TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
epicd spike wrote: That's like saying a medicine is useless because one label was misprinted.
brainchild wrote:bluefete wrote:brainchild wrote:mediahouse wrote:brainchild
The baby is pretty impressive, but unless d writing is saying something we don't know it's just weird and not much of a message.
Actually the writings on the baby body said " be thankful and grateful to allah" watch the video around 20 seconds you will hear the lady say it.
so what more you need
To date there are many people and tribes that dont know anything about any religion , the purpose of the prophets was to spread the message in some cases the message wasnt delivered.
Actually that was jus one of the things, the others are random verses from the Koran, which as i said is no new information therefore it's cool but useless.If u checked the link i posted u would see that everyone gets "signs".
If something is truly ordained by God u can bet the bank on it happening. So the message not being delivered would count as a failure and the true Creator knows no such thing. My point here is all religions on this earth, past and present, had its day in the sun. They all had prophets, oracles, watever u wanna call them, they all had stories that go back so far that the only real proof existed in the minds of the believers and they all are still waiting for the return of their god or gods to collect some grand prize. Seriously...how long are we gonna play this game?
Tell me this....If we are all children of God/Allah y does the Koran and Bible(can't speak for the rest) promote slavery and kings living in ridiculous luxury? aren't we all created equally? shouldn't mankind be taught to uplift eachother with no man having power over another? I understand a man being chosen by God to lead but shouldn't something like this happen in a manner that we can all see and know this is the chosen man by God? These books teach us to live in and accept the flawed world we live in now. The wheels can be set in motion at anytime for man to prosper as one, but we are side tracked by this pursuit of the unknown.
So that is why Manning built the palace!!!!
But some of these same leaders were self-made millionaires or grew up around luxury. Abraham, Joseph, Moses, to name a few.
Yeah...but wat is ur point here?
Wat i'm saying is dat it clearly shows someting is wrong here...it's fine if a deity determines dat only a chosen few have d intelligence or worthiness to pass on his message. But when u say we're all your children/people, created equally in ur image, take us out of bondage and promote us having others in bondage to me dis makes no sense.
In fact the exodus didn't even make sense!
What about sending a messenger/prophet to every culture? Egyptian, Hebrews, Incans, Mayans, Native Americans...everyone who was around at dat time. This messenger tells the same story of the same God, teaches them all to understand and live in harmony with the planet we were created upon, teaches us how to live in a nutshell. We all then have d choice of coming together and prospering as one or live apart but have freedom of movement, tolerance and respect for eachother, bcos at the end of the day we're all brothers sharing a common goal. That sounds more like the movements an all supreme being to me. Not one where the majority is basically taught to be a follower of other men who basically give themselves authority.
Tell me this...who gave england to the royal family? was it God? bcos if it wasn't i don't see y they're so all powerful and have the right to make laws to govern me. If people don't wake up every morning and go work for the queen she's just another old woman, money can't build a castle without people doing the physical work... same goes for every other leader on d planet. Why would these religious text promote such a way of life? Brings Animal Farm to mind "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others".
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:epicd spike wrote: That's like saying a medicine is useless because one label was misprinted.
yup - great analogysMASH wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:epicd spike wrote: That's like saying a medicine is useless because one label was misprinted.
if u cannot decipher what was the writing i would not know what u are using. if u can decipher what is printed, but it is wrongly labeled, u would use in inappropriately, oft with disastrous results.
if u know the real medicine, despite the inaccurate labeling, then u would not need the label.
but if u don't have the knowledge of what was the original intent of the material, and all u have is the inaccurate type, it would be achieving an effect, just not what was intended in the first place.
MG Man wrote:suppose god is a sadistic iron in black leather? u still think u well prepared?
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:yup - great analogysMASH wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:epicd spike wrote: That's like saying a medicine is useless because one label was misprinted.
if u cannot decipher what was the writing i would not know what u are using. if u can decipher what is printed, but it is wrongly labeled, u would use in inappropriately, oft with disastrous results.
if u know the real medicine, despite the inaccurate labeling, then u would not need the label.
but if u don't have the knowledge of what was the original intent of the material, and all u have is the inaccurate type, it would be achieving an effect, just not what was intended in the first place.
imagine if it ended up being a placebo
turbohead wrote:brainchild wrote:Yeah...but wat is ur point here?
Wat i'm saying is dat it clearly shows someting is wrong here...it's fine if a deity determines dat only a chosen few have d intelligence or worthiness to pass on his message. But when u say we're all your children/people, created equally in ur image, take us out of bondage and promote us having others in bondage to me dis makes no sense.
In fact the exodus didn't even make sense!
What about sending a messenger/prophet to every culture? Egyptian, Hebrews, Incans, Mayans, Native Americans...everyone who was around at dat time. This messenger tells the same story of the same God, teaches them all to understand and live in harmony with the planet we were created upon, teaches us how to live in a nutshell. We all then have d choice of coming together and prospering as one or live apart but have freedom of movement, tolerance and respect for eachother, bcos at the end of the day we're all brothers sharing a common goal. That sounds more like the movements an all supreme being to me. Not one where the majority is basically taught to be a follower of other men who basically give themselves authority.
Tell me this...who gave england to the royal family? was it God? bcos if it wasn't i don't see y they're so all powerful and have the right to make laws to govern me. If people don't wake up every morning and go work for the queen she's just another old woman, money can't build a castle without people doing the physical work... same goes for every other leader on d planet. Why would these religious text promote such a way of life? Brings Animal Farm to mind "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others".
where in the quran have you seen it promoting this slavery and kings palace.... if you read the life story of the Prophet Muhammed(saw) you would see that every ting he was given he gave it away in charity, after his death his amour was sold to allow some debts to be paid of. as i posted in the vid about 2 pgs back you would see where he was labelled as the most influential man in the history of mankind. i say this without belittling any previous Prophets, king solomon and david were just rulers, majority of the jewish Prophets werent accepted by their ppl and the msg was disregarded.
turbohead wrote: if you read the life story of the Prophet Muhammed(saw) you would see that every ting he was given he gave it away in charity, after his death his amour was sold to allow some debts to be paid of.
)turbohead wrote: as i posted in the vid about 2 pgs back you would see where he was labelled as the most influential man in the history of mankind.
So you're saying your whole point in following a religion is "just in case" it's true?meccalli wrote:Living as a christian who takes everything that i hear with a grain of salt..It only keeps me in line, helps me through tough times and takes nothing away from me enjoying my stay on earth. Should I die and there be no God...So be it. Should there be a God..well I consider myself prepared to meet him.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:So you're saying your whole point in following a religion is "just in case" it's true?meccalli wrote:Living as a christian who takes everything that i hear with a grain of salt..It only keeps me in line, helps me through tough times and takes nothing away from me enjoying my stay on earth. Should I die and there be no God...So be it. Should there be a God..well I consider myself prepared to meet him.
and you expect the "just in case God" to be so stupid that he wont realise your lack of sincerity?
sMASH wrote:the thing about slaves, is that there was slavery. some people had slaves, some societies slaves were common place. slavery was very present. even if u wanted to go against it, it was prevalent, like banking today. as much as one may not like to involve themselves with banks, this is the way the world works right now, so u comply.
in a time with little means of sustenance, and less excess, it was seen as a means of employment by the badly off. a slave would have available to them what they may not be able to provide for themselves.
but, slavery was terrible, where slaves although paid, sometimes, were seen as little more than animals, as we expect.
but the islamic treatment of slaves was very humane, comparatively. slaves had to be clothed, fed, and housed as the masters could afford, which would be like them selves more or less. the slaves became like dependents that the masters were responsible for, and not property.
it would be like very respectable servitude.
slavery, although allowed was discouraged. as most times, if some one recognizes that they sin, and want to atone, most times the first option recommended was to free a slave. things like giving alms, feeding poor, even performing prayers were options only after the freeing of a slave.
some people would prefer slavery because they would not be able to survive other wise.
u must know about people who employ others just because they feel sorry for them. they don't have much skills or abilities to make it on their own, and the boss 'give them ah lil enn'. in a society ( not a time period, eh,) which allows slaves, most likely they would be so.
if ever ur in a place or time which allows slaves, islam has guidelines to treat with it.
sMASH wrote:
but the islamic treatment of slaves was very humane, comparatively. slaves had to be clothed, fed, and housed as the masters could afford, which would be like them selves more or less. the slaves became like dependents that the masters were responsible for, and not property.
it would be like very respectable servitude.
if ever ur in a place or time which allows slaves, islam has guidelines to treat with it.
"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;"
Exodus 20:5, KJV
brainchild wrote:sMASH wrote:the thing about slaves, is that there was slavery. some people had slaves, some societies slaves were common place. slavery was very present. even if u wanted to go against it, it was prevalent, like banking today. as much as one may not like to involve themselves with banks, this is the way the world works right now, so u comply.
in a time with little means of sustenance, and less excess, it was seen as a means of employment by the badly off. a slave would have available to them what they may not be able to provide for themselves.
but, slavery was terrible, where slaves although paid, sometimes, were seen as little more than animals, as we expect.
but the islamic treatment of slaves was very humane, comparatively. slaves had to be clothed, fed, and housed as the masters could afford, which would be like them selves more or less. the slaves became like dependents that the masters were responsible for, and not property.
it would be like very respectable servitude.
slavery, although allowed was discouraged. as most times, if some one recognizes that they sin, and want to atone, most times the first option recommended was to free a slave. things like giving alms, feeding poor, even performing prayers were options only after the freeing of a slave.
some people would prefer slavery because they would not be able to survive other wise.
u must know about people who employ others just because they feel sorry for them. they don't have much skills or abilities to make it on their own, and the boss 'give them ah lil enn'. in a society ( not a time period, eh,) which allows slaves, most likely they would be so.
if ever ur in a place or time which allows slaves, islam has guidelines to treat with it.
I always understood the place slavery had in society, i was simply expanding bcos apparently Turbohead nvr came across it in his reading.
turbohead wrote: some ppl choose to say islam was spread by the sword, why not reverse the saying and say the defended their sole belief in the oneness of God by means of engaging arms with rivaling tribes.
sMASH wrote:christianity placed great importance on the two forbidden trees in the garden of eden
sMASH wrote: the original sin was hereditary, so if sumthing wasn't devised all of man was goin to hell.
turbohead wrote:brainchild wrote:sMASH wrote:the thing about slaves, is that there was slavery. some people had slaves, some societies slaves were common place. slavery was very present. even if u wanted to go against it, it was prevalent, like banking today. as much as one may not like to involve themselves with banks, this is the way the world works right now, so u comply.
in a time with little means of sustenance, and less excess, it was seen as a means of employment by the badly off. a slave would have available to them what they may not be able to provide for themselves.
but, slavery was terrible, where slaves although paid, sometimes, were seen as little more than animals, as we expect.
but the islamic treatment of slaves was very humane, comparatively. slaves had to be clothed, fed, and housed as the masters could afford, which would be like them selves more or less. the slaves became like dependents that the masters were responsible for, and not property.
it would be like very respectable servitude.
slavery, although allowed was discouraged. as most times, if some one recognizes that they sin, and want to atone, most times the first option recommended was to free a slave. things like giving alms, feeding poor, even performing prayers were options only after the freeing of a slave.
some people would prefer slavery because they would not be able to survive other wise.
u must know about people who employ others just because they feel sorry for them. they don't have much skills or abilities to make it on their own, and the boss 'give them ah lil enn'. in a society ( not a time period, eh,) which allows slaves, most likely they would be so.
if ever ur in a place or time which allows slaves, islam has guidelines to treat with it.
I always understood the place slavery had in society, i was simply expanding bcos apparently Turbohead nvr came across it in his reading.
Slaves are mentioned in at least twenty-nine verses of the Qur'an.
The Qur'an includes multiple references to slaves, slave women, slave concubinage, and the freeing of slaves. It accepts the institution of slavery. It may be noted that the word 'abd' (slave) is rarely used, being more commonly replaced by some periphrasis such as ma malakat aymanukum ("that which your right hands own"). The Qur'an recognizes the basic inequality between master and slave and the rights of the former over the latter. The historian Bruschvig states that from a spiritual perspective, "the slave has the same value as the free man, and the same eternity is in store for his soul; in this earthly life, failing emancipation, there remains the fact of his inferior status, to which he must piously resign himself."[2][17] The Qur'an also recognizes concubinage.[18][19] A master may make his female slave as his concubine and, if she is a Muslim, he can marry her.[20] Abstinence however is said to be a better choice.[14] The Qur'an urges, without commanding, kindness to the slave[21] and recommends, their liberation by purchase or manumission. The freeing of slaves is recommended both for the expiation of sins[22] and as an act of simple benevolence.[23] It exhorts masters to allow slaves to earn or purchase their own freedom (manumission contracts)."
Mamluks were slave soldiers who were converted to Islam and served the Muslim caliphs and the Ayyubid sultans during the Middle Ages. Over time, they became a powerful military caste numerously defeating the Crusaders and, on more than one occasion, they seized power for themselves, for example ruling Egypt in the Mamluk Sultanate from 1250-1517.
Salafi and traditionalist juridical support for slavery
In recent years, according to some scholars,[118] there has been a "worrying trend" of "reopening" of the issue of slavery by some conservative Salafi Islamic scholars after its "closing" earlier in the 20th century when Muslim countries banned slavery and "most Muslim scholars" found the practice "inconsistent with Qur'anic morality."[119][120]
In 2003 a high-level Saudi jurist, Shaykh Saleh Al-Fawzan, issued a fatwa claiming “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.”[121] He attacked Muslim scholars who said otherwise maintaining, “They are ignorant, not scholars ... They are merely writers. Whoever says such things is an infidel.”
Consequences of Muhammad's prescriptions on slavery
Early Islamic history
W. Montgomery Watt points out that Muhammad's expansion of Pax Islamica to the Arabian peninsula reduced warfare and raiding, and therefore cut off the sources of enslaving freemen.[82] According to Patrick Manning, the Islamic legislations against the abuse of the slaves convincingly limited the extent of enslavement in Arabian peninsula and to a lesser degree for the whole area of the whole Umayyad Caliphate where slavery existed since the most ancient times.[48]
Later periods
Bernard Lewis writes: "In one of the sad paradoxes of human history, it was the humanitarian reforms brought by Islam that resulted in a vast development of the slave trade inside, and still more outside, the Islamic empire." He notes that the Islamic injunctions against the enslavement of Muslims led to massive importation of slaves from the outside.[83] According to Patrick Manning, Islam by recognizing and codifying the slavery seems to have done more to protect and expand slavery than the reverse.[
sMASH wrote:abraham's bosom... is either heaven or a resting place until judgement day. the later is like in islam where the grave is either easy or terrible for the soul until judgement day.
sMASH wrote:christianity placed great importance on the two forbidden trees in the garden of eden
sMASH wrote: the original sin was hereditary, so if sumthing wasn't devised all of man was goin to hell.
bluefete wrote:Jesus... was able to mix with the Gentiles / Samaritans to the utter disgust of the traditional followers of Zionism.
. sMASH wrote: but if is me punishing, they would tote how much feelings they want, they toting their load too,,,, and in good time.
sMASH wrote: why make a big deal about the trees?
), such as why two trees are specified and named (the original myth is quite detailed) and many of the multiple deity references - except for the "let us make man in our image" quote.Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 136 guests
