"yashmaki" wrote:

fiver i'm skint is that all you're gona give me!

hey i aint made out of money

"Constantine" wrote:

We worship him because he told us he is divine and part of God, not because he could turn water into wine or walk on water.

"I believe in God the Almighty" #3 (Articles of the Apostolic Creed, Theodore Zahn, p. 33-37)

"The first of all the commandments is Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One." #8 (Mark 12:29)

"So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God" #9 (Mark 16:19)

"and Jesus ……….for forty days in the wilderness was tempted by the devil" #12 (Luke 4:1)
In the Bible we also read:
"God cannot be tempted by the devil" #13 (James 1:13)

"And devils came out of many, crying out and saying, 'You are the son of God!' And he, rebuking them, did not allow them to speak, for they knew that he was the Messiah" #14 (Luke 4:41).

"This is the prophet Jesus" #18 (Mathew 21:11)

"Whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. Whoever welcomes God's messenger because he is God's messenger will share in his reward." #19 (Mathew 10:40)

"No messenger is greater than the one who sent him" #20 (John 13:16)

"And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." #21 (John 17:3)

"Here is my servant whom I have chosen" #22 (Mathew 12:18)

"To you first, God having raised up His servant Jesus, sent him to bless you" #23 (The Acts 3:26.).

"Why do you call me good? No one is good but one, that is God." #24 (Mark 10:18.)

"You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only you shall serve" #25 (Luke 4:8.)

thats suficient proof that jesus was a prophet and not god

"Allahuakbar" wrote:

This guy wasn't saying it was gonna rain at a certain time, he was saying that it would rain at a certian time, then stop, then rain again. According to the times he would say. Dodgy guy lol.

lol you've heard of weather reports haven't you?

I'm getting a vision...

Hang on...

It's getting clearer...

Wait... here it comes:

Akbar.. you can expect rain and a low of 53 on Kiawah Island, SC starting tonight!

With... a chance of precipitation at 89.. no, no, it's 90%!

It shall rain early...then remaining cloudy with showers overnight. Thunder possible, yea verily! Low 53F. ESE winds shifting to SSW at 10 to 15 mph. Chance of rain 90%. Rainfall around a half an inch.

"Constantine" wrote:

lol whoa what's with the convert Dave drive all of a sudden - Judda calm down, Yash - hooked ya up with an explanation below. I can provide further relevant scripture if you need it.

But let's try not to transfer our frustration at miracle man onto me or my religion folks.

lol i dont think anyones trying to convert u (where'd u get that from?) but Judda obviously thinks that because u PM-ed him a coupla times, he knows u better than u know urself! :roll:

"Constantine" wrote:

"yashmaki" wrote:

maybe you should have pointed out there are countless verses in the bible that permit polygamy. Example, King david, King Solomon had hundreds of wives and concubines many other examples.

...the fact that Prophets Kings or Patriarchs practiced it is irrelevant since in our beliefs they were not perfect and did sin.

David especially.

plz can u reply to my previous post re: this. i.e. does it really say in the Bible that David and Soloman had concubines? coz muslims would see this as an extremely disrespectful portrayal of Prophets. and we believe Prophets were capable of making mistakes too, that they were not infallible, but neither did they have such massive sins on their records either - i mean, how could people accept their message if ther character was such?

"Aasiyah" wrote:

"Constantine" wrote:

lol whoa what's with the convert Dave drive all of a sudden - Judda calm down, Yash - hooked ya up with an explanation below. I can provide further relevant scripture if you need it.

But let's try not to transfer our frustration at miracle man onto me or my religion folks.

lol i dont think anyones trying to convert u (where'd u get that from?) but Judda obviously thinks that because u PM-ed him a coupla times, he knows u better than u know urself! :roll:

assia i was only guessin but the stuff i sed he sed he really did say.. like da bible is too damn old to interpate properly and only fools think that it can be interpated properly at this day and age.... when it came 2 stoning to death the OT abrogated the NT... and that Muhammad was a falsed prophet who created a flawed, perverted religion....etc. ofcourse the guy is entitled to his own opinion but i was VERY offended when he said "how or even y shud da usa distinguish u from binladin and the islamists"... i guess the guy had no idea what that felt like :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

n e way my chritians m8s say da stuff dat i betted on...so y shuldn't he?

"Constantine" wrote:

lol whoa what's with the convert Dave drive all of a sudden

please dont judge us by ur own chritian standered....

i can do splendid magic tricks and i can nab some money off my dad and bribe ppl if i wanted to convert dem...

the koran blatently says that god guides whomever he wills and he misguides whoemver he wills :roll:

[2:145] [b]Even if you show the followers of the previous scripture every kind of miracle, they will [u]not[/u] follow[/b] your Qiblah. Nor shall you follow their Qiblah.

its [u]NOT[/u] our duty to guide... :roll: god duz dat...

"Aasiyah" wrote:

plz can u reply to my previous post re: this. i.e. does it really say in the Bible that David and Soloman had concubines? coz muslims would see this as an extremely disrespectful portrayal of Prophets. and we believe Prophets were capable of making mistakes too, that they were not infallible, but neither did they have such massive sins on their records either - i mean, how could people accept their message if ther character was such?

The Quran allowed men to have concubines: 'what your right hand posseses'.

But seeing as slavery is no more, this provision no longer applies.

"Judda" wrote:

assia i was only guessin but the stuff i sed he sed he really did say.. like da bible is old.... when it came 2 stoning to death the OT abrogated the NT... and that Muhammad was a falsed prophet who created a flawed, perverted religion....etc. ofcourse the guy is entitled to his onw opnion but i was VERY offended when he said "how or even y shud da usa distinguish u from binladin and the islamists"

y do i get the feeling ur taking his words out of context? if u were offended u shud have questioned him further about it. i trust Dave will clarify this anyhow.

"Judda" wrote:

n e way my chritians m8s say da stuff dat i betted on...so y shuldn't he?

maybe because Christians happen to have individual brains as opposed to being copies of eachother! u shouldnt assume things about people Judda, its condescending.

"Judda" wrote:

"Constantine" wrote:

lol whoa what's with the convert Dave drive all of a sudden

please dont judge us by ur own chritian standered....

i can do splendid magic tricks and i can nab some money off my dad and bribe ppl if i wanted to convert dem...

the koran blatently says that god guides whomever he wills and he misguides whoemver he wills :roll:

[2:145] [b]Even if you show the followers of the previous scripture every kind of miracle, they will [u]not[/u] follow[/b] your Qiblah. Nor shall you follow their Qiblah.

its [u]NOT[/u] our duty to guide... :roll:

i see that ur quoting the Quran from submission.org/ur 'bros disk' AGAIN. :roll: come on Judda...!
next time plz go to this site (it has a reliable Quran search facility): http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/

and anyway, wot r u talking about? Dave made it clear that the forum member should steer clear of this 'miracle-performing' Christian.

"Aasiyah" wrote:

plz can u reply to my previous post re: this. i.e. does it really say in the Bible that David and Soloman had concubines? coz muslims would see this as an extremely disrespectful portrayal of Prophets. and we believe Prophets were capable of making mistakes too, that they were not infallible, but neither did they have such massive sins on their records either - i mean, how could people accept their message if ther character was such?

Yes, David and Soloman both had concubines and slaves, as well has hundreds of wives.

Muslims don't differentiate between kings, prophets, judges, or patriarchs - it appears they all have the same meaning to you "whoever brings a book"

For us it is much different, the bible is not just a collection of revelations from God to people - though it is partly that. It is a record of Gods interaction with people over thousands of years. We believe God works through good people, and bad people a like - a famous example is the Pharoah of Egypt whose heart God "hardened" - the Pharoah thus became a part of God's plan, whether he liked it or not, not because he was a particularly super person, but because it was God's will.

It is extremely important to Christians that we make differenciations - during the time of the Kings especially. Not only was God's great plan progressing steadily, but the fall of the Jews was too. Initially Israel was ruled by Judges who interpreted the law of God and applied it to the people, but gradually they saw other nations had kings and wanted kings as well. God told them this was not what he wanted from their covenant and would lead to their ruin - but they ignored. Thus they were given their kings. From the beginning it is important to notice the excesses of the kings - though in the very beginning men like David and Soloman were good God fearing people and God acted through them, they became perverted by their power - so it was with almost all the kings.

Eventually the wealth and licentiousness of the kings became the wealth and licentiousness of the Isrealites themselves. Then God sent Amos - one of my favorite Prophets.

At the time he was sent Israel was a seperate kingdom from Judah and the Israelites were very wealthy and believed it was because God liked them. So here comes this ugly smelly straggly haired goat herder who tells them that God isn't just angry - he hates them, is going to ignore their prayers and offerings and destroy them completely.

Something like 60 years later the assyrians attacked and the tribes have never come back together again.

But God promised that in the distant future he would send others and bring them back on track until eventually they are reunited.

Thus for Christians it is not just "not a problem" that kings like David or Solomon screwed up, it's an intrical part of our belief in the bible as a written history of a peoples experience with God, and it reinforces our belief in a divine plan.

It was the Israelites need to be like the nonbelievers around them that was their downfall, and adopting kings was the first step.

It's not the words of David or Solomon which interest us the most - it's their lives and how they fit into God's plan. The Psalms are beautiful, and I have no doubt David meant them - but much like this David, he loved God but found the comforts of wealth and excess too comfortable to give up and refused to.

Thus he failed - but he was redeemed in Christ.

David for us is the symbol of the Israelites and humanity.

assia it was not from submission.org or my bros disc, i got it from www.koran.com, check submission.org if u like..

on geocity they spotted 50 errors/contradictions in yusif ali's transaltion of the koran. So many ppl who have read that have left the religion. That’s why I don’t trust the guy.

Dave said the evil comment when I told him about the riduilous number of sects I found in google.

Quote:

assia i was only guessin but the stuff i sed he sed he really did say.. like da bible is too damn old to interpate properly and only fools think that it can be interpated properly at this day and age.... when it came 2 stoning to death the OT abrogated the NT... and that Muhammad was a falsed prophet who created a flawed, perverted religion....etc. ofcourse the guy is entitled to his own opinion but i was VERY offended when he said "how or even y shud da usa distinguish u from binladin and the islamists"... i guess the guy had no idea what that felt like :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

Yes stoning is abrogated by the new testament, yes I said as a christian reading Muhammad's words against the trinity I am forced to conclude he is a false prophet, I don't recall saying islam was perverted but I said to what extent it is correct depends on how much it agrees with Christianity, and that last comment was directed at you Judda. I was harsh and reacting to your proud explanation that you are a wahabbi but i'll retract that now since I did go overboard.

My point was simple though - you counter in secret so much of what people say on this forum, specific members especially - you tell me emphatically you are correct and they are wrong - they tell me they are correct and you are wrong, i've known them longer Judda.

Thus who am I to believe? And when you talk about being a wahabbist and stuff like that, making snidey little comments left and right why should I differentiate you from any fringe sect, you pointed out there are like 5,000 and 20 and that you are right and everything I think is wrong is also wrong according do your flavor - aren't you just telling me what I want to hear?

It seems like your only boundary is that everybody else is wrong if you don't like it.

So why should I bother to differenciate if there is no "islam" and it's all just subjective to you?

"Enver" wrote:

"Aasiyah" wrote:

plz can u reply to my previous post re: this. i.e. does it really say in the Bible that David and Soloman had concubines? coz muslims would see this as an extremely disrespectful portrayal of Prophets. and we believe Prophets were capable of making mistakes too, that they were not infallible, but neither did they have such massive sins on their records either - i mean, how could people accept their message if ther character was such?

The Quran allowed men to have concubines: 'what your right hand posseses'.

But seeing as slavery is no more, this provision no longer applies.

thats disgusting!

I have not read that in the koran and I have only read that in a few week, dodgy ahadith which everyone i know rejects.

god wud NEVER allow such filth!

"Constantine" wrote:

I was harsh and reacting to your proud explanation that you are a wahabbi but i'll retract that now since I did go overboard.

Yeah right :roll:

Do you say that to EVERY wahhabi you meet?

Everyone in the forum cusses us so if u listen to them and the media you’ve only got a one sided view of us. You cannot condemn us all over a few nutcases

"Constantine" wrote:

My point was simple though - you counter in secret so much of what people say on this forum, specific members especially - you tell me emphatically you are correct and they are wrong

huh?

"Constantine" wrote:

i've known them longer Judda.

no u haven't, i was here b4 u under a 100 diffrent usernames, i know the good and bad about EVERYBODY in the forum...

"Constantine" wrote:

Thus who am I to believe? And when you talk about being a wahabbist and stuff like that, making snidey little comments left and right why should I differentiate you from any fringe sect, you pointed out there are like 5,000 and 20, and you tell me that there is no framework - so why (under this logic) should I differentiate them from the extremists?

we have a few fanatics like EVERY society- what gives you the right to condemn a whole religion?

"Constantine" wrote:

It seems like your only boundary is that "they do bad stuff"

who?

Reworded my original post for more clarity.

Look Judda - you tell me that everybody on this forum is wrong if I don't believe it - and that i'm supposed to listen to you.

lol everybody knows that, just like any christian, i've got a problem with shariah when it persecutes Christian converts, everybody knows i've got a problem with polygamy, and that i'm not cool with Ayesha.

This isn't new - but while everybody here has long since settled with the fact that some differences between the religion have no bridges - you are off telling me they are all not muslims and that you are right, and everything I think is wrong is actually not part of islam anyway.

Added to that you that you tell me you are a wahhabbi - don't really clarify what you mean by that at all, and you tell me every one of these individual sects is wrong but you are right.

So why should I differenciate Judda if it's all just one big subjective clump and you can agree with all the stuff that sounds nice to you and disagree with all the stuff that doesn't?

You are the only person on this forum that talks about members behind their backs - nobody else regularly PMs me with messages about how everyone else is wrong and you are right. So if all of this is subjective, why should I differenciate Judda?

"Judda" wrote:

assia it was not from submission.org or my bros disc, i got it from www.koran.com, check submission.org if u like..

on geocity they spotted 50 errors/contradictions in yusif ali's transaltion of the koran. So many ppl who have read that have left the religion. That’s why I don’t trust the guy.

Dave said the evil comment when I told him about the riduilous number of sects I found in google.

'koran.com' doesnt seem to exist?! all i had to do was copy and paste that quote into google, and it came up on submission.org! and r u trying to tell me geocity is now an authority on the Quran? anyway, if u dont 'like' Yusuf Ali for whatever reason, u can get the Pickthall translation on the Islamicity Quran Search too. :roll:

but Islam never permitted having concubines. This was a pre islamic practise as was slavery (two interlinked). As the Quran was revealed and put into practise our prophet went about abolishing such mistreatment of women and slaves.

What your "right hand possess'" refers to female slaves, or female captives of war, not concubines as such. If muslim men wished to have a sexual relationship with these women they would have to marry them, and supposing the girls accepted then it would be permitted. So having concubines was never permitted in Islam. It was something existant waay before.

As Islam came into being the system of slavery was slowly broken down, although it was never truly abolished because it was so heavily embedded in society at large, both amongst the muslims and non muslims. Muslims were encouraged to free their slaves, or if the slaves wished to remain with them they were to give them the same rights as a free man.

Our prophet himself was given Maariya (ra),a coptic by an egyptian ruler as a gift. Rather than taking her as a concubine he married her. She was not his slave, she was not his concubine. She was given the same rights and respect as all his other wives. There are some scholars who dispute this but most the scholars class her as his wife.

So concubines or slavery was never permitted by Islam. It may have continued during the early days of Islam, but the Quran never justified it.

I see you have edited the last part of your post:

"Constantine" wrote:

It seems like your only boundary is that everybody else is wrong if you don't like it.

not really, u know I admit to the flaws in the religion and in my culture…

"Constantine" wrote:

So why should I bother to differenciate if there is no "islam" and it's all just subjective to you?

Please clarify…

"Constantine" wrote:

"Aasiyah" wrote:

plz can u reply to my previous post re: this. i.e. does it really say in the Bible that David and Soloman had concubines? coz muslims would see this as an extremely disrespectful portrayal of Prophets. and we believe Prophets were capable of making mistakes too, that they were not infallible, but neither did they have such massive sins on their records either - i mean, how could people accept their message if ther character was such?

Yes, David and Soloman both had concubines and slaves, as well has hundreds of wives.

Muslims don't differentiate between kings, prophets, judges, or patriarchs - it appears they all have the same meaning to you "whoever brings a book"

For us it is much different, the bible is not just a collection of revelations from God to people - though it is partly that. It is a record of Gods interaction with people over thousands of years. We believe God works through good people, and bad people a like - a famous example is the Pharoah of Egypt whose heart God "hardened" - the Pharoah thus became a part of God's plan, whether he liked it or not, not because he was a particularly super person, but because it was God's will.

It is extremely important to Christians that we make differenciations - during the time of the Kings especially. Not only was God's great plan progressing steadily, but the fall of the Jews was too. Initially Israel was ruled by Judges who interpreted the law of God and applied it to the people, but gradually they saw other nations had kings and wanted kings as well. God told them this was not what he wanted from their covenant and would lead to their ruin - but they ignored. Thus they were given their kings. From the beginning it is important to notice the excesses of the kings - though in the very beginning men like David and Soloman were good God fearing people and God acted through them, they became perverted by their power - so it was with almost all the kings.

Eventually the wealth and licentiousness of the kings became the wealth and licentiousness of the Isrealites themselves. Then God sent Amos - one of my favorite Prophets.

At the time he was sent Israel was a seperate kingdom from Judah and the Israelites were very wealthy and believed it was because God liked them. So here comes this ugly smelly straggly haired goat herder who tells them that God isn't just angry - he hates them, is going to ignore their prayers and offerings and destroy them completely.

Something like 60 years later the assyrians attacked and the tribes have never come back together again.

But God promised that in the distant future he would send others and bring them back on track until eventually they are reunited.

Thus for Christians it is not just "not a problem" that kings like David or Solomon screwed up, it's an intrical part of our belief in the bible as a written history of a peoples experience with God, and it reinforces our belief in a divine plan.

It was the Israelites need to be like the nonbelievers around them that was their downfall, and adopting kings was the first step.

It's not the words of David or Solomon which interest us the most - it's their lives and how they fit into God's plan. The Psalms are beautiful, and I have no doubt David meant them - but much like this David, he loved God but found the comforts of wealth and excess too comfortable to give up and refused to.

Thus he failed - but he was redeemed in Christ.

David for us is the symbol of the Israelites and humanity.

wow, thanx for the info, i've learnt something new today! pretty shocking stuff actually, i always thought one of the major similarities between Islam and Christianity is that we recognised the same 'leaders' (Prophets/Kings etc) throughout history, and held them in equal esteem. but that is clearly not the case. i get wot ur saying about Pharoah being part of God's plan and all, but when it comes to David and Soloman, i find that hard to stomach. :? i guess thats a point where Christians and Muslims differ then.

"Aasiyah" wrote:

"Judda" wrote:

assia it was not from submission.org or my bros disc, i got it from www.koran.com, check submission.org if u like..

on geocity they spotted 50 errors/contradictions in yusif ali's transaltion of the koran. So many ppl who have read that have left the religion. That’s why I don’t trust the guy.

Dave said the evil comment when I told him about the riduilous number of sects I found in google.

'koran.com' doesnt seem to exist?! all i had to do was copy and paste that quote into google, and it came up on submission.org! and r u trying to tell me geocity is now an authority on the Quran? anyway, if u dont 'like' Yusuf Ali for whatever reason, u can get the Pickthall translation on the Islamicity Quran Search too. :roll:

Quote:

[2:145] Even if you show the followers of the scripture every kind of miracle, they will not follow your Qiblah. Nor shall you follow their Qiblah. They do not even follow each others' Qiblah. If you acquiesce to their wishes, after the knowledge that has come to you, you will belong with the transgressors.

thats what submission.org said :roll:
there is a word that distingishes the 2 aswell....

Pickthall cool i sometimes use his transaltions on the forum

i ain't trying to convert you Dave loool. If you truly believe in something sooner or later you will come to follow it. you don't need ppl like me to persuade you, I'm no good at that anyway.

Lol I didn’t notice this post :?

"Constantine" wrote:

Look Judda - you tell me that everybody on this forum is wrong if I don't believe it - and that i'm supposed to listen to you.

rubbish u know a give u an all rounded view

"Constantine" wrote:

lol everybody knows that, just like any christian, i've got a problem with shariah when it persecutes Christian converts, everybody knows i've got a problem with polygamy, and that i'm not cool with Ayesha.

that’s cool coz i aint happy about it either, and I aint cool with Mary.

"Constantine" wrote:

Added to that you that you tell me you are a wahhabbi - don't really clarify what you mean by that at all, and you tell me every one of these individual sects is wrong but you are right.

lol I would do

"Judda" wrote:

Please clarify…

You know I don't post stuff PMs Judda

lol you got me in a corner

"Constantine" wrote:

"Judda" wrote:

Please clarify…

You know I don't post stuff PMs Judda

lol you got me in a corner

he doesnt seem to mind, i mean if uv got his permission, u can post his PMs here right?

"Constantine" wrote:

"Judda" wrote:

Please clarify…

You know I don't post stuff PMs Judda

lol you got me in a corner

yeah but i was furious about what u sed...

yea i know u r angry about chritian converts being killed in saudi, dave da koran says there is no compulsion in religion, that is abrogated by ahadith [b]i reject[/b], now r u gonna judge us all by the same brutal standerds?

"Judda" wrote:

"Constantine" wrote:

"Judda" wrote:

Please clarify…

You know I don't post stuff PMs Judda

lol you got me in a corner

yeah but i was furious about what u sed...

yea i know u r angry about chritian converts being killed in saudi, dave da koran says there is no compulsion in religion, that is abrogated by ahadith [b]i reject[/b], now r u gonna judge us all by the same brutal standerds?

Judda, u dont seem to be getting Dave - in order to clarify he needs to be able to quote from your PMs - will u give him permission to do so?

come off it judda wahabi...forgive me for laughing judda looool. Wahabis are known to be hardcore orthodox muslims. They are referrred to as salafis aswell. Ppl often call your regular muslim who prays daily, fasts in ramadan, does his pilgrimage etc wahabis.

In my mind they're on par with the salafi movement. Now Judda are you this sort of wahabi or have you got some other definition in mind? Actually this is a different topic open a new thread for it if you wana reply that is.

"Judda" wrote:

yeah but i was furious about what u sed...

You already told me what you were furious about and you told me what you were going to do about it.

Quote:

yea i know u r angry about chritian converts being killed in saudi, dave da koran says there is no compulsion in religion, that is abrogated by ahadith [b]i reject[/b], now r u gonna judge us all by the same brutal standerds?

When you run off and tell me about how everybody on the forum is just being brutal for x or y reason or that certain forum members think rape is okay and therefore you are right and they are wrong it sounds to me like you are doing two things - telling me what I want to hear, and interpreting/putting words in other peoples mouths.

Does that sound to you like a sound basis for judging who is and is not a muslim? - Because that is your preoccupation, telling me what a muslim is.

And it's been awfully pliable thusfar

dave i just say it how it is

Yash that was very steriotypical :evil: :evil: :evil:

lol i'm a pretty damn unorthadox wahhabi and i can assure u that most of r not how yash and the media has described us.

"Aasiyah" wrote:

Judda, u dont seem to be getting Dave - in order to clarify he needs to be able to quote from your PMs - will u give him permission to do so?

well lets just see if he stoops down to my level, i am very good at emotionally hijacking ppl. infact ed once called me a "little pierce of garbage" on PM.

You love getting people worked up don't you

"Judda" wrote:

"Aasiyah" wrote:

Judda, u dont seem to be getting Dave - in order to clarify he needs to be able to quote from your PMs - will u give him permission to do so?

well lets just see if he stoops down to my level, i am very good at emotionally hijacking ppl. infact ed once called me a "little peice of garbage" on PM.

I NEVER SAID THAT.

!!!!!!!

This is like being stuck in a cage - in a corner with a big padlock on it underwater.

[img]http://joe12518.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/...