(13-04-2024, 11:57 AM)Lukongsimi Wrote:  embarrassed about his race?
We don’t look down on him even he is a cecca 
But most Singaporeans hate cecca

(13-04-2024, 11:16 AM)Lukongsimi Wrote:  Why ?

(13-04-2024, 11:18 AM)Lukongsimi Wrote:  

What happened?

(13-04-2024, 11:57 AM)Ali Imran Wrote:  No, the Quran doesn't say 100 lashes before stoning to death. In the Quran, the punishment for sex outside of marriage is public caning. In the Bible, it is public stoning. 

If God says must punish offenders that way, why do you not carry it out? And before you answer, I want to inform you that NT scholars opined that the story of the adulteress woman in John is a forgery.

(13-04-2024, 12:01 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Yes, I will shoot my rifle at the enemies and kill them. 

Yes, I agree 100% with all the teachings in the Quran but I can fail to do it for a variety of reasons.

(13-04-2024, 12:27 PM)luncheonmeat Wrote:  What is book 17 no. 4191 then? {honestly, I dunno the Koran nor Hadith}
First you claim because John's gospel called 'Zionists'/Jews liars Christians shouldn't believe the Jews, now you say many of John's accounts are forgeries. So which is it? The accounts are forgeries if they counter the teachings of the Koran but genuine when they agree with the Koran? 

(13-04-2024, 12:29 PM)pinkpanther Wrote:  Cmon Ali, will you commit jihab in Allah or muhammad name?

(13-04-2024, 12:37 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  That is the Hadith, not the Quran.

This is not about what I believe. I asked you about how much you believe in the Bible's verses, which you believe is God's word.

I quoted the adulteress story because I think you will use it to tell us that Jesus already abrogates the stoning for adulterers in the OT.

(13-04-2024, 12:39 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  I am not sure what you're asking.

If I am required to fight a war, yes, I will fight. If say Malaysia wants to invade us, I will fight them, as required by my country, and fighting in defense of my country is permitted by God.

(13-04-2024, 12:43 PM)pinkpanther Wrote:  It is the duty of all Singaporeans lah...nothing with God's calling..
Will you commit jihab in Allah's name?

(13-04-2024, 12:13 PM)Oyk Wrote:  They are conflicted.  India is the next engine for growth after China.  The PAP government made the right decision to sign the CECA with India.  OYK gave a very good speech in Parliament to substantiate it.  Leong Mun Wai was invited to challenge this, and till nao, there's not even a squeak from him.  He chickened out.

Why are they conflicted?  Because, they know that CECA is good, but they don't like Indians.  CECA is being used in edmw to refer to anyone who is of an Indian origin whether a citizen of India or a descendent of an Indian.  When put to them, they lied that they had nothing against Indians, and only didn't think that the Agreement was good for Singapore.  When OYK proved that CECA benefited Singapore, they could not lie anymore and started attacking OYK.  It's all in edmw.  Then they twist, say they don't mind Indian Singaporeans, they are our brothers, they just don't like those from India who STOLE their jobs wor.  Boosheet!

Hope has to hide his identity, or he will become a target here.  I am a Han Singaporean who had been USED to deflect hate speeches on Indians.  By nao, there are enough evidence that I am not an Indian or of Indian origin.  I did not come from a family that prayed to Vishnu or some Indian god.  We prayed to Guanyin, the kitchen god, and one who even carried a Chinese 大刀。Do you know which god carries that?

(13-04-2024, 12:43 PM)Blasterlord2 Wrote:  How can it be like that? OT said stone adulterers then NT said dun stone. So god changed his mind? Ok ok... it's his plan for humankind so we shouldn't question him. We're just pawns.

(13-04-2024, 11:57 AM)Lukongsimi Wrote:  embarrassed about his race?
We don’t look down on him even he is a cecca 
But most Singaporeans hate cecca

(13-04-2024, 12:48 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  No, the NT didn't state that you don't stone the adulteress.

Quote:On the other hand, a number of scholars have strongly defended the Johannine authorship of these verses. This group of critics is typified by such scholars as Frederick Nolan (1865), and John Burgon (1886), and Herman C. Hoskier (1920). More recently it has been defended by David Otis Fuller (1975), and is included in the Greek New Testaments compiled by Wilbur Pickering (1980/2014), Hodges & Farstad (1982/1985), and Robinson & Pierpont (2005). Rather than endorsing Augustine's theory that some men had removed the passage due to a concern that it would be used by their wives as a pretext to commit adultery, Burgon proposed (but did not develop in detail)[citation needed] a theory that the passage had been lost due to a misunderstanding of a feature in the lection-system of the early church.[16]

Almost all modern critical translations that include the pericope adulterae do so at John 7:53–8:11. Exceptions include the New English Bible and Revised English Bible, which relocate the pericope after the end of the Gospel. Most others enclose the pericope in brackets, or add a footnote mentioning the absence of the passage in the oldest witnesses (e.g., NRSV, NJB, NIV, GNT, NASB, ESV).[1] Since the passage is accepted as canonical by Catholics, however, some Catholic editions of these critical translations will remove the brackets while retaining the footnote explanation of their uncertainty (e.g. RSV-CE/2CE and ESV-CE); others, like the NRSV-CE, nevertheless retain the brackets.

Textual history

John 7:52–8:12 in Codex Vaticanus (c. 350 AD): lines 1 and 2 end 7:52; lines 3 and 4 start 8:12
The pericope does not occur in the Greek Gospel manuscripts from Egypt. The Pericope Adulterae is not in 𝔓66 or in 𝔓75, both of which have been assigned to the late 100s or early 200s, nor in two important manuscripts produced in the early or mid 300s, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin-Greek diglot Codex Bezae, produced in the 400s or 500s (but displaying a form of text which has affinities with "Western" readings used in the 100s and 200s). Codex Bezae is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it. Out of 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7–8, seventeen contain at least part of the pericope, and represent at least three transmission-streams in which it was included.[17][18][19][20]

Eastern Christianity
According to Eusebius of Caesarea (in his Ecclesiastical History, composed in the early 300s), Papias (c. AD 110) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews,[21] which might refer to this passage or to one like it.[22][23] However, according to the later writer Agapius of Hierapolis, Papias wrote a treatise on the Gospel of John, where he included the story within the Gospel itself.[24] Possibly the earliest evidence for the existence of the pericope adulterae within the Gospel of John is from the 2nd century Protoevangelium of James, which contains the words "οὐδὲ ἐγὼ [κατα]κρίνω ὑμᾶς" (neither do I condemn you) in Greek, which are identical to the text of John 8:11. Other parallers between this story within Protoevangelium and the Johannine pericope adulterae include: (1) a is woman accused of adultery, (2) the accusation is made by the Jews, (3) the woman is brought by a crowd to stand before a religious figure, (4) the accused woman is presented to the judge for a ruling and (5) both accounts are a part of a "confrontation story". However, it is not certain if the author borrowed directly from the Gospel of John or from a now-unknown document such as the Gospel according to the Hebrews.[19]

In the Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum, composed in the mid-200s, the author, in the course of instructing bishops to exercise a measure of clemency, states that a bishop who does not receive a repentant person would be doing wrong – "for you do not obey our Savior and our God, to do as He also did with her that had sinned, whom the elders set before Him, and leaving the judgment in His hands, departed. But He, the searcher of hearts, asked her and said to her, 'Have the elders condemned thee, my daughter?' She said to Him, 'No, Lord.' And He said unto her, 'Go your way; neither do I condemn thee.' In Him therefore, our Savior and King and God, be your pattern, O bishops."[25] The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Book II.24, composed c. 380, echoes the Didascalia Apostolorum, alongside a utilization of Luke 7:47.[26] Further, Didymus the Blind (c. 313–398) states that "We find in certain gospels" an episode in which a woman was accused of a sin, and was about to be stoned, but Jesus intervened "and said to those who were about to cast stones, 'He who has not sinned, let him take a stone and throw it. If anyone is conscious in himself not to have sinned, let him take a stone and smite her.' And no one dared," and so forth.[27] It is also shortly mentioned by the 6th century author of the Greek treatise "Synopsis Scripturae Sacrae".[20] Among the early Greek attestations of the pericope adulterae are the 6th century canon tables found in the Monastery of Epiphanus in Egypt. Although fragmentary, the manuscript likely contained the story of the adulteress and contained its own section number.[28][29] Evidence of its existence within some Egyptian manuscripts additionally comes from two ivory pyxides dated to around the 5th or 6th century, which depict the story of the adulteress.[18]

Within the Syriac tradition, the anonymous author of the 6th century Syriac Chronicle, called Pseudo-Zacharias Rhetor mentioned the translation of the pericope Adulterae into Aramaic from a Greek manuscript from Alexandria.[18] The story of the adulteress is also found in manuscripts of the Palestinian Syriac Lectionary, including MS "A" (1030ad), MS "C" (1118ad) and MS "B" (1104ad).[30]

An author by the name of "Nicon" wrote a treatise called "On the Impious Religion of the Vile Armenians", in which he argued that the Armenian Christians tried to remove the passage from their manuscripts. This has been often attributed to the 10th century author Nicon, however Wescott and Hort argued that it is a later 13th century Nicon. They argued that this writing was made in response to the claims of Vardan Areveltsi, who stated that Papias is responsible for the inclusion of the story in the Gospel of John.[20] Later on, in the 12th century the passage was mentioned by Euthymius Zigabenus, who doubted the authencity of the passage. However, his contemporary Eustathios of Thessaloniki commented on the passage as an authentic part of John's Gospel.[18]

(13-04-2024, 12:48 PM)Hope Wrote:  I am not Ceca. I was born here.I have worked in three countries.

(13-04-2024, 12:46 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Of course, I will do jihad, in Allah's name. I even eat my lunch in Allah's name. Have you heard your Malay friends say "Bismillah" when they want to eat? Bismillah means in the name of Allah.

(13-04-2024, 12:53 PM)pinkpanther Wrote:  To kill and to die in the name of Allah...say like 911...Will you do that?

(13-04-2024, 12:53 PM)Goldmine Wrote:  Why debate and argue so deeply for what? What's the point? If you think the religion is good  just follow. Why so over zealeous?

(13-04-2024, 12:53 PM)Goldmine Wrote:  Why debate and argue so deeply for what? What's the point? If you think the religion is good  just follow. Why so over zealeous?

(13-04-2024, 12:37 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  That is the Hadith, not the Quran.

This is not about what I believe. I asked you about how much you believe in the Bible's verses, which you believe is God's word.

I quoted the adulteress story because I think you will use it to tell us that Jesus already abrogates the stoning for adulterers in the OT.

(13-04-2024, 12:55 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Commit suicide? Not allowed in Islam. Kill civilians? Not allowed in Islam. 

What else you want to know?

(13-04-2024, 01:01 PM)pinkpanther Wrote:  Will you cast terror into the hearts of non believers and kill them in Allah name?

(13-04-2024, 01:03 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Allah didn't ask me to do that.

(13-04-2024, 12:55 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Commit suicide? Not allowed in Islam. Kill civilians? Not allowed in Islam. 

What else you want to know?

(13-04-2024, 12:47 PM)Lukongsimi Wrote:  Heard it’s kuan Kong carrying big sword 
Use to go Chinese temples n dreamt of black spirit coming out of the statue 
was bef I follow Christ

(13-04-2024, 12:58 PM)luncheonmeat Wrote:  Let me ask you, was King David sentenced to death for having an affair with Bathsheba and ordering the killing of  her husband, or did  their innocent child die for his/her parents sin?

(13-04-2024, 12:55 PM)Ali Imran Wrote:  Commit suicide? Not allowed in Islam. Kill civilians? Not allowed in Islam. 

What else you want to know?

(13-04-2024, 01:07 PM)pinkpanther Wrote:  Surah 3:151: "We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve (all non-Muslims) …"
Surah 9:5: "Then kill the disbelievers (non-Muslims) wherever you find them, capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush …

So you cherry picking.? Why you don follow the quran?

You stubborn mule...talk one big circle..waste of my time..
I go eat my curry lembu!