Exactly, what is the purpose of life if you bound yourself to some book?

Essentially I could do the same thing if I wrote a book and years later people worship whatever creature I created and follow the teachings presented. The bible tells us nothing more than be good or die. Same goes for the Qur'an.

Theory wrote:Exactly, what is the purpose of life if you bound yourself to some book?

Essentially I could do the same thing if I wrote a book and years later people worship whatever creature I created and follow the teachings presented. The bible tells us nothing more than be good or die. Same goes for the Qur'an.

Simple, to live your life the righteous life.

Not really. There are many books out there, Bible, Torah, hindu texts etc etc. I follow the true one though. The one that came from God. As He knows best.

In no way does the Qur'an say "Be good or Die". Otherwise, many people would have "die"ed already...

Ahmed IV wrote:Well for one...what is Roman Catholicism? In other words what defines it?

Let's focus first on What is the Church? The Catholic Church's name comes from the
Greek word Katholikos. It means Universal. It is Universal. That's why we call it so. As Jesus Christ commanded, he instituted a teaching body to preach the Word to all, hence it being Universal.

Observe, he did not make a book as like the Qur'an. He made a Church. (We shall atend to the Bible later if that is fine with u.) But does Scripture, or in this case the Gospels (Wat u may call Hadiths about Jesus) mention of such? Yes it does!

According to the Gospel of the Apostle Matthew - 28:19-20


Observe how he instructs his apostles to teach the Word to all? That is Universality, Katholicos, Catholicus, Catholic!


That Ahmed is a basic and important pillar of our faith. That Jesus instructed and called for Universal teaching. Do u follow? Can we move on? If so then I will explain how he did this.

(Of course it is fine, you may quote the Bible, Torah, whatever you liek, just like I could quote the Qur'an )

Phoenix I understand that I point...however I do not find it releveant. My question was asking what is the Bible, or as you say Catholic Church, when there are hundreads of different scriptures?

Jesus founded a Church. Not a book. I hope I made this clear.

Now the reason why there are many versions of the Bible is simple. Language change. The most accurate Bible the Catholic Church (or that any Church) has in existence is the Latin Vulgate. Finished in the Year 382 AD by Saint Jerome, it is the original Catholic Bible. It was worked on for years with careful translation from the original Hebrew and Greek Texts and was commissioned by Pope Damasus 1 during the Council of Rome in 382. It is in theory the original Holy Bible. Approved by the Council of Carthage in 397. So, do not say that we do not have a one, unified text. If u want the original, infallible Bible, it's the Latin Vulgate. Even the Protestants used it to create their heretical Bible, the King James Version.

Now ask urself the question. How many people around the world uses Latin as their Native Language? No one. It's a dead language. So we can't simply say "Oh, let's read the Latin Vulgate!". It can't be done unlike the Qur'an written in Arabic since Arabic is still alive last time I checked.

So we must translate it! The easrliest translation of the Latin Vulgate to English was the Douay-Rheims Bible. Made in the Year 1582, it stood as the face the Catholic Bible against the Protestant Reformation and was even used by the Protestants to produce the King James Bible. (See how much they relied on us Catholics.)

Now the Douay-Rheims is brilliant and all. I mean, who can reject a direct translation of the Latin Vulgate into English? Especially one made by the highly regarded English College in Douay, France. But the style it was written on became harder to understand as the English language continued to progress. (Ever tried reading Shakespear?) So it needed to be rivesed! Bishop Richard Challoner of England was more than happy to to that in 1749. And naturally of course that was revised. That revision was revised. Etc....etc.....etc.

The most accurate versions we have in present day are the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition and the New American Bible. As u can see, there are many translations. These are used in Catholic Lithurgy and are even on the Vatican Website. But if u want Bibles that are easier to read in modern English then u can try the Good News Bible or the New International Version. I personally go for the two early ones but it's people's choice right?

Now do u understand? The Catholic Church does not have many Bibles. but many translations of the same Bible (The Latin Vulgate). All in the attempt to make it easier to read for our worshipers to understand the Word of God. We cannot simply force them to understand Latin can we? Just as the Qur'an has been translated to other languages, so is the Bible.

As for others like the New World Translation (Used by the Jehovas Witeness) or the King James Version (used by the Protestants), I suggest u leave them alone. That coming from a Catholic of course but hey, do they have a copy of the orignal text to refer to when making these translations? Noooooooo. Who does? We do!

The Church is about the teachings. So same difference. Unless you mean he founded a building...

So why do you trust in something that could have been edited so dramatically by "language change"? And if I am not mistaken, back then most people were illiterate so how could you know if it is excatly like the original Bble? Finally, if it is exactly like the origioncal Bible, why are there so many contradictions within it?

I never said trnaslating is wrong...the words that get replaced or added or taken out, is what's wrong.

Eventhough the Qur'an is translated into differrnt languages, we make it clear that it is a translation and not a Qur'an...since translatiosn can be edited over time...but the Qur'an cannot.

The original text of the Latin Vulgate is found in The Vatican. Research has been done and their copy is indeed opentick. Plus u don't have to take their word for it. There are a number of other rare copies found in museums and universities all across the world.

What u have also pointed out is why do we put great faith in the Vatican? Because it is the Church that Christ founded. He promised that it will be the universal fountain of knowledge he promised it to be when he founded it. I will now bring our conversation to the foundation of our Church.

Gospel of the Apostle Matthew - 16:18-19

"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this
rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Observe. That is the foundation of our Church. The apostle Simon was named Peter. The original term probably used by Jesus was Kepha meaning rock in Aramaic. This was later translated to Greek where the term Petros was used. Petros of course meaning a male rock such as Petra means a female rock.

That is when Jesus founded the Church and appointed Peter as the supreme earthly ruler of his church. He apponted him the first Pope! Or Papa which means Father. Still not convinced that it was Peter who Jesus appointed as head of the Church?

The Gospel of the Apostle John 21:15-17

"..Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of
John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you
know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." He then said to
him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to
him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my
sheep." He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love
me?" Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, "Do you
love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that
I love you." (Jesus) said to him, "Feed my sheep."

And Peter did Ahmed. He was the man with the strongest faith amongst all of the apostle. He is The Rock. Strong and firm.

Now go back to Matthew. Did u recall the part where he said that the gaits of heaven shall not prevail or triumph against our Church? If we are indeed using our own selfish translation when translating the Holy Text then did Jesus lie? Did he fail? No that is Herasy! There is even more quotes stating that he will be with us untill the end of days...

"I am with you ALL days, even until the end of the world."

Matthew 28:20

"...and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail against
it."
Matthew 16:18

"...and I will ask the Father and He will give you
another Advocate to dwell with you forever, the Spirit of Truth..."
John
14:16-17

"I will not leave you orphans."
John
14:18

If we are indeed, untrustworthy to translate then surely Jesus abandoned the insitution he founded? Surely we have fallen and have been apostasised. But as said above, that can never happen. He promised to be with us and with us he has been. The Catholic Church Ahmed! Standing for more than 2000 years! The oldest institution in history. Spreading the Word in a Universal fashion to all corners of the World. We are his eternal Kingdom. We have triumphed. (Brings tears to my eyes really.)

Some parts may be edited...

Also you didn't answer my question:

Finally, if it is exactly like the original Bible, why are there so many contradictions within it?

Name one sir if u plz?

The reason there are so many different translations is because different people translate it. Different groups won't get the same. Naturally some words can get mixed up here and there. That is why we constantly revise our translations every few years. And we are getting more and more accurate as we progress.

It's like translating hieroglyphics here Ahmed. We're relying on very old Hebrew, Greek and Latin Texts. Language continues to progress as we speak so it get's difficult keeping up with the translations. I won't be surprised if mistakes are made trying to translate the Qur'an. what makes u think ur scholars are more trustworthy than ours?

"I won't be surprised if mistakes are made trying to translate the Qur'an. what makes u think ur scholars are more trustworthy than ours?"
Aha, but I did say they are not Qur'ans....they are translations ALso when anyhting is ever edited in transaltion it just that they remove a word form it ro so and put a better word that they found...same def. though. Also theya re more trustworthy since the Qur'an is eidted....so no matter how much thye edit the translation, the backbone that is never changed is the Qur'an.

Is God Peacefull or War like?

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

and

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Ahmed don't you think it a bit odd how Islam was founded from nomadic people who worshiped false gods? don't you think there was more than a little blood shed? in war you only hear the story of the wining side.

preid1220 wrote:Ahmed don't you think it a bit odd how Islam was founded from nomadic people who worshiped false gods? don't you think there was more than a little blood shed? in war you only hear the story of the wining side.

Umm...no? What did Judaism come out from? Same thing. Christianity came from Judaism.

I don't get your point really.

Judaism was founded by people who were in more than one war, the Christians faces a war fro freedom against the Romans so the Islamic people...

I heard about some war Mecca and Medina or something like that. Fighting for useless thoughts I say...

preid1220 wrote:Judaism was founded by people who were in more than one war, the Christians faces a war fro freedom against the Romans so the Islamic people...

Pried go to the point...you are going in circles! What are you trying to say?

---

JJ Mecca and Median are 2 cities that the Prophet lived in. The pagans waged war agsint the Prophet, and the prophet defended himself.

This was only for Ahmed and I to debate. We had a deal

That deals been broken, in other words:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL5yhZIacTE

As expected Phoenix ran away from the debate , like last year...anyhow Theory...that clip was...fail IMO.

Fang so continue please.

I didn't read the last 2 pages...

Anyway, you still haven't given 'proof' that can't be explained in another way

If this debate lasts for 3 more weeks or something then I'll step in ...

It will last... and never end

Ahmed IV wrote:"I won't be surprised if mistakes are made trying to translate the Qur'an. what makes u think ur scholars are more trustworthy than ours?"
Aha, but I did say they are not Qur'ans....they are translations ALso when anyhting is ever edited in transaltion it just that they remove a word form it ro so and put a better word that they found...same def. though. Also theya re more trustworthy since the Qur'an is eidted....so no matter how much thye edit the translation, the backbone that is never changed is the Qur'an.

Is God Peacefull or War like?

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Awwww, u though I ran away didn't u? Nah. Business needed to be attended to in real life.

Do u see how very bigot that statement u made above was Ahmed? U claim that ur scholars are more trustworthy than mine because u claim they are? U claim ur translations are more trustworthy because they are? Where is the sens Ahmed? Why aren't the people in the Vatican trsuworthy to translate the Latin Vulgate into modern English? What makes Islamic Scholars more accurate that Catholic scholars?

Our translations are pretty much like urs. It changes because mistakes my have occured or words need to be added to make more sense out of the text, but as u said, the meaning remains.

Also, u took that quote from Exodus out of context. What Moses was stating was that God acted as a warrior to his people and defended them against slavery. He is praising God for his strength, just as Muslim praise God with the Takbir.

I do not object. I believe that all people that follow God know the truth. Regardless of what they call themselves or say.

((I have returned to the horizon!))

Welcome back

I will respect others' beliefs, and not try to convince anyone that God doesn't exist, but there is not enough valid proof for me

Fang wrote:I didn't read the last 2 pages...

Anyway, you still haven't given 'proof' that can't be explained in another way

Yes I did! Twice.

Heres a third.
=======================
A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities around the world. One of its two authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC. His book says that mountains have underlying roots.1 These roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a shape like a peg


This is how the Quran has described mountains. God has said in the Quran:

Have We not made the earth as a bed, and the mountains as pegs?

(Quran, 78:6-7)

Modern earth sciences have proven that mountains have deep roots under the surface of the ground and that these roots can reach several times their elevations above the surface of the ground. So the most suitable word to describe mountains on the basis of this information is the word ‘peg,’ since most of a properly set peg is hidden under the surface of the ground. The history of science tells us that the theory of mountains having deep roots was introduced only in the latter half of the nineteenth century.

Mountains also play an important role in stabilizing the crust of the earth. They hinder the shaking of the earth. God has said in the Quran:

And He has set firm mountains in the earth so that it would not shake with you...

(Quran, 16:15)

Likewise, the modern theory of plate tectonics holds that mountains work as stabilizers for the earth. This knowledge about the role of mountains as stabilizers for the earth has just begun to be understood in the framework of plate tectonics since the late 1960’s.

Could anyone during the time of the Prophet Muhammad have known of the true shape of mountains? Could anyone imagine that the solid massive mountain which he sees before him actually extends deep into the earth and has a root, as scientists assert? A large number of books of geology, when discussing mountains, only describe that part which is above the surface of the earth. This is because these books were not written by specialists in geology. However, modern geology has confirmed the truth of the Quranic verses.

---

Ahh, so I was wrong. Phoneix returned

The reason why "our" scholars tranlsated correctly unlike "yours" is that we don't have contradictions. The Bible, hovwever, does...many times.

PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.

JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

Which one is the correct one?

P.S.: Welcome back Icehawk!