The Religion Discussion

[Red Fraction]

18 Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope:
19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!

Dspike can you with unbiased thinking explain the above please. I'd like to know what are your thoughts?

When I read it "Isaiah" 5 these words remind me of the world we are living in right now. But this was in isreals time. So why does it bear striking accracy to now.?

Dspike take a look at this taken from Daniel "I am quoting from the good book because it is relevant"

22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Do you know who is the ancient of days?
And do you know which is the fourth kingdom being spoken about in this text?

[sensiman]

Did you guys know Jesus drove a Honda but was on the d-low about it?

he and his disciples use to move in one accord

[AdamB]

What language was the quran written in?

Who transalate it?

How we sure the transalation correct and not distorted over time?

You should ask him about the poor lil' bugger who used to be a scribe for Muhammad... The guy used to ask his boss if he could rewrite certain parts to give it more elegance or make it easier to read, and the boss would let him do so... then he got it into his head that if HE COULD CHANGE THE "WORDS OF GOD" then either he was a prophet just as Muhammed was - or Muhammad was just as ordinary as he was. As he knew he was no prophet, he gave up the task and wisely put space between himself and his former dictater. But the dictater was also a dictator and ordered him murdered. I think the luckless lad was slaughtered in the Kaaba...

Rubbish!!! You sorry old chap!! Buggering is ah catholic priest thing...

[d spike]

Dspike it's alot to read, but you have to go back in time and Wikipedia will not show you the facts. But they are their plain as day.

My quoting Wikipedia is specifically aimed at a fellow who seems incapable of debating, but accepts what is written in that group of articles. Calm down and explain what you read. Such simple things such as book titles and authors would be extremely helpful.

Me saying all these religions are the same Means nothing to you because, you havenot read what I have read and looked for.

Interesting. That probably explains my question. So what exactly did you read?

[AdamB]

Dspike I was being Extremely sarcastic when I said that last part of my post wrt believe or die.

Don't tell me you can love both cause you cant serve two masters and be normal with it

Careful there, lad. That "Man cannot serve two masters" is one of Jesus' sayings - AdamB can claim that due to his disregard for the New Testament writings, he can disagree with that thinking.

How we sure the transalation correct and not distorted over time?

Please research the preservation of the Quran in Arabic, any two on the face of the Earth are identical. The entire Quran is memorized word for word, letter for letter by millions of muslims. There are scholars whose works of explaining the Quran are also documented.

Of course the Koran is well preserved - there is no argument there. The question is which one was preserved? All other versions were destroyed after 650AD.

"Gerd R. Puin's study of ancient Quran manuscripts led him to conclude that the Quran is a "cocktail of texts", some of which may have been present a hundred years before Muhammad." (Wikipedia)

The Quran has been noted to have certain narratives similarities to Christian apocrypha. (Wikipedia)

"The author of the Apology of al-Kindy Abd al-Masih ibn Ishaq al-Kindi claimed that the narratives in the Quran were "all jumbled together and intermingled" and that this was "an evidence that many different hands have been at work therein, and caused discrepancies, adding or cutting out whatever they liked or disliked". Bell and Watt suggested that the variation in writing style throughout the Quran, which sometimes involves the use of rhyming, may have indicated revisions to the text during its compilation." (Wikipedia)

Truth exists, yes. GOD IS THE TRUTH!! In arabic, Allahul-Haqq!! or Allahu al-haqq (GOD is THE TRUTH). The same name you, dspike, made fun of a couple of pages back. Real mature. Ignorance is bliss.

Yes, I didn't know the translation... so what? You can hack or haq all you want. Can you EXPLAIN what the phrase "God is Truth" means? By using only the language common to us both? Or without resorting to Wikipedia, or copying out badly written handouts that contain words you yourself don't know and can't spell?
No.
You would view a theological discourse on this magnificent phrase and sneer at it as "poetry".
...and YOU have the audacity to speak of ignorance...
(Sigh)
And to think there was a time when but academia and poetry was held in high regard by the Muslim world... I guess AdamB hasn't as yet reached that part of whatever studies he is attempting to undertake.

It isn't my fault that you lack a sense of humour - one of God's best gifts to man... without it most of this thread goes over your head... but then again, you chose to take part in a discussion on religion with as much knowledge of theology as I have of Arabic, so I guess most of this thread has already gone over your head...

If God is offended with me, then bet your favourite camel that He WILL deal with me. And THAT, my presumptuous friend, has nothing to do with you. YOUR job is to watch the path you tread, not sneer at my choice. Go read and UNDERSTAND the Prophet's words, you sorry little man.

Can you translate for me the following statement from English language to the language in which the New Testament was written (the language of Jesus and his disciples), Aramaic I think? Here goes: "Jesus is GOD and the Son of GOD"

Interesting thought ...was the language in which the New Testament was written different from the language of Jesus and his disciples?

What did Jesus call GOD? The word in the language that he (Jesus) spoke?

Megadoc or RedFraction or any christian (Bizzare too!) welcome to reply. I am asking because I don't know and want to know.

No, you are NOT. You have made this PERFECTLY clear in most of your previous posts. You just want someone to put up a target for you to spit at.

Blasted ignorance again.
Go look in your Wikipedia, as this information is WELL KNOWN.
The spoken language was Aramaic, but the official language of scholars was GREEK.This sort of thing is quite common throughout history - only those ignorant of history would not know this.
For many years, Latin was considered the official language in Europe... The English court spoke French... We talk in "Creole English" but our official written language is Standard English. (AdamB, why don't you produce a newspaper written in Creole? Lemmeh see how many ah dem go buy yuh paper. Man, yuh go buss...)

Ignorance is a helluva thing. It creates misunderstanding, fear and hate.

Not up to the task eh Dspike!! LOL

Now who yuh following - Jesus or someone else who wrote something in a language different from Jesus', someone who did not witness the events BUT IT SEEMED GOOD TO HIM, ALSO.

Yeah boy Dspike, you have REAL FAITH!!

[d spike]

Rubbish!!! You sorry old chap!! Buggering is ah catholic priest thing...

"poor lil' bugger" is a term that is used to emphasize a luckless fellow, and has nothing to do with buggery. You need to expand your reading environment.
As far as buggery being

ah catholic priest thing...

I dare say judging from the age of the victims that have come forward, pedophilia should be the term used - which might very well explain the link between Catholicism and Islam that Red Fraction was hinting about. Thanks AdamB, I was wondering about that...

[megadoc1]

Megadoc, I didn't get time to take part in that discussion with Marlener and yourself regarding the afterlife, but I just thought you should know that the scripture Marlener was quoting from (Ecc.) is a Sadducee text - and this now-defunct Judaic sect didn't believe in an afterlife.

Cheers

thanks for the info.I always believed this was somehow tied to the Sadducee and their teachings ,
that's why I found my self asking her about Abraham, Issac and Jacob , then I go on to show her the statement Jesus made "God is the God of the living,not the dead!" that strongly suggest that they were living in the afterlife and not "sleeping"

[d spike]

Not up to the task eh Dspike!! LOL

You need to stop being silly...
If you actually read the post you were responding to, you would have realized that I answered your questions...

This just shows that you don't read.

I know a proper Muslim must try to emulate the Prophet as best he can, but illiteracy is not something to emulate. Try and focus on his directives concerning peace...

[nareshseep]

So instead of highlighting the fallacies of any particular religion... try and choose what of your religion can benefit the human race.

should the rest be discarded though? Can you pick and choose what parts of a religion you want to adhere to and which parts you don't want to follow? If you could do that then you would be discarding and ignoring some of the words of God.

Choose your GOD but don't choose your GOD for others.

then God is no more than a security blanket or comforter, the size and scope of which resides only in the head of the beholder?

If there is a choice of which God to follow then that means there is NOT one God and there is NOT only one way to worship him and that would effectively make the entire concept of monotheistic God and religion null and void.

To pick and choose is to follow in your own way and not in God's way.

Similarly you cannot subscribe to science only how and when you want to. You can't decide to ignore gravity one day or have a section of people who decide gravity doesnt exist. Which is why you cannot claim modern medicine works when you take anti-biotics, yet you choose to ignore evolution because it makes you uncomfortable.

Which is why it seems the discussion is now about which way is the right way.
So we ask for evidence

I nearly forgot bout this

Science/Education always improves, religion will remain stagnant and archaic. There are discoveries being made everyday some adding to what we know , some disproving ideas thought to be true but at the end of the day, science is improving. Believing and practicing on an ancient belief system does not and will not benefit society. I will not discount the fact that there are lessons to be learned from all religions and before you say that I am picking and choosing what to believe, do not forget that the Bible is a collection of books, and in the past someone chose what books the masses would see.
And since it was done at that point in time, why cant the same be done now? If science was like religion we all will still be believing the earth is the center of the solar system. And all heretic who opposed will be killed. GOD existed but only in ancient times and spoke to people in their dreams. The same occurrence today will warrant a visit to St Anns.

Repeating something and going no where is a sure sign of madness...

[AdamB]

18 Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope:
19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!

Dspike can you with unbiased thinking explain the above please. I'd like to know what are your thoughts?

When I read it "Isaiah" 5 these words remind me of the world we are living in right now. But this was in isreals time. So why does it bear striking accracy to now.?

Dspike take a look at this taken from Daniel "I am quoting from the good book because it is relevant"

22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Do you know who is the ancient of days?
And do you know which is the fourth kingdom being spoken about in this text?

See there, you base your belief on verses that could mean ANYTHING that any faction of christians WANTS IT TO MEAN!

It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) the Book (this Qur'an). In it are VERSES that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the VERSES of Al-Ahkam (commandments), Al-Fara'id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudud (legal laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and UNCLEAR VERSES) are from our Lord." And none receive admonition except men of understanding. (Tafsir At-Tabari).
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #7)

My point here is that the foundations are based on clear verses, while those who do the opposite (seek the hidden meanings from the unclear verses) are in manifest deviation (in their hearts)!!

Cheers!!

[d spike]

Megadoc, I didn't get time to take part in that discussion with Marlener and yourself regarding the afterlife, but I just thought you should know that the scripture Marlener was quoting from (Ecc.) is a Sadducee text - and this now-defunct Judaic sect didn't believe in an afterlife.

Cheers

thanks for the info.I always believed this was somehow tied to the Sadducee and their teachings

Many people who only accept literal interpretation of the Bible are always astounded (and often disbelieving) that this text is Sadduceean - they simply assume that accepted scripture could only be Christian and orthodox Jewish scripture that is in alignment with Christian teachings.

[marlener]

d spike without going to far back into the issue and diverting t]you from responding to Adamb question what is your belief on the state of the dead,and i did post several other texts as well beside the one you are making reference too.

[AdamB]

Truth exists, yes. GOD IS THE TRUTH!! In arabic, Allahul-Haqq!! or Allahu al-haqq (GOD is THE TRUTH). The same name you, dspike, made fun of a couple of pages back. Real mature. Ignorance is bliss.

Yes, I didn't know the translation... so what? You can hack or haq all you want. Can you EXPLAIN what the phrase "God is Truth" means? By using only the language common to us both? Or without resorting to Wikipedia, or copying out badly written handouts that contain words you yourself don't know and can't spell?

Al-Haqq (The Truth)

He is the Truth in His Essence and Attributes, He is the most necessary of existences, He is what the whole of existence needs to exist. He is the One who was and is described with magnificence, Beauty and Perfection. He is the One who was and is known to be Beneficent. His saying is the Truth, His Actions are the Truth, the meeting with Him is the truth, His Messengers are the truth, His books are the truth, His religion is the truth, worshipping Him Alone is the truth, everything that has to do with Him is the Truth. This is because Allaah is the Truth, and what they supplicate to other than Him is false and invalid, and because Allaah is the Most High, the Great.

[megadoc1]

Megadoc, I didn't get time to take part in that discussion with Marlener and yourself regarding the afterlife, but I just thought you should know that the scripture Marlener was quoting from (Ecc.) is a Sadducee text - and this now-defunct Judaic sect didn't believe in an afterlife.

Cheers

thanks for the info.I always believed this was somehow tied to the Sadducee and their teachings

Many people who only accept literal interpretation of the Bible are always astounded (and often disbelieving) that this text is Sadduceean - they simply assume that accepted scripture could only be Christian and orthodox Jewish scripture that is in alignment with Christian teachings.

I was there once but I learn some stuff over the last two years..there are even Egyptian text or sayings in the bible as well

[AdamB]

You still haven't proved that Hindus or Buddhists set out willfully to convert persons en mass.

Sorry, I did not set out to prove this neither is it my responsibility!!

Very nice of you... but you did state:

Have never really read of any wars of conversions led by Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs (Dharmic Religions)

Never heard of Kashmir?

It is quite remarkable that you should mention Kashmir...
Here is some interesting information, acquired from your favourite source, Wikipedia (of which you are apparently unaware):

The Muslims and Hindus of Kashmir lived in relative harmony, since the Sufi-Islamic way of life that Muslims followed in Kashmir complemented the Rishi tradition of Kashmiri Pandits, and Sufi saints such as Sheikh Noor-ud-din Wali were thought of as Muslim Rishis. This led to a syncretic culture where Hindus and Muslims revered the same local saints and prayed at the same shrines. Famous sufi saint Bulbul Shah was able to convert Rinchan Shah who was then prince of Kashgar Ladakh to an Islamic lifestyle, thus founding the Sufiana composite culture. Under this rule, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist Kashmiris generally co-existed peacefully. Over time, however, the Sufiana governance gave way to outright Muslim monarchs...

Some Kashmiri rulers, such as Sultan Zain-ul-Abidin who was popularly known as Budshah(بڈشاہ) (the King) (r.1423-1474), were tolerant of all religions...

...however, several Muslim rulers of Kashmir were intolerant of other religions. Sultãn Sikandar Butshikan of Kashmir (AD 1389-1413) is often considered the worst of these. Historians have recorded many of his atrocities. The Tarikh-i-Firishta records that Sikandar persecuted the Hindus and issued orders proscribing the residence of any other than Muslims in Kashmir. He also ordered the breaking of all "golden and silver images". The Tarikh-i-Firishta further states: "Many of the Brahmins, rather than abandon their religion or their country, poisoned themselves; some emigrated from their native homes, while a few escaped. After the emigration of the Brahmins, Sikandar ordered all the temples in Kashmir to be thrown down. Having broken all the images in Kashmir, Sikandar acquired the title of 'Destroyer of Idols'."

The Kashmir conflict is a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region, the northwestern most region of South Asia.

So... why mention Kashmir? Whatever religious persecution has taken place there, it was clearly started by the Muslims. Other than that, the nonsense happening there in modern times is political.

Ignorance is a helluva thing.

To be selective is to be dishonest!!

What say you about the "created" State of Israel in Palestine? Who started it? The Germans / Hitler, so put the Jews to get even with the Palestinians. The jews didn't start it , so they have the right to oppress the ones who opened up to them to find a home! Or did they produce their land deed from the bible??

Kashmir continues to suffer Indian oppression and world focuses on nuclear war scare

by Zawahir Siddique

September, 2009
http://www.crescent-online.net/2009/09/ ... icles.html

http://electronicintifada.net/content/i ... shmir/8985

[AdamB]

Not up to the task eh Dspike!! LOL

You need to stop being silly...
If you actually read the post you were responding to, you would have realized that I answered your questions...

This just shows that you don't read.

I know a proper Muslim must try to emulate the Prophet as best he can, but illiteracy is not something to emulate. Try and focus on his directives concerning peace...

Don't try and. TRY TO...

[AdamB]

Can you translate for me the following statement from English language to the language in which the New Testament was written (the language of Jesus and his disciples), Aramaic I think? Here goes: "Jesus is GOD and the Son of GOD"

Interesting thought ...was the language in which the New Testament was written different from the language of Jesus and his disciples?
So language of Jesus=Aramaic, language of scriptures=Greek. This is the only answer you provided.

What did Jesus call GOD? The word in the language that he (Jesus) spoke?

Megadoc or RedFraction or any christian (Bizzare too!) welcome to reply. I am asking because I don't know and want to know.

Dspike,
Are you a politician? Still waiting on the answers?

Ignorance and misguidance as the basis for belief and worship = a Hell of a thing!!

[d spike]

18 Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope:
19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!

Dspike can you with unbiased thinking explain the above please. I'd like to know what are your thoughts?

I note you use the KJV. When it comes to scholastic studying of scripture, I'm afraid this version with its archaic idiom and improper translations doesn't cut it at all. Anyone who swears by this version alone deserves whatever AdamB tells them regarding "tampered scripture"...

The Book of Isaiah is actually produced by at least three fellows, as the writing style changes, and the writing spans from the eighth century BC right into the sixth century BC.
These verses are written by the "original" Isaiah, also called "Proto-Isaiah". They serve as part of his reference to the danger posed by the late eighth century expansion of Assyria into the Kingdom of Judah. They are part of his prophesy of judgment against God's people, which implies that their covenant with God cannot protect them when they have broken it by idolatry and other sins.
These six verses are from chapter five and are aimed at the sinful folk who have willingly loaded themselves with the burden of their transgressions. These folk challenge God brazenly, almost taunting Him to stick to His covenant and zap the enemy... all the while perverting moral standards and practicing injustice and bribery. They think they are wise enough to handle any situation and reject a humble dependence on God (a clear shot at Ahaz ) and clearly spend a lot of time boasting about their strength while liming at bars - though their only strength seems to be lifting glasses.

You need to look at the historical setting:
Assyria was the super-power at the time, and Judah had just refused to join Israel and Syria in a revolt against Assyria. These two countries then threatened invasion of Judah. Isaiah advised Judah's king, Ahaz, to seek God's protection, but Ahaz asked the Assyrians for protection instead, thus making Judah an Assyrian vassal. (Assyria later thrashed and trashed Israel.) Isaiah didn't approve of this belittling of his country, and proceeded to foretell the results of the error of kowtowing to goyim Assyrians.

When I read it "Isaiah" 5 these words remind me of the world we are living in right now. But this was in isreals time. So why does it bear striking accracy to now.?

Simply because of the human condition - "All men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God", to quote Paul. Because of our love to err, we fall, repeatedly. Due to this, the errors of the past often repeat themselves. (Take this thread as an example. Do you know why it is so bloody long? Because people keep saying the same old things, bringing up the same old arguments over and over and over... and to just look back at what went before is so simple it is laughable. Some of us just quote ourselves ad nauseum to deal with the monotony of it all. ) History is full of Ahazes and Isaiahs... and to consider these ancient writings (whose focus is quite clear) as a specific modern prophecy is yet another foolish error that is oft repeated...

Dspike take a look at this taken from Daniel "I am quoting from the good book because it is relevant"

22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Do you know who is the ancient of days?
And do you know which is the fourth kingdom being spoken about in this text?

I fail to see how it is relevant.
Daniel is a remarkable book, written partly in Aramaic and partly in Hebrew. It is written in the apocalyptic style which was popular between 200 BC and 100 AD - unfortunately, many literalists/fundamentalists are convinced that it hides prophecies of modern and future events, simply because they ignore the idiom of the time, the focus of the author and his concerns.
While the book seems to be set in sixth century BC Babylonian times, it is actually a lot newer - the second century BC, to be precise.
The traditional stories of the first six chapters are legends older than the visions of the later chapters. Those visions were written by an anonymous author in the Maccabean era, who compiled the legends with the visions as one book, in the second century BC.
The visions describe the national crisis that occurred under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a Seleucid king who attempted to introduce Hellenistic religious practices, including the worship of idols, into the temple and the Jewish religion more generally, sparking outrage from the more traditional holy rollers - such as the writer who produced Daniel.

Within the foreign royal court, the hero and his friends survive all sorts of dangers, rising to the highest positions in the land. Daniel foretells both the individual punishment of the Babylonian kings and the overthrow of their empire. Then Daniel has visions, which culminate in frightening depictions of a powerful king who, like the Babylonian rulers of the court tales, attacks Israel, defiles the temple, and incurs divine judgment.

Now, will you explain the link you claim exists between Catholicism and Islam? (I hope it isn't that old story about the priest who Muhammad used to chat with... That has never seemed more than a tale, I'm afraid.)

[d spike]

d spike without going to far back into the issue and diverting t]you from responding to Adamb question

In order to be diverted, one must first have a destination - and there is none where debate with that high-strung lad is concerned... He questions not to seek answers, but to encourage others to reveal targets for him to denigrate and insult. He is a stranger to original thought, and refuses to think over any response made by someone whose view is not identical to his.

what is your belief on the state of the dead

Why would you want to know my belief on anything? How would knowing my belief affect anything? This is a discussion, and I, like others, state my opinion. That is (or was) what this discussion was about... In a public discussion on religion, it is too easy to focus on compartmentalizing people rather than considering what they have to say - their opinion. AdamB is a perfect example. He is bothered no end by my refusal to state my "religion", as his concept of discussing different religions is to put down all religions other than Islam. This puts him at a disadvantage, as he has no target, and his method of automatic response is stymied. He now has to rely on logic and thought to come up with answers - and the result of that needn't be further discussed.
As I have said more than once:

I see no point in stating my beliefs here as it will serve no purpose - it will neither change nor affect nor strengthen your, or anyone else's beliefs. If it does, then that person's faith structure would be extremely weak (to modify your belief because of something you read on the internet? Please!) and the very next wind that blows in their life will take them elsewhere.

Now, before some folks get all huffy about it, think first. If you have agreed (or disagreed ) with anything I have said, and I then proceed to answer your question by saying that I believe: we all go to a large open field where we romp and play and make out...
...or we will each become a God of our own universe...
...or we all go either to a heaven where we will get to bang a harem of virgins (or is it eat seventy-two raisins... they still are squabbling about the precise translation) and live on a diet of milk and honey, or go to a hell where suffering is intolerable (if the goody-goodies are constantly eating milk and honey - do you have any idea what that does to your innards? - then hell would have to be the sewers of heaven; which makes sense as somebody has got to shovel an eternity of extremely wet dung, lest it pile up and stink to, er, high heaven...
...or we all come back as krill...
...or our souls crystallize into left-side socks (never notice how those just keep appearing?)...
Would you then cease to agree with what I said (or disagree)?
Voicing my opinion is how I have served this discussion best. (And that is also only my opinion. )

and i did post several other texts as well beside the one you are making reference too.

I was simply and only referring to a specific one that, due to its uniqueness (the author's religious beliefs) is often misunderstood and more often misappropriated.

Don't try and. TRY TO...

So, you are working on your grammar... excellent!
Now, start trying with your spelling and work your way up to logic then theology, and then we could discuss matters on more equal terms.

He is the Truth in His Essence and Attributes, He is the most necessary of existences, He is what the whole of existence needs to exist. He is the One who was and is described with magnificence, Beauty and Perfection. He is the One who was and is known to be Beneficent. His saying is the Truth, His Actions are the Truth, the meeting with Him is the truth, His Messengers are the truth, His books are the truth, His religion is the truth, worshipping Him Alone is the truth, everything that has to do with Him is the Truth. This is because Allaah is the Truth, and what they supplicate to other than Him is false and invalid, and because Allaah is the Most High, the Great.

I hope you didn't pay too much for that pamphlet.

[marlener]

Well written response,the reason I asked about your belief maybe I should have asked for your view or opinion which ever suits you,is because you were being quoted and apparently Megadoc got the impression that you shared his views,so it was for clarification,but seeing that you have choosen to be "open minded", I will say you have not stated that you are in agreement or disagreement with any particular view. Hope you wasn`t just evading the question though.
Your info on the Ecc text was interesting though and good point of study.

[MG Man]

Allaah is the Most High,.

hmm..........ok you got my attention there

[AdamB]

Dspike,
Is not your god (well gods when put together) described (or had described Himself) with Perfection?

[AdamB]

on more equal terms.

[Dizzy28]

You still haven't proved that Hindus or Buddhists set out willfully to convert persons en mass.

Sorry, I did not set out to prove this neither is it my responsibility!!

Very nice of you... but you did state:

Have never really read of any wars of conversions led by Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs (Dharmic Religions)

Never heard of Kashmir?

It is quite remarkable that you should mention Kashmir...
Here is some interesting information, acquired from your favourite source, Wikipedia (of which you are apparently unaware):

The Muslims and Hindus of Kashmir lived in relative harmony, since the Sufi-Islamic way of life that Muslims followed in Kashmir complemented the Rishi tradition of Kashmiri Pandits, and Sufi saints such as Sheikh Noor-ud-din Wali were thought of as Muslim Rishis. This led to a syncretic culture where Hindus and Muslims revered the same local saints and prayed at the same shrines. Famous sufi saint Bulbul Shah was able to convert Rinchan Shah who was then prince of Kashgar Ladakh to an Islamic lifestyle, thus founding the Sufiana composite culture. Under this rule, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist Kashmiris generally co-existed peacefully. Over time, however, the Sufiana governance gave way to outright Muslim monarchs...

Some Kashmiri rulers, such as Sultan Zain-ul-Abidin who was popularly known as Budshah(بڈشاہ) (the King) (r.1423-1474), were tolerant of all religions...

...however, several Muslim rulers of Kashmir were intolerant of other religions. Sultãn Sikandar Butshikan of Kashmir (AD 1389-1413) is often considered the worst of these. Historians have recorded many of his atrocities. The Tarikh-i-Firishta records that Sikandar persecuted the Hindus and issued orders proscribing the residence of any other than Muslims in Kashmir. He also ordered the breaking of all "golden and silver images". The Tarikh-i-Firishta further states: "Many of the Brahmins, rather than abandon their religion or their country, poisoned themselves; some emigrated from their native homes, while a few escaped. After the emigration of the Brahmins, Sikandar ordered all the temples in Kashmir to be thrown down. Having broken all the images in Kashmir, Sikandar acquired the title of 'Destroyer of Idols'."

The Kashmir conflict is a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region, the northwestern most region of South Asia.

So... why mention Kashmir? Whatever religious persecution has taken place there, it was clearly started by the Muslims. Other than that, the nonsense happening there in modern times is political.

Ignorance is a helluva thing.

To be selective is to be dishonest!!

What say you about the "created" State of Israel in Palestine? Who started it? The Germans / Hitler, so put the Jews to get even with the Palestinians. The jews didn't start it , so they have the right to oppress the ones who opened up to them to find a home! Or did they produce their land deed from the bible??

Kashmir continues to suffer Indian oppression and world focuses on nuclear war scare

by Zawahir Siddique

September, 2009
http://www.crescent-online.net/2009/09/ ... icles.html

http://electronicintifada.net/content/i ... shmir/8985

You conveniently put stories for your point of view as well. You speak of the Jewish Land Deed for Israel but where is the Pakistani Land Deed for Kashmir?

Kashmir suffers oppression by the Indian Government because it continues to be a source of terrorists and a potential danger to the democratic nation of India. The Pakistani ISI gives military, logistical and monetary aid to these terrorists groups. You want the Indian government to sit down and have a conversation with these terrorists over Tea?
We cant even have a logical discussion with you here on Tuner.

[RBphoto]

^^^Bodeaux^^^

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Interesting study here.

Intuition
in·tu·i·tion   [in-too-ish-uhn, -tyoo-]
noun
1. direct perception of the truth or fact that is independent of any reasoning process.

Religious Faithfuls Lack Logic, Study Implies
Apr 26, 2012 2:00pm

ABC NEWS (HEALTH - MEDICAL UNIT) - A rare and controversial study merging science and faith suggests that analytic thinking, a process that favors reason over intuition, promotes religious disbelief.

Canadian researchers used math puzzles and “priming,” a technique that plants subtle suggestions in pictures and text, to persuade more than 650 believers and non-believers to think analytically. They then used surveys to probe religious beliefs, from faith in God to the power of prayer.

“If you can get people to engage in analytic thinking, whether it’s by looking at pictures or showing them difficult-to-read text, analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief,” said Will Gervais, a PhD student in psychology at the University of British Colombia and lead author of the study published today in the journal Science. “This indicates that analytic thinking is one of many factors affecting people’s religious beliefs.”

In the first of five tests, people who solved a math problem analytically rather than arriving at the intuitive answer were more likely to report religious disbelief. For example: A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs $1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost? The intuitive answer is $0.10; the analytic answer is $0.05.

In the second test, subjects were randomly assigned to look at one of four images. Those who viewed Rodin’s “The Thinker,” which was previously found to prime analytic thinking, reported having weaker religious beliefs. The third and fourth tests used words like “think,” “reason,” and “rational” to prime analytic thinking, which was also linked to religious disbelief.

In the fifth test, 91 people who rated their religious beliefs on a survey in a hard-to-read font were more likely to report religious disbelief than 91 subjects given the same questions in an easy-to-read font. The difference in font is a subtler way to prime analytic thinking, Gervais said.

“If people find something hard to process, it engages analytic thinking,” he said. “It’s a neat manipulation.”

Intuitive thinking, a mental shortcut that bypasses reason, is linked to stronger religious beliefs.
“It’s largely intuitive processes that let people form religious beliefs,” said Gervais. “If you’re surrounded by a lot of other religious people publically demonstrating their faith, you’re more likely to develop those beliefs.”

The study does little to calm the culture clash between science and religion.

“Religion versus science; believers versus atheists; our evidence doesn’t say much about those debates,” said Gervais. “But it sheds light on one cognitive factor that may influence where people stand on those debates.

It also challenges the notion that religious beliefs are set in stone.

“People have this impression that they’re really core, central beliefs that don’t change. But we know people’s religious beliefs can vary across situations and across their lifespan,” Gervais said.

But devout believers may be shocked to hear their faith can wax and wane with tricky tests.

“I suppose some people might find it surprising,” Gervais said, “that really subtle experimental manipulations might be able to temporarily alter religious beliefs.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religious-disbelief-study-implies/

[Red Fraction]

Dspike, it is relevant because what daniel saw in the vision was our time now. What Is priority the beginning or the end?

If someone wrote a book about something. And over time it was rewritten and reprinted. But today that same book regardless of who what where when and why, stil has the same effect that it had from inception, does that make it less believable?

And why would a person say that the contents in daniel are hidden? When clearly Daniels bigger brother "revelation; meaning to reveal" says I quote.

18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;


10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

[MG Man]

Ezekiel's spaceship
have fun :p

[Red Fraction]

Adamb I fail to see how "woe unto them that call evil good and good evil" could mean anything other than what it is.

Any sensible thinking individual would see that the sentence justifies itself entirely leaving no room for misconception.

Does it really matter what language Jesus spoke In adamb?
And Jesus referred to himself as my fathers son. Everything he did was done by him through his father.

The ancient of days is God the father.

Dspike I've found alot of helpful reading I'll post it separate its rather long, adamb you should read it too it speaks of Islam and the Vatican and their way of killing off the infidels using guile and flattery.

[Red Fraction]

ROME, MAY 29, 2003 (Zenit.org).- Mary has a place in Islam too, says a Vatican aide.

"God is the only point of reference for the Muslim believer, but next to him are those who reflect his holiness. Mary is one of them," Archbishop Francesco Gioia, president of the Pilgrimages to the See of Peter. The archbishop expounds on that point in a book, "Mary, Mother of the Word, Model of Dialogue Between Religions," published by Città Nuova. "Mary occupies an outstanding place in Islam," he said. "She is the only woman whose name the Koran mentions -- up to 34 times."

Mary is particularly fascinating to Muslims. "She is the model of all believers because of her absolute faith and perfect 'submission' to the will of God," he added. "Vatican Council II took note of the benevolent attitude of the Muslims toward Mary, and in the declaration 'Nostra Aetate' one reads: 'They honor Mary, the virginal mother (of Jesus), and at times invoke her with devotion," the archbishop observed. Muslim faithful's affection and devotion for Mary is reflected in the pilgrimages they undertake to Marian shrines, especially Fatima, and in the fact that many Muslim women are called Mary, he added.  … "In the Koran, Mary has a decided Christological function, underlined by the prevailing designation of Jesus as 'son of Mary,'" he continued.

Do you understand what it means to KISS a book? Catholics have always been taught to kiss their Bibles if they dropped unto the floor. Priests as far back as I can remember have kissed the Bibles after reading from them at mass each week. I know, I was Catholic 29 years. The kiss was a form of extreme respect and reverence. Yes, I know it sounds hypocritical for Rome to do that, but this is Rome, the ultimate wolf in sheep's clothing we’re talking about. For the Pope to kiss the Koran is to say it is a book worthy of extreme respect and reverence. So I ask, just what do we find in this book the Pope loves to caress and kiss? Is it really a book worthy of extreme respect and reverence?

Surah 5:51 "Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. God does not guide the wrongdoers."

Surah 9:73 "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate."

Surah 9:5 "When the sacred months are over slay the idolators wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them."

Surah 5:33-34 "Those that make war against God (Allah) and His apostle (Muhammad) and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land."

Surah 47:3-6 "This, because the unbelievers follow falsehood, while the faithful follow the truth from their Lord. Thus God lays down for mankind their rules of conduct. When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take a ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens. Thus shall you do. Had God willed, He could Himself have punished them; [but He has ordained it thus] that He may test you, the one by the other."

Surah 4:99 "He that leaves his home in the cause of God shall find many a refuge in the land and great abundance. He that leaves his dwelling to fight for God and His apostle and is then overtaken by death shall be recompensed by God. Surely God is forgiving and merciful."

Surah 22:57 "Those that have embraced the true Faith and done good works shall enter the gardens of delight; but the unbelievers who have denied Our revelations shall receive an ignominious punishment." -The Koran, Translated by N. J. Dawood, Penquin Books, London, 1999

It’s easy actually to see how the Pope would embrace such a book as this. For the words of this book, sound amazingly like those of the Vatican during the Inquisitions were countless numbers of Christians died for their faith. Rome has a history of killing Christians, and as we see in the Koran, so does Islam. Now do you understand why they are joining forces? Birds of a feather do indeed need to flock together to get a work such as this done for the ultimate unclean bird!

Like William Jefferson Clinton said a few years back, we see the Pope echoing his statements almost perfectly. Soon you will see the One World Government come to be (It actually began in 1999 with the enacting of the Roman International Criminal Court) The fact that Christian holy sites may one day be part of Palestinian authority is definitely another reason the Pope is so chummy with those that boldly and graphically hate Christians. Is this why during the Pope’s trip to the Sudan, a country in which the Christians are suffering a bloody persecution, and are even reduced to slavery, the Pope declared: "Baraka Allah as-Sudan! Translated that means, "May Allah bless the Sudan!"

By the way, were you aware that on May 6, 2001 Pope John Paul II made religious history by being the first Pope ever to set foot inside a mosque? When he stepped foot inside the “Great mosque of Damascus” he boldly proclaimed to all the world that he has no problem with those that would kill Christians. He is also boldly proclaiming Christ a liar regarding joining with those that hate truth. It's not hard ti understand 2 Corinthians 6:14 where it says plainly, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?"

As many of you may already know, the European continent is in fact the testing grounds for the One World Government we see forming before our very eyes. The cashless society is tested there. You can travel from country to country without exchanging money or passports now. Catholicism is the “legal” religion. The One world court system is housed there. So it would only be fair that the Muslim get involved in this up and coming global landscape…

It’s not just Europe. It’s all over  the World! From Muslim clerics saying opening prayers for a Texas House of Representatives meeting on March 18, 2003, to declaring Ramadan a national holiday in Portugal! That’s right, I said Portugal. The grand majority of people in that nation are Catholic. Last I checked it was something like 95% of the population is Catholic. And only a fraction of them are Muslim. Yet, Ramadan is now an official holiday according to their proclamation # 298. (See it here.. http://www.op.gov.ph/proclamation.asp an actual facsimile of the proclamation is here… http://www.op.gov.ph/ramadan.jpg )

The Pope is pushing Islam. The Koran is pushing Mariology, or “Mary worship.” In fact, “Muhammad” himself stated “Satan touches every son of Adam the day his mother beareth him, save only Mary and her son.” –Muhammad by Martin Lings, p. 26

Doesn’t it seem strange to you that the founder of Islam would be preaching Roman Catholic theology? What Muhammad is preaching is in fact the Roman Catholic theology of “ORIGINAL SIN!” All throughout Muhammad’s “mission” you see Roman Catholic monks, priests, and even Catholic kings helping him. It actually started to escalate rather quickly when he was 9 years of age when a Catholic monk declared him a holy prophet merely because of a BIRTHMARK on his back! Still… why would Rome seek to do such a thing?

Ask yourself this question. Who do Muslims hate the most? Christians and Jews right? Who does Rome hate the most? Christians and Jews. If Rome can remove the Jews, they have Jerusalem. If they can stifle the Christian, they have everything else! History proves the Vatican has never fought their own battles exclusively. They have always sought the help of others to do their evil deeds. During the Inquisition, it was the civil authorities. During World War II it was Hitler who helped the Vatican kill 6 million Jews. And today we see the United States Government doing all it can to help Rome. Even if it means making friends with the very Muslims that destroyed the Twin Towers! There are over 1 billion Muslims, and over 1 billion Catholics. But they have a very real problem. There are too many Jews and Christians running about. And it’s NOT the so called “Protestant” Christians that anger Satan. As of June 26, 2000, the One World Church has gotten most of the Protestant churches to join them anyway. It’s that small remnant of Sabbath Keeping Christians that anger the dragon running things from Rome. (See Revelation 12:17) As for the Jews, according to Daniel 11:45, they are on the land the Vatican WANTS! Do some research in history. During Islam’s conquest of North Africa, two groups of people warred with Islam. Christian’s and Jews. NEVER will you find Islam and the Vatican at war during this time. Nor will you ever see a single shrine of Rome harmed in any of these conflicts! Problem was, the leaders in Islam started to get puffed up when they realized they were so victorious. So much so that when it came time for the Pope to exact payment (the land of Jerusalem) for all his help, they refused. They figured they could have that for themselves as well! That made the Roman Pontiff very angry! So angry in fact that history records the “crusades” the Pope initiated to prevent Islam from completely taking Europe. These wars lasted for centuries, and Jerusalem finally became completely unattainable for the Pope. UNTIL NOW!

Is Rome still preaching Mary to the Muslim? According the Zenit Organization, a Roman Catholic publication, yes they are!

Virgin Mary Seen as a Model for All Muslims
Interview with Islamic Theologian Sherazade Hushmand

ROME, DEC. 10, 2001 (Zenit.org).- Muslims venerate Mary, the Pope reminded the faithful Sunday during his Angelus address. Iranian Muslim theologian Sherazade Hushmand affirms that view.

There are verses in the Koran that include a significant prayer to God by Mary's mother, Hushmand explained in this interview with Vatican Radio.

--Q: Of what significance is the figure of Mary to Muslims?

--Hushmand: She is very present in the Koran, which presents her, specifically, as Mary Immaculate. In the third sura, beginning with verse 34 and subsequent ones, the Koran speaks about this aspect of Mary, about her total purity.

Speaking of Mary, one of the verses talks about freedom. The woman of Hemram, who is Mary's mother, prays to God saying: "God, I dedicate to you the one I have in the womb, and I dedicate her so that she will be free, absolutely free."

This word is used only once in the Koran, and only for Mary. This freedom is an absolute freedom from all what might be seen as sin, evil, failure, weakness. Mary is pure of all this. Then comes God's affirmation: "I accept her."

--Q: Do all followers of Islam believe this?

--Hushmand: In Chapter 66, the last verse, 12, the Koran says: "Do you want me to give you a faithful example to follow, valid for all the world's believers?" Mary is proposed there as the example. This is very strong -- because not only is Mary an example and a symbol for Christians to follow, but also in the Koran, Mary becomes a symbol and model for all believers, also for Muslims themselves.