Which God is truthful?

[whirlingmerc]

Yes, for sure.
But neither Trinity nor Jesus is God. Please
Regards

I see it very differently

 

[Aupmanyav]

I can go to the loo without truth or beauty, but they are still important.

There is neither beauty nor truth in 'One God'; it is only jealousness, hate, cruelty and dominance.

 

[paarsurrey]

There is neither beauty nor truth in 'One God'; it is only jealousness, hate, cruelty and dominance.

Beauty and all other positive verities that we perceive belong to Him, and He (One G-d) has let us perceive them . Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I see it very differently

It is an illusion. Right? Please
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

How? Please
Regards

You asked, "Which God?" That question itself means there musty be more than one God according to you. Lets say there is one car on the street. Why would you ever ask, Which car?" It is implied that there is at least 2 cars. Same with wife ... If you ask a friend, Which wife?" it means he must have more than one wife, no? Otherwise you would never ask the question.

 

[firedragon]

It isn't so much of an assumption, it is more based on the only books we have from David are the Psalms....

This is why all the texts have to be put together to be understood properly, and not be seen as separate, as literally a lot of the Quran makes no sense without knowing the additional contexts it came from.

Plus the Quran quotes the Psalms:

21:105 Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth."

Psalms 37:29 The righteous shall inherit the land, and live in it forever.

Plus even Google translates the word زبور (Zabur) as Psalms.

Google translate. No good.

21:105 does not say Psalms. Some used to assume Zaboor is meant to be psalms because it was revealed to David. But then Quran cites Moses and Taurat. Do you assume Taurat is the Pentateuch in the Bible. No. If you read into it the Pentateuch is not written by Moses. Thus that assumption is false. How about Injeel? Do you believe the Gospel in the bible is Injeel cited in the Quran? Wrong mate. Which one?

Yes. People used to make these assumption very long ago when there were no scholarly analysis of these things. Now we have passed that era. No scholar worthy of scholarship believes in the things you believe.

And the Quran has many things that are similar to the bible. That does not mean it quotes the bible verses. The Shema is very similar to La ilaha illah. How about Surah ikhlas. The bible has passages just too close to it. How about when the Quran says not to kill innocents etc. The Talmud has similar passages.

Thus with the kind of assumption you are making all of these are books that we are supposed to adopt?

Nope. There could have been one single source to the Quran and previous revelations. But you can never assume that any of the above books are THE BOOKS cited in the Quran.

 

[wizanda]

Some used to assume Zaboor is meant to be psalms because it was revealed to David.

The Surah 21:105 quotes the Psalm that was given to David, which is after the Torah which was given to Moses.

If you read into it the Pentateuch is not written by Moses.

I'm aware that some of the Torah comes after Moses death; yet that is the revelation still, it has been handed down the same for thousands of years.

Do you believe the Gospel in the bible is Injeel cited in the Quran?

There are 3 synoptic gospels, that between them substantiate what Yeshua stated, enough to build a case, against the false gospel of John and Paul as is prophesied.

No scholar worthy of scholarship believes in the things you believe.

I don't follow atheistic scholars; seriously i find this line of investigation derogatory to both the Quran, and Bible's messengers....Plus proves you don't believe in God having ultimate power to maintain the message.

How about when the Quran says not to kill innocents etc. The Talmud has similar passages.

The Quran is quoting what the Jewish people have in their Talmud.

Thus with the kind of assumption you are making all of these are books that we are supposed to adopt?

This isn't logical reasoning what you're putting forward, it is the same argumentative hypocrisy I've seen from many fake Muslims.

Thus with the kind of assumption you are making all of these are books that we are supposed to adopt?

You're not meant to worship books, you're meant to read the messages, and understand what has been sent before as one whole.

But you can never assume that any of the above books are THE BOOKS cited in the Quran.

I can't assume the Quran isn't edited either, that the translators haven't added their own conclusion; i don't assume, I'm not an accuser (satan), so i don't go out of my way disproving everything, without a logical reason to do so.

4: 150-151 Indeed, those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and wish to discriminate between Allah and His messengers and say, "We believe in some and disbelieve in others," and wish to adopt a way in between - Those are the disbelievers, truly. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment.

 

[wizanda]

There is neither beauty nor truth in 'One God'

Namaste Aupmanyav-Ji,

• Within the Dao as One, it is its simplicity that allows it to be all...
• Within Brahman as One, it is the unity of all vedic understanding, that allows it to be the ultimate...
  
• Within Yah-Avah meaning Lord To Be, and Brahman ultimately meaning To Be, there is unison...
• Within Yeshua being a manifestation of the divine, we see similar to an avatar...
  
• With Allah meaning The God, there is meant to be Oneness with all religions...
• Within recognizing that the universal mind (Alaya-vijnana) is the ultimate without a name, thus removing all concepts of self, we can become part of the 0neness (Nirvana)...
• Within seeing that all the different names, and all the different understandings there is a Oneness between mankind trying to understand these things, there is unity.

Unfortunately though for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so many have gone opposite to what exists.....

Just proving here is near Hell, and people don't seek enlightenment, they seek to prove their own ego.

So personally find all understanding of the divine beautiful; yet lots of people's souls are ugly tho, like self tortured spikey creatures, who consistently prove they've got nothing to do with 0neness.

Another way to understand how it is beautiful, is to understand each religious ideology is a jigsaw piece in a huge puzzle, when assembled you can see Oneness; yet otherwise you see lots of egos wandering around with only one piece, with sharp edges.

 

[firedragon]

The Surah 21:105 quotes the Psalm that was given to David, which is after the Torah which was given to Moses.

Wrong. It doesnt say psalms. It says Zaboor. You have made an assumption based on the supposed answer.

I don't follow atheistic scholars; seriously i find this line of investigation derogatory to both the Quran, and Bible's messengers....Plus proves you don't believe in God having ultimate power to maintain the message.

I didnt tell you to ask an atheistic scholar. Ask any scholar. A qualified scholar of the Quran and bible. Well, ask someone like Shabir Ali if you like. If you want a biblical scholar ask someone like Barbara Arland.

So you believe that God maintained and protected the Pentateuch? Because Moses wrote it? Do you believe that Moses wrote it. Do you believe this is the Torah revealed to Moses?

Alright. Google the "Documentary Hypothesis" and make your own assessment. At least.

The Quran is quoting what the Jewish people have in their Talmud.

I know its not. But you argue that since there is similar verse in the Quran and Psalms, it is the Zaboor cited in teh Quran. I just used your logic to show you its bad logic. Thats all.

This isn't logical reasoning what you're putting forward, it is the same argumentative hypocrisy I've seen from many fake Muslims.

Thanks. You can go thrive on insults. maybe you need them more.

You're not meant to worship books, you're meant to read the messages, and understand what has been sent before as one whole.

Well. You should understand the message as well. The Taurat is not the bible. The injeel is not the bible. the zaboor is not the bible. When Jesus went to the mountain and preached the Gospel or Injeel what did he preach? John, Matthet, Mark or Luke? Which Gospel?

No. The books called Matthes, Mark, etc are telling you that he preached the "Gospel". There is no book called the Gospel in the Bible. Same way the Psalms in the OT is not the Zaboor.

I agree. Just believing in a book is pointless. You must read, analyse and understand.

I can't assume the Quran isn't edited either, that the translators haven't added their own conclusion; i don't assume, I'm not an accuser (satan), so i don't go out of my way disproving everything, without a logical reason to do so.

4: 150-151 Indeed, those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and wish to discriminate between Allah and His messengers and say, "We believe in some and disbelieve in others," and wish to adopt a way in between - Those are the disbelievers, truly. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating punishment.

True. Thanks for the brand new information and calling others disbelievers because you cant stick to a point respectfully.

Zaboor is not the Psalms. Thats it.

Peace.

 

[wizanda]

Wrong. It doesnt say psalms. It says Zaboor. You have made an assumption based on the supposed answer.

Hadn't said the Psalm is Zabur; I said it quoted the Psalm exactly, and showed the evidence....You've got no evidence, just conjecture.

Do you believe this is the Torah revealed to Moses?

No the Torah is a history of the Jewish people, so no it isn't completely a revealed text, though some Jews might think otherwise, the text its self doesn't say that, and it is faulty logic to assume it.

Because Moses wrote it?

Moses didn't write all the Torah, Moses helped inspire it.

So you believe that God maintained and protected the Pentateuch?

The Torah is fine as a collection of writings explaining Jewish history, and beliefs.... It is impossible to say otherwise, other than conjecture.

I know its not.

5:32 Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

This only comes from the Talmud, stop making up stuff without any evidence.

Mishna Sanhedrin 4:5 Therefore the human was created alone in the world; to teach that one who destroys a single life is considered as if he had destroyed an entire world; and one who sustains a single life, it is considered as if he had sustained an entire world.

You can go thrive on insults.

I don't thrive on insults, I'm currently re-reading the Quran and am horrified at the lack of discernment by so called Muslims; if you don't want to fit into that category, please be more logical.

When Jesus went to the mountain and preached the Gospel or Injeel what did he preach?

I've just explained, between the multiple accounts, we can see what Yeshua was teaching in the Synoptic Gospels.

Now as testimonies, they've all got holes in them, and additions; yet between them we can make a case of what he said, to show how John is false and how Paul contradicts him.

Just believing in a book is pointless. You must read, analyse and understand.

Actually the books are useless, if you've not got the wisdom from God to discern what they're meaning.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Within the Dao as One, it is its simplicity that allows it to be all...
Within Brahman as One, it is the unity of all vedic understanding, that allows it to be the ultimate...

Dao, Brahman is not God. Oneness does not brook any God.

 

[wizanda]

Dao, Brahman is not God.

The Dao is the ultimate source of reality, as the Myriad of things were created from it, it is the wisdom that is inherent within reality.

How is Brahman not the source of all reality, and thus God?

Oneness does not brook any God.

From my NDE Heaven is called Oneness, it is the surrounding energy of the singularity.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The Dao is the ultimate source of reality, as the Myriad of things were created from it, it is the wisdom that is inherent within reality.
How is Brahman not the source of all reality, and thus God?

We do not know the reality. To give it attributes without knowing it is wrong. First let us find out about it.

 

[paarsurrey]

We do not know the reality. To give it attributes without knowing it is wrong. First let us find out about it.

Be a believer and one could know the Truth of reality. Please
Regards

 

[Brickjectivity]

There is neither beauty nor truth in 'One God'; it is only jealousness, hate, cruelty and dominance.

I will give that some thought. You put it very succinctly in a way that is hard to disagree with. When is monotheism not about jealousness, hate, cruelty and dominance? When it isn't.

I have seen several attempts to deal with the problem you are talking about, and I have seen monotheism appear seemingly out of nowhere in several spots in History: the pharoah Ahkenaten who preached the one god Aten, the god Marduk of the Babylonians, 'God' of us Christians, and there is the one god proposed by Socrates. I also count Rome's Glory as a sort of monotheism.

 

[firedragon]

Hadn't said the Psalm is Zabur; I said it quoted the Psalm exactly, and showed the evidence....You've got no evidence, just conjecture.

No the Torah is a history of the Jewish people, so no it isn't completely a revealed text, though some Jews might think otherwise, the text its self doesn't say that, and it is faulty logic to assume it.

Moses didn't write all the Torah, Moses helped inspire it.

The Torah is fine as a collection of writings explaining Jewish history, and beliefs.... It is impossible to say otherwise, other than conjecture.

5:32 Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

This only comes from the Talmud, stop making up stuff without any evidence.

Mishna Sanhedrin 4:5 Therefore the human was created alone in the world; to teach that one who destroys a single life is considered as if he had destroyed an entire world; and one who sustains a single life, it is considered as if he had sustained an entire world.

I don't thrive on insults, I'm currently re-reading the Quran and am horrified at the lack of discernment by so called Muslims; if you don't want to fit into that category, please be more logical.

I've just explained, between the multiple accounts, we can see what Yeshua was teaching in the Synoptic Gospels.

Now as testimonies, they've all got holes in them, and additions; yet between them we can make a case of what he said, to show how John is false and how Paul contradicts him.

Actually the books are useless, if you've not got the wisdom from God to discern what they're meaning.

How do you know what is the Torah? The first five books? Any evidence?

And about the Talmud and Quran, what did I make without any evidence? Let me hear it.

You said Yeshua. Where in the synoptic gospels or the Gospel of John does that name appear? If you say its Jesus where is he called Yeshua in the Gospels.

Cheers.

 

[Kirran]

I will give that some thought. You put it very succinctly in a way that is hard to disagree with. When is monotheism not about jealousness, hate, cruelty and dominance? When it isn't.

I have seen several attempts to deal with the problem you are talking about, and I have seen monotheism appear seemingly out of nowhere in several spots in History: the pharoah Ahkenaten who preached the one god Aten, the god Marduk of the Babylonians, 'God' of us Christians, and there is the one god proposed by Socrates. I also count Rome's Glory as a sort of monotheism.

I think that monotheism is kind of one way of conceptualising a more widespread and repeated tendency for people to intuit a unity of the transcendent. This is reflected also in Daoist and Buddhist traditions. So I do call myself a theist but at the end of the day the theist-atheist dichotomy is one born from modern Western Abrahamic paradigms, and its spread elsewhere is essentially colonialist.

 

[wizanda]

We do not know the reality. To give it attributes without knowing it is wrong. First let us find out about it.

Having had a NDE, got a rough idea about multiple quantum physics dimensions, and how it fits together....

Plus some of the bits stated are within the religious texts, was quoting from.

Be a believer and one could know the Truth of reality.

Sorry that isn't the case, believer in which book, in which concepts, there are millions of them, and without any first hand experience, all of what you believe could be wrong.

How do you know what is the Torah? The first five books? Any evidence?

That is like saying any proof a stick is a stick... Jewish writings on the Torah are based on them 5 books, stop being silly please.

And about the Talmud and Quran, what did I make without any evidence?

Just posted you both the Talmud and Quran, where clearly the Quran is stating something only found in the Talmud...Then you go "no it isn't", without any rational reasoning behind it.

You said Yeshua. Where in the synoptic gospels or the Gospel of John does that name appear? If you say its Jesus where is he called Yeshua in the Gospels.

They claim Yeshua was transliterated into the name jesus, thus every time you see jesus that should say Yeshua...

Matthew 1:21 She shall bring forth a son. You shall call his name Jesus, for it is he who shall save his people from their sins."

Yeshua means salvation; so when it says, "he shall be called Yeshua, because he shall save his people", this is why.

His name was turned into a blasphemy, to hide that he fulfills prophecy in multiple places within the Tanakh.

 

[firedragon]

Just posted you both the Talmud and Quran, where clearly the Quran is stating something only found in the Talmud...Then you go "no it isn't", without any rational reasoning behind it.

I know. Many quote those. I agree.

I stand with my question. Without any rational reason, what was the assumption I made?

That is like saying any proof a stick is a stick... Jewish writings on the Torah are based on them 5 books, stop being silly please.

So your point is the Pentateuch is the Torah because the Jews say it. Fine.

But its not the Taurat cited in the Quran. Because the Quran says it was revealed to Moses.

They claim Yeshua was transliterated into the name jesus, thus every time you see jesus that should say Yeshua...

Matthew 1:21 She shall bring forth a son. You shall call his name Jesus, for it is he who shall save his people from their sins."

Yeshua means salvation; so when it says, "he shall be called Yeshua, because he shall save his people", this is why.

His name was turned into a blasphemy, to hide that he fulfills prophecy in multiple places within the Tanakh.

The New Testament calls him Iesaw or Iesous. Isnt it?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Be a believer and one could know the Truth of reality.

OK. Should I believe in Jedi, Cthulhu or Flying Spaghetti Monster?