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.

Messages - Egyptian

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... 18
Ahteism & Agnosticism / Re: Neanderthals?
« on: December 19, 2012, 01:15:45 PM »
What's islam's stance on stuff like neanderthals and homo erectus? Apparently we have neanderthal DNA in us?

Even Chimpanzees Gorillas etc has more than 90% identical DNA with humans ..... but we know as muslims  “Allah does what He pleases.” Allah can create His creatures in any manner that He chooses.

In Islam ,human beings living on the Earth today, are all descendants of a male and a female

Allah also says: “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is the one who is the most God-fearing.” [Sûrah al-Hujûrât:13]

We also see that Allah created the first male "Adam" and female ,directly from "dust ,water,mud....""  without the agency of parents ,or any kind of ancestors.

The direct creation of Adam (peace be upon him) can neither be confirmed nor denied by science in any way. It is a matter of the Unseen and something that science does not have the power to confirm or deny. As a matter of the Unseen, we believe it because Allah informs us about it.

when it comes to all the living things ,other than humans ,the Qur’ân  neither confirm nor deny the theory of biological evolution or the process referred to as natural selection. The question of evolution remains purely a matter of scientific enquiry. The theory of evolution must stand or fall on its own scientific merits – and that means the physical evidence that either confirms the theory or conflicts with it.

Sheikh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî wrote:

The role of science is only to observe and describe the patterns that Allah places in His creation. If scientific observation shows a pattern in the evolution of species over time that can be described as natural selection, this is not in itself unbelief. It is only unbelief for a person to think that this evolution took place on its own, and not as a creation of Allah. A Muslim who accepts evolution or natural selection as a valid scientific theory must know that the theory is merely an explanation of one of the many observed patterns in Allah’s creation.

As for the fossil remains of bipedal apes and the tools and artifacts associated with those remains, their existence poses no problem for Islamic teachings. There is nothing in the Qur’ân and Sunnah that either affirms or denies that upright, brainy, tool using apes ever existed or evolved from other apelike ancestors. Such animals may very well have existed on Earth before Adam’s arrival upon it. All we can draw from the Qur’ân and Sunnah is that even if those animals once existed, they were not the forefathers of Adam (peace be upon him).

And Allah knows best.


This is off the topic, I tried sending but couldn't find the right way round, sorry.
I am just wondering if you could kindly shed some light on the verse 5:117 please.

Zakallah khyar


Actually ,not only Shakir rendered the meaning as "to die" but also other translations ,including ;Muhammad Asad , Wahiduddin Khan,Amatul Rahman Omar,Shabbir Ahmed,George Sale
why did those translators rendered it that way?  why some muslim scholars believe that Jesus died a natural death,and hence denying or questioning the belief of the second coming of Jesus? what was the final scene of the mission of jesus on Earth, according to the Quran?

all those questions will be answered throughly,with new fresh lines, in my next thread "which I'm about to finish inshallah soon" ......

I will post that thread inshllah in the section  "Crucifixion or Crucifiction" ........

the following is the outline of the study:

1- In response to the jews plan to excute Jesus in a humilating scanelous way,God took jesus up to heaven,according to the Holy Quran.

2- the claimes of someone substituted Jesus on the cross ,or was swooned ,are not only conjectural "forcing between the lines" theories ,but also not in accordance with the linguestic Quranic input.

3- Though the verb "tawaffa" when applied to a human ,is usually translated as "caused to die" , there are reasons to render it to the possible alternative meaning "to take fully".

4- In spite of that ,there is no clear proof from the Quran that Jesus will come again a second coming.

5- Are convinced that "tawaffa"  should mean "caused to die" ,finding no clear proof from the Quran that Jesus will come again , mistrusting the non-Quranic traditions claiming a second coming of Jesus ,some sunni scholars denied ,or questioned the second coming of Jesus ...
including the prominent Salafi scholar Muhammad Rashid Rida ,Imam Muhammad Abduh ,grand imams of al azhar Mahmud Shaltut , Mustafa l'Maraghi,Muhammad Abu Zahra. etc....

6- The belief of jesus death ,denying or questioning his second coming ,should by no mean gets a muslim who think so outside the fold of Islam ,moreover of no value for the christian critics ,who think that believing in jesus death is equal to believing in him as being crucified and atoned people by his blood.

that is some of the outline of the study ..... hope I finish it all and post it later inshallah.

Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / Re: head covering survey
« on: December 09, 2012, 03:49:03 PM »
if you don't hold that opinion, then you thinks its wrong.

That is not my general approach to the controversal issues ....  If I don't hold an opinon ,that doesn't necessarily mean I'm sure that it is wrong ...

It actually just a personal interest, and the purpose is not find what the majority thinks, its about how people back up there arguments, i want to see the arguments of how people justify there claims

people will back up their claims using the already available material online "don't expect new lines at all" ...... tons of publications discussed the matter in past and present .....

me personally If I would back up my opinion ,I would quote the work of "Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani" on the matter "Hijab al-Mar'ah al-Muslimah fil Kitab was-Sunnah" etc.....


« on: December 09, 2012, 04:39:07 AM »

Playing Chess: Permissible? by Imam Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / Re: head covering survey
« on: December 08, 2012, 02:54:40 PM »

I don't think you need a survey to know how many muslims believe that Face covering for women is mandatory or not .... most muslims don't think that Face covering is mandatory ,and the majority of the religious women in the islamic world wear Hijab ,not niqab ...... I hold that opinion too,after long readings and reflections.... (respecting the other opinion as well)....

« on: December 07, 2012, 11:30:49 AM »

There is no proof of chess prohibition that is attributed to the prophet peace be upon him ,and there is no proof that Arabs knew that game before or during the time of the prophet ,but at later times   was taken up by the Muslim world after the conquest of Persia ....

Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / Re: 33: 50
« on: December 06, 2012, 05:28:34 PM »
Thanx Bro Osama for your kindness , the tension in Egypt is something to be expected , as the results of the presidental election showed how the people are divised ,and how the never ending malicious media against the Islamic movements (Muslim Brotherhood aka Ikhwan etc...) ,has created what I call (Ikhwanophobia) .......
Nasserism propagandestic rubbish did mislead the simple naive farmers by demonizing the Muslim Brotherhood movement , as a consequence those misleaded people have brought up their children by feeding them their fear and hate of such movement  !!!
after the 60's things were changed and the Islamic movements started to contact such brainwashed simple people ,to enlighten them ....... they succeeded to a great deal ....
yet a big deal of Egyptians are still brainwashed and suffer from (Ikhwanophobia) .....

Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / Re: 33: 50
« on: December 05, 2012, 04:21:40 PM »

My Question is... what was the privileged that only the prophet had.
2nd question: was is the proof that the prophet could marry more than one wife, a Quranic verse please?

1- Both of your questions,zulfiqar , are already answered in the noble verse you just quoted !!

2-Why don't you post such kind of topics in the right section "ISLAMIC DISCUSSIONS | GOD | QURAN | QURAN CANON & HISTORY | HADITHS & SUNNA" ?



Examples of the use of the expression "thalithathalathaten"(the same exact as in the verse 5:71) :


- عن ابنِ  الدَّيلمي قالَ: كنتُ ثالثَ ثلاثةٍ ممَّن يخدمُ معاذَ بنَ جبلٍ، فلمَّا حضرَتهُ الوفاةُ قلنا: يرحمُكَ اللَّهُ إنَّا صحِبناكَ وانقطَعنا إليكَ

Narrated Ibn Aldailamy :he said "I was one of the three(thalithathalathaten) who served Mu'adh ibn Jabal ,when he was about to die ,we said "May Allah bless you .......

If we note Ibn Aldailamy used the term (thalithathalathaten) ,yet  it is only means he was one of the three servants of Mu'adh ibn Jabal ,without implying order ,rank etc......

Another Haith :

- إن الله يقول أنا ثالث الشريكين ما لم يخن أحدهما صاحبه فإذا خانه خرجت من بينهما
(Related by the two Sheikhs according to Abu Huraira). .... Allah Most High says: I am the third (thalithu)of two partners as long as they do not betray each other.

would any person assume that , as long as Allah used for himself the word (thalithu) ,then it denotes it should refers to his order with the two human business partners ,or his rank?!!!!!

Another Haith :

إذا كنتم ثلاثةً فلا يتناجَ اثنانِ دونَ الثالثِ

When three men are sitting together, no two of them should whisper to each other, for this would cause anguish to the third. (Bukhari, Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, Thirmidhi, Adu Daud).

again the word (thalith) , denotes no order or rank.


Similar  expression  is (thaniathnaini) (ثانى اثنين) (one of two)

The Quran - 9:40 If you do not succour the Apostle, then [know that God will do so -just as] God succoured him at the time when those who were bent on denying the truth drove him away, and he was but one of two(thaniathnaini): when these two were in the cave, [and] the Apostle said to his companion, "Grieve not: verily, God is with us.

it doesn’t denote order at all , it doesn’t denote that the companion of the prophet was expelled by the pagans and then the prophet later as his second ,but they been expelled together ..

another similar meaning in Sunna narration :

Muhammad ben udai said : I was one of four رَابِعَ أَرْبَعَةٍ (rabea arbaaten) who travelled to Syria etc….. (narrated Altabarani) .....

more exposition of the bias,exaggerations,shallow knowledge of that missionary in next posts

To be continued.(inshallah)

    Tafsîr al-Qurtubi    "They disbelieved who say: Allah is one of three"
Notice that this translation of 5:73 does not say Allah is one of three in a Trinity, but rather one of three. This again implies that there are three gods since God is said to be only one of three.

first : that is the proper translation .

second :it implies that christians take along side the one and only true God (the father), two gods ...

you may say that christians don't believe so......     that is irrelevant , it is not what you think you are doing , but what you REALLY do.

you may say that the father is a Hypostasis ,but what if he is really NOT  a hypostasis but the full divine entity?
What is God, according to Islam?

He is the entity that sent Jesus and appointed for him a mission,we call him (Allah)...Christians would like to call such being by (the father) .... Well, though we think he is a father of no one... we won't prohibit you from calling him what you wish, but pay attention....Whenever we mention the word (Allah ) whom you call (the father) we believe in him as the full un-manifested deity. He doesn’t mean for us one of the three aspects of the deity. Allah (what Christians call the father) is not what you think the incomplete definition of the deity but he is the full UN-personified deity.....

Allah (whom they call the father, considering him just one of the three manifestation of the divine being ) is the only divine entity to be exist and to be alone worshiped ...he doesn't need neither (the son),nor (the holy spirit) to complete the Godhead..... he is simply alone there ....
The Quran accuses Christians with ascribing mortal partners to the almighty,besides ,offering the worship that is due to Allah alone ...
Though we disagree regarding the limit of the father with regard to the deity, we agree in two points ...that (1) such entity exists (2) and divine as well...
Christians don't believe in 3 gods,according to the Quran. but associating with the one true God (the father as they like to call),with 2 non divine entities (Jesus,holy spirit)...  it is not (god+god+god) but (God+god+god).
second :May I ask you where did you get the idea that there is God and he is manifested to his creation with three ways? you will argue that the bible says so.... and the bible is entirely the word of God ,that it must be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth in any Metaphysical concept therein.

In other words ,the validity of the trinity depends on the validity of the bible ....
it is a matter of faith ,or would you claim that the supreme being is kept there in a laboratory and proven to be with three manifestations?
your definition of the deity (as manifested in 3 ways) is based on a book of faith (bible),on the other hand a Muslim counter definition of the deity (one entity with no manifestations) is based on a book of faith ,too (Quran) .......
Jesus could be a physical manifestation of the deity, or a prophet, or a lunatic  etc.....The validity of any of the previous rests on the validity of the scripture whether Christian, Islamic.....

He wrote :

Furthermore the Arabic word for third (thalith) is used in two other places of the Quran and in both instances it refers to someone or something that comes third in time, position or order: 
    when We sent unto them two men, but they cried them lies, so We sent a third (thalithin) as reinforcement. They said, ‘We are assuredly Envoys unto you.’ S. 36:14
Here, thalith refers to an envoy that was chronologically the third one that Allah sent.
  Have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza and Manat the third (al-thalithata), the other? S. 53:19-20 In this text Manat is mentioned third, which again shows that thalith in Quranic usage refers to someone or something that comes third in order, rank, position, time etc.


Muslims believe that Allah of the Quran is the same as the God who sent Jesus Christ, which identifies him with God the Father. This again causes a problem since if Allah is indeed the same Person as God the Father then the Quran is wrong in saying that Christians believe that the Father is the third of three. According to historic orthodox Christian beliefs the Father is the First Person of the One True Godhead, not the third deity of three gods.
Hence, the correct way of expressing what orthodox Christianity teaches concerning the order within the Godhead is to say that God is the first of the three  (Allaha awwalu thalathatin).

In fact, there are several ways that the author(s) of the Quran could have expressed what Christians actually believed concerning God the Father’s relationship within the Godhead. S/he/they could have articulated the Christian understanding that God the Father is the first of three by employing any of the following expressions,
Allah huwa wahid min thalatha.
Allah huwa awwal min thalatha.
Allah awwal thalatha.
As it stands the phrase used in the Muslim scripture concerning God the Father’s position within the Godhead is blatantly wrong.

you have been tricked by the shallow knowledge by those who help you with Arabic.!!!!

 The expression (thalithu thalathatin) , simply means (one of three),not neccesarily three in rank or order

You wrongly claim that verse   36:14  helps your case while it isn't .... what does it says?

"when We sent unto them two men, but they cried them lies, so We sent a third (thalithin) as reinforcement. They said, ‘We are assuredly Envoys unto you."

order here understood from the context ,not merely the use of (thalithin) .


true Christians have never taken Jesus and Mary as two gods in opposition to the one true God. Nor do they view them as two additional gods, e.g., no informed Bible-believing Christian believes that Jesus and Mary are two gods in addition to the supreme God of all.

The action of worship in the christian world either directed at Jesus or Mary and saints ..... the father is hardly worshipped.

the verse doesn't say christians are ignorant of the father (the only true God) , but though they know him they direct their worship to his creatures (Jesus , Mary ) ....

Mr Sam , in many occasion you shared us in your articles with your wonderful prayer to Jeus eg;

Amen! Come Lord Jesus, come! You are our great God and Savior who forgives all our sins and redeems us from every lawless deed in order that we might live in such a way as to bring you glory, honor, and praise! We love and adore you, O risen Lord of glory! Amen.

and I ask you how many time your directed such wonderful prayer to The father (Allah) ?

how many Catholic who would pray directly to the father ,instead of Mary and the Saints?

This again causes a problem since if Allah is indeed the same Person as God the Father then the Quran is wrong in saying that Christians believe that the Father is the third of three. Christians teach that the Father is the First Person of the One True Godhead, not the third deity of three gods.

wrong again, you need to do your homwork in Arabic


In the name of Allah most gracious most merciful.

I posted a thread before on that topic..... now I intend to post it again,with much elaborations and direct quotations of this missionary to be refuted.....

    O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only an apostle of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His apostles, and say not, Three (thalathatun). Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one God; far be It from His glory that He should have a son, whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His, and Allah is sufficient for a Protector. S. 4:171

    They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah's is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things. S. 5:17

    They are unbelievers who say, ‘God is the Messiah, Mary’s son.’ For the Messiah said, ‘Children of Israel, serve God, my Lord and your Lord. Verily whoso associates with God anything, God shall prohibit him entrance to Paradise, and his refuge shall be the Fire; and wrongdoers shall have no helpers.’ They are unbelievers who say, 'God is the Third of Three (thalithu thalathatin). No god is there but One God. If they refrain not from what they say, there shall afflict those of them that disbelieve a painful chastisement. Will they not turn to God and pray His forgiveness? God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a Messenger; Messengers before him passed away; his mother was a just woman; they both ate food. Behold, how We make clear the signs to them; then behold, how they perverted are! S. 5:70-75

The above passages presuppose that when Christians say God is three they meant God, Jesus and Mary. After all, why bother mentioning that Mary ate food and that Allah could destroy her if he wanted? Doesn’t this assume that she cannot be a god or goddess if she had to eat and could be annihilated?


You read it that way! , but:

    I'm sorry but your arguments make a number of assumptions and liberal interpretations to reach your desired conclusions. First, you make the assumption that the argument the Koran is putting forward is that since Mary and Jesus eat food, neither is God. Therefore, the Koran believes Mary is part of the Trinity. However, the argument could be easily construed, since Mary and Jesus ate food, both are nothing but plain humans. This doesn't imply that Mary was part of the trinity Godhead in the Koranic view, but merely that in the Koranic view Christians viewed her as something aside from another plain human being. As is described in the article itself, some Christian sects truly worshiped her and the Church itself put her forth as Godbearer, which is more than just another human being. Indeed, Catholics continue to address prayers to her, an act that would be considered shirk in Islam (i.e., associating others with God). Hence, the Koranic argument need not be interpreted as anything more than that Jesus and Mary are both human beings.

The next passage should help erase any doubts that this is what the Quran means by all this:

    And when God said, ‘O Jesus son of Mary, didst thou say unto men, "Take me and my mother as gods, apart from God"?’ He said, ‘To Thee be glory! It is not mine to say what I have no right to. If I indeed said it, Thou knowest it, knowing what is within my soul, and I know not what is within Thy soul; Thou knowest the things unseen I only said to them what Thou didst command me: "Serve God, my Lord and your Lord." And I was a witness over them, while I remained among them; but when Thou didst take me to Thyself, Thou wast Thyself the watcher over them; Thou Thyself art witness of everything.’ S. 5:116-117


unfortunately ,the passage won't erase any doubts that this is what the Quran means by all this ,you ignored the fact that not every object referred to as (god) in the quran neccesarily requires it to be thought of as divine.....

well,as  nothing better than understanding the Qur'an by the Qur'an.....we need to check the verses with that use the same expression the expression is :


 The formula (to take ....instead) is used inside and outside the context of worship....     Eg;
Holy Quran 27:55 "You are taking the men out of lust instead of the women! No, you are an ignorant people!"

Does the verse suggest those men as taking men for sexual pleasure besides women? Not at all ....The meaning is though they know the normal object for sexual intercourse (women) they approached the abnormal object(men) instead

The formula is used inside the context of worship in numerous instances

Holy Quran 27:24 I found her and her folk prostrating herself to the sun—instead of God—and Satan made to appear pleasing to them their actions and barred them from the way so they are not truly guided.

It seems that those folk could have thought the sun as God .

Holy Quran 39:38 If you should ask them who created Heaven and Earth, they would say: "God." SAY: "Have you (all) ever seen what you appeal to instead of  God [Alone]? If God wanted [to cause] me any trouble, would such females ever remove His trouble? Or if He wants some mercy for me, will such females hold back His mercy?" SAY: "God is [the Means] by Which I reckon; on Him do the reliant rely."

Holy Quran  10:18 They worship, instead of Allah, what can neither harm them nor help them, saying, ´These are our intercessors with Allah.´ Say: ´Would you inform Allah of something about which He does not know either in the heavens or on the earth?´ May He be glorified and exalted above what they associate with Him!

Holy Quran  36:23 Should I adopt other gods instead of Him? If the Mercy-giving should want any harm to me, their intercession would never help me out in any way nor would they rescue me:

Holy Quran  39:43 Or do they adopt intercessors instead of God? SAY: "Even though they do not control a thing and cannot even reason?"

we note that the previous objects of worship are (1) called gods .  (2) their worshipers didn't believe in them as God the creator ,they just intercede.
the same words (to take instead) are used in:

Holy Quran   9:31 They have taken  their learned men and their monks for their lords instead of God. So have they taken the Messiah, son of Mary, although they were commanded to worship only the One God. There is no deity but He. He is far above whatever they set up as His partners!

Have you seen,what the verse saying ?

1- your intentions should be consistent with your actions that counts ,it is not what you think you are doing but what you REALLY do.
2- veneration, asking for intercession etc . is considered worship in Islam even if the object of veneration is not believed to be divine…. It is enough that you direct any form of worship that is due to God alone for anyone, anything to turn him, her ,it to be god

2- though the objects of worshiped mentioned in the same verse viewed differently by their worshipers (Jesus as divine,saints are not) yet that is not the focus of the verse, the focus is on the act of worship itself, that is why it says " they were commanded to worship only the One God" ...

the same way with verse

Holy Quran 5:116 And as Allah said, "O Isa son of Maryam, (Jesus son of Mary) did you say to mankind, "Take me and my mother to your selves as two gods, apart fromAllah '?" He said, All Extolment be to You! In no way is it for me to say what I have no right to.

The verse is just one example of, the thought to be divine(Jesus) and the thought to be not divine yet could be intercessor and be venerated (Mary),be taken as gods ..
another verse

Holy Quran 3:64 SAY: "People of the Book, [let us] rally to a common formula to be binding on both us and you, that we shall worship only God [Alone] a associate nothing else with Him, nor shall any of us take on others as lords instead of God." If they should turn away, then say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims."

what Christians truly believe becomes apparent to anyone familiar with the basics of the Christian faith. In the first place, orthodox Christians have never taken Mary as a goddess alongside God. If the Quran were referring to a heretical group of Christians known as the Maryamites this would then serve to strengthen the position that these verses do not address Trinitarians, but apostates that deviated from the true faith.

Shirk in Islam doesn't  necessarily requires Mary to be believed in as a goddess alongside God ....  just once you direct to her ,what must be directed at God alone ,then you automatically made her god ...

let's listen to the common prayers of the world's largest Christian church, with over a billion members.

"Most Holy Virgin Mary, Help of Christian,how sweet it is to come to your feet imploring your perpetual help.If earthly mothers cease not to remember their children,how can you, the most loving of all mothers forget me?Grant then to me, I implore you, your perpetual help in all my necessities, in every sorrow, and especially in all my temptations.I ask for your unceasing help for all who are now suffering.Help the weak, cure the sick, convert sinners.Grant through your intercessions many vocations to the religious life. Obtain for us, O Mary, Help of Christians,that having invoked you on earth we may love and eternally thank you in heaven."

"Holy Mary,help those in need,give strength to the weak,comfort the sorrowful,pray for God's people,assist the clergy,intercede for religious.Mary all who seek your help experience your unfailing protection.Amen."

let's now listen to the opinion of your fellows of the orthodox christianity(the protestant type) of  their fellows of  the orthodox christianity(the catholic type)  regarding what they do with Mary;

just a sample quotes:

Quote from: [size=12pt
Roman Catholic Mary Worship by the evangelical minister John MacArthur Jr.  ]The Roman Catholic view of Mary is pagan, it is utterly pagan.[/size]

Quote from: Philip Schaff Excerpted from: "History of the Christian Church": Volume III, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity, A.D. 311-390 Chapter VII, P. 409-427 (§ 81.-83.)
To this day the worship of Mary is one of the principal points of separation between the Graeco-Roman Catholicism and Evangelical Protestantism.
the veneration of Mary gradually degenerated into the worship of Mary; and this took so deep hold upon the popular religious life in the Middle Age, that, in spite of all scholastic distinctions between latria, and dulia, and hyrerdulia, Mariolatry practically prevailed over the worship of Christ.
..The popular religious want had accustomed itself even to female deities, and very naturally betook itself first of all to Mary, the highly favored and blessed mother of the divine-human Redeemer, as the worthiest object of adoration.
The Festivals of Mary.
This mythical and fantastic, and, we must add, almost pagan and idolatrous Mariology impressed itself on the public cultus in a series of festivals, celebrating the most important facts and fictions of the life of the Virgin, and in some degree running parallel with the festivals of the birth, resurrection, and ascension of Christ

Quote from: Roman Catholicism, Mary, and Idolatry ,by Matt Slick, President and Founder of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry.
Does the Roman Catholic Church promote idolatry? According to the scripture and its own practices, yes it does. "Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry," (1 Cor. 10:14).

Quote from: Nick Goggin
Watchmen Bible Study Group]It has been said that actions speak louder than words. And while the average Catholic may tell you that they do not worship the Mother Mary, their actions say something quite different. [/size].

we have already indicated that the historic Christian teaching has never been that God is three or the third of three, which would be tritheism (three separate gods forming a unity) as opposed to Trinity (Tri-unity), ONE God who exists in Three distinct yet inseparable Persons (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). Third, orthodox Christians have never taught as part of their doctrine that Jesus is the third Person of the Trinity. Rather, he is the Second Person

that is irrelevant to the verse ..... nowhere in the verse that it says christians belive that Allah is three , or jesus is third of three , or Allah is the third of three (as you will see later).

Fourth, Muslims believe that Allah of the Quran is the same as God the Father of the Holy Bible

right this time.

Rebuttals & Polemics / Re: Is there a contradiction or not (2) ?
« on: November 28, 2012, 12:42:09 PM »

now the question is: were the forefathers of Arabs warned by Ibrahim and Ismail a.s. as it is in Quran, or not? becase Quran 36:6 seem to contradict it.

Please help me giving answers.

The verse: 

That you may warn a people whose forefathers were not warned, so they are unaware. (Quran 36:6)

If read alone, one might understand from the verse that Mohamed (peace be upon him) was a prophet and warner to only Arabs ?

but verse 7.158 ,makes it clear that he sent to all mankind...

  Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you all.


the same way , we could apply qualifier to "forefathers" understanding them as not ALL the forefathers of ALL Arabs ,but rather the forefathers of the Arabs livings then back till the era of Abraham.

Note : for Bro parsian ... plz post those kind of threads in the proper place ( Rebuttals & Polemics )

May Allah bless you always.

Rebuttals & Polemics / Re: Is there a contradiction or not (1) ?
« on: November 28, 2012, 12:21:06 PM »
In one Surah speaks a prophet when he entered Al-Jannah. I do not remember which Surah and wich ayah is it, but it is Noble Quran.

I guess you may refer to Jesus "though nowhere in the Quran that he is in paradise right now"......

Some say Ezra. Some say Azariah. Cant find any sources which say the jews ever worshipped either of them.

The absence of proof is not a proof of the absence.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... 18

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube