Which Religious Scripture Is Truly The Word Of God?

[LuisDantas]

Give me proof.

Sorry. I am not playing that game. I have no duty to convince you, nor to agree with you.

You will have to decide either to brand me as a liar or something or to believe in my sincerity.

As is actually unavoidable whenever such a strictly personal idea such as "God" is involved.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yep, the blame is not on God.

Oh, then your belief is silly and worthless, and your God is a sorry joke, entirely unworthy of my consideration.

Here, that was simple, see?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You are blaming God?

I'm pointing out the inconsistencies in what you're arguing.

He gave you a life as a blessing and a free will.

YOU YOURSELF caused your demise in Hell.

Not God, once again.

So you think I have the power to thwart God's will? I didn't know I had it in me.

Not all creation fails.

But some does. It takes only one failure for God not to be perfect. Do you believe in a god who is perfect or one who isn't completely imperfect?

However, you are choosing to fail by disbelieving.

You fail, not the creator.

You yourself guided to chose that path.

... by acting on desires that were placed in me by who, exactly? I may act on the desires and values that motivate me, but I didn't choose those desires and values; who did?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yep, the blame is not on God.

It seems like your god isn't responsible for anything.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

Is there no rule against banning members who continuously post troll threads repeatedly?
Since I came here, this is second thread designed on childish arguments and illogical reasons to glorify his faith in the end by calling others a liar or a Muslim hater
Granted he's 15 or so his profile says, but this is a place for discussion and better understanding, not for this.
Are there really no laws for these activities in this group?

 

[4consideration]

Is there no rule against banning members who continuously post troll threads repeatedly?
Since I came here, this is second thread designed on childish arguments and illogical reasons to glorify his faith in the end by calling others a liar or a Muslim hater
Granted he's 15 or so his profile says, but this is a place for discussion and better understanding, not for this.
Are there really no laws for these activities in this group?

Here is a link to the Forum Rules: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/rf-rules.170244/

You may also find it slightly left of center at the top of this page.

The general process for moderation of posts, restriction, and banning is covered there.

If you see a post you think is a rule violation, you may report it using the Report button on the lower left of the post. It allows space for you to say why you think the post is a violation.

Additionally, the Site Feedback section found at the very bottom of the Forums page allows you to initiate a conversation with all the staff. Any thread you create there can only be seen by you and the staff. That is the place to ask the staff questions. Hope this helps.

 

[Jabar]

Is there no rule against banning members who continuously post troll threads repeatedly?
Since I came here, this is second thread designed on childish arguments and illogical reasons to glorify his faith in the end by calling others a liar or a Muslim hater
Granted he's 15 or so his profile says, but this is a place for discussion and better understanding, not for this.
Are there really no laws for these activities in this group?

Troll threads repeatedly?

Man, come on and stop being a hater...

I am not trolling at all.

I never called anyone here a liar, show me one comment.

You make false accusations once again.

 

[Flankerl]

So, we can debate about it.

Isn't lying a sin according to your Religion?

You really shouldn't do it.

 

[Riverwolf]

I would suggest that each religious person will say their book is the best. Is this hard to understand or summin'?

At least we Heathens don't try to pretend that Havamal actually was written by Woden... well, most of us don't, anyway; there might be a few out there who do.

 

[Riverwolf]

Very irrational of the belief of Gods dying.

How is it irrational? Gods die all the time.

The fact that the ''gods'' could create a universe and also destroy it

The Gods didn't "create" the Universe. In all the PIE Old Stories, the Universe was born from what the Greeks called Chaos.

Here is the Vedic rendition of that.

******

नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीं नासीद्रजो नो व्योमा परो यत् ।
किमावरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्नम्भः किमासीद्गहनं गभीरम् ॥ १॥

Then even nothingness was not, nor existence,
There was no air then, nor the heavens beyond it.
What covered it? Where was it? In whose keeping?
Was there then cosmic water, in depths unfathomed?

न मृत्युरासीदमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्न आसीत्प्रकेतः ।
आनीदवातं स्वधया तदेकं तस्माद्धान्यन्न परः किञ्चनास ॥२॥

Then there was neither death nor immortality
nor was there then the torch of night and day.
The One breathed windlessly and self-sustaining.
There was that One then, and there was no other.

तम आसीत्तमसा गूहळमग्रे प्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वाऽइदम् ।
तुच्छ्येनाभ्वपिहितं यदासीत्तपसस्तन्महिनाजायतैकम् ॥३॥

At first there was only darkness wrapped in darkness.
All this was only unillumined water.
That One which came to be, enclosed in nothing,
arose at last, born of the power of heat.

कामस्तदग्रे समवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यदासीत् ।
सतो बन्धुमसति निरविन्दन्हृदि प्रतीष्या कवयो मनीषा ॥४॥

In the beginning desire descended on it -
that was the primal seed, born of the mind.
The sages who have searched their hearts with wisdom
know that which is kin to that which is not.

तिरश्चीनो विततो रश्मिरेषामधः स्विदासीदुपरि स्विदासीत् ।
रेतोधा आसन्महिमान आसन्त्स्वधा अवस्तात्प्रयतिः परस्तात् ॥५॥

And they have stretched their cord across the void,
and know what was above, and what below.
Seminal powers made fertile mighty forces.
Below was strength, and over it was impulse.

को अद्धा वेद क इह प्र वोचत्कुत आजाता कुत इयं विसृष्टिः ।
अर्वाग्देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाथा को वेद यत आबभूव ॥६॥

But, after all, who knows, and who can say
Whence it all came, and how creation happened?
the gods themselves are later than creation,
so who knows truly whence it has arisen?

इयं विसृष्टिर्यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न ।
यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन्त्सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न वेद ॥७॥

Whence all creation had its origin,
he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not,
he, who surveys it all from highest heaven,
he knows - or maybe even he does not know.

*****
Chaos. That Darkness wrapped in Darkness. From that popped into being all Things.

That Chaos. I name her Only Ever Wight, the Mother of Life. And her Name is Death.

 

[Jabar]

Isn't lying a sin according to your Religion?

You really shouldn't do it.

Well yes intentionally, but i am not lying so good try.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yep, the blame is not on God.

And yet, the Qur'an itself says otherwise.

I, a non-Muslim, will now actually QUOTE this book that you keep talking about but never actually cite. Yusuf-Ali translation (because I've always liked it best).

*****

6. Inna allatheena kafaroo sawaon AAalayhim aanthartahum am lam tunthirhum la yu/minoona

6. As to those who reject Faith,
It is the same to them
Whether thou warn them
Or do not warn them;
They will not believe.

7. Khatama Allahu AAala quloobihim waAAala samAAihim waAAala absarihim ghishawatun walahum AAathabun AAatheemun

7. God hath set a seal
On their hearts and on their hearing,
And on their eyes is a veil;
Great is the penalty they (incur).
****

So, by the Qur'an's own admission, Allah is responsible for "sealing our hearts and hearing."

And this isn't exactly far into the text. This is Chapter Freaking TWO.

 

[Riverwolf]

So, we can debate about it.

What do you think a debate is?

 

[Jabar]

And yet, the Qur'an itself says otherwise.

I, a non-Muslim, will now actually QUOTE this book that you keep talking about but never actually cite. Yusuf-Ali translation (because I've always liked it best).

*****

6. Inna allatheena kafaroo sawaon AAalayhim aanthartahum am lam tunthirhum la yu/minoona

6. As to those who reject Faith,
It is the same to them
Whether thou warn them
Or do not warn them;
They will not believe.

7. Khatama Allahu AAala quloobihim waAAala samAAihim waAAala absarihim ghishawatun walahum AAathabun AAatheemun

7. God hath set a seal
On their hearts and on their hearing,
And on their eyes is a veil;
Great is the penalty they (incur).
****

So, by the Qur'an's own admission, Allah is responsible for "sealing our hearts and hearing."

And this isn't exactly far into the text. This is Chapter Freaking TWO.

Stop making misconceptions on the verse, the other verse says differently.

I wanna ask what verses are there?

You should take the Qur'an metaphorically.

Yes, it is chapter freekin 2, and you already made a misconception.


:O

 

[Riverwolf]

Stop making misconceptions on the verse, the other verse says differently.

Show me.

I wanna ask what verses are there

You've read the Qur'an yourself, haven't you?

You should take the Qur'an metaphorically.

The tricky thing about taking a work metaphorically is that it means my interpretation of it becomes subject to my own biases and preconceptions. Metaphorically, it can now mean basically whatever you want it to mean.

That's normally just fine... but then there's this (rather ridiculous) notion of an eternal afterlife at stake. With that, taking things metaphorically isn't such a good idea.

 

[Jabar]

Show me.



You've read the Qur'an yourself, haven't you?



The tricky thing about taking a work metaphorically is that it means my interpretation of it becomes subject to my own biases and preconceptions. Metaphorically, it can now mean basically whatever you want it to mean.

That's normally just fine... but then there's this (rather ridiculous) notion of an eternal afterlife at stake. With that, taking things metaphorically isn't such a good idea.

This is emphasized by a number of other verses that prove that some of the disbelievers did believe in Allaah and His Messenger (and hence became Muslims) such as His sayings:

"Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from their disbelief) their past will be forgiven." (8:38)

"So were you yourselves in the past (i.e. disbelievers) until Allaah conferred upon you His Favours." (4:94)

"And some of these (disbelievers) believe therein." (29:47)

Their hearts are only sealed for as long as they wish to keep themselves in denial and ignorance. So, if a person wishes to open his eyes and learn, his seal will be removed. The seal is dependent on the actions and intentions of the person in question. So despite the verse in question, some individuals could be preached to and in fact were preached to successfully.

Just like the strengthening of one's heart and belief is attributed to Allah 8:10-11,10:57,18:14,48:4,57:27 the natural phenomenon of sealing of the hearts, ears, and eyes exists with the will of Allah, like each and every natural phenomenon such as rain etc., this is why it is attributed to Allah.Everything that occurs is within the boundary of the divine laws created and designed by God.

Stop making misconceptions and acting as though he put a seal as he gave us a free will to do what we want.

Your arguments are irrational and do not have understanding behind them.

 

[Riverwolf]

This is emphasized by a number of other verses that prove that some of the disbelievers did believe in Allaah and His Messenger (and hence became Muslims) such as His sayings:

"Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from their disbelief) their past will be forgiven." (8:38)

"So were you yourselves in the past (i.e. disbelievers) until Allaah conferred upon you His Favours." (4:94)

"And some of these (disbelievers) believe therein." (29:47)

Their hearts are only sealed for as long as they wish to keep themselves in denial and ignorance. So, if a person wishes to open his eyes and learn, his seal will be removed. The seal is dependent on the actions and intentions of the person in question. So despite the verse in question, some individuals could be preached to and in fact were preached to successfully.

Okay. Fair enough.

See? THAT'S what it is to actually SHOW something. You can use the Qur'an when talking about what the Qur'an says.

Stop making misconceptions and acting as though he put a seal as he gave us a free will to do what we want.

I called it like I saw it, and what I saw indicated that it's his doing.

Then again, why would that "seal" be there in the first place?

Your arguments are irrational and do not have understanding behind them.

Understanding is not a general thing.

I am not terribly familiar with Islam or the Qur'an, largely because I don't particularly care. So I don't have much "understanding" of it. I'm willing to stand corrected on matters of what Islam teaches, regardless of whether it's "true" or not.

I do, however, have plenty of "understanding" of my own way, and of how religion and religious behavior typically work. Tell me: how many other religions have you actually looked into in-depth?

 

[Hawkins]

When put into comparison, all religious scriptures, which prevails over the other?
They must contain the following

1) Complex literature
2) Prophecies and Scientific evidences
3) Logic
4) No Errors






Peace.

Knowledge can be divided into 2 parts, the part that humans have mastered and the part humans haven't yet acquired. (today's humans assume that second part is non-existence out of their arrogance)

History books are human accounts of witnessing about events/figures lying without today's human knowledge such humans can understand and comprehend.
Religious books are human accounts of witnessing about events/figures lying beyond human knowledge and thus may not be understandable to today's humans.

The Holy Bible is a multiple account human witnessing backed by the martyrdom of direct witnesses. It is the only book humans have which is reconcilable for us to tell that the message conveyed 2000 years ago is the same message conveyed today among humans. Humans don't have another book which allows you to compare today's contexts with ancient scrolls, or compare the contexts from 2 independent sources.

If a God exists, He will do so by ensuring that humans can get to the same message which conveys yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Holy Bible is the only book which does so!

 

[Riverwolf]

Knowledge can be divided into 2 parts, the part that humans have mastered and the part humans haven't yet acquired. (today's humans assume that second part is non-existence out of their arrogance)

Many do, sure, but plenty know better. Especially anyone with more than a passing familiarity to the sciences; they know full well that we know mostly nothing.

 

[Hawkins]

Many do, sure, but plenty know better. Especially anyone with more than a passing familiarity to the sciences; they know full well that we know mostly nothing.

You are plainly wrong. Humans failed to keep anything can be tracked as original. Show us one book which can be compared with the same contexts written in ancient scrolls!

Humans failed to keep any original scrolls at the point when paper was invented. To simply put, human documents can't last across the border of 2000 years (or even 1500 years), except for the Holy Bible.