What did Allah ever suffer. Was his prophet ever crucified, publicly shamed, or beaten?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

I tell you this as politely as is possible, I read nothing you send me, don't waste your time I don't deal with the intolerant wretches of society.

I could respond by typing all the cruelty portrayed in the Torah and demanded by Yahweh, the accepted human sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter as a condition of victory in war, the incestuous daughters who seduced there own father, the fact that Yahweh allegedly kills infants en masse, the murder of Prophets, the Baal worship, the weeping for Tammuz and the massacre of Canaan.

The cursing of innocent Canaan because of Ham seeing Noah naked and telling his brothers who covered him up without seeing his shame, no harm was done he was just drunk.

The idolatry of Solomon. The evil Kings of Judah and Israel. Moses forcing the Levites to kill the calf worshippers after making them drink water and goldust which made them easier to kill, high basically. Korah.

Eve being blamed for the sin of Adam who knew what he was "eating."

The constant genocide.

And it would be only the icebergs tip.

So waste all the time quoting from books you only look for negativity in, ignoring both context and positivity, because your Tanakh is at least 1,000 times worse AND your New Testament is so corrupted the true story is gone forever corrupted by paganism, dying ressurection godmen are as old as Tammuz, maybe older.

Not to mention that the Pauline epistles are the words of the king of antichrists who despises Jews and the Apostles as well as James the Just and especially Peter.

Both respond to his trouble making teachings against the Law in their epistles and James in Acts by making him take a vow before the Romans rescue him from an assassination plot that ends with Paul going to Nero for vindication (unrecorded).

Your religion has serious issues. You claim to live by the Bible though Paul say the Torah/Law is "dead", "a curse" that it CAUSES and is responsible for sin, people are "slaves" to the Law, etc.

All Islam does is correct the error of believing Jesus is a God and lose the apostate teachings of Paul alone of all the Christian Prophets.

He was a false prophet.

"Do you want to be shown, senseless person, Faith without works is barren/dead?" James 2:20

How we know he is talking about Paul is Paul's main teaching is faith alone, not works, leads to salvation. That is, faith in his teaching that Jesus died as a sin offering for anyone who believes what Paul says.

And especially because of 2:21

"Was not our ancestor Abraham justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the alter?22. You see that faith was active along with his works, faith was brought to completion by the works."

24. You see that a person is justified by works and not faith alone.

26. Just as the body is dead without the spirit, so is faith dead without works.

Do I need to supply the location of the passage where Paul used Abraham as an example of how faith alone justifies "us"?

Or any of his passages that say faith alone, not works "justifies us"?


2 Peter 3:14

"So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this in all his letters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction...Beware that you are not carried away with the error of the lawless and lose your own stability."

A simple person might see Peter as complimenting Paul, but they can't see the bigger picture. "Brother" (read: NOT an Apostle) Paul is the "Lawless" whose writings lead the "ignorant and unstable" to "destruction" to THIS DAY.

Hidden within a feigned compliment is information of real value. "Hard to understand" is not a compliment. His followers also twist other writings/scripture. Lawless theology, Pauline theology, leads to instability.

According to Paul, "Knowledge puffs up."

3:18 (the Gematric number of El Shaddai)

"But grow in grace and knowledge. of our Lord and Savior..."

What knowledge was Paul talking about?

The knowledge of Jesus, or the personally knowing Jesus that all legitimate Apostles had experience with that he did not.

I can go on for days using just the New Testament.

The Old... years.

a reply to: irenialilivenka

You seem to have a vested emotional interest in maintaining the 'purity' of a particular religion. One that happens to be unoriginal, just a version of many others that have come before.

a reply to: GodEmperor

I have interest in defending the innocent from the lies of the hate filled hypocrite.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: irenialilivenka

You seem to have a vested emotional interest in maintaining the 'purity' of a particular religion. One that happens to be unoriginal, just a version of many others that have come before.

You seem to have a vested interest in being uninteresting.

What is wrong with Arabs and Persians, every nationality now, having a new Prophet and new religion based on another Semitic religion?

Christianity did it, complain about that.

Al-Baqarah (the Heifer) 2:62

The believers, the Jews, the Christians and the Sabaens--- all those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good deeds----will be rewarded by their Lord; they shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Now, maybe you could show me a passage in the Bible that allows non-Christians the opportunity to enter the Kingdom of God.

Paul curses the "other Gospel" taught through the Apostles by Jesus, delivers people to Satan (his words).

Christians are taught if you are not a Christian you will go to hell.

Islam teaches all the Monotheistic religions go to Heaven.

Yet "half of all Muslims" want to harm you...?

Who do you think you are fooling?

YOU have been fooled, and should keep it to yourself. Unless looking foolish is your goal in which case carry on.

So you are claiming half of all Muslims don't follow the Qur'an? (Because it says your religion is fine, you can go to Heaven without converting to Islam).

So why are you using it as "evidence?"

Because you don't know the book well, only concentrate on passages that may sound or be violent, but nothing close to the senseless violence of the Tanakh or the human sacrifice vicarious atonement because "Jesus suffered for your sins" paganism of the New Testament.

Should we talk about the Crusades?

European Catholics, destitute and ignorant of science, were envious of the golden age of Islamic scientific inquiry and ressurection of Greek Wisdom by Muslims and the prosperity of the Muslim world.

They went to Jerusalem and MURDERED EVERY MAN, WOMEN and CHILD who was not a Christian.

How Christ-like.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: irenialilivenka

No one is arguing about how the word translates into another language. I am saying what is meant by the words is different. If you can't understand such a basic concept I really will just have to agree to disagree because you can't argue with irrationality.

What, exactly, are you disagreeing with, facts?

"I am saying what is meant by the words is different."

No, all of them mean God, Elohim and Allah at least, Yahweh is translated Lord, but doesn't mean it, but is the Hashem and refers to the SAME GOD in meaning and factually speaking.

If your ''basic concept" was not false, I would agree with you.

The God of Moses is Allah/Yahweh/Elohim.

The same God as Abraham, Jesus and Mohammed.

I think the simple concept of the fact that all three religions absolutely factually DO worship the same God by whatever name regardless of the definition of alternate epithets...Is a concept you KNOW IS true...But wish wasn't on account of your hatred of Muslims.

Or ACTUALLY don't understand, in which case nobody can help you save Allah Himself.

Allah means The God or just God in English because we have capital letters.

Why are you pretending I am inept when you are trying so hard to make a fact...not a fact?

I love this debate, where are you? I love making haters look foolish.

Come back!!

Seeing more and more Muslims converting. I think they are the ones whose spiritual search is genuine and comes from a heart that seeks Truth.

Your Thread has quickly degenerated into a polarised 'debate' with most posts being deflective and not actually addressing your query.

As to the suffering of Allah or his prophet, the only thing they have suffered is jealousy. To my mind, Mohammed is only 2nd to Paul in his jealousy of Jesus Everything that flows from that jealousy is designed to punish God for not making or choosing them to be His son.

a reply to: teapot

Damn, I gave you a star.

Then you accuse Mohammed of being jealous of a man he honored more than himself.

I take back my star in spirit.

originally posted by: teapot
Seeing more and more Muslims converting. I think they are the ones whose spiritual search is genuine and comes from a heart that seeks Truth.

Wise words.

Your Thread has quickly degenerated into a polarised 'debate' with most posts being deflective and not actually addressing your query.

As to the suffering of Allah or his prophet, the only thing they have suffered is jealousy. To my mind, Mohammed is only 2nd to Paul in his jealousy of Jesus Everything that flows from that jealousy is designed to punish God for not making or choosing them to be His son.

A made up lie. What makes you think Mohammed wanted to be the son of a God who has no son?

Foolishness. I will answer my own question.

Mohammed was a monotheist, like Jesus, who was not (other than honorarily titled) the actual son of God.

God has no need to have a son.

MANY people are called son of God in the Bible, it is not literal and there is no reason for Mohammed to be jealous.

When did you prophecy this... Mohammed was jealous... nonsense?

Have you been summoning demons?

Demons lie. So do people who make claims without evidence. Which you seem to have done.

Why do you contradict yourself, your single comment degenerated, this thread evolved.

a reply to: irenialilivenka

Both Mohammed and Paul used the name of Jesus to add gravitas to their positions that they and their words were the word of God.

Your view that anyone who does not agree with your take on spiritual matters is as fascist in essence as Mohammed's exhortations to his followers that they should kill anyone that disagrees with them/him.

a reply to: teapot

I don't think Mohammed is guilty of what I agree Paul is guilty of.

You really haven't a clue what you are talking about though, tbh.

Mohammed didn't use Jesus, he accepted him as the Messiah because he was a man of faith.

Mohammed is the exact opposite of Paul.

Paul invented false doctrines, Mohammed only continued a past tradition and made it available WITHOUT PAUL who is a false prophet in Islam and the likely reason Islam exists, not personally but how he corrupted Jesus Nazarene faith.

Mohammed restored it. This is a fact. Islam is the closest thing in existence today to Nazarene Judaism.

originally posted by: teapot
a reply to: irenialilivenka

Both Mohammed and Paul used the name of Jesus to add gravitas to their positions that they and their words were the word of God.

Your view that anyone who does not agree with your take on spiritual matters is as fascist in essence as Mohammed's exhortations

Did you want to restructure your sentence, because you didn't include my "thoughts" about people who disagree with me AT ALL.

You expressed YOUR thoughts that Mohammed was a "fascist."

Mentioned THAT I disagree with people, but not about what or why I am not allowed to disagree with people. I THINK you mean my actions of disagreement are as fascist as...

Who are you, the thought police?

This is not "my view" in the first place, nor do I think Mohammed or his exhortations are fascist, in essence or otherwise.

to his followers that they should kill anyone that disagrees with them/him.

Problem with your statement is he actually DIDN'T teach this.

Read the chapter called the red heifer, where it is states "Jews, Christians and Sabaeans, people of scripture, shall have no fear on the Day of the Lord, nor any grief."

NONE of those people agreed with Mohammed 100% and in some cases at all.

Yet he didn't say to kill them or even that they were excluded from heaven.

So you are angry because you want me to agree with you, and accusing me of doing what you are doing, while I am not, haven't been.

If I disagree regarding facts, it is because I am fond of facts.

If spiritually it is my right to disagree with anyone at anytime, and is not fascist. I leave people to their beliefs after making known my personal thoughts.

a reply to: irenialilivenka

You seem upset.

And no, I speak as I find and will not be restructuring my sentences to suit you.

So far, none of your deflective posts have addressed the question posed in the OP:

What did Allah ever suffer. Was his prophet ever crucified, publicly shamed, or beaten?

What do you think the 'apostates' featured in the video linked in the OP deserve for their conversions?

a reply to: teapot

Are you wishing for me to be upset?

I don't get upset at words on screens...Or hardly ever.

I just don't like liars, racists and the like.

But upset? I have nothing about which TO be upset, so both no and, why would you think that?

a reply to: teapot

I read my own message, I don't get the impression that if it was not me that person would be upset.

Factually accurate?

Definitely.

Upset?

No.

a reply to: teapot

If you look through my history, even other threads, I really don't debate things in which I'm not educated.

So most often what happens is an angry fella like yourself loses a debate on a factual basis and responds by calling me things that I am not, like upset. Bias. Crazy, I have heard it all.

But look who gets the last, silence ushering word in in every thread I participate in.

So what is there FOR me to be upset about?

Do I feel sadness at:

Discrimination?

Absolutely.

Islamaphobes?

Sure.

That you feel bad about being rebuked?

I really do. I wish you were more enlightened. You sadden me.

originally posted by: irenialilivenka
a reply to: GodEmperor

I have interest in defending the innocent from the lies of the hate filled hypocrite.

Religion is a barbaric and antiquated form of social control. Islam, like the rest of them, should remain isolated to the history books. A cult that gains widespread popularity is called a religion. The Middle East at one time was a global center for science and art, then religious theocracies took hold, descended into a Dark Age that endures to this very day. It's not unique, Europe experienced it's own Dark Age for hundreds of years, thanks to religion; with very little in the way of scientific discoveries for hundreds of years.

Allah does not suffer, because it does not exist, a thing that doesn't exist experiences nothing.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Says you.

I don't actually care what you think about religion, honestly, I don't.

Nor do I agree with you.

a reply to: GodEmperor

You don't have to have a positive opinion of religion to recognize its good aspects, community, discipline, Wisdom, morality.

It is not always bad. Dark times happened, no one is denying that.

But when you categorize religion as you have, you are just revealing you are a negative energy in the world with negative thoughts and opinions.

OPINIONS.

a reply to: irenialilivenka

You continue to fail to address the OP

What did Allah ever suffer. Was his prophet ever crucified, publicly shamed, or beaten?

All you have done is attack anyone whose opinion differs to yours.

Why is that?