Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Brussels Journal

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Comments (Page 8,651)

Showing posts 173,001 - 173,020 of198,743
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183687
Jul 27, 2013
 
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
Susan,
Thanks.
Anything specific about global events in 2014?
Thank you in advance.
Even if I knew specifically what was going to happen next year JOEL, I probably wouldn't disclose it, I believe I've seen scripture broken. Once VWD Day comes, the clock starts ticking regarding all biblical events culminating in my death and resurrection. 1984 was the "acceptable year of the Lord" so it's been 30 years and it's time.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183689
Jul 27, 2013
 
Thank you, Susan.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183690
Jul 27, 2013
 
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
Thank you, Susan.
1984 is a fiction novel written by George Orwell back in 1948.
1984 is possibly the definitive dystopian novel, set in a world beyond our imagining. A world where totalitarianism really is total, all power split into three roughly equal groups--Eastasia, Eurasia, and Oceania. 1984 is set in Oceania, which includes the United Kingdom, where the story is set, known as Airstrip One.

Winston Smith is a middle-aged, unhealthy character, based loosely on Orwell's own frail body, an underling of the ruling oligarchy, The Party. The Party has taken early 20th century totalitarianism to new depths, with each person subjected to 24 hour surveillance, where people's very thoughts are controlled to ensure purity of the oligarchical system in place. Figurehead of the system is the omnipresent and omnipotent Big Brother.

But Winston believes there is another way.

1984 joins Winston as he sets about another day, where his job is to change history by changing old newspaper records to match with the new truth as decided by the Party.

"He who controls the past, controls the future" is a Party slogan to live by and it gives Winston his job, but Winston cannot see it like that. Barely old enough to recall a time when things were different, he sets out to expose the Party for the cynically fraudulent organisation that it is. He is joined by Julia, a beautiful young woman much in contrast with Winston physically, but equally sickened by the excesses of her rulers.

Susan's role Joe on this thread is to play the fictional character of the beautiful girl from the novel 1984.
Her association with her sic doctor is the character Winston is to change past history to fit in with the character she is acting out.

Winston in the novel takes advantage of the beautiful girl and subjects her to mental and sexual abuse.

Susan is mentally convinced that she is the beautiful girl in the novel 1984.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183691
Jul 27, 2013
 
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>1984 is a fiction novel written by George Orwell back in 1948.
1984 is possibly the definitive dystopian novel, set in a world beyond our imagining. A world where totalitarianism really is total, all power split into three roughly equal groups--Eastasia, Eurasia, and Oceania. 1984 is set in Oceania, which includes the United Kingdom, where the story is set, known as Airstrip One.
Winston Smith is a middle-aged, unhealthy character, based loosely on Orwell's own frail body, an underling of the ruling oligarchy, The Party. The Party has taken early 20th century totalitarianism to new depths, with each person subjected to 24 hour surveillance, where people's very thoughts are controlled to ensure purity of the oligarchical system in place. Figurehead of the system is the omnipresent and omnipotent Big Brother.
But Winston believes there is another way.
1984 joins Winston as he sets about another day, where his job is to change history by changing old newspaper records to match with the new truth as decided by the Party.
"He who controls the past, controls the future" is a Party slogan to live by and it gives Winston his job, but Winston cannot see it like that. Barely old enough to recall a time when things were different, he sets out to expose the Party for the cynically fraudulent organisation that it is. He is joined by Julia, a beautiful young woman much in contrast with Winston physically, but equally sickened by the excesses of her rulers.
Susan's role Joe on this thread is to play the fictional character of the beautiful girl from the novel 1984.
Her association with her sic doctor is the character Winston is to change past history to fit in with the character she is acting out.
Winston in the novel takes advantage of the beautiful girl and subjects her to mental and sexual abuse.
Susan is mentally convinced that she is the beautiful girl in the novel 1984.
Wrong on all counts, Shamma. Where did that come from? There are many parallels in the book and my ministry but I am not a character in it. Doublethink, Newspeak, and the Ministry of Truth among others. Also, J. L. Emanuels birthday is given on page six, April 4, 1984. My calling began in August, 1983 and I went public with my beliefs at Old Dominion University on December 13, 1983. 1984 was simply the beginning of the end and was when I was spiritually reborn.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183692
Jul 27, 2013
 
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong on all counts, Shamma. Where did that come from? There are many parallels in the book and my ministry but I am not a character in it. Doublethink, Newspeak, and the Ministry of Truth among others. Also, J. L. Emanuels birthday is given on page six, April 4, 1984. My calling began in August, 1983 and I went public with my beliefs at Old Dominion University on December 13, 1983. 1984 was simply the beginning of the end and was when I was spiritually reborn.
So you rewrote the book 1984 to suit your own agenda.

The idea of frauds is to change histiry to suit their agenda.

The idea is if you can change the true history to suit your own agenda you gain power over truth.

Muhammad is the father of that philosophy.
Muhammad used lies and rewrote the history of Jesus Christ for personal power in founding his religion of Islam.

Frauds like you Susan come along in time all through history.

The Jews reject you because they spotted your fraud from the beginning of your hoax.

You have to re-invent your self Susan.
You have been exposed!
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183693
Jul 27, 2013
 
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: well if you like susan better than your jesus,
Where did i say that, lunatic? Go ahead and show me. You can't. you can even read a post properly.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
you take it up with her. and none of her's or your quotes, match what is written in TheTorah.
Every quote I have quoted comes straight from straight from authoritative Jewish sources, that don't make up their own versions of the Torah like you do.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
and has a lot to do, with your lack of recognition of being here in IT again.
I have no idea what you mean by IT and nor does anybody else. So stop with the stupid, self invented terms if you even wish to communicate at all.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
and i gave you the solution to believe in G-D,
I do, and I also believe that you have NOTHING to do with God any more than anybody else. Clear enough for you? Don't even dare to equate my lack in belief in you to having anything to do with belief in God. I simply don't believe a lunatic writing from a condo in Denver.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
and you have refused to believe in G-D here and now in TheTorah.
You can't even explain exactly what "now in TheTorah" means. It's just a stupid term you invented.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
so just because you forever reject the solution about believing in G-D,
I don't at all. I don't believe in YOU. What part don't you understand?
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
does not mean i have not given an solution.
Believe in God is no solution at all. Everybody here believes in God, they just don't believe YOU, and you are not God nor do you have anything to do with God, nor do you have any right at all to speak on behalf of God.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
as you deny all of your Book of Revelation,
You are not in Revelation.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
always takes place here in what you call genesis.
No it doesn't. And I would even ask you to quote the verse that says it does, but we both know that you can;'t find a verse that says this.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
that the world has forever rejected, being here in from G-D over and over.
That isn't even true. Some will be saved. Some are righteous. If you want to know who is unrighteous, you can start with yourself by daring to suggest that you speak for God.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
because you all do not want, to try and get it right for even once.
If getting it right only means believing in God, then plenty have it right. So far, that's all you can suggest, is that people believe in God. Well plenty do. Maybe it just isn't you stupid, invented, delusional form.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
even though this is the third time, G-D has given this same story to all of you and your grandmother of all precisely again.
It is NOT the third time and you have absolutely no basis for saying it is. NONE.
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
so Pehter is not the only one, who has denied Adam as Christ for the third time here in TheTorah.
Adam and Christ are NOT the same person and there is NOTHING in the scriptures that say they are. NOTHING. You are pulling all of this out of your azz.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183694
Jul 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
with your being no different than the rest of this subtle talking critter world. rejecting TheOnly Story G-D is ever going to give,
No, I reject YOU and your invented ideas that have no basis at all in the scriptures. Get it? Get it?
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183695
Jul 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>I ignore Jimmie and I don't normally respond to his posts. He is one of many nuts in the world who believe they are Jesus. At least I am original, all of the prophecies including the "crucifixion" have been fulfilled in my personal life.
You have been crucified? Oh for crying out loud, don't even bother to answer. I can't take it anymore. How do people get so crazy?
MUQ

Jubail, Saudi Arabia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183696
Jul 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Seeker wrote:
1.

Well now you know the rules of logic. Look, it's this simple. Here's a simple example. If a prophecy says that someone will have xyz qualities, and it specifically says they will be born in a certain town, if we are certain they were not born in that town, then that person CANNOT be the person who fulfills that prophecy, no matter if that person has other qualities that are similar to the prophecy or not.

02. If you want to discuss whether "from among your brothers" did not mean fellow Jews or Hebrews or Israelites or whatever, and instead meant from the descendants of Ishmael, then we can discuss it further. But other than that, there is no need for discussion because if that prophet was supposed to be a Jew, then it simply CANNOT be Muhammad. So it's your choice, but this is the only place that the discussion can ever lead to.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
11. Perhaps it is first time that you are doing a slow step by step discussion on ANY subject.
I think I have made it pretty clear why your methodology is unnecessary or even flawed and you are wasting my time.

2.

MUQ, let me put it to you in mathematical terms. If I say that 2+3-1=4, and you contend that it equals 5, then I will ask you how you could come to that conclusion. And if you say that all we have to do is to ignore the -1 and it will equal 5, what is anybody supposed to think about such cross eyed logic?
Ans.

01. My dear brother, it is OK to make any number of rules, but first we should have an example to “Test these rules”.

So we should start with some one on whom both of us agree. We both agree that Jesus IS prophesized in OT books, so it was much easy for us to complete the routine checking.

But I found that you faltered at the first two examples and I am asking you for another prophesy and you seem to have found cold feet, so to say.

02. My dear brother, how can I “Plunge into” about our prophet being mentioned in Bible, when we cannot even test your rules for some one whom we agree?

Is my approach logical or your approach?

03. My dear brother you keep on firing “tangent shots” at me about Deut 18:18 and I will show you that it has “MORE MATCHING POINTS” than those two “Most clear prophesies” about Jesus in Isaiah 9:6 (A Child is Born, to us a Son is given…) and Isaiah 7:14 (Emmanuel, Emmanuel..”

04. You say I am wasting your time, but really I am doing it in a slow step by step process.

First discuss some things on which we agree, before proceeding to topics on which we do not agree.

PS:

I said if some one says 2+3 = 5, will you agree with it?

From where you got that “-1”, by “faking and adding evidences”? That is what became habit of your people by “misinterpreting prophesies” about Jesus from OT books.

Just adding and subtracting till they fit Jesus.

My dear brother, how come you are not giving any more of those hundreds and thousands of prophesies that are so abundant in OT books that you cannot read even “one page” without finding a “New one”

This reluctance on your part is strange.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183697
Jul 27, 2013
 
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>So you rewrote the book 1984 to suit your own agenda.
The idea of frauds is to change histiry to suit their agenda.
The idea is if you can change the true history to suit your own agenda you gain power over truth.
Muhammad is the father of that philosophy.
Muhammad used lies and rewrote the history of Jesus Christ for personal power in founding his religion of Islam.
Frauds like you Susan come along in time all through history.
The Jews reject you because they spotted your fraud from the beginning of your hoax.
You have to re-invent your self Susan.
You have been exposed!
You do understand that you are blaspheming the name of the living God? And that blasphemy is a deadly sin? You are making yourself an enemy of God and they will get no warning when VWD Day comes. If you disagree with me Shamma, that is fine but you also obviously hate me, another deadly sin, and I don't even know you. Don't call me a fraud or a liar, there are witnesses to all of these things. The Jews reject me because they're expecting the Messiah to be a Jewish male. I am neither ethnically Jewish nor male. Blessed are all those who have hoped in me, have waited for me, and all those who have forgiven me.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183698
Jul 27, 2013
 
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
You have been crucified? Oh for crying out loud, don't even bother to answer. I can't take it anymore. How do people get so crazy?
I have fulfilled the prophecies Christians apply to the crucifixion of Jesus on 10/22/69. Every jot and verse. These are Psalms 22, 69, and Job 16. I'm glad that is behind me instead of ahead of me. That is why leviathan is called "the piercing serpent".
Isaiah 27:1. It was an act of neglect and abuse.
El Cid

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183699
Jul 27, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>I have fulfilled the prophecies Christians apply to the crucifixion of Jesus on 10/22/69. Every jot and verse. These are Psalms 22, 69, and Job 16. I'm glad that is behind me instead of ahead of me. That is why leviathan is called "the piercing serpent".
Isaiah 27:1. It was an act of neglect and abuse.
I call bullshit on your psychotic reverie, and your Jewish doctor who affirms your madness should lose his license to practice medicine.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183700
Jul 27, 2013
 
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>You do understand that you are blaspheming the name of the living God? And that blasphemy is a deadly sin? You are making yourself an enemy of God and they will get no warning when VWD Day comes. If you disagree with me Shamma, that is fine but you also obviously hate me, another deadly sin, and I don't even know you. Don't call me a fraud or a liar, there are witnesses to all of these things. The Jews reject me because they're expecting the Messiah to be a Jewish male. I am neither ethnically Jewish nor male. Blessed are all those who have hoped in me, have waited for me, and all those who have forgiven me.
Are suffering from VWD now Susan?

Von Willebrand Disease

Von Willebrand Disease is a condition first described in 1926 by Dr Erik Adolf Von Willebrand at the University of Helsinki in Finland. It is caused by low amounts or structural abnormalities in a protein called Von Willebrand Factor. This results in prolonged clotting and easy bleeding and bruising.

Von Willebrand Disease likely affects 1% of the US population (1 in every 100 people). The symptoms are often mild, and many people don't know they have it. Men and women are equally affected, but the condition is more common in Caucasians than other ethnic groups.

Causes

The Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) is a very large protein that helps platelets stick together and to injured blood vessel walls. This makes the protein critical for clot formation. Inherited genes result in low amounts of VWF (type 1 disease), abnormalities in the structure of VWF (type 2 disease) or the near absence of VWF (type 3 disease). Type 1 is most common and results in the mildest symptoms. Type 3 is rare, but severe.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183701
Jul 28, 2013
 
The marriage laws in Islam and out side of marriage sex violate the laws of God.

Does Scripture or God allow polygamy? The answer is NO!

In Matt. 19:4 we are told by Jesus that God created one “male and [one] female” and joined them in marriage. Mark 10:6-8: "But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.''For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,'and the two shall become one flesh'; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.
The two as one is the pattern on how marriage was to be conducted from the start. NOT three or four as one.

Eve was taken from Adams body and given back to him as his wife (singular) showing God’s approval of what the marriage union is to be like. God always spoke of man's “wife,” as singular, not wives. Notice it also states one father one mother.

It wasn’t until after the fall of Adam and Eve into sin (Gen. 4:23) that polygamy occurs. Cain was cursed, Lamech is a descendent of Cain who is the first to practice polygamy. The first time polygamous relationship is found in the Bible is with a thriving rebellious society in sin; when a murderer named “Lamech [a descendant of Cain] took for himself two wives”(Gen.4:19, 23).

The same Godly pattern of one man and one wife is lived by Noah. At the time of the Ark (Gen. 7:7), Noah took his one wife into the ark, all his son’s took one wife; God called Noah’s family righteous and pure. If polygamy were ordained of God, it would have made sense that Noah and his sons would have taken additional wives with them to repopulate the earth faster from the cataclysm.

This was to be a permanent union between man and woman (Genesis 2:18). Marriage represents a relationship of both spiritual and physical unity.

Hebrews 13:3-4 “Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.”

We have examples of saints in the Old Testament going off the commandment i.e. Solomon, but this is not God approved. Many of the patriarchs took more than one wife. Abraham, by recommendation of Sarah, took her maid. Jacob was tricked through Laban, into taking Leah first, and then Rachel, to whom he had been betrothed. Polygamy was not considered wrong in ancient cultures, but was a departure from the divine institution God ordained.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183704
Jul 28, 2013
 
Shamma wrote:
Polygamy was not considered wrong in ancient cultures, but was a departure from the divine institution God ordained.
Nathan to David:

"This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says:‘I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms."

The LORD gave David's masters' wives into his arms.

God did not operate on Adam to take out a rib. The number of ribs in a man and a woman, is same. The language is figurative. May be God created Eve from the remaining mud.

The two become one only in bed when making love. After it is over, they become two again.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183705
Jul 28, 2013
 
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Nathan to David:
"This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says:‘I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms."
The LORD gave David's masters' wives into his arms.
God did not operate on Adam to take out a rib. The number of ribs in a man and a woman, is same. The language is figurative. May be God created Eve from the remaining mud.
The two become one only in bed when making love. After it is over, they become two again.
1. God allows sin to happen, but that does mean God condones sin.
God punished David by raking the first child born from the sin between David and Bathsheba

2. By taking the rib of Adam and forming Eve from it we are one race, the Human race. The two became[one flesh].
So there was no difference between Adam and Eve's flesh.

When a man and women marries they become one flesh before sexual relations.
The marriage ceremony unites them as one,
Mr. and Mrs. John Doe.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183706
Jul 28, 2013
 
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>Are suffering from VWD now Susan?
Von Willebrand Disease
Von Willebrand Disease is a condition first described in 1926 by Dr Erik Adolf Von Willebrand at the University of Helsinki in Finland. It is caused by low amounts or structural abnormalities in a protein called Von Willebrand Factor. This results in prolonged clotting and easy bleeding and bruising.
Von Willebrand Disease likely affects 1% of the US population (1 in every 100 people). The symptoms are often mild, and many people don't know they have it. Men and women are equally affected, but the condition is more common in Caucasians than other ethnic groups.
Causes
The Von Willebrand Factor (VWF) is a very large protein that helps platelets stick together and to injured blood vessel walls. This makes the protein critical for clot formation. Inherited genes result in low amounts of VWF (type 1 disease), abnormalities in the structure of VWF (type 2 disease) or the near absence of VWF (type 3 disease). Type 1 is most common and results in the mildest symptoms. Type 3 is rare, but severe.
VWD stands for Vengeance, Wrath, and Destruction. It is more than one day, and is a general time. It starts with the combustion of my enemies and ends with the combustion of the wicked after my trial. It'll probably be about a year between the two events. Satan will also have a trial during that time and will receive the death penalty.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183707
Jul 28, 2013
 
Incest was allowed by God in the garden of Eden and years afterwards. Not only was Eve Adams' wife, she was also his daughter. Cain and his wife were siblings as were Abraham and Sarah. Polygamy was also allowed and approved by God thousands of years ago. Gods' law is flexible, except for the Testimony, the ten commandments, and will change with the times. It will state in the Torah if a law is perpetual or forever. Gods original and ultimate intent is monogamy.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183708
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
But I found that you faltered at the first two examples and I am asking you for another prophesy and you seem to have found cold feet, so to say.
I did not falter at all. There is nothing that excludes Jesus from being a fulfillment of those two prophecies. And, you only focused on the first part of Isaiah 9:6 while completely ignored the second, more relevant part of the titles ascribed to that person, and you KNOW you did that. The only thing you could say was that you believe that the context of the verse means it wasn't Jesus, but that is merely an opinion. There is nothing at all that excludes Jesus from being the person who fulfilled 9:6 and 7:14, and in fact, it still most likely looks like it is him.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
02. My dear brother, how can I “Plunge into” about our prophet being mentioned in Bible, when we cannot even test your rules for some one whom we agree?
You did test them. You cannot find anything that automatically disqualifies Jesus from being that person prophecized, and that is my first rule. If you did, then I would automatically say that Jesus is not the person prophecized in those verses.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Is my approach logical or your approach?
03. My dear brother you keep on firing “tangent shots” at me about Deut 18:18
How can it be a tangent shot when this was what the discussion was supposed to be about? You make no sense at all.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
and I will show you that it has “MORE MATCHING POINTS” than those two “Most clear prophesies” about Jesus in Isaiah 9:6 (A Child is Born, to us a Son is given…) and Isaiah 7:14 (Emmanuel, Emmanuel..”
It doesn't matter how many matching points there are if there is a very important part that immediately disqualifies him. If you found something that immediately disqualifies Jesus from being the one prophecized in 9:6 and 7:14, then i would agree that those verses are not about him, but nothing outright disqualifies him.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
04. You say I am wasting your time, but really I am doing it in a slow step by step process.
First discuss some things on which we agree, before proceeding to topics on which we do not agree.
How many times do I have to tell you that first someone should look at whether the person is immediately disqualified before we even move onto similarities. If you do not agree with that, then there is no reason to pursue this conversation any further.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
PS:
I said if some one says 2+3 = 5, will you agree with it?
From where you got that “-1”, by “faking and adding evidences”?
Okay, I think that's enough. You do not appear to be a very educated person and while you THINK you are being logical and reasonable, you really are not. If you couldn't properly grasp a mathematical example, then that says it all. There was no adding a -1,-1 was part of the original formula mentioned and the example was supposed to show that you can't just ignore part of the equation to make it give you the answer that you want. If you couldn't grasp that, then this is a pointless conversation. I'm not saying that you are stupid at all. I'm just saying that you have no real formal education to speak of, and I can tell by your response.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Just adding and subtracting till they fit Jesus.
There was NOTHING added or subtracted to Isaiah 9:6 nor 7:14, and there was NOTHING shown to automatically disqualify Jesus from being a fulfillment of those propechies. The most you could say is that the government or power was not on Jesus' shoulders, but I answered that Jesus is supposed to return and that will be the final fulfillment of that part. In the case of 7:14, you said it doesn't specifically say virgin, but I countered that how else can a mere birth like everyone normally has be a "sign" if it wasn't a special birth, i.e, a virgin birth?
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#183709
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
03. My dear brother you keep on firing “tangent shots” at me about Deut 18:18
I think this statement of yours says it all. Let me explain a basic rule of logical debate to you. I cannot be going off on a tangent by discussing the original point that the discussion was supposed to be about in the first place. Only someone who does NOT discuss the original point can be said to be going off on a tangent, and if you cannot understand that, then you have no solid grasp of the rules of logical debate and I have no further interest in pursuing this with you as it can never go anywhere. I cannot have a discussion with someone who does not understand the fundamentals of logical debate because it will never go anywhere. Again, you are not stupid, but you appear to have no real formal education at all in matters of logic and debate. You are making one logical error after another.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 173,001 - 173,020 of198,743
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••