Re: in response to Jochen

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Debate ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Mohamed Ghounem on February 11, 1998 at 03:03:00:

In Reply to: Re: in response to Jochen posted by Jochen Katz on February 11, 1998 at 00:53:55:

Dear brother Jochen,
I say Hello you say Good-bye (Beatles)

{You live in a different world. Calling others a liar is an attack in my vocabulary. But if you redefine the meaning of language, then you have to talk to those who follow your defintions. I stick to the conventional meanings.}

It is an attack if intended so, I may through a rock at you to attack you or to scare away a evil dog by your side, one is an attack, the other is asistance, don't mention it :-)

{I have made you that offer already months ago, but you continue to complain instead of going to work and write responses for the site. Why are you such a coward?}

They have all been answered last I checked, if you have any that aren't answered, give it or them to me and I will answer it a.s.a.p. it may take a day or two as I am unussually still tired from the jet lag but you'll get the answer.

{Write a response and I will put it up. And I will answer you on the site. But this silly exchange here is ended NOW.}

You like the indoors and I like the public :-) again "His malice may be concealed by deception, but his wickedness will be exposed in the assembly." Proverbs 26:26 The mountain ussually comes to Muhammad.

{On this very message board, you have posted many times "Bible contradictions" Can you point me to even one of these postings that you called "difficulties in the TRANSLATION of the Bible"? Or did you not call them errors or contradictions?}

There is a major difference and you know it, the Bible is accepted as the word of God in English by the common Christian. The Bibles in English are called _VERSIONS_OF_THE_BIBLE. While the Qur'an in English on the other hand is called "_TRANSLATION_OF_THE_QUR'AN".

The second point is that there is no original Bible, it is gone, therefore when a _new_ Bible comes out (i.e. New International Version), it is accepted as the new word of God which supersedes the previous word of God. According to Islam, there is only 1 Qur'an and is only accepted in Arabic, any translation is not equal to the original as any linguist would explain.

Thirdly, If I Say "Bible Contradictions", there is nothing false in my statement, as the King James Version is accepted as the Bible/Word of God by common Christians, not a translation of the word of God. Why? because the Aramayic language Jesus spoke is extinct.

For example: If I picked up a KJV Bible in English and told a Christian "this is not the Bible, it is only a _translation_", they would deny it and say _God_understands_all_languages_ and therefore when the Bible is written in English, it is accepted as the word of God.

A simple question if you are saying that the Bibles are all only translations, then why don't you study the original, also the Qur'an, as you know, in English is a translation, so why don't you study the original?

In summuary, to say 'difficulties in the Qur'an' is a deceptive statement, you can say "difficulties in the translation of the Qur'an" since you only quote from translators of the Qur'an, not from Allah, or do you not know the difference yet? Ikrak Bism Rabina.

{I don't want to attack you. No, I only kindly point out your hypocrisy.}

Ha Ha.

{It is not me, but the author does not say every Muslim persecutes Christians. He points out concrete cases of persecution. And they are documented. Can you tell me one of them that is not real?}

Who ever it is that can be found through you site writes > "The Persecution of Christians in the Islamic World"

You write {But nowhere did we ever say "All Muslims ..."}

wrong again, what do you Jochen, think is meant by "Islamic World", does this not engulf _all_Muslims_ , does (Islamic World) mean a couple of Muslims, a few Muslims, some Muslims, or All Muslims? Well, what's the answer?

Second of all, is it because the coptic onesided stereotyping media says it is true, does that mean it is true, you admit that you haven't been to Egypt and yet you claim these claims are true. Do I have integrity, do I lie from what you've seen, I say I have been to Egypt and that your claims are so one-sided that it is to the point of being untrue, Egypt is one of the most peaceful countries I have been to, I have seen many churches in Egypt and they and the goers are not complaining, confused but not complaining.

{Stealing and murdering is against the law in the US too. And it happens anyway. Should it not be reported because it is not the law? does it not happen because it is not the law? I find your arguments incredibly strange.}

Let me clarify, it should be reported to increase the local law enforcers, but not groups should be slandered along with the law breakers.

For example, we should not say "A black man stold" because we would be labeling all black males as thieves. The proper way to give media news is "an individual murdered", any thing else is labeling innocent groups.

{It is not. Beginning of January a friend of mine, a convert was arrested in Egypt and held for a whole week, and beaten, just because he was a convert to Christianity.}

Yeah right, I'm still waiting for talkative Tim.

Peace and Blessings,
Your Brother in Islam: Mohamed

Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 

Subject  : Re: Re: in response to Jochen 
Comments:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Debate ] [ FAQ ]

WWWAdmin 2.0a © 1997 Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company, All Rights Reserved