Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - shaad

Pages: 1 [2]
16
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / John 1:1
« on: October 05, 2017, 11:10:26 PM »
Assalamualaikum,

A christian quoted an argument from Carm.org to refute a muslim concerning the correct Translation of John 1:1....can some please tell me how to respond to this? Here's the quote...

"John 1:1 in a literal translation reads thus:  "In beginning was the word, and the word was with the God, and God was the word."  Notice that it says "God was the word." This is the actual word-for-word translation.  It is not saying that "a god was the word."  That wouldn't make sense.  Let me break it down into three statements.

"In beginning was the word . . . "
(en    arche      en  ho  logos)
A very simple statement that the Word was in the beginning.
"and the word was with the God . . . "
(kai  ho  logos  en  pros ton theon)
This same Word was with God.
"and God was the word."--Properly translated as "and the Word was God."
(kai theos en   ho  logos)
This same Word was God.
Regarding statement 3 above, the correct English translation is " . . . and the Word was God" and not "and God was the word."  This is because if there is only one definite article ("ho"="the") in a clause where two nouns are in the nominative ("subject") form ("theos" and "logos"), then the noun with the definite article ("ho"="the") is the subject.  In this case "ho logos" means that "the word" is the subject of the clause.  Therefore, " . . . the Word was God" is the correct translation and not "God was the Word."1 But this does not negate the idea that John is speaking of only one God, not two, even though the Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that Jesus is "a god" or the "mighty god" as was addressed above."


17
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / The Queen of the Xenomorphs
« on: October 02, 2017, 07:31:45 AM »
Assalamualaikum dear Brother Osama,

Do you know the christian website called Tektonics? It's gaining a lot of popularity nowadays, i'm seeing more and more Christians using this website to refute arguments which attacks the Textual Integrity of the Bible as well as other common subjects...It also seems that all those Christian Apologetics websites which grows like mushrooms seems to borrow many of their arguments from Tektonics...Have you dealt with articles of this website in the past brother Osama? Seems muslims should deal with the Queen first instead of the Xenomorphs...

18
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Imam Ghazali Book about Atheists?
« on: September 29, 2017, 10:23:52 AM »
Assalamulaikum guys,

Did Imam Ghazali ever write a book about Atheists? I mean something similar like "Tahāfut al-Falāsifa" in which he deals with the doctrine of philosophers and seriously it is such a masterpiece that I've seen a Christian website praising his work and quoting some of his arguments to prove the existence of God...so is there a book in which he deals with the arguments of Atheists?

19
Assalamualaikum,

I've put the article of the trinitarians on pastebin because it's a bit long and also i would break the rules if i put the link of the original website so sorry about the inconvenience


<Infidel's link removed by Osama Abdallah>

20
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Is that supposed to be strange???
« on: September 27, 2017, 09:05:03 AM »
Assalamualaikum

Can someone please tell me if the Quran says anything about some kind of specific "Law of nature"?

The reason i'm asking this question is because today I stumbled upon a 6 mins video in which a cat was having sex with a chicken 😅 so isn't this supposed to be unnatural?

I mean if it was a dog and a cat or another species of mammal it would still be strange but at least understandable in my opinion BUT a cat having sex with a chicken is too unnatural right?

21
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Dabiq
« on: September 21, 2017, 06:29:38 AM »
Assalamualaikum,

 I just read the latest Issue of Dabiq....They make lengthy articles about wisdom and contemplation and on the same page they put bloody pictures of their attacks and i guess this is enough to prove how idiotic they are...i went on page 30 and the title was "Why we hate you and why we fight you" and all the reasons that they've written are mainly emotional with a tiny amount of Quranic verses which are as usual taken out of context...They mock the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion and calls muslims like us "Apostates" and what is really funny is that they don't even bring a single proof from the Quran and Hadiths to prove us wrong....what is even funnier is that they put pictures of kids who are apparently playing happily in the caliphate in order to attract sympathizers who wish to bring their kids and i'm pretty sure little do these sympathizers know about the amount of child soldiers that have been recruited and judging from the amount of territory and fighters that these idiots have lost, there is a high chance that these kids are on the frontline...

22
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Nabeel Qureshi
« on: September 16, 2017, 09:01:29 PM »
He died of stomach cancer....such a young guy...makes me feel really sad to be honest...

23
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Hypostatic Union
« on: September 14, 2017, 10:58:49 AM »
Assalamualaikum guys,

"Hypostatic Union", have you guys ever heard of this term? I was reading articles on CARM.org and i came across an article in which Mr Matt was using this argument to explain why Jesus(peace be upon Him) didn't know the time of his return.Hypostatic Union simply means that Jesus had TWO natures, His "divine" one and the "human" one.I've seen that Sami Zaatari already refuted his article but I would like to ask one question.So basically i would like to quote the words of Mr Matt which he used to explain Hypostatic Union on his website...

"Hypostatic Union is the union of the two natures (Divine and human) in the person of Jesus. Jesus is God in flesh (John 1:1, 14, 10:30-33, 20:28, Phil. 2:5-8, Heb. 1:8). He is fully God and fully man (Col. 2:9), thus, He has two natures: God and man. He is not half God and half man. He is 100% God and 100% man. He never lost His divinity. He continued to exist as God when He became a man and added human nature to Himself (Phil. 2:5-11). Therefore, there is a "union in one person of a full human nature and a full divine nature."

Did you guys notice some really important things which he said about the nature of Jesus? Let me quote it again...


 "He is 100% God and 100% man"

"He NEVER lost his divinity"

"He CONTINUED to exist as God when he became a Man"

"Full human nature and full divine nature"

So my question is(using the Hypostatic Union logic of course), if Jesus never lost his "divinity", he was still "100%" God and if he still had his "Full divine nature", this means he still retained his "divine wisdom and knowledge" when he became human right? Then how on earth he didn't know the time of his return?

One his article Mr Matt says....

"Before Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection He said the Father alone knew the day and hour of His return.  It wasn't until after Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection that omniscience was attributed to Jesus."

My question is, how on earth was Jesus granted omniscience only after his crucifixion and resurrection when in His own explanation of "Hypostatic Union" he said that...

"He is 100% God and 100% Man"

"He NEVER lost his divinity"

"He CONTINUED to exist as God when he became a Man"

"Full human nature and full divine nature"

So using the Hypostatic Union logic, Isn't Jesus supposed to retain his "Omniscience" attribute?


24
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Mystery Babylon
« on: September 11, 2017, 02:23:44 AM »
Assalamualaikum,

Have you guys ever heard of "Mystery Babylon"? I was claimed by christians in the past that it was the Vatican, NOWADAYS many Christians have brought up proofs that it is infact Mecca by using some pretty detailed biblical descriptions and i saw a 59 mins video on youtube about it...i've also read articles which talks about this subject which shows that Mystery Babylon should infact be in a desert according to the Bible and there's also lots of descriptions which according to them are "irrefutable" proofs that it is infact Mecca and we(muslims) are infact the "bad guys" to keep it short....can you guys please tell me what are your thoughts about that? I have also seen some christians using this argument at some places during debates on the internet, can someone who please tell me how to respond to their claims concerning this subject?

25
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / sex with minors in Judaism???
« on: September 06, 2017, 06:34:06 AM »
Assalamualaikum guys,

I need some help concerning something really "strange".I was planning to post this 2 weeks before but i kinda got busy.Well I don't really remember for what reason but 2 weeks ago i reading chapter 15 of the "Ishut" on Chabad.org and i stumbled across this "verse"...



"A man should not marry a barren women, an elderly woman, an aylonit or a minor who is not fit to bear a child[11]
 unless
he has already fulfilled the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying,[12] or he has another wife with whom he can father children.[13]"

The footnote of number 11 says...

From the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 23:1), one can infer that sexual relations with a minor are considered as emitting wasted seed, one of the more severe prohibitions of the Torah. The Ramah (loc. cit.:5) and other authorities, however, differ and explain that as long as relations are carried out in an ordinary manner, having relations with a minor or an aylonit DOES NOT VIOLATE this prohibition.

Ok i went to check Schulchan Arukh Even HaEzer 23:1 to see what exactly does it say and this is what it says....

"It is prohibited to spill seed needlessly and this sin is more severe than all Torah transgressions. For this reason a man should not thresh inside and sprinkle [his semen] outside [of a woman], and he should not marry a girl who is unable to have children."

BUT a couple of "verses" below, more accurately on 23:5 it is written...



"A woman who has some sort of closure in her womb and therefore when her husband has relations with her he sprinkles outside, this is prohibited (but it is PERMITTED to have relations with a minor or an aylonit since this is the way of the land) (Tosafot and the Mordecai ch. 1 Yevamot, and Nimukei Yosef on the chapter [entitled] Haba al Yevamto)."

Can anyone give me his opinion on this? Does that mean sexual relationship with minors is allowed in some circumstances in Judaism?

Here is a link to Ishut chapter 15 on Chabad.org....

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/952889/jewish/Ishut-Chapter-Fifteen.htm

And here is the link where i was reading Schulchan Arukh 23:1-5....

https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh,_Even_HaEzer.23?lang=bi

26
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Anti-Paul Christians
« on: August 11, 2017, 06:21:31 AM »
Assalamualaikum ;)

Whoaa i didn't know that there Christians who are STRONGLY Anti-Paul out there! Seriously this Christian author destroys Paul's fallacies in detail....

https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html

27
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Is this a Joke?
« on: August 06, 2017, 12:17:50 AM »
Assalamualaikum,

I noticed something kinda weird in the NRSV...

Matthew 2:11New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

11 On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

The greek word "prosekynēsan" is translated as "paid him homage".Well it's ok until the same word is translated as "Worship"...

Matthew 14:32-33New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

32 When they got into the boat, the wind ceased. 33 And those in the boat worshiped(prosekynēsan) him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Seriously is this some kind of joke?

28
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / LORD OF THE SABBATH
« on: August 05, 2017, 03:49:28 AM »
Assalamualaikum,

A Christian told me that Jesus is god because he said he is the lord of the Sabbath.Can you guys please tell me what Jesus meant by saying this?

29
Well hi guys!  :)

Recently i was reading a short article on Answering Christianity concerning how non jews are considered by the jews.The link is below

http://www.answering-christianity.com/nonjews_in_talmud.htm

Well somewhere it is written:-

"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. THEY ARE BEASTS."  TALMUD: Baba Mezia, 114b (page referrals).

Well i checked the Baba Mezia...i can't find this sentence...here's the link to 114b below...it would be great if you guys could check it because maybe i'm mistaken...or maybe the JewsforAllah authors were mistaken or didn't check the source...

http://www.come-and-hear.com/babamezia/babamezia_114.html

30
GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Who are the Edomites?
« on: May 19, 2017, 07:55:02 AM »
Assalamualaikum brothers! Well i'm a bit confused right now.I was recently reading something on Answering Christianity and i found it was written somewhere on the article that i was reading that the Edomites were Arabs or in other words Ishmaelites.On the other hand i read on a Christian website that the Edomites were among the children of Esau the son of Isaac.So who were the Edomites? Arabs or something else?

Pages: 1 [2]