[Faith-talk] Christianity in review.

Fri May 16 17:16:07 UTC 2014

Pappa Bear,

My take is that he doesn't really want to be convinced. I hope I'm wrong.

Blessings,

Linda

At 11:30 AM 5/16/2014, you wrote:
>Even this has been posted and reposted by our good friend Mustafa and though
>it has been discussed, question and examined from the other side of the
>coin, we still have it reposted again and for many on the list, nobody will
>attempt to respond again only to have it reposted two months from now again.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Faith-talk [mailto:faith-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mostafa
>via Faith-talk
>Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 8:19 AM
>To: faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>Subject: [Faith-talk] Christianity in review.
>
>
>Dear all, peace be with you.
>
>Today I would like to inshallah proceed on discussing the concept, the
>doctrine, or the mystery of the Trinity.
>
>I have spoke about it many times before.
>
>The further I dive into it, the mysterious it provocatively becomes.
>
>Trinitarianism is a derived concept out of a pagan traditionalism.
>
>Trinitarian apologists are constantly attempting to formulate any form of
>disambiguation.
>
>But could Trinitarianism  actually be clarified?
>
>   Let us analyze that proposition then.
>
>Trinitarianism is the somehow belief that God is one, but he somehow reveals
>himself into three coequal and coeternal persons.
>
>The Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit.
>
>So God is a triune being, hypostases.
>
>They insist to Contemptibly  portray the divine being in such a blasphemous
>manner.
>
>The Christian objection to the concept of monotheism in Islam is rationally
>refuted.
>
>I remember that my friend Pastor Bob has posed the misconception that the
>concept of God is theoretical in Islam.
>
>Well at this point, I want to enthusiastically address the broad phenomenon
>of Christianity which is obsessed with temporally portraying the divine
>being into forcible complex.
>
>The dimension here becomes decipherable when they tend to periodically
>equate the triune being with other temporal objects.
>
>But let us now strive to critically analyze what they have somehow proposed.
>
>Someone is God, he then has to be transcendent, eminent, omnipotent and
>glorious.
>
>In truthfulness and trustworthiness, do you believe in the Creator as your
>savior?
>
>I believe that I was asked before to talk about the concepts of
>transcendence and eminence of God in Islam.
>
>Well, before I get into that, I may initially define some terms.
>
>We have the word transcendence  which signifys the state of being or
>existence above and beyond the limits of material experience.
>
>   Subsequently, it comes the word eminence which signifys the High status
>importance owing to mark superiority.
>
>These two rilmes are chronologically pertained to each other.
>
>Can Allah be eminent and transcendent at the same time?
>
>For Christians, God deigned to atone them.
>
>They consider God incarnates  into human flesh a form of bestowing grace.
>
>I constantly constitute my rebuttal by decisively emphasizing that Allah
>glory be to Him does not need to come down in order to forgive or to bestow
>His grace.
>
>The Christian utterance of God really exasperates me.
>
>   It really does because of its turbulent conception.
>
>Christian apologists are tremendously reluctant to expose its problematic
>side.
>
>Does the Trinity stand up to scrutiny?, or it just crumbles within rational
>examinations?
>
>I may instantly glance at another aspect of Christianity, and that is the
>concept of good and evil.
>
>Christians asserts that sin is the death of the spiritual perception.
>
>They typically advocate that when Adam and Eve sinned, the spiritual death
>has entered into the world.
>
>Well, that sounds quite inconsistent to me.
>
>For how come I would inherit  something I have not witnessed nor I have not
>done.
>
>I just do not see the point here.
>
>I also do not see the point of why God cannot just forgive on his own, and
>that he had to redeem someone who is innocent in order to forgive.
>
>Some people here on the faith talk list accused me of insignificant
>repetition.
>
>Well excuse me but, I have not got any of my questions answered properly or
>convincingly.
>
>Though I furthermore believe that my experience in dealing with Christians
>has emphatically proved their vast vairiation in doctrine.
>
>Their doctrines are essentially based on denominational principles, and each
>denomination has its own tennets.
>
>So for instance, when it comes to the Bible, we recognize that the Roman
>Catholic version consists of 73 books whilst the Protestant version consists
>of 66 books.
>
>Who has omitted these 7 books from the Protestant version?, or who added
>these seven books to the Roman Catholic Bible?
>
>Nobody knows.
>
>             "And indeed, there is among them a party who distort the
>Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but
>it is not from the Scripture. And they say this is from Allah ," but it is
>not from Allah . And they tell lies about Allah and well they know".
>
>The Noble Koran, chapter 3, verse 78.
>
>The translation of the Koranic verse above plainly resembles the current
>condition of these translations you possess.
>
>Can you veritably testify that what you possess at the moment represents the
>precisely divine speech?
>
>Even the Trinity which you devote your faith to, it used to be there in.
>
>   In one Jhon five verse seven, we can read the following:
>
>"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and
>the Holy Ghost: and these three are one".
>
>It is exactly written like that in the authorized king James version.
>
>But, it does not appear in later English translations.
>
>It is  omitted in the revised standard version of the Bible as well as the
>New international version of the Bible, and they are both belong to
>Protestant denominations.
>
>On that premiss, we can provokingly implement the Koranic disposal regarding
>the present form of the Bible.
>
>The Koran believes in the deliberate alterations of the Bible.
>
>Some people though may think of that as offensive or inappropriate.
>
>        Well if you think so, you can practically examine what the Koran says
>about the Bible along with the textual conditions of the current Bible, and
>see if they match.
>
>I am not attempting to disgrace what you embrace.
>
>At the same time, the Koran does not denounce the Bible as a revelation from
>God.
>
>What the Koran condemns is actually the textual distortion.
>
>By the way, some Christian apologists tell us back that the Koran is
>corrupted, altered and distorted.
>
>Great, quite good.
>
>Do you have a biblical reference that somehow supports your proclaimation?
>
>I do not say myself that the current form of the Bible is corrupted.
>
>It is the Koran that tells me so.
>
>When I go to the Bible to critically examine its present formation, I just
>find exactly what the Koran foretells.
>
>I comprehend that Pastor Jones has desecrated the Koran out of envy and
>detest.
>
>He fallaciously taunted the Koran, and he preposterously considers himself
>somehow associated with Jesus Christ peace be upon him.
>
>What a catastrophe.
>
>I really believe that burning  the Koran was made out of hate and envy.
>
>I want to clearly repose the statement which says that Muslims tend to
>slander the Bible.
>
>I am not attempting to cause a posting riot or disturbance.
>
>But the buttomline here is that I can definitely speak about the textual
>corruption of the Bible, yet the Christian has no valid proposition to try
>doing that back to me, just because he does not have a convincing response
>to my theological contentions.
>
>If  the Bible does not tell you anything about the Koran, why some Pastors
>then tend to somehow criticize its context?
>
>The belief I hold regarding the Bible is primarily based on the Koranic
>citations as well as critical examinations of the current text, the current
>translations of the Bible.
>
>I have spoken abundantly today, yet I do not bear to cause  disappointment
>to anyone.
>
>I apologize if my message unintentionally have caused offence or unintended
>discourtesy.
>
>I am held accountable before Allah if I caused any verbal profanity or
>offensive remarks.
>
>I constantly would like to commence strident  arguments on theologically
>related subjects, and at the same time, I dislike offending people.
>
>Well, that is my senior attitude though.
>
>That is what I have got for the time being.
>
>I am just about to go hangout with some friends.
>
>We are having a Barbecue here.
>
>Come and join us.
>
>   Thank you for reading, I wish you all a pleasant time, and peace be with
>you.
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Faith-talk mailing list
>Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>Faith-talk:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/heavens4real%40gmail
>.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Faith-talk mailing list
>Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>for Faith-talk:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/mentink%40frontiernet.net
>
>
>-----
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3950/7506 - Release Date: 05/16/14