Islam, Christanity and Judisam.....What is the difference?

looking4clues...

www.answering-islam.org...

www.catholiceducation.org...

www.religioustolerance.org...

www.essays.cc...

personal.tmlp.com...


I could find more, but I don't need to waste time finding more sources. I am not telling you that you have to agree with me or even these articles, but once again, there is the difference....opinion and interpretation! Just like these three religions.

Originally posted by looking4clues

As far as me proving God's existance to you, I cannot. Just like I cannot prove Love. But you continue to demand physical proof, and at the same time claim you have faith too. It doesn't add up.

(SIGH)

Where have I asked you to prove the existance of God? NAME ONE PLACE.

I have merely asked why YOUR religion was any more correct then the others a question you continue to evade by the way

The fact that you can not understand how someone can have faith and not believe the same as you is a sign of your closed mind.

Is the only Faith that counts is YOUR faith? Does any faith that does not include YOUR personal Ideas of religion count?

Leveller


Great Post

I think in order for the human race to survive religion will have to evolve past its tribal roots

As you can see, the three become one. They may have started out as three individuals but the end product is just a singular.

Which is well and good, but as I mentioned...the Trinity isn't stated anywhere in the bible. In fact, in Matthew 12:32 (one of the most recently cited passages, up a few posts), it clearly differenciates by saying that speaking ill of Jesus will be forgiven, but not speaking ill of the Holy Spirit. How can this be? If they are truly one in the same?

The whole concept of the trinity is nothing but the church's cop-out and shoe-horning to fit the mold of a monotheistic religion, which it clearly is not... It's one of their more clever moves...though my favorite is the renaming of the "Tree of Knowledge" into the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil"....that was pretty clever. This way they hide the fact that the early church strived to keep the masses illiterate and uneducated, reserving such learning only for those in the church or the aristocracy...

Originally posted by Amuk
Where have I asked you to prove the existance of God? NAME ONE PLACE.

Please explain what you meant by "Invisible friend" and "three superstitions".

Your words.

Originally posted by Gazrok

As you can see, the three become one. They may have started out as three individuals but the end product is just a singular.

Which is well and good, but as I mentioned...the Trinity isn't stated anywhere in the bible. In fact, in Matthew 12:32 (one of the most recently cited passages, up a few posts), it clearly differenciates by saying that speaking ill of Jesus will be forgiven, but not speaking ill of the Holy Spirit. How can this be? If they are truly one in the same?

The whole concept of the trinity is nothing but the church's cop-out and shoe-horning to fit the mold of a monotheistic religion, which it clearly is not...

I almost agree with this but don't- sorry.

All but the montheism part. I believe the 'trinity' stuff is nothing more sinister than word play such as we use today.
n 0 0 b = newbie = newcomer= unlearned
URL= unique/uniform/universal resource locator
CPU= central processing unit
modem= thingy that hooks computer to internet :-)

Now the "concept" may have been twisted or misused but the term, I believe, is nothing more than linguistic shorthand.

It's one of their more clever moves...though my favorite is the renaming of the "Tree of Knowledge" into the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil"....that was pretty clever. This way they hide the fact that the early church strived to keep the masses illiterate and uneducated, reserving such learning only for those in the church or the aristocracy...

(Too bad man failed his first assignement.)

I agree. Also though, could this be that with knowledge one would necessarily HAVE to know good and evil?

My personal favorite is:

Gen 1:26 God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
Gen 1:27 God created man in his own image. In God's image he created him; male and female he created them.

Plural and singular? I still don't get it.

Originally posted by Jazzerman
Hmmm....whats the difference in these religions? Absolutely nothing...

Please explain what "absolutely nothing" means. Is that was of saying they are similar but not identicle?

Your words.

The links you provide show similiarities, we are looking for differences. heres one for you... censorship (Saudi Arabia, an Islamic Law Nation not open to debate.)
cyber.law.harvard.edu...

How about having your prayer not count for anything if you don't perform wudu correctly. Wudu is not in Christianity and you can pray anytime in Christianity and God always hears you.

Originally posted by Amuk
Leveller


Great Post

I think in order for the human race to survive religion will have to evolve past its tribal roots

Read this concerning Islam and their "evolution".
Fatwa on America and Fundamentalist teachings

Looking4clues...

Originally posted by Amuk
What is the difference between yours and brand X?

All three believe in one God, the same one really
All three give the same message
All three promote an us against them agenda
All three demote women and childern to a status of property
All three promote slavery
All three allow and encourage violance against the "unbelievers"
All three claim to be the infalible word of God

I am serious what makes YOUR version special? Maybe its just because I am a hopeless Heathen but I dont see any REAL difference

[edit on 24-8-2004 by Amuk]

This is what the original poster wanted to know. We are talking about the beliefs of each religion, not the politics. Showing me what websites are censored does nothing but tell me about their political infrastructure, not their core belief system. Now, if you show me how they are different "spiritually" I will have no problem with that. We all know there are evil people in any religion (which once again is a similarity) who want to have censorship, deprive people of Rights, etc., but those stem more out of environmental and economic situations...not spiritual.

So, once again, each religion is pretty much the same as there can be only one truth. If you worship it in different forms or in many forms essentially its still the same thing everyone is trying to attain.

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

Originally posted by leveller
Religion needs to evolve even further. . . .

I disagree with this. To agree would be to say (in other words) that religion is incorrect and unfinished. Understanding needs to occur, not evolution.

Firstly, understanding is part of evolution.
Secondly, religion is incorrect and unfinished!!!! Look through your history books and you will see how much has changed over the centuries. Everywhere you look, you can see religion evolving on a day to day basis. The Churches are constantly redefining definitions of theism.
It's a very dangerous act to just sit by and let a religion stagnate. It has to move with the evolution of mankind.
Man was not made for religion. Religion was made for man.

Posted by leveller. . .he problem is that some still revert back to the tribal scriptures and find reason there to carry out violence.

I disagree with this statement. Christianity looks for and finds no reason(s) for violence.

Absolute rubbish. Wether you like it or not, there are those who have used the scriptures to further violent agendas. Christianity has the wierd foible of being able to use another religions writing's (the Old Testament) and can take them or leave them as it sees fit. Some Christians have picked and chosen parts that suit their causes and some of those causes have included violence.
Now, you could use the argument that these people are not in the strictest sense Christians, but that is really a twisting of reality. They are the same people who sit in a Christian church on a Sunday. The same people who are accepted as good Christians until something goes bad and then they are disowned. Christians have this uncanny knack of accepting somebody as one of their own and then dropping them if they do something that the mainstream suddenly deems to be inappropriate.
But history proves that there have been atrocities carried out by Christians over history, just as there have been by the other religions. To say that the Crusades were not carried out by Christians when these people were the mainstream of the religion and supported by the majority of the Christian population, beggars belief. You can't pick and choose who you want in the religion unless you make the interpretation for the masses. Otherwise you're following your own religion and have basically created a sect.



[edit on 26-8-2004 by Leveller]

Originally posted by looking4clues

Originally posted by Amuk
Where have I asked you to prove the existance of God? NAME ONE PLACE.

Please explain what you meant by "Invisible friend" and "three superstitions".

Your words.

No problem.

Right after you answer my questions that I have asked you REPETEDLY and you have ignored

Originally posted by Jazzerman
Looking4clues...

This is what the original poster wanted to know. We are talking about the beliefs of each religion, not the politics. Showing me what websites are censored does nothing but tell me about their political infrastructure, not their core belief system. Now, if you show me how they are different "spiritually" I will have no problem with that. We all know there are evil people in any religion (which once again is a similarity) who want to have censorship, deprive people of Rights, etc., but those stem more out of environmental and economic situations...not spiritual.

So, once again, each religion is pretty much the same as there can be only one truth. If you worship it in different forms or in many forms essentially its still the same thing everyone is trying to attain.

Thank you at least SOME of the people here understand the question maybe if repeted over and over he will catch on, IF he is not DELIBERTLY refusing to answer the Questions and trying to highjack the thread

Again Leveller a great post


Part of my point is how can any of the three claim Moral superiority when all three have a history of slaughtering anyone that opposes them.
Christians.....

The Inqusition
The Crusades
The Witch burnings
The FORCABLE conversion of most native American and Polonesion Tribes
Etc

Jews
Just read the Old Testement
Palistianians

Muslims
Just watch the News
Jews
Read the Koran

There is blood on each of their hands and it continues today

I already posted this but it seemed relevent !

Well looks like its going to happen alll over agian . I'm not going to go into detial what i mean by this but there is an old cycle taking place here foalks .

news.bbc.co.uk...

That is a very good reason why religion should NOT be a part of laws.

In the Bible the price for adultry is death by stoning

That is just an example on the Christian side

Religious rules should NEVER be incorperated into the law of the land, the middle east is a prime example of why.

If the religious right took over here we would see the same nonsense here

[edit on 26-8-2004 by Amuk]

There is only truth, if a religious text has a single untruth or contradiction, then the entire must be questioned.

This is where i have the issues with the 3 major religions of the wolrd

Opus,

What exactly is Truth?

Also, Gazrok is right, the word Trinity never apears once in the Bible. I have given more information some pages back.


Amuk, my freind, maybe I can clarify Looking4Clues stance,

Below we have the most putrid of arguments touted by the most putrid of minds.

the Ontological argument:
(1) I define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Deep

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
Amuk, my freind, maybe I can clarify Looking4Clues stance,

Below we have the most putrid of arguments touted by the most putrid of minds.

the Ontological argument:
(1) I define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Deep

This type of drivel NEVER ceases to amaze me. The bitter truth is the proof of Gods exsitance will never be known till we die.

PERIOD

They dont know ANY more then you or me.

The difference is MY philosophy has room for THEM.

Originally posted by Amuk
This type of drivel NEVER ceases to amaze me. The bitter truth is the proof of Gods exsitance will never be known till we die.

PERIOD

They dont know ANY more then you or me.

The difference is MY philosophy has room for THEM.

What have I been telling you? DUH... but Amuk doesn't want to know is GOD exists.... LMAO!!! How do I know???

I find it useless to conceptualize God, or even waste a lige devoted to some X variable in our lives, where we can devote ourselved to better humanity.

We live in a world bathed in poverty, war, famine, disease, and a million other problems, but what do we waste our efforts on ? Fighting in the name of these X variables !

Deep