People said things the Christ and others had not said

[MHz]

You should be more concerned about why your version is so different than the one the Bible promotes.

 

[Ludlow]

No, you didn't. Why is your opinion of who Jesus Christ is any more "right" than what the Jews say or what the Christians say?


I say that the Quran has it wrong. Christ IS the Saviour that the Jews were waiting for. That he came to earth to forgive mankinds sins. That he was crucified, died, and was buried. On the 3rd day he rose from the dead and he now sits at the right hand of his father.

THAT is what happened. Mohamed chose to ignore that fact, so that he could raise himself up above the Son of God. So that he could disregard what Christ preached and go on his murderous rampage.

And,,,as others have done, to justify his reprobate actions.

 

[gerryh]

Your own post says there was no battle. When any European Nation won a new territory were ant 'taxes' imposed on the people??
Were the wars in the Middle-east or Europe. If the answer is Europe then Muslims were the invaders, if the wars between the Christians and Muslims was in the Middle-east the European Christian were the invaders. Not that hard to comprehend gerr. BTW the war still seems to be going on and the Christians have a long way to go before they can call it a 'win'.
.

say what? Where the hell do you get your history and geography from? 2 years before his death, Mohamed attacked the Byzantine Christians without provocation. That was the one and only time Mohamed went up against "Christians". YOU are the one that implied that Mohamed was only defending himself the many times he went to war. As a matter of fact, you implied that he was protecting himself against European Christians on a "Holy war". The crusades happened centuries after Mohamed died.

You are still making shyte up.

 

[lone wolf]

If Jesus died in 30AD and some saw and heard and touched him then they were around to be eye-witnesses to the events they wrote about. It's not rocket science but you do have to pay attention.

I'm pretty sure it was legitimized when a few people were doing the 'signs following'. 325AD was setting up which copies followed the originals the best, by 450AD Rome was using the corrupt Latin version of the Bible.

Are you stupid enough to wear a neon sign in front of a police station saying "I Have Dope" because that's exactly the scenario should you happen across a Roman soldier or one of his collaborators. Please feel free to avail yourself of library services - even those online. There was no magic....

 

[Ludlow]

If Jesus died in 30AD and some saw and heard and touched him then they were around to be eye-witnesses to the events they wrote about. It's not rocket science but you do have to pay attention.

I'm pretty sure it was legitimized when a few people were doing the 'signs following'. 325AD was setting up which copies followed the originals the best, by 450AD Rome was using the corrupt Latin version of the Bible.

The evolution of the English bible took several hundred years. With several different translations. Not sure where you get your information. Still and all it remains a collection of books written by men. Prone to exaggeration,,and hearsay.

Your own post says there was no battle. When any European Nation won a new territory were ant 'taxes' imposed on the people??
Were the wars in the Middle-east or Europe. If the answer is Europe then Muslims were the invaders, if the wars between the Christians and Muslims was in the Middle-east the European Christian were the invaders. Not that hard to comprehend gerr. BTW the war still seems to be going on and the Christians have a long way to go before they can call it a 'win'.


Still better than Pete and Repete.

I see spelling is lost on you as well. Allow me,,, "repeat"

 

[lone wolf]

Repete, in this case, may be one of a pair of trolls who tag-team they who are deemed pick-on worthy

 

[Ludlow]

ya think?

 

[MHz]

say what? Where the hell do you get your history and geography from? 2 years before his death, Mohamed attacked the Byzantine Christians without provocation. That was the one and only time Mohamed went up against "Christians". YOU are the one that implied that Mohamed was only defending himself the many times he went to war. As a matter of fact, you implied that he was protecting himself against European Christians on a "Holy war". The crusades happened centuries after Mohamed died.

You are still making shyte up.

Do you read your own posts or not. If you do then how many Christians died in this 'major battle'. Answer from your post is 'Zero, there were some people who were 'conquered' to the extent they paid taxes to a different organization. Not really Attila the Hun kind of behavior.

" He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting "agreements" from northern tribes. They could enjoy the "privilege" of living under Islamic "protection" (read: not be attacked by Islam), if they paid a tax."

Repete, in this case, may be one of a pair of trolls who tag-team they who are deemed pick-on worthy

Thank you.

 

[gerryh]

Back to the beginning. I originally posted concerning Mohamed ignoring who Christ was and what Christ taught so that he could go on his murderous rampage.

Then you came up with this.......

Since the 'Christian warriors' came from European Nations it would seem that they brought the war to the mid-east or do you think Muslims were chanting, 'Come and get us.'

There were no European Christian warriors in the middle east during the time of Mohamed.

You didn't answer the question. Your statement implies that Mohamed's warring was a direct result of the Crusades (Christian Holy Wars). Either answer the question, or admit that you don't know and got it wrong.

I'm pretty sure when you are attacked in your own land it is called 'defensive' and it is the (Christian) invaders that is the warring party. Please try and follow along.

When was Mohamed attacked in his own land and by who?

again, when were the crusades, and when was Mohamed's conquests.

 

[MHz]

The evolution of the English bible took several hundred years. With several different translations. Not sure where you get your information. Still and all it remains a collection of books written by men. Prone to exaggeration,,and hearsay.


I see spelling is lost on you as well. Allow me,,, "repeat"

The preface of the 1611KJV.

"S. Jerome maketh no mention of the Greek tongue, wherein yet he did excel, because he translated not the old Testament out of Greek, but out of Hebrew.


If you ask what they had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New. "



The OT was translated by Jews in Jerusalem just in case you want to argue that Gentiles couldn't translate Hebrew.

When was Mohamed attacked in his own land and by who?

Change it to Muslims and the answer becomes European Christian Zealots. The same holds true for this century and the last one.

 

[gerryh]

Change it to Muslims and the answer becomes European Christian Zealots. The same holds true for this century and the last one.

I wasn't talking about Muslims, I was talking about Mohamed. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

 

[MHz]

Apparently, as I was referencing Muslims in general. (rather than one that lived for a short time compared to how long the war has been going on)

 

[Curious Cdn]

Jesus never mentioned homosexuality ... not one little peep. He was probably as surrounded by it as we are, chances are but it made no impression on him that was recorded. Yet, the evangelicals seem to live just to treat the marginal of the world badly based on what they would have liked him to say.

It's all a test no doubt but the question is, just who is being tested for what?

 

[gerryh]

Apparently, as I was referencing Muslims in general. (rather than one that lived for a short time compared to how long the war has been going on)

and yet you quoted my statement concerning Mohamed.