Dr. William Campbell destroyed by Dr. Zakir Naik on scientific errors in the Bible MUST WATCH!!

[Karlysymon]

How is Mohammed's message inconsistent with previous scripture? He preached the message of monotheism, worshipping a sole Creator....as did those before him

The trinity seems incredibly inconsistent and contradictory of previous scripture.

That's not good enough. I can also wake up tomorrow and say an angel appeared to me and told me to begin preaching that there is one God and we should worship him only. How do you prove that iam infact god-sent?
We see this in Christ's life on earth. Over and over, He always referred to and quoted the ancient scriptures. His teaching never deviated from the Law and the Prophets, rather reaffirming it. Even the Sanhedrin, at His trial, couldn't find fault with His teaching, simply wanting Him dead for blasphemy.

We can forget the trinity for a moment. There was an ancient structure that stood for which Islam is silent about. We want explanations for this: the Kabba, as the holy house, bears no resemblance at all to the ancient temple. Why? We need an explanation for why Friday is deemed as the holy day for worship instead of Moses' Sabbath. We also need to know why the priesthood came to an end.

This is interesting actually because the temple and its rituals were so central to the Hebraic way of life. When Christ died, it signaled the end of that system. The Jews were so attached to it that, as the book of Acts shows, everyone who believed that the system was no longer valid was persecuted and killed. So this is interesting because i have to wonder how Muhammad would have fared, (had he lived in the first century) before the Sanhedrin with his final revelation in hand, failing to acknowledge a 3000yr heritage. Stephen's matyrdom seems the most likely outcome.

 

[phipps]

That's not good enough. I can also wake up tomorrow and say an angel appeared to me and told me to begin preaching that there is one God and we should worship him only. How do you prove that iam infact god-sent?
We see this in Christ's life on earth. Over and over, He always referred to and quoted the ancient scriptures. His teaching never deviated from the Law and the Prophets, rather reaffirming it. Even the Sanhedrin, at His trial, couldn't find fault with His teaching, simply wanting Him dead for blasphemy.

We can forget the trinity for a moment. There was an ancient structure that stood for which Islam is silent about. We want explanations for this: the Kabba, as the holy house, bears no resemblance at all to the ancient temple. Why? We need an explanation for why Friday is deemed as the holy day for worship instead of Moses' Sabbath. We also need to know why the priesthood came to an end.

This is interesting actually because the temple and its rituals were so central to the Hebraic way of life. When Christ died, it signaled the end of that system. The Jews were so attached to it that, as the book of Acts shows, everyone who believed that the system was no longer valid was persecuted and killed. So this is interesting because i have to wonder how Muhammad would have fared, (had he lived in the first century) before the Sanhedrin with his final revelation in hand, failing to acknowledge a 3000yr heritage. Stephen's matyrdom seems the most likely outcome.

Jesus said this: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled (Matthew 5:17-18).

 

[phipps]

Scripture has been tampered with in the past and thoughts of men infiltrated God's books. You guys say so yourself, I mean Timothy is allegedly Paul's son but who gave Timmy the authority to be an author? Was he chosen by God?

Not every verse in past scripture is corrupted. I've said this before so there's no need to keep blowing the Islamic perspective out of proportion. There are many verses I've read of the bible that I agree with , however, I disagree with some interpretations as they contradict, in my view, the nature of God.

Timothy did not write the books of Timothy. There are two epistles to Timothy (letters) in the Bible and they were written by Paul. The new testament has thirteen letters from Paul. They are Romans, First and second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, First and Second Thessalonians, First and second Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Hebrews. All these books are in agreement with the rest of the books of the Bible. The Bible cannot contradict itself. If it did, it couldn't be trusted. One of the basic principles when studying the Bible is being able to trust that the Bible is a cohesive work that doesn't contradict itself on anything.

Timothy met Paul as young man and was his travelling companion. He helped Paul establish churches and visit them. He is mentioned in a few of Paul's letters to others as well. Here are some verses in the Bible that mention Timothy.

Acts16:1
Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek.

Acts 17:13-15
But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was preached by Paul at Berea, they came there also and stirred up the crowds. Then immediately the brethren sent Paul away, to go to the sea; but both Silas and Timothy remained there. So those who conducted Paul brought him to Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him with all speed, they departed.

2 Timothy 1:5
when I call to remembrance the genuine faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded is in you also.

1 Thessalonians 3:1-2
Therefore, when we could no longer endure it, we thought it good to be left in Athens alone, and sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow labourer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith,

The Bible has 66 books with so many Chapters and verses. The Quran is not as big as the new testament which is the smaller of two testaments. Bible study needs life dedication to it with the help of the Holy Spirit. Reading one Chapter or verse here and there will be confusing and it will seem like the Bible is contradictory.

 

[Serveto]

This is interesting actually because the temple and its rituals were so central to the Hebraic way of life. When Christ died, it signaled the end of that system. The Jews were so attached to it that, as the book of Acts shows, everyone who believed that the system was no longer valid was persecuted and killed. So this is interesting because i have to wonder how Muhammad would have fared, (had he lived in the first century) before the Sanhedrin with his final revelation in hand, failing to acknowledge a 3000yr heritage. Stephen's matyrdom seems the most likely outcome.

It wasn't as central, to everybody, as Christians usually suggest. Just as our era has Protestants who repudiate the Roman Catholic Priesthood and all of its pomp, rites, ritual and ceremony as decadent, Jesus' era had its proto-Protestants, the Essenes, who are not mentioned in the New Testament with the other sects, the Saducees and the Pharisees, but history, again, proves their existence. They had retired to the Dead Sea area, railed against the Roman Catholic Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood, and avoided their stronghold, Rome Jerusalem, which, not long afterward, St. John described as "figuratively Sodom and Egypt,"

"By retiring to Qumran, far from the Temple which they considered profaned by the wickedness of the official priesthood, the members of the [Essene] sect had to renounce offering the usual sacrifices there. Josephus writes that the Essenes "fulfill their sacrifices among themselves" ... whereas according to Philo ..., they offered no sacrifice at all. It appears from various Qumran writings that the sect did not in principle condemn sacrifices absolutely; they accorded them a place in religion. But the present section of the Rule [one of their discovered documents] shows that, for the Essenes, 'the offering of the lips,' i.e., divine praise, and perfect conduct, were sufficient to secure God's loving-kindness and to take the place of expiatory sacrifice. This doctrine can cite the authority of Amos, Hosea and Isaiah ..."
Essene Writings from Qumran
A. Dupont-Sommer, p. 96​

The above reference to Hosea is this verse:

Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips."
(Hosea 14:2)

​

 

[Karlysymon]

It wasn't as central, to everybody, as Christians usually suggest. Just as our era has Protestants who repudiate the Roman Catholic Priesthood and all of its pomp, rites, ritual and ceremony as decadent, Jesus' era had its proto-Protestants, the Essenes, who are not mentioned in the New Testament with the other sects, the Saducees and the Pharisees, but history, again, proves their existence. They had retired to the Dead Sea area, railed against the Roman Catholic Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood, and avoided their stronghold, Rome Jerusalem, which, not long afterward, St. John described as "figuratively Sodom and Egypt,"

"By retiring to Qumran, far from the Temple which they considered profaned by the wickedness of the official priesthood, the members of the [Essene] sect had to renounce offering the usual sacrifices there. Josephus writes that the Essenes "fulfill their sacrifices among themselves" ... whereas according to Philo ..., they offered no sacrifice at all. It appears from various Qumran writings that the sect did not in principle condemn sacrifices absolutely; they accorded them a place in religion. But the present section of the Rule [one of their discovered documents] shows that, for the Essenes, 'the offering of the lips,' i.e., divine praise, and perfect conduct, were sufficient to secure God's loving-kindness and to take the place of expiatory sacrifice. This doctrine can cite the authority of Amos, Hosea and Isaiah ..."
Essene Writings from Qumran
A. Dupont-Sommer, p. 96​

The above reference to Hosea is this verse:

Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips."
(Hosea 14:2)

​

My point of the temple and its rites being central to everyone is exemplified, not just by the Sabbath worship but by the Temple tax that ALL MALES had to pay aswell as their consecration to the LORD (Luke 2:21-27) rite.

So, the Essene renounced the sacrifices, not because the rituals were inherently abominable but because the entire system had been profaned. Right? That's not the first time it happened, in Israelite history (Ezekiel 8-9: Malachi 1:6-14)
I suppose, this isn't any different from someone who stops going to church because secular songs pass for a worship songs.

 

[Daciple]

It wasn't as central, to everybody, as Christians usually suggest.

Well it was central to God, and the entire economy and "statehood" of Israel. You are correct that there was a much much much smaller sect the Essene who essentially created their own Religion that deviated from what the Bible actually taught. While you compare them to the Protestants, in my opinion they moreso resemble the Catholic Church in the fact that they choose to create their own Religion apart from the what the Bible actually taught and I am sure had their own "Priesthood" as in a heirarchy of leaders. They created their own "Sacrificial System" apart from the Bible ect ect ect.

The reference you have states this:

This doctrine can cite the authority of Amos, Hosea and Isaiah

However this is what Isaiah also say:

Is 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

And if we look at every instance of Sacrifice that God is not pleased nor wants it can all be 100% summed up by David in Psalm:

Ps 51:14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.
15 O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.
16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
18 Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem.
19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.

God didnt want their Sacrifices because it was all being done in vain, they didnt actually have the broken heart before Him for it, they were relying on the act instead of the meaning and reason for the need of it. They were being Religious, instead of having that Personal Accountability and Relationship. However none of that actually did away with the necessity for the Sacrifice, it was still needed and pleasing to God, He commanded it many many many times.

As David shows the sacrifices God wants are the broken and contrite heart and THEN the physical offerings which are also needed will be acceptable to him.

The Sacrifices were commanded and needed, the Essenes rejected the Word of God and created their own Religion, just like the Catholics have done, and like the Pharisees have done in what we now call Modern Judaism...

 

[Serveto]

Well it was central to God, and the entire economy and "statehood" of Israel.

Spoken like a Levitical priest, who might, just might, have had a hand in writing a book bearing his name, Leviticus.

You are correct that there was a much much much smaller sect the Essene ...

Why place emphasis upon their size and numbers? First of all, those aren't known. Though they had a headquarters, of sorts, in the Dead Sea region, they may have had a community which extended throughout Asia Minor. Anyway, if big numbers are the proof of a sect's legitimacy, the estimated 1.2 billion Catholics should be impressive, though, to me, it isn't particularly.

... who essentially created their own Religion that deviated from what the Bible actually taught ...

Catholics say the same thing of Protestants, and vice versa, and the Jews of Judaism say it of Christianity as a whole. The Essenes, as I see it, were analogous to Protestants insofar as: 1) they protested against an existing, established priesthood, Levitical/Aaronic rather than Roman, obviously; 2) they took the sacred writings, "the Bible," with them on their puritanical exit; and 3) they proceeded to interpret the Bible differently, in fact, very differently.

While you compare them to the Protestants, in my opinion they more so resemble the Catholic Church in the fact that they choose to create their own Religion apart from the what the Bible actually taught ...

It's too bad we can't locate an articulate Essene, well versed in the scriptures, to argue his and their case. History leaves only fragments of their writings. At any rate, it seems they saw no or little use in blood rites and rituals, and they found justification for their beliefs primarily in the writings of the Israelite prophets, who often railed against the priests, rather like Protestant bloggers against Rome. I, personally, think Prophet Hosea's metaphor, "calves of their lips," is an at best awkward phrase, but it conveys the idea, which the Essenes reportedly accepted, that praise and worship of God were adequate, without the need for any ritualistic bloodletting, with an officiating priest in attendance.

... and I am sure had their own "Priesthood" as in a heirarchy of leaders ...

They did. It sounds as though, rather like Freemasonry and early Roman Catholicism in this regard, theirs was a sort of secret society, with three grades of initiation. Anyway, I cannot name a community which doesn't have a sort of hierarchy of leaders, including most Protestants denominations. They, too, usually have their elders, bishops, teachers, evangelists, etc., and it's usually one of those guys who administers the Protestant version of the Roman Catholic Eucharist, called Communion.

The reference you have states this: However this is what Isaiah also say:

Is 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain ...

I appreciate hearing your perspective, of course, but the point is largely moot. Unless and until we can call an Essene to the witness stand and ask him to counter your theological objections to their position, I would rather stay with history. The Essenes seem to have either vanished, when once their much-anticipated "Teacher of Righteousness" arrived, who seems surprisingly contemporaneous with Jesus Christ, or quite possibly morphed into the equally difficult, these days, to find, the very very very small sect of Ebionites and the Jerusalem Church, who did not seem to survive the destruction of Jerusalem, including its Jewish Temple, by Titus in 70 A.D.

 

[Daciple]

Spoken like a Levitical priest, who might, just might, have had a hand in writing a book bearing his name, Leviticus.

Or maybe just maybe, they were called a Levitical Priest because thats the name of the Book that spells out their duties to God as written by Moses. You would think that Aaron would have been the one who wrote that Book, but it wasnt, it was Moses.

Why place emphasis upon their size and numbers?

Why exclude it? I mean there could be something to the fact that they were much smaller in number than IDK the millions of people in Israel at the time still following some aspect of the Biblical commands to Sacrifice, and lets not forget there was this one guy and His who was kind of a big deal that was indeed following these Commandments that the Essene were rejecting...

Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord
24 And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

So lets see the Mother of Jesus followed the Commandment in what is called the Law of the Lord to sacrifice turtledoves or pigeons, and she took Jesus where? Oh thats right Jerusalem to the Temple of God. However you want us to believe that all of this was not called for by God or done away with?

There is also another major figure besides Jesus that we see was literally in the midst of performing the Commands written in the Book of Leviticus when something of God happened to him. If we take your/ the Essenes perspective into consideration as Truth then well God would NEVER do such a thing...

Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

8 And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
9 According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.

11 And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense.

So here we see that Gabriel, the Angel of the Lord comes into the Temple that the Essenes consider defiled, to speak with Zacharias, a Priest who married a daughter of Aaron, the beginning of the line of the Levitical Priesthood, while Zacharias was literally in the middle of doing the command as laid out in Leviticus to burn incense, to tell him that God heard his prayer concerning having a child. We see Gabriel tells John that he will have a child and shall name him John and that John will make the way for Jesus the Messiah to come.

John by the way is also a Levitical Priest in case you missed that, the linage you are seeming to want to discount to uphold the Essene refusal to abide by the Commandments of God...

To be honest brother, this alone to anyone who believes the Bible completely destroys any argument one wants to make concerning the Levitical Priesthood or any ideologies concerning the Essene, they are wrong, the Word of God is right period. Jesus and his whole family, John and his whole family all followed the Commandments concerning Sacrifice and all of them still upheld the Temple in Jerusalem as being the dwelling place of God Himself. All of that goes directly against any argument you or the Essene want to make. Whom shall I believe, Jesus, John and the Word of God or a tiny off shoot living outside of Israel and the Religion they made up?

Anyway, if big numbers are the proof of a sect's legitimacy, the estimated 1.2 billion Catholics should be impressive, though, to me, it isn't particularly.

While I do agree that numbers doesnt equate to Truthfulness, its still a fact that the Essene were a small sect and off shoot of Israel. And of course their sizes doesnt mean they are more or less correct, but what does determine it would be the Word of God and the fact that Jesus followed these Commandments that they say are not essential. The fact that John was a Levitical Priest, that his father was literally in the Temple performing the exact Commandments that you and the Essene say God didnt want to be performed ect.

Catholics say the same thing of Protestants, and vice versa, and the Jews of Judaism say it of Christianity as a whole. The Essenes, as I see it, were analogous to Protestants insofar as: 1) they protested against an existing, established priesthood, Levitical/Aaronic rather than Roman, obviously; 2) they took the sacred writings, "the Bible," with them on their puritanical exit; and 3) they proceeded to interpret the Bible differently, in fact, very differently.

Yet they rejected everything that Jesus Himself upheld, so again who is right? Them or Jesus?

Do I understand your position sure, but I see them as running from the True Faith so they can incorporate ideologies they want to follow, just like the Catholic Church has done. They wanted to do rituals they want, they want to make up their own Traditions ect so they create a Religion apart from the actual Faith and follow it...

It's too bad we can't locate an articulate Essene, well versed in the scriptures, to argue his and their case. History leaves only fragments of their writings. At any rate, it seems they saw no use in blood rites and rituals, and they found justification for their beliefs primarily in the writings of the prophets. I, personally, think Hosea's metaphor, "calves of their lips," is an awkward phrase, but it gets the idea across that praise and worship of God were adequate.

Yeah, thats great that they choose to interpret it as they did, but Jesus interpreted it as we are stating, which means one of them are wrong. Jesus made Sacrifices, Jesus celebrated the Holy Days as found in the Torah, Jesus made statements that all of these Books were correct and True ect. If Jesus was against Sacrifice then IDK He probably would have said so, He probably wouldnt have literally Sacrificed Himself for the covering of Sin, He probably wouldnt of called the Temple His Fathers House, He probably wouldnt of participated in all the Temple Rituals. Same with Johns family ect.

They did. It sounds as though, rather like Freemasonry and early Roman Catholicism in this regard, theirs was a sort of secret society, with three grades of initiation.

Yeah that doesnt bode well to their supposed correct interpretation and belief system. Here is what Jesus said:

John 18:20 Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.

Anyway, I cannot name a community which doesn't have a sort of hierarchy of leaders, including most Protestants denominations. They, too, usually have their elders, bishops, teachers, evangelists, etc., and it's usually one of those guys who administers the Protestant version of the Roman Catholic Eucharist, called Communion.

I have no problem with a hierarchy of leaders but your opening remark stated that this type of thing is what they were rebelling against.

Just as our era has Protestants who repudiate the Roman Catholic Priesthood and all of its pomp, rites, ritual and ceremony as decadent

All they did was create their own Priesthood, with their own pomp, rites, rituals and ceremonies, and from what I have read of them, it was NOT according to the actual Biblical Commands, they rejected the Bible, called it wrong and set up their own Religion in place of it. Yes before you go there they did use the Bible, but that is my point as well. The RCC uses the Bible but they reject it in the same breath, adding to it what they want and removing parts to keep their Faith in tact...

I appreciate hearing your perspective, of course, but the point is largely moot. Unless and until we can call an Essene to the witness stand and ask him to counter your theological objections to their position, I would rather stay with history.

Sure history shows their ideology was incorrect in the fact that they dont exist anymore. If their interpretation was the Truth, if that is really what the Bible stated then I am quite sure that God Himself would have made a way that they survived and that their beliefs would be known blatantly throughout the World. In my perspective the fact that they are gone testifies to the fact that they must not have had the Truth because the Truth wouldnt be kept in a tiny sect apart from Israel, and then snuffed out to History.

And I also argue that Jesus Himself is the one that outright denies the interpretations of the Essene because Jesus literally went and participated in everything the Essene called either unclean o r not needed in Worship of God.

 

[Serveto]

@Daciple

That was a great post and rejoinder! I do enjoy talking to you, and plan to address your well-reasoned post in more detail when and as I can, with the research it deserves, but, in the meantime, please stop identifying me with the Essenes. It's annoying and inaccurate. I present them, but am not of them. Even if I were Jewish, or a wanna be Jew, as most Christians seem to be, at least by way of what St. Paul calls "adoption" or being "engrafted," I probably would never have joined their puritanical sect, much as I won't join Protestants today, because the Essenes were reportedly so rigid and austere concerning the Sabbath, and its strict observance, that they would not defecate on the Seventh Day. I probably would have to escape their compound and run up to Jerusalem to use the public toilet, or what the British call the W.C. (water closet), but, for that matter, while I was in Jerusalem, neither would I go to the Sadducees and the Pharisees to have a priest slit a long-necked giraffe's neck and drain it of its blood to atone for my many, and I might add, long sins.

 

[z gharib]

I probably would have to escape their compound and run up to Jerusalem to use the public toilet

 

[Daciple]

please stop identifying me with the Essenes

Lol I am sorry brother, I guess I should have prefaced it more of the ideologies you are saying the Essenes held, no offense...

 

[Etagloc]

@AspiringSoul

You have a problem with me because you're a narcissist who takes whatever random half-baked ideas you came up with this morning and calls it "Islam". You have a problem with me because you've been too influenced by Europeans and not watering down Islam to appease Western values is "primitive" to you. It might take time but I want you to know that it's possible for you to break the chains of colonialism. You only have to bow down to Allah. You don't have to (and shouldn't) bow down to the West. You can overcome your colonized mentality.

You have a problem because, besides being such a self-absorbed narcissist that you think your ideas are a source of "Islam" above the Quran and Sunnah (whose authority you attack, by the way- even to the extreme of attacking Saheeh Al-Bukhari). By your methodology, an angel must be whispering in your ear and you must be a prophet after Muhammad (PBUH).

You have a problem because you act like whatever New Age, One World Religion ideas you think you came up with and brand as "Islam" are divine revelation.

You have a problem because you're a shameless innovator, making stuff up as you go and being so narcisstic that you think you're entitled to call "Islam" whatever absurd, fuzzy ideas you came up with this morning. What you call "Islam" is something you make up as you go, off the top of your head.

Daciple has already explained things pretty well and I quote him as there's no need for me to restate what's already been said. I'm not making takfir (contrary to what you may believe, actually believing in the Quran and the Sunnah doesn't make me a khawarijite) but your Islam is about as authentic as salsa from New York.

Lol youre a hoot bud, the Faux Muslim tries to tell Born Again Christians they dont understand Christianity and he who rejects Christianity knows it better. Good times lol

as I have said over and over, you are really NOT a Muslim. You have created your own Religion mixed from Islam/Christianity/Gnostic/Occult ideologies. You may not like my assestment of your Religion but it is correct, as no Muslims believes your Muslim, no Christian believes your Christian, no Gnostic would accept you as Gnostic, not Occultist would accept you as following the Occult. You have made up your own unique brand and hodgepodge of beliefs, it clearly isnt Islam...

Look brother I made it clear that this isnt the thread to deconstruct your made up Religion.

You have a problem because you're a miserable old guy who wants to start stuff with random people online.

You have a problem because your watered-down, New Age, warm fuzzy, One World Religionized "Islam" is exactly what is being described in this picture

I understand your hatred and antagonism towards me. Colonialism's lackeys have always despised those who weren't like them.

 

[Bacsi]

To me, there's no big difference between the Quran and the Bible in the sense that their validity is similar. I see errors and contradictions in both. The Quran is certainly better in having less mistakes and contradictions, because it's the result of one man's work. Also, and it's my personal opinion, the Bible with its polytheism is much weaker vs. Quran's monotheism.

 

[AspiringSoul]

@Etagloc only last year said the Qur'an was a book of evil sorcery.

"Influenced by Europeans"
As opposed to Influenced by Persians, Indians, Africans and Arabs? Islam is a world religion not the desert cult of sorcery YOU want it to be.

Posting Muslim videos and copy pasting material is a convenient way of posing as a Muslim online whilst spewing hate against Muslims like me? Why are you so hell bent on turning Islam into a dumb desert cult?
I suspect something foul here.

 

[AspiringSoul]

Lol this guy keeps on posting Dasciple's posts against me too...
Very suspicious.

Next year you will "find Jesus"

 

[AspiringSoul]

Btw I'm not a narcissist in fact that's one of the personality types I despise most. I can come across that way because my views stand out even though nothing Ive said so far is wrong.
For example

Me: some magic is sorcery and some magic is good.
Ave Muslim: that is totally false all magic is sihr/sorcery and there is no good magic. You are dodgy.
Me: what is the definition of magic? Anything that can alter the physical through the non physical ie the mind. But we know all matter is energy and therefore thought has a magical aspect to it.
Here is a HADITH which proves that in Islam 'incantations' (a type of magic) is permissable when it is for good and contains no traces of shirk.

So far so good right?

Colgate: omg that is proof Islam is sorcery. I knew it...you've given me proof.

.....

A year later

Me: some hadith are not legit. There are even hadith within bukhari collection that contradict one another.

Colgate: you are a munafiq...haadeeeeeef...and Qur'an mate. Vee fallow da sunnah and salaf
Here is some material about da koofeeeroon that was totally written about you.

Conclusion: you're a fucking twat and I don't care about approval from anyone.

 

[shqipe]

Liberal islam lolll come on now

 

[AspiringSoul]

W

Liberal islam lolll come on now

What are you referring to?

 

[AspiringSoul]

Yes, Paul's son- but... I'm still trying to figure out who exactly this Paul person is... I don't mean any disrespect to Christians but I think it would be accurate to call the religion Paulianity... I say that as an observation, not intending that as an insult.... Christianity seems to be based on Paul....

the Old Testament? based on something Paul said, the whole Old Testament is basically thrown out.... so a few lines from Paul can throw out the whole Old Testament..... and then most of the NT from what I understand is written by Paul........

when I was a kid, I was taught that our religion worshipped Jesus (PBUH).... but who exactly is this Paul character? that's what I want to know...

Why single out Paul? Peter saw the vision in the cloud which was pretty fundamental in everything Paul later did. Paul had a lot of religious zeal and he was far more intelligent in matters of religion and knowledge of people than the other apostles which is why he played the biggest role in establishing the next chapter of Christianity. Peter however really set the ball rolling with that vision and the experiences that followed where gentiles began embracing Christianity.
That is...Christianity for gentiles..

 

[Etagloc]

Timothy did not write the books of Timothy. There are two epistles to Timothy (letters) in the Bible and they were written by Paul. The new testament has thirteen letters from Paul. They are Romans, First and second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phillipians, Colossians, First and Second Thessalonians, First and second Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Hebrews. All these books are in agreement with the rest of the books of the Bible. The Bible cannot contradict itself. If it did, it couldn't be trusted. One of the basic principles when studying the Bible is being able to trust that the Bible is a cohesive work that doesn't contradict itself on anything.

Timothy met Paul as young man and was his travelling companion. He helped Paul establish churches and visit them. He is mentioned in a few of Paul's letters to others as well. Here are some verses in the Bible that mention Timothy.

Acts16:1
Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek.

Acts 17:13-15
But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was preached by Paul at Berea, they came there also and stirred up the crowds. Then immediately the brethren sent Paul away, to go to the sea; but both Silas and Timothy remained there. So those who conducted Paul brought him to Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him with all speed, they departed.

2 Timothy 1:5
when I call to remembrance the genuine faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded is in you also.

1 Thessalonians 3:1-2
Therefore, when we could no longer endure it, we thought it good to be left in Athens alone, and sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow labourer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith,

The Bible has 66 books with so many Chapters and verses. The Quran is not as big as the new testament which is the smaller of two testaments. Bible study needs life dedication to it with the help of the Holy Spirit. Reading one Chapter or verse here and there will be confusing and it will seem like the Bible is contradictory.

How do you explain the trinity, though?

Do you believe it is possible for humans to understand the trinity doctrine or do you believe it is beyond human understanding?

I simply do not see how 1 can equal 3.

Also, does the trinity doctrine have Biblical support? I am not really aware of any verses in the Bible that seem to explicitly spell out the trinity doctrine... I think it came from the church if I'm not mistaken. I'm from a Christian background but my memory of the Bible is sort of foggy.