Muhammad - Prophet or Profiteer of God?

page: 24
4
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Anyone else noticed that although this thread has more replies than any other in the last 7 days it is no longer listed on the homepage?

Censorship? I hope not.

Valid point Beachcoma, although i would have thought the word of God should be so perfect that it could only be translated for peaceful purposes.

[edit on 11/12/07 by Grenade]




posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grenade
Anyone else noticed that although this thread has more replies than any other in the last 7 days it is no longer listed on the homepage?


That's got to do with the lack of flags.


Originally posted by Grenade
[...] i would have thought the word of God should be so perfect that it could only be translated for peaceful purposes.


People aren't perfect. So anything can be twisted to suit an agenda. Just look at climate change for example -- those in power are now twisting it to suit a taxation agenda. Go figure



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Has anyone else noticed that even tho this is the most replied thread (by far) in the last 7 days, it has been removed from the homepage?

Censorship? I hope not.

Sorry for double post, my ATS gone mad. It must be the CIA.


Actually its not even in the most replied in the last 5 days. I find that very hard to believe but hey ho, im not going to count.

[edit on 11/12/07 by Grenade]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by Grenade


Originally posted by Grenade
[...] i would have thought the word of God should be so perfect that it could only be translated for peaceful purposes.


People aren't perfect. So anything can be twisted to suit an agenda. Just look at climate change for example -- those in power are now twisting it to suit a taxation agenda. Go figure



One difference, God himself didnt write the scientific papers on Climate change, nor did he draw up new tax legislation. The message within the Qu'ran should surely be perfect and not open to interpretation? I guess Muhammad realised this and thats why he declared himself the final Prophet. Shame i dont believe in the Qu'ran, eternity in hell doesnt sound too pleasant but life on earth living by a book doesnt sound too good either. Ill take my chances with free will


EDIT for Tags



[edit on 11/12/07 by Grenade]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grenade
The message within the Qu'ran should surely be perfect and not open to interpretation?


Only true if if select sentences aren't taken out of context.

Are you just arguing with me for the heck of it? It's starting to feel that way...



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
so basically saying double cross them back, but only offer charity for those that repent? Seems quite extreme to me?

No, it doesn't say to double-cross them back. Why do you wish to twist everything into an negative against Islam? It says that when the Meccans broke their treaty, the muslims announced to them that they considered it annulled, except for against those who didn't break it. It also says that if a person was seeking protection, the muslims have an obligation to assist them. There is also the quote about inclination towards peace that I mentioned later.



Originally posted by blueorder
Not sure in fairness, but this sentence is rather "hazy"

"And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

The first line says fight on until there is faith in Allah- ie convert them, yet in the last sentence it opposes "oppression", fighting until conversion would be oppressive

Nobody said anything about fighting until conversion. Forced conversion is not acceptable in Islam. One example of the oppression that the Meccans were doing on the muslims was the prevention of the worship of Allah. So once justice prevails and there is faith in Allah, they would stop (or if the Meccans stopped, they would stop).



Originally posted by blueorder
why would they be going abroad to fight in wars, if it is a book of peace?

Because (as I said above) there are situations when you must fight.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jimbo999
 


You are absolutely right, Jimbo. This accusation was not only made at the onset of Christianity but is still believed today in Judaism. However there is a difference. Basically, Christianity accepts everything the Jewish Old Testament teaches, it believes God chose to bless the earth through Isaac and not Ishmael, and we accept Yahweh and His revelations to mankind.

Islam twists the Jewish Bible by saying the Jews distorted God's message and that the Arabs (the descendants of Isaac's older brother Ishmael) were the ones assigned to bringing the message of God to the people.

In essence, Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism- not the abolition of it. At the onset of Christianity there was no distinction in the terminology of Christians and Jews. They were all "Jews." Even the Gentile converts were called Jews because there was not yet a distinction of the faiths. Christians were merely Jews who believed the promised Messiah was Jesus.

If you look at the Koran, you will see that Islam is not a fulfillment of Judaism and Christianity but a distortion of both created by Mohammad for his people, the Arabs.

Also, Christianity's eschatology, although in harmony with the Hebrew end time prophecies, still offers unique and new revelations. Islam does not. It is nothing more than a rehash and perversion of the older Abrahamic religions and eschatology.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by Grenade
The message within the Qu'ran should surely be perfect and not open to interpretation?


Only true if if select sentences aren't taken out of context.

Are you just arguing with me for the heck of it? It's starting to feel that way...


Didn't realise i was arguing with you


I actually find your opinions to be well thought out and respect them. Just we obviously have different opinions on Islam and religion. Sorry dude, didnt mean to offend you.

I have this problem with my girlfriend all the time, i think im being reasonable and she thinks im a banker with a w

BTW on a more peaceful note, your Zero G cat post is funny as hell. Sad, but very funny


[edit on 11/12/07 by Grenade]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Grenade
 


It's cool. I'm having a bad sore-throat and it's making me irritable. All the lozenges aren't working... I'm going to try apple-cider-vinegar and lemon next... sigh..



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
reply to post by Grenade
 


It's cool. I'm having a bad sore-throat and it's making me irritable. All the lozenges aren't working... I'm going to try apple-cider-vinegar and lemon next... sigh..


I know the feeling mate, i get tonsillitis now and again which normally changes me into the incredible hulk (including the green skin). I find myself sympathising with Hitler and premoting nuclear testing.

Breath through your nose mate and try not to swallow.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


I'm very sad, AshleyD. It appears that either you are ignoring me, or not noticing what I am saying. Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael were the ones to bring the message of God to the people. Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael are the Chosen ones. Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael are somehow in a more elevated position than anyone else. Islam says that EVERY people had someone who brought a message to them.

For all you say about Judaism and Christianity, Judaism STILL does not accept Christianity as valid. Same as Christianity does not (usually) accept Islam as valid.

Besides, if Islam HAD offered unique and new revelations, you would have said that it is creating new things, new corruptions, and is therefore false. Either way, to you, Islam has to lose.

I'm so sad, that I'm going to go to sleep for the night


[edit on 11-12-2007 by babloyi]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   

I'm very sad, AshleyD. It appears that either you are ignoring me, or not noticing what I am saying.


Sorry! I didn't see your reply to me at the bottom of a longer reply to someone else. I don't ignore anyone- I'm just unobservant.



Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael were the ones to bring the message of God to the people.


Actually, yes it does in all technicality. Mohammad is universally accepted as a descendant of Ishmael and it is he who is believed by Muslims to have the absolute undistorted revelation of God. So in this matter, a descendant of Ishmael was the one destined according to Islam to bring the message of Allah to the people. Islam believes the testimony of Jews and Christians strayed from the original truth so Allah sent Mohammad as his "true" prophet.


Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael are the Chosen ones. Islam DOESN'T say that the descendants of Ishmael are somehow in a more elevated position than anyone else.


You are correct in the sense that Arabs are not the chosen people in the sense Christianity and Judaism believe the Jews are the chosen people. What it does mean and as the Koran states, Ishmael, the eldest, is the one believed by Muslims to be the child of blessing instead of Isaac. And again, it is universally accepted that Ishmael is the forefather of the Arab people.

No, Islam does not teach the Arabs are the "chosen" people who are blessed above all others as, like Christianity and Judaism, anyone of any nationality can convert to the faith.


Islam says that EVERY people had someone who brought a message to them.


Yes but what else does it say? That Mohammad brought the only true and undistorted revelation of Allah while the Christians and Jews, in essence, twisted Allah's true message.


For all you say about Judaism and Christianity, Judaism STILL does not accept Christianity as valid...


I believe I already stated this in one of my above comments. It is very true Orthodox Judaism considers Jesus to be a false Messiah.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Odium
 


who are the brits and who are the un to overide what G-D says ?leviticus 25:23 the land is Mine----------numbers 33:52 drive out the inhabitants of the land---or they that remain will become pricks in your eyes and thorns in your sides and will trouble you--------if you dont i will do to you(israelites)as I plan to do to them.do some checking--------the squatters on israels land mainly moved in from jordan---------which existed long before the brits stuck their noses into the middle east



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by yahn goodey
 


I would like proof that God said that. Proof that is clearly independent and can't be used to proove any single religion. :-)

Otherwise, it was promised to the Arabs and not the Jews.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
I would like proof that God said that. Proof that is clearly independent and can't be used to proove any single religion. :-)

Otherwise, it was promised to the Arabs and not the Jews.


Promised to the Arabs by who?

I suppose it wouldn't be considered independent since they are both religious sources but both the Jewish Tanakh and the Koran say Israel was promised to the Jews by God (and the Koran says it was promised to them by Allah).

But I'm not sure what you are asking for if you want the clarification from a non religious source. Who do you believe promised the land of Israel to the Arabs?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
Because (as I said above) there are situations when you must fight.


why abroad, that would be a curious "defensive" approach, along the lines of attack being the best form of defence?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 

I like the way you put it on:
“”In essence, Christianity is the fulfilment of Judaism- not the abolition of it””
I have news for you; the fulfilment you are talking about is base on Christian doctrine not Jewish.
You can be sure that Jew will disagree with this big time.
What you are writing in your post is nonsense, every one knows that Jew don’t acknowledge Jesus, they don’t consider him as a prophet never mind the son of God.
Judaism simply rejects the Christian concept (the trinity) and (son of God) source below:
“The Jews insisted: we have a law and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the son of God” (John 19/7)
Is more connection between Judaism and Islam then Christianity, for the simple reason that Modern Christianity is simply an invention of the early church.
This dogma never existed during the life time of Jesus nor was it preached by Christianity after his death until the 4th century. The trinity and son of god concept was formulated by the church in the year 381 in the council of Constantinople, yet it wasn't until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon, that the trinity was declared trustworthy.
I am not a religious person or have faith in any of this above but from what I understand Islam look like (you like it or not) an extension of Judaism and reparation of Christianity.
But again it is only my humble interpretation.

Kacou



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


I....I am not getting you. What is wrong with 'abroad'? Replace it with 'go forth' or 'go' if you like.


reply to post by AshleyD
 

AshleyD, all Prophets of God were 'true' prophets, and all of them gave an undistorted, pure, true testimony. If the Quran says the followers later corrupted that message, this doesn't mean that according to the Quran, any of those Prophets are any less important (the Quran states the opposite, in fact).

And no, Ishmael is not considered to be the 'special child of blessing' according to Islam (at least not 'special' in any sense greater than Isaac). God's covenant was with Abraham and his descendants, no favouritism.

PS: I believe Odium is talking about the British, AshleyD.

[edit on 12-12-2007 by babloyi]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi

I....I am not getting you. What is wrong with 'abroad'? Replace it with 'go forth' or 'go' if you like.



abroad implies going to other lands to fight- as for "replacing" it, there we go with differing interpretations again!



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


Ahhh...I comprehend. No, 'abroad' doesn't mean going to other lands. 'Abroad' can be outdoors, or outside, etc. The 'another country' meaning is pretty recent. Come now, you never read any of those silly 'old-style' poems, or fantasy novels?





top topics
 
4
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join