Yes but it is well known amongst Muslims that Muhammad did not hit His wives. He would just go away. If the Quran commanded the striking of wives then Muhammad would have done so. Just my understanding.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Qur'an Vs Bible Vs Bhagavad Gita Vs None
- Thread starter Only Reason
- Start date
Yes but it is well known amongst Muslims that Muhammad did not hit His wives. He would just go away. If the Quran commanded the striking of wives then Muhammad would have done so. Just my understanding.
ppp
Well-Known Member
It is not.
Agree to disagree on that one.
ppp
Well-Known Member
No. You are simply wrong. You lack the capacity to know what you claim for any rational definition of the word "know".
The Scriptures are an historical record, before it (history) even began to be recorded!
Even though it’s earliest books (the Pentateuch) only date from the 1500’s BCE (after the exodus), it describes events like the first marriage, a divine gift for A&E, from Yahweh.
Do other religious works describe the origin of marriage? I’m not aware of any.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Some atheists will not agree to disagree because they always have to be right.
It is self-evident who those atheists are.
When people can never admit they are wrong it is the sign of a fragile ego.
You can have your opinion. Have a nice day.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I do believe the world will be around for a long time even with the end of the world which isn't an extinction but just a remodeling.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe the Bible gives us the Holy Spirit who can make changes as needed. For instance I can eat shellfish and pork.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe the Qu'ran and Bible are on the same basis as to whom wrote them and who inspired them but the Qu'ran does not have the gospel.
How are the Holy Spirit's changes communicated to the faithful? Via clergy?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I agree. Only Jesus had a gospel.
joelr
Well-Known Member
History has been recorded since the Sumerians. We have clay tablets with history from Mesopotamia thousands of years before the OT. The first known author is Edheduanna, she wrote The Exaltation of Inanna thousands of years before the OT. In it she talks about Inanna as the most supreme deity who created all deities, created wisdom, male and female.......
The OT is re-worked Mesopotamian and Egyptian myths. Genesis:
The Genesis creation narrative is the creation myth[a] of both Judaism and Christianity.
It expounds themes parallel to those in Mesopotamian mythology, emphasizing the Israelite people's belief in one God
Comparative mythology provides historical and cross-cultural perspectives for Jewish mythology. Both sources behind the Genesis creation narrative borrowed themes from Mesopotamian mythology,[1
Genesis 1–11 as a whole is imbued with Mesopotamian myths.
Genesis 2 has close parallels with a second Mesopotamian myth, the Atra-Hasis epic – parallels that in fact extend throughout Genesis 2–11, from the Creation to the Flood and its aftermat
I already pointed out Proverbs is a copy of an Egyptian text but overall is similar to all the other cultures in wisdom literature.
Christianity is all Greek and Persian theology. The way Yahweh is written about in the OT is similar to how Gods were written about for millenia before.
Just because a work of fiction tells a creation story (every religion does this) that takes place a long time before the book was written that doesn't mean it's true?
Every scripture starts with a creation story? The OT version is a direct copy of the Mesopotamian story. Moses is made up of all Egyptian myths.
At 9:00 Hebrew A Hebrew Bible Professor talks about that
No.
ARCHEOLOGY OF THE HEBREW BIBLE
William Dever, Professor Emeritus of the University of Arizona, has investigated the archeology of the ancient Near East for more than 30 years and authored almost as many books on the subject.
Q: The Bible chronology puts Moses much later in time, around 1450 B.C.E. Is there archeological evidence for Moses and the mass exodus of hundreds of thousands of Israelites described in the Bible?
Dever: We have no direct archeological evidence. "Moses" is an Egyptian name. Some of the other names in the narratives are Egyptian, and there are genuine Egyptian elements. But no one has found a text or an artifact in Egypt itself or even in the Sinai that has any direct connection. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. But I think it does mean what happened was rather more modest. And the biblical writers have enlarged the story.
Q: Is there mention of the Israelites anywhere in ancient Egyptian records?
Dever: No Egyptian text mentions the Israelites except the famous inscription of Merneptah dated to about 1206 B.C.E. But those Israelites were in Canaan; they are not in Egypt, and nothing is said about them escaping from Egypt.
Q: Tell us more about the Merneptah inscription. Why is it so famous?
Dever: It's the earliest reference we have to the Israelites. The victory stele of Pharaoh Merneptah, the son of Ramesses II, mentions a list of peoples and city-states in Canaan, and among them are the Israelites. And it's interesting that the other entities, the other ethnic groups, are described as nascent states, but the Israelites are described as "a people." They have not yet reached a level of state organization.
So the Egyptians, a little before 1200 B.C.E., know of a group of people somewhere in the central highlands—a loosely affiliated tribal confederation, if you will—called "Israelites." These are our Israelites. So this is a priceless inscription.
Q: Does archeology back up the information in the Merneptah inscription? Is there evidence of the Israelites in the central highlands of Canaan at this time?
Dever: We know today, from archeological investigation, that there were more than 300 early villages of the 13th and 12th century in the area. I call these "proto-Israelite" villages.
Forty years ago it would have been impossible to identify the earliest Israelites archeologically. We just didn't have the evidence. And then, in a series of regional surveys, Israeli archeologists in the 1970s began to find small hilltop villages in the central hill country north and south of Jerusalem and in lower Galilee. Now we have almost 300 of them.
Hindu text does. Oh look, more Mesopotamian stuff. The OT biggest influence.
The first recorded evidence of marriage ceremonies uniting a man and a woman dates back to approximately 2350 BC, in ancient Mesopotamia.[297] Wedding ceremonies, as well as dowry and divorce, can be traced back to Mesopotamia and Babylonia.[298]
So can the creation story, flood story, Job story, warrior Yahweh
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
I have a book of Native American myths which has a lot of such things.
Bree
Active Member
Did Bahaullah ever raise someone from the dead, heal the blind or was he himself raised from the dead by Gods own hand?
If no, then he is not someone we need to be devoting ourselves to.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Baha'u'llah performed miracles but why would that matter? Please explain why you think miracles matter.
How does a miracle help anyone?
"Bahá’u’lláh forbade His followers to attribute miracles to Him because this would have amounted to the degradation of His exalted station. Nevertheless, there are many accounts left to posterity by His disciples, describing the circumstances in which He either healed incurables or raised the dead.
None of these supernatural acts were considered by His followers to be a proof of the truth of His Cause, since they are only convincing to a limited number of people and they are not decisive proofs even for those who see them."
Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith
You have absolutely no way of knowing that Jesus performed any of the alleged miracles that were attributed to him or that he rose from the dead. God does not have hands that raised Jesus from the dead. These are faith-based beliefs with no supporting evidence. The New Testament is not evidence of any kind, it is just a book of stories written by men who never even knew Jesus.
Again, why would it matter even if any of these alleged miracles occurred? Christians just use these to say that Jesus is special and that Christianity is superior to all the other religions. Frankly, I consider that arrogant.
Baha'is believe that Jesus and Baha'u'llah were Manifestations of God. The Baha'i belief regarding miracles in general and the miracles of Christ is explained in this passage:
“But in the day of the Manifestation the people with insight see that all the conditions of the Manifestation are miracles, for They are superior to all others, and this alone is an absolute miracle. Recollect that Christ, solitary and alone, without a helper or protector, without armies and legions, and under the greatest oppression, uplifted the standard of God before all the people of the world, and withstood them, and finally conquered all, although outwardly He was crucified. Now this is a veritable miracle which can never be denied. There is no need of any other proof of the truth of Christ.
The outward miracles have no importance for the people of Reality. If a blind man receives sight, for example, he will finally again become sightless, for he will die and be deprived of all his senses and powers. Therefore, causing the blind man to see is comparatively of little importance, for this faculty of sight will at last disappear. If the body of a dead person be resuscitated, of what use is it since the body will die again? But it is important to give perception and eternal life—that is, the spiritual and divine life. For this physical life is not immortal, and its existence is equivalent to nonexistence. So it is that Christ said to one of His disciples: “Let the dead bury their dead;” for “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” 1
Observe: those who in appearance were physically alive, Christ considered dead; for life is the eternal life, and existence is the real existence. Wherever in the Holy Books they speak of raising the dead, the meaning is that the dead were blessed by eternal life; where it is said that the blind received sight, the signification is that he obtained the true perception; where it is said a deaf man received hearing, the meaning is that he acquired spiritual and heavenly hearing. This is ascertained from the text of the Gospel where Christ said: “These are like those of whom Isaiah said, They have eyes and see not, they have ears and hear not; and I healed them.” 2
The meaning is not that the Manifestations are unable to perform miracles, for They have all power. But for Them inner sight, spiritual healing and eternal life are the valuable and important things. Consequently, whenever it is recorded in the Holy Books that such a one was blind and recovered his sight, the meaning is that he was inwardly blind, and that he obtained spiritual vision, or that he was ignorant and became wise, or that he was negligent and became heedful, or that he was worldly and became heavenly.”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 101-102
They describe the origin of marriage in plausible terms? I know much of American Indian myths described implausible concepts (like shape shifting); but what of marriage? Could you please share one or two?
“Hindu text does.”
Where, please.
And then immediately after, “Oh look, more Mesopotamian stuff.”
Was that deflection?
I will respond to your queries, but one at a time, ok?
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
Legends are not historical records but they mean what they were meant to mean. What Baha'i writings are doing to other Holy Books is totally like Procrustean bed:
Procrustes, also called Polypemon, Damastes, or Procoptas, in Greek legend, a robber dwelling somewhere in Attica—in some versions, in the neighbourhood of Eleusis. His father was said to be Poseidon. Procrustes had an iron bed (or, according to some accounts, two beds) on which he compelled his victims to lie. Here, if a victim was shorter than the bed, he stretched him by hammering or racking the body to fit. Alternatively, if the victim was longer than the bed, he cut off the legs to make the body fit the bed’s length. In either event the victim died. Ultimately Procrustes was slain by his own method by the young Attic hero Theseus, who as a young man slayed robbers and monsters whom he encountered while traveling from Trozen to Athens.
The “bed of Procrustes,” or “Procrustean bed,” has become proverbial for arbitrarily—and perhaps ruthlessly—forcing someone or something to fit into an unnatural scheme or pattern.
(Source: Britannica)
The “bed of Procrustes,” or “Procrustean bed,” has become proverbial for arbitrarily—and perhaps ruthlessly—forcing someone or something to fit into an unnatural scheme or pattern.
(Source: Britannica)
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
And what is it that they were meant to mean?
What many liberal theologians believe about Jesus' death
Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1
They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.
Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.
In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events.