a simple question

[jcarl]

Re: Truth?

I should have known that truth thing bring the discussion even more on a tangent. I'll give my spill, and if anyone wants to go all out on this then lets take it to the Gen. Philosophy forum.

Originally posted by Raithere
Such a narrow definition will not serve. Concepts can by contradictory yet true. The Sun is an enemy to the man dying of thirst in the desert but a friend to those caught in the depths of winter.

The enemy/friend personality of the sun is relative to the situation and understood within the context.

Light both a particle and a wave. An electron may be in more than one place at a time. Reality is not constrained by our conceptions. How much less so must God be?

I'm not going say anything right now(I left my Chemistry book at school) about light and electrons b/c I don't know enought about them. However Truth corresponds to reality. Our conceptions of it[truth] can be right or wrong, but that has no weight on whether something is true or not.

Originally posted by Gifted
Don't Muslims(someone get me on this, very limited knowledge here) believe in Jesus too, just that he wasn't the Messiah, he was just another prophet?

If Jesus is not Messiah, then he is a liar, a lunatic, and not worthy to be called a prophet.

 

[jcarl]

Re: Truth?

I should have known that truth thing bring the discussion even more on a tangent. I'll give my spill, and if anyone wants to go all out on this then lets take it to the Gen. Philosophy forum.

Originally posted by Raithere
Such a narrow definition will not serve. Concepts can by contradictory yet true. The Sun is an enemy to the man dying of thirst in the desert but a friend to those caught in the depths of winter.

The enemy/friend personality of the sun is relative to the situation and understood within the context.

Light both a particle and a wave. An electron may be in more than one place at a time. Reality is not constrained by our conceptions. How much less so must God be?

I'm not going say anything right now(I left my Chemistry book at school) about light and electrons b/c I don't know enought about them. However Truth corresponds to reality. Our conceptions of it[truth] can be right or wrong, but that has no weight on whether something is true or not.

Originally posted by Gifted
Don't Muslims(someone get me on this, very limited knowledge here) believe in Jesus too, just that he wasn't the Messiah, he was just another prophet?

If Jesus is not Messiah, then he is a liar, a lunatic, and not worthy to be called a prophet. He is either Lord of all or nothing at all.

 

[Hevene]

Originally posted by jcarl

There can only be one truth. Anything contrary to that truth is not truth. If what Mohammed teaches is truth, then what Jesus, Buddha, et al must be false, and vice versa. We are equally created, but we are not equal from then on.

There is only one truth, but people with insufficient understanding misread the truth and then pass down from one generation to another and so on, then the truth gets changed, ie the interpretation of it etc etc. If you look at the teaching of Jesus, Buddha etc, there are lots of similarities, plus the bits and pieces added in by us to create fear, control and so on.


Originally posted by spidergoat

People can still make individual choices, but I think it is significant that most people who were brought up to believe something actually do. It is a form of mental violence to brainwash your children into believing the same things you do.

Yep, children immitate their elders, so whatever we do, they will observe and think if it's ok for my parents to do that, then it must mean that it's ok for me to do them too. So we see history kept on repeating itself.

 

[Cris]

Jcarl,

First off, can you point me to some references. Secondly, what makes these eye witness accounts credible? Did someone follow Mohammed with a pen/pad taking down everything he did? By the way some people think on this forum, that would be the only way to prove somebody existed.

There are many references on the web to appropriate biographies. Unlike Buddha and JC, where there is little to no historical evidence, Mohammed is one of the best documented historical religious figures.

But even if M somehow did not exist it really doesn’t matter. M was a messenger and although Muslims revere him, it is his message that was important and not the man himself. The issue with JC is quite different since it is essential for him to have existed if Christianity is to be credible. It is claimed he is God and was physically resurrected and became the savior of the human race through that event. Well now we have somewhat of a massive problem if he didn’t actually exist as a man, since a nonexistent man could not have been resurrected and hence no savior.

We would think that for probably the most important man in the history of mankind there should be little doubt that he actually existed, but Christians cannot point to any independent and reliable evidence that shows that Jesus actually existed and did any of the things claimed in the bible. And there have been some credible analyses recently that explore these claims and conclude that JC is most likely pure myth. Try “The Christ Conspiracy by Acharya S” and “The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty”.

As to the question of who is better then let’s look at their messages –

M – Struggle and absolute submission to Allah.
J – Love me or go to hell.

The M message suits tyrannical regimes very well since it encourages submission to authority and hence makes the mullahs extremely powerful.

The J message simply encourages submission by threats and fear, and again allows tyrannical regimes to exercise control.

It is no coincidence that both religions suit the needs of tyranny since both religions were designed by such men at times when tyrannical political power and physical threats were the primary forces that controlled the world in ancient times.

Neither message has any value to the people of today, so M and J are equally bad as each other.

 

[miss khan]

hello everyone! i'm new here, so welcome me

anyway, to get to the topic of the post, I think you've just simply worded your question wrong jcarl. Muslims do not believe Muhammad (peace & blessings be upon him) is "better" than Jesus (peace be upon him). We are taught to believe in all of the prophets, including Jesus (pbuh), Abraham (pbuh), Moses(pbuh) .. and to give them equal respect & acknowledgment, because they were ALL prophets of Allah. Muhammad (pbuh) was the LAST prophet of Allah, that is the major diff betw him and Jesus, & since he was the LAST prophet, with him, he brought the LAST revelation, which is the Quran, which is the FINAL revelation, which is what we follow.

 

[outlandish]

Hi Miss Khan, welcome.

AsalaamU Alaikum.

 

[miss khan]

walaikum asalam

 

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by spidergoat
his dad can beat up your dad!

my god can beat up your god!

 

[Flores]

Re: Re: Truth?

Originally posted by jcarl
If Jesus is not Messiah, then he is a liar, a lunatic, and not worthy to be called a prophet.

Correction, you are the liar, lunatic, and not worthy to fill your own tiny shoes.

Jesus said:
Matt 19
[16] And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
[17] And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.


Jesus never that he is anything but a prophet, a light ray send by god to show us the way. WHich is basically the same thing that Moses Said, Mohammed said, Jacob said, Abraham said, ect.....Believe only in GOD and keep the commandments. Wittness the words of Jesus by following god, not by idolating the messanger....But why would you understand such a basic concept, you're not a believer, just a man made roman catholic corrupted so called christ follower.

 

[Cris]

Flores,

Jesus never said that he is anything but a prophet,

That seems to be about the only thing that isn't claimed of him. You are simply wrong – try this -

http://www.everystudent.com/wires/whodoyousay.html

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Cris
Flores,

That seems to be about the only thing that isn't claimed of him. You are simply wrong – try this -

http://www.everystudent.com/wires/whodoyousay.html

And the usual dillemma, your interpretation contradicts with mine by about 180 degrees......And too bad, we can't bring back the dead Jesus who you claim said those things that I claim means something up to clear us for good........Can we perhaps reach some wisdom out of this dillemma? Should I open perhaps another thread about why religion should be a private thing.

 

[Cris]

Flores,

And the usual dillemma, your interpretation contradicts with mine by about 180 degrees......And too bad,

The article seems clear – there is little interpretation needed – Jesus has to be God and it seems the statements that are claimed he made leaves no doubt.

we can't bring back the dead Jesus

Especially since he probably never existed.

who you claim said those things

They are not my claims, the extracts are directly from the bible. These are very clear Christian claims. For Christians it is essential that Jesus is God since how else can anyone other than God save mankind. If he was just a prophet then Christianity has no meaning. Which of course is part of the Islamic message, right?

Can we perhaps reach some wisdom out of this dillemma? Should I open perhaps another thread about why religion should be a private thing.

If any religion has any degree of truth then its tenets cannot be open to free and personal interpretation as if truth could be determined by a popular vote.

Islam believes it has the one true religion but can coexist with Christianity if Jesus was only a prophet, but this is inconsistent with the basic tenet of Christianity, i.e. that Jesus is God and the savior of mankind. Clearly it is inconceivable that he could be merely a prophet. Christainity also claims that the only way to God is through a belief in Jesus as the savior, and clearly Muslims do not believe that.

The net result is that Islam and Christianity are diametrically opposed to each other. Either one could be true, or both could be false, but they can’t both be true.

 

[jcarl]

Originally posted by Cris
Jcarl,

There are many references on the web to appropriate biographies. Unlike Buddha and JC, where there is little to no historical evidence, Mohammed is one of the best documented historical religious figures.

We would think that for probably the most important man in the history of mankind there should be little doubt that he actually existed, but Christians cannot point to any independent and reliable evidence

How bout the Koran. That's about as independent as you can get. In the Surah IV:157 it talks that Jesus wasn't dead but feigned it when he was put in the tomb. Now that is a flawed argument(on several fronts) but the point is that they, not believing that he is who he said he was, puts Jesus in their Holy Book. If Jesus hadn't existed, do you think that mohammed would have gone through the trouble of making an argument that an event in Christ's life was feigned. Had Jesus not existed, then surely Mohammed would have made note of that.

Some others, Lucian, the Roman satirist. "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day-the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account."

As to the question of who is better then let’s look at their messages –

M – Struggle and absolute submission to Allah.
J – Love me or go to hell.

Jesus gave all of us a choice to believe in him or not. We were sentenced to die, he gave us a shot at a pardon, and now the ball is in our court. What we do is up to us. We reject the pardon, then God simply says "thy will be done."

It is no coincidence that both religions suit the needs of tyranny since both religions were designed by such men at times when tyrannical political power and physical threats were the primary forces that controlled the world in ancient times.

Is it tyrannical to give punishment to someone who commited a crime?

The net result is that Islam and Christianity are diametrically opposed to each other. but they can’t both be true.

Couldn't agree more.

Originally posted by miss Khan
Muslims do not believe Muhammad (peace & blessings be upon him) is "better" than Jesus (peace be upon him). We are taught to believe in all of the prophets, including Jesus (pbuh), Abraham (pbuh), Moses(pbuh) .. and to give them equal respect & acknowledgment, because they were ALL prophets of Allah.

So then Jesus is a prophet. But he claimed to be the sun of God. Therefore, he is a liar if he is just a prophet. I don't know about you, but I'm not really one for respecting a liar.

Originally posted by Flores
Jesus said:
Matt 19
[16] And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
[17] And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

What Jesus is saying here is that he is either all or nothing at all. He is either the son of God or NOT a good man, since he would then be a story-teller.

But why would you understand such a basic concept, you're not a believer, just a man made roman catholic corrupted so called christ follower.

I'm sorry didn't think that you knew me. I am Baptist and thus I am not Catholic and indeed have several problems with Catholic doctrine. So next time you try slap a label on somebody, make sure the sticky side lands on them and not you.

 

[Markx]

Originally posted by jcarl

Could you please explain "Son Of God", you used it quite frequently, what exactly Son of God means?, was a seeded by God in Mariam? Did God came as human and had sex with Mariam? Why you keep saying that he was a Son Of God? Please provide me with some refrences in this regard. Thank you in advance.

 

[Cris]

Jcarl,

If Jesus hadn't existed, do you think that mohammed would have gone through the trouble of making an argument that an event in Christ's life was feigned. Had Jesus not existed, then surely Mohammed would have made note of that.

The earliest manuscripts of the Koran are dated at 750CE and the Christian mythology was well established by that time. The Koran simply took earlier lies and made new ones.

Some others, Lucian, the Roman satirist. "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day-the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account."

LOL. Lucian wasn’t born until at least 100 years after Jesus alleged crucifixion. He isn’t offering historical evidence; he is repeating the myth spread by Christians. But your point does reflect the general quality of Christian claims for Jesus historicity.

Jesus gave all of us a choice to believe in him or not.

But the strategy used is one of terrorism; the terror and fear of HELL.

We were sentenced to die,

Another evil aspect of Christianity; convince the victims that they are somehow bad and there is no hope unless they submit to the tyranny of Christianity.

he gave us a shot at a pardon,

This myth attempts to convince innocent people that death is not the end but a gateway to paradise. Probably the greatest evil possible – the effective brainwashing that convinces vulnerable people that the ultimate bad – death – is the best thing that could happen to them.

and now the ball is in our court.

And hopefully rational people can see the Christian fraud for what it is.

What we do is up to us. We reject the pardon, then God simply says "thy will be done."

Like I said – Christianity is just full of terror and threats of violence. An absurd and childish religion.

Is it tyrannical to give punishment to someone who committed a crime?

But there was no crime. Mankind has evolved form simpler lifeforms, and is only guilty of being alive. The only crime is that told in the fairy story of Adam and Eve and even there they were tricked by a deceitful god. And since everyone knows that the story of Adam and Eve is just a fable then so must the resultant need for a savior. Jesus is just another fairy story designed to frighten unwitting and gullible people.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Re: Re: Truth?

Originally posted by jcarl
I should have known that truth thing bring the discussion even more on a tangent. I'll give my spill, and if anyone wants to go all out on this then lets take it to the Gen. Philosophy forum.

The enemy/friend personality of the sun is relative to the situation and understood within the context.

I'm not going say anything right now(I left my Chemistry book at school) about light and electrons b/c I don't know enought about them. However Truth corresponds to reality. Our conceptions of it[truth] can be right or wrong, but that has no weight on whether something is true or not.

If Jesus is not Messiah, then he is a liar, a lunatic, and not worthy to be called a prophet.
----------
M*W: Jesus was not the Messiah. A fictional character cannot be a liar unless the story is written that way. Jesus was not the lunatic, Paul was. Jesus was only a prophet and nothing more, even in the myth. He died for no one because he didn't exist.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by jcarl
I should have known that truth thing bring the discussion even more on a tangent. I'll give my spill, and if anyone wants to go all out on this then lets take it to the Gen. Philosophy forum.

I don't believe that it is tangential. In fact, I consider it central to the underlying assumptions in your initial question. There are any number of problems with the initial question but inquiring as to what makes Mohammed 'better' than Jesus or vice versa forces a false dilemma. You're also forcing a literal analysis of a subject (God) that, by definition, cannot be literal.

I'm not going say anything right now(I left my Chemistry book at school) about light and electrons b/c I don't know enought about them. However Truth corresponds to reality. Our conceptions of it[truth] can be right or wrong, but that has no weight on whether something is true or not.

I would suggest Physics as Chemistry uses an outdated, though still useful, model. The problem here is one of epistemology and whether one can know, in an absolute sense, anything about reality much less that which is supposed to transcend reality. Current theory and evidence suggests that such knowledge is impossible, that there is a level of indeterminacy that intrinsic to the very nature of existence, at a primary level there is no true or false.

~Raithere

 

[jcarl]

Originally posted by Cris
Jcarl,

LOL. Lucian wasn’t born until at least 100 years after Jesus alleged crucifixion. He isn’t offering historical evidence; he is repeating the myth spread by Christians. But your point does reflect the general quality of Christian claims for Jesus historicity.

If Christ hadn't been real, then wouldn't he have had some knowledge of such a fallacy that would have been Christianity.

Yet another evidence of Christ: A pagan named Thallus attempted to argue that the darkness occuring during Christ's death was natural. This man, whose idea was preserved by Julius Africanus, seemed to take the existence of Christ for granted. The denial of Christ's existence is never occurred to even the opponents of 1st Century Christians.

But the strategy used is one of terrorism; the terror and fear of HELL.

In first grade some of us were told that if we were good, we'd get a little prize/candy/whatever. Now did everyone behave well? No, and those got separated from the group, detention, on the fence, et all. Those who did behave in a correct manner were rewarded by candy, recess, etc. Why should God be any different than the teacher?

Another evil aspect of Christianity; convince the victims that they are somehow bad and there is no hope unless they submit to the tyranny of Christianity.

I'll leave you to the assumption that Christianity is somehow in the ranks of Sadaam and Hitler. But we all on an electric chair that is death. Likewise we are all given the pardon. Some will accept it, some will not.

Are we as humans bad? I think that we will all agree that we have at least once done something morally wrong in our lives. I believe that we all are infected with the disease of sin. The only way we can do that is to die(the wages of sin is death). But, we have a savior in Christ, who was the sacrificial lamb for all of us. , who died that we might have life more abundantly.

This myth attempts to convince innocent people that death is not the end but a gateway to paradise. Probably the greatest evil possible – the effective brainwashing that convinces vulnerable people that the ultimate bad – death – is the best thing that could happen to them.

Death is the turning in of a test paper. What we have done during the test is what will determine our score. Some will pass because they knew the answers. Others will not pass because the correct answer seemed to easy.

only guilty of being alive.

We are guilty for what we have done in our lives, guilty meaning responsible for our actions.

The only crime is that told in the fairy story of Adam and Eve and even there they were tricked by a deceitful god. And since everyone knows that the story of Adam and Eve is just a fable then so must the resultant need for a savior. Jesus is just another fairy story designed to frighten unwitting and gullible people.

Tell me, would the story of Adam and Eve be the only time in history in which people did wrong? I should say not. Look at the Crusades. The plundering, senseless killing, and utter violence(from both sides) were indeed a great sin(I personally think that those who committed these crimes in the name of Christianity(or more appropriately Christendom) will be held responsible come the end times, provided that they were even saved at all.

Originally posted by MW
M*W: Jesus was not the Messiah. A fictional character cannot be a liar unless the story is written that way. Jesus was not the lunatic, Paul was. Jesus was only a prophet and nothing more, even in the myth. He died for no one because he didn't exist.

So then you are sayign that Paul somehow started a religion on the foundation of a nonexistent person. How then did Chrisianity get off the ground?

Originally posted by Markx

Originally posted by jcarl

Could you please explain "Son Of God", you used it quite frequently, what exactly Son of God means?, was a seeded by God in Mariam? Did God came as human and had sex with Mariam? Why you keep saying that he was a Son Of God? Please provide me with some refrences in this regard. Thank you in advance.

It's hard to explain Son of God w/o getting into the trinity deal. There are three Aspects of One God.
-"There are three eternal distinctions in one divine Essence, we Distinguish among the persons, but we do not divide the substance"-Systematic Theology by Theissen(all quotes will come from here, for brevity purposes)
-"All three, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are God, are equal in power, glory...but The Holy Ghost and Son, are voluntarily subordinate to The Father in terms of order."
-"Jesus Surrendered the exercise of his divine attributes
-This explains why Jesus prayed to the Father when he was a man.
-As to how Mary was seeded with Jesus, I don't think anybody knows for sure how. Just let it suffice that Jesus was created not in the normal way. God allowed Mary to become pregnant, no sex required. How? His ways are not our ways, so no one can really knows.
-Essentially The Son of God is the essence of God with all his{God's} powers, yet in a man's body. He is the bridge between Holy God and Unholy Man. Does that answer your questions?

 

[jcarl]

Originally posted by Raithere
I don't believe that it is tangential. In fact, I consider it central to the underlying assumptions in your initial question. There are any number of problems with the initial question but inquiring as to what makes Mohammed 'better' than Jesus or vice versa forces a false dilemma. You're also forcing a literal analysis of a subject (God) that, by definition, cannot be literal.

God is above all. Therefore no one can be above God. Also, God is not self-contradictory. Then that means that only one person can be manifestation of the true God. Now I would like to know what Muslims think that makes Mohammed ahad of Jesus. Someone said a while back that what makes Mohammed "above" Jesus is that he gave the final revelation. Is that the only reason? What the Prophet Jesus gives is contradictory to what Mohammed gives. That being said what convinces you[muslims] that the Final Revelation is true Revelation?

 

[Vienna]

Originally posted by jcarl
God is above all.

And you are quite right!

But you are wasting your time with your argument on these boards son. You will only find either Atheists or Muslims here and they both hate Christianity. All the hate in the world will never see the truth.