Jump to content
Islamic Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About open

  • Rank
    Full Member

Previous Fields

  • Marital Status
  • Religion

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. As the subtitles indicates, in German (as in most European languages) the day precedes the month in dates. Therefore "9.11." is the 9th of November in Germany. And as it happens, this "nine eleven" date is of special importance for Germany: On the 9th of November 1918, the German emperor Wilhelm II resigned, Germany became a republic. The later development, especially the unfair treaty of Versailles, made many Germans think things had been better in the monarchy than in the democracy. On the 9th of November 1923 the then unknown Adolf Hitler tried to repeat Mussolinis fames march to Rome in Germany. The day before, 8th of November, some leading Bavarian politicians were forced to join, but they soon departed, and the march was stopped by the machine-guns of the police a few hundred meters after it had started. Hitler was arrested and got a long-term sentence, but he was released about one year after. On the 9th of November 1938, when the Nazis celebrated the 25th anniversary of the 1923 "tragedy" and remembering the "martyrs" that died there, a Secretary of the German Embassy in Paris, vom Rath, died. He had been attacked by a Jew who was embittered that his relatives was forced to leave Germany without any possessions to take with. The Nazis, using a familiar tactic, blamed "The Jews" for it, and organized a Progrom: the meetings on that days were used to spread the parole, and during the night every Synagogue in Germany was attacked most were burned down), together with many Jewish shops. Hundreds of Jews were killed. The Jews were forced to pay 1 Billion Reichsmark, that is several billion Euros in today's currency. On the 12th of November, an act of government was issued that forbid Jews to sell any goods to "Aryans". While the first three dates are related by a logical chain of cause and effect, the last one seems unrelated tho the other. On the 9th of November 1989 the reform government of communist east Germany (GDR) resolved to allow their citiztens to cross the border to the West. This was published in a press conference by a leading party member who did this without any authorization and could not tell any details. The news was spread by west German media and soon many citizens came and demanded to cross the border, because "it has been opened by the government". Anybody knows what happened then ... In 1990, some people proposed the 9th of November to be the national holiday of reunited Germany, but the then Chancellor decided to take a date that was not related to the holocaust. We celebrate the day of the final reunifacation, 3rd of October 1990. The 9th of November is still a date to remember what happened 1938 and 1989.
  2. The Superiorities Of The West

    Peace from our Lord, let me try do write something that helps mutual understanding. Paradoxically, I have to start with a point that seems to be the opposite. In my view, this is an example of westernophobic thinking. Of course to have to explain this, and to do it I describe some piece of Islamophic thinking: The West is divided by many conflicts and clashes of interest. Left against right, Atheists against Christians, poor against rich, in some countries ethnic conflicts like white against coloured, and of course all the conflicts and differences between nations. On the other hand, there is a monolithic threat to west: Islam. Whether Khomeiny or Taliban, Saudis or Hisbollah, Ghaddafi or al Qaida: they all are part of a grand design to infiltrate, attack and destroy us. In this forum, I don't need to write a single word to show that this Islamophobic view is nonsense. But look, Salih Mirzabeyoglu almost says the same, only the roles of "East" and "West" are exchanged! Therefore I say this is westernophobic. Whether Salih Mirzabeyoglu shows other traits of westernophobia, I don't know, but it may well be possible ... But let me aks the question: how do people like Islamobiphics or Salih Mirzabeyoglu arrive at such erroneus conclusions? I promised to say something that helps mutual understanding, and I hope my answer to that question fulfills this promise: People do not remember or even notice anything they could perceive with their senses, they concentrate on differences from the "normal" case. Another way of describing is that they neglect "redundant information", so this behavior has some rational basis. But what is considered "normal" depends on the environment you are living in. You can see it in such innocent cases as face characteristics: Africans and Asians usually say that they have difficulties to tell one European face from another, because they are so similar. Europeans just feel the oppisite: All Chinese (or all black Africans) look alike ... This does not apply to migrants that experience so many "foreign" faces in their new environment that they naturally learn to distinguish them. But this is rather off-topic. My point is that this is not restricted to face recognition: it applies to everything. People looking at foreign cultures quite naturally group them accrding to the differences to their own culture: the nearer cultures are to their own culture, the finer the differences that are perceived. Therefore, Salih Mirzabeyoglu perceives more differences within the "East" than within the "West". From a neutral point of view, "East" and "West" are both inhomogen, it it is impossible to say which one is more diverse. I feel I have to add that I don't think Mirzabeyoglu is an exact parrallel to the Islamophobic view I described above, he seems to be more learned than the people that typically share such a primitive Islamophobic view. But it would be possible to give a more refined (and therefore somewhat less radical) Islamophoibic view that is an exact parallel to the view of Mirzabeyoglu (to cite it at the top of the posting might make the discussion more difficult, so I choose to do it the easy way :sl: ). As to the Greek inheritence: Many people forget that Greek knowledge and philosophy was almost lost in early medieval Europe, the medieval Europeans learned it by Latin translations of the Arabic versions of Euklid, Plato and so on. The Greek tradition was an important part of the great Islamic cultures of the past, it seems that those scholars who drove it out in the name of sharia weekened the Islamic world (this is a quesion rather than a statement). And a last remark: If I try to divide the world's spiritual traditons into two groups, East and West, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam will be in one group, Hinduism and Buddhism in the other group. I see more differences between Christianity and Islam than between Hinduism and Buddhiusm, but I know that I am biased, being "Western", and have to subtract that bias. Again I end up with not knowing whether "East" or "West" is more diverse ... The main difference between "East" and "West" as I define them is monotheism and its consequences (which are much more that just the number of Gods being 1). And since many consequences are shared by atheism (or at least classical atheism), atheism belongs to West (like a child that has gone astray).
  3. Happy & Comfort ( Os )

    Well, looking at the list of options I'm puzzled. Some window, a lot of Linux, and ... nothing!!!######you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/style_images/1/folder_post_icons/icon14.gif[/img] There are several non-Linux-Unices: For non-IBM-Computers lots of them ... Mac OS X .... BSD in different "distributions" Solaris and some time, the Hurd :sl: :sl: Maybe there are non-Unix versions of (old) Mac OS out in space? Or a non-Unix OS like OS/2 or it successors (foregot the name, but I once heard it got open source ...). On my Computer are: 2 Linuxes (only one, Open Suse, on the List) DRDOS ("for compatibility reasons" :j: ). So I strongly miss check boxes for, at least, "Mac OS", "BSD", "other Linux", and "other OS".
  4. Question To Christians

    This sounds like a legend, do you have any evidence that this is more than a reaction to colonialism? There was some Eastern (Buddhist or Hinduist) influence to the West, even before 256 BC. You can see it in Plato ... Most of 256 to 56 BC the Maccabees ruled over Palestine and either forced pagans to convert to Judaism or drove them out. Surely, no "Theravada monasteries" could survive long in that time. As to Palestine, we can definitely rule out this possibility. As to Egypt, I'm no expert, but I strongly doubt that. Your Freudian slip is right: we have reasons to doubt whether this Lindner ever existed :sl: It seems he doesn't know much about Palestine history, he either ignores the facts or distorts them. Maybe he took the so-called Essenes of Qumran as "Buddhist monks". But their predisposition for Biblical text, their strong apocalyptic beliefs, in a word their whole "theology" is not Buddhist, but Jewish. As to Christ, He is attested in history, the first document that mentioned His death on the cross and the resurrection was composed less than 20 years after that. The first detailed description of His ministry on earth less about 30 years after, or less than 40 years (to be on the safe side). Well, the first biography of Muhammad was composed about 120 years after his death, and no-one (apart from some obnoxious German scholars) doubt his existence... If we compare to the Buddha .. well, did he really exist? :sl: OK lets look into the NT: There is only one God, the God of Abraham, Isaak and Jacob Apart from miracles, dead people don't return, "every man dies only once and will then be judged by God" (in the day of resurrection) There is only one person by whom we can be rescued from the just wrath of God, Jesus Christ, who will return to judge those who rejected the offer to be saved by Him To do good things, or to train yourself by meditation, fasting etc. is no way of deliverance. You have to believe in the grace of God. Looks like a pirated version of Buddhism, eh? Even in trifling things we can see differences: in Matthew 6:7 we can read that prayer wheeels are nonsense (the verse does not mention prayer wheels, for they were unknown in Palestine, but the inference is drawn easily). The only parallels are in a field where most religions converge more or less - ethics. Not in the core of the faith.
  5. Question To Christians

    Peace from our Lord, What you call "Qabbalah" is commonly called "Gnosticism". Qabbalah (as I have seeen this word) is used for a Jewish movement, that has many gnostic traits and is not very orthodox. The Gnostic idea is older than Christianity. About 100 years ago, some researchers, seeing the similarities between Gnosticism and Christianity, speculated that some ideas in Christianity were borrowed from Gnosticism. But further research has meanwhile shown is was the other way round: the parralels to Christianity appeared only after the Christian faith spread around. In my mother tongue German, some historians therefore differentiate between pre-Christian "Gnostizismus" and later "Gnostik", whether there is a similar pair of English terms I don't know. So your parallels between your "Qabbalah" (i.e. Gnosticism) and Christianity are simply explained by borrowings from the Christians.
  6. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    in principle, it is possibole to give a physical description of Jesus as He walked on earth. In practice, we have no such description. But incarnation is no transformation, what I said applied to Father, Son and Spirit. Physical description of the Son does not suffice dto describe God. This site does not mention quantum physics (or did I overlook anything?), better look into (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality"]Wikipedia[/url] to see the think I was speaking about. Well, you are right :sl: At least a better one than ######, but I fear you got me: this arithmetric is not adequate enough. It is more accurate to say that God reveals Himself like F=S=G and F != S != G. (The sign you used to denote "not equal" is a raised 1 on my system, so I use another notation for that). This sort of "complementarity" (in the Bible you never see both "formulas" at the same time, unlike in trinitarian creeds) is in a broad sense comparable to the complementarities find in quantum mechanics.
  7. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Well, You have to improve yourself to really refute what I say. Of course, you may continue in your way to misrepresent the Bible and so find easy "refutation". My time is limited too, so it may take some time until I come too look into IF again. ...
  8. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, No, You gave a "closed" list of "options" and I said this list was incomplete. Why your unability to see all possibilities has to do with the "incompleteness" of the Bible, I don't know. If you knew the Bible you would have recognized the Biblical verses my "update" of your list is based upon... You don't know what is said in Daniel 7 about the son of man :sl: The "son of man" is the person who comes into heaven to the throne of God who give him His authority. And you seem to misunderstand deliberately what I said. The Bible says that Jesus is human and divine, if you think this is a contradiction you don't understand the matter. Of course not. Well, I could tell what Mohammad is reported to have done ... I know a story that is not recorded in any hadith! :j: Should I go on in your way and ask why the Muslims reject this story######you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/style_images/1/folder_post_icons/icon14.gif[/img] :sl: I am not Catholic, I don't care what the Catholic church banned or not. There was one Gospel: the message of Jesus who died and rose from the dead to save us. This message was preached by the Apostles, and it is contained in the four books called "The Gospel", the first part of the NT. The books you mentioned were written later, this is the primary reason they were not accepted. It is just the difference between original and later fabrication. Afraid? Muhammad banned Musailima. The verses of Musailima are alomost completely lost. Was Mohammad afraid of them when he banned them? Just think of the right answer to this and you have the answer to your question.
  9. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, Thats a logical fallacy: they can show this only if there are no verses that say otherwise. And all these verses show is only that Jesus avoided death, and I have already shown why: Lk 13:33 In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem![[emphasis added]] æóáßöäú áÇóÈõÃøó Ãóäú Ãõßóãøöáó ãóÓöíÑóÊöí Çáúíóæúãó æóÛóÃÇð æóãóÇ ÈóÚúÃóåõãóÇ¡ áÃóäøóåõ áÇó íõãúßöäõ Ãóäú íóåúáößó äóÈöíøñ ÅöáÇøó Ãöí ÃõæÑõÔóáöíãó Luke 4:12 Jesus answered, 'It is said: “Do not put the Lord your God to the test.†ÃóÑóÃøó Úóáóíúåö íóÓõæÚõ ÞóÇÆöáÇð: «ÞóÃú Þöíáó: áÇó ÊõÌóÑøöÈö ÇáÑøóÈøó Åöáåóßó What you demand is just another way of "puting the Lord your God to the testâ€. Of course Jesus would not do this. He was not "introduced" two times because they didn't recognize Him, but because they did not immediately arrest Him. If You prefer those, ok: Mk 14:48 'Am I leading a rebellion,' said Jesus, 'that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? 49 Every day I was with you, teaching in the temple courts, and you did not arrest me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.' 48 æóßóáøóãóåõãú íóÓõæÚõ ÞóÇÆöáÇð: «ÃóßóãóÇ Úóáóì áöÕòø ÎóÑóÌúÊõãú ÈöÇáÓøõíõæÃö æóÇáúÚöÕöíøö áöÊóÞúÈöÖõæÇ Úóáóíøó¿ 49 ßõäúÊõ ßõáøó íóæúãò Èóíúäóßõãú ÃõÚóáøöãõ Ãöí Çáúåóíúßóáö¡ æóáóãú ÊóÞúÈöÖõæÇ Úóáóíøó. æóáóßöäøó åóÃóÇ íóÌúÑöí ÅöÊúãóÇãÇð áöáúßöÊóÇÈö» Mt 26:50 Jesus replied, 'Friend, do what you came for.'4 Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51 With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 52 'Put your sword back in its place,' Jesus said to him, 'for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?' 50 ÃóÞóÇáó áóåõ íóÓõæÚõ: «íóÇÕóÇÃöÈöí¡ áöãóÇÃóÇ ÃóäúÊó åõäóÇ¿» ÃóÊóÞóÃøóãó ÇáúÌóãúÚõ æóÃóáúÞóæúÇ ÇáúÞóÈúÖó Úóáóì íóÓõæÚó. 51 æóÅöÃóÇ æóÇÃöÃñ ãöäó ÇáøóÃöíäó ßóÇäõæÇ ãóÚó íóÓõæÚó ÞóÃú ãóÃøó íóÃóåõ æóÇÓúÊóáøó ÓóíúÃóåõ¡ æóÖóÑóÈó ÚóÈúÃó ÑóÆöíÓö ÇáúßóåóäóÉö¡ ÃóÞóØóÚó ÃõÃõäóåõ. 52 ÃóÞóÇáó íóÓõæÚõ áóåõ: «ÑõÃøó ÓóíúÃóßó Åöáóì ÛöãúÃöåö! ÃóÅöäøó ÇáøóÃöíäó íóáúÌóÃõæäó Åöáóì ÇáÓøóíúÃö¡ ÈöÇáÓøóíúÃö íóåúáößõæäó! 53 Ãóãú ÊóÙõäøõ Ãóäøöí áÇó ÃóÞúÃöÑõ ÇáÂäó Ãóäú ÃóØúáõÈó Åöáóì ÃóÈöí ÃóíõÑúÓöáó áöí ÃóßúËóÑó ãöäö ÇËúäóíú ÚóÔóÑó ÌóíúÔÇð ãöäó ÇáúãóáÇóÆößóÉö Luke 22:47 While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus asked him, 'Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?' 49 When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, 'Lord, should we strike with our swords?' 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. 51 But Jesus answered, 'No more of this!' And he touched the man's ear and healed him. 52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, 'Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? 53 Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns.' 47 æóÃöíãóÇ åõæó íóÊóßóáøóãõ¡ ÅöÃóÇ ÌóãúÚñ íóÊóÞóÃøóãõåõãõ ÇáúãóÃúÚõæøõ íóåõæÃóÇ¡ æóåõæó æóÇÃöÃñ ãöäó ÇáÇöËúäóíú ÚóÔóÑó. ÃóÊóÞóÃøóãó Åöáóì íóÓõæÚó áöíõÞóÈøöáóåõ. 48 ÃóÞóÇáó áóåõ íóÓõæÚõ: «íóÇíóåõæÃóÇ¡ ÃóÈöÞõÈúáóÉò ÊõÓóáøöãõ ÇÈúäó ÇáÅöäúÓóÇäö¿» 49 ÃóáóãøóÇ ÑóÃóì ÇáøóÃöíäó Ãóæúáóåõ ãóÇ íõæÔößõ Ãóäú íóÃúÃõËó¡ ÞóÇáõæÇ: «íóÇÑóÈøõ¡ ÃóäóÖúÑöÈõ ÈöÇáÓøóíúÃö¿» 50 æóÖóÑóÈó ÃóÃóÃõåõãú ÚóÈúÃó ÑóÆöíÓö ÇáúßóåóäóÉö ÃóÞóØóÚó ÃõÃõäóåõ Çáúíõãúäóì. 51 ÃóÃóÌóÇÈó íóÓõæÚõ ÞóÇÆöáÇð: «ÞöÃõæÇ ÚöäúÃó åóÃóÇ ÇáúÃóÃøö!» æóáóãóÓó ÃõÃõäóåõ ÃóÔóÃóÇåõ. 52 æóÞóÇáó íóÓõæÚõ áöÑõÄóÓóÇÃö ÇáúßóåóäóÉö æóÞõæøóÇÃö ÃóÑóÓö Çáúåóíúßóáö æóÇáÔøõíõæÎö¡ ÇáøóÃöíäó ÃóÞúÈóáõæÇ Úóáóíúåö: «ÃóßóãóÇ Úóáóì áöÕòø ÎóÑóÌúÊõãú ÈöÇáÓøõíõæÃö æóÇáúÚöÕöíøö¿ 53 ÚöäúÃóãóÇ ßõäúÊõ ãóÚóßõãú ßõáøó íóæúãò Ãöí Çáúåóíúßóáö¡ áóãú ÊóãõÃøõæÇ ÃóíúÃöíóßõãú Úóáóíøó. æóáßöäøó åóÃöåö ÇáÓøóÇÚóÉó áóßõãú¡ æóÇáÓøõáúØóÉõ ÇáÂäó áöáÙøóáÇóãö!» Well, dispite all differences all four Evangelists agree that Jesus did nor fear death at this moment. Yes this is a difference. John emphasizes what Jesus did, the other describe what Judas did. You will never find witnesses that agree on all details, unless they are false witnesses that have been instructed by someone telling them what to say. If witnesses disagree on some points, but agree on other points, they confirm each other in those points they agree. Yes I do. But i know what is written in the OT: isaiah 53:3 He was despised and rejected by others, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem. 4 Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. 5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. 6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. 8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. 9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth 3 ãõÃúÊóÞóÑñ æóãóäúÈõæÃñ ãöäó ÇáäøóÇÓö¡ ÑóÌõáõ ÂáÇóãò æóãõÎúÊóÈöÑõ ÇáúÃõÒúäö¡ ãóÎúÃõæáñ ßóãóäú ÃóÌóÈó ÇáäøóÇÓõ Úóäúåõ æõÌõæåóåõãú Ãóáóãú äóÃúÈóåú áóåõ. 4 áóßöäøóåõ Ãóãóáó ÃóÃúÒóÇäóäóÇ æóÊóÃóãøóáó ÃóæúÌóÇÚóäóÇ¡ æóäóÃúäõ ÃóÓöÈúäóÇ Ãóäøó ÇáÑøóÈøó ÞóÃú ÚóÇÞóÈóåõ æóÃóÃóáøóåõ¡ 5 ÅöáÇøó Ãóäøóåõ ßóÇäó ãóÌúÑõæÃÇð ãöäú ÃóÌúáö ÂËóÇãöäóÇ æóãóÓúÃõæÞÇð ãöäú ÃóÌúáö ãóÚóÇÕöíäóÇ¡ Ãóáøó Èöåö ÊóÃúÃöíÈõ ÓóáÇóãöäóÇ¡ æóÈöÌöÑóÇÃöåö ÈóÑöÆúäóÇ. 6 ßõáøõäóÇ ßóÛóäóãò ÔóÑóÃúäóÇ ãöáúäóÇ ßõáøõ æóÇÃöÃò Åöáóì ÓóÈöíáöåö¡ ÃóÃóËúÞóáó ÇáÑøóÈøõ ßóÇåöáóåõ ÈöÅöËúãö ÌóãöíÚöäóÇ. 7 Ùõáöãó æóÃõÃöáøó¡ æóáóßöäøóåõ áóãú íóÃúÊóÃú ÃóÇåõ¡ Èóáú ßóÔóÇÉò ÓöíÞó Åöáóì ÇáÃøóÈúÃö¡ æóßóäóÚúÌóÉò ÕóÇãöÊóÉò ÃóãóÇãó ÌóÇÒøöíåóÇ áóãú íóÃúÊóÃú ÃóÇåõ. 8 ÈöÇáÖøöíÞö æóÇáúÞóÖóÇÃö ÞõÈöÖó Úóáóíúåö¡ æóÃöí Ìöíáöåö ãóäú ßóÇäó íóÙõäøõ Ãóäøóåõ ÇÓúÊõÄúÕöáó ãöäú ÃóÑúÖö ÇáÃóÃúíóÇÃö¡ æóÖõÑöÈó ãöäú ÃóÌúáö ÅöËúãö ÔóÚúÈöí¿ 9 ÌóÚóáõæÇ ÞóÈúÑóåõ ãóÚó ÇáÃóÔúÑóÇÑö¡ æóãóÚó ËóÑöíòø ÚöäúÃó ãóæúÊöåö. ãóÚó Ãóäøóåõ áóãú íóÑúÊóßöÈú ÌóæúÑÇð¡ æóáóãú íóßõäú Ãöí Ãóãöåö ÛöÔøñ The suffering of the Messiah are foretold in the OT, and this was part of the teaching of Jesus. AFAIK, no Jew ever claimed Psalm 37 was a prophecy to the Messiah. Things are different with Is 53 or Ps 22 ... I can't see a denial. Can you please show me the verse that says Mariam was no descendent of David? BTW, there is a traditional explanation of Luke 3 that says that Eli was the father-in-law of Joseph, i.e. the father of Mariam. No trinitarian will regard this as a contradiction. Indeed, this observation was one of those that confirmed the trinatarian belief of Jesus being human and divine. You are not the first one who detected this!
  10. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our God, I said something different. But unless you are willing to learn what the trinity doctrin really says you will not understand that. The first step is to understand that God is greater than our mind, that there is no easy formulae to describe God... In so far that God is no liar. And BTW, no trinitarian will claim that God the Father is a man ... How can an electron be a wave and a particle at the same time? This is "illogical". Yet it is true. The Bible tells us that Jesus is God, that the world is created by Him? Who am I to contradict this? No. One of the motives to formulate the trinity doctrines was to avoid saying that there are two Gods. This is basically the same thing that we read in the OT: to be cleansed from sin, blood has to been shed. In the OT it was the blood of animals, but this was only preliminary, for Hebrews 10:4 It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Ãóãöäó ÇáúãõÓúÊóÃöíáö Ãóäú íõÒöíáó Ãóãõ ÇáËøöíÑóÇäö æóÇáÊøõíõæÓö ÎóØÇíóÇ ÇáäøóÇÓö Not murder, sacrifice. John 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No-one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.' Åöäøó ÇáÂÈó íõÃöÈøõäöí áÃóäøöí ÃóÈúÃöáõ ÃóíóÇÊöí áößóíú ÃóÓúÊóÑöÃøóåóÇ They thought they killed Jesus, but it only appeared to them, for He gave His life of His own account. You misunderstood this because you don't know about sacrifices. If you really knew that "they slew Him not", you would not speak of murder. All Christians (and many non-Christians) agree that Jesus died, there is no doubt on this. As to Muslims, I have heard quite different opinions about what really happened. You have no surety, but only conjecture. You gave no examples of this, I know some apparent differences that can be explained if You know about the customs and language of that age. I don't know any real contradiction. Which means the Qor'an is wrong when it predicts a resurrection? What a kind of argument is this? Job 7:9 does not deny resurrection, the passage (V.7-11) speaks about the short life and the dead leaving the world. Cf. Job 19:25-27. Eccl 9:5 speaks of the ignorance of the dead. Is 26,14 speaks of the "lords" (V.13) that ruled over israel, and contains the promise they will never return again. You can find the resurrection in Dan 12, and of course in the NT. That it is hard to find in the OT has to with the changes that the saving death and resurrection of Jesus caused. Matthew 22:29 Jesus replied, 'You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God ÃóÑóÃøó Úóáóíúåöãú íóÓõæÚõ ÞóÇÆöáÇð: «ÃóäúÊõãú Ãöí ÖóáÇóáò áÃóäøóßõãú áÇó ÊóÃúåóãõæäó ÇáúßöÊóÇÈó æóáÇó ÞõÃúÑóÉó Ç
  11. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, Jeremiah 8:8 speaks of the pen of the scribes, that functioned as lawyers and turned the just law of God into injustice. This is not on changing the book, but on adding traditions and interpretations that turn the content of the book upside down. As I have shown, the same is true for the OT. There are many verses that show this. And if verses that speak of how God punishes people is a proof that a book is altered - well I get the impression that you will agree that Sura 9 is not from God (which explains why it is not introduced by the basmala?). :sl: Your selective quoting may impress the uninformed, to the informed one it shows that you are not honest, which means that your case cannot be defended honestly by you. This is either a feature of your case, or of you. Try to find out which one is true.
  12. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, I know there are Christians rejecting the trinity doctrin (though Mormons have their own book added and AFAIK they have left monotheism, so they are not Christian) My point is that there are many positions that deviate from trinitarian faith, e.g. the belief in three Gods. That this is a transgression of the limits of our religion (as defined by the trinity doctrin et.al.), you can even read in the Qur'an. Well, the confusion did not arise that late, and in my eyes the source is somewhat different: Acts 20:29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30 Even from your own number some will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. 29 ÃóÅöäøöí ÃóÚúáóãõ Ãóäøóåõ ÈóÚúÃó ÑóÃöíáöí ÓóíóäúÃóÓøõ Èóíúäóßõãú ÃöÆóÇÈñ ÎóÇØöÃóÉñ¡ áÇó ÊõÔúÃöÞõ Úóáóì ÇáúÞóØöíÚö. 30 Èóáú Åöäøó ÞóæúãÇð ãöäúßõãú ÃóäúÊõãú ÓóíóÞõæãõæäó æóíõÚóáøöãõæäó ÊóÚóÇáöíãó ãõäúÃóÑöÃóÉð¡ áöíóÌõÑøõæÇ ÇáÊøóáÇóãöíÃó æóÑóÇÃóåõã All examples are from the OT. Some of them are blatantly misinterpreted (e.g. Ps 137:9 does not speak of an act of God, but is the wish of oppressed people), but the general point ist that in the times of the OT, God prepared His people for the coming of the Messiah. As our messengers told: Acts 14:15 'Friends, why are you doing this? We too are only human, like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made heaven and earth and sea and everything in them. 16 In the past, he let all nations go their own way. 17 Yet he has not left himself without testimony: he has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.' [[emphasis added]] 15 æóåõãóÇ íóÕúÑõÎóÇäö: «áöãóÇÃóÇ ÊóÃúÚóáõæäó åòÃóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáäøóÇÓõ¿ ãóÇ äóÃúäõ ÅöáÇøó ÈóÔóÑñ ÖõÚóÃóÇÃõ ãöËúáõßõãú¡ äõÈóÔøöÑõßõãú ÈöÃóäú ÊóÑúÌöÚõæÇ Úóäú Ã¥Ãöåö ÇáÃóÔúíóÇÃö ÇáúÈóÇØöáóÉö Åöáóì Çááåö ÇáúÃóíøö ÕóÇäöÚö ÇáÓøóãóÇÃö æóÇáÃóÑúÖö æóÇáúÈóÃúÑö¡ æóßõáøö ãóÇ ÃöíåóÇ¡ 16 æóÞóÃú ÊóÑóßó ÇáÃõãóãó Ãöí ÇáúÚõÕõæÑö ÇáúãóÇÖöíóÉö íóÓúáõßõæäó Ãöí ØõÑõÞöåöãú¡ 17 ãóÚó Ãóäøóåõ áóãú íóÊúÑõßúåõãú Ãõæäó ÔóÇåöÃò íóÃõáøõåõãú Úóáóíúåö. Ãóåõæó ãóÇÒóÇáó íõäúÚöãõ Úóáóíúßõãú ÈöÇáúÎóíúÑö¡ æóíóÑúÒõÞõßõãú ãöäó ÇáÓøóãóÇÃö ÃóãúØóÇÑÇð æóãóæóÇÓöãó ãõËúãöÑóÉð¡ æóíõÔúÈöÚõßõãú ØóÚóÇãÇð æóíóãúáóÃõ ÞõáõæÈóßõãú ÓõÑõæÑÇð It is known from the oldest Qor'anic manuscripts that the basmala was a means to seperate the suras and no part of the original revelation. AFAIK, there is at least one sunna school that has said that all the time. Well, as to the Sura that is not introduced by the basmala: it is easy to find verses in there that seem to contradict your claim of God being loving. I have read postings of people that pick out ayats like those to "prove" that Allah is cruel and hateful (not von IF, on other forums). If you want, you can find the in the Qor'an the same things you picked from the OT. And to balance your qotations: Psalm 103:1 Praise the Lord, my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holy name. 2 Praise the Lord, my soul, and forget not all his benefits— 3 who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases, 4 who redeems your life from the pit and crowns you with love and compassion, 5 who satisfies your desires with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's. 6 The Lord works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed. 7 He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of israel: 8 the Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. 1 ÈóÇÑößöí íóÇäóÃúÓöí ÇáÑøóÈøó¡ æóáúíóÃúãóÃú ßõáøõ ãóÇ Ãöí ÃóÇÎöáöí ÇÓúãóåõ ÇáúÞõÃøõæÓó. 2 ÈóÇÑößöí íóÇäóÃúÓöí ÇáÑøóÈøó¡ æóáÇó ÊóäúÓóíú ÌóãöíÚó ÎóíúÑóÇÊöåö. 3 Åöäøóåõ íóÛúÃöÑõ ÌóãöíÚó ÂËóÇãößö æóíõÈúÑöíÃõ ßõáøó ÃóãúÑóÇÖößö. 4 æóíóÃúÃöí ãöäó ÇáúãóæúÊö ÃóíóÇÊóßö æóíõÊóæøöÌõßö ÈöÇáÑøóÃúãóÉö æóÇáÑøóÃúÃóÉö. 5 æóíõÔúÈöÚõ ÈöÇáúÎóíúÑö ÚõãúÑóßö ÃóíóÊóÌóÃøóÃõ ßóÇáäøóÓúÑö ÔóÈóÇÈõßö. 6 ÇáÑøóÈøõ íóÃúßõãõ ÈöÇáÚóÃúáö æóíõäúÕöÃõ ÌóãöíÚó ÇáúãóÙúáõæãöíäó. 7 ÃóØúáóÚó ãõæÓóì Úóáóì ØõÑõÞöåö æóÈóäöí ÅöÓúÑóÇÆöíáó Úóáóì ÃóÃúÚóÇáöåö My point was on another level: How can you be loving without an object of love? A monolithic God was not loving until He created at least one thing or person to be loved by Him... Well, we are warned in the Bible that false teachings and rebellion against God will prevail in the last days before our Lord comes back again - so what conclusions should we draw from that? :sl: BTW, an analysis shows that most iof the growth of Islams stems from the many children of the Muslim peoples, while much of the growth of Christianity comes from conversions ... but as I said, numbers prove nothing. As to the USA: I'm German :sl: I leave this for other guys to answer.
  13. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    [[continuation:]] Yes, in many verses. One of them is: 1.John 5:20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life æóÅöäøóäóÇ äóÚúáóãõ Ãóäøó ÇÈúäó Çááåö ÞóÃú ÌóÇÃó Åöáóì ÇáÃóÑúÖö æóÃóäóÇÑó ÃóÃúåóÇäóäóÇ áöäóÚúÑöÃó ÇáÅöáåó ÇáúÃóÞøó. æóäóÃúäõ ÇáÂäó äóÃúíóÇ Ãöíåö¡ áÃóäøóäóÇ Ãöí ÇÈúäöåö íóÓõæÚó ÇáúãóÓöíÃö. åóÃóÇ åõæó ÇáÅöáåõ ÇáúÃóÞøõ¡ æóÇáúÃóíóÇÉõ ÇáÃóÈóÃöíøóÉ It is Isaiah that states that the LORD does give His glory to no other, and it is in the chapter you quoted from whre we can find that the Son shared the glory of the Father: John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began. ÃóãóÌøöÃúäöí Ãöí ÃóÖúÑóÊößó ÇáÂäó¡ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáÂÈõ¡ ÈöãóÇ ßóÇäó áöí ãöäú ãóÌúÃò ÚöäúÃóßó ÞóÈúáó Êóßúæöíäö ÇáúÚóÇáóãö You can detect the same in John 12:37-41 (compare with Isaiah!), and there is some evidence in Ph 2:8-11 (the passage mentioned in the first part) pointing into the same direction: the God speaking to Isaiah was Jesus. Indeed, Jesus Himself said that it was He who sent all those Prophets to Jerusalem is about to send more (Mt 23:34-39). I already answered that ... The core of the matter is: in the Bible you have statements that identify Jesus with God, and statements that speak of son and Father as different "entities". The debate how this can be lead to the trinity doctrin. Quoting only selected verses from the Bible, it is easy to "prove" that Jesus is not divine, or that He is no man, but identical to the Father, ot that there are three Gods, and other errors rejected by the trinity doctrin. If you want me to elaborate on this, tell me, but I don't like to be accused of preaching my religion only because I corrected your misrepresentation of the trinity doctrin. Well, we were warned in the Bible not to accepted an angel from heaven that brings a message contradicting the Gospel message, and if you tell me that the Qor'an contradicts the Bible, well, thats bad for the Qor'an...
  14. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, They have nothing to do with: We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.######you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/style_images/1/folder_post_icons/icon14.gif[/img] This ist the first sentence of the Nicean creed. And as far as I can see, this part of the trinity doctrine is confirmed by the verses you quoted. Or from a later ("final") formulation of the trinity doctrine: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. The trinity doctrine states that God is one. Stating that God is one is no rejecting of Fathter, Son and Spirit. But 1*1*1 = 1. You use the wrong kind of arithmetric. Well, stating that God is one is a very special way to deny the oneness of God... And accordingh to your logic the trinity is wrong because it was invented by corrupt bishops, and the proof for that corruption is that they "invented" the trinity. Thats no logic, that is bubbling sentences without real meaning. Well, there are other ways to interpret this than the reductionism you use. Yet both Matthew and Mark confess Jesus as Son of God (Mk 1:1) and the only way to know the Father (Mt 11:27), and Matthew even tells us how believers should be baptized: Matthews 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in1 the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.' 18 ÃóÊóÞóÃøóãó íóÓõæÚõ æóßóáøóãóåõãú ÞóÇÆöáÇð: «ÃõÃöÚó Åöáíøó ßõáøõ ÓõáúØóÇäò Ãöí ÇáÓøóãóÇÃö æóÚóáóì ÇáÃóÑúÖö. 19 ÃóÇÃúåóÈõæÇ ÅöÃóäú¡ æóÊóáúãöÃõæÇ ÌóãöíÚó ÇáÃõãóãö¡ æóÚóãøöÃõæåõãú ÈöÇÓúãö ÇáÂÈö æóÇáÇöÈúäö æóÇáÑøõæÃö ÇáúÞõÃõÓöº 20 æóÚóáøöãõæåõãú Ãóäú íóÚúãóáõæÇ Èößõáøö ãóÇ ÃóæúÕóíúÊõßõãú Èöåö. æóåóÇ ÃóäóÇ ãóÚóßõãú ßõáøó ÇáÃóíøóÇãö Åöáóì ÇäúÊöåóÇÃö ÇáÒøóãóÇä It were not the bishops who did it. They found it in the Bible, it was God Himself who declared it. See below. None of them is mentioned in the Bible as God. You laugh at something you don't understand, like all those who laugh at Islam because they always look at it from the outside. For example, from a Christian point of view it is easy to show that in the Qur'an Allah is described as being inferior to a writing pen. I could laugh at that, but I don't because I know this is not the way you look upon it. Well listen to what Jesus said to John: Revelation 1:17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: 'Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades 17 ÃóáóãøóÇ ÑóÃóíúÊõåõ ÇÑúÊóãóíúÊõ ÚöäúÃó ÞóÃóãóíúåö ßóÇáúãóíúÊö¡ ÃóáóãóÓóäöí ÈöíóÃöåö Çáúíõãúäóì æóÞóÇáó: «áÇó ÊóÎóÃú! ÃóäóÇ ÇáÃóæøóáõ æóÇáÂÎöÑõ¡ 18 ÃóäóÇ ÇáúÃóíøõ. ßõäúÊõ ãóíúÊÇð¡ æóáóßöäú åóÇ ÃóäóÇ Ãóíøñ Åöáóì ÃóÈóÃö ÇáÂÈöÃöíäó. æóáöí ãóÃóÇÊöíÃõ ÇáúãóæúÊö æóÇáúåóÇæöíóÉö There is no-one before Jesus, and there will be no-one after Him, He is eternal. This is but one verse, I could cite more to show you that Jesus laid the foundation to the trinity doctrin. The trinity doctrine is an attempt to clarify what is written in the Bible about Father, Son, and Spirit. The attempt came after Jesus, but the foundations of it were laid by Jesus and the messengers He sent out to us. A better verse to understand this would be 1.Corinthians 15:28. I accept and believe the subjection of the Son to the Father, see Philippians 2:6-11 for a fuller account of that. As far as I know (I understand the Bible better than those old creed overloaded with philosophical terms) the bishops that spoke of equality did not deny this subjection. [[Too much quotes: posting split into two parts]]
  15. Languages, Islam And The Holy Bible.

    Peace from our Lord, Right. It was not me who brought 'elowhiym into the discussion, and I agree with much of what you say. Sometimes even humans. Thats no valid argument, the word 'elo(a)h (the (a) is a weak a required by the following h) exists, you can find it from Deuteronomy 32:15 to Hanakuk 3:3 in the OT. According to my Bible program, 57 times. As to the etymology: the difference between 'el and 'elo(a)h in Hebrew consonantal script is the same as the difference between jah and JHWH ... If one accepts trinity, this doctrine sheds some light on 'elowhiym, but arguing the other way round is no valid argument. I didn't come up with 'elowhiym, it was visha, a muslim. All I said was that 'elowhiym is no plural of reverence, because that kind of plural does not exist in ancient Hebrew. When I looked for a king mentioined by a plural, all I found was an example in a part of the OT that was written in Aramaic (Ezra 4:15), in a letter of a Persian King. And what you have written confirms my thesis.