the right religion

[Riverwolf]

i can understand how the god could be both, and i see it the top of wisdom, the god is merciful to who deserves that and the hell is the criminals and who deserves that, i consider if the god not like that, he is not just, wise at all

I personally see applying things as they are "deserved" as petty. An incarnation of God trying to present a certain teaching may play the deserve game(and has done so in the past), but not God Supreme. Besides, there is NO crime worth an eternity in Hell, so it is wholly unjust. No just God would allow such a thing. It is taught that baby Krishna was targeted by his evil uncle to be killed, and sent a witch to kill him. She smeared poison over her breasts and proceeded to breastfeed him under the guidance of a nanny. But instead of dying, He sucked the life out of her. But He granted the witch salvation, because she had approached Him in a motherly way. While I don't worship Krishna specifically, that is an illustration of how God would bend the rules to save even the worst of sinners. Heck, even when He finally killed his murderous uncle, He granted him salvation, because he was constantly focused on Him, even though as an enemy.

Wisdom is the guiding hand of all actions. In order for God to be just, He'd first have to be wise. Wisdom must come before justice, or else there will be no true justice.

but i'd like to mention a story here, i was intending to post it in a separate subject but i have to post it now, Allah had said in the quran "It is He who enables you to travel on land and sea until, when you are in ships and they sail with them by a good wind and they rejoice therein, there comes a storm wind and the waves come upon them from everywhere and they assume that they are surrounded, supplicating Allah , sincere to Him in religion, "If You should save us from this, we will surely be among the thankful"
the story saying that there was a sailor while he's sailing in sea, a storm hits his ship anddestroyed it, so he raises up his hand to the god, oh! my god i believed in you please save me, so then a ship passed beside him and the people asked him to come, he refused to come with them, and he waits for 3 days and everyday many ships come beside him and he refuse to join any, then he died and blame the god because he didn't save him, then he met the god in the other life and blamed the god not for saving him, so the god answered, i sent to you tens of ships and you refuse to join any, the sailor answered, i thought you will cometo save me or send an angel, or it was on the ship "the ship of thegod comesto save you"
what's your opinion about that man? i think you agree with me that he's wrong, he assume a certain action from the god and build a picture or imagination for the god, what he should do and what he shouldn't do? andat last he was mistaken, and deceive himself,

What does that have to do with hell? I've heard that story several times, and rather enjoy it. There's similar stories in my tradition, as well.

so, i just want to ask you and everybody else, from where you form that notion aboutthe god? did he tell you? are you sure that the scriptures between your hands are fully right? how do you know that

Scriptures, yes, but also common sense, personal experience and observations, etc. The Scriptures are just guidebooks; they are fallible and always have been. I've never read a perfect Scripture in my life. But this makes sense; they are written by men. They are recording what their experiences are as best as they are able to, which is the reason for the contradictions. Even still, the authors' own biases still creep into the Scriptures. Thus, it falls onto us to use our wisdom-guided intelligence to determine what is Truth and what is not.

But our faith and trust is primarily based on what the Sages teach, and they have literally devoted their ENTIRE lives to discovering these truths. They have renounced all ties to the world for the sake of Truth, usually at a very young age, and when they are ready, they start to teach their wisdom to the world. It's quite easy to tell a genuine Sage from a false one by their teachings. If they're just repeating what's already been said, then they're false. If they are teaching an entirely new set of teachings that do not mesh with the old teachings, logic, and wisdom, then they're false. However, if a new insight into the old teachings is provided, and/or logical reasons are given for the teachings, then they are genuine.

I've read several modern genuine Sages. Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, Paramahamsa Yogananda, Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda... Each one has a unique and instantly identifiable way of teaching, as well as providing new spins on old teachings. Yogananda, Vivekananda, and Subramuniyaswami also had the added challenge of presenting these teachings to the West, and each has done very well.

Besides, I could ask you the same thing.

i couldn't understand what do you mean here

The Qur'an teaches that Allah does not incarnate, and the only reason I've ever seen for this is because it's "beneath him." This makes absolutely no sense to me, as there is nothing that is above or beneath God. How could there be?

 

[Riverwolf]

i want to repeat again, the four witnesses are required only for adultery as we consider it as a shame for both man and woman who did that
i didn't consider the non-human witnesses as witnesses, i considered it as the life view of the witnesses, in the past the witness had only one method to apply his testimony which is to see by his own eyes, now if it's recorded it's instead of the life view by eyes, and the witness will be the technical experts which reviewed the recorded video and confirmed that it's not fabricated, and we need four witnesses so we will show it for four technical experts to ensure the credibility of the testimony
as for example a person could claim that this woman do adultery and he fabricates a video for that and the court decided to pass it to a single certain technical expert to say it's fabricated or not? the man who claims about thewoman could go and pay for him to say it's not fabricated, so if 2 it would be more credible, and four will be more and more in order to avoid Accusation people
are you convinced now?

Nope. After all, suppose all four testified that it wasn't a fabrication. However, suppose all four of these people were in on trying to make this poor woman look bad, and testify falsely?

indeed, islam isn't like that thinking, one of the Purposes of islamiclaw, is to keep the people happy is to clean the community from any immoral habits or actions, so it prevents it from origins, no need to talk about it now
so the law is one of the methodes that islam use to prevent that from spreading into the comunity to avoid, sorrows and happiness occured after that. i just want you to compare between the islamic communities and others regarding that point, you can observe the difference, here we don't have teens pregnancy, you can't find a girl is pregnant while she couldn't identify the father of the baby because shedid adultery with six men, also here no lesbianism, gays, , no porn movies, here the only allowed way to do sex is marriage, islam solve the problem of the porn,
at other communities, you can observe the difference, couples can stay with eachother as you said cheating, not loving just to do sex, single man could have a relation with 10 women in the same time no problem, porn movies are allowed to all free, people become crazy of sex, and don't like to marry and build a family
and what's the result? usually women who pay the price, who pay the fee, when become old, she lives a lone suffering her past and regret bite on her hands [in regret] saying I wish I hadn't do that, it's really painful, it destroeys the comunity slowly so that islam divert it to the court

All of these points could easily be argued to the death, and I'm not the expert in it. However, someone more familiar with these cultures may do better. I'm not a part of mainstream pop culture, so I don't know what goes on there.

However, believe me when I say that, in terms of keeping relationships strong, pornography is one of the least of their problems. I'd blame it more on the fact that we're not really taught how to keep a family together over here; we have to figure it out for ourselves. Plus, those teens who are rebelling and having sex all the time typically come from very authoritarian households, and are rebelling against such oppression.

So, yeah, relationship problems in the west are FAR more complicated than porn. Correlation does not automatically equal causation.

So I stand by my statement that the courts have no place in peoples' personal lives.

 

[Mark2020]

surly not, the jesus was perfect person and he was comptent enough to explain torah and gospel but the problem wasn't at jesus peace upon him, it was on his followers who distorted his message

Hello islam
I always hear from muslims that christians 'distorted' the bible. But neither they give any proof nor they show the original one nor when was it distorted. I find this non reasonable.

 

[Pegg]

agree

WELL, good question, but theanswer is simple, the torah is distorted not means that all of it becomes a word of people only, i explained before that the people add and remove from it and the word of god mixes with the word of people, so what the jesus quote is of the part of the right torah, this is one, second: also what the jesus had quoted from torah could be distorted and not quoted by the jesus as i don't believe the gospel itself isn't distorted, it's distorted too and may the parts you refer to is also distorted, are my words clear? i'm sorry my english is bad

Ok, so you say that Jesus quoted from the 'right' Torah. Do you know that Jesus used the Greek Septuagint manuscript of Hebrew scriptures? And do you know that we still have that today?

I promise you that the idea the Torah is distorted is not in harmony with reality. I dont think you understand enough about the manuscripts of the scriptures, about how they were produced, how they were copied and how they were protected. The Jewish scribes were absolutely meticulous when it come to copying their manuscripts. And there are so many of them available today that, when compared, the only difference is in how the alphabet changed over time and vowel points etc over the centuries.

even Jesus, mary, Abraham, Moses?

Jesus did not have a human father, he was a product of Gods holy spirit upon the virgin Mary. So Adams imperfection did not pass onto Jesus...he was the only man besides Adam to be born perfect.

Abraham, Moses, the prophets...they were all imperfect men because they were all decedents of Adam, just as I am and you are. Any man who has died proves he is imperfect because death is the punishment God gave to Adam for his sin.

i can see the spiritual meaning if it was talking about the blood itself not the women, could i ask you a question as mary was a woman and has Menstruation like anyother woman, so her son too is also not perfect, so the god himself was not perfect he's sinful like us

Mary produced several other children, all of whom died..and so did she. This shows that she gave birth to imperfect children and was imperfect herself.

But Jesus is different because God put the life of Jesus into mary's womb...so God had control of his conception and God was able to protect Jesus from the imperfection his mother had. Now if God viewed women as unclean, there is no way he would have used a woman to bring his son into the world. He could have created him in the same way he created Adam... but he doesnt view women as unclean... he veiws our 'sinful condition' as unclean. Men and women are equal in Gods eyes with regard to sin...we both die at Gods command. And if men were the ones to bring children to birth, then the laws about menstruation would have applied to them because it is the process that brings children into the world which has been corrupted and is currently unclean.

 

[Riverwolf]

Hello islam
I always hear from muslims that christians 'distorted' the bible. But neither they give any proof nor they show the original one nor when was it distorted. I find this non reasonable.

Not really. If it was distorted, than it stands to reason that the original was lost, and it's likely that the distortion would have been a gradual process. Besides, Muslims claim that the teachings of the original Torah and the original Gospel are contained in the Qur'an.

 

[Mark2020]

Not really. If it was distorted, than it stands to reason that the original was lost, and it's likely that the distortion would have been a gradual process. Besides, Muslims claim that the teachings of the original Torah and the original Gospel are contained in the Qur'an.

That's not an answer to my questions. As vague as the clamis.

 

[Yanni]

Jesus did not have a human father, he was a product of Gods holy spirit upon the virgin Mary. So Adams imperfection did not pass onto Jesus...he was the only man besides Adam to be born perfect.

Abraham, Moses, the prophets...they were all imperfect men because they were all decedents of Adam, just as I am and you are. Any man who has died proves he is imperfect because death is the punishment God gave to Adam for his sin.



Mary produced several other children, all of whom died..and so did she. This shows that she gave birth to imperfect children and was imperfect herself.

I'm sorry, but there are three problems with your statement about Jesus being perfect and about Jesus and death, and about his not having a human father. First of all, Jesus was NOT perfect. Christians believe that Jesus was "god" as a member of the trinity. Does God lie? Not according to the prophet Samuel and not according to the Torah. In Numbers, 23:19, the Torah states, "God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent [change His mind]...Behold, I have received a command to bless; He has blessed, and I cannot reverse it." And in 1 Samuel, 15:29, Samuel says, "The Strength of Israel [God] will not lie or repent, for He is not a man that He should change His mind."
Now, God does not lie, but Jesus lied to the High Priest after his arrest. John's Jesus told the High Priest that he taught openly and said nothing in secret, but this was a lie. Mark's Jesus frequently told his followers not to tell anyone about his mission. John's Jesus said, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the Temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing (John 18:20). Mark's Jesus said, "But he [Jesus] commanded them strictly that no one should know it (Mark 5:43).
Mark's Jesus frequently insisted that his messianic activities be kept secret while John's Jesus told the High Priest that he had always spoken openly about his message. Therefore, this was a lie. God does not lie but John's Jesus lied to the High Priest. Therefore, Jesus was not God.
Now, regarding Jesus' not having a human father, you unconsciously admit that Jesus couldn't possibly have been the messiah. All agree that the Messiah must be a direct descendent from the House of David and Solomon and from the tribe of Judah. Did you know that tribal affiliation adheres to the father's side and not the mother's? Well, if Jesus had no father, then he certainly was not the messiah.
Third, was Jesus not supposedly resurrected? That shows that he DID die! Why do you say that he didn't?
And before you ask any questions, Jesus failed to fulfill any of the six authentic Jewish messianic criteria, which are 1) to have the correct genealogy by being descended from King David and King Solomon (which we just discussed he wasn't; so that automatically rules out his authenticity); 2) be anointed King of Israel; 3) return the Jewish People to Israel; 4) rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem; 5) bring peace to the world and end all war; 6) bring knowledge of the One True God to the entire world. And if you'll respond with the "second coming" theory, there is no scriptural basis in the Jewish Bible for a "second coming." In fact, the Torah says that when a man dies, "on that day, his plans all perish."

 

[Mark2020]

@Yanni, do jews believe that the Messiah is God?

 

[Riverwolf]

That's not an answer to my questions.

What questions? You made a statement.

As vague as the clamis.

The clamis? What's clamis? p)

Kidding aside, it's perfectly reasonable. I'm not sure what else you want.

 

[Mark2020]

What questions? You made a statement.

The clamis? What's clamis? p)

Kidding aside, it's perfectly reasonable. I'm not sure what else you want.

The questions were obvious.
When/where/who distorted the bible? or started distortion if it were gradual. You didn't give any answer to that.
As to claiming that teachings of bible are in the quran, I don't think that's correct.

It's still a valid question to ask if it were distorted, were is the original copy and what did it say?

 

[Riverwolf]

The questions were obvious.
When/where/who distorted the bible? or started distortion if it were gradual. You didn't give any answer to that.

Nor do I think an answer to the question is even necessary. It's at best a nitpicky question, moreso than my nitpicks. It's like if I asked of the Bible and Christians: "when did the pharisees, etc. go wrong? Who was the first one to become greedy?"

As to claiming that teachings of bible are in the quran, I don't think that's correct.

And it's not what I said. What I said is the answer to your next question:

It's still a valid question to ask if it were distorted, were is the original copy and what did it say?

The claim is that the original contents are contained in the Qur'an.

 

[Mark2020]

Nor do I think an answer to the question is even necessary. It's at best a nitpicky question, moreso than my nitpicks. It's like if I asked of the Bible and Christians: "when did the pharisees, etc. go wrong? Who was the first one to become greedy?"

And it's not what I said. What I said is the answer to your next question:

The claim is that the original contents are contained in the Qur'an.

What a silly debate this is!
I asked some question. If you have answers then give them. Otherwise, I'm not interested in arguing about silly stuff.

 

[Riverwolf]

What a silly debate this is!
I asked some question. If you have answers then give them. Otherwise, I'm not interested in arguing about silly stuff.

That's your response to my answers? Seriously? You're not actually going to address my points? Or, if you somehow find them silly, you're not going to explain how they're silly, which I don't understand?

 

[YmirGF]

The claim is that the original contents are contained in the Qur'an.

You are correct, RiverWolfie. The Islamic assertion is that both Christian and Jewish scriptures had been altered and that the scenarios outlined in the Qur'an were the authentic telling of events. Variations or departures from Christian and Jewish texts are indicative of areas that have allegedly been changed (quite consciously) by human hands. It's not a particularly difficult concept to wrap ones head around.

 

[DinChild]

56 pages of responses, and like every other religious forum I've been to; bickering. My question, if it has been approached, is Atheism isn't a religion. Nor is it a belief. Does that mean it's exempt from the logic of this thread? Or must a religion be the only answer?

 

[Mark2020]

You are correct, RiverWolfie. The Islamic assertion is that both Christian and Jewish scriptures had been altered and that the scenarios outlined in the Qur'an were the authentic telling of events. Variations or departures from Christian and Jewish texts are indicative of areas that have allegedly been changed (quite consciously) by human hands. It's not a particularly difficult concept to wrap ones head around.

Give a proof that they claim the original contents are in the quran.
Was the alledged the altering before or after the quran? Can you even answer that one? Maybe the rest of my questions are too difficult.

 

[Yanni]

@Yanni, do jews believe that the Messiah is God?

Absolutely not. The Messiah will be a normal human being born from a human father and mother who will be a descendent of the Davidic line (from his "human father," because tribal affiliation follows the father), and he will fulfill his mission that God commands him, which basically is to unite the entire world under One God and to end all war and suffering and to spread the light of Torah throughout the world.

 

[YmirGF]

Give a proof that they claim the original contents are in the quran.

Have you read the Qur'an, my friend? A careful reading of the text and the implications of the text should answer this.

Was the alledged the altering before or after the quran? Can you even answer that one?

The alleged alterations were in effect at the time of Muhammad's "revelations". That is part of the reason for his "revelations" - to set the record straight, one last time before Judgment Day.

This reference is from Muhammad Asad's English translation and is speaking of the Injil, a purely Muslim concept, as originally revealed to Jesus.

Qur'an: al-Ma`idah 5:46

And We caused Jesus, the son of Mary, to follow in the footsteps of those [earlier prophets], confirming the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah; and We vouchsafed unto him the Gospel, wherein there was guidance and light, confirming the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah, and as a guidance and admonition unto the God-conscious.

Maybe the rest of my questions are too difficult.

My time here is limited. Perhaps you could rephrase your concerns rather than have me go through the thread.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

But God didn't tell us that at Mount Sinai; Jesus' followers said that, and they also "elected" Jesus as God in 325 C.E.

I think God told our people at Mount Sinai to respect history.

 

[Riverwolf]

56 pages of responses, and like every other religious forum I've been to; bickering. My question, if it has been approached, is Atheism isn't a religion. Nor is it a belief. Does that mean it's exempt from the logic of this thread? Or must a religion be the only answer?

Please share your thoughts. This is a public forum, so all are invited, religious or not. :yes: (Just keep the rules in mind.)