You're out of line, Jelly!
-
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!
the right religion
- Thread starter islam abduallah
- Start date
is it out of line to joke about a diety or Mohammed?
Yes, it is. You should not be putting anybody else's religion or beliefs down. You should be a decent man enough to respect the religions of others (and their deities).
it might be noble to be muslim, I don't know the ins and outs of being muslim so I can't say for sure just as it might be noble for you to follow your religion...if you have one.
why is it noble to not joke about a persons diety if they choose to have one or many if the case may be that way?
Because it's just as bad as joking about a person's weight, or just joking about fat people in general; it's just not decent. And especially when you're making fun of someone's deity, whom that person "worships" and may or may not believe is the Creator and Master of the Universe. And especially asking such a person if he knows jokes about his own God/Prophet right in front of him. I don't think that is right. Now, if you want to joke in private, that's your business (freedom of speech). But to do so in front of those who hold what you're making fun of as dear to them, that's just not right.
Thanks for your reply, Yanni. I am starting to understand your point of view. You translate it as a past event since it is in perfect tense, but the perfect tense as I read doesn't necessarily imply a past action. I found in some grammar literatures that this tense is called 'prophetic perfect', which refers to events yet to happen. Even the JPS translation ( which is translated by jews) renders it present not past:
"For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us..."
Also the LXX renders it in present (is born and is given).
Checking the context from the first of chapter, it looks to me that he's talking about the future, not the past. He's a prophet
He's foretelling the future, not writing a whole chapter on past events. Even checking the previous chapter, looks the same to me.For the second part:
Again in the JPS translation (JPS Tanakh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) which is by jews not christians, renders it " and his name is called Pele- joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;", which is passive voice. I understand the the verb vayyeqra is active voice, but in grammar literature, you'll find that when the subject is indefinite (they or one, like french 'on'), the verb used is qara, which is active, and this can be noted in many locations in the tanach (like gen 16:14), and it is translated 'is called'.
Also checking the meaning of the verse, it is talking about this 'son', so it is unreasonable to say many adjectives about God, and not give adjectives or any description to the son; that's just my opinion.
Would you please tell me where this "Naamah" is used. You mean 'Naarah'?
We have a lot for older literature. They don't have a single manuscript that proves their claim from newer dates.
Not my point, nor do I care. We didn't claim pharisees distorted their holy book.
May be to you. To me and I think to many people, there should be a proof, whatever small it is, to such a big claim. Yet there isn't a glimpse.
I already replied to that.
Again, that's your opinion, which is different from mine. Maybe you're not interested to get answers about that, but I am.
If someone tells you " your father isn't really your father", would you just take the words for granted? or you require proof?
When someone says the torah and bible, which millions of people believed in for 2000 and 600 years respectively, are distorted, shouldn't they give a clue, or they expect people to just take their words for granted?
If you studied the bible, you wouldn't give such a claim.
I made a mistake; the word is "Almah" which means a young woman. And according to the great Jewish commentators, Rashi and Radak, this young woman was either the young wife of Isaiah or Ahaz (respectively). (I'm just curious; was Jesus ever called Immanuel?). So according to those great commentators, that woman mentioned by the verse was already married to either Isaiah or Ahaz; she was not an unmarried virgin. Second, I hate to burst your bubble, but that JPS Tanakh, is not used or accepted by the Torah/Orthodox community, simply because it was compiled by many non-Orthodox Jews. The way we translate the Torah is based on our Mesorah (tradition) and not on any scholarly expertise. Our whole way of living has been passed down from generation to generation, including the text of the original Torah written by Moses and how we are to translate it. One such example is that "Almah" does not mean virgin, and never meant virgin.Thanks for your reply, Yanni. I am starting to understand your point of view. You translate it as a past event since it is in perfect tense, but the perfect tense as I read doesn't necessarily imply a past action. I found in some grammar literatures that this tense is called 'prophetic perfect', which refers to events yet to happen. Even the JPS translation ( which is translated by jews) renders it present not past:
"For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us..."
Also the LXX renders it in present (is born and is given).
Checking the context from the first of chapter, it looks to me that he's talking about the future, not the past. He's a prophet
For the second part:
Again in the JPS translation (JPS Tanakh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) which is by jews not christians, renders it " and his name is called Pele- joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;", which is passive voice. I understand the the verb vayyeqra is active voice, but in grammar literature, you'll find that when the subject is indefinite (they or one, like french 'on'), the verb used is qara, which is active, and this can be noted in many locations in the tanach (like gen 16:14), and it is translated 'is called'.
Also checking the meaning of the verse, it is talking about this 'son', so it is unreasonable to say many adjectives about God, and not give adjectives or any description to the son; that's just my opinion.
Would you please tell me where this "Naamah" is used. You mean 'Naarah'?
hi mark, if you review my posts with Mrs. Pegg, you can find some evidences and while further argument you will find more
I can't look in the 60 pages. Would you give a link or number of page. Thanks
There are liars who are so good at it that no one will ever know.
Except for the hell part.
The ones who do it in public are still trying to hide themselves, but the fear of getting caught is sexually arousing to them. It also occurs when clubbers just want a quick fix, but also want to go back into the club, perhaps for others.
It's completely wrong to say that they're telling everybody else to do likewise.
I say again, good for them.
I know. We have it, too.
I don't believe that.
We Hindus don't believe this life to be permanent, either. We believe that the only permanent reality is God, and that all, without exception, will one day return to Him. We're also taught to not fear death at all. The Bhagavad Gita says:
Truly there never was a time
When I was not, nor you, nor these
Lords of mennor in the future
A time when we shall cease to be.
2:12
Of that which is born, death is sure,
Of that which is dead, birth is sure.
Over the unavoidable,
Therefore you never should lament.
2:27
Nevertheless, we all still fear death, even if we don't realize we do. Most of the time, we're not even thinking about it. But when death comes, suddenly that fear will show up, and it's very hard to overcome it. This isn't a Hindu teaching; this is a psychological reality. It's fear of death that keeps us from going into dangerous situations, after all.
It takes a VERY long time, and a LOT of hard work, to truly conquer fear of death.
I gave a lot of points to support my idea other than the JPS. I only used the JPS as a translation by jews. Whether orthodox or non orthodox (which I have no idea what it means
, they're still jews. Even the LXX has the same meaning as I said, though it has other weird things. I understand that you have the text originally written by Moses, but I believe it was written in ancient hebrew, which has differences from modern hebrew that you speak now. I read that there are differences in pronunciation and grammar between the 2. So things like the prophetic perfect could become obsolete, or not currently used in your langauge.
I saw some examples on prophetic perfect in the tanach/OT in this page:
BiblicalUnitarian.com - The Prophetic Perfect
Anyway I was only interested to know how jews think..
For the word 'almah', I think you mean Isaiah 7:14.
I read about it before, but I found that the word has the two meanings. Again the LXX rendered in 'parthenos' which exclusively means 'virgin' not 'girl'.
Anyway just using common sense, where would the 'sign' be if the meaning were: the girl would be with child and give birth to a sign? Looks unreasonable to me if so.
For 'immanuel', not literarily, but since He is God who appeared in flesh.
Last edited:
Our oldest manuscripts of the New Testament, as far as I'm aware, are centuries later than Jesus. But even still, the gosples themselves could have been the problem, because perhaps the writers were so focused on their love for Jesus that they forgot that he taught love of God. (After all, that was 30 years later, and they were getting old. That affects memory.)
Not my point either.
Except that the Bible is imperfect?
That's a big claim, and an unreasonable one. I'd need to see some indication.
I expect the indications provided in the Qur'an came from the actions of the Jews and Christians of the time.
I've done rudimentary study of the Bible, and I do make that claim. There are plenty of contradictions.
Though I do notice that this is the same attitude given by Islam Abdullah, who says that the Qur'an is perfect to all those who study it.
My point is, there ARE indications.
The "sign" in that passage was that by either Isaiah's or Ahaz' wife giving birth and through prophetic inspiration called his name "Immanuel," which is a a conjunction of the two words "Imanu" (with us), "El" (is God), the Jewish people saw that as a sign that Judah would be saved from the threat of Rezin and Pekah, through the name meaning "God is with us." The Christians didn't have access to the Oral Law which "explains" the passages and wording of the Written Law (Scripture). The Oral Law was given to the Jewish People by God Himself at the Giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. The explanations of the Written Law are as Divinely originated as the Written Law itself. Without an authentic explanation, these passages are of course able to be mistranslated or misinterpreted. The Orthodox Jews are those who abide by the laws of the Torah to this day; non-Orhodox Jews include the Conservative and Reform Movements who threw out many of the fundamental beliefs of Torah Judaism throughout the ages, in order to make them fit more with today's society. The way they translate things cannot be accurate according to our Mesorah (tradition). Yes, we're all Jews; however, not all Jews keep the Torah and the Mitzvos (commandments). The only faction of Judaism that relates most to the history and past of the Jewish People is the Orthodox Jewish community.I gave a lot of points to support my idea other than the JPS. I only used the JPS as a translation by jews. Whether orthodox or non orthodox (which I have no idea what it means
I understand that you have the text originally written by Moses, but I believe it was written in ancient hebrew, which has differences from modern hebrew that you speak now. I read that there are differences in pronunciation and grammar between the 2. So things like the prophetic perfect could become obsolete, or not currently used in your langauge.
I saw some examples on prophetic perfect in the tanach/OT in this page:
BiblicalUnitarian.com - The Prophetic Perfect
Anyway I was only interested to know how jews think..
For the word 'almah', I think you mean Isaiah 7:14.
I read about it before, but I found that the word has the two meanings. Again the LXX rendered in 'parthenos' which exclusively means 'virgin' not 'girl'.
Anyway just using common sense, where would the 'sign' be if the meaning were: the girl would be with child and give birth to a sign? Looks unreasonable to me if so.
The nature of prophesy, by the way, according to Orthodox Judaism, is that a person experiences a communication with God, either by means of a trans or a dream. The context of that trans or dream can be either past, present, future, or all. Prophecy does not need to be specifically about the future. Anything that God tells a prophet (one who experienced this communication) is considered a prophecy; what a prophet tells others can be about the past, present, and future. That is why there is no contradiction to a verse that seems to talk about past, present, or future. They are all prophesy.
Last edited:
I see, but was any of them called 'Immanuel'?
Anyway, I don't see this much of a sign, since signs much bigger had already happened to the jewish people. I understand your point of view though.
But weren't the early Christians originally jews who had jewish scriptures. Matthew quoted many times from the tanach.
Thanks for making this clear
I see, so you use the context to understand the meaning right?
Anyway, what is a trans?
logician
Well-Known Member
there r many religion in the world, but surly there r only one right religion, but how could we reach the right believe, the right path?
It could also be that all religions are "Wrong".
A trans is when someone who was previously fully congnizant of his surroundings all of a sudden seems to fall under a spell (it's almost like hypnotism) and God talks to that person; all other sounds and noises seem like a blur; all he is fully aware of is God's Voice talking directly to him.
Although those early Christians quoted from the Tanach, they were mistaken about those passages' meanings and proper interpretations. Once you break with mainstream Judaism (as they did), anything they quote or say can be twisted to fit their point of view.
When God talks to a prophet, that which God tells him is so perfectly clear at the onset of the conversation. God is not a man that He should be unclear in His communication. Many prophets who had prophecy by means of a dream, for example, would probably wake up in a cold sweat after they realize that the Creator, Sustainer, and Master of the Universe just communicated with them.
You might want to read more about manuscripts if you want. But there are as early as the 2nd century AD.
Not my point either.
About the second claim, the gospels are in accordance with the tanach (at least from Christians' point of view) and didn't make such vague claims without caring to give details. They didn't claim the torah is distorted or so...
Again, study it if you want.
As unreasonable as their claims.
Distorted scriptures can't be compared to the actions of some people. Would be stupid mistake to make.
Then do study more and see what people/scholars say about what look to you as contradictions. I would agree that somethings APPEAR contradicting, but when you do further study, you understand that there are no contradictions, which I believe is the case with many types of studies.
Which is unreasonable?
To understand something, you have to study it well.
However, I don't think the quran is perfect. Even in the language department, where they claim it is a miracle, it has many mistakes ( of course in arabic).
There are no indications whatsoever in the quran as to who/where/why/when were bible and torah distorted. If you believe otherwise, please give proofs from quran.
I am sorry, I am not really interested in discussing whether you like or don't like my questions. I'm interested in seeing any answers to them.
Last edited:
And I can provide you with two of the best proofs that the Jewish God is NOT fake and is in fact the One True God.
First of all, you probably don't know this, but Judaism is the ONLY religion in the world (and the Jewish People is the only people in the world) to have a claim throughout history that God revealed Himself to the ENTIRE JEWISH NATION on Mount Sinai. Now, that was roughly around 3 million people (men, women, and children). In fact, the Torah says in numerous places that God revealed Himself to the entire nation. Now, how can anyone fool 3 million people into believing that they were all present at the same time and place and all experienced the same exact thing at the same exact time? You can't. Because 500 people can claim they were fishing that day in the Mediterranean Sea; 1000 people can claim they were sleeping; and the list can go on and on of reasons why whoever is making this claim is not telling the truth and may be delusional. Maybe he can convince 500 people (pretty dumb people if they can be that gullible). But you just can't convince 3 million men, women, and children that they all experience a Revelation of God when it didn't actually happen, and then expect that those men, women, and children would pass down the same story to their descendants for generations until this very day. UNLESS, IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED! And we believe that it did, and this belief is the very foundation of our Torah and our existence as a people. No other nation in the history of the world has made such a claim, because the fact is that no other nation ever experienced such an event. Now how did all the other religions in the world begin? Well, most of the time, one or a few people claimed that God spoke to them and revealed His will, and that He said He was making a new religion. Some people actually believed him (or them) and even liked his ideas, and his story spread around the world. That's how you have so many Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Muslims, etc. However, they never claimed that 3 million people all heard God speak directly to THEM (the people) at the same place and at the same time. You just can't convince them of that unless it was true; plus, you need a whole people to be able to make that claim. Whenever a new religion started, there was never 3 million people present, all accepting the new religion at the same time; its charm had to spread to the 4 corners of the earth first. So that is the uniqueness of the validity of the Jewish People's religion.
Second, the best proof of the existence of God is most evident in two great people's writings: Mark Twain and the Russian philosopher, Nikolai Berdyaev. Mark Twain wrote the following in his Concerning the Jews:
"If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one per cent. of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star-dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also away out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvelous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished.
The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?"
The "secret," my friend, is that there is a God in this universe Who promised the Jewish People that they would never be destroyed from the face of the Earth. No human could have made such a prediction; the odds of it coming true would be too great.
Nikolai Berdyaev wrote:
"The Jews' destiny is too imbued with the "metaphysical" to be explained either by material or positive historical terms...Their survival is a mysterious and wonderful phenomenon, demonstrating that the life of this people is governed by special predetermination...The survival of the Jews, their resistance to destruction, their endurance under absolutely peculiar conditions and the fateful role played by them in history; all these point to the particular and mysterious foundations of their destiny..." (Berdyaev, Nikolai, The Meaning of History, London: World, 1935, pp. 86-87).
I thing the message of these passages are self-evident. The existence of a Supernatural Being in control of this Universe cannot be questioned.
OK, I understand now.
OK, I respect your point of view, which is different from mine. Though I read there are more than a hundred prophecies from the tanach that were satisfied in Jesus, to name a few Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22. How do jews understand them?
Yes, of course God is never unclear. I mean to understand a passage in hebrew for example the first verse that we discussed, how do you know if the perfect verb refers to past or future?
First of all, there were many prophecies that were NOT fulfilled by Jesus. There is so much on this topic that I wouldn't be able to really address all of them here. However, there is a great book called 26 Reasons Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus by Asher Norman, that addresses all (or most) of your questions. I highly recommend the book to those who want to understand "why Jews don't believe in Jesus." The link on Amazon is Amazon.com: Twenty-Six Reasons Why Jews Don't Believe In Jesus (9780977193707): Asher Norman: Books, and the link to his website is 26Reasons.com ~ 26 Reasons Why Jews Don't Believe In Jesus? By Asher Norman.
In Reason 13, he shows how the authors of the Christian Bible employed a number of deceptive techniques to shoehorn Jesus into the text. I will list those techniques in order (but I can't explain them here):
1) Messianic prophecies were invented and then attributed to Jesus;
2) Non-messianic prophecies were turned into messianic prophecies;
3) Versus in the Jewish Bible were taken out of context in the Christian Bible;
4) Verses in the Jewish Bible were mistranslated, words and phrases were invented and tenses were altered;
5) Verses in the Jewish Bible were misappropriated to support messianic claims about Jesus.
I'll just give you one example, something I think we discussed earlier:
The Christian Bible (NKJ) Matthew 1: 22-23: The Christian Bible says, "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying: "Behold, a virgin shall be with child and will bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which translated means, God is with us." (Matthew 1:22-23, citing Isaiah 7:14).
The Jewish Bible (Stone Edition) Isaiah 7:14: Properly translated [as it has been understood by the Jewish nation ever since the prophecy was originally written], Isaiah said, "Behold, the [not "a"] young woman [not "virgin"] is [not "shall be"] with child and will bear a son and she [not "they"] will call his name Emmanuel." (Isaiah 7:14)
This is just one of many examples of how the original Hebrew text (which the Jews still use to this day written in their Torah scrolls, as it has been written on ever since the Torah was first given to the Jewish People) was twisted and changed to suit the early founders' of Christianity objectives.
There are many other problems with Christianity that Asher Norman cites in his book. I highly recommend it for all those finally wanting to know the facts.
"I am a former ordained Christian minister who has returned to (Orthodox) Judaism, the faith of my forefathers. Asher Norman's riveting book spells out why heaven and hell does not depend on faith in Jesus. I encourage Jews, Christians and 'messianic Jews' to buy this book. The only thing that would stand in their way is fear of the truth." - R. Mariano (Moshe) Otero (Founder and Director, Los Caminos De Israel, Hollywood, Florida).
Last edited: