Why Islam makes more sense conceptually of all the Abrahamic faiths

[Spiderman]

I knew this. And then they killed Ali, the so called rightful heir to Islam, according to the Shia. Islam is very messed up. I think that Abu Baker followed Muhammad. He is said to have formed the first Calif. Stories circulate that Ali was the rightful heir, but he did not want it, and left to go to modern day Iraq. On his way there, he was murdered by the followers of Abu Baker.

Aisha, according to Muslims is the one who compiled the notes of Muhammad PBUH, and that became the Quran. This from Muslim speakers at the Mosque. I've heard non Muslim "scholars" tell a different story about these things, but what do they know?

Compare that to Christianity, which continues in Chaos.

From my very biased point of view, Paul took Christianity in a new direction. The Disciples were all Jews, and wanted The Master's belief system to be an extension of it. They'd have had a big problem with Jewish leaders of the day. Christianity was in constant turmoil until Constantine, around 312 AD. There are apparently mixed reports about him, some saying he was not as trustworthy as Trump.

Then, of course something happened around 700 AD, and then the Inquisition, and then what ever Martin Luther did. Christians were a blood thirsty bunch; crucifying and burning each other at the stake. None of that had a thing to do with the goals of Jesus Christ. Even today, if the members of a religion are not obediently in doctrinal lock step, there is blood to shed.

If Islam is the true faith, why did Allah leave such dispute over the rightful heir?

You speak of Trump negatively, but Trump doesn't chop off heads or talk about having his enemies tortured and mutilated. Do you need me to quote the Qur'an again about burning people, crucifying them, torturing them, cutting off hands and feet?

If Islam is the true faith, why is Islam the Religion that tortures, bullies, imprisons, and mutilates the most people (for Religious reasons) of any Religion on Earth, in the 21st century?

Why do Islamic regimes make sex-slaves of non-muslims, but no 1st world Christian regimes do this (that I know of).?

Why are the most misogynistic laws in the 21st century found in Muslim Theocracies, if it is the true faith?

 

[Tumah]

Regarding the second, I seem to have forgotten that one, but you posed an analogy regarding the Jewish relationship with God by offering the analogy of the special fan club. I thought it was quite the clever analogy. But of course my position was clear that there seems to presuppose the idea of a special relationship between God a specific people. which is why you and I disagree.

That's fine, I'm not trying to convince you to agree about what reality is, only to explain that the special relationship we believe we have is not meant to exclude a relationship between G-d and non-Jews as it seemed that you said about Judaism in your OP.

But regarding the analogy in relation to Maimonides, were you referring to this?


"I will begin the subject of this chapter with a simile. A king is in his palace, and all his subjects are partly in the country, and partly abroad. Of the former, some have their backs turned towards the king's palace, and their faces in another direction; and some are desirous and zealous to go to the palace, seeking "to inquire in his temple," and to minister before him, but have not yet seen even the face of the wall of the house. Of those that desire to go to the palace, some reach it, and go round about in search of the entrance gate; others have passed through the gate, and walk about in the ante-chamber; and others have succeeded in entering into the inner part of the palace, and being in the same room with the king in the royal palace. But even the latter do not immediately on entering the palace see the king, or speak to him; for, after having entered the inner part of the palace, another effort is required before they can stand before the king--at a distance, or close by--hear his words, or speak to him. I will now explain the simile which I have made. The people who are abroad are all those that have no religion, neither one based on speculation nor one received by tradition. Such are the extreme Turks that wander about in the north, the Ku****es who live in the south, and those in our country who are like these. I consider these as irrational beings, and not as human beings; they are below mankind, but above monkeys, since they have the form and shape of man, and a mental faculty above that of the monkey."

Yes, that's the one.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I knew this. And then they killed Ali, the so called rightful heir to Islam, according to the Shia. Islam is very messed up. I think that Abu Baker followed Muhammad. He is said to have formed the first Calif. Stories circulate that Ali was the rightful heir, but he did not want it, and left to go to modern day Iraq. On his way there, he was murdered by the followers of Abu Baker.

Aisha, according to Muslims is the one who compiled the notes of Muhammad PBUH, and that became the Quran. This from Muslim speakers at the Mosque. I've heard non Muslim "scholars" tell a different story about these things, but what do they know?

Compare that to Christianity, which continues in Chaos.

From my very biased point of view, Paul took Christianity in a new direction. The Disciples were all Jews, and wanted The Master's belief system to be an extension of it. They'd have had a big problem with Jewish leaders of the day. Christianity was in constant turmoil until Constantine, around 312 AD. There are apparently mixed reports about him, some saying he was not as trustworthy as Trump.

Then, of course something happened around 700 AD, and then the Inquisition, and then what ever Martin Luther did. Christians were a blood thirsty bunch; crucifying and burning each other at the stake. None of that had a thing to do with the goals of Jesus Christ. Even today, if the members of a religion are not obediently in doctrinal lock step, there is blood to shed.

What I find common in a lot of religious faiths is that historical faiths all tend to diverge from whence their original message was intended for and a similar paradigm shift can be said about its adherents. Sometimes the death of charasmatic leaders produces the fragmentation of a once unifying ideology.

 

[Desert Snake]

What I find common in a lot of religious faiths is that historical faiths all tend to diverge from whence their original message was intended for and a similar paradigm shift can be said about its adherents. Sometimes the death of charasmatic leaders produces the fragmentation of a once unifying ideology.

Your context is fictional, there are many religions, if you are not religious, christianity is the 'older' religion than judaism, with the form deity /egypt, ankh , and pre-judaism mythic similaritiy to m east polytheistic concepts.


So forth. You seem to like to create your own fictional paradigms for these subjects, without actually researching anything.

 

[Ellen Brown]

What I find common in a lot of religious faiths is that historical faiths all tend to diverge from whence their original message was intended for and a similar paradigm shift can be said about its adherents. Sometimes the death of charasmatic leaders produces the fragmentation of a once unifying ideology.

It is disappointing isn't it? I am fairly close to abandoning the whole business and just trying to find the intelligent Creator.

 

[Spiderman]

Your context is fictional, there aee many religions, if you are not religious, christianity is the 'older' religion than judaism, with the form deity /egypt, ankh , and pre-judaism mythic similaritiy to m east polytheistic concepts.


So forth. You seem to like to create your own fictional paradigms for these subjects, without actually researching anything.

He claims to have studied Islam for ten years and claims "Muslims are required to respect all creatures."

That is like saying, "I've studied Fascism for ten years, and fascists are required to respect all creatures".

The Qur'an contains far more hate, violence, and graphic torture than Mussolini's "Doctrine of Fascism."

The Doctrine of Fascism contained no graphic torture at all. Not so with the Koran.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

That's fine, I'm not trying to convince you to agree about what reality is, only to explain that the special relationship we believe we have is not meant to exclude a relationship between G-d and non-Jews as it seemed that you said about Judaism in your OP.QUOTE]

Well you and I have discussed this before so we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Jewish presentation that Ha'Shem is the God of everyone has always been apparent to me however, it is also apparent based on not just scripture but how it is presented mainstream that God has also an exclusive relationship with God.

 

[Spiderman]

He claims to have studied Islam for ten years and claims "Muslims are required to respect all creatures."

That is like saying, "I've studied Fascism for ten years, and fascists are required to respect all creatures".

The Qur'an contains far more hate, violence, and graphic torture than Mussolini's "Doctrine of Fascism."

The Doctrine of Fascism contained no graphic torture at all. Not so with the Koran.

Hence,
@Epic Beard Man
I proved that you speak ignorance about the Religion you claim to have "studied for ten years."

What I have a problem with is Fascist Dictatorships!

Muhammad established a Fascist form of government.

I read Mussolini's "Doctrine of Fascism" and it was very spiritual, Monotheistic, and Religious!

Muhammad was a statesman and a Fascist Dictator.

Im very troubled to see so many people like yourself, claiming to be for equal rights and social justice, while promoting Fascism which robs so many people of liberties and threatens us all!

 

[Tumah]

Well you and I have discussed this before so we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Jewish presentation that Ha'Shem is the God of everyone has always been apparent to me however, it is also apparent based on not just scripture but how it is presented mainstream that God has also an exclusive relationship with God.

Are we agreeing to disagree about what Judaism says?
What do you mean that G-d has an exclusive relationship with G-d?
Does the Talmud factor into your position about Judaism's stance or only the Tanach?

Again, I am not trying to convince you about the truths of Judaism. I'm only trying to correct your understanding about what Judaism says. I don't particularly care if you believe it to be true or not, I just don't want you to accidentally present Judaism as saying something it doesn't.

 

[Ellen Brown]

Have you any idea or clue as to who it was that committed the original sin. It sure wasn't Adam and Eve either.

Your communication if aggressive and offensive. We won't talk.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Did not respond to the problem.

Do you consider yourself the only and very elect?[/QUOT

Nope not at all, there are others who are of God's elect people.

Now, By what makes a person to be of God's elect people ?

It's not by following man's teachings and doctrines that's for sure.

There are two aspects of understanding the Bible.

You have the word which is written down
That anyone can read, that is able to read.

Then you have the Spirit of the word,

In Mark 3:29, Christ Jesus spoke about the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost
"But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness , but is in danger of eternal damnation"

Now in Mark 13, Christ Jesus fortold what the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is.
And when it will take place.
And who can commit it.
Now those who have ears to hear what the Spirit of the word is saying, Shall hear.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Having survived reading Shakespeare, I find the KJV of the Bible to be simple and have been reading it for more than 40 years. Anyone who tells me that I can not understand the Bible has got trouble on their hands. Jesus said himself that believers are his Brothers (and Sisters), what more do you want?

Can you explain what the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is.

Christ Jesus fortold in Mark 13, what the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is.
And when it will happen.
And who can commit it.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Instead of saying that I don't have no clue perhaps you'd debate the logic (not scripture) behind the notion that God needed to morph into a human being to save humanity. I find it peculiar that in scripture, God can save Moses, Noah, and Abraham through divine revelation or through angelic intermediaries, yet, from a spiritual standpoint it is necessary that a human needed to be tortured and killed for the metaphysical benefit of humankind. Rather than divine revelation man is only saved through God morphing into a human, in understanding that in conjunction to the historical context of all previous prophetic events, I find the idea of God morphing into a human to save humanity quite strange.

Like I said, you have no understanding about the bible.
As you have not answered, for what reason did God come down here, in the body of flesh of Jesus Christ.
What was the real purpose for God to do this.
There was a reason behind, About Moses, Noah, Abraham, What God did.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Your communication if aggressive and offensive. We won't talk.

Nope on the contrary, it's just a simple question, When did the original sin take place. It happen way before the book of Genesis was written.
And way before Adam and Eve came to be.

 

[wizanda]

Why Islam makes more sense conceptually of all the Abrahamic faiths

Islam doesn't make more sense; it is a mess of plagiarization without all the additional contexts, as it matches Rabbinic Judaism's ideas since the Babylonian Exile, and not the Tanakh:

The God Most High (El Elyon) gave Israel to YHVH Elohim as his nation (Deuteronomy 32:7-9).

YHVH Elohim said he would become Yeshua Elohim to set a Snare for the whole of mankind, which catches out those who don't pay attention to additional contexts.

H3444 (Yeshua) + H1961 (To become) = Exodus 15:2-3, Psalms 118:14-21, Isaiah 12:2

Please don't claim to acknowledge the prophets, when it sounds more like reading what external scholars have to say about the religious beliefs, and not the texts.

In my opinion.

 

[danieldemol]

I don't see how.



Are you referring to the legal system within Islam or are you referring to scriptural?



Well considering Baha'i is a much younger religion and more pluralistic, I can see your point, but you'd be hard pressed to critique leadership when it was said that he referred to others who did not believe as him as "donkeys" and "pigs" this was gestured to those who did not believe as him (or in him):

“Say, Oh you donkey! Whatever God says is the truth and will not become void by the words of the polytheists (deniers of Baha’ism).” (Baha’u’llah, Kitab-i badi`, p. 174)

So while you may criticize leadership amongst the Jews, Christians and Muslims perhaps one may reflect their own leadership amidst the presumption of plurality in their own faith.

“Deniers of Baha’ism” is an addition to the text inserted by the Muslim divines, the term “donkey” is stated in response to an individual and forms Baha’u’llahs way of critiquing that individual for being able to carry the scriptures but not understand them.
Hence the reason donkey is not in the plural form because it does not refer to all deniers of the Baha’i faith

 

[LuisDantas]

What I find common in a lot of religious faiths is that historical faiths all tend to diverge from whence their original message was intended for and a similar paradigm shift can be said about its adherents. Sometimes the death of charasmatic leaders produces the fragmentation of a once unifying ideology.

Is that so?

It seems to me that some diversity of interpretation and implementation is not only expected, but also healthy. There is also a real need to consider the change of possibilities arising from historical, social and technological circunstances. That, too, has some effect on religious priorities and possibilities - and it should.

Reliance on the originator is not necessarily a good trait, and it does not explain nor justify the actual lengths of divergence that happen later.

And again, Islaam is rather remarkable in that respect, even among the Abrahamic doctrines.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Are we agreeing to disagree about what Judaism says?
What do you mean that G-d has an exclusive relationship with G-d?
Does the Talmud factor into your position about Judaism's stance or only the Tanach?

What comes to mind is the following:

"Most Jews hold that being the "Chosen People" means that they have been placed on earth to fulfill a certain purpose. Traditional proof for Jewish "chosenness" is found in the Torah, the Jewish bible, in the Book of Deuteronomy (chapter 14) where it says: "For you are a holy people to Hashem your God, and God has chosen you to be his treasured people from all the nations that are on the face of the earth." In the Book of Genesis (chapter 17) it also written: "And I [G-d] will establish My covenant between Me and you [the Jewish people] and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you."

Source:https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-quot-chosen-people-quot

The source also notes:

"But does "chosenness" really mean the Jews were divinely chosen? After all, how did the notion of one God become known to the world? Through the Jews. And, according to Jewish sources, that is the meaning of chosenness: to make God known to the world. As Rabbi Louis Jacobs has written: "We are not discussing a dogma incapable of verification, but the recognition of sober historical fact. The world owes to Israel the idea of the one God of righteousness and holiness. This is how God became known to mankind."


Although accurate in relation to being the oldest among the Abrahamic faiths, the concept of monotheism was not even brought about solely from Judaismas Zoroastrianism is older than Judaism and the belief in the one god Aten, worshipped by Akhenaten is older than that. It is even argued by Muslim scholars that Islam is primordial faith of all mankind or fitrah in Surah al-A’raaf 7:172 :

And [mention] when your Lord took from the children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants and made them testify of themselves, [saying to them], "Am I not your Lord?" They said, "Yes, we have testified." [This] - lest you should say on the day of Resurrection, "Indeed, we were of this unaware."

So although according to Judaism, Jews are tasked with duties to fulfill and are chosen above all nations to fulfill them, Islam takes the general approach in that all human beings prior to their existence in the world made a covenant with God. I get your explanation but however you slice it, the philosophy behind chosenness still has an exclusionary element.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Like I said, you have no understanding about the bible.
As you have not answered, for what reason did God come down here, in the body of flesh of Jesus Christ.
What was the real purpose for God to do this.
There was a reason behind, About Moses, Noah, Abraham, What God did.

You tell me Christian, how this makes sense?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Islam doesn't make more sense; it is a mess of plagiarization without all the additional contexts, as it matches Rabbinic Judaism's ideas since the Babylonian Exile, and not the Tanakh:

The God Most High (El Elyon) gave Israel to YHVH Elohim as his nation (Deuteronomy 32:7-9).

YHVH Elohim said he would become Yeshua Elohim to set a Snare for the whole of mankind, which catches out those who don't pay attention to additional contexts.

H3444 (Yeshua) + H1961 (To become) = Exodus 15:2-3, Psalms 118:14-21, Isaiah 12:2

Please don't claim to acknowledge the prophets, when it sounds more like reading what external scholars have to say about the religious beliefs, and not the texts.

In my opinion.

Yup, right! In your opinion...Next!