Debating Muslims

[Puritan Sailor]

Hey Irish, where's this guy from? I think part of the problem is a language barrier. Another issue you should pin him done on is that he claims the Bible we have today is corrupted. But he has no proof of that. He said that the only basis for our Bible is a text from 1500? I don't think so. He's simply living in denial if that's the case. Even liberal scholars acknowledge this

 

[Irishcat922]

It's interesting that he quotes the Jesus seminar. Obviously been watching to much American T.V.

 

[Irishcat922]

I am fixin to write him back on his claims on scripture. I will post his response.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Originally posted by Paul manata

Originally posted by puritansailor
Interesting quotes Paul. So where do we get this popular notion that Islam is a "religion of peace"?

Check the stats. Islam is ONLY a religion of piece where they are a minority. In the minority they preach tolerance. When they get in charge it begets what you see in the Arab/ Islamic countries. I'm sick of the whole "we're peaceful" argument. They say all thse texts and "terrorists" are aberrations. Well, the problem is that when you have so many aberrations you the "peaceful" are the real aberrations.

I concur!

 

[Irishcat922]

That's what i told my Sons that these guys call me their friend but realistically if they had the opportunity they would Kill me.

 

[SmokingFlax]

Regarding "peaceful Islam, this is almost a replay of the previous PB topic:

Surprising article. Muslims being self critical!

from a month and 1/2 ago. Manata's last comments here were almost exactly my observation on this issue...as well as what true Islam is.

....................................................................

Quote:

" Now, the Bible, the
Torah that Qur'aan speaks about are not what we have in the hands today, the
Torah of Moses was burned by the Babylonians prior Babylonian slavery, and
the Bible Jesus received was burned by Christians at Niece in the third
Century AD. What you have today is the Jewish Tanak..."

As Patrick mentioned, this statement is ENTIRELY without any proof whatsoever.

And then this guy goes on to try and and justify his position by quoting from the OT??? After he just said that it is not legitimate??? How arbitrary can you get?

 

[Irishcat922]

This is what I am dealing with!

"Again I say: people did not corrupt what is from the LORD, what you have is
not from the LORD, and corrupting it as you are doing in every revission
does not make you corrupting what is from the LORD, but what is from man. I
said: the Boble of Jesus spoken abou tin the Qur'aan, is not in your hands,
because Christians of Old burned it, and adopted what you have today in the
leadership of a man called Athanasious. Corrupting what you have is not a
challenge to god, but to men who wrote those books. OK, let me put a
challenge in your way to simplify things: go to Mathew, find me where Mathew
claimed that he received his book from god, when Paul said all Scripture is
from god, he spoke abou tthe Old Testament, because the book of Mathew ws
not around. Go to Mark, show me where he claimed to receive his from god, go
Luke 1:1 to read who and where he received, and why he wrote his book,
search John and come back to tell me where he said he received his book from
god, I m not speaking bout Revelation, when this man was sleeping on the day
of the LORD, and received his book in dreams. I am speaking about the book
of John. Let me give you how you altered and corrupted in your book, just a
couple of examples. In Exodus Abraham said to Isaac: god himself will
provide the gift for the alter, other versions say: god will offer himself
as a gift for the burnt offering. In the first we see god helping by giving
an offering, in the second god becomes available for being burned himself.
Go to book store, open diffrent versions of your NT, Mathew chapter 2 speaks
about wise men from the east, look through many to see how many say: Magi
from the East, and this changed because Magi are fire and Satan worshipers.
I have evidance without a number, I did not wish to bring this, you started
by criticizing the Qur'aan, I hate to show you what I hve about your book,
it is horrible, and you can tell I red a lot. Therefore, your book which is
man made is being corrupted from time to time with every revission, and this
has nothing to do with defying god as you say, because god has nothing to do
with it, nd I am sorry to be the one to say this"


[Edited on 3-11-2004 by Irishcat922]

 

[Irishcat922]

I brought that up with Him he did'nt seem to want to touch it. I will press the issue with him

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Originally posted by Irishcat922
This is what I am dealing with!

OK, let me put a
challenge in your way to simplify things: go to Mathew, find me where Mathew
claimed that he received his book from god, when Paul said all Scripture is
from god, he spoke abou tthe Old Testament, because the book of Mathew ws
not around. Go to Mark, show me where he claimed to receive his from god, go
Luke 1:1 to read who and where he received, and why he wrote his book,
search John and come back to tell me where he said he received his book from
god, I m not speaking bout Revelation, when this man was sleeping on the day
of the LORD, and received his book in dreams. I am speaking about the book
of John.

We had a thread dealing with this issue about the self-attesting claims of the NT not too long ago. You can read it here at

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=6381

 

[Irishcat922]

I think he's mad now! Yet he rambles on without answering my question!

You really did not answer my question, what is your proof that the original
>documents were destroyed, and isn't Allah powerful enough to preserve truth
>without man corrupting it?
> ----- Original Message -----



My friend, no book from a sane god would insult all the prophets, and did
not leave any from this evil. No book from a sane god would insult god
himself, and call him a liar. No book from a sane god would have so much
contradictions, yet be called by some harmony. Even this book in your hands,
in the book of Ezra it says the Israelis lost the Troah, and they think they
found it. No book from a sane god would teach there is nothing like out
LORD, then at Geneses says: he made mn on his image and likeness. If you are
interested in hearing the lies, and how horrible is the situation, I will
send you messages I wrote under the title of holy lies. Babylonian burned
the Old books of Moses and David. Christians burned the Bible of Jesus
carried by two thirds of the communion at Nicae, Arius had the Bible of
Jesus, he and those with him were put to death, and Athanasious won with the
four gospel, and then all were forced on you by a pagan Roman Emperor named
Constantine. As I said; the Greek version says: Kata to Mathion, or
according to Mathew, so on for all four books, you and I know why Luke wrote
the book of Luke and Acts, to present to Theophilis, other things are mere
letters from Paul to churches taken for reveon, no other nation took simple
letter for heavenly revelation except Christians. John had more letters to
sevniffrent churches thn those of Paul, and even his letters were considered
to be sent by god, and you have many gods to answer to my friend. All I am
asking you: please realize Jesus is one of the servants of the true LORD,
worship the true LORD as Jesus worshiped him. If you cannot find where Jesus
bowed and kneeled in prayer to the true LORD, I will help you find them, why
you cannot see the prayer of Jesus, if he ws god, then his worship should
have been done to Satan, he will not bow and kneel to himself. Now, what
question you have I did not answer?

 

[Irishcat922]

I brought those points up to him Paul. I wrote him again this morning to give me hard historical proof that i could research for myself. I have had no response other than this. I am going to continue to try to provoke a legitimate response from him. Until then maybe at least we have him thinking.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Although not related to the ongoing debate, I find this article about how Muslims tend to gain weight during Ramadan interesting (not unlike my experience as a Roman Catholic during Lent).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=583&e=4&u=/nm/20041103/od_nm/morocco_ramadan_dc

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Supposedly. The fast is from sunrise to sunset. At sunset, apparently, some Muslims go hog wild.

 

[Irishcat922]

This is what he wrote in response to the arguments you suggested yesterday Paul.

"Very good, need time, I am willing to answer but just let me reflect close."

Like you said he is probably getting counsel from an Iman.


This is the latest garbage he is mailing out.

Dear beloved all, Greetings in the name of the only true LORD, the LORD over
Muhammad, the LORD over Jesus, and the LORD over great Moses. Also I send
you the best wishes for you and your loved ones. We are still looking at the
issue of how different beliefs teach us how to treat women, we said that
those who believe in the Jewish Tanak, or what we invented by saying: Old
Testament, do not hear and abide to what the book teaches, therefore, their
belief is an empty one. None of them treat women as geneses said; as a help
to man, or take Moses seriously about not touching women when pure before
meeting with the LORD in prayer, because touching women make men impure
according to the book of Exodus. None believe the woman will be 33 days
impure for bringing a man child, and double that for having a woman child,
because women children cause double impurity and unseemliness. None abide
by killing witches, or not allow a witch to live as Exodus 22:18 stated. It
is amazing, those who have this kind of teaching do not follow, but follow
what is found in Muslims books about how to treat women, while Muslims have
different teaching, and they follow what is found in other's books as well.
Let us go further into the books, but before I do, I need to speak out what
is on my mind regarding Mr. Bush who won. This man said he is a protector
for the Jews in the world, but in his hypocrisy he said that he protects
freedom and democracy, then why this hypocrite is making those who speak bad
about Jews to shut up, if he has any decency, he should take the
Judeo-Christian book from the hands, and burn it, because it is all against
the Jews, the enemies of the LORD. Read the miserable picture of the Jews
from what is called god, they are horrible, let us give this Jewish
protector a hand, not a finger, let us burn the Judeo-Christian book that
speaks so miserably about the Jews, and the champ of Anti-Semitic, start
with the Jewish Tanak.
Let us look at how Leviticus looks at women, and how much of this those who
say they accepted Leviticus apply to their lives. Leviticus 15:19 says: and
when a woman is in her blood period, she shall be put apart from everyone
for seven days, and whosoever toucheth her should be unclean until the
evening, everything she touches or sleeps on become unclean, anyone touching
what she comes in contact with becomes unclean, if anyone makes love with
her, becomes unclean for seven days, and every bed he also touches become
unclean for making love to this woman in her period (plague), and the book
continues to tell how women in this period are such unholy plague and
contagious.
Please hear me out, women are our mothers, our sisters, our daughters, and
our beloved wives, I wonder if god has anything to do with those teachings
mentioned in the Jewish Tanak, or are they from Jewish hand written? The
LORD made women in such a state of having blood period, women during this
period suffer a lot as it is, they are moody, they are in a state of
embarrassment, in a state that they need our love, and should put them at
ease from this stressful moments. Why women according to Leviticus Jewish
book are such a plague, even touching them make us impure, unclean all day
long, even touching their bed, or anything they touch will make us unclean,
and unholy? Is not this something the LORD made them live through, I know
they themselves are not suppose to touch the holy book, but taking them in
our arms, or a little kiss on the cheek for comfort, make us catch some
disease and uncleanness? Why those who believe in Leviticus attack other
beliefs and the way they treat women, is this teaching about making women
look like plague so wonderful? Imagine we treat our women as what we are
ordered in this book, would this make a loving life more desirable, or so
miserable? Those who believe in Leviticus should hush up about how others
treat their women.
Leviticus 19:20 tells us how if a man slept with a woman engaged to another,
but she is still a slave, they should not be put to death, which means if
the woman is not a slave, and a man made love to her, they both should die,
are we doing any of this, are we following the orders of god? None are
doing, and yet have true belief in Leviticus. Leviticus 21:9 says: every
daughter of a priest commits adultery, she should be burned with fire, I
don't see this happening anywhere. Verse 13 says: a priest should marry only
a virgin, and should not marry a divorced, or impure woman that committed
adultery, and no prostitutes. Another horrible picture of how Jews treat
women is in Numbers 12:10-15, which speaks of how Miriam the sister of Aaron
and Moses was spoken about and treated. For those who speak against multi
marriages in other's beliefs, Deuteronomy 17;17 says: kings should not take
many women, so that he will not fall into temptation. For those who are
angry with those with multi marriages, Abraham had three wives,, Jacob had
four, Moses had three, David had 100, Solomon had 700, why some are so evil
against any prophet with 9 wives?
Deuteronomy 21:10 says: if you capture a beautiful woman and has a desire
unto her from the enemies at war, bring her home, shave her head (make her
bold), cut her nails, and make her cry her family for one month, then you
mate with her, then she will become your wife, and you her husband. Then you
may divorce her, and let her go, but do not sell her for money, because you
raped (humiliated) her before you marry. Is not god so great with his
teachings, are we following this since we say we believe in it, and why we
should curse others for how they treat their women? Until next time; with
this blessings for women from god, and how we shouLd treat them

 

[Irishcat922]

I brought all that up to him, that is what he is having to get back with me on. I'll keep you posted as he responds.

Thanks for all your input it has been very helpful thus far.

[Edited on 4-11-2004 by Irishcat922]

 

[Irishcat922]

Paul'

I thought the Hadith is not considered on the same level of insiration as the Koran. I mean I'm sure it probably carries as much weight with a devout Muslim. But is it good to use it in such debates?

[Edited on 4-11-2004 by Irishcat922]

 

[Irishcat922]

Here is my friends latest rebuttal. I think he is like you said Paul using his phone a friend option. But i guess I am too. I am using alot of your arguments on him, so I guess that's fair.

This is my answer for your question, do not come back saying I
did not answer.
This is my question: If we corrupted it in the 3rd century then why did
Mohamed tell Christians, IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY, to read their Bible to see
if Mohamed was telling the truth???
Where did he say such?
You say we burned it in the third century, right? Koran was written in the
7th, right? So, in the 7th century we had a new, blasphemous, incorrect,
word from God, right? Now, this is what Koran says:
Surah:
[10.93] And certainly We lodged the children of Israel in a goodly abode and
We provided them with good things; but they did not disagree until the
knowledge had come to them; surely your Lord will judge between them on the
resurrection day concerning that in which they disagreed.
[10.94] But if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed to you, ask
those who read the Book before you; certainly the truth has come to you from
your Lord, therefore you should not be of the disputers.
Since you know this, let me tell you how the Ayahs before were
speaking about the story of how Israelis escaped Pharaoh, I want to draw
your attention to Ayah 83, where Moses declared Israelis as Muslims. Anyway,
Ayahs 75-93 that you brought, speak about what happened with the Israelis,
this is found even in the made up books in the hands today, Allah said: if
you are in doubt, ask those who have the stories even today. How those
stories are somewhat correct, although books were burned? Ezra brought those
stories from the memories of the Israelis who were in Babylonian slavery, if
you take the books from the hands of your Jewish Rabbi, also Christian
priests, don't they remember those stories so well? Having true stories does
not make the books legitimate, and saying compare to what even those have,
does not make the books from the LORD.
See, the Jews are talked about in 93 then Mohamed talks to the Christians in
94. He says that if people want to see that Islam is true then they need to
ask those who have read the book (Bible/Gospels). 94 says that the Book is
TRUE. Mohamed calls the Bible true IN THE SEVENTH CENTURY.
No, Allah says to Muhammad, what you received is the truth,
compare even to what they have, and they will tell you they hve the same
stories. Allah says: what Muhammad received is the truth, not what Jews had
is the truth.
But remember, we burned it in the third. Now, NO ONE, not even the Jesus
seminar, says that our Bibles have been corrupted since the seventh century.
So if our Bibles are the same as they were in the seventh then Mohamed told
them to read a Bible where Jesus, a prophet, who can't lie, calls himself:
the Son of God. But this is a lie, according to Islam.
As I said, having the stories almost half true, does not make the
books true, take the Qur'aan out of our hands, we will still tell you the
stories as they are, because we memorize our book better than any other
nation before us, and we are the only nation that memorize the whole book as
well, even as little children.
Again we have Mohamed telling people to judge by what is found in the
Gospels and Torah, wherein truth is revealed. Look, in Sura 5:50-51 (46-47)
Allah says, "And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps,
confirming that which was revealed before him and We bestowed on him the
Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed)
before it in the Torah -- a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward
off evil. Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath
revealed therein. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed, such
are evil-livers."
Ayahs 50-51 do not say what you say they do, then I went to Ayahs
5:46-47, Allah speaks about the true Bible of Jesus, what you have as I said
is not from Jesus bit man made thing. One more info I did not mention is the
fact that I do also believe that during the days of Muhammad, we may still
have some remnant who had parts of the true Bible of Jesus, because the real
struggle against this Bible was under the Roman controlled Syria and
Northern Egypt, but at Saudi the Bible was still safe for some time, until
it completely disappeared. What you have is not the true Bible, read Ayah
57:27, where Allah says He gave Jesus the Bible, while what you have was not
received/given by Jesus, but was written by men such as Mathew..etc. Now
your book speaks about the Bible of Jesus, let us look at examples:
(1) Read Mathew 4:23, which says: Jesus was teaching in their Synagogues,
teaching the Gospel of the Kingdom. We all know that the NT was not around
during Jesus time, yet he had a Gospel of the Kingdom, and the Old Testament
was called the Tanak, never called by Gospel by any of the Jews, or anyone
else. Mathew 9:35 speaks how Jesus was preaching the Gospel of Heaven, and
don't tell me this is the Jewish Tanak, never Jews called their book as
such. Verse 11:5 says: and the poor are receiving the Gospel, this is before
any of the four wrote his.
(2) Luke 9:6 says: they went preaching the Gospel and healing the people.
None of the Disciples saw any of the books in the NT.
(3) Acts 14:7 sys: and there they preached the Gospel, which means of Jesus,
because as we said they had none of the NT available yet, they preached the
same what Jesus had for a Gospel. Let me tell you: I have tens of examples
that speak about a Gospel that existed before your NT, where is this Gospel
my friend, where is the Bible Allah gave unto Jesus, not what Mathew and the
rest wrote, or mere meaningless letters that you made revelation from
heaven?
I think I explained enough, to show how mistaken you are.

[Edited on 6-11-2004 by Irishcat922]

 

[Irishcat922]

They don't understand that Jesus never personally wrote anything. They think from what I read, that when we refer to the Gospel, we are refferring to the writings of Jesus. They call them Injeel.