Debate?

- Yes, so you keep mentioning. Where is this unbroken chain? The Catholic Church had to change its narrative when it was found out that their claimed chain is fictitious, same for all the other claims. Please show me a verifiable unbroken chain from Jesus (pbuh) of your church.

Creator being distinct from creation means there is no part of creator in creation.

- What is divine energy? Does this notion even exist in your Bible?

Jesus (pbuh) is a body, a body is a contingent being, it can not possibly be divine. That's like saying God is not-God. & yes, they are all creation of the Creator, He is inconceivable, "whatever image comes to your mind, God is not it". If you can perceive God, then he is not God anymore, for perception implies contingency & limitation. God can not be contingent or limited, for he is a necessary uncaused being.

- What are you quoting? This sounds a lot like what some Shia believe about their imam....

I am about to go on a full week vacation, I would rather not debate that now, but the majority of Muslims are mostly radical, 

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, most verses of violence in the Quran are open-ended, meaning that they are not necessarily restrained by historical context contained in the surrounding text (although many Muslims choose to think of them that way). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

The divide between creation and The Uncreated is of essence. God is certainly present in creation by His energies.

I will use a quote from a modern Bishop I think is good..

"God in his entirety is completely present in each of his divine energies. Thus the essence-energies distinction is a way of stating simultaneously that the whole God is inaccessible, and that the whole God in his outgoing love has rendered himself accessible to man." -Kallistos Ware

You are going to find examples in the Bible sure, but this type of language wasn't fleshed out entirely until the rise of certain heresies made it necessary to explain what the Church has always believed.

We are not like you Muslims who believe that your Koran was dictated by God. In fact, to say the bible is like that would be the heresy of bibliolatry, which we would consider an idolatry.

Now if you deny the incarnation, you deny all the prophets. You also deny thst God can be witnessed in the things that are made.

This is Saint Paul and Saint Timothy's letter to the Church of Colossae.

The Shia are making their Imam out to be Christ.

Shouldn't you know these things yourself? I don't need to ask a bishop, I have looked into it & realized there is no such thing.

- I'm not sure what this means. Is God an energy?

- Doesn't your church believe God is the original author of the Bible inspired by the Holy Spirit? How is that idolatry?

- So Jesus become creation while still being divine? That's a strict contradiction. Creation & divine are mutually exclusive.

- What does incarnation have to do with all that?

- They almost do, yet they don't consider their Imam divine, which is my point. Some Shia believe God created all things through their imams & for them. Why are they believing this? It's not in the Quran. There is no mention of any of this in the Quran, yet they believe it. People tend to worship those they deeply love, & ascribe divine attributes to them.

Not as nearly as radical as the lovely Christians...

- Every verse in the Quran has a reason & circumstance of revelation, some are Muhkamat (absolute) which do not allow different interpretations (such as "Allah is One"), some are Mutashabihat (ambiguous) which may be interpreted in accordance with textual & circumstantial context by the qualified ulama (scholars). Some Christians love to deny it, but the Bible is believed to be infallible too, as it states in the Dei Verbum "the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself … the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings". I could bring up some Bible verses, but you already know about those.

- Sure, fight who how & with what? Aliens? Muslims? With arms? Potatoes? Words?... When it says in the US Constitution: 'right to bear arms', it's not saying go & shoot people... These things are understood in proper context.

Not as nearly as radical as the lovely Christians...

Doubtful

- Every verse in the Quran has a reason & circumstance of revelation, some are Muhkamat (absolute) which do not allow different interpretations (such as "Allah is One"), some are Mutashabihat (ambiguous) which may be interpreted in accordance with textual & circumstantial context by the qualified ulama (scholars). Some Christians love to deny it, but the Bible is believed to be infallible too, as it states in the Dei Verbum "the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself … the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings". I could bring up some Bible verses, but you already know about those.

What verses?

- Sure, fight who how & with what? Aliens? Muslims? With arms? Potatoes? Words?... When it says in the US Constitution: 'right to bear arms', it's not saying go & shoot people... These things are understood in proper context.

What's the context then

The rest is bullshit, it shows Muslim's cruelty

History is your friend.

You're not asking me to actually quote violence in the Bible? Google it, it is known, I'd rather not. I don't attack other people's scriptures.

You just deleted it. SELF-DEFENSE. Fighting in the Quran is sanctioned against aggressors & oppressors in self-defense to establish peace: "fight those who fight you and do not transgress" "fight until there is no more oppression" "if they abide by peace, abide by it in return"...etc.

How so?

Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged." which commands fighting against aggressors who fought & wronged the Muslims who: "[They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah ." And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentions

It is idolatry because it is calling a book The Word of God when the book itself says that The Word of God is eternal, pre-eternal even, One in essence with God, being God, and that which we are saved by. The Word of God is Jesus Christ. Not the Jesus Christ you know, for you only know the human nature of Christ. You do not know The Divine, The Word of God being made flesh, dwelling among us.

United in the hypostasis or divine Person of The Son are two distinct physis or natures. To quote the Athanasian creed...

"He is God from the essence of the Father, begotten before time; and he is human from the essence of his mother, born in time; completely God, completely human, with a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as regards divinity, less than the Father as regards humanity. Although he is God and human, yet Christ is not two, but one. He is one, however, not by his divinity being turned into flesh, but by God's taking humanity to himself. He is one, certainly not by the blending of his essence, but by the unity of his person. For just as one human is both rational soul and flesh, so too the one Christ is both God and human."

We certainly venerate saints, but we do not give them the honor that is due to God alone. We venerate them for the Christ that is in them, as they are icons of Christ.

Jesus Christ is not simply a saint. Jesus Christ is God with Us. 

And Saint Athanasius wrote, "That God became man that man might become God"

Salvation to us is theosis, being united to God through union with The Son. For Jesus Christ is The Only Begotten Son, existing before all ages as The Word of God, but we are united to Him through adoption as children of God. This is salvation, for even as The Prophet Isaiah spoke,

"All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field:

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever."

And it is only by and through The Word of God that there is salvation.

And truly, the name "Jesus" even means "God's Salvation".

Salvation is unity with Jesus Christ to the glory of God The Father by The Holy Spirit.

- I'm not sure if you are aware, but most churches claim some apostolic succession too, each different from the other... & upon investigation one finds that none are actually authentic.

- You mean manifestation of God's Power in creation?

- What's the difference? Isn't the Holy Spirit God to you?

- But this implies a strict contradiction.

- This does not answer my question.

- Exactly, that's the whole point. The Shia venerate their Imam like you venerate your Christ. They talk more & care more about their Imam than they do about God, just like you do. This is polytheism, associating human equals to God.

- Are you saying salvation is becoming God?

You don't get it the context you were spewing states that Muslims go to war and invade people.

How great, And uh oh yeah who started those wars, surely it wasn't the Seljuk Turks, A muslim country Right?

Quran 8:12 which says, “When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”

And oh yeah The BOP is on YOU for the second point

Supply evidence that some "angel" lol ever spoke to Muhammad.

Debate what?

Do you have evidence, if so present it. There's nothing to debate, evidence confirms the claim, a failure to present evidence proves the falseness of the claim.

Translation:Permission please oh YES allah to behead infidels

Crusades were justified, that's right

It doesn't matter the angels, clearly states you go to war and behead people

I'm sorry but when you say the Bible is violent, the BOP is on YOU

Do you suffer from a severe case of cognitive dissonance?

In your dreams, I'm sure. You wanna debate that?

War, by design, involves killing... The Quran sanctions Just War -in self-defense against aggressors. 

 What do you think about the violent passages in the Bible?

Any specifics?

The three main reasons given for the Crusades were:

1. Rescuing fellow Christians from invasion and persecution
   
2. Conquering or retaking lands in the possession of Muslims
   
3. Fulfilling personal vows to go on a crusade
   

In my opinion, a war is justified only as a last resort for defense of oneself or others or if it is clearly and directly commanded by God (e.g. God speaks directly to a person). (For more on this, see Onward Christian Soldiers? Christian Perspectives on War by Timothy J. Demy.) Therefore, I consider the first reason to be a possible just cause for war. However, the crusaders seemed primarily focused on the second objective, which casts some doubt on the extent to which they were motivated by the first objective.
With the later crusades, the length of time since the initial invasion should be considered as well. If the current inhabitants of a city weren't alive when the invasion occurred and aren't being oppressed, they're not necessarily in need of rescue. Jerusalem was retaken by the Turks in 1187; Frederick II's and Louis IX's crusades occurred forty and sixty years later, respectively.
As for the second reason, there is nothing in the Bible to support the notion that certain lands (e.g. Jerusalem) ought to remain in the hands of Christians or that Christians ought to take control of lands which belong to non-Christians. The Bible teaches that Christians are to love their enemies (in the case of the Crusades, the Europeans viewed the Turks as their enemies) and help them:

Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Mt 5:44)
If you come across your enemy's ox or donkey wandering off, be sure to take it back to him. If you see the donkey of someone who hates you fallen down under its load, do not leave it there; be sure you help him with it. (Ex 23:4-5)

Land or other property belonging to non-Christians or a non-Christian government should be left in their keeping (Ex 20:15, 17, Mt 22:21). Furthermore, Christians are not to coerce others into faith (1 Pt 3:15-16). When nonbelievers refuse to accept Christianity, Christians are to move on and evangelize others (Mt 10:14), not punish the nonbelievers (Lk 9:51-56).
Concerning vows, Jesus taught that they should be avoided altogether (Mt 5:33-37). The OT warns against making vows (Pr 20:25) and includes several examples of foolish vows having disastrous results (e.g. 1 Sam 14:24-35).
Behavior of the crusaders
Many of the crusaders' actions were in opposition to the principles of the Bible. This doesn't mean the crusaders were not Christians (though some of them may not have been), for even Christians do wrong. It does mean that not all actions of Christians or those who claim to have God's approval are in fact approved by God.
General Biblical guidelines for Christians' treatment of nonbelievers are discussed in the previous section. Below are some specific wrongs committed by the crusaders and the Bible passages which teach us to do otherwise.

Not according to the Quran, despite your wishes for the opposite.

 I don't like quoting the Bible. But I'm sure you're aware of what I'm talking about.

Rescuing fellow Christians from invasion and persecution

Conquering or retaking lands in the possession of Muslims

Fulfilling personal vows to go on a crusade

For real?! -_- ... The Crusaders *massacred* the Christians of the Middle East...

The Crusades were carried by Franks & Brits, who have never had anything to do with the Middle East & had very little contact with Muslims. They can't "take back" what they never had in the first place. 

Are you talking about the Crusades, or joining a crusade?

 Then why do you keep quoting it. Thanks for conceding.

- Then debunk..

It's not like they could've know, since they indiscriminately massacred everyone, wether Muslim, Jew or Christian, man, woman or child. The crusaders massacred fellow Christians in Europe too, not just the Middle East...

They sacked Constantinople too & massacred its people...

Why are you trying to defend such atrocious actions? 

So far you proved the opposite. 

As I said, I don't like quoting the Bible. But you know exactly what I'm referring to. 

You seem to be absolutely clueless of what the Crusades were about. LOL!

The Crusaders to Constantinople. The Ottomans saved the persecuted Christians of Constantinople.

"Nothing will ever equal the horror of this harrowing and terrible spectacle."
An observer describes the scene:
"Nothing will ever equal the horror of this harrowing and terrible spectacle. People frightened by the shouting ran out of their houses and were cut down by the sword before they knew what was happening. And some were massacred in their houses where they tried to hide, and some in churches where they sought refuge.

If you need a citation, then you really are clueless. Why don't we debate this?

Yes you are.

Aren't going to defend your book?

You do realise that Muslims sometimes do things that are not Islamic and Christians sometimes do what is not Christian?  Realpolitik often requires a 'flexible' view of religion.