Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Gods Servant

Defend The Faith

Recommended Posts

I noticed there are so many misguided and misconceived objections against the Christian faith, specifically the Catholic faith such as we worship Mary and other such nonsense. Here is a book available online that addresses the typical objections. I think Muslims should prudently take the time to read the chapter dealing with their objection/s before posting, so they know what they are objecting to in the first place and how we typically respond to these objections. I think this would be much more progressive then the continuous misconceived ongoing tautology in this forum.

http://www.lumenverum.org/apologetics/DefendtheFaith/page.html

God bless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

I don’t know why the hyperlink is not working here. Anyway that’s ok just copy and paste the ‘http’ address and it should work.

Edited by Gods Servant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First chapter:

 

Objection: “The doctrine of the Trinity is not found in the Bible. It is
really a disguised form of pagan polytheism––the worship of three
gods in one!”
 
The Blessed Trinity is God, one and undivided, in three distinct divine Persons.

 

This is not defending. Its asserting polytheism: 3 distinct divine persons!

It couldn't be more straightforward association.

 

 

Mysteries are fine in novels and fiction. Your Creator is nothing like that. Your Creator is REAL. There is no mystery about His oneness. In fact, this is the basis of faith. If you think he's 3 distinct divine persons, then you have no faith in your Creator. Plain and simple.

 

That very concept is the reason why thousands of Christians revert to Islam every day. They leave a fictitious faith, full of mysteries, and return back to the real thing, which we were all born with, to naturally submit to The One who created us, not to a group of "Persons". LOL!!!

 

 

Good. But even those themselelves err by saying "Jesus Christ is his creature son".

What is wrong with you people. Don't you have brains to think with? how can you accept, or even consider, such hallucinations about Your One God, the creator of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them?

 

Why don't you all come to your senses, stop following fiction and mystery, and simply accept the fact that Jesus Christ is a human and servant of his creator, just like all God's prophets? There are no divine prophets whatsoever. Only Allah Al-Mighty alone is divine, and all His creations are just like that, His creations, not His family!

 

Simply hilarious! and we're not even past the first 2 pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First chapter: This is not defending. Its asserting polytheism: 3 distinct divine persons!It couldn't be more straightforward association.  Mysteries are fine in novels and fiction. Your Creator is nothing like that. Your Creator is REAL. There is no mystery about His oneness. In fact, this is the basis of faith. If you think he's 3 distinct divine persons, then you have no faith in your Creator. Plain and simple. That very concept is the reason why thousands of Christians revert to Islam every day. They leave a fictitious faith, full of mysteries, and return back to the real thing, which we were all born with, to naturally submit to The One who created us, not to a group of "Persons". LOL!!!  Good. But even those themselelves err by saying "Jesus Christ is his creature son".What is wrong with you people. Don't you have brains to think with? how can you accept, or even consider, such hallucinations about Your One God, the creator of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them? Why don't you all come to your senses, stop following fiction and mystery, and simply accept the fact that Jesus Christ is a human and servant of his creator, just like all God's prophets? There are no divine prophets whatsoever. Only Allah Al-Mighty alone is divine, and all His creations are just like that, His creations, not His family! Simply hilarious! and we're not even past the first 2 pages.

That's fine you don't have to agree, I don't have a problem with that. Thanks for taking the time out to read the chapter :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You welcome. However thanking me is not the point, nor it is important. Whats important is that you reconsider your faith. If what you bring along and give a title of "defend the faith" actually admits your polytheism, then its about time you reconsidered your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No way does the book confess we believe in polytheism, thats just your biased interpretation of it. On the contrary I don't think you Muslims are using your brains either, I just didn't want to go there because it will get us no where...

Edited by Gods Servant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to go there? its not a fight or anything. I do have to advise you, that's why.

And why are you starting this topic then..do you prefer to keep it mysterious as it is?

"in three distinct divine Persons" can be the definition of polytheism. There is no mystery about it.

 

Why on earth would anyone prefer a mystery, when the fact is clear as the sun in the sky? (or probably clouds at your end for that matter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“We cannot know the nature of Allah”

 

Edit by admin:

Anti-Islamic link removed. Please see forum rule #4


In other words the nature of God is a mystery to Muslims. You may want to recant your issue with mystery otherwise your argument falls into the fallacy of using a double standard,

 

one and undivided, in three distinct divine Persons - I don't any polytheists who confess God is ONE and UNDIVIDED, do you? "In three distinct divine persons means three persons of one substance, ONE substance not three substances, there's a difference...


“I didn’t want to go there” – I didn’t want to argue, I just wanted to share the information in this book hoping to clear the Muslim’s misconceptions. It appears no matter how well arguments are presented you will swallow only what you want to swallow. I can see why Jesus instructed us to “shake the dust from our feet” as a testimony against you…

Edited by dot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't quote from or post links of anti-Islamic websites. This violates our forum rules.

You cannot discuss the truth of Islam by quoting anti-Islamic websites, and preacher websites, who are known for professing the art of lies and deceptions. If you're after the truth, read from authentic Islamic sources.

 

As slaves of God/Allah, we are to know our creator from what He Al-Mighty tell us about Him. We are not supposed to create mysteries of fiction around His nature. Allah said to us:

Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent."

 

Those graceful words put and end to all human speculations and theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still don’t know or cannot understand the nature of God, hence it’s a mystery to you.


We do not create fiction either. You claim we do but you cannot prove this by presenting a before and after manuscript. All you have is the Quran nothing else; sorry that’s not good enough from a historian’s point of view.

 

Before you claim the bible is filled with fiction you should study the following problems with the Quran:

 

"I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides; then I will surely crucify you all" Surah 7:124

 

Yet the Encyclopedia Britannica, in harmony with all records of history, reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier than 500 BC. My question how do you explain this blaring historical error?

 

Muslims claim, that a proof the Quran was from God, is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology before man discovered it for himself. However, all the information in the Quran regarding Embryology is copied from three sources, 1. A Greek doctor named Galen, who lived of 150 AD. 2. A Jewish doctor named Samuel ha-Yehudi who lived 150 AD. 3. the Greek father of medicine Hippocrates who lived 400 BC. My question is: in light of the fact that all the information contained in the Quran was already in print by these three doctors, will you retract the argument on Embryology? If not, will you supply one detail revealed in the Quran about Embryology, that was not already revealed or that was new?

Edited by Gods Servant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet the Encyclopedia Britannica, in harmony with all records of history, reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier than 500 BC. My question how do you explain this blaring historical error?

 

Muslims claim, that a proof the Quran was from God, is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology before man discovered it for himself. However, all the information in the Quran regarding Embryology is copied from three sources, 1. A Greek doctor named Galen, who lived of 150 AD. 2. A Jewish doctor named Samuel ha-Yehudi who lived 150 AD. 3. the Greek father of medicine Hippocrates who lived 400 BC. My question is: in light of the fact that all the information contained in the Quran was already in print by these three doctors, will you retract the argument on Embryology? If not, will you supply one detail revealed in the Quran about Embryology, that was not already revealed or that was new?

 

The word that is translated as "crucify" means "to impale". Impaling people was practiced in Ancient Egypt. If you want  to read an in-depth article, this one is for you: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/crucify.html

 

It's not true that the Qur'an copies other sources: http://www.islamicwritings.org/quran/medical-miracles/does-the-quran-plagiarise-ancient-greek-embryology/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The word that is translated as "crucify" means "to impale". Impaling people was practiced in Ancient Egypt. If you want to read an in-depth article, this one is for you: http://www.islamic-a...al/crucify.html”

 

Ok, then I submit to that point.

 

 

“It's not true that the Qur'an copies other sources: http://www.islamicwr...eek-embryology/”

 

My point was the information regarding embryology had already been discovered before the Quran was revealed. You therefore cannot use this as scientific “proof”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My point was the information regarding embryology had already been discovered before the Quran was revealed. You therefore cannot use this as scientific “proof”.

 

Did you read the paper that the brother gave you its link?

It was found that there was no similarity between these ancient writings and text of the Qur’an. The Qur’anic ideas on embryology were completely different in terms of style, content and accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was the information regarding embryology had already been discovered before the Quran was revealed. You therefore cannot use this as scientific “proof”.

 

Let's say for the sake of argument that the information was the same. You still cannot use the word "discovered" for that time period. There was no way to ascertain whether something was true or false when it came to embryology because they lacked the equipment. Thus, the ancient "discoveries" weren't really discoveries - they were just guesses. Another thing you must take into consideration is that these ancient authors held false beliefs regarding embryology but the Qur'an does not. If you copy somebody's work, you don't just copy the correct information. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok for the sake of argument, regardless if it was “discovered” or not the point again being that information was around prior to the Quran. It’s nothing new out of the sky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok for the sake of argument, regardless if it was “discovered” or not the point again being that information was around prior to the Quran. It’s nothing new out of the sky.

 

Erm, actually the information presented in the Qur'an is different from the ancient sources. But anyway, you have to factor in that the Qur'an does not contain mistakes like the rest of the ancient materials. Furthermore, you can't just look at one piece of information. You have to look at all the evidence. Here's a post to help you with that: http://www.gawaher.com/topic/734272-who-is-a-believer/?p=1229733

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you have to factor in that the Qur'an does not contain mistakes like the rest of the ancient materials.

That’s strictly on the assumption that the Quran is the word of God – obviously I don’t share that presupposition so I cannot use the Quran as a tool to correct other works of antiquity. As far as I’m concerned it can be just as fallacious. This is what I was trying to say before, the dominating factor is our presupposition. How objective can we humans be especially with something as sensitive as religion that we both feel strong about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×