Is there an Islamic response to John 3?

Sign*Reader wrote: I don't know what demon is upon you which bugging you around. You say you don't have religion but sound like pitching Jesus, Christianity against Islam and Muhammad and now Judaism. Just forget about your moronic comparisons, who cares, go get a massage from  Haggard's boy friend. and enjoy his confession, there is no punishment for him now it will be on the Doom's day for sure.  dayhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-hagg ard6nov06,0,7806096.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Well, that is real Muslim of you!  Is that what Islam really is?

By the way, I have NEVER said that I did not have religion!  I thought lying was against Islam, but I could be wrong based on the actions of some who claim to be Muslim on this forum.

What is the REAL problem you have with my postings?  Does the truth hurt that much?

Would you like to engage in honest discussion?

Pick anything I have said and let us discuss it.  Show me that I lied  and I will make my apologies and leave defeated.

Dzul wrote:

>Do you know that in the region where I am right now has been using written text exactly from the Quran to cure many ailments ?

Can you provide us with more details, please?

Dzul wrote: To StephenC Before you say that you did not mean to make fun of us, by saying that Muslims are blind towards the faith... is making fun of the millions of Muslims around the world.... So you are the enlightened one is it? So continue enlighten everyone else in your own space and forum...

Who forced you to read my postings?  Do you own this forum?  Is my posting on this forum costing you or anyone else any additional money?

I am just as much of a member of this forum as you.

Am I posting in the Muslim only forums?  No.  I am now only posting here and in the forum for non-muslims.

By the way, the only way someone can make fun of you is if you let them.

I treat all religions the same.

stephenc wrote: andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Which sounds more creditable: The story of Jesus Christ or The story of Muhammad? As Jesus said, you can tell the truthfulness of a prophet by his works. How can you be sure what Jesus said?   [quote] Let's see.  The life and times of Jesus Christ in the New Testament was written by contempary eyewitnesses who's accounts while not exactly the same (no witness gives the exact same account as anotheer witness) gives basically the same events and sayings.

Your are asserting again, without evidence or proof.

1)      Please give me the name of the contemporary who wrote the document, and the name of the person to whom it was passed on.

2)      Hundreds of narratives existed. Please tell us which ones were correct.

3)      Authenticate the narratives of the NT.

4)      The NT was not put together until well into the third century.

StephenC wrote: With the life and times of Muhammad in the Quran, it was written well by a committee who picked and chose what would go in and what would not.

The nature of the Quran was transmitted primarily through memorization. The Quran is supposed to be recited. Writing was only a secondary means for preservation. The Quran was already memorized and written at the death of the Prophet (saw).

1)      Provide proof that someone threw out something that was a part of the Quran. (please provide proof of your charge, you have been wanred over and over about this)

2)      The Quran was taught by the Prophet (saw), and taught to those around him, and memorized it. It was not some new novelty after his death.

3)      You want to keep whining about a �committee�, yet it was the Christian NT that was put together by a committee, centuries after the death of Jesus, who chose the narratives based upon pure conjecture and speculation. Lets not forget the fact that the narratives they did choose exist as copies, of copies, of copies of the originals, and exists as variant.

4)      The very fact that an authoritative edition, an official �key�, that would be the official standard of what the Quran is in written form was put together by men who actually learned directly from the Prophet does not do any damage to the integrity of the Quran. The fact that you feel more comfortable with the NT, a book put together by men centuries after the event, a book that contains narratives that were among hundreds of narratives, without any way of knowing what was right or wrong, proves just how prejudiced you are. And I am 99% certain you are an evangelical. Your replies and obfuscation, and deflections, are right on the MO of a missionary.

stephenc wrote:   Anything not included in the final Quran was destroyed.  This committee was commissioned by someone who allegedly showed favoritism and bias towards his own clan.

This begs the question: Why would someone keep errors? Unless you can prove that the �Quran� was thrown out during this time, do not keep repeating this charge.

Your next charge is, like most of your dribble, incomplete. �This committee was commissioned by someone who allegedly showed favoritism and bias towards his own clan.� My reply is: Who was showing favoritism? What is the favoritism that would have corrupted the Quran? And show what was thrown out due to the favoritism?

I find your replies odd. No one with any serious background would take your theories serious, or base any serious conclusion from them. They are waay to far fetched, and one must use a great deal of imagination to fill in the gaps to find your conclusion.

stephenc wrote: andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: I would add, you can tell the truthfulness of a religion by how it treats people. The Jewish and Muslim religions have strict punishments for the slightest violations. Irrational. Christianity allows people to do whatever they like, therefore it is a better religion. LOL...Thats what you just said. Islam, nor Judaism punish for the slightest violations. I just love your one word sentence.  They pack such insight into them that no explanation would seem to be necessary, unless of course the reader demands more than"blind faith and obedience!"

Pot calling the kettle black? You place drunkard utterances and then exclaim huge conclusions, and then have the audacity to think that everyone should be as inebriated as you are in order to make the same sweeping jumps to such absurd conclusions. The world is not all entirely inebriated; we require more clarification, evidence, and an argument to find your absurd utterance.

You stated that a faith can be judged truthful about how it treats its people, and then followed with a typical Christian howler about �punishments� and �slightest violations�.

You are implying that Christianity is true because it is easier. That is irrational. Please tell me where this is wrong? I do not care if you are unable to keep up with this thread, that�s really a matter of your lack of background.

stephenc wrote: I am not such a person.  God gave me a brain to reason and ask questions.  If you would quit being so timid about your religion and attempt to give honest answers to honest questions, you would learn more.

Your questions are sophomoric and completely juvenile. You ask some of the same things, when replied to, you deflect, find trivial items to carp on, and then after 30,000 lines of your tautological dribble, you repeat the same odd utterances. Your questions are usually complex, with assumptions buried in them that are a direct result of your ignorance and weakness in critical thinking. I should not be forced to run in circles due to your lack of education and knowledge of religion. If you stop thinking so highly of yourself, and take time to crack open books, and take a basic critical thinking course, you might actually come to know how foolish your position has been, and maybe you would offer an apology!

stephenc wrote: And no, I did not say Christians could do whatever they want.  And NO your lie is not what I said.  Anyone can read what I wrote.  Well, maybe you can not, but others can.

Actually, that is exactly what you implied. If you do not like what the direct implication is, then stop sounding off like a broke drunkard and take the time to be coherent and clarify what you mean and how your conclusions are found.

stephenc wrote: andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: How does the religious punishments of Christianity compare to that of Judahism and Islam? Your "complex" question uses an assumption that is false. The comparison cannot be made given the ambiguity of Christian theology regarding "law" . Depends how you interpret the Pauline letters as to how much law from the Torah, or Hebrew Scriptures you will use. Christendom, for the most part, have chosen to reject Gd's law out of convenience, as they create their own, and that has been revised with utter failure for 2000 years.  Initially, I would take except with your characterization of my posting as "complex questions" but then I realize that to a person who likes to post one word sentences, anything containing more than two words maybe "complex."

Irrational ranting. Your opinion about my reply does not make your question any more valid. You are beginning one of your famous deflections. Find an excuse to ignore a valid, and factual point, and then move on like it is all ok. It is still a complex question.

stephenc wrote:   I could break it down to: How does the punishments of Christianity compare to that of Judahism? and How dooes the punishments of Christianity compare to that of Islam? Does that make it easier for you to understand?  Care to answer, perferrably with more than a one word answer?  But if it is a strain, don't!

The questions are just separate from the original question. The assumption is still buried in your �questions�, instead of the �one�.  Let me re-paste what you purposely avoided.

�Your "complex" question uses an assumption that is false. The comparison cannot be made given the ambiguity of Christian theology regarding "law" . Depends how you interpret the Pauline letters as to how much law from the Torah, or Hebrew Scriptures you will use.

Christendom, for the most part, have chosen to reject Gd's law out of convenience, as they create their own, and that has been revised with utter failure for 2000 years. �

You have to clarify time period and sect (Of Christianity).

Your lack of education about this topic makes it difficult to have a coherent discussion. Really.

StephenC wrote: As for YOUR BASELESS claim that "Christendom, for the most part, have chosen to reject Gd's law out of convenience, as they create their own, and that has been revised with utter failure for 2000 years. " What is your proof?

History! History recorded from the third century to the 20^th century.

STephenc wrote: Yes, some Christian religions have adopted pagan churches and traditions, but so has Islam!

That was one of those �drunkard like utterances�. You made, absolutely, no sense at all. Christians adopting churches?????? Pagan churches???? Traditions? Islam adopted a pagan church? Stephen, put the bottle down, or crack pipe, or whatever it is you are fixed to, and brush this up when you are a bit more coherent. LOL. Seriously.

stephenc wrote: Some Christians have elevated apostles to positions of semi-worship, but so has islam! Shall I continue or will removing the veil from your eyes offend you too much?

Your crack pipe is offensive, as your ranting is giving me a headache. What does any of this irrelevant dribble have to do with the unproven or argued assumption that you have buried in your question?

Answer: Nothing. It was a way for you to throw in another accusation about Islam. This is another waste of time.

stephenc wrote: andalus wrote: stephenc wrote: Remember, we all worship the same God, it is the messengers (including false messengers) that cause the problems! how do you know? How can you be sure? There is some merit to the theory that certain religions worship the Devil.  However, I am not prepared to make such a claim without proof.  I tend to accept doctrine unless it is faulty. For example, it is my understanding that Judahism, Christianity, and Islam all worship the God of Abraham.  And that the major differences is what the various prophets allegedly claimed. The real differences between Islam and the other two mentioned religions is that Christianity builds upon Judahism without changing anything.  Whereas, Islam changes the messages of the status of certain people in the other two religions.

Christianity has to build upon the Hebrew Scriptures because it is dependent up it, it is a must; Christianity is replacement theology, so it has to be built upon the HS. Its nature requires it. This is out of necessity. Replacement theology completely changes the Hebrew Scriptures, and alters their meanings, the nature of Gd, and the replaces the people of Judah with pork eating gentiles. Replacement theology also changes the nature of sin, evil, and the sacrificial system. You really do not know your theology, not mine, not that of the Jews, but you sound like a missionary!