Should i read the bible? (1 Viewer)

[SabtheLab]

fisrst of all, iron woman, i am not disregarding jesus nor am i trying to manipulating him to serve my own purpose. in fact i wouldnt be able to call myself a muslim if i didnt believe and love him. and yes i do agree that he spread a message of peace and love that has transcended 2000 years of civilisation. im not denying that. by heresy, im not entirely sure as to what ur referring to. i cant see anything heretical about what i said.

as for rific, im not attempting to infiltrate the perceptions of others with my own. nor did i mention anything about truth. all i said was that to read the Quran in particular, it's important to remove ur biases, tpo create what i call an objective approach. this is after all the best approach to take dont you agree? when i say horrible misconceptions, thats exactly what i mean- the true message of Islam has been distroted to such a huge extent in the West since the event of the crusdaes, that lies and misconceptions have become integral in Western psyche. in order to thus appreciate the value of the Quran (FROM and objective perspective), you have to first eradicate your biases. I am not preaching to anybody nor am i attempting to discredit the bible by saying the Quran is the truth(incidentally, though this is what i believe), i am merely giving people the opportunity to be open-minded, intellectual human beings who are willing to break away from silly ideas and misconceptions to undertake an objective study of a religion with 1.6 billion adherents worldwide and holding the status of being the fastest growing faith in the world. now please, rific, if you think what ive said about objective approaches is unfair, then feel free to discuss it

 

[SabtheLab]

iron woman ive just re-read ur post and i see what u mean by heretical. in no way was i actually trying to preach the idea that Jesus plagiarised from the Old Testament and if you read the post again, you'll realise that i admitted that i didnt believe in the theory. i was merely drawing on an analogy to satisy Dr Gorgeous concern that the Quran was plagiarised from the Bible. please refer back to a few earlier posts. had i actually been encouraging the theory that Jesus plagiarised, then yes, that would be heresy. that would be considered blasphemy in Islam.

 

[rific]

as for rific, im not attempting to infiltrate the perceptions of others with my own. nor did i mention anything about truth. all i said was that to read the Quran in particular, it's important to remove ur biases, tpo create what i call an objective approach. this is after all the best approach to take dont you agree? when i say horrible misconceptions, thats exactly what i mean- the true message of Islam has been distroted to such a huge extent in the West since the event of the crusdaes, that lies and misconceptions have become integral in Western psyche. in order to thus appreciate the value of the Quran (FROM and objective perspective), you have to first eradicate your biases. I am not preaching to anybody nor am i attempting to discredit the bible by saying the Quran is the truth(incidentally, though this is what i believe), i am merely giving people the opportunity to be open-minded, intellectual human beings who are willing to break away from silly ideas and misconceptions to undertake an objective study of a religion with 1.6 billion adherents worldwide and holding the status of being the fastest growing faith in the world. now please, rific, if you think what ive said about objective approaches is unfair, then feel free to discuss it

lol, actually I do have a problem with objectivity in a subjective world, I think it's highly ironic, more than a little funny and in most situations counter productive to true understanding of any topic - but that comes from my studies and, I suppose, my personal philosophy, feel free to disagree. On that note, essentially the same note if you think about it, I think all communication attempts to ''infiltrate perceptions", regardless of intention and actual outcome, otherwise no communication has occured. Moving right along, no one can eradicate personal bias entirely, they can reshape it, they can renounce it wholeheartedly, but at some point in their lives, that bias formed part of who that person was, and so alters who they are today, eradiction implies complete nullification of personal history, not to mention asking someone to eradicate bias before instruction can not work because it is through instruction that perceptions are changed and simply saying 'read this' or 'do that' doesn't work as instruction because it it simply orders from a differing belief structure - no attempt to bridge understanding is made.

Personally, I don't think you come across 'preachy' (lol, well, most of the time), I think what you say does make sense in terms of your approach and your commentary, I just hope you can see that I hold a valid position even though it is effectively contrary to your approach and, to a degree, your commentary

 

[Dr_Gorgeous]

iron woman ive just re-read ur post and i see what u mean by heretical. in no way was i actually trying to preach the idea that Jesus plagiarised from the Old Testament and if you read the post again, you'll realise that i admitted that i didnt believe in the theory. i was merely drawing on an analogy to satisy Dr Gorgeous concern that the Quran was plagiarised from the Bible. please refer back to a few earlier posts. had i actually been encouraging the theory that Jesus plagiarised, then yes, that would be heresy. that would be considered blasphemy in Islam.

I didn't say that jesus plagiarised the old testement, I was merely suggesting the possibility of Islam taking some truths/principles from the bible and starting a religion based around those teachings. Lot's of religions and cults have done it through the centuries, hence why we have the religious diversity today.

 

[SabtheLab]

Dr Gorgeous, i know you didnt imply that Jesus plagiarised. I was merely pointing to an analogy. Dr Gorgeous, i cant see how it is is anymore valid to say that Islam is founded upon Christian principles and"made up" accordingly, then it is to say that it truely is from God. For someone like you(assuming your some type of Christian) its extremely easy to say something like this as it is a concept which has been drummed into you perhaps by family, church, Western books on Prophet Muhammad etc. etc. And thats why i personally dont take offence to that sort of a suggestion because i understand perhaps why you think that way. But what i do have a problem with is the fact that these theories are bandied about by people who dont know any better and are never actually TRULY researched in order to make an accurate conclusion. For one who has actually thoroughly researched Islam, unlike the other religions and cults, and really delved into the Quran and Sunnah, it is impossible to keep entertaining the notion that Islam is a "made up" religion. And when i say impossible, its because it is, and ive heard this from many a convert to Islam ( quite a few of whom were former priests and ministers). From the surface and perhaps from looking at the similarities between the principles/beliefs of Islam and Christianity, its extremely easy for anyone to suggest that Islam was founded upon Christianity. But delving abit deeper into Islam it becomes so plain and clear that it coulnt possibly have been created by a man 1400 years ago. Ill relate to you my own personal story. I was born Muslim howeevr, never really practised it and knew almost nothing about it. Living in a Christian country, its been drummed into me that Islam was plagiarised. Of course , me not knowing much about Islam and acknowledging that Jesus (peace be upon him) came before Muhammad(p.b.u.h), i began to fall for this idea. And for the early part of my highschool life i was none the wiser. I had extreme doubts about my own religion and began to question it's authenticity. But me, being a very analytical and inquisitive person, decided i was going to study both Christianity and Islam in-depth. It's taken 3 years, but after painstaking research, and many a meeting with ministers and sheikhs, ive come to the logical and only plausible explanation- Islam could not POSSIBLY have been founded upon Christianity-but it did come from the same God, to rectify the teachings of St Paul. This is my own conclusion that has been seconded by many Christians who converted to islam (Im personally friends with about 23 + 3 former ministers and 2 former Catholic priests.

So Dr Gorgeous, i understand where your coming from and i can underetsand why you'd feel that way. I felt it myself at one point. But believe me, from personal experience, i know that once you actually undertake a genuine study of Islam, it's literally impossible to continue believing that idea.

 

[HotShot]

lol

if ur suggesting that islam came from christanity, well according to this theory christanity from judaism. but none will believe that, because they dont want to, they want to believe that thier religion is theres and so on for selfish reasons.

nevertheless the theory above is quite hard to argue, but it is very simply the best possible explanation. my theory the bible quran whatever was written by a king long ago named gob aka in arabic allah. he wrote this book as law and his fellow citizens followed, but alas his kingdom was overtaken by a tribe called satan, the book was hidden and never found.

Centuries later, the book was discovered, there were no such historians of that time to marvel a tthis book as result it was believed it was mysteriously placed by a stranger force. few people believed in the book whilst others didnt. as time went by different tribes interpreted the book in its own way and as a result it was split....

how is this? you cant argue against that. you cant ask me for evidence because i proved there is no evidence, thanks to the first people historians not realising the importance of verifying a source.

 

[HotShot]

um sabthelab

dont brag! people have been researching all sorts of things for many many years, it does not mean anything. for tomorrow a new discovery can be made to complelety abolish another. science is the evidence for this. science provides us everything, cloning, curing and so on.

science can prove anything, and i know you going to argue about the scientic marvels of the quran, bbut the thats like the greeks, the egyptians who built the pyramids arent they scientif marvels. the book (quran, bible...) are evidence that science rules.

who could imagined that computers would have been developed. for everything there is explanation, its because of religious people science is being held back. these are steps that need to be taken to advance to beat the aliens from mars.
Yes they are aliens from mars, they have been discovered by the lsif. the isif lived the during the age of dinosaurs, ever wondered why there were bones that still exist , its because the aliens slaughtered the isifs leaving nothing behind. but they did leave something behind a few remants of the isif. that evolved (just like pokemon) and then super saiyaned to grow more people, fused to become smarter.

lol what a story!

 

[SabtheLab]

as for the greeks and romans and their scientific marvels, good on 'em. Aristotle sure got the ball rolling for scientific progression. And im not denying that. As for bragging, as a Muslim, i dont brag as arrogance is a sin.
As for religion holding science back. Ah now here is a topic of debate. I think you'd be more precise in saying CHRISTIANITY held science back. And i think the best example of this is Galileo being placed under house arrest simply because he redefined the model of the universe which didnt concur with the Churches teachings. This is politics and the Church didnt want to lose their power over the people. In many other instances, Christianity has held science back. The concept that faith should be without reason is absolutely ludicrous. Thats called blind faith. And when scientific discoveries are made, Christians seem to be intimidated by it, somehow believing it's going to force them to reevaluate their views on God. Therefore, historically, Christianity has supressed science. But once again, and this is a point i have to make in EVERY SINGLE FRICKING THREAD.......dont confuse Christianity with religion!!!!!!!!!! two completely separate concepts.

In saying religion, ur implicating other faiths such as Islam. Id like to point out something crucial here. Islam not only strongly encourages the pursuit of science but also points to it and certain scientific phenomena as evidence to the existence of God. As Muslims, we are told to reflect,to use our intelligence and question our beliefs to make sure that we truly do believe...negating any possibility of what is reffered to as "blind faith" something im sure most Christians on this thread would attest to .

In fact modern chemistry, mathematics, astronomy, opthalmolagy, physics (and tons more) are based on discoveries made by pious Muslims motivated by the fact that seeking knowledge, and scientific knowledge in particular, is very, very strongly encouraged by Allah(God). (I understand its based on Greek discoveries as well, but thats besides the point).

So please, hot, next time your going to refer to a religion which supresses science, make sure your terminology is correct- its CHRISTIANITY not RELIGION .

 

[SabtheLab]

what book are you guys talking about?

 

[soha]

How long is it?

how long is the Quaran?...u ask

i can tell you there is 77439 words in the quaran

323 015 letters in the quaran

6226 verses in the quaran

30 chapters

thats all i know..and it took 4 months to count all of these figures
so read and enjoy

 

[inasero]

as for the greeks and romans and their scientific marvels, good on 'em. Aristotle sure got the ball rolling for scientific progression. And im not denying that. As for bragging, as a Muslim, i dont brag as arrogance is a sin.
As for religion holding science back. Ah now here is a topic of debate. I think you'd be more precise in saying CHRISTIANITY held science back. And i think the best example of this is Galileo being placed under house arrest simply because he redefined the model of the universe which didnt concur with the Churches teachings. This is politics and the Church didnt want to lose their power over the people. In many other instances, Christianity has held science back. The concept that faith should be without reason is absolutely ludicrous. Thats called blind faith. And when scientific discoveries are made, Christians seem to be intimidated by it, somehow believing it's going to force them to reevaluate their views on God. Therefore, historically, Christianity has supressed science. But once again, and this is a point i have to make in EVERY SINGLE FRICKING THREAD.......dont confuse Christianity with religion!!!!!!!!!! two completely separate concepts.

In saying religion, ur implicating other faiths such as Islam. Id like to point out something crucial here. Islam not only strongly encourages the pursuit of science but also points to it and certain scientific phenomena as evidence to the existence of God. As Muslims, we are told to reflect,to use our intelligence and question our beliefs to make sure that we truly do believe...negating any possibility of what is reffered to as "blind faith" something im sure most Christians on this thread would attest to .

In fact modern chemistry, mathematics, astronomy, opthalmolagy, physics (and tons more) are based on discoveries made by pious Muslims motivated by the fact that seeking knowledge, and scientific knowledge in particular, is very, very strongly encouraged by Allah(God). (I understand its based on Greek discoveries as well, but thats besides the point).

So please, hot, next time your going to refer to a religion which supresses science, make sure your terminology is correct- its CHRISTIANITY not RELIGION .

You are right in saying that Christinity held science back, and your example of the church dominance in the dark ages effectivey stifling Galileo's scientific endavours is a good example of this. Furthermore, I do have a great respect for the scientific contributions that Islamic scholars have made to the world. However your argument is still flawed because you are arguing somewhat along the lines of:
"Science is the means to knowing everything, God provided science so that believers would have a firm basis to base their dogma as opposed to the Christian religion which operates on the basis of blind faith. In fact, Christians have effectively hindered people from knowing God through suppression of scientific ideas".
Now, the main problem I have with your argument is that Science is not the be all and end all. In fact, the Bible makes it very clear that thse who want justification for a relationship with God in the form of physical evidence will find none. That's because if we based a relationship on continual need for reaffirmation it wouldn't engender an element of trust and reliance which is central to any relationship.

Secondly, you seem to equate this notion with "blind faith". Christians are not that clueless as you might assume. The core principle on which the Christian gospel rests is the resurrection of Jesus Christ and a new life for all who believe in Him. Christians can only accept the significance of this because it fulfils the prophecies of the Old Testament and it was witnessed by hundreds of people subsequently. How can this be blind faith? God is working in our lives everyday and this is how we know that there is a loving God who is sovereign over our lives and with whom we can come into a personal relationship. That, my friend, is hardly "blind faith".

Furthermore, you say that many Christians attest to blind faith. It makes me quite angry that you're trying to assume the position of a learned Christian scholars and suggesting what we believe in. So in response, there are no sensible Christians who would agree with your rhetoric.

Finally, in response to what you say about Christians misdeeds. It's true and I do not doubt for a single second that scientific progress has suffered greatly as a consequence of Christian politics, not to mention countless innocent Muslims murdered during the crusades. However, this is as pointless as me arguing that since Muslim terrorist attacks have taken the lives of many countless innocent lives in the last century, this effectively precludes the validity of the whole Islamic religion. The argument you are employing is ultimately a desperate, childish final resort and does not contribute to the debate between Christianity and Islam in any way, shape or form. Furthermore, what I am saying is that individuals can effect their own actions due to the provision of free will but this might not be representative of the ideologies of the Christian or Islamic values as a whole.

 

[arielbelle]

Heey guess what? i read that, the meaning of the "big bang" theory could also be seen as, the "big bang" between church and science.!. how amazing, i never saw it that way!

i also saw a bumper sticker once which said: " the big bang theory: god said 'bang' and created the universe"

 

[inasero]

A verse in support:

When the crowds were increasing, he began to say, "This generation is an evil generation. It seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah

Luke 11:29 ESV

 

[SabtheLab]

You are right in saying that Christinity held science back, and your example of the church dominance in the dark ages effectivey stifling Galileo's scientific endavours is a good example of this. Furthermore, I do have a great respect for the scientific contributions that Islamic scholars have made to the world. However your argument is still flawed because you are arguing somewhat along the lines of:
"Science is the means to knowing everything, God provided science so that believers would have a firm basis to base their dogma as opposed to the Christian religion which operates on the basis of blind faith. In fact, Christians have effectively hindered people from knowing God through suppression of scientific ideas".
Now, the main problem I have with your argument is that Science is not the be all and end all. In fact, the Bible makes it very clear that thse who want justification for a relationship with God in the form of physical evidence will find none. That's because if we based a relationship on continual need for reaffirmation it wouldn't engender an element of trust and reliance which is central to any relationship.

Secondly, you seem to equate this notion with "blind faith". Christians are not that clueless as you might assume. The core principle on which the Christian gospel rests is the resurrection of Jesus Christ and a new life for all who believe in Him. Christians can only accept the significance of this because it fulfils the prophecies of the Old Testament and it was witnessed by hundreds of people subsequently. How can this be blind faith? God is working in our lives everyday and this is how we know that there is a loving God who is sovereign over our lives and with whom we can come into a personal relationship. That, my friend, is hardly "blind faith".

Furthermore, you say that many Christians attest to blind faith. It makes me quite angry that you're trying to assume the position of a learned Christian scholars and suggesting what we believe in. So in response, there are no sensible Christians who would agree with your rhetoric.

Finally, in response to what you say about Christians misdeeds. It's true and I do not doubt for a single second that scientific progress has suffered greatly as a consequence of Christian politics, not to mention countless innocent Muslims murdered during the crusades. However, this is as pointless as me arguing that since Muslim terrorist attacks have taken the lives of many countless innocent lives in the last century, this effectively precludes the validity of the whole Islamic religion. The argument you are employing is ultimately a desperate, childish final resort and does not contribute to the debate between Christianity and Islam in any way, shape or form. Furthermore, what I am saying is that individuals can effect their own actions due to the provision of free will but this might not be representative of the ideologies of the Christian or Islamic values as a whole.

Inasero, im not trying to undervalue the christian faith or discredit it..im simply asserting the fact that Christians sometimes tend to follow their scholars, bibles etc. a bit too blindly. Most christians have no knowledge of their histroy and the different councils, philosophers etc. that were needed to develop the christian faith. Half of the teachings, dogma, theological concepts etc. were NEVER taught by Jesus and these are well-known facts, just research "Christian histroy". The trinitarian doctrine you follow today was introduced by Constantine and the basic idea that jesus is the son of god was introduced by St. Paul so that he can bring christianity to the Gentiles and lend creedence to the idea that jesus died for our sins....this is an inarguable fact. What right did paul and the rest of the theoligians of the time have in creating their own concept of god which wasnt taught by jesus in the first place.... jesus never taught that he was the son of god, except in a metaphorical sense and you'd understand what im saying if you read the hebrew verison of the bible.

 

[Riddles]

the bible i believe is a bloody awesome book, and its all true

 

[Iron]

jesus never taught that he was the son of god, except in a metaphorical sense and you'd understand what im saying if you read the hebrew verison of the bible.

You are so outlandishly annoying. Im through crossing swords with pea-brains. It's insulting to peas.

 

[JRPeck]

bang

i also saw a bumper sticker once which said: " the big bang theory: god said 'bang' and created the universe"

The Bible's account of creation includes process, not just instantaneous creation. In fact, there are three creation stories: Genesis 1:1, the seven days, and the detailed account of Adam and Eve. One can see the possibility of a big bang in the Genesis 1:1 story. And intelligent design is replacing the discredited theory of evolution.

Romans 1:20--Since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Yes, ignorant Christians have impeded scientific discovery, but science made it's greatest progress through others that understood Romans 1:20, which also addresses 'blind faith'.

 

[SabtheLab]

Ironwoman, rather than complain about me being annoying, why dont you at least try to attempt to prove me wrong

And the guy before me(soz cant rember ur name), i am not denying the original truth of the bible. god cant bppl listen to what im saying... i believe in the original gospels however i concede that it has been changed, corrupted, played with, lost in translation etc.

People im not returning till my trials are over, so see u at the end of august

 

[jumb]

What's the go with all the smilies?

 

[withoutaface]

What's the go with all the smilies?

I dunno, but they make me want to shoot myself.