jesus "supposedly" introduced a clarification of Jewish law to correct a mistaken belief. Other than behavior when Jesus clearly sinned, according to Jewish law (breaking a plethora of laws in the OT as the NT records of him), many of the assertions are simply incorrect. It is not a sin to pray for a sick person to become well, contrary to what the Gospels state. The longest prayer in the Shabbat service, the Amidah, includes a prayer for the sick -- the 8th of the 18 (or 19 in some congregations) blessings is thanking God for healing the sick. There are lots of other problems------- -doesnt the tanakh specify that the messiah would be always protected by God in Ps20:6,18:5,28:8,84:9,1Chron16:22,Isa42:4, so then how could he be crucified by the Romans? -where does the Tanakh say that 1 of the criterias of the Messiah is to die for other's sins past/present/future? -where does the Tanakh talk about some kind of blood atonement for one's future sins (as trinitarians believe that once we accept jesus/god died on the cross then all our sins even future sins are forgiven)? because none of the clearly outlined criterias of the messiah in the Tanakh have been met by Jesus, trinitarians use the excuse that the messiah MUST come twice. So i ask bring the proof that he HAS to come twice. I dont mind him coming twice as long as he fulfills the clearly outlined criterias of the appellation "messiah" otherwise you cannot call him "messiah". since according to christians the messiah HAS to come twice then it means you are assuming Jesus has fulfilled all requirements of the messiah as clearly outlined in the Tanakh, for him to bear that apellation, in his 1st coming but this causes you another problem: Jesus hasnt fulfilled 1 of the clearly outlined criterias so if you want to accept the scenario (not present in scriptures) that the messiah HAS to come twice then it implies a rejection of the title of messiah/savior to Jesus in his 1st coming. Christians deceivingly point to a few verses and say "it must be Jesus(AS)" Yet, when there are numerous other verses that do not fit him they do not deal with them. Example: Psalm 22 they all shout out "it refers to the crucufixion! no, not so fast now, the verse is not to be read that way but that has already been dealt with. Now, let us just say that their interpretation is justified. Why not read on in the psalm and notice (if you can) that it portrays someone who is saved by God, who prays to God afterward in thanksgiving and joins the congregation of the Lord. So if this in any contorted way does refer to Jesus it does not mean the trinitarian god you people refer to. It just means a righteous servant who is thankful for being saved and joins others in the worship of God. now to the "suffering serveant:" he is decribed as suffering from disease, more than once (most likely leperousy) Does Jesus(AS) fulfill that part? He was shunned by men, everyone hated him. The gospels give the impresion he was famous for healing He opened up not his mouth. Um, did not Jesus talk at his trial? "I am?" Note well that if the suffering servant is a person and he does make intercession it is not for the entire world, it is only for his people. No where does it give the impression that it is for some original sin, it is done because of the people going astray. This is the interpretation one gets if we assume it was a human being. Find me: Original Sin A dying and ressurected god intercession for the world To christians this is a monumental problem, to muslims its a non-issue because we know the Gospels and the Jewish books are corrupt as the first link in my signature proves.
×
×
  • Create New...