Why don't Christians pay Muslims the same respect ?

[WinterHold]

Why would I lie about history or my holly book ?

That has to be the fucking funniest thing I've read today.

I rather suspect you don't intentionally tell falsehoods, you're just too stupid and ignorant to realize how many actual falsehoods drip from your mouth.

Thank you ^^

[paulpablo]

Theres no condition in the verse, its saying christians will be the most cordial to muslims, because amongst them are pastors and monks, they are humble.

Thats like me saying to my friend "this new guy in work is really cordial to get along with, its because he is quite humble and he is also kind" then when my friend gets his legs blown off by a shotgun fired by this man. Then in my friends dying words he says "You said he was cordial" Then me saying "yeh but he wasnt kind, so that breaks the condition of him being cordial"

That proves your poor judgement
#Note : the next line contains a stupid joke ; ignore it if you wanna cut to the point
First of all ; most "cordial & very nice people" might be serial killers ! so you should know that before telling your friend that the new guy is nice, never heard about fish ? he was the nicest old man on earth ; turns out to be a cannibal & a pedophile, WTF ? he ate a little girl's vagina (a true character, and I have the worst joking sense).

Secondly, the point.
I wasn't joking when I said that you have a poor judgement. You're not a god, so your judgement would always be inaccurate, to a limit .

Then, you specified a person (with his name), which is a second mistake.

The Quran deals with rules. Through out the book, some people are specified with names ; most of them are dead already.
The rule is where the condition stands.

For the example, the verse which specifies that Ibraham was praying. If wasn't praying in reality (and you've saw him), then yes ; the verse is false.

But when another verse says, that unbelievers are in hell because "they didn't believe in god", can we use this verse to judge anybody ?

Actually this is a verse of a general rule. Non-believers go to hell, but since we don't know the future, I can't say that you -paulpablo- are in hell. All I can say is : god is so divine, he doesn't accept you turning your back & not believe in him, and he punishes those who don't believe in him with hell.

but are you in hell ? as paulpablo ? I don't know, only god knows.

That's the difference. Here it was a general rule, christians are somehow better because they have monks & pastors who aren't arrogant.

So still, can I judge all christians ? nope, I don't if the monks & pastors ,the bumble ones, are still there or not.

i dont know what half of this babble means, the verse is false, theres no condition in the verse, either im just way more stupid than i thought or youre babbling to try and make excuses for the quran

---

it says christians will be most cordial TOWARDS MUSLIMS therefore the crusades is an example of them NOT being cordial towards muslims.
Your just attempting to bend over backwards and change word definitions to make the quran sound correct and failing really badly

---

you made the point that a serial killer might be described as nice, BUT NO ONE WOULD DESCRIBE THEM AS BEING NICE TO THE PERSON THEY KILLED

therefore the quran is wrong when it says christians will be most cordial towards believers, they werent, and it says they will be most cordial BECAUSE among them are monks who are humble
BECAUSE
because isnt a conditional word
it would be conditional if the sentence said
the christians will be most cordial towards muslims IF they are humble
but it doesnt, it says BECAUSE so you can stop trying to use deceptive tactics to change words
thanks

---

So still, can I judge all christians ? nope, I don't if the monks & pastors ,the bumble ones, are still there or not.

more nonsense babble, according to you the quran is always right, and it just told you christians do have monks and pastors among them, so if the quran is always right then christians must always have monks and pastors among them, if they dont then the quran is wrong

---

Finally just to clear things up for you let me explain how people use the word "because" in sentences since you are having difficulty.

The cat didnt feel hungry anymore BECAUSE it ate the fish

You can assume that the cat DID eat the fish in this sentence

The man was rich BECAUSE he made wise investments

you can assume the man DID make wise investments in this sentence because as it says at the begining, he is rich and its because he made the investments.

The christians will be most cordial to the believers BECAUSE among them are monks and pastors who are humble

You can assume the christians are going to be most cordial towards muslims because there will be pastors and monks among them who are humble.

The sentence would be inacurate if
1 the christians didnt have monks or pastors among them, because the sentence says they do have monks and pastors among them, it doesnt say IF they have monks and pastors among them

2 the christians arent cordial towards muslims

3 the monks and pastors arent always humble

hence it is inacurate, no verbal gymnastics no excuses, its just simly wrong

[Aractus]

1- How are they going to get salvation if they didn't believe in Jesus's sacrifice ?

Are you serious, or are you intentionally ignoring the fact that I've already answered this for you?

2-It's not as simple as you describe it : )
http://www.gotquestions.org/Muhammad-Bible.html

Again it's hard to take you seriously. John 16 Jesus talks about God the Father ie Jehovah, and you claim it's about Muhammad and that Muhammad, a mere prophet, sent Jesus to Earth???

Translation errors are severe in the bible..and even when the word revealed, nobody believes in it.. it's still wrong, even though

It is the plural of machamad, which means “lovely, cute, or desirable.” Although it is the root word of Muhammad

Nope, you've been taught wrong. "Translation errors are severe in the bible." You have no clue as to what you're attesting. We have every book of the Bible in the language it was written. If the NT wasn't written in Greek there would be clear evidence, there isn't any. If the OT was written originally in Greek or some other language, there would be evidence - and there isn't. You've simply been taught to believe what you're told without evidence.

[Zen Badger]

You've simply been taught to believe what you're told without evidence.

Can't........... Breathe...........

Too................. Much.............. Irony................In......................One ..................Sentence...................

[Confused Ape]

You've simply been taught to believe what you're told without evidence.

There's no conclusive proof that Jesus ever existed. All that Tacitus says on the matter is that some kind of superstition broke out again after someone had been executed and the superstition had spread to Rome.

The New Testament says that some people claimed they'd seen Jesus after his death. People have claimed they saw Elvis after his death. Do the Elvis reports prove that Christianity is true or just indicate that humans throughout time have thought they've seen people who are dead?

[LastPoet]

I bet that more people claim that Elvis existed, than 2000 years ago, people claimed Jesus existed. I believe more that Elvis existed, because you know, there is footage, sound and DNA to give evidence for his shenanigans, or miracles as christians dub their godboy, I do appreciate Elvis contribution to the evolution of rock&roll, but I prefer the tuba:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD0o5Cjhi...Jw&index=1

Those of you that don't understand Portuguese, are fucked

[Confused Ape]

I bet that more people claim that Elvis existed, than 2000 years ago, people claimed Jesus existed. I believe more that Elvis existed, because you know, there is footage, sound and DNA to give evidence for his shenanigans,

But is there any concrete proof that Elvis sightings after his death were more than just subjective experiences? Some conspiracy theorists claimed that Elvis faked his own death and that's why people occasionally saw him. Others believed he was dead and claimed that they'd seen his ghost.

[thesummerqueen]

I think the comparison is that even though people both claimed sightings or whatnot, Elvis at least has reliable documentation of existing. Jesus does not.

[catfish]

I think it's important to note that TV and film is a relatively new invention and that when Yeshua supposedly came back, people didn't recognise him...
.

[Confused Ape]

I think the comparison is that even though people both claimed sightings or whatnot, Elvis at least has reliable documentation of existing. Jesus does not.

Going by what Tacitus said it's likely that some weird cult started up in Judea after somebody was executed. I don't find this astonishing because people have claimed to see dead people in modern times and weird cults/religions have started in modern times.

UFO Religions

A UFO religion is any religion in which the existence of extraterrestrial (ET) entities operating unidentified flying objects (UFOs) are an element of belief. Typically, adherents of such religions believe the ETs to be interested in the welfare of humanity which either already is, or eventually will become, part of a preexisting ET civilization. Others may incorporate ETs into a more supernatural worldview in which the UFO occupants are more akin to angels than physical aliens; this distinction may be a little blurred within the overall subculture. These religions have their roots in the tropes of early science fiction (especially space opera) and weird fiction writings, in ufology, and in the subculture of UFO sightings and alien abduction stories. Raelism is the largest UFO religion in the world.[1]

The above all started in the 20th Century.

What I'm really puzzled about is why the Jewish followers of some weird cult in Judea wanted to tell Greek speaking Gentiles about it.

PS:

I think it's important to note that TV and film is a relatively new invention and that when Yeshua supposedly came back, people didn't recognise him... .

We're told that the people who claimed to have seen him eventually believed it was him. This isn't to say that somebody couldn't have started a weird cult deliberately by claiming they'd seen an executed man after his death, of course. The executed man would need to be someone a bit newsworthy for Jews at the time otherwise everyone would have said "Who? I've never heard of him being thought of as a Messiah."