This has always been a conveniant and juevinile excuse to allow the mind to excuse the atrocities attributed to the God of the bible but it has never washed with me and never will.
"Allah" is the god of the christians, muslims, and jews
- Thread starter USS Exeter
- Start date
This has always been a conveniant and juevinile excuse to allow the mind to excuse the atrocities attributed to the God of the bible but it has never washed with me and never will.
Most certainly not.
I reason that God is perfect and I am Not.
Therefore I reason Gods decisions and guidance is Good irrespective of my understanding or lack of understanding as to reasons behind His will for us.
I know i do not have perfect understanding so therefore my reasoning on this is Good, that’s where faith/trust in God must come into play.
The greatest wisdom anyone can come to understand is that one lacks wisdom and must rely on the guidance of Someone who is.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
One reasons using facts. You are merely speculating or conjecturing. If you know you do not have perfect uderstanding why have faith in god ? You are just filling a gap with an explanation which suits your purpose.
Your last bit sounds Socratic but reveals the fact that you are seeking a father figure. The "Someone" who is exists only in your mind.
That lake must be getting pretty full up by now. Standing room only !
sowhatifit'sdark
Valued Senior Member
I see it as either cowardice or the product of secret hates. But the Christian tradition has, sadly, too few who consider introspection or self insight to be important qualities. The form of 'goodness' suffices. They are blissfully pre-Freudian, riding along in images of who they are based on the few thoughts and urges they have the courage to notice in themselves.
It's like confusing my character and actions with what I do one minute a month.
It would seem so. According to what some people think, the vast majority of the earths' population will end up there.
The point I was making is that the same people who say we can't use our moral standard to judge the biblical Gods' action are the same ones who state we derive our morality from the bible...but...when we use that sense of morality obtained apparently from the bible to judge the things we find morally offensive and downright nasty and evil then we are told our inferior and imperfect standards should be "thrown out the window"..wtf??
It would seem so. According to what some people think, the vast majority of the earths' population will end up there.
The point I was making is that the same people who say we can't use our moral standard to judge the biblical Gods' action are the same ones who state we derive our morality from the bible...but...when we use that sense of morality obtained apparently from the bible to judge the things we find morally offensive and downright nasty and evil then we are told our inferior and imperfect standards should be "thrown out the window"..wtf??
An oft-repeated theme is that it is not for us to question god's will. which means we must not question the idiot on the doorstep determined to save us.
W
WildBlueYonder
Guest
sounds logical, but if you were really a Jew, Christian or Muslim, you would not support that.
as a Christian, let me tell you why;
Jesus quotes from the Old Testament, regards it as eternal,
Christians quote the Old Testament, regard it as eternal,
muslims quote targums, regard the quran as eternal, but if islam was really the continuation or correction to the Bible, why are the Bible fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls from 2k years ago, the same as used today in the Bible, but not the same as in the quran?
islam worships an arab god, thats why it wasn't supposed to be translated in to vernacular languages, because people would see that allah is an arabic god, tongue-tied in other human languages, a tribal god, that places arabs & arab speakers on a higher pedestal than common muslims, (check out what medrassas do, they teach recitation of the quran in arabic, but don't teach arabic, why not?)
because its the same idea behind the Catholic Latin Bible, if only priests could read the Bible, they were the top of the food chain, until Wycliffe & Tyndale in English, then Gutenberg did them in with the printing press & Luther with knocking Rome down with the whole tradition of men thing, via the 5 solas
check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_solas
Mohammad used targums to weave together Jewish beliefs along with heretical unchristian beliefs into the quran, thats why Mohammad had to drive out the Jewish tribes from Medina, then kill the rest, because they caught him on all his Biblical errors, mistakes that are enshrined in the quran,
the quran is not Biblical, because targums were meant to be rabbinical teachings, analogies to explain the Bible or its concepts, something that Mohammad didn't know, because quite frankly, he didn't know the God of Abraham
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targum
W
WildBlueYonder
Guest
allah seems to be the same spirit that got Joseph Smith to believe he was a prophet, thus starting a new religion, masquerading as the "old" original, I think allah is a demon or satan
Jesus warned against false prophets, Paul warned against false prophets
since it seems that Mohammad didn't know the God of Abraham, he was a false prophet
I think Rushdie's book title says it all, thats why muslims wanted him killed, because he revived the story that Mohammad could be tricked by satan into putting verses into the quran, thus we get the "Satanic Verses", now erased in the sanitized & edited version of the quran we have now, out of chronological order, starts from longest sura to shortest, obvious editing, especially if you believe that the "Mother of the Book" (allah's eternal version) is in heaven with allah
also notice that the quran has had a few revisions, see Yemeni fragments, now hidden from scholars
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199901/koran
Now you've told us that the Quran is wrong, don't forget that millions of Muslims believe you are wrong.I believe you are both wrong because what you believe cannot be supported by empirical evidence. Religion is nothing more than superstition that is gradually approaching its sell-by date and from my point of view , the sooner the better.
Since most if not all Muslims believe that Jesus was not literally the son of God or came to provide atonement for our sins ,perhaps they regard Paul as a false prophet?
There is no doubt about it...all three abrahamic religions have their roots in the mythology of Yahweh. If Gabriel was the angel that Muhammed claims to have encountered then there is no way around this. Gabriel was associated with Yahweh...not Apollo,Zeus,Artemis,etc.
Unfortunately the Bible has many contradictions and moral problems just like the Quran does.
Most Christians seem to regard the "eternal" Old Testament as obsolete and try to distance themselves from it as much as possible.
If they were required to follow it today they would have to literally kill anyone who trys to teach them a different faith, even their own family, children, and friends, because that is exactly what portions of the Old Testament "eternally" command them to do.
This fruit of the Old Testament teachings can clearly be seen in the character and person of Paul who was a mass murderer.
Last edited:
I have indeed found my Father.
The only one worthy of the title.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
No one is going to the lake untill the day of Judgement. And i am sure it will be big enough for all those who will be going there.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
sowhatifit'sdark
Valued Senior Member
Perhaps you are one of the false prophets who wishes to increase the divide between the monotheists. Perhaps the false prophets were the very politically minded people who decided which texts would be made a part of the Bible and which would not and built up the Catholic Church. Perhaps Luther and Calvin were false prophets who took people from the one true church or even further from Jesus.
You as an individual, with great faith IN YOUR OWN INTUITION have decided that you believe this text to be holy and not that one. This churct to be right and that to be wrong. The history of Christianity is replete with many humans making decisions that could be fallible so pointing fingers at texts changes in Islam only looks silly and an excuse to feel smug.
You think you know what is God's word and what is not. Take responsibility for that decision and then ask yourself if you are sure you are not one of the false prophets, albeit a minor one.
I say they are both right, or should that be wrong ? Poor old god must get horribly confused.
Mind Sifter
Registered Member
which part of targum / bible quoted in qur'an? enlighten us.
which madrasah? liar.
quote from wikipedia:
"A typical Islamic school usually offers two courses of study: a hifz course; that is memorisation of the Qur'an (the person who commits the entire Qur'an to memory is called a hafiz); and an 'alim course leading the candidate to become an accepted scholar in the community. A regular curriculum includes courses in Arabic, Tafsir (Qur'anic interpretation), shari'ah (Islamic law), Hadith (recorded sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad), Mantiq (logic), and Muslim History. Depending on the educational demands, some madrasahs also offer additional advanced courses in Arabic literature, English and other foreign languages, as well as science and world history."
you've demonstrated your logic earlier regarding how muhammad got the name isa from the greek iesous. by now you must have an idea how we value your thoughts.
this further show us your lack of knowledge in literature even in a contemporary novel. aah, you were referring to the title of the novel. do you actually read it? you have no idea whatsoever about the so called 'satanic verses', do you? when was it erased from the qur'an? pray tell us.
do think as much as you like, just don't humiliate yourself by revealing your thoughts to others.
from the link you gave "Von Bothmer, however, in 1997 finished taking more than 35,000 microfilm pictures of the fragments, and has recently brought the pictures back to Germany. This means that soon Von Bothmer, Puin, and other scholars will finally have a chance to scrutinize the texts and to publish their findings freely"
that was 11 years ago and none of them able to came up with something regarding the 'original' vs. the 'sanitized/edited' version?
anyone knows any links?