I hope you're happy Oli.
The Essentials of Islam
- Thread starter Cris
- Start date
Reincarnation is unfounded speculation without a speck of evidence.
Prove it? Ha ha. Delusion.
Sock - not really. Damn.
Greetings danross, hope you and your family are well and prosperous,
Spidergoat, who is me, appreciates you speaking about Islam in your own words. Many Muslims spidergoat has encountered here only use quotes, as if individual judgement was prohibited. Spidergoat too believes in reincarnation, but no soul. We are made of atoms that go back to the Earth upon our death, and are incorporated again into other living things. Furthermore, our culture passes down from generation to generation, so in this sense reincarnation is very real.
Spidergoat believes Mohammed wanted a religion for the Arabs, and used the Bible as a source of legitimacy. Like Joseph Smith who invented Mormonism, he too was illiterate, and dictated his largely borrowed text to others. One would think that God could choose a messenger that could write, or at least teach Mohammed the skill.
That the words of the Koran are the result of human invention is made clear when Mohammed decided to allow certian tribes to continue their pagan rituals for political reasons, then later retracted them and said they were inspired by satan. Certianly, God could have prevented his messenger from being possessed by demons.
Spidergoat, who is me, appreciates you speaking about Islam in your own words. Many Muslims spidergoat has encountered here only use quotes, as if individual judgement was prohibited. Spidergoat too believes in reincarnation, but no soul. We are made of atoms that go back to the Earth upon our death, and are incorporated again into other living things. Furthermore, our culture passes down from generation to generation, so in this sense reincarnation is very real.
Spidergoat believes Mohammed wanted a religion for the Arabs, and used the Bible as a source of legitimacy. Like Joseph Smith who invented Mormonism, he too was illiterate, and dictated his largely borrowed text to others. One would think that God could choose a messenger that could write, or at least teach Mohammed the skill.
That the words of the Koran are the result of human invention is made clear when Mohammed decided to allow certian tribes to continue their pagan rituals for political reasons, then later retracted them and said they were inspired by satan. Certianly, God could have prevented his messenger from being possessed by demons.
Full stop. You'll have to demonstrate or recant this bit of fantasy first before anything you say is really worth listening to.
There are many verses in the OT, and NT that talk of Mohammed. Here is one from the OT. Isaiah 28: 9-13 “Whom will he teach knowledge? and whom will he make to understand the message? Those just weaned from milk? Those just drawn from the breasts? (This implies a simple type of people some call “camel jockeys.”) For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little. (The Qur’an was given pieces at a time, over about 20 years) For with stammering lips and another tongue (Mohammed spoke Arabic, not Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin or Greek) He will speak to this people, to whom He said, "This is the rest with which you may cause the weary to rest,'' And, "This is the refreshing''; yet they (Most Christians, and Jews) would not hear. But the word of the Lord was to them, "Precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little,'' that they (Christian and Jew) might go and fall backward, and be broken and snared and caught. ( and so Islam fights even today against Christian, and Jew.)
If we will read the history of the Qur’an, and compare it to Isaiah above, we will find the OT gives a splendid account of that future book. That proves the worth of both the OT, and Qur’an, or at least it should make one wonder. Maybe this person writing this should have 21 posts, so a link can be inserted, as the proof on Jesus not being crucified in the NT is longer than he thought, about two pages long.
If we will read the history of the Qur’an, and compare it to Isaiah above, we will find the OT gives a splendid account of that future book. That proves the worth of both the OT, and Qur’an, or at least it should make one wonder. Maybe this person writing this should have 21 posts, so a link can be inserted, as the proof on Jesus not being crucified in the NT is longer than he thought, about two pages long.
Geoff you must have had a serious grin in amusement after chastising the man in this first paragraph.
I find it hard to believe that you treated seriously his belief system here. No matter how foolish it is.
I should check that one out. Do you know if it was Umar who responsible for the change?
Why just the other day I was talkin' to sock puppet path and he said....
Nothing like a well-placed, crippling blow which leaves your opponent in agony. Unless it's money.
Well, the fact of the matter is that I did and do. I just think his criticisms of other religions, given the case of islamic theology, is silly. He's welcome to believe as he likes, however.
I believe it was under his authority. Check it out on wiki; there was also a German archaeological team that found some old Qurans that apparently didn't match the present ones. Apparently you have to bury or burn a Quran; you can't merely throw it away.
Greetings Spidergoat,
Excuse this delayed response. The same sentiments are echoed back to you, and your heirs.
It can not be said that your ideas on reincarnation are defective, since some in esoteric spiritual science, for example, Max Heindel of the Rosicrucian Fellowship, who is supported by many in the Theosophical Society, states that for most of humanity their soul is as good as destroyed, which in the final end is identical to not having a soul, or not acquiring one. Those two organizations support, and are authorities on Islam, at least that is found true after one learns to read "between the lines." Part of their secret mumbo jumbo. I draw a good deal of my deeper material on Islam from those people.
This is written in this manner to help foment a battle of semantics, as previously proven by the use of the third, and first person in one sentence all referring to myself. This author’s first amendment right, as long as I, he, she, we do not transgress the policies of the SciForums, which all are bound by in this limited arena, which limits should be expanded to encompass the world.
There is also mention of losing a soul in Acts 3:23 “And it shall come to pass that every soul who will not hear that Prophet (I agree with Muslim scholars who say that is Mohammed: Deuteronomy 18:18) shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.“
Excuse this delayed response. The same sentiments are echoed back to you, and your heirs.
It can not be said that your ideas on reincarnation are defective, since some in esoteric spiritual science, for example, Max Heindel of the Rosicrucian Fellowship, who is supported by many in the Theosophical Society, states that for most of humanity their soul is as good as destroyed, which in the final end is identical to not having a soul, or not acquiring one. Those two organizations support, and are authorities on Islam, at least that is found true after one learns to read "between the lines." Part of their secret mumbo jumbo. I draw a good deal of my deeper material on Islam from those people.
This is written in this manner to help foment a battle of semantics, as previously proven by the use of the third, and first person in one sentence all referring to myself. This author’s first amendment right, as long as I, he, she, we do not transgress the policies of the SciForums, which all are bound by in this limited arena, which limits should be expanded to encompass the world.
There is also mention of losing a soul in Acts 3:23 “And it shall come to pass that every soul who will not hear that Prophet (I agree with Muslim scholars who say that is Mohammed: Deuteronomy 18:18) shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.“
Did you actually say anything in that post?
Other than:
Reincarnation is not a given, it is not a fact, so ideas on the subject can be said to be defective.
and:
Other than:
which is patently untrue.
Reincarnation is not a given, it is not a fact, so ideas on the subject can be said to be defective.
and:
if you read "correctly" between the lines any source can be shown to support any doctrine. Spurious nonsense.
Where is Nature? Verses from the Qur’an were previously shown, Chapter, Imran, verses 1-3, that proved that at one time Muslims accepted the Injeel, NT and OT. Those verses do not conclude saying that “in the future a day will come when the copies of the Book of the people of Book that were once accepted by Muslims will be destroyed, where not one good complete copy can be found, so that even the Injeel is totally lost, and all that come after are false.” Many verses from other chapters in the Quran can be sited that are similar to Imran, 1-3, still you will never find one verse saying the Injeel is false, or even that only portions of the Injeel were preserved, so that today‘s Injeel contains some of the true Injeel, but most of it is falsified. The Qur’an says that it is best not to accept certain ideas in the NT, or Injeel, like do not say Jesus is God, or God is one of a Trinity, which implies that certain ideas are a test from Satan, testing mankind, but the Qur’an never once says the NT is false.
This Sciforum member must conclude, just as much as he would hope this were not true, that most of the Muslim world are like the savant in the story “Rain Man.” Many so called Muslims can memorize a good number of things, and appear brilliant, even becoming scholars, but practically speaking they are a nuisance to themselves, and to the rest of mankind: those who can think in a practical manner. The rain man was confined, and placed as ward of a guardian. I contend that one billion Muslims should be treated similarly, unless any one of them can prove to be different.
This is a repeat so that a so called Muslim does not have to go back to the top to reread this article. If not one sect of Islam can see the obvious told here concerning the purity of the NT, that such purity is here with us today, which is backed up by the Qur’an, then they are a menace to the free world. Since they do not follow the Qur’an they do no submit, therefore they are not Muslims. They also prove they are illogical, and should be placed in confinement. Say like Mormons live mostly in Utah, pass a law that those who act like Muslims today are to be confined to Saudi Arabia, or Iran, and so on. Let no such mentally defective Muslim be allowed to walk freely in the western civilized world, unless accompanied by a guardian, who can think logically.
This person, danross, was informed that judgments are allowed at SciForums. The above is my unfortunate judgment passed upon so call Muslims. The author of this article is not maligning so called Muslims, any more than Rain Man was maligned when he was placed under confinement, a ward of the state.
Hi Oli, at least half of the world, about 4 billion people, believe in reincarnation. Some recall their past lives. What is your defense? Is it: If a billion flies eat “s***” that does not mean you will eat it too? Are you a Muslim Oli?
This Sciforum member must conclude, just as much as he would hope this were not true, that most of the Muslim world are like the savant in the story “Rain Man.” Many so called Muslims can memorize a good number of things, and appear brilliant, even becoming scholars, but practically speaking they are a nuisance to themselves, and to the rest of mankind: those who can think in a practical manner. The rain man was confined, and placed as ward of a guardian. I contend that one billion Muslims should be treated similarly, unless any one of them can prove to be different.
This is a repeat so that a so called Muslim does not have to go back to the top to reread this article. If not one sect of Islam can see the obvious told here concerning the purity of the NT, that such purity is here with us today, which is backed up by the Qur’an, then they are a menace to the free world. Since they do not follow the Qur’an they do no submit, therefore they are not Muslims. They also prove they are illogical, and should be placed in confinement. Say like Mormons live mostly in Utah, pass a law that those who act like Muslims today are to be confined to Saudi Arabia, or Iran, and so on. Let no such mentally defective Muslim be allowed to walk freely in the western civilized world, unless accompanied by a guardian, who can think logically.
This person, danross, was informed that judgments are allowed at SciForums. The above is my unfortunate judgment passed upon so call Muslims. The author of this article is not maligning so called Muslims, any more than Rain Man was maligned when he was placed under confinement, a ward of the state.
Hi Oli, at least half of the world, about 4 billion people, believe in reincarnation. Some recall their past lives. What is your defense? Is it: If a billion flies eat “s***” that does not mean you will eat it too? Are you a Muslim Oli?
Proved? By your interpretation of 3 lines? No.
Marvellously stated. And I so loved the absolute proof and the supporting evidence that you provided . Oh wait, you didn't.
If it's "obvious" why would you need to point it out? Provide evidence.
Illogical? How do they differ from you? Only in the flavour of illogicality.
Define "mentally defective". From a non-theist perspective. Otherwise you're tarred with the same brush. Go join your fellows.
Other than stating they are mentally defective, illogical , and can't see your convoluted "thought processes", you mean.
With no evidence. Which makes them all rather illogical, don't you think?
Untrue. They CLAIM to do so.
Defence? Against what? Stupidity and/ or mass delusion?
Another assumption?
Last edited:
It looks like there is only danross interested in discussing Islam. Nature has fled, frightened I guess by reality, and Oli seems not interested in Islam, but more in taking out of context things that one says so the sane looks insane, making Oli most likely to be a retired editor for the news media, maybe Newsweek, Time magazine, or the Washington Post?
And still with the pseudo-mystical third person references. A boring, hackneyed third-rate B-movie SF ploy. YOU have an identity, regardless of "past names". Since you can register whatever user name you wish then why didn't you register under the name of your idenitity?
Discussing Islam or making unsupported statements?
Or maybe bored out his wits, too busy, any of a number of things.
Another ridiculous assumption on your part. I'm interested in everything.
Out of context? I respond to your unsupported statements as they are presented. You still have to back any one of them up.
You're claiming to be sane now? Bet you can't support that statement.
You see, one fallacious assumption after another. Here's a hint, check my profile - I live in the UK. I don't think I've even read any of those publications, let alone edited them.
If you truly are interested in discussing anything then please do so. First give your proofs or supporting evidence for your claims and we can proceed from there. Otherwise forget about it.
Oli, please,
In the post of danross it said that there was no verse in the Qur'an that says the Injeel is falsified. Therefore all one needs do is show one verse that proves danross wrong to prove him wrong. Please pay attention: How can anyone, even Oli, prove that the Injeel is false when no verse exist in the Qur'an. You can not quote what does not exist. Yet Oli wants me to quote that which can not be found, no matter how hard one looks. Logic, simply use logic.
Here is what happened to danross recently, after trying to find someone that wished to discuss Islam, and not just discuss their petty egos, but more petty egos were found. This came from following a link shown at Sciforums. Here is the letter to askIslam to report ChatIslam:
I joined the chat room called ChatIslam.com, and the lecturer was a person who I could not see on the monitor, but only heard his lecture. Many people came and left while I tried to listen to the speech which was heavily accented in a southern, USA afro pronunciation. I thought that might prove others had a hard time understanding him. During the speech I made a short comment that the afro accent makes it hard to understand the lecture. Then a person, called Monitor D began to insult me. Called me a racists, and on, and on. I said Presidential candidate Jesse Jackson had the same communication problem, but the next time he went to run for President, after losing, that I could finally understand what he was saying because he got speech lessons on pronunciation for Anglo Saxon speech patterns. Those are facts, not racists comments. I told monitor D that if the lecture was in Japanese, that I would ask it to be in English, and that does not make me a racists. Monitor D would never stop insulting me, and finally he blocked me from the chat room after I told him I would report him for his hateful conduct.
I asked him to stop writing me, so I could ask the question I came there to ask, but he kept popping up, always insulting me, until he band me from the session.
This happened on Sunday June 3, 2007 around 10:10 AM.
Hope you can help that person.
God bless you, As salamu alikum
Dan Ross
In the post of danross it said that there was no verse in the Qur'an that says the Injeel is falsified. Therefore all one needs do is show one verse that proves danross wrong to prove him wrong. Please pay attention: How can anyone, even Oli, prove that the Injeel is false when no verse exist in the Qur'an. You can not quote what does not exist. Yet Oli wants me to quote that which can not be found, no matter how hard one looks. Logic, simply use logic.
Here is what happened to danross recently, after trying to find someone that wished to discuss Islam, and not just discuss their petty egos, but more petty egos were found. This came from following a link shown at Sciforums. Here is the letter to askIslam to report ChatIslam:
I joined the chat room called ChatIslam.com, and the lecturer was a person who I could not see on the monitor, but only heard his lecture. Many people came and left while I tried to listen to the speech which was heavily accented in a southern, USA afro pronunciation. I thought that might prove others had a hard time understanding him. During the speech I made a short comment that the afro accent makes it hard to understand the lecture. Then a person, called Monitor D began to insult me. Called me a racists, and on, and on. I said Presidential candidate Jesse Jackson had the same communication problem, but the next time he went to run for President, after losing, that I could finally understand what he was saying because he got speech lessons on pronunciation for Anglo Saxon speech patterns. Those are facts, not racists comments. I told monitor D that if the lecture was in Japanese, that I would ask it to be in English, and that does not make me a racists. Monitor D would never stop insulting me, and finally he blocked me from the chat room after I told him I would report him for his hateful conduct.
I asked him to stop writing me, so I could ask the question I came there to ask, but he kept popping up, always insulting me, until he band me from the session.
This happened on Sunday June 3, 2007 around 10:10 AM.
Hope you can help that person.
God bless you, As salamu alikum
Dan Ross
Greetings, Oh Pretentious One.
Still you fail to answer anything.
I want you to prove your interpretation. For example,
What does a lengthy post on someone's inability to understand a regional accent have to do with the topic at hand?
Other than a deflection from the fact that you still haven't supported any of your assertions?
Still you fail to answer anything.
No, I want you back up your assertions. I didn't say anything about the Injeel, you are confused.
I want you to prove your interpretation. For example,
No, it implies (or states) CHILDREN. But you for some reason seem to think otherwise. Why?
What does a lengthy post on someone's inability to understand a regional accent have to do with the topic at hand?
Other than a deflection from the fact that you still haven't supported any of your assertions?
Ashkirk, Ana la tet kalam al Arabiah.
Last edited: