Christian/Muslim ThreadsMuhammed the borroweryes and the verse also says "His mother was in the state of sincerity, they both ate food." Why does he need to emphasize on Mary's humanhood, when the accusation of her being a God doesn't excist according to you?
see the above of course she is no more then a woman, that is THE christian view... catholics venerate her as a pure and very unique and remarkable woman, but never as a God or a part of the triune nature of God... so again, who is muhammed rebuting? except his own straw men? Where do you see that Muhammed is directing him to the jewish false beliefs? is that your interpretation or cover up? Put it simple H20... Muhammed makes the accusation of worshipping two Gods next to Allah... makes it THREE ! and of what religion are the people part of mentioned? of Christianity! so what does muhammed think he is rebuting? christianity! Indirectly a christian is a polytheist an idolater and a fulltime practiser of Shirk according to Islam... so for sure a christian is condemned... and muhammed reffered to the people of the book as the jews and the christians, i think this is common knowledge for a muslim... how does muhammed or his army while persecuting know to differentiate between a christian and a heretic if they themselves can't even get their facts straight? And i'm a catholic by baptism and heart, minded like a protestant with great sympathy for protestant churches and my protestant friends... who are all brothers in my opinion... all of them are christian... and i defend protestantism and catholicism as christian equally... i only exclude sects (yehova's witnesses, mormons, uniterians, christian science, muslims,...) who alter the gospel in such a way that salvation becomes unatainable Well many indeed study the Textus Receptus for proof and reproof, and many translations are being printed, corrected and updated... If i don't trust a translation or a certain chapter and i feel the need to study it thoroughly i would too try and study the original language... yet i have my trust in the translations... i never saw a bible translation differing that much from another that it had an entire other meaning... at best you find a longer sentence or another synonym used and that's about it. Given the fact that Ahmed Deedat knows hebrew shows that the interpretation of the bible still stays open! and is not a guarantee of reading it correctly. Another example is the many hundreds of sects in Islam who all speak and read the quran in arabic, yet they differ on verses in so much that they get entire new believes, again proof that even if you learn the language YOU still can be wrong! See, when i debate Hindu's, they can't ask me to except me to learn Sanskrit (wich is according to their tradition the most holy language on earth, and is spoken in heaven)... unless i'm writing a book or i am academic scholar i feel no obligations to debate in details. And when i debate the quran, like i did, i rely on all translations, and not just one... just like in questiong suspects... what the most witnessess have in common will be the most correct. I still do not think it is a neccesisty... in the end it's the fault of the Arab language of being so vague that many translations are off track and why so many sects can spring out of simple book... i don't know him, but i have no problem with people translating God to Allah... as long as it reffers to Yehova and not to Hubbal and please, start another threat on the Maryan debate and continue this further there, this is about Quranic Borrowings |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame