TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
AdamB wrote:Are you another christian on a "glad"?
AdamB wrote:Habit7 wrote:Who was the first Muslim? Muhammad, Moses or Abraham and Jacob?
Define muslim and I'll answer.
Habit7 wrote:I will allow you a Muslim, to define what is Muslim. Who better to do it than you?
Sacchetto Boutique wrote:afaik, the 1st muslim (one who accepts with firm belief that there is ONE GOD) was Adam (as) and every single prophet after him till Muhammad (saws) preached the same oneness of God...so id say they were all muslim.
Sacchetto Boutique wrote:where did i say islam is as old as Adam (as)? Adam was prophet number1 who preached that there is a God and he has no partners..Adam taught this to his children but evil crept in...the reason, I believe that there were so many prophets was because evil (Satan) kept tricking people to change/ add/ alter, mis-interpret/ Mis-understand God so that they will stray from the correct path. Muslims call God Allah but he has many names such as -
Ar-Rahman (The All-Compassionate),
Al-Malik(The Absolute Ruler),
As-Salam (The Source of Peace)
Al-Bari' (The Maker of Order)
Al-`Alim (The Knower of All) etc etc
turbotusty wrote:the Holy Trinity is a most sacred symbol and universal truth that permeates ALL OF EXISTENCE Err......no it is not! salt and water when mixed becomes saline solution. or Holy Water.. because of this same universal truth U lost me. man must join with woman to form a whole new being known as child A man doesnt nescessarily have to join with a women. A baby can be made in a lab. it is the beginning and end of life itself whilst still accounting for everything in between. there is nothing in this existence that functions outside of the Holy Trinity's conceptual symbolism Ammm...yes there is. only a fool would refute the Holy Trinity for their literal dogmatic perception How about non christians, or 'uncontacted' people? Are they fools?. living in dogmatic interpretation and literal transliteration is the downfall of ALL in all faiths.
turbotusty wrote:it have no backtracking. u attempted to allude to say adam was a muslim.. to which the ramifications would cite islam as being the first religion.
"so id say they were all muslim" - this statement didnt include adam too although u called his name just before that?
Kasey wrote:turbotusty wrote:the Holy Trinity is a most sacred symbol and universal truth that permeates ALL OF EXISTENCE Err......no it is not! salt and water when mixed becomes saline solution. or Holy Water.. because of this same universal truth U lost me. man must join with woman to form a whole new being known as child A man doesnt nescessarily have to join with a women. A baby can be made in a lab. it is the beginning and end of life itself whilst still accounting for everything in between. there is nothing in this existence that functions outside of the Holy Trinity's conceptual symbolism Ammm...yes there is. only a fool would refute the Holy Trinity for their literal dogmatic perception How about non christians, or 'uncontacted' people? Are they fools?. living in dogmatic interpretation and literal transliteration is the downfall of ALL in all faiths.
U keep on making opinionative, baseless claims and expect people to go along with you. Please do not do this. Sooner or later, people will stop trying to understand where the hell you are coming from, and just write you off as a nut.
IS MOHAMMED A DESCENDENT OF ISHMAEL?
By Dr. Rafat Amari
The genealogy fabricated by Ibn-Ishak contradicts the sayings of Mohammed, who expressed his ignorance about his ancestors prior to his 17th ancestor.
Ibn Ishak was considered by the Muslim scholars of his time as being guilty of forgery and fabricating false genealogies.[1][i]
Long before Ibn Ishak, Muslims who lived in Mohammed’s own time also fabricated genealogies in an attempt to connect Mohammed to the descendants of Ishmael. Mohammed, himself, rejected all of these false genealogies, and he put limits regarding the genealogy of his ancestors. Regarding Mohammed’s own rejection of the false genealogies, Amru bin al-As wrote:
Mohammed genealogized himself regarding his ancestors until he reached al-Nather bin Kinaneh, then he said, “anyone who claimed otherwise or added further ancestors, has lied.”[2][ii]
By this, Mohammed confessed that neither he, nor anyone else, knew about his ancestors beyond al-Nather bin Kinaneh. Nather bin Kinaneh is the 17th ancestor in the genealogy which Mohammed recognized as true. Other narrations of the customs, or sayings, of Mohammed, called Hadiths, show Mohammed refused to be genealogized prior to Maad, معدwho some suggested, was the 4th ancestor prior to al-Nather bin Kinaneh.[3][iii]
When we look at the ancestors of Mohammed, it’s reasonable to estimate 30 years for each generation of the 17 ancestors of Mohammed. Therefore, we can conclude that Mohammed knew about the genealogy of his tribe as far back as about 510 years. If we want to add the other four ancestors that Mohammed listed, we would go back 630 years. The truth is, nobody knew beyond such date. How, then, could Ibn Ishak and his followers reliably document a genealogy back to Ishmael, who lived in 2050 B.C.? This gives approximately 2000 years between the 21st ancestor of Mohammed and Ishmael. How could Ibn Ishak claim the Ishmaelites lived in Mecca during this period and give details about their history when Mohammed himself said that nobody knew about his relatives prior to his 17th or 21st ancestor? Mecca was not even in existence during this period, as we have clearly demonstrated. Ibn Ishak’s genealogy contradicts Mohammed’s own claims that he did not know his ancestors farther back than al-Nather bin Kinaneh, the 17th ancestor before himself
[1][i] Halabieh, I, page 93 ; comments on Ibn Hisham, page m
[2][ii] Halabieh I, page 36
[3][iii] Masudi, Muruj al-Thahab, Beirut-Lebanon, 1991, II, pages 280-282
http://religionresearchinstitute.org/Mo ... .htm#_edn2
Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:it have no backtracking. u attempted to allude to say adam was a muslim.. to which the ramifications would cite islam as being the first religion.
"so id say they were all muslim" - this statement didnt include adam too although u called his name just before that?
dude..lol islam is over 1400yrs old... it came about when the Quran was revealed to the prophet Muhammad (saws). Today, muslims follow 'islam' the religion. The rules are outlined in great detail in the hadiths as well as the quran itself.
A muslim is any person who accepts God as the lord and creator/ sustainer of the universe and everything in it, he is the most gracious, the most merciful, owner of the day of judgement. Thee alone do we worship, thee alone do we ask for help.
You are confusing "islam" with "muslim" and u claim to know so much
"Muslim" is an Arabic word meaning "one who submits to God".
turbotusty wrote:Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:it have no backtracking. u attempted to allude to say adam was a muslim.. to which the ramifications would cite islam as being the first religion.
"so id say they were all muslim" - this statement didnt include adam too although u called his name just before that?
dude..lol islam is over 1400yrs old... it came about when the Quran was revealed to the prophet Muhammad (saws). Today, muslims follow 'islam' the religion. The rules are outlined in great detail in the hadiths as well as the quran itself.
A muslim is any person who accepts God as the lord and creator/ sustainer of the universe and everything in it, he is the most gracious, the most merciful, owner of the day of judgement. Thee alone do we worship, thee alone do we ask for help.
You are confusing "islam" with "muslim" and u claim to know so much
"Muslim" is an Arabic word meaning "one who submits to God".
ahhh well that is an interesting switch in perception. so we are not claiming anymore then that a muslim is anyone who follows islam.. but a muslim is anyone that follows God.
that is an interesting switch because i doubt anyone else in the thread wouldve taken that as the perception as u were taking. pretty sure everyone assumes when u say 'muslim' u meant 'follower of the islamic faith and its practices'.
but without making it clear that u were referring to the fundamental definition of the word 'muslim' can be misleading.
in that regard i have no problem saying that i am muslim. i also have no problem in saying praise Allah! but i also have no problem in saying Praise Shiva, Thor or any other and all the Gods including Osiris etc. i can pray in any temple of any faith as a result of my unified faith. i would insult no other faith no matter how foolish it may seem. at the end of the day we all mean the same thing. God is creator of us and the environment we live in. the planets etc. The Supreme Being of which there can only be one who is absolutely supreme is in my eyes the embodiement of the stories of all the Gods on the earth. his name doesnt matter. when i pray i address him as 'Supreme Creator' to make sure im addressing the right person. i even have my own secret name for God. but we all agree on a supreme being even tho we cant define him properly or find him. so why hate others for their faith? y look down on another's faith.
well there is only ONE GOD
while a muslim may look down on a hindu for the flaw of worshipping idols a muslim is guilty of not understanding why he prostrates the way he does in temple or why he is so prone to physical aggression even to the point of disobeying the 10 commandments. all have flaws. and all have strengths.. christian may be naive fools, but their strength is compassion! whether the wicked takes advantage of them or not they receive their blessing for their works, tho they live the lives of hypocrits in many instances.
You cant say a muslim looks down on a hindu..this isnt a religious thing, this is a personal thing... a hindu can do the same and a christian can do the same. I have hindu and christian family who i love and would never harm. If a corrupt christian, hindu or muslim, intends to harm others and claim its the word of God, they will answer for that on judgement day.
i hope none are offended and can accept that at the very least, these book were written and copied by the hands of men. they were translated into different languages. grammar and sentence structure is different in different languages and much is lost in translation to another language. by the hands of man leaves opening for errors in translation among other error types. fighting among religions is pointless. your God is my God and everyone else's.
sons and daughters of God. we are his product. not just our bodies but our spirit. our Spirit is the Christ Consciousness. it's a big code, a puzzle to crack. and the code.. is now cracked!
Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:it have no backtracking. u attempted to allude to say adam was a muslim.. to which the ramifications would cite islam as being the first religion.
"so id say they were all muslim" - this statement didnt include adam too although u called his name just before that?
dude..lol islam is over 1400yrs old... it came about when the Quran was revealed to the prophet Muhammad (saws). Today, muslims follow 'islam' the religion. The rules are outlined in great detail in the hadiths as well as the quran itself.
A muslim is any person who accepts God as the lord and creator/ sustainer of the universe and everything in it, he is the most gracious, the most merciful, owner of the day of judgement. Thee alone do we worship, thee alone do we ask for help.
You are confusing "islam" with "muslim" and u claim to know so much
"Muslim" is an Arabic word meaning "one who submits to God".
ahhh well that is an interesting switch in perception. so we are not claiming anymore then that a muslim is anyone who follows islam.. but a muslim is anyone that follows God.
that is an interesting switch because i doubt anyone else in the thread wouldve taken that as the perception as u were taking. pretty sure everyone assumes when u say 'muslim' u meant 'follower of the islamic faith and its practices'.
but without making it clear that u were referring to the fundamental definition of the word 'muslim' can be misleading.
in that regard i have no problem saying that i am muslim. i also have no problem in saying praise Allah! but i also have no problem in saying Praise Shiva, Thor or any other and all the Gods including Osiris etc. i can pray in any temple of any faith as a result of my unified faith. i would insult no other faith no matter how foolish it may seem. at the end of the day we all mean the same thing. God is creator of us and the environment we live in. the planets etc. The Supreme Being of which there can only be one who is absolutely supreme is in my eyes the embodiement of the stories of all the Gods on the earth. his name doesnt matter. when i pray i address him as 'Supreme Creator' to make sure im addressing the right person. i even have my own secret name for God. but we all agree on a supreme being even tho we cant define him properly or find him. so why hate others for their faith? y look down on another's faith.
well there is only ONE GOD
while a muslim may look down on a hindu for the flaw of worshipping idols a muslim is guilty of not understanding why he prostrates the way he does in temple or why he is so prone to physical aggression even to the point of disobeying the 10 commandments. all have flaws. and all have strengths.. christian may be naive fools, but their strength is compassion! whether the wicked takes advantage of them or not they receive their blessing for their works, tho they live the lives of hypocrits in many instances.
You cant say a muslim looks down on a hindu..this isnt a religious thing, this is a personal thing... a hindu can do the same and a christian can do the same. I have hindu and christian family who i love and would never harm. If a corrupt christian, hindu or muslim, intends to harm others and claim its the word of God, they will answer for that on judgement day.
i hope none are offended and can accept that at the very least, these book were written and copied by the hands of men. they were translated into different languages. grammar and sentence structure is different in different languages and much is lost in translation to another language. by the hands of man leaves opening for errors in translation among other error types. fighting among religions is pointless. your God is my God and everyone else's.
Yes again..there is only one God and there will always be just one God. He has no son, no wife etc etc..
Habit7 wrote:This guy differsIS MOHAMMED A DESCENDENT OF ISHMAEL?
By Dr. Rafat Amari
The genealogy fabricated by Ibn-Ishak contradicts the sayings of Mohammed, who expressed his ignorance about his ancestors prior to his 17th ancestor.
Ibn Ishak was considered by the Muslim scholars of his time as being guilty of forgery and fabricating false genealogies.[1][i]
Long before Ibn Ishak, Muslims who lived in Mohammed’s own time also fabricated genealogies in an attempt to connect Mohammed to the descendants of Ishmael. Mohammed, himself, rejected all of these false genealogies, and he put limits regarding the genealogy of his ancestors. Regarding Mohammed’s own rejection of the false genealogies, Amru bin al-As wrote:
Mohammed genealogized himself regarding his ancestors until he reached al-Nather bin Kinaneh, then he said, “anyone who claimed otherwise or added further ancestors, has lied.”[2][ii]
By this, Mohammed confessed that neither he, nor anyone else, knew about his ancestors beyond al-Nather bin Kinaneh. Nather bin Kinaneh is the 17th ancestor in the genealogy which Mohammed recognized as true. Other narrations of the customs, or sayings, of Mohammed, called Hadiths, show Mohammed refused to be genealogized prior to Maad, معدwho some suggested, was the 4th ancestor prior to al-Nather bin Kinaneh.[3][iii]
When we look at the ancestors of Mohammed, it’s reasonable to estimate 30 years for each generation of the 17 ancestors of Mohammed. Therefore, we can conclude that Mohammed knew about the genealogy of his tribe as far back as about 510 years. If we want to add the other four ancestors that Mohammed listed, we would go back 630 years. The truth is, nobody knew beyond such date. How, then, could Ibn Ishak and his followers reliably document a genealogy back to Ishmael, who lived in 2050 B.C.? This gives approximately 2000 years between the 21st ancestor of Mohammed and Ishmael. How could Ibn Ishak claim the Ishmaelites lived in Mecca during this period and give details about their history when Mohammed himself said that nobody knew about his relatives prior to his 17th or 21st ancestor? Mecca was not even in existence during this period, as we have clearly demonstrated. Ibn Ishak’s genealogy contradicts Mohammed’s own claims that he did not know his ancestors farther back than al-Nather bin Kinaneh, the 17th ancestor before himself
[1][i] Halabieh, I, page 93 ; comments on Ibn Hisham, page m
[2][ii] Halabieh I, page 36
[3][iii] Masudi, Muruj al-Thahab, Beirut-Lebanon, 1991, II, pages 280-282
http://religionresearchinstitute.org/Mo ... .htm#_edn2
among other things
crazybalhead wrote:Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:Sacchetto Boutique wrote:turbotusty wrote:it have no backtracking. u attempted to allude to say adam was a muslim.. to which the ramifications would cite islam as being the first religion.
"so id say they were all muslim" - this statement didnt include adam too although u called his name just before that?
dude..lol islam is over 1400yrs old... it came about when the Quran was revealed to the prophet Muhammad (saws). Today, muslims follow 'islam' the religion. The rules are outlined in great detail in the hadiths as well as the quran itself.
A muslim is any person who accepts God as the lord and creator/ sustainer of the universe and everything in it, he is the most gracious, the most merciful, owner of the day of judgement. Thee alone do we worship, thee alone do we ask for help.
You are confusing "islam" with "muslim" and u claim to know so much
"Muslim" is an Arabic word meaning "one who submits to God".
ahhh well that is an interesting switch in perception. so we are not claiming anymore then that a muslim is anyone who follows islam.. but a muslim is anyone that follows God.
that is an interesting switch because i doubt anyone else in the thread wouldve taken that as the perception as u were taking. pretty sure everyone assumes when u say 'muslim' u meant 'follower of the islamic faith and its practices'.
but without making it clear that u were referring to the fundamental definition of the word 'muslim' can be misleading.
in that regard i have no problem saying that i am muslim. i also have no problem in saying praise Allah! but i also have no problem in saying Praise Shiva, Thor or any other and all the Gods including Osiris etc. i can pray in any temple of any faith as a result of my unified faith. i would insult no other faith no matter how foolish it may seem. at the end of the day we all mean the same thing. God is creator of us and the environment we live in. the planets etc. The Supreme Being of which there can only be one who is absolutely supreme is in my eyes the embodiement of the stories of all the Gods on the earth. his name doesnt matter. when i pray i address him as 'Supreme Creator' to make sure im addressing the right person. i even have my own secret name for God. but we all agree on a supreme being even tho we cant define him properly or find him. so why hate others for their faith? y look down on another's faith.
well there is only ONE GOD
while a muslim may look down on a hindu for the flaw of worshipping idols a muslim is guilty of not understanding why he prostrates the way he does in temple or why he is so prone to physical aggression even to the point of disobeying the 10 commandments. all have flaws. and all have strengths.. christian may be naive fools, but their strength is compassion! whether the wicked takes advantage of them or not they receive their blessing for their works, tho they live the lives of hypocrits in many instances.
You cant say a muslim looks down on a hindu..this isnt a religious thing, this is a personal thing... a hindu can do the same and a christian can do the same. I have hindu and christian family who i love and would never harm. If a corrupt christian, hindu or muslim, intends to harm others and claim its the word of God, they will answer for that on judgement day.
i hope none are offended and can accept that at the very least, these book were written and copied by the hands of men. they were translated into different languages. grammar and sentence structure is different in different languages and much is lost in translation to another language. by the hands of man leaves opening for errors in translation among other error types. fighting among religions is pointless. your God is my God and everyone else's.
Yes again..there is only one God and there will always be just one God. He has no son, no wife etc etc..
So hinduism and islam believe the same thing then. NICE!!!
Sacchetto Boutique wrote:whether he is a direct decendant or indirect, that wasnt my point...i was merely trying to show that the prophets that christians believe are the ones we also believe..the blue highlighted ones are the ones made mention of in the quran afaik
AdamB wrote:^^It was a rhetorical question meant to provoke thought.
Are you another christian on a "glad"? There have been many on this thread, varying from one extreme to the next.
None seem to understand the simple concept of GOD not being in "need". Full stop.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: alfa and 101 guests
