Is the bible the word of God ?

[proudchaldean]

Here are my thoughts:

1) I believe there is a God

2) I dont believe the bible is the word of God

3) Archaeological findings only prove that the bible existed and not that the bible is the word of god

4) Jesus can only be shown to be God through use of the bible....







SamIAM Edit: *I changed the topic a little. Personal arguments must be taken to private messages or outside this site. I'll be watching u.

[Randel]

Ok I dont believe their is a god, but I believe if the christian god is real than the bible is the world of him, so I answered yes.

[proudchaldean]

thanks for the edit...ull be watching me????? who do u think u are...Saddam????

[Samuel]

Yea, that was completely lame. *In Sam's defense, this site gets out of hand sometimes. *But it's mostly because of the Christians, who terrorize this board with their sheer stupidity.

[proudchaldean]

i agree...but i didnt think there was anything i said to warrant an "ill be watching u"...im not 16 buddy

[Rita]

LMAO @ sam's edit response. :lol: *Btw, this is my section... stay out of it... I will moderate it when needed. I haven't been biased at all. :)

Anyways, I chose not sure because I don't believe the entire Bible & all versions are written by God. I believe half or more of it is and the rest has been out of context or another's perception.

[proudchaldean]

^^i didnt think his edit was very funny...more insulting

[Shlama_98]

Bible was written by man, but that does't mean there's no God.

Is it the word of God? of course, but any book that teaches humans how to live a good life being a good person is considered the word of God to me.

[Randel]

i agree...but i didnt think there was anything i said to warrant an "ill be watching u"...im not 16 buddy

samd is preety much right, a lot of it is that, but with that little 16 year old thing is completely off, there is no reason to watch the 16 year olds they are the most well behaved people on the site.

[Rita]

Bible was written by man, but that does't mean there's no God.

Is it the word of God? of course, but any book that teaches humans how to live a good live being a good person is considered the word of God to me.

I said this in a previous post and a few people, who should be nameless, jumped down my throat saying that God actually wrote the Bible.

[rudy]

Here are my thoughts:

1) I believe there is a God

2) I dont believe the bible is the word of God

3) Archaeological findings only prove that the bible existed and not that the bible is the word of god

4) Jesus can only be shown to be God through use of the bible....







SamIAM Edit: *I changed the topic a little. Personal arguments must be taken to private messages or outside this site. I'll be watching u. Thanks for the great topic proudchaldean. now I have in my 8 years as a devote Christian been asked this question many times and it is a legitemant one. I questioned it myself for a while but decided to began to research it . Now I'm going to say what I believe is fact. I know some here are going to think I'm trying to convert you to believe like me. I can not convert anyone only the Holy Spirit can. I do pray that you do accept the Bible as the Word of God but I cant make that decision for you. its between you and God. With that said here is my take on proudchaldean question. * *In order to answer these questions we must look at both the internal and external evidences that the Bible is truly God’s Word. The internal evidences are those things internal to the Bible itself that testify of its divine origin. One of the first internal evidences that the Bible is truly God’s Word is seen in its unity. Even though it is really sixty-six individual books, written on three continents, in three different languages, over a period of approximately 1500 years, by more that 40 authors (who came from many walks of life), the Bible remains one unified book from beginning to end without contradiction. *This unity is unique from all other books and is evidence of the divine origin of the words as God moved men in such a way that they recorded His very words.
* * * Another of the internal evidences that indicate the Bible is truly God’s Word is seen in the detailed prophecies contained within its pages. The Bible contains hundreds of detailed prophecies relating to the future of individual nations including Israel, to the future of certain cities, to future of mankind, and to the coming of one who would be the Messiah, the Savior of not only Israel, but all who would believe in Him. Unlike the prophecies found in other religious books or those done by Nostradamus, the biblical prophecies are extremely detailed and have never failed to come true. There are over three hundred prophecies concerning Jesus Christ in the Old Testament alone. Not only was it foretold where He would be born and what family He would come from, but also how He would die and that He would raise again on the third day. There simply is no logical way to explain the fulfilled prophecies in the Bible other than by divine origin. There is no other religious book with the extent or type of predictive prophecy as the Bible does.
* * * A third internal evidence of the divine origin of the Bible is seen in its unique authority and power. While this evidence is more subjective than the first two internal evidences, it is no less a very powerful testimony of the divine origin of the Bible. The Bible has a unique authority that is unlike any other book ever written. This authority and power is best seen in the way countless lives have been transformed by reading the Bible. Drug addicts have been cured by it, homosexuals have been set free by it, derelicts and deadbeats have been transformed by it, hardened criminals reformed by it, sinners are rebuked by it, and hate has been turned to love by reading it. The Bible does possess a dynamic and transforming power that is only possible because it is truly God’s Word.
* * * * Besides the internal evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word there is also external evidences that indicate the Bible is truly the Word of God. One of those evidences is the historicity of the Bible. Because the Bible details historical events its truthfulness and accuracy is subject to verification like any other historical documentation. Through both archaeological evidences and other written documents, the historical accounts of the Bible have been proven time and time again to be accurate and true. In fact all the archaeological and manuscript evidence supporting the Bible makes it the best documented book from the ancient world. The fact that the Bible accurately and truthfully records historically verifiable events is a great indication of its truthfulness when dealing with religious subjects and doctrines and helps substantiate its claim that it is the very Word of God.
* * * * Another external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the integrity of the human authors. As mentioned earlier, God used men from many walks of life to record His Words to us. In studying the lives of these men, there is no good reason to believe that they were not honest and sincere men. Examining their lives and the fact that they were willing to die (often excruciating deaths) for what they believed in quickly becomes clear that these ordinary yet honest men truly believed that God had spoken to them. The men who wrote the New Testament and many hundreds of other believers (1 Corinthians 15:6) knew the truth of their message because they had seen and spent time with Jesus Christ after He had rose from the dead. The transformation of seeing the Risen Christ had a tremendous impact on these men. They went from hiding in fear, to being willing to die for the message God had revealed to them. Their lives and deaths testify to the fact that the Bible truly is God’s Word.
* * * * * * * * A final external evidence that the Bible is truly God’s Word is the indestructibility of the Bible. Because of its importance and its claim to be the very word of God, the Bible has suffered more vicious attacks and attempts to destroy it than any other book in history. From early Roman Emperors like Diocletian, through communist dictators and on to modern day atheists and agonistics, the Bible has withstood and outlasted all of its attackers and is still the most widely published book in the world today.
* * * * * * Throughout time, skeptics have regarded the Bible as mythological, but archeology has established it as historical. Opponents have attacked its teaching as primitive and outdated, but its moral and legal concepts and teachings have had a positive influence on societies and cultures throughout the world. It continues to be attacked by science, psychology, and political movements and yet remains just as true and relevant today as it was when it was first written. It is a book that has transformed countless lives and cultures throughout the last 2000 years. No matter how its opponents try to attack, destroy, or discredit it, the Bible remains just as strong, just a true, and just as relevant after the attacks as it was before. The accuracy which has been preserved despite every attempt to corrupt, attack, or destroy it, is clear testimony to the fact that the Bible is truly God’s Word. It should not surprise us that no matter how the Bible is attacked, it always comes out unchanged and unscathed. After all, Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away” (Mark 13:31). After looking at the evidence one can say without a doubt that “Yes the Bible is truly God’s Word.” Thank you and God Bless!!

[proudchaldean]

Rudy -- great points -- here is my response

1. Unity of the bible -- I dont see the bible as unified, especially the NT, which gives us 4 different accounts of the life of jesus. *Furthermore, anyone can create an anthology of literature and make it flow well.

2. *Prophecies coming true -- the writers of the NT were jews and were very familiar with the OT -- of course they knew which prophecies Jesus had to fulfill in order to be regarded as the Messiah!! *It seems almost too good to be true...isnt it a good possibility that Jesus' life as written in the gospels was tailored to fit these prophecies?

3. *Integrity of the authors -- it is well documented that the gospels served as evangelical tools...tools to convert people to christianity -- isnt it also a good possibility that these gospel authors who were so devoted to their beliefs could have switched things around a little bit in order to make the faith they would DIE FOR a little more attractive to the average person?

4. *Detailing of historical events/archaeological evidence -- Remember that there actually was a man named Jesus that lived during the time period described in the gospel. *There are roman records that refer to him and that he was put to death...does this mean he was God? *Lets also not forget that the OT is very much a history of the ancient jewish people, so yes i will agree that the bible is full of accurate historical references...however, as i pointed out earlier, so are many novels. *The fact that a lot of things in the bible match up with history DOES NOT MAKE IT THE WORD OF GOD!!

I look forward to your response Rudy

[Samuel]

Rudy -- great points -- here is my response

1. Unity of the bible -- I dont see the bible as unified, especially the NT, which gives us 4 different accounts of the life of jesus. *Furthermore, anyone can create an anthology of literature and make it flow well.

2. *Prophecies coming true -- the writers of the NT were jews and were very familiar with the OT -- of course they knew which prophecies Jesus had to fulfill in order to be regarded as the Messiah!! *It seems almost too good to be true...isnt it a good possibility that Jesus' life as written in the gospels was tailored to fit these prophecies?

3. *Integrity of the authors -- it is well documented that the gospels served as evangelical tools...tools to convert people to christianity -- isnt it also a good possibility that these gospel authors who were so devoted to their beliefs could have switched things around a little bit in order to make the faith they would DIE FOR a little more attractive to the average person?

4. *Detailing of historical events/archaeological evidence -- Remember that there actually was a man named Jesus that lived during the time period described in the gospel. *There are roman records that refer to him and that he was put to death...does this mean he was God? *Lets also not forget that the OT is very much a history of the ancient jewish people, so yes i will agree that the bible is full of accurate historical references...however, as i pointed out earlier, so are many novels. *The fact that a lot of things in the bible match up with history DOES NOT MAKE IT THE WORD OF GOD!!

I look forward to your response Rudy


Why do you bother? * That wasn't even Rudy. *It was another article shit face stole. *

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-God-Word.html

[Samuel]

Hey Resident Retard *(this will be used instead of Rudy from now on, because he obviously can't think for himself).

Do you recommend I read: *Recommended Resource: * * Scripture Alone by James White.

Another book you've never seen the cover to. *Proud. *Don't bother waiting for the resident retard to respond with HIS thoughts. *He'll just use someone elses.

[JerkFace]

Hey Resident Retard *(this will be used instead of Rudy from now on, because he obviously can't think for himself).

Do you recommend I read: *Recommended Resource: * * Scripture Alone by James White.

Another book you've never seen the cover to. *Proud. *Don't bother waiting for the resident retard to respond with HIS thoughts. *He'll just use someone elses.

lol samd makes me laughter

[proudchaldean]

^^Be careful SamD, SamIam, i mean Saddam, is watching!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ojeen1981]

first off guys, no one read the jokes i posted up..plz read them.....

now, in regards to the question about this topic. *as any other question, we should try our best to answer any question with all objectivity as possible. *In this light, i would like to use some philosophical tools to perhaps come to some objective conclusion about this, and as always, everyone is entitled their own opinion. *

This question can be re-written to be applied to any religion, this means, any indoctrinated faith can ask this question. For those who are familiar with philosophical systems, I will use the Dialectic to analyze this question.

Naturally, u will have two distinct answers, both with their own arguments. *While people from group A will say that their doctrine is divinely inspired, Group B people will proclaim that a divinely inspired doctrine does not exist. Again, both groups of people have and will lay out their own arguments to base their conclusions on. *

Furthermore, those people who belong to Group A (who believe that the doctrine is divinely inspired) may take the argument further. *In this case, since such people are starting from the initial idea, or are working with the platform that their doctrine is divinely inspired, than if they state that parts of their Book is divinely inspired while other parts are not, than this is a logical contradiction, not only to their doctrine itself, but also to the beliefs that they hold. *This means that if a person proclaims that his book is divinely inspired than turns around and says that some of it is while some of it is not, that’s a contradiction of your own beliefs. *

Last but not least, we must, as always use a historical lens to further analyze things into a more comprehensive objective picture. *In this case, I will choose the Bible since it is the main topic of discussion. *Biblical authors of the Old Testament lived under cultures that they were either from that culture, or alien to it. *An example of this is the Babylonian Captivity, in which the Jewish people were held captives by the Babylonian Empire. Scholars tend to argue that Jewish theological thinking of the time adopted or was influenced from Babylonian “ways of seeing”. *This does not prove anything wrong nor right, it is a historical analysis that could have taken place or could not have taken place. *And there are more things about this which I will not go into to make it simple. *

Bottom line is that there are different views on this, and we must understand the historical, philosophical and finally theological underpinnings of such a complicated subject to attempt to come to a objective conclusion. *

I just want to apologize for making this long, and I want everyone to know that I did not give my opinion…thanks all and so sorry abot the length…God bless n peace

[rudy]

Rudy -- great points -- here is my response

1. Unity of the bible -- I dont see the bible as unified, especially the NT, which gives us 4 different accounts of the life of jesus. *Furthermore, anyone can create an anthology of literature and make it flow well.

2. *Prophecies coming true -- the writers of the NT were jews and were very familiar with the OT -- of course they knew which prophecies Jesus had to fulfill in order to be regarded as the Messiah!! *It seems almost too good to be true...isnt it a good possibility that Jesus' life as written in the gospels was tailored to fit these prophecies?

3. *Integrity of the authors -- it is well documented that the gospels served as evangelical tools...tools to convert people to christianity -- isnt it also a good possibility that these gospel authors who were so devoted to their beliefs could have switched things around a little bit in order to make the faith they would DIE FOR a little more attractive to the average person?

4. *Detailing of historical events/archaeological evidence -- Remember that there actually was a man named Jesus that lived during the time period described in the gospel. *There are roman records that refer to him and that he was put to death...does this mean he was God? *Lets also not forget that the OT is very much a history of the ancient jewish people, so yes i will agree that the bible is full of accurate historical references...however, as i pointed out earlier, so are many novels. *The fact that a lot of things in the bible match up with history DOES NOT MAKE IT THE WORD OF GOD!!

I look forward to your response Rudy *Great questions proudchaldean! Before I try to answer I don’t want this to get out of hand. Please. This is not directed to you but to all who are going to read this. I feel sometime no matter what I say someone always flips out to my comments. This is what I believe. And I do believe the Bible is the Word of God. Ok here is my response.

1. Unity of the bible: yes there are 4 accounts of the life of Jesus. 4 men who lived, breathed, ate and slept, with or around Jesus wrote them. But I have not found any contradictions in any of them when you read and study them. Matthew wrote his book to the Jews around the year 37 AD. To prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah and King of Israel. More than 60 Old Testament references in Matthew. It also tells why Israel rejected Christ. *Mark was written to the Romans around A.D. 64 to show the Lord Jesus as the perfect and absolutely faithful suffering servant. Luke was written to the Greeks around 60 AD to present Christ as the perfect God-man, who after a perfect ministry provided a perfect salvation for sinful humanity. *John was written to the whole world in view. Written around 80-90 AD. Now I put all this info down for this reason. You said “anyone can create an anthology of literature and make it flow well”. I would agree with you but these men weren’t “anyone”. Look at the dates very careful and I encourage to study where these men were when they wrote them. They were not living side by side but hundreds of miles away and years apart. And if you read and study the Gospels you will see just how wonderful they all go together.

2. . *Prophecies coming true: I don’t care if they were Jew’s, Arab, Russian, and Japanese. Here let me give you some examples. He would be from the house of David (2nd Samuel 7:12-16 & Jeremiah 23:5 & psalms 89 :3-4). Fulfilled Matthew 1 & Luke 1. *He would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2). Fulfilled Luke 2:4-20. He would be born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14) fulfilled Matthew 1 Luke 1. He will perform many miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6) Fulfilled all over the Gospels. The Gentiles will believe in Him but his own will reject him ( Isaiah 8 & 28 & 49 & 50 & 52 psalms 22 & 118) fulfilled 1st peter 2:7. I can keep going there are thousands more but I will stop here. You said “It seems almost too good to be true...isn’t it a good possibility that Jesus' life as written in the gospels was tailored to fit these prophecies” You are write it does sound too good to be true but it is true my friend. And to answer the second part of you statement. Come on Bro think about what you are saying?!! What is the probability of that happening??

3. . *Integrity of the authors: So let see these guys just sat around one day and said “ hey remember or good buddy Jesus lets make up some great stories about him, live our lives in the most poorest of condition, spend years in prison, be separated from our families and die a horrible and painful death”? is this what you are saying they did?? Think about it!

4. Detailing of historical events/archaeological evidence. You said “The fact that a lot of things in the bible match up with history DOES NOT MAKE IT THE WORD OF GOD”. Well to the person who decides not to read & study the book I can see why they would say such things. But when you decided to began to explore and understand the beauty of the words with-in this great book it can ONLY BE GOD’S WORD! For example, in proverbs 24:17 says this “Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbles” look at these word very carefully and think about the person whom you consider to be your enemy or someone that you really hate. What do you wish to happen to them? Our human mind would tell us to be glad when they fall. But these words tell us something totally different. This is just one example I’m trying to keep it as short as possibly but with this kind of topic it is very difficult to do that. So I’m sorry if I’m boring you. Thank you and God Bless.

[rudy]

Rudy -- great points -- here is my response

1. Unity of the bible -- I dont see the bible as unified, especially the NT, which gives us 4 different accounts of the life of jesus. *Furthermore, anyone can create an anthology of literature and make it flow well.

2. *Prophecies coming true -- the writers of the NT were jews and were very familiar with the OT -- of course they knew which prophecies Jesus had to fulfill in order to be regarded as the Messiah!! *It seems almost too good to be true...isnt it a good possibility that Jesus' life as written in the gospels was tailored to fit these prophecies?

3. *Integrity of the authors -- it is well documented that the gospels served as evangelical tools...tools to convert people to christianity -- isnt it also a good possibility that these gospel authors who were so devoted to their beliefs could have switched things around a little bit in order to make the faith they would DIE FOR a little more attractive to the average person?

4. *Detailing of historical events/archaeological evidence -- Remember that there actually was a man named Jesus that lived during the time period described in the gospel. *There are roman records that refer to him and that he was put to death...does this mean he was God? *Lets also not forget that the OT is very much a history of the ancient jewish people, so yes i will agree that the bible is full of accurate historical references...however, as i pointed out earlier, so are many novels. *The fact that a lot of things in the bible match up with history DOES NOT MAKE IT THE WORD OF GOD!!

I look forward to your response Rudy


Why do you bother? * That wasn't even Rudy. *It was another article shit face stole. *

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-God-Word.html see samd i trying to ignore you when you start running your mouth. I happen to be a volunteer for that web site and have been with them you almost a year now. but just in case you are wondering the last thing I posted I did all on my own. I hope you are somewhat happy now? (but I highly dought it) but keep up the good work on making yourself look stupid. :alright:

[rudy]

Hey Resident Retard *(this will be used instead of Rudy from now on, because he obviously can't think for himself).

Do you recommend I read: *Recommended Resource: * * Scripture Alone by James White.

Another book you've never seen the cover to. *Proud. *Don't bother waiting for the resident retard to respond with HIS thoughts. *He'll just use someone elses. I would not recommend any of James White for you to read he is way out of your leag. for you try Dr. suses ( not shure if I spelled it correct but you know who i'm talking about right?)

[ojeen1981]

samd, thats not cool what u said about rudy...u have no reason to put down like that ...

[Samuel]

Hey Resident Retard *(this will be used instead of Rudy from now on, because he obviously can't think for himself).

Do you recommend I read: *Recommended Resource: * * Scripture Alone by James White.

Another book you've never seen the cover to. *Proud. *Don't bother waiting for the resident retard to respond with HIS thoughts. *He'll just use someone elses. I would not recommend any of James White for you to read he is way out of your leag. for you try Dr. suses ( not shure if I spelled it correct but you know who i'm talking about right?)



So the real Rudy can't spell the words "sure" or "league." * Or Seuss for that matter. *Blow me.

[Samuel]

samd, thats not cool what u said about rudy...u have no reason to put down like that ...


I used to get accused of plagiarizing in almost all of my posts. *When people couldn't really prove the plagiarism, they labeled me a book worm. *I've even had the adminitrator of this site mock me. * On the other hand, Rudy here has copied and pasted the entire "gotquestions.org" database and deliberately attempted to convince us that those were genuinely his thoughts. *Not one of you people have called him out on it. *So what's the fvcking deal? *

There are so many things wrong with what he does. *Besides the fact that it's dishonest... it's frustrating for the non-Christians. *While we're debating an issue, the resident retard casually looks up a response and pastes it an entire essay. *The burden of refuting Rudy's plagiarism is placed on the non-Christians. *If you had to read his bullshit day in and day out...and respond to it...you'd be pissed too. *Of course you don't really have to care since you all ejaculate to the bible while holding one another's hand.

[Rita]

Samd, you have said what you needed to say. Do not be so deragatory when you speak to people. He didn't disrespect you & you shouldn't either, regardless if he copies from that site or not.

Also, I would like to mention that I did post something yesterday about copying from sites and to cite any sources they get their information from. I guess you missed it. *No one actually did it but I just wanted to let you know that I noticed it, it was brought up & mentioned that they need to cite sources when plagiarising, even though I am a Christian.

BTW, one more thing, LMFAOOOOOOOOOO @ all the basic misspelled words. :lol:

[Samuel]

Samd, you have said what you needed to say. Do not be so deragatory when you speak to people. He didn't disrespect you & you shouldn't either, regardless if he copies from that site or not.

Also, I would like to mention that I did post something yesterday about copying from sites and to cite any sources they get their information from. I guess you missed it. *No one actually did it but I just wanted to let you know that I noticed it, it was brought up & mentioned that they need to cite sources when plagiarising, even though I am a Christian.

BTW, one more thing, LMFAOOOOOOOOOO @ all the basic misspelled words. :lol:

Rita's such a cute mod. *Trying to be all neutral and shit. *I like it.

[rudy]

Samd, you have said what you needed to say. Do not be so deragatory when you speak to people. He didn't disrespect you & you shouldn't either, regardless if he copies from that site or not.

Also, I would like to mention that I did post something yesterday about copying from sites and to cite any sources they get their information from. I guess you missed it. *No one actually did it but I just wanted to let you know that I noticed it, it was brought up & mentioned that they need to cite sources when plagiarising, even though I am a Christian.

BTW, one more thing, LMFAOOOOOOOOOO @ all the basic misspelled words. :lol:Rita the only reason I didn’t put that site up it’s because I do some work for that site and I didn’t believe it was fare for me to come onto this site and try to make people go over there. Now you know there have been many others who have come over from other sites and tried to be slick about it and try to get some of us here to go there. Am I correct on this or not? If I was to post that site on here there would be many who would yell “don’t try to convert us”. But I do love gotquestion.org. And like I told samd its wonderful how God works sometimes. He doesn’t even realize he just made an advertisement for them. And also samd if you think that I’m some stupid person who needs to always go to others for help to answer some questions you all ask. I do not believe I am some super masterminded like yourself. As a matter of fact I had lot of problems while I was in school. But with a lot of prayer and reading of God’s word I began to improve and I only have God to thank for that because I was unable to do it on my own. I thank God he does require his children to have B.A. or PHD’S EXT EXT. but instead he can take a fisherman like Peter and make him a great disciples. Or he can take a shepherd boy like David and make him king of Israel and call him a man after God’s own heart. He can even take a prostitute off the streets forgive her and make her one of our great saints. (Mary Magdalene). So I do believe he can take a “Resident Retard” and make some use of him. So God Bless and please try to chill you seem to get very excited.

[rudy]

Sorry proudchaldean for getting off the topic but I hope everyone is through attacking other people’s credibility. If it’s ok with you I would like to finish this topic. If you do not want to post on here feel free to send me a PM. Thank you and God Bless

[maxpower]

:applause: ^^^ AMEN TO THAT RUDY ^^^ *:applause:

YO SAMD :goofy: *NOW EASY THERE BUDDY, SAVE YOUR ENERGY FOR YOUR G/F.. U NEED IT \:D/

[ojeen1981]

samd, thats not cool what u said about rudy...u have no reason to put down like that ...


I used to get accused of plagiarizing in almost all of my posts. *When people couldn't really prove the plagiarism, they labeled me a book worm. *I've even had the adminitrator of this site mock me. * On the other hand, Rudy here has copied and pasted the entire "gotquestions.org" database and deliberately attempted to convince us that those were genuinely his thoughts. *Not one of you people have called him out on it. *So what's the fvcking deal? *

There are so many things wrong with what he does. *Besides the fact that it's dishonest... it's frustrating for the non-Christians. *While we're debating an issue, the resident retard casually looks up a response and pastes it an entire essay. *The burden of refuting Rudy's plagiarism is placed on the non-Christians. *If you had to read his bullshit day in and day out...and respond to it...you'd be pissed too. *Of course you don't really have to care since you all ejaculate to the bible while holding one another's hand.

listen bro, first off, ive grown to gain some respect for you, and like anyone else, you are entitled to your thoughts. *If rudy did something wrong or if rudy did not do something rudy, this dont give u the ligitimaticy to say things so harsh towards the Bible. *am sure u love reading some authors like Noam Chomsky (whom love) but u dont see me or anyone else telling u to get off his nut sac, thats simply ignorant! i didnt expect this to come from someone who is an inspiring intellectual. *a true objective intellecual is to take others point of view, this is the reason why i love listing to those who are athestic or agnoistic or of other faiths, i love reading their publications, it gives u ideas to expand your mind upon. *

likewise, if you are a person who dont belive the Bible, thats perfectly fine. *however, it does not mean u bash it out like that. I hope u get what am saying to u ...peace dude

[Samuel]

samd, thats not cool what u said about rudy...u have no reason to put down like that ...


I used to get accused of plagiarizing in almost all of my posts. *When people couldn't really prove the plagiarism, they labeled me a book worm. *I've even had the adminitrator of this site mock me. * On the other hand, Rudy here has copied and pasted the entire "gotquestions.org" database and deliberately attempted to convince us that those were genuinely his thoughts. *Not one of you people have called him out on it. *So what's the fvcking deal? *

There are so many things wrong with what he does. *Besides the fact that it's dishonest... it's frustrating for the non-Christians. *While we're debating an issue, the resident retard casually looks up a response and pastes it an entire essay. *The burden of refuting Rudy's plagiarism is placed on the non-Christians. *If you had to read his bullshit day in and day out...and respond to it...you'd be pissed too. *Of course you don't really have to care since you all ejaculate to the bible while holding one another's hand.

listen bro, first off, ive grown to gain some respect for you, and like anyone else, you are entitled to your thoughts. *If rudy did something wrong or if rudy did not do something rudy, this dont give u the ligitimaticy to say things so harsh towards the Bible. *am sure u love reading some authors like Noam Chomsky (whom love) but u dont see me or anyone else telling u to get off his nut sac, thats simply ignorant! i didnt expect this to come from someone who is an inspiring intellectual. *a true objective intellecual is to take others point of view, this is the reason why i love listing to those who are athestic or agnoistic or of other faiths, i love reading their publications, it gives u ideas to expand your mind upon. *

likewise, if you are a person who dont belive the Bible, thats perfectly fine. *however, it does not mean u bash it out like that. I hope u get what am saying to u ...peace dude


Excuse me but, what's the greater crime against intellectualism? *Disrespecting others or stealing someone elses INTELLECTUAL work? *Quite frankly, I've yet to meet a non-arrogant "intellectual." *But anyway. *That is my dream Ojeen. *I want *people on ChaldeanChat to start referring to me as "the intellectual." *:roll: * Hey ojeen. *Why don't you take a few steps back on this one. *Your buddy rudy there fvcked up pretty badly. *You're not going to "save" the fellow disciple this time. *In fact...associating with him will only tarnish your own image (as it is currently doing in my mind).

Elvis? *John? *Where art thou? *


What does it say about a person pathetic enough to defend another's offense just because they happen to share an opinion? *To me it says that you have no confidence in any of your beliefs, and are thus unwilling to accept the fact that an influencial member of your posse turned out to be a phony because his phonyness may pose as a semblance to your entire ideology. *

"So if Rudy is a phony, am I really a phony as well... ? *And if that's the case...is this whole establishment a charade!? *Noo!!! *I Don't want to die and become dirt.... so well.... *What was i thinking about again? * Oh who cares nvm...I LOVE JESUS..."

If rudy is going to claim this volunteering bullshit. *I'll call him out on it again. *There were times where i complimented Rudy's knowledge. And instead of acting HUMBLE (c'mon..isn't this what you christians do?) and telling me that it was in fact, NOT HIS. *He carried on. *Rudy, sorry. *But you're full of shit.

[ojeen1981]

samd, thats not cool what u said about rudy...u have no reason to put down like that ...


I used to get accused of plagiarizing in almost all of my posts. *When people couldn't really prove the plagiarism, they labeled me a book worm. *I've even had the adminitrator of this site mock me. * On the other hand, Rudy here has copied and pasted the entire "gotquestions.org" database and deliberately attempted to convince us that those were genuinely his thoughts. *Not one of you people have called him out on it. *So what's the fvcking deal? *

There are so many things wrong with what he does. *Besides the fact that it's dishonest... it's frustrating for the non-Christians. *While we're debating an issue, the resident retard casually looks up a response and pastes it an entire essay. *The burden of refuting Rudy's plagiarism is placed on the non-Christians. *If you had to read his bullshit day in and day out...and respond to it...you'd be pissed too. *Of course you don't really have to care since you all ejaculate to the bible while holding one another's hand.

listen bro, first off, ive grown to gain some respect for you, and like anyone else, you are entitled to your thoughts. *If rudy did something wrong or if rudy did not do something rudy, this dont give u the ligitimaticy to say things so harsh towards the Bible. *am sure u love reading some authors like Noam Chomsky (whom love) but u dont see me or anyone else telling u to get off his nut sac, thats simply ignorant! i didnt expect this to come from someone who is an inspiring intellectual. *a true objective intellecual is to take others point of view, this is the reason why i love listing to those who are athestic or agnoistic or of other faiths, i love reading their publications, it gives u ideas to expand your mind upon. *

likewise, if you are a person who dont belive the Bible, thats perfectly fine. *however, it does not mean u bash it out like that. I hope u get what am saying to u ...peace dude


Excuse me but, what's the greater crime against intellectualism? *Disrespecting others or stealing someone elses INTELLECTUAL work? *Quite frankly, I've yet to meet a non-arrogant "intellectual." *But anyway. *That is my dream Ojeen. *I want *people on ChaldeanChat to start referring to me as "the intellectual." *:roll: * Hey ojeen. *Why don't you take a few steps back on this one. *Your buddy rudy there fvcked up pretty badly. *You're not going to "save" the fellow disciple this time. *In fact...associating with him will only tarnish your own image (as it is currently doing in my mind).

Elvis? *John? *Where art thou? *


What does it say about a person pathetic enough to defend another's offense just because they happen to share an opinion? *To me it says that you have no confidence in any of your beliefs, and are thus unwilling to accept the fact that an influencial member of your posse turned out to be a phony because his phonyness may pose as a semblance to your entire ideology. *

"So if Rudy is a phony, am I really a phony as well... ? *And if that's the case...is this whole establishment a charade!? *Noo!!! *I Don't want to die and become dirt.... so well.... *What was i thinking about again? * Oh who cares nvm...I LOVE JESUS..."

If rudy is going to claim this volunteering bullshit. *I'll call him out on it again. *There were times where i complimented Rudy's knowledge. And instead of acting HUMBLE (c'mon..isn't this what you christians do?) and telling me that it was in fact, NOT HIS. *He carried on. *Rudy, sorry. *But you're full of shit.

samd, i dont know what the hell u read bro...thatsd not at all what i was doing...i was telling u that if a person did some mistake, this does not mean that u can go ahead and bash the Bible. *i gave u an example, am sure uve read some Chomsky, no one has the right to bash chomsky himself if me and u misused him....DO U GET WHAT AM SAYING ??????? *CALM DOWN with your temper dude.....peace brotha

[Samuel]

Actually. *My professor bashes Chomsky all the time. *He calls him an idiot. *He asks how a linguist knows anything about politics. *I wonder if that takes away the intellectualism of my very conservative professor, who happens to insult the liberals a hell of a lot?

[ojeen1981]

u keep going around the point here dude.......your professor is able to bash on chomsky becuase he reads his works and comes to a conclusion that chomsky dont know nothing about politics. *however, if your professor went and read the works of comentroies on chomsky and than bashed the works of the commentary himself and CHOMSKY, than thats not right!!!

your professor has those thoughts about chomsky becuase he read his works...

i love chomsky, he is the most quoted individual...and so wht if he is a lingustic...the guy thinks outside the box...just woundering if your professor or u have read any Edward Saad??

[Samuel]

My professor thinks Said is an idiot as well.

[ojeen1981]

thanks for answering my question and not seeing my point samd

[Samuel]

Ok i'm sorry for disrespecting the bible.

[ojeen1981]

thanks u so much man!!

[Samuel]

thanks u so much man!!

no problem.

[CHALDEANELVIS]

I don't believe gravity exists. So what I'm going to do is jump off a building with the presupposition that gravity does not exist because I can't see it for myself, therefore it doesn't exist. Because of my blind ingnorance and blind faith, I am going to splatter my brains all across the street.

If you don't believe on the account of you don't see, it makes no difference, you are going to be judged by the God who created you. I assume we all atleast believe God exists and He will judge each and every single one of us.

Samd, whats going to happen when you stand before God on the day of judgement? Do you consider yourself a "good person?"

Now, if you claim to be an intellect, I am expecting an intellectual reply, not name calling and 4 year old remarks and ad-hominem attacks. I would like to have a serious dialouge with you with love. Yes, LOVE. So please, if you are going to respond harshly dont bother. If you do bother, I refuse to answer.

God Bless,
Elvis

[John_5_24]

Elvis? *John? *Where art thou? *


Samd, if you haven't noticed, I stopped replying to you directly after you got personal with me the last time. *I actually believe that you are pretty well informed, misguided, but well informed. *I would enjoy having more dialogue with you, but I don't have the patience to respond to curse laiden personal attacks anymore.

[UmiSayz]

The answer to this question is NO. God does not make mistakes. :)

[renee]

The answer to this question is NO. God does not make mistakes. :)

that's the point, God does not make mistakes. So, if there are mistakes in the bible, (and there are), God could not have written it. It's proven by simple logic. But cults survive by denying logic, so I don't expect this to ever be resolved.

[rudy]

I’m *hoping all tempers have come down now and personal attacks can stop?
I know this subject can go for a long time it’s been going on for thousands of years already. But let’s do this one question at a time please! Let it be a give and take topic. We all can learn for each other. If someone wants to know personal info about myself please take it to pm I have nothing to try to prove to anyone. With all this said. My 1st question to those who believe the Holy Bible in NOT the word of God is this. Can you explain to me how this book has stood the test of time? Now to those who believe the Holy Bible IS the word of God let them answer the question and give just one reply please! So we can move on to the next question. Thank you and God Bless.

[ojeen1981]

i like the way u put that rudy, its more organized that way. *my previous reply to this topic was an analysis to this question, and i would like for those who have not read it to go back and read my previous reply. *I will now answer the question from my own lens!!!!

The Bible goes beyond something that we all profess to have, that thing is logic. *allow me to explain, logic can not explain the virgin birth of christ, logic can not explain how and why when someone hits u on your right cheek, u turn the other, logic can not explain why time after time of humans sining, God still gives us a chance, logic can not explain how can God desencd himself down and manifest himself in the form of human. *and i can keep going...the point is simply this, the Bible is the absoulte word of God becuase it transcends human logic, this shows that it has been written by a being whose logical capacity surpasses its creation (us humans).

another reason why the Bible is the word of God is this. *The Bible is the only holy book that preaches that man's good works will not give him heaven. *after tough study of other faiths, ive found out that all other paths preach that good works lead u to heaven. *Biblical scripture teach us that no good work of humans can attain us eternal life. *but instead, it is the grace of God and his love for his creatioin that we are given a chance to belive in him and attain eternal life. *

The Bible defies human logic, and it preaches something distinct from other faiths that they dont have, these two reasons are more than enough to be paramount proof the Bible is in fact divinly inspired. *

am sorry for making this long....and like i siad, my previous response was more philosophical and historical, and this one is more theological. *I would urge those who read this one to read my previous one...much thanks..God bless

[renee]

Can you explain to me how this book has stood the test of time? .

I think Rita already explained this but you apparently need it one more time:

The philosophy of the Buddha and the writings of his earliest disciples have stood the test of time (it's just that you don't read them). They are even some are older than the New Testament.

The philosophies of Plato and Aristotle and Socrates and their writings have stood the test of time.

The histories of Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger both pre-date the New Testament and both have stood the test of time.

Using your logic, All of these are the word of God -- and that's rediculous.

There is no evidence (and the Egyptians were great record keepers) that the Isrealites were ever in Egypt. There is no evidence (in the Roman record) that a slaughter of males less than 2 years old ever happened.

There is no evidence in medical history that a virgin birth ever occured (although in the Buddhist tradition, Buddha was the result of a virgin birth). I'm not saying it didn't happen. In fact, I believe it did. I'm just saying the Bible is special to Christian ONLY because we CHOOSE to believe it through FAITH.

[Senalko]

:shock: *:shock: *:shock: *akhh Rassi.... i got a headache from this topic...

You guys Complicate things to the Extreme.....i prefer to look at things from a common sense point of View than go deep and go into theories and analysis...


I am not sure how u guys come up with all these evidence to suggest that the bible is Written from god or are god's words, but that are totally Untrue..

The Bible, is nothing more than a Story Written by four of Jesus's Students or Diciples which simply Dexcribes the life of Jesus.....Wether the Content of it is True or untrue is Debatable for 2 major reasons:

1- The bible itself wasnt Written at the time of Jesus.. it Was Written some yearssss after jesus had already gone...

2- When u consider any book that is Written, u cant Leave out the possibility that its been tampered with... Human beings are very Clever at Creating Religions of their own, or changing alot of Contents to Suit their Political and Social needs at the time they were living....Just the fact that Christianity is so divieded today and u have so many different Groups who claim they are the True Christian Faith is a Clear Evidence and proof that its not beyond these people to have changed the Bible...

Whatever the truth is, i see the Bible as good enough book for people to generate faith in Christianty....However people need to understand that the bible was hand Written by 4 human beings... its just a Story.. it has nothing to do with God and was not Sent from God....

The only connection that i can see is at the time of the Writing of the bible, it was said that God had sent jesus's Disciples the Courage and will to spread jesus's life and spread his teachings....

In Fact Christianty as a Religion was born at the hands of one of jesus's Disciples.. Jesus himself never Claimed a new religion nor was he able to....

The jews rejected him in a big way and sent him on his death Track... it wasnt until his Diciples , mainly John , that Chtristianty was able to develop and the first Church created....:)

[Savoshka]

[glow=yellow:df4c57cd14]It is wonderful how much time good people spend fighting the devil. *If they would only expend the same amount of energy loving their fellow men, the devil would die in his own tracks of ennui.[/glow:df4c57cd14]

[UmiSayz]

[glow=yellow:81af7519e3]It is wonderful how much time good people spend fighting the devil. *If they would only expend the same amount of energy loving their fellow men, the devil would die in his own tracks of ennui.[/glow:81af7519e3]


And whos the devil?

[Savoshka]

^^ that would be the evailness that's goin on genrally today and u know.....

[UmiSayz]

^^ that would be the evailness that's goin on genrally today and u know.....


Oh I thought u were talkin about the ppl sayin "bad" stuff about the Bible. I get what you're saying though.

[Savoshka]

yep yep umi :D

[rudy]

:shock: *:shock: *:shock: *akhh Rassi.... i got a headache from this topic...

You guys Complicate things to the Extreme.....i prefer to look at things from a common sense point of View than go deep and go into theories and analysis...


I am not sure how u guys come up with all these evidence to suggest that the bible is Written from god or are god's words, but that are totally Untrue..

The Bible, is nothing more than a Story Written by four of Jesus's Students or Diciples which simply Dexcribes the life of Jesus.....Wether the Content of it is True or untrue is Debatable for 2 major reasons:

1- The bible itself wasnt Written at the time of Jesus.. it Was Written some yearssss after jesus had already gone...

2- When u consider any book that is Written, u cant Leave out the possibility that its been tampered with... Human beings are very Clever at Creating Religions of their own, or changing alot of Contents to Suit their Political and Social needs at the time they were living....Just the fact that Christianity is so divieded today and u have so many different Groups who claim they are the True Christian Faith is a Clear Evidence and proof that its not beyond these people to have changed the Bible...

Whatever the truth is, i see the Bible as good enough book for people to generate faith in Christianty....However people need to understand that the bible was hand Written by 4 human beings... its just a Story.. it has nothing to do with God and was not Sent from God....

The only connection that i can see is at the time of the Writing of the bible, it was said that God had sent jesus's Disciples the Courage and will to spread jesus's life and spread his teachings....

In Fact Christianty as a Religion was born at the hands of one of jesus's Disciples.. Jesus himself never Claimed a new religion nor was he able to....

The jews rejected him in a big way and sent him on his death Track... it wasnt until his Diciples , mainly John , that Chtristianty was able to develop and the first Church created....:)Ok Senalko let me try to answer you. Again I’m going to say this I’m not shoving my realign down anyone’s throat just commenting on Senalko’s remarks (I feel I have to keep saying this for some to understand).
1. The Bible as a whole was written by about 36 to 40 men from various walks of life over a space of 1500 years (from Moses to John). But I believe the true author was the Holy Spirit. All the human authors claim to be writing not their own words but the Word of God (see Exodus 34:27 & Jeremiah *35:1,2). NOTE: WHEN I PUT VERSES UP HERE ITS NOT TO SHOW HOW MUCH I KNOW BUT WHERE I GET MY INFO. SO PLEASE GO AND LOOK UP THE VERSE FOR YOURSELF. PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE! Now let me carry on. Many times the expression “thus saith the Lord” or its equivalent is used. Also take note Jesus himself said “it is written” many times (see Matthew chapter 4). What was written? If the Bible was not written till he was gone than what was he talking about?
* *
2. Your are correct some have tried to tamper with the book (example the Jehovah Witnesses new world translation). But the true Word still stands today. *How do I know this? Let me tell you a quick story. One of my good friends (who is Muslim) told me this “the bible was correct but man tampered with it and corrupted it” I asked him this “Mohammad was about 600 years after Christ and the Bible during his time had been sent through out the whole know world. Who, when and, where collected all the Bibles in the world and began to change it? And if they did so who redistributed them all back out and kept them all the same? Because weather you read an English, Arabic, Chinese, Russian or, French bible they are all the same”. Christ said “Heaven and earth will pass away but my words will live forever’ Matthew 24:35. I believe the reason there are so many different denominations today is proof of how good Satan is at what he does! Keeping the body of Christ divided.

3. Senalko bro you said “However people need to understand that the bible was hand Written by 4 human beings... its just a Story” Well my friend you need to understand you are totally wrong it was more than 4 humans. Just a story? So are you telling me the Gospels are just stories? So when the prophet Mica said 700-750 years BC that a savoir would be born in Bethlehem (Mica 5:2) was this just a coincidence? I can give you a million more but, I want to try to keep this as short as possible.

4. You also said “In Fact Christianity as a Religion was born at the hands of one of Jesus’ Disciples... Jesus himself never Claimed a new religion nor was he able to” No brother it was not just one but many over thousands of years. You are correct Jesus never claimed a new religion. He Claimed SALAVATION THROUGH HIS SHED BLOOD (see John 16:33)! (The word Christian means to be like Christ).

5. Yes Senalko the Jews did reject him but it wasn’t just them that sent him to the cross but so did I when I chose to sin against my heavenly Father. And one last note The Bible speaks of 7 churches not one they are the church of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and, Laodicea. And you want to know something else they weren’t all doing what was right! (See Revelation chapters 2 &3)
O yea I almost forgot samd I didn’t use gotquestion.org this time bro honestly. (LOL). Thank you and God Bless.

[rudy]

Can you explain to me how this book has stood the test of time? .

I think Rita already explained this but you apparently need it one more time:

The philosophy of the Buddha and the writings of his earliest disciples have stood the test of time (it's just that you don't read them). They are even some are older than the New Testament.

The philosophies of Plato and Aristotle and Socrates and their writings have stood the test of time.

The histories of Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger both pre-date the New Testament and both have stood the test of time.

Using your logic, All of these are the word of God -- and that's rediculous.

There is no evidence (and the Egyptians were great record keepers) that the Isrealites were ever in Egypt. There is no evidence (in the Roman record) that a slaughter of males less than 2 years old ever happened.

There is no evidence in medical history that a virgin birth ever occured (although in the Buddhist tradition, Buddha was the result of a virgin birth). I'm not saying it didn't happen. In fact, I believe it did. I'm just saying the Bible is special to Christian ONLY because we CHOOSE to believe it through FAITH.Yes renee you are correct they have stood the test of time. So has Slavery and Prostitution but it doesn’t make it right. I’m saying this for this reason. I have just started to read about Buddhism so I honestly don’t know much about it yet. But I do know this the biggest deferens between Buddha, Philosophies of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates and others you mentioned and the Holy Bible is this. Through out history the Bible has been under more attacks than all writings put together. Many people, kings, governments and, cults have tried to distort or destroy the writings within this book. Even to this day we see this happening. But the Words still stand strong and the Holy Bible is still the best selling and most distributed book in history! It seem like every time someone tries to destroy this book by studying it and trying to find errors in it, cant help but accept it! Examples of this are C.S. Lewis, Lee Srtobel (who were atheist and were very well respected in the fields of science and evolution) and ended up devoting their lives to this book. Their have been many other but these are the two that pop up in my mind. But honestly these are good question renee! Thank you and God Bless.

[renee]

[Yes renee you are correct they have stood the test of time. So has Slavery and Prostitution but it doesn’t make it right. I’m saying this for this reason. I have just started to read about Buddhism so I honestly don’t know much about it yet. But I do know this the biggest deferens between Buddha, Philosophies of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates and others you mentioned and the Holy Bible is this. Through out history the Bible has been under more attacks than all writings put together. Many people, kings, governments and, cults have tried to distort or destroy the writings within this book. Even to this day we see this happening. But the Words still stand strong and the Holy Bible is still the best selling and most distributed book in history! It seem like every time someone tries to destroy this book by studying it and trying to find errors in it, cant help but accept it! Examples of this are C.S. Lewis, Lee Srtobel (who were atheist and were very well respected in the fields of science and evolution) and ended up devoting their lives to this book. Their have been many other but these are the two that pop up in my mind. But honestly these are good question renee! Thank you and God Bless.

But Rudy, you said the Bible was written by God bc it has stood the test of time. You put one criteria, and I proved you wrong by that criteria. Two rejoinders to your comments: 1) CS Lewis converted to Episcopalian, not Christian by your definition; 2) Slavery and Prostitution stood the test of time because they were instituted by god -- as is everything.

Since there is one True god, and that god instituted everything, that means god also instituted Greek philosophy, atheism, buddhism, etc.

You can't have things only your way. if god the almighty is the author of everything, then it is everything bad as well as good.

BTW, I can't wait for Narnia to come out this winter.

[rudy]

[Yes renee you are correct they have stood the test of time. So has Slavery and Prostitution but it doesn’t make it right. I’m saying this for this reason. I have just started to read about Buddhism so I honestly don’t know much about it yet. But I do know this the biggest deferens between Buddha, Philosophies of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates and others you mentioned and the Holy Bible is this. Through out history the Bible has been under more attacks than all writings put together. Many people, kings, governments and, cults have tried to distort or destroy the writings within this book. Even to this day we see this happening. But the Words still stand strong and the Holy Bible is still the best selling and most distributed book in history! It seem like every time someone tries to destroy this book by studying it and trying to find errors in it, cant help but accept it! Examples of this are C.S. Lewis, Lee Srtobel (who were atheist and were very well respected in the fields of science and evolution) and ended up devoting their lives to this book. Their have been many other but these are the two that pop up in my mind. But honestly these are good question renee! Thank you and God Bless.

But Rudy, you said the Bible was written by God bc it has stood the test of time. You put one criteria, and I proved you wrong by that criteria. Two rejoinders to your comments: 1) CS Lewis converted to Episcopalian, not Christian by your definition; 2) Slavery and Prostitution stood the test of time because they were instituted by god -- as is everything.

Since there is one True god, and that god instituted everything, that means god also instituted Greek philosophy, atheism, buddhism, etc.

You can't have things only your way. if god the almighty is the author of everything, then it is everything bad as well as good.

BTW, I can't wait for Narnia to come out this winter.No renee I didn’t just say “the Bible is the word of God because it stood the test of time”. I don’t base my opinion about the Bible being the word of God because it has just stood the test of time. This was just one question I wanted to ask. And About C.S. Lewis, here you guys read it * http://www.biblestudyinfo.com/screwtape/biography.shtml (<sorry samd LOL). Also renee I’m not trying to have things my way because I know if I did it would be a total disaster! You also said “if god the almighty is the author of everything, then it is everything bad as well as good” well I’m going to give you the words of a man who’s name is Hank Hanegraaff (I know renee you probably think he is a “quack” but that’s ok. I happen to admire him very much!!) *He said this “First, Christian theism acknowledges that God created the potential for evil because God created humans with freedom of choice. We choose to love or hate, to do good or evil. The record of history bears eloquent testimony to the fact that humans of their own free will have actualized the reality of evil through such choices. Furthermore, without choice, love is meaningless. God is neither a cosmic rapist who forces his love on people, nor a cosmic puppeteer who forces people to love him. Instead, God, the personification of love, grants us the freedom of choice. Without such freedom, we would be little more than preprogrammed robots. Finally, the fact that God created the potential for evil by granting us freedom of choice ultimately will lead to the best of all possible worlds- a world in which “there is no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (revelation 21:4) Those who choose Christ will be redeemed from evil by his goodness” . (again sorry samd Hank said it better than me LOL) Thank you and God Bless.

[proudchaldean]

They're making a Narnia movie????? WOOOOW...im so excited!!!! i hope its not just the lion witch and wardrobe...a lord of the rings type movie series would be awesome

[renee]

I’m *hoping all tempers have come down now and personal attacks can stop?
I know this subject can go for a long time it’s been going on for thousands of years already. But let’s do this one question at a time please! Let it be a give and take topic. We all can learn for each other. If someone wants to know personal info about myself please take it to pm I have nothing to try to prove to anyone. With all this said. My 1st question to those who believe the Holy Bible in NOT the word of God is this. Can you explain to me how this book has stood the test of time? Now to those who believe the Holy Bible IS the word of God let them answer the question and give just one reply please! So we can move on to the next question. Thank you and God Bless.

Here is your exact quote Rudy. And Rudy, You are quoting to me "the *bible answer man?" I listen to his dribble on the radio. PLEEZE.

[rudy]

I’m *hoping all tempers have come down now and personal attacks can stop?
I know this subject can go for a long time it’s been going on for thousands of years already. But let’s do this one question at a time please! Let it be a give and take topic. We all can learn for each other. If someone wants to know personal info about myself please take it to pm I have nothing to try to prove to anyone. With all this said. My 1st question to those who believe the Holy Bible in NOT the word of God is this. Can you explain to me how this book has stood the test of time? Now to those who believe the Holy Bible IS the word of God let them answer the question and give just one reply please! So we can move on to the next question. Thank you and God Bless.

Here is your exact quote Rudy. And Rudy, You are quoting to me "the *bible answer man?" I listen to his dribble on the radio. PLEEZE. *I just not going to answer you anymore renee. Every time you have asked me a questions I have tried to answer you to the best of my knowledge. And when I do answer, you always come back with personal attacks. I’m sorry this is the way you choose to conduct yourself but I’m not going to respond to you in the matter you chose to react to me and I think that is the difference between me and you. I too listen to the Bible answer man show and I do enjoy it very much but I didn’t get my quote from his show but that’s ok you think what every you like. Why don’t you try calling in to the show sometimes? Here is his # 1-888-275-4265. So you take care of yourself. Rudy

[CHALDEANELVIS]

The answer to this question is NO. God does not make mistakes. :)

that's the point, God does not make mistakes. So, if there are mistakes in the bible, (and there are), God could not have written it. It's proven by simple logic. But cults survive by denying logic, so I don't expect this to ever be resolved.

Renee, I remember you once said in one of your forums "come back to the real Church" meaning the Catholic Church of course. My friend and I are so disturbed at the number of professing Catholics on these forums that we took the liberty of emailing Father Frank from West Bloomfield, MI who teaches at St. Thomas Church. I understand you're from Cali. Well, Fr. Frank is a very well respected priest amongst the Chaldeans, and I mean VERY WELL. He was very, very saddened to hear that there are chaldeans who claim to be Catholics and at the same time deny that Jesus is God and say that the Bible has contradictions. He would like you to email him or anyone else who wants to hear it from a chaldean priest. I will not post his email on this forum, PM me if you want his email. Up to this point, you are not a Catholic, and according to Scripture, you are a blasphemer of the One Holy and True God. I still don't know how a Catholic can deny scripture. Renee, why don't you read the Bible for yourself. 33 years old drowing in philosophy. Every contradiction you can give me I can refute it just as fast as you send it. You only believe they are contradictions because you've never read for yourself. You just copy and paste and call it a day. You gave me Romans 3:28 and James 2:15 (I believe) and I showed you the fallacy of your argument, and you still wouldn't believe. This draws me to believe that you are in grave danger according to the Lord Jesus Christ:

"Even If one rises from the dead they still won't believe"

Renee, get in touch with the priest. If not this priest, visit your local priest. Amen

-Elvis

[UmiSayz]

Father Frank from West Bloomfield, MI who teaches at St. Thomas Church.

-Elvis


Your priest is blind if he thinks the bible is not corrupted or altered.

[CHALDEANELVIS]

Father Frank from West Bloomfield, MI who teaches at St. Thomas Church.

-Elvis


Your priest is blind if he thinks the bible is not corrupted or altered.


I suppose then that you are walking in light? How do you know absolutely without a doubt in your finite mind that you are correct? How do you know?

By the way, he is not my priest. I don't see a priest. I only mentioned this for the Catholics in here. And another thing, what are you doing answering to this post anyway? What does this concern you? Sure, I know you're going to say because you have the freedom, but why does this matter to you? Would you like me to talk about how false the Quran is (assuming you're Muslim)? If not, how do you think I feel about you taking the absolute that the Bible is inconsistent?

:think:

[renee]

They're making a Narnia movie????? WOOOOW...im so excited!!!! i hope its not just the lion witch and wardrobe...a lord of the rings type movie series would be awesome

No, it's just the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I know, I was disappointed too. But who knows. If it's as successful as Rings, maybe they'll do more. I think it's comming out in December just like the Rings.

[renee]

[quote="CHALDEANELVIS @ Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:17 am
Up to this point, you are not a Catholic, and according to Scripture, you are a blasphemer of the One Holy and True God. I still don't know how a Catholic can deny scripture. Renee, why don't you read the Bible for yourself. 33 years old drowing in philosophy.
-Elvis[/quote]

That's the irony elvis, I am a Catholic because of my baptism. That act, by my parents when I was a baby bought me a place in heaven (unless I commit the Unpardonable Sin, of course). I have read the Bible. But unlike you and your ilk, I have also read philosophy and the principles of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other eastern religions. Nothing I've said has blasphemed god. I've never denied the scripture, I've denied that it was written by god. for me, inspired by god is good enough. I have not seen and I still believe. You, my friend, need the bible to believe. I don't. I think that makes my faith stronger than yours.

[UmiSayz]

Would you like me to talk about how false the Quran is (assuming you're Muslim)?




Bible has been proven false many times. Since you think you can prove the Quran wrong...give it a try. If the scientist can't prove it wrong...what makes you think you can? I'll give you 500 dollars if you can show me any proof if you can prove the Quran wrong. I'm dead serious.

[Rita]

Father Frank from West Bloomfield, MI who teaches at St. Thomas Church.

-Elvis


Your priest is blind if he thinks the bible is not corrupted or altered.


I suppose then that you are walking in light? How do you know absolutely without a doubt in your finite mind that you are correct? How do you know?

By the way, he is not my priest. I don't see a priest. I only mentioned this for the Catholics in here. And another thing, what are you doing answering to this post anyway? What does this concern you? Sure, I know you're going to say because you have the freedom, but why does this matter to you? Would you like me to talk about how false the Quran is (assuming you're Muslim)? If not, how do you think I feel about you taking the absolute that the Bible is inconsistent?

:think:

For once I agree with Elvis. Umi you have no right to talk about our priest. You don't even know him! Also, Elvis brought up a good point... you talk about the Bible & our religion yet you praise the Korán and your religion. I am taking it upon my own account, as a Catholic, and asking questions about the Bible yet it doesn't mean I don't believe in the majority of it. Maybe Father Frank will give me an educated answer instead of only passages from the Bible so I can understand from a deeper level. Also, if you like... we can make another thread about the Korán and discuss its accuracy as well.

[renee]

Maybe Father Frank will give me an educated answer instead of only passages from the Bible so I can understand from a deeper level. Also, if you like... we can make another thread about the Korán and discuss its accuracy as well.


Alright Rita. Again, a voice of reason in the cesspool of internet chatter.

[BONO]

^^^ I agree with Rita and Elvis..

Umisayz, u need to stop these offensive opinions of yours...

u r not going to win in here, simply b/c we are christains and U R NOT. *so if u want to discuss about the Quran, feel free to do that in any of the Islamic website out there. *Personally if I was u, I would try to educate the terrorist first.

[UmiSayz]

For once I agree with Elvis. Umi you have no right to talk about our priest.




Its not like i'm disrespecting him. If he thinks the Bible is "100%" correct hes wrong. Theres proof. Even the Christians believe that the Bible isn't 100% correct. ITs been altered many times.




you talk about the Bible & our religion yet you praise the Korán and your religion. I am taking it upon my own account, as a Catholic, and asking questions about the Bible yet it doesn't mean I don't believe in the majority of it.



I'm disrespecting the bible at all. Just because i'm sayin that its been proven wrong that doesn't mean i'm talkin trash about it. If you guys have questions about the Quran then i'll do my best to answer your questions. I praise the Quran cause in my belief the book itself is *a miracle. Thats my belief.

[BONO]

^^^ dude, how would u think if I had the same attitude as u in an islamic website. *the first thing they will tell me is to get the hell out of there and go to a christain or chaldean website. *

then they would ban me,

then they would bomb my house LOOOl J/K.

[CHALDEANELVIS]

[quote="CHALDEANELVIS @ Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:17 am
Up to this point, you are not a Catholic, and according to Scripture, you are a blasphemer of the One Holy and True God. I still don't know how a Catholic can deny scripture. Renee, why don't you read the Bible for yourself. 33 years old drowing in philosophy.
-Elvis

That's the irony elvis, I am a Catholic because of my baptism. That act, by my parents when I was a baby bought me a place in heaven (unless I commit the Unpardonable Sin, of course). I have read the Bible. But unlike you and your ilk, I have also read philosophy and the principles of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other eastern religions. Nothing I've said has blasphemed god. I've never denied the scripture, I've denied that it was written by god. for me, inspired by god is good enough. I have not seen and I still believe. You, my friend, need the bible to believe. I don't. I think that makes my faith stronger than yours.[/quote]


Whoa, wait a minute. You've read the Bible and you claim that "because you were baptized as a baby, you're going to Heaven" What are you saying? I have a great challenge for you. Show me in the Bible where an infant is baptized. A direct, clear scripture verse where an infant is baptized. You won't find it. The Bible says "Repent, and be baptized" Notice the repenting. Baptizm is an outward confession of your inward faith. To tell me that you repented and accepted Christ as your Savior as an infant is absurd. Now you have to show me where that derived from or else the Catholic Church is teaching heresy.

By not reading the Bible, it makes your faith stronger? So you say it was inspired by God, I show you verses that plainly tell you that ALL scripture was God breathed, not written by man. You have to answer to these verses. Renee, I noticed one thing about you, you never ever answer the Scriptural claims. Even when you receive the answer, your ignorance keeps you blind.

How do you answer this:

2 Timoty 3:16 "All scripture is God breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

How do you answer this:

1 Peter 1:12 "It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things which have now been announced to you by those who preached the good news to you through the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to loo"

Renee, God says He wrote the Bible and the men were inspired by Him. Are you saying that God can't keep His words infallible and without contradiction? Where then is the inspiration found?

How do you answer this:

2 Peter 1:15-21 "And I will see to it that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things. For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. *First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."


You won't be able to answer to those claims. Renee, just face it, He is the potter and you are the clay, enjoy the ride1 :D

-Elvis

[UmiSayz]

^^^ dude, how would u think if I had the same attitude as u in an islamic website. *the first thing they will tell me is to get the hell out of there and go to a christain or chaldean website. *

then they would ban me,

then they would bomb my house LOOOl J/K.


It depends on the person bro. They would not ban you at all. It would just be a big respectful debate nothing more. Most islamic sites will not tolerate misbehavior towards other ppl's belief.

[BONO]

^^^so if u don't like this site, please feel free to preach over there....

[UmiSayz]

^^^so if u don't like this site, please feel free to preach over there....


I never said I dont like it. Just some ppl here need to show more respect. I do get out of hand sometimes but I dont think i have been lately. :think:

[proudchaldean]

I got ur back Umi...what u said was not meant to be offensive, only ur input on a civilized discussion we were having...if u ask me, the fundamentalists are more offensive

[CHALDEANELVIS]

^^^ I agree with Rita and Elvis..

Umisayz, u need to stop these offensive opinions of yours...

u r not going to win in here, simply b/c we are christains and U R NOT. *so if u want to discuss about the Quran, feel free to do that in any of the Islamic website out there. *Personally if I was u, I would try to educate the terrorist first.



They're not offensive. If you go to the begining of my earlier days of this site ppl were demonizing Islam and yet no one does anything about it here. I am NOT doin the same as you guys did to my religion. I just said its not the word of God. Its not my fault that you guys get offended. I didn't say anything bad about the Bible did I?

I want to first note that NO REAL Christian would ever say that the Bible is false, has contradictions, was not inspired, and was "tampered with throughout the ages" All of those have been answered, yet you still question. Rudy posted those answers in his extensive responses, yet you still question.

Do you know of a man named Sam Shamoun? That name should shake you up a bit. He is the the greatest Christian defender against Islam in our day. There is yet a Muslim to defeat him in a debate. As a matter of fact, no Muslim will accept his debates. He has disected the Quran and proves that it is not inspired, it is not the word of God.

I will challenge you on Islam, but all of my information will be off his webiste. I can guarentee without a doubt in my mind that any claim you have will be answered and that you can not come up with proof that refutes Sam's answers. Many Muslims have tried, all have failed. We've given you so much proof and evidence that the Bible is real, inspired, and we have the original manuscripts since the Apostles wrote it.

www.answering-islam.org

Remember, this is not just some ordinary guy. He single handedly destroyed all of Islams claims to our Bible and then refuted the Quran completely. You won't find a Muslim to prove this man wrong, they don't exist.

As for the $500, just split it between me and Sam. I'll be expecting the check in the mail. J/K

-Elvis

[UmiSayz]

LOL! Answering Islam is SOOOOO WRONG! Ojeen and I had a discussion about that. I warned him about that site! Sam Shamoun is garbage!

[renee]

Whoa, wait a minute. You've read the Bible and you claim that "because you were baptized as a baby, you're going to Heaven" What are you saying? I have a great challenge for you.



There you go again, mis-representing my words.


Firstly, I said I've read the bible. I didn't say that infant baptism was found anywhere in the bible. Remember, I reject the bible as the final authority (and i"m sure you will mis-quote me as having rejected the bible). The bible is necessary but not sufficient for salvation. BTW, infant baptism has it's roots in the 1st century church when whole families converted to christianity. the entire family would be baptized and subsequent children would be baptized as they were born.

I said that my parents bought me a place in heaven. I never said I'm going there. Again, Baptism is a necessary condition for heaven. It is not sufficient. I happen to believe that a loving god will allow all the opportunity to repent at the final judgment (unless you commit the unpardonable sin).

If you haven't been baptized using the formula "I baptize you (add name) in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost" you too will not go to heaven.

I don't need the bible to believe. YOU DO. If suddenly archeological evidence proved everything in the bible false, I'd still believe. Would you?

[UmiSayz]

It our defense against that idiot Sam Shamoun...this guy made a site goin against him ...


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

[BONO]

It our defense against that idiot Sam Shamoun...this guy made a site goin against him ...


http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac.htm
so the scientist that proved u claim proved the bible to be wrong is OK, but the guy above who claims to prove the quran wrong is garbage. *I think I just proved my point and rest my case.

:thankyou: *:thankyou: *:thankyou:

[UmiSayz]

so the scientist that proved u claim proved the bible to be wrong is OK, but the guy above who claims to prove the quran wrong is garbage. *I think I just proved my point and rest my case.

:thankyou: *:thankyou: *:thankyou:


Funny that you applaused to yourself. You have proven NOTHING! Look at that site and judge it yourself. Tell me the quotes on the bible if its accurate. Look at the comparisions. The guy only made the site to defend us and to prove the Quran CANNOT be proven wrong. That site would never exist if that idiot Sam Shamoun tryin to misguide the ppl about the Quran. That guy got it all wrong. He misinterpeted the Quran on purpose because he knows theres lots of idiots out there that would believe him especially after 9/11.

[BONO]

case closed bro. get over it ;)

[UmiSayz]

case closed bro. get over it ;)


I'm getting the last word. Case closed. :alright:

[proudchaldean]

The Last Word Is Mine!!!!! Case Closed Biyatches!!!

[renee]

I usually get the last word. *:no no:

[UmiSayz]

I usually get the last word. *:no no:

Get lost. Case closed. *:angel:

[CHALDEANELVIS]

Whoa, wait a minute. You've read the Bible and you claim that "because you were baptized as a baby, you're going to Heaven" What are you saying? I have a great challenge for you.



There you go again, mis-representing my words.


Firstly, I said I've read the bible. I didn't say that infant baptism was found anywhere in the bible. Remember, I reject the bible as the final authority (and i"m sure you will mis-quote me as having rejected the bible). The bible is necessary but not sufficient for salvation. BTW, infant baptism has it's roots in the 1st century church when whole families converted to christianity. the entire family would be baptized and subsequent children would be baptized as they were born.

I said that my parents bought me a place in heaven. I never said I'm going there. Again, Baptism is a necessary condition for heaven. It is not sufficient. I happen to believe that a loving god will allow all the opportunity to repent at the final judgment (unless you commit the unpardonable sin).

If you haven't been baptized using the formula "I baptize you (add name) in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost" you too will not go to heaven.

I don't need the bible to believe. YOU DO. If suddenly archeological evidence proved everything in the bible false, I'd still believe. Would you?

So because the early Church Fathers began baptizing, which by the way wasn't in the First Century, it makes it right? Where did they get the idea that it "removes original sin" how can they infallibly say that? Ever ask yourself that? Did you know that one of the greatest Church Fathers, who many say just about started Catholicism, was baptized later in life? Even he knew that it would be pure heresy to say that baptizm at birth removes sin. Where did it originate Renee?

Who told you that the Bible is not necessary for salvation? That is pure heresy. Jesus taught the way to salvation all through scripture, and the only thing you've learned is that "baptizm removes original sin" That's hilarious, show me where Jesus taught that and I will become an atheist/catholic like you.

By the way, it doesn't take the "unpardonable sin" to go Hell. Every person born on earth is on their way to Hell because they are infected with a very terminal disease. It's called SIN. Water is not sufficient to cleanse it, neither is baptizm in the name of Jesus. Again, show me where it originates. People are going to Hell because they have not been bathed in the blood of the Perfect Lamb. Jesus said "Whosoever BELIEVES will have eternal life" but the Bible is not sufficient enough for Renee and she refuses to ask a priest. "Sola Renee" it is!

There is much more than just beliveing but I won't get into it unless you want to know.

-Elvis

[renee]

Who told you that the Bible is not necessary for salvation?

Do you read English Elvis? I said that the bible IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION. I also said it was not sufficient. (It's a reference to symbolic logic where you have necessary and sufficient conditions for proofs but since you reject philosophy and are too ignorant to learn about it you wouldn't have gotten that.) Receiving the Eucharist and doing corporal acts of mercy are also required.


"baptizm removes original sin"

I didn't say anything about original sin. I said baptism is required for salvation which is exactly what John the Baptist and Jesus believed.

By the way, it doesn't take the "unpardonable sin" to go Hell. *

This is my belief because I believe that God the Father or Mother is good and gracious.


"Whosoever BELIEVES will have eternal life" but the Bible is not sufficient enough for Renee and she refuses to ask a priest. "Sola Renee" it is!

I believe you are quoting John 3:15 and the quote is "whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life" This says nothing about believing that only by following the bible to the letter will give eternal life. Come on baby, tell me, can't I believe just through the oral tradition?

There is much more than just beliveing but I won't get into it unless you want to know.

-Elvis

[Rita]

Umisays wrote:
They're not offensive. If you go to the begining of my earlier days of this site ppl were demonizing Islam and yet no one does anything about it here. I am NOT doin the same as you guys did to my religion. I just said its not the word of God. Its not my fault that you guys get offended. I didn't say anything bad about the Bible did I?
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________

First and foremost, I think you should go back to your earlier days of posting when you first became a member and see who was giving you grief before you point any fingers. If I recall, I was the one standing up for you and giving you respect regardless of your religion. I never criticized you and made mention that not all Muslims are extremists and believe in any type of killing to accomodate your concept of Jihad.

The point of my reply to you was that you are claiming that Your religion is superior over ours and your holy book is 100% correct and accurate. If you would like people to criticize and start mentioning things from your holy book that are absurd & prove so much contradiction, we could. In my opinion, the Bible stands true compared to any other holy book others believe in and I'm sure you would think otherwise.

Sorry, I tried to reply to his post and I accidentally deleted it. Above is exactly what Umisays wrote in his previous accidentally deleted post and my reply.

[Rita]

It our defense against that idiot Sam Shamoun...this guy made a site goin against him ...


http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac.htm
so the scientist that proved u claim proved the bible to be wrong is OK, but the guy above who claims to prove the quran wrong is garbage. *I think I just proved my point and rest my case.

:thankyou: *:thankyou: *:thankyou:

I definately agree with Bono here. You sound like an arse. What are the credentials of both people and what are the facts? You simply waive the idea that the Koran is wrong but applaud the so called scientist is accurate on the Bible. Many people can claim the Koran is wrong and same with the Bible. They will never have absolute proof, just theories and claims.

[CHALDEANELVIS]

Who told you that the Bible is not necessary for salvation?

Do you read English Elvis? I said that the bible IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION. I also said it was not sufficient. (It's a reference to symbolic logic where you have necessary and sufficient conditions for proofs but since you reject philosophy and are too ignorant to learn about it you wouldn't have gotten that.) Receiving the Eucharist and doing corporal acts of mercy are also required.


"baptizm removes original sin"

I didn't say anything about original sin. I said baptism is required for salvation which is exactly what John the Baptist and Jesus believed.

By the way, it doesn't take the "unpardonable sin" to go Hell. *

This is my belief because I believe that God the Father or Mother is good and gracious.


"Whosoever BELIEVES will have eternal life" but the Bible is not sufficient enough for Renee and she refuses to ask a priest. "Sola Renee" it is!

I believe you are quoting John 3:15 and the quote is "whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life" This says nothing about believing that only by following the bible to the letter will give eternal life. Come on baby, tell me, can't I believe just through the oral tradition?

There is much more than just beliveing but I won't get into it unless you want to know.

-Elvis


Renee, how many times have I challenged you on scriptural verses and you never, ever, ever accept? Look at all of my forums and posts. You have never responded with a scripture verse to back yourself up nor refuted a scripture verse I have given you.

You say Baptizm is necessary for salvation and thats what John and Jesus believed. SHOW ME. What happend to Faith Alone? Why does John's gospel use the word "Believe" 99 times? Believing/faith, see the correlation? And the Baptizm is only in outward confession of your inward faith. The theif on the cross did not get baptized, yet Christ said he was going to be with Him in Paradise. You can't keep making your traditional claims based on nothing.

You need to go back to all my Scriptural verses that show that the Bible was not written by man, but rather God. If you hold to the Bible GO BACK AND RETRIEVE MY VERSES AND PROVE YOURSELF.

I'm only kidding myself, you are not going to get the verses because you can't refute them. Just as you haven't been this entire time. I've shown you 100% proof and you refuse to believe. I guess God afterall is NOT capable of keeping His words until the coming of the end of ages like he promised, only because Renee says so of course, even though the Bible says otherwise.

-Elvis

[UmiSayz]

First and foremost, I think you should go back to your earlier days of posting when you first became a member and see who was giving you grief before you point any fingers. If I recall, I was the one standing up for you and giving you respect regardless of your religion.


Girl i wasn't blaming you for anything. I was thankin you if I remember correctly? *:think:








The point of my reply to you was that you are claiming that Your religion is superior over ours and your holy book is 100% correct and accurate. If you would like people to criticize and start mentioning things from your holy book that are absurd & prove so much contradiction, we could. In my opinion, the Bible stands true compared to any other holy book others believe in and I'm sure you would think otherwise.



OMG i never think that we're superior than others. If you believe that theres misinterpation in the bible then why do you still chose to follow that path? Why do you think the Quran is wrong? Its been written in the same scripture for 1400 yrs. The only thing i can tell you is that the Hadiths can have errors on it. Some of it is correct and some of it is not. Quran is our standard book...not the Hadith. Some ppl will get that mixed up. Do a lil research for yourself and think whats best for you. IF you believe that the bible is "correct" then i respect that. Its your belief. Im not here to question YOU or anyone elses belief. But if someone is goin to sit here and demonize Islam i will defend it. I will do my best to correct them on it. I can say whatever I want about the Bible or BIBLES if I want cause i've studied it. I'm sure that most of you ppl here haven't opened the Quran at all and yet you sit there telling us that we're wrong. My guess is that some ppl are lookin at ppl's actions and they judge them on there behavior and using there religion to demonize it. Thats what you call ignorance.

[UmiSayz]

I definately agree with Bono here. You sound like an arse. What are the credentials of both people and what are the facts? You simply waive the idea that the Koran is wrong but applaud the so called scientist is accurate on the Bible. Many people can claim the Koran is wrong and same with the Bible. They will never have absolute proof, just theories and claims.


Why dont you go see for yourself before you start bashing me.

[KoolEug1981]

The content of the Bible is divinely inspired. Countless attempts were made to find contradictions in the bible but were to no avail. *Of course some of the historical details recorded in the bible may seem incongruent with archeological findings. *This is the case because the bible is not a historical text. *Many people forget that our propensity for unraveling the mysteries of the past through history and archaeology is a modern fascination. *The authors of the bible were therefore not concerned with recording minute details pertinent to the political realities of their world. *
Many scholars assent that that some of the biblical characters and accounts were heavily influenced by Mesopotamian mythologies (Noah for example). But the theological canvas painted by the authors of the bible has a distinct flare that is unparallel in the mythologies of ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. What makes the biblical accounts unique is that they are replete with divine revelations pertaining to how one can attain salvation. *This theme has been consistent throughout the disparate books of the bible. *The characters in Mesopotamian mythologies were subject to the ravages of a quarreling pantheon of gods who displayed utter contempt for humans. *In addition, the God of the bible displays immense love and respect for humans since they were created in His image. The status of humans in Mesopotamian mythology was relegated to that of laborers who were solely created to perform the menial task of irrigation instead of the gods.
The Quran, considered by Muslims the uncreated and unchanging word of God, is imbued with contradictory theological themes. *For example, Quaranic passages that look favorably upon Jews were composed during the time when Mohammed sought refuge amongst the Jewish communities of Yathrib and Khaybir. *During those times Mohammed made several overtures in order to appease the Jews. *Mohammed even urged his entourage to adopt Jewish rituals like fasting and praying towards Jerusalem. *Quaranic passages that contain anti-Semitic overtones, on the other hand, reflect the degeneracy in Islamic-Jewish relations that occurred when the Jews dismissed Mohammed as a prophet. The Jews of Khyabr and Yathrib paid a heavy price for their insubordination, and they were subsequently massacred by Mohammed and his followers. The Quran legitimizes these atrocities by claiming that the Jews are a “wicked race” who fell out of favor with God because they “altered” the scriptures.
Here is another example. The Muslim view of Jesus is heavily influenced by Nestorian theology. Nestorius, 4th century apostate from N. Africa, claimed that Jesus had 2 separate natures (divine and human) that were not in unison. *The monk (his name is Bahira, and the Quran made him play a different role, that of someone who heralded the arrival of Mohammed) that taught Mohammed everything he knows about Christianity was Nesotrian (someone who embraced Nestorius’s creed). *This is the primary reason why the Quran contains contradictory views of Jesus. *While certain passages claim that he was the spirit of God, others contend that he was merely a prophet. *Mohammed himself could not fathom that concept and his irreconcilable views of Jesus were later transmitted in the Quran!!!

[KoolEug1981]

hey SamD, ur not an intellecutal man. U might be good when it comes tio rhetoric, but I refuse to call u an intellectual. *An intellecutal is someone who endeavors to accumulate info from disparate fields = *someone who is multifaceted. *U don't fit that description. *U do provide some witty retorts, but they lack content.
Besides, u never were bold enough to anwer the questions to the survey I posted. Were afraid that by answering the questions wrongly that certain insecurities might surface?
U have no right to disparage Rudy's character by the way. *The dude steadfastly maintains the same convictions. *Thats a commendble quality. U, on the hand, don't have the guts to advocate a specific position. *ur just someone who finds pleasure in dispensing insults!!!1

[Samuel]

hey SamD, ur not an intellecutal man. U might be good when it comes tio rhetoric, but I refuse to call u an intellectual. *An intellecutal is someone who endeavors to accumulate info from disparate fields = *someone who is multifaceted. *U don't fit that description. *U do provide some witty retorts, but they lack content.
Besides, u never were bold enough to anwer the questions to the survey I posted. Were afraid that by answering the questions wrongly that certain insecurities might surface?
U have no right to disparage Rudy's character by the way. *The dude steadfastly maintains the same convictions. *Thats a commendble quality. U, on the hand, don't have the guts to advocate a specific position. *ur just someone who finds pleasure in dispensing insults!!!1

oh kno u refuse to call me n intelectual. *someone shoot me. *so is an intelectual sum1 who plagerizes oh [strike:04694a8e8b]great one[/strike:04694a8e8b] fvck face? *or sum1 who agreez with ur retarded ass?

[Samuel]

btw to all the assholes who keep bringing this up. *When the fvck did i call myself an intellectual?

[ojeen1981]

kooleug, i agree with your def. of Intellectual, but samd never called himself as such.

[Samuel]

in the same respect, a bunch of parrots repeating stuff they read out of an unsubstantiated novel aren't the greatest thinkers ever to step foot on this planet. *You're not thinking when you're copying and pasting fairytales. *But in all fairness, your God prohibits such vile behavior. *You people practice "selective" thinking; a process which labels certain thoughts as a blasphemous and a "grave matter" if pursued any further. *Right Father Frank? *

Scare Tactics worked on me when I was just a little one (probably equivalent to the thinking capacity of KoolEug today). *But i think it's important to emphasize that no one in their right mind is going to convert to a religion because some holier-than-thou pious figure attempts to use scare tactics and threats of eternal damnation to compel allegiance. *In fact, such rhetoric has the potential to reaffirm one's distaste toward the entire establishment. *

Want to persuade me? *Make some sense for once. *Leave the fairytales for the 8 year olds, please.

[KoolEug1981]

what scare tactics r u speaking of? No one is coercing u to belive *the words of the bible. *All I was saying is that don't sound pompus + arrogant when u don't have anything to substaniate it with. *Answer the questions man, quit being so insecure. *So what if u don't know ur own history, I don't really care.

[Samuel]

what scare tactics r u speaking of? No one is coercing u to belive *the words of the bible. *All I was saying is that don't sound pompus + arrogant when u don't have anything to substaniate it with. *Answer the questions man, quit being so insecure. *So what if u don't know ur own history, I don't really care.


Listen Big boy. *You have a few problems with me. *Articulate your grievances in a behooving manner so that I may refute your assertions rather than postulate the rationale behind your uncorroborated claims. *

Great. *now that you know how annoying you sound...for the sake of the God that you supposedly love. *Shut up. *

By the way. *I know my history damn well. *In fact, I have taken quite a few American History classes.

[Randel]

what scare tactics r u speaking of? No one is coercing u to belive *the words of the bible. *All I was saying is that don't sound pompus + arrogant when u don't have anything to substaniate it with. *Answer the questions man, quit being so insecure. *So what if u don't know ur own history, I don't really care.


Listen Big boy. *You have a few problems with me. *Articulate your grievances in a behooving manner so that I may refute your assertions rather than postulate the rationale behind your uncorroborated claims. *

Great. *now that you know how annoying you sound...for the sake of the God that you supposedly love. *Shut up. *

By the way. *I know my history damn well. *In fact, I have taken quite a few American History classes.

I got an A in Mr lockridges class while the rest of the class got e's except for 3 people who past with d's.

Just thought I would let you all know.

Mr lockridge is a big fat bitch.

[KoolEug1981]

I was alluding to Mesopotamian history. *The questions I posted were about Iraqi history. *I'm sure u know American history (250 years of history is not that hard to know). *U should not be boastful about that

[Sally]

Here are my thoughts:

1) I believe there is a God

2) I dont believe the bible is the word of God

3) Archaeological findings only prove that the bible existed and not that the bible is the word of god

4) Jesus can only be shown to be God through use of the bible....


I agree!







SamIAM Edit: *I changed the topic a little. Personal arguments must be taken to private messages or outside this site. I'll be watching u.

[maxpower]

sally.. i gotta teach you how to post babe, lol... miss you sis... when u going to chicago?

[sammiedebull]

I doubt that every word in the bible is the word of god, even christans agree that the book was changed as it changed hands during its time.

[ojeen1981]

not really sammie

[sammiedebull]

so you are saying every word is teh exact word, no chanegs were made?

[ojeen1981]

yes, that, but i was talking about u saying that this:"even christans agree that the book was changed as it changed hands during its time."

and if u gonna make that claim about Biblical scripture, i can make the same calim about the Quran and their is historical proof for that. anywayz, we can take this on pm...i dont feel like talking about it on here

[sammiedebull]

I really do not talking about such things on PM because no matter how long we talk and through research on each other, we will never agree.

[ojeen1981]

okay...its not about agreeing, its about having an intellecrual convo.

we can agree to disagree...but thats fine..we both know where we stand..so its all good

[Shlama_98]

yes, that, but i was talking about u saying that this:"even christans agree that the book was changed as it changed hands during its time."

and if u gonna make that claim about Biblical scripture, i can make the same calim about the Quran and their is historical proof for that. anywayz, we can take this on pm...i dont feel like talking about it on here

You don't need to make a claim on the Quran, there's hardcore evidence that the Quran is also not word by word.

[UmiSayz]

You don't need to make a claim on the Quran, there's hardcore evidence that the Quran is also not word by word.


Sure. Thats your belief. Lets see this "hardcore evidence" of yours. I dont even want to get into it but I want to see it. :roll:

[sammiedebull]

Isn't this a thread about the bible? where did the quran come in?

[Shlama_98]

Sure. Thats your belief. Lets see this "hardcore evidence" of yours. I dont even want to get into it but I want to see it. :roll:

It's my belief and it's the logical one also, want me to prove it? sure, bare with me then.

First we have to see the script the Quran is written with today, we all agree that most Qurans are written in Arabic, the Muslims claim that the original script of the Quran is the Arabic script and the Quran was never rewritten, but this claim has a big problem in it, why? well let's see:

- Muhammad lived from 570 AD to 633 AD, and this is according to Islam.
- The Quran was written during Muhammad's life.
- There was no dots in the Arabic alphabets during the life of Muhammad. (According to the history of the Arabic alphabets)
- There was no vowels in the Arabic alphabets during the life of Muhammad. (Also according to history)

What does that tell you? it tells you that if the Quran is written during Muhammad's time then it would be impossible that it's the same exact Quran because the dots in Arabic were added after the death of Muhammad, so the question is who added the dots to the Quran?

If you know Arabic well, you'll understand that the dots on certain letters are very important, without them you're lost, the Arabic alphabets evolved from the Nabatean alphabets which come from the Syriac Aramaic script, the Nabatean alphabets had no dots on them, when the Arabic alphabets were evolving they were used without dots at first, but by the 7th century AD (After Muhammad's death), dots were added so it can make things easier, so let's look at the Arabic alphabets and see what the dots could mean:

http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_b.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_t.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_th.gif
1 dot in the bottom is B, 2 on top is T, and 3 on top is TH.

http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_j.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_ch.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_kh.gif
1 dot in the bottom is J, no dot is a heavy H, and dot on top is KH.

http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_d.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_dh.gif
No dot on top is D, and a dot on top is DH.

http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_r.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_z.gif
No dot on top is R, a dot on top is Z.

http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_s.gifhttp://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_sh.gif
No dots on top is S, 3 dots on top is SH.

There's also other letters that could confuse with their dots in Arabic like N, Q, F, and a few others, the whole point is without dots the Quran must've looked very different, and since we don't know who added the dots to the Quran then how can you say it's perfect? keep in mind that if Arabic today has no dots then you cannot read it at all, therefore the Quran is not word by word nor is it perfect.

The dots were not the only thing of course, but the vowels also came around the 7th century Ad and were finalized by the 8th century, so the Quran originally not only it did't have dots, but also did't have vowel signs on it, so the vowels you see today in the Quran were added after Muhammad's death, he did not put them in there because the vowel system did not exist during his time.

The final form of the Arabic alphabets were completed by the 9th century AD, so the Arabic alphabets today are like the Arabic alphabets of the 9th century AD which is around 250/300 years after Muhammad's death, so the question is where's the real copy of the Quran? better yet what did the real Quran sound like before the dots and vowels were added to it? or what did it say before it was played around with? these are all good questions with no answers, but the bottom line is I wish Muslims were open minded about it because if they believe the Quran is perfect then they should not accuse the Bible of being playing around with because both books are on the same boat, I along with many other open minded people believe both books have been played around with, and any scholar will tell you the exact same thing.

[ojeen1981]

well put Shlama..however, their are other internal passages of the Quran which also clearly tell us that things have been changed, for example the direction of where to worship..if anyone is intrested, i can post something about it next time..or pm me..thanks! peace

[UmiSayz]

Shlama - It doesnt make any sense saying there was no dots or vowels in the Arabic language before the Prophet(saws) that means they didnt even write meaning they didnt even read!

I'll break it down, its like me saying...

"N prblm ll wt fr th pncl"

You wouldn't understand what I wrote, so how can they have written without vowels? Just think about it. Use your common sense. Allah reminds us thru out the Quran to use our intellect. Its ok if you want to believe that your right. You haven't showed me any evidence. This thread is getting of subject. So i'll stop now. My eyes are closed.

[maxpower]

Shlama - It doesnt make any sense saying there was no dots or vowels in the Arabic language before the Prophet(saws) that means they didnt even write meaning they didnt even read!

I'll break it down, its like me saying...

"N prblm ll wt fr th pncl"

You wouldn't understand what I wrote, so how can they have written without vowels? Just think about it. Use your common sense. Allah reminds us thru out the Quran to use our intellect. Its ok if you want to believe that your right. You haven't showed me any evidence. This thread is getting of subject. So i'll stop now. My eyes are closed.

while ur eyes were closed.. a hot blond chick passed by flashing boobies *:boobs:

[AllOutMan]

Nice try Shlama, you are right about the vowel points and dots, but still what does that have to do with that proving Quran is not the word of God and it has been altered? In short, the arabic language did go through some changes where the introduction of punctuations (vowel points, or marks on alphabets) and dots were introduced to make arabic words more easy to be read correctly for the non-fluent arabic readers. Ultimately, the dots and punctuations were added to the Quran so that non-fluent arabic readers will pronounce the words correctly. However, despite the additions, of course the Quran word pronounciation and meanings remained the same. Since then the copy of the Quran with the punctuations has been the only one in circulation.

So the punctuations were added to the Quran to ensure people read it correctly, does that change God's word? Nope. Similarly, new dots were introduced also and ultimately new alphabets resulted, but why? Because...... for the non-fluent the new alphabets would ensure they pronounce it correctly.

For example, only fluent enough english speakers know that
ape is pronounced with a 'long a' - aaaaaaape
ant is pronounced with a 'short a' - ant

So introduction of dots, ultimately led to new alphabets, 'long a' and 'short a' would be now different alphabets, so no confusion ;). Wow, now thanks to the update to the arabic language syntax, now modern arabic language is much easier to read correctly, yaaay! Actually, the new modern arabic syntax was inspired from the fact different regions who received the original copy of the Quran without punctuation were reading it differently (with different accents). So because the preservation of the Quran and its reading is so vital, the new system was introduced. Its funny how you actually use the new system designed to preserve the Quran as a basis of proving the Quran has been altered! Come on, we are humans, we can adapt to new syntax but still read it in the same way.

Still not convinced? Lets say I transliterated (NOT translation) the whole Quran to English for my poor friend who doesnt know how to read arabic but he really wants to read the Quran in its original form.

Bismi Allâhi Ar-Raĥmâni Ar-Raĥîmi

So have I changed God's words although it is in a new form? I used a bunch of new alphabets that doesnt exist in the arabic language, didnt I? (whats A? whats r? i?). But isnt it *still the same words though and dont they have the same meaning? :) Upgrading the arabic language *(adding dots and vowel points) hasnt changed the reading.

Not to offend anyone, but Im curious, do the "fundamentalists" on this site actually look deep into their claims (research it with an open-minded) before actually posting it? I wonder do they actually miss the bigger picture or are they trying to intentionally mislead by taking advantage of people's ignorance? For example, with this argument, not everyone on this site is a fluent arabic reader so how would they know that the same arabic word can be pronounced differently depending where you put the arabic word in a sentence and what context and whether it is referring to a male or female. The introduction of vowel points and dots makes it easier for non-fluent arabic readers like myself to pronounce it correctly (arabic grammar is difficult). Nobody is going to convert anyone through fundamentalists means. Lets try not to spend so much time trying to prove the other person is wrong. Lets focus on our similarities and not our differences. Believe me, I know we have lots of similarities and we can learn a lot more through this approach. Peace.

[AllOutMan]

Also just as a clarification for anyone interested. Arabic 'vowels' are not like english vowels, they are not extra alphabets. Arabic vowels are a bunch of marks (slashes) you put above and below the arabic alphabets which help make sure you pronounce the word correctly.

Check out this site for more if you interested
http://www.as-sidq.org/durusulQuran/articles/vowels.htm

(Ha. Just noticed the above link also mentions why the vowels were added to the Quran also... "The short vowels are merely oral, and used only in teaching texts for guiding the learner... As far as *Qur'an concern these vowels signs are absolutely *necessary in this age in order to pronounced religious text for those who are not well versed in classical Arabic language.")

[UmiSayz]

Good one AllOutMan. :alright:

[ojeen1981]

With all due respect, alloutman, your argument does not have any historical analysis, I don’t know if you know how to read Arabic, but the fact that in Arabic if we include those dots or if we disregard those dots, it does immense changes to the meaning of the words and sentences, but my friend, and I am not trying to offend anyone, I will provide internal verses from the Quran that shows u their has been changes, and I will also give u historical circumstances (but not on this post since I don’t wanna make it too long). *I beg that you bare with me. *
In sura 16:101 says:
None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar- Knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?"
The science of Abrogation (To abolish, do away with, or annul, especially by authority) is clearly practiced in the Quran. *The science of abrogation is found in the Qur'an in sura 2:106,108, stating: "We substitute one revelation for another..." and again in sura 17:86, which says, "If it were Our Will, We could take away that which We have sent thee by inspiration." In sura 16:101 the Science of abrogation is clearly defined as one verse being substituted by a better verse. Verse 101 read, "None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar- Knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?”

Islamic scholars attempt to explain this by stating that while some passages are annulled (Mansukh) and the verses which replace them are referred to as Nasikh. The problem, however, is that there is no way to tell which ones are mansukh and which verses are nasikh because the order in which the Qur'an was written down was not done chronologically but according to the length of the suras.
The problem with this is that if the Quran was divinely inspired, why would it need to be improved upone?? Would it not have been perfect from the start??? And these verses go in direct vilation with the following Quranic verses;
"...There is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah." An even more damaging pronouncement is made in sura 4:82 which reads, "Do they not consider the Qur'an? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancies."
I will not provide the Suras that this was used in neither the history of how the Quran was actually changed because I don’t want to elongate my email…the point of this was three:

1) while at one point Quranic verses bluntly tell us that no one can alter the words of allah and that’s its divinely inspired, other verses tell us baldly that verses were abrogated. *It shows internal change within quranic passages
2) my second point was that there are historical and quranic internal passages which can be argued by critiques who are atheist scholars and or Christian/Jewish scholars in an attempt to discredit Islamic faith. *This is don’t for either malicious intentions, or simply for the sake of further intellectual knowledge, I personally do it for my intellectual knowledge, not to offend my friends who are Muslims, and if I did, I sincerely apologize, especially to umisays because I don’t know who else is a Muslim on this site. *
3) My third point is that scholars have attempted to do the same thing to Biblical scripture; it needs hard core theological and historical studies to understand all this. *The point is, I like buying books that discredit Biblical scripture through either history or philosophy, it expands my horizons, that’s the point…thank u all!

[UmiSayz]

Ojeen you dont have to apologize. Your just tryin to understand. Sure theres ppl that will argue about the copy of the Qur'an *along with the vowels and the diacritical marks is not the same original Qur’an that was present at the Prophet’s(pbuh) time. But they fail to realize that the word ‘Qur’an’ means a recitation. Therefore, the preservation of the recitation of the Qur’an is important, irrespective of whether the script is different or whether it contains vowels. If the pronunciation and the Arabic is the same, naturally, the meaning remains the same too. Go to this site on the Qur'an section. http://www.islamic-awareness.org/

That should answer most of your questions.

[Syllabus69]

I am still confused as to how muslims can take the word of this guy muhammad. *Your whole religion is based on ONE MAN and what he SUPPOSIVELY HEARD ALONE in a cave. *As I have stated before that today would be conisdered LUNACY. *Why do you follow some religion that could have been some mans delusions. *If you look back in history, you have to admit the possibility of muhammad doing this just for political gain. *Because without his ramblings, he never would have risen atop to political leadership.

[sammiedebull]

again, you are not here to convert anyone, neither am i, also i will not reply to anyone who fails to respect other religions or viewpoints. I am sure that you can make such attacks on any religions but that is not the point, the point is to try to understand an educate yourself more about aother peoples view points and religions. I could say :

1) what makes you think a man (jesus) can also be god.

2) how can hindus worship 100 gods? they think a rat is god or something like that.

etc, etc, etc.

That is thier religion, i try not to judge them because this is what they believe and want. I see that a lot of people here just attack and think they would dis-credit a religion in the hope of converting someone or something to that nature. Drop it, ask questions, learn and dont attack!!!

[Syllabus69]

I am not trying to convert anyone. *I just want them to admit that they follow a religion where it is based strictly on a man who got this supposid message from an angel. *When you put it under the light it doesnt seem a very sacred religion. *Based only on ONE mans word.

[Syllabus69]

At least in Christianity, there are countless amounts of Jesus preforming MIRACLES. *There are countless accounts of written text where eyewitnesses saw Jesus doing these things, healing the sick, curing the blind, WALKING ON WATER. *Where are these miracles in Islam? *There are none that I have read about, just the original miracle of him receiving the message (Quran) from the angel Gabriel.

[sammiedebull]

so if someone can do a miracle it automatically makes them a prophet :)?

come on man.

[Shlama_98]

Nice try Shlama, you are right about the vowel points and dots, but still what does that have to do with that proving Quran is not the word of God and it has been altered? In short, the arabic language did go through some changes where the introduction of punctuations (vowel points, or marks on alphabets) and dots were introduced to make arabic words more easy to be read correctly for the non-fluent arabic readers. Ultimately, the dots and punctuations were added to the Quran so that non-fluent arabic readers will pronounce the words correctly. However, despite the additions, of course the Quran word pronounciation and meanings remained the same. Since then the copy of the Quran with the punctuations has been the only one in circulation.

So the punctuations were added to the Quran to ensure people read it correctly, does that change God's word? Nope. Similarly, new dots were introduced also and ultimately new alphabets resulted, but why? Because...... for the non-fluent the new alphabets would ensure they pronounce it correctly.

For example, only fluent enough english speakers know that
ape is pronounced with a 'long a' - aaaaaaape
ant is pronounced with a 'short a' - ant

So introduction of dots, ultimately led to new alphabets, 'long a' and 'short a' would be now different alphabets, so no confusion ;). Wow, now thanks to the update to the arabic language syntax, now modern arabic language is much easier to read correctly, yaaay! Actually, the new modern arabic syntax was inspired from the fact different regions who received the original copy of the Quran without punctuation were reading it differently (with different accents). So because the preservation of the Quran and its reading is so vital, the new system was introduced. Its funny how you actually use the new system designed to preserve the Quran as a basis of proving the Quran has been altered! Come on, we are humans, we can adapt to new syntax but still read it in the same way.

Still not convinced? Lets say I transliterated (NOT translation) the whole Quran to English for my poor friend who doesnt know how to read arabic but he really wants to read the Quran in its original form.

Bismi Allâhi Ar-Raĥmâni Ar-Raĥîmi

So have I changed God's words although it is in a new form? I used a bunch of new alphabets that doesnt exist in the arabic language, didnt I? (whats A? whats r? i?). But isnt it *still the same words though and dont they have the same meaning? :) Upgrading the arabic language *(adding dots and vowel points) hasnt changed the reading.

Not to offend anyone, but Im curious, do the "fundamentalists" on this site actually look deep into their claims (research it with an open-minded) before actually posting it? I wonder do they actually miss the bigger picture or are they trying to intentionally mislead by taking advantage of people's ignorance? For example, with this argument, not everyone on this site is a fluent arabic reader so how would they know that the same arabic word can be pronounced differently depending where you put the arabic word in a sentence and what context and whether it is referring to a male or female. The introduction of vowel points and dots makes it easier for non-fluent arabic readers like myself to pronounce it correctly (arabic grammar is difficult). Nobody is going to convert anyone through fundamentalists means. Lets try not to spend so much time trying to prove the other person is wrong. Lets focus on our similarities and not our differences. Believe me, I know we have lots of similarities and we can learn a lot more through this approach. Peace.

Thanks for replying AllOutMan, I have to go out now but when I come back I'll reply to you, take care and looking forward for the discussion :)

[Syllabus69]

so if someone can do a miracle it automatically makes them a prophet :)?

come on man.

No jackass, pay attention... All I was saying was that there were eyewitnesses and recorded history of Jesus and his miracles. *They give Jesus VALIDITY. *What Validity does muhammad have? *I am not attacking muslims I am just questioning their basis.

[Shlama_98]

Ok AllOutMan, I'll reply to you now :)

First I wanna say it's good that you at least agree with me that the dots and vowels were added later on which will at least show UmiSayz that this talk is not coming from the air.

As for your argument, writing the Quran in English is not really a good example for two reasons, #1) English and Arabic are two different languages, but even within these two different languages the alphabets can still make mistakes, let's take a small example and work on it from there:

- Let's take the two words 7awa2 (Eve) and Hawa2 (Air) for example, of course you know the 7 represents the letter http://www2t.biglobe.ne.jp/~BokerTov/semitic/fig/ar_ch.gif while the 2 represents the "Hamza", both don't exist in English, so when you translate the word Eve and write it exactly with the latin letters you'll write it like this "Hawa", the word Air will also end up like "Hawa", now you as an Arabic reader might pick it up cause you know your book, but a person just learning will get confused, get what I mean?

The second reason why this does't compare because the Arabic language and the English language are two different things, one is Semitic and the other is an Indo-European language, so when I say the Quran might've had an Aramaic hand in it it makes more sense because both Aramaic and Arabic are sister languages, but when you swtich words from one to another you could get a different meaning, for example:

Lakhma/La7ma or La7mu in Syriac Aramaic means "Bread".
La7am or La7mu in Arabic means "Meat".

So it's very easy to mix some words together like that and confuse people. You also said that the dots were added to the Arabic alphabets because it makes things easier, I agree, but the person who added them was not Muhammad, so notice that my attack is not on Muhammad nor am I saying the Quran is not the word of God, I'm simply saying the Quran has mistakes in it because it's not a perfect book, it's been rewritten from different versions of alphabets to another, you know what I mean?

You said it should'nt affect the language if they added dots or vowels, vowels might not be a big problem, but the dots are, why? well let's look at the origin of the Arabic alphabets:

http://www.omniglot.com/images/writing/nabataean.gif

These are the alphabets that evolved into Arabic, most semitic alphabets contain 22 letters only, in Arabic there's 28 plus the Hamza, you agree that the letters during Muhammd's time did't have dots in them so dots were added on some of them so they don't confuse, but if that's the case then how did they manage to put dots under the right letters? remember this is not Muhammad adding the dots, this is someone probably noone knows, did't this person make mistakes while adding those dots? how do you know this person did not makes mistakes? words like:

Jabal could turn to 7abel - Mountain to Rope
Gharaq into 3araq - Drowned to Sweat
Arabeya/Arabi into Gharbeya/Gharbi - Arabian into Western
Sharq into Saraq - East into Stole
3ali into Ghali - High to Expensive

Should I keep going? I can find plenty of words, my whole point is the Quran was written by men just like the Bible, not by God, there's no evidence the Quran was written by God, if there is I'd like to see it, and since the Quran was written by men then it must contain mistakes, Muslims claim that the Bible is corrupted because it's been rewritten, well then what's the difference when the Quran itself was rewritten by another person with a another new alphabet system? this is pretty much the same thing.

The Assyrians today have the closest Bible to the old because they were among the first Christians and the early Bibles they copied still exist in our Churches, you see unlike the other Christian groups, many of the Assyrians kept themselves isolated in their villages and mountains so their Bibles survived, the Muslims claim that the Bible has been corrupted because it's been translated into hundreds of languages, well if I told you that the Assyrians have the same Bible from the early days are you gonna call it corrupted? it's written in the classical Syriac Aramaic and it still exists, this means that the Muslims can no longer say the Bible is corrupted because our early copies are just as valid as the Quran's early copies (I believe they're both not perfect), but the whole point is Muslims can no longer say the Bible is corrupted cause it's rewritten because the Quran is on the same exact boat.

[Rita]

I agree with Syllabus and Shalma. BTW, why haven't any of you answered Syllabus' question? He is not attacking your religion or trying to convert you. I don't know how you took it in that sense other than you getting defensive because you didn't have a valid answer for his question.

No offense, but there are many bums in Detroit who claim they are God or they are his prophet... why do you turn your face from them and open your arms up to another? IS it because one had a poilitical standing and the other doesn't have much going 4 him?

[Shlama_98]

To clear things up about the topic itself, I think the word of God could be any good teachings, sometimes you don't have to have a direct phone line to God in order to teach his words, you learn from others and become an example.

If I were to go out dedicating my life teaching people to be good human beings and push them into doing good deeds, then my words could be classified under "God's word" also, because I'm going out there trying to make the world a better place.

Looking at the Gospels and the life of Jesus shows us that he went out and taught people in parables, and he taught them to be good human beings, that alone tells me that the words of the Gospel are the words of God, Buddha did the same thing and so did the other Prophets and Messengers.

At the same time I think that every holy text is gonna have errors in it because these holy books are thousands of years old, but just because a holy book has errors does't mean people should'nt follow it, in my opinion as long as you're following the good teachings and trying to be your best then this holy book has done its purpose.

[sammiedebull]

Syllabus69, how do you know, where you there, do you have pictures? a video? show me, the truth of the matter is that you do not have real evidence, you have faith and we have discussed faith before.

[CHALDEANELVIS]

I think over the span of time the Christians have been replying on here, we've shown you more than enough evidence for the case of Christianity. What you are talking about is cultural relativism. Let me show you the error in that mind set.

The year is 1940. I am the head of the Gastapo. You are a jew. I call you into my office and say to you "You are a jew and I am a German. Tomorrow morning at 6 am we are going to kill you" What do you say? Can you say they are wrong? Why?! This is what the Germans FIRMLY believed, that jews were scum. They believed it was right to murder and eradicate all Jews. Are you simply going to say we are to respect all religions because of what they believe? With your mind set, you are guilty of murdering over 6 million Jews, how do you feel?

The case for Christianity has been presented to you crystal clear. There is more Manuscripts, archaeology, and over 2,000 prophecies than any other religion. For someone to say that the Bible has been tampered with and has not lasted throughout the ages would have to give an account for the 14,000 manuscripts that were spread world wide and say that each and every single one of them have been tampered! Best of all, they were 99.9% accurate when collected! The Benzentine and Alexandrian texts need also to be observed. 1947 Dead Sea Scrolls have proven the case for Christianity and the validity of the Bible. For those who say "were not here to convert" well, I am here to convert. I am here to regenerate the heart through the saving message of the Gospel. I have been studying many different religions including Islam, Buddah, and even those who claim to be Christian; Jehovas, Mormons. If you really want to talk about the case for Christ against all other religions, I'd be more than happy to do so. Just keep an open mind and stay in prayer. We've gone through many, many, of the topics so please tell me how you believe that all religions lead to God. Give me specific objections, one by one, and we can go over them. I want to do this as loving as possible, no ad hominem attacks.

Sammie, you said "so you are saying every word is teh exact word, no chanegs were made?"

99.9% of what we have is accurate. The .1% is punctuations, different words but same interpretations. Yes, we have the words of Christ because God said "My words will never pass away" and "I will exalt my words higher than My name" "Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word the preceedth out of my mouth" Is God not capable of doing such a task?

God Bless,
Elvis