# Islam



## TabbyAnn (Jan 15, 2015)

In reading the New Testament and the Quran, the pacifist nature of Jesus and the violent nature of Muhammad become apparent. Jesus taught a self-improvement course for controlling oneself and Muhammad taught a violent political system for controlling others.

As the worldly ruler of Mecca, Muhammad wrote laws in the Quran that would be illegal in the United States today, like chopping off hands for stealing, beatings for adultery, beheadings for infidels, polygamy for men, and so on.

So in order for Muslims to practice the teachings in the Quran, without running afoul of the laws in most countries, they would have to take over the country and establish Sharia law.  And we are watching that happen today. Some countries have established political Parties that are opposed to allowing any more Muslims to enter the country.  In the United States however, we treat Islam as a religion, gives tax breaks to its mosques, and pretend the violent Islamists aren’t true Muslims, when in fact they are.


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 16, 2015)

I regard Jesus of Nazareth as a revolutionary (as was Gandhi centuries later).


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jan 16, 2015)

A good discussion on NPR with Islamic scholars has made the case that there is a big difference between Muslims who follow Shria law and those who don't.  With Shria law being the cause of the violence that is not mainstream for those who follow the Koran.  In short, Sharia law is misinterpretation of the Koran...


----------



## Vivjen (Jan 16, 2015)

I have heard a similar discussion, Ralphy.....I agree with you.
there is good and evil in all societies...


----------



## Ramblin Rose (Jan 16, 2015)

Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.


----------



## Ameriscot (Jan 16, 2015)

Ramblin Rose said:


> Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.



True.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 16, 2015)

Interesting.


----------



## Rocky (Jan 16, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I regard Jesus of Nazareth as a revolutionary (as was Gandhi centuries later).



Excellent.  I agree.

Perhaps with the addition of the Buddha, who did not set out to become a religion himself.  Perhaps Jesus, too, was of that frame of mind.  Gandhi escaped that happening to him.  All 3 pacifists, teachers.


----------



## jujube (Jan 16, 2015)

Ramblin Rose said:


> Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.



Yes!


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 16, 2015)

It appears to the majority of Westerners that Islam is blood thirsty, violent and certainly mysoginistic...   I have yet to see proof that it is otherwise..  Actions speak louder than words..


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 16, 2015)

Ralphy1 said:


> A good discussion on NPR with Islamic scholars has made the case that there is a big difference between Muslims who follow Shria law and those who don't.  With Shria law being the cause of the violence that is not mainstream for those who follow the Koran.  In short, Sharia law is misinterpretation of the Koran...



I'm hearing in pc world now don't associate Islam and Muslim, they are not interchangeable words.


----------



## Josiah (Jan 16, 2015)

Ramblin Rose said:


> Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.



I agree.


----------



## AZ Jim (Jan 16, 2015)

Religion= The great divider of mankind.


----------



## Josiah (Jan 16, 2015)

Religion = the major cause of hostility in world today.


----------



## TabbyAnn (Jan 16, 2015)

Ramblin Rose said:


> Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.



The only intelligent way to interpret the Quran is to read it for yourself.  The chapters are called Suras. 

Read Sura 47 verse 3 which says “When ye encounter the infidels, strike off  their heads until ye make a great slaughter of them”. 
How exactly would you interpret this??

Read Sura 5 verse 42 which says “As to the thief, whether man or woman, cut ye off their hands in recompense for their doings.”   
How exactly would you interpret this??

Read Sura 24 verse 2 which says “The whore and the whoremonger, scourge each of them 100 stripes and let not compassion keep you from carrying out the sentence of Allah. “
How exactly would you interpret this??

I could go on and on, but the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of Muhammad are both very straightforward. They don't leave a lot to interpretation.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 16, 2015)

TabbyAnn said:


> The only intelligent way to interpret the Quran is to read it for yourself.  The chapters are called Suras.
> 
> Read Sura 47 verse 3 which says “When ye encounter the infidels, strike off  their heads until ye make a great slaughter of them”.
> How exactly would you interpret this??
> ...



Convenient omission. This is why a lot of hardcore religious types are taken as hypocritical: either you can walk the talk or you don't. But that's a problem too because then you have people actually attempting to walk the talk which in reality is not possible which circles right back to the first post/premise including a convenient new modification ie sharia law and/or variations.


----------



## RadishRose (Jan 16, 2015)

I read today something that disgusted and frightened me no end!

In Saudi Arabia a man was sentenced to 50 lashes every Friday until 1,000 had been completed; THEN imprisoned for TEN YEARS for insulting Islam. 

A few minutes ago The Independent reported:
Authorities in Saudi Arabia have publicly beheaded a woman in Islam’s holy city of Mecca, prompting further criticism of the country’s human rights record.

Laila Bint Abdul Muttalib Basim, a Burmese woman who resided in Saudi Arabia, was executed by sword on Monday after being dragged through the street and held down by four police officers.
She was convicted of the ****** abuse and murder of her seven-year-old step-daughter.
A video showed how it took three blows to complete the execution, while the woman screamed “I did not kill. I did not kill.” It has now been removed by YouTube as part of its policy on “shocking and disgusting content”.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 16, 2015)

RadishRose said:


> I read today something that disgusted and frightened me no end!
> 
> In Saudi Arabia a man was sentenced to 50 lashes every Friday until 1,000 had been completed; THEN imprisoned for TEN YEARS for insulting Islam.
> 
> ...



Chris Hayes from Msnbc actually pointed out the hypocrisy of some of the countries with human rights issues marching with the world leaders in Paris. He cited public flogging and prison sentence for a Saudi Arabian who started a blog to discuss issues. And this the problem I have when I hear this isn't Islam or true Muslim. Intermingle with politics the religion will be used for power and discipline rather than spirituality or self improvement.


----------



## Sunny (Jan 16, 2015)

There was an article in the Washington Post today about the mass exodus of Jews out of France and into Israel. The article said that in a way, this is fulfilling Sharia law, which desires to rid France of its Jewish population, which has been there since the time of Jesus.


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 16, 2015)

Context is everything, Tabbyann. Especially historical context.


----------



## Don M. (Jan 16, 2015)

Josiah09 said:


> Religion = the major cause of hostility in world today.



Not only Today...but throughout human history.  If it were possible to go clear back to the days of the Egyptian Pharaoh's and all the way up to today, religious fanaticism has probably killed more people than all the major wars of the 20th century.  I'll bet that Hell has had to be expanded many times, over the centuries, to accommodate all those who committed atrocities in the name of their various religions.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 16, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Religion= The great divider of mankind.





Josiah09 said:


> Religion = the major cause of hostility in world today.



Agree with both of you.


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 16, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> It appears to the majority of Westerners that Islam is blood thirsty, violent and certainly mysoginistic...   I have yet to see proof that it is otherwise..  Actions speak louder than words..



That is why I am not a Muslim. I am however a Christian and my freedom to practise my religion depends on everyone being free to practise theirs. I will speak out in defence of that right for myself and others.

None of us, however, have the right to break the laws of any country we find ourselves in.
If we choose to do so as a matter of conscience then we have to face the consequences.


----------



## rkunsaw (Jan 19, 2015)

http://conservativepost.com/thomas-...ms-in-1801-is-more-important-today-than-ever/


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

Islam is EVIL!! IMO
Good comparison Tabby. 
They think they can gain other countries and win. I don't really think they will. I think many countries have had their own laws and improved those laws for years and years to make it work in today's society. The Quran does not allow for changes for growth in society. That's the problem with it. If it were not so barbaric in what it says, it may be even slightly tolerable by the rest of the world.
I think IS is pissing off the world!!! Well that's good right? You can't just go live in another country and expect that country to bow to their barbaric rules, when that country in all it's diversity has made it work and accepts many nationalities. 
RamblinRose: you nailed that one:





> Both the Bible and the Quran can be interpreted according to what the reader wants to see.


Left open for interpretation so that the basic rules can adapt to the times!!!! IS does not see this!!! Muhammad was evil in my opinion. He was not a scholar, but a thief. Do we listen to thief's? No, we do not! But his followers did. His Quran was first of all written by his followers after her died. It therefore was rewritten in the beginning. Most likely interpreted in a way his followers thought and not what it was actually supposed to be. But who really knows, since the first words where not written but told!!!


----------



## Debby (Jan 19, 2015)

TabbyAnn said:


> In reading the New Testament and the Quran, the pacifist nature of Jesus and the violent nature of Muhammad become apparent. Jesus taught a self-improvement course for controlling oneself and Muhammad taught a violent political system for controlling others.
> 
> As the worldly ruler of Mecca, Muhammad wrote laws in the Quran that would be illegal in the United States today, like chopping off hands for stealing, beatings for adultery, beheadings for infidels, polygamy for men, and so on.
> 
> So in order for Muslims to practice the teachings in the Quran, without running afoul of the laws in most countries, they would have to take over the country and establish Sharia law.  And we are watching that happen today. Some countries have established political Parties that are opposed to allowing any more Muslims to enter the country.  In the United States however, we treat Islam as a religion, gives tax breaks to its mosques, and pretend the violent Islamists aren’t true Muslims, when in fact they are.




On the other hand, perhaps the Muslims in the West have for the most part, done like many Christians and Jews and decided to ignore the violence that is inherent in the God of their books and live with the peaceful parts?  Several instances in the OT where God told the Jews to go in and do a bit of ethnic cleansing, or where some sinners were to be stoned to death.......

I did a search recently for Muslims preaching peace (or something like that) and there are any number of Muslim groups speaking out against the violence of these fanatical terrorists.  Perhaps it's time that our news media started focusing on those people more so that our society can see that not all are like that anymore than all Christians today aren't like Westboro Baptist.


----------



## Sunny (Jan 19, 2015)

I think that is what is badly needed (Muslims preaching peace). I have not seen or heard a whole lot coming from that direction, perhaps out of fear. Where was the Muslim outcry after 9/11?  The silence was deafening. How many Muslims have spoken out, written letters to the editor, etc. about all the beheadings, the Boston marathon, the suicide bombers, the nut cases running around with assault weapons in the name of Islam?  Why are the Muslim women not loudly protesting that religion's treatment of them?

I'm glad to hear that there are many Muslim groups speaking out. I personally have not seen or heard them.


----------



## Josiah (Jan 19, 2015)

Debby, how about the God of the Old Testament? I'd certainly put him on a par with the most vicious pronouncements in the Quran.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

Debby said:


> On the other hand, perhaps the Muslims in the West have for the most part, done like many Christians and Jews and decided to ignore the violence that is inherent in the God of their books and live with the peaceful parts?  Several instances in the OT where God told the Jews to go in and do a bit of ethnic cleansing, or where some sinners were to be stoned to death.......
> 
> I did a search recently for Muslims preaching peace (or something like that) and there are any number of Muslim groups speaking out against the violence of these fanatical terrorists.  Perhaps it's time that our news media started focusing on those people more so that our society can see that not all are like that anymore than all Christians today aren't like Westboro Baptist.



The news media certainly helps along those bad tempers in people. I think you are right Debby, more news on the good stuff.
I live near a mostly 100% Muslim community. A few bad apples were and are hiding out there, the FBI got an eye on, but for the most part they stick with there own and haven't caused trouble. That's here in the Detroit area. With as many as we have around, I'm surprise that we haven't had major issues.


----------



## Grumpy Ol' Man (Jan 19, 2015)

Josiah09 said:


> Debby, how about the God of the Old Testament? I'd certainly put him on a par with the most vicious pronouncements in the Quran.



If we read the Bible... the Old Testament... Colorado's recent vote to allow gay marriage and legalize marijuana is Biblical.  In Leviticus we are told, "If man lies with man, he shall be stoned."


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I regard Jesus of Nazareth as a revolutionary (as was Gandhi centuries later).



Definitely agree, plus the fact He did claim to be God, and the God of the OT was no pacifist.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

TabbyAnn said:


> In reading the New Testament and the Quran, the pacifist nature of Jesus and the violent nature of Muhammad become apparent. Jesus taught a self-improvement course for controlling oneself and Muhammad taught a violent political system for controlling others.
> 
> As the worldly ruler of Mecca, Muhammad wrote laws in the Quran that would be illegal in the United States today, like chopping off hands for stealing, beatings for adultery, beheadings for infidels, polygamy for men, and so on.
> 
> ...



I don't know what the Quran says, maybe it's time I read it.  My thought is though, some "religions" seem like love god, but hate his creation, at least the ones that don't follow his laws, whatever that religion believes are his laws (I know, his/hers/its).  Many "christians" today (and I have first hand knowledge of this) don't even read the bible, let alone mirror Christ.  The word religion leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and the word god just leaves questions in my head.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

That's why go with the new testament. I think they left that part out....LOL
I think gay people have been around since the time people began. I'm not for or against Gays, I'm glad they are finally coming out of the closet. We all strive to be all we can be with who we are in life. Gays are no different.
I do think we go too far in ruling gay rights however. And since we have separation of Church and State in America, religions have no say what these people do in their life. If you rule on something like that, you take away more freedoms from the people.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

True FC, people have a right to live as they choose (lifestyles etc) as long as they aren't breaking a law (not laws of religion, but of the State/Country they live in).


----------



## Debby (Jan 19, 2015)

Sunny said:


> I think that is what is badly needed (Muslims preaching peace). I have not seen or heard a whole lot coming from that direction, perhaps out of fear. Where was the Muslim outcry after 9/11?  The silence was deafening. How many Muslims have spoken out, written letters to the editor, etc. about all the beheadings, the Boston marathon, the suicide bombers, the nut cases running around with assault weapons in the name of Islam?  Why are the Muslim women not loudly protesting that religion's treatment of them?
> 
> I'm glad to hear that there are many Muslim groups speaking out. I personally have not seen or heard them.



Two things:  

First, our western media is not talking about Muslim peace activism.  Second, how many of us have actually looked to find out what they are saying?  I include myself in that.  But when I did a Google search:  Muslims speaking against 9/11, the following is one of the links that I found:

"In the aftermath of the violence and horror of 9/11, criticisms were made that Muslim leaders and organizations were not outspoken enough in denouncing acts of terrorism. Muslims are constantly perplexed by this accusation, as we heard (and continue to hear) nothing but unequivocal and unified condemnations by the leaders of our community, both in the United States and worldwide. But for some reason, people are not listening.For the record, the inhuman attacks of September 11 were condemned in the strongest terms by virtually all Islamic leaders, organizations, and countries. TheChairman of Saudi Arabia's Supreme Judicial Council summarized that, "Islam rejects such acts, since it forbids killing of civilians even during times of war, especially if they are not part of the fighting. A religion that views people of the world in such a way cannot in any sense condone such criminal acts, which require that their perpetrators and those who support them are held accountable. As a human community we have to be vigilant and careful to preempt these evils........."
http://islam.about.com/cs/currentevents/a/9_11statements.htm




And the following link gets you a list of Muslim scholars and Muslim organizations and individuals speaking out against 9/11 type terrorism.  http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

Why the heck isn't the media talking about all these folks?  Is there a purpose to allowing it to appear that ALL Muslims are in favour of this terrorism, can't be trusted, etc....?  If we started thinking of the terrorists as a small group of lunatic fanatics out of a large group who's religion has been hijacked, would it be harder to kill whole populations?   To justify the murders of innocent families who happen to practise 'that' religion?  Bottom line, media should be talk to any and all Muslim groups who espouse peace and every time an incident happens.

(obviously, the Saudi statement above is problematic considering that countries human rights abuses, but the point is that there are many Muslim groups talking and teaching about the situation and we're just being kept in the dark)


----------



## Debby (Jan 19, 2015)

Josiah09 said:


> Debby, how about the God of the Old Testament? I'd certainly put him on a par with the most vicious pronouncements in the Quran.




What you've just mentioned is one of the reasons why my husband and I finally left the church.  We were unable to ignore the obvious contradiction of the OT God and the NT God, and chose to leave.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

nwlady said:


> I don't know what the Quran says, maybe it's time I read it.  My thought is though, some "religions" seem like love god, but hate his creation, at least the ones that don't follow his laws, whatever that religion believes are his laws (I know, his/hers/its).  Many "christians" today (and I have first hand knowledge of this) don't even read the bible, let alone mirror Christ.  The word religion leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and the word god just leaves questions in my head.



Denise, You'd be surprised at what the Quran says. It's not laid out in any chronically order, it's just a bunch of statements and not even in a story line version.
In fact I was told it's not to be read but recited. If that makes any sense. Say it over and over until you're brainwashed with it's words.
Here ya go, an English version. Use the arrows given to go page by page. I was also told to read it in English is wrong due to miss translation. But since we read English,, we somehow need to understand why this religion is right?
http://clearquran.com/index.html

And a brief history of Islam video
[video]http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=History+Of+Islam&FORM=R5FD5#view=detail&m  id=D08A8C86F1546A4A5680D08A8C86F1546A4A5680[/video]


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Wow, can't thank you enough FC, I just haven't been curious enough to read any of it, but now with the link I can definitely take a look.

Somehow the reciting thing doesn't surprise me, kind of like chanting or something.  In christianity they preach memorizing, and in some "groups" they do the tongue thing which sounds like garble, but they say it's a personal language only god can understand. But yet there has to be at least one other person to decipher/interpret it.  This isn't in the bible though, not as far as I've read.  Maybe I missed it.

I may be off track, but if the OP brings up Quran, seems appropriate to mention more on it, as well as other religions having similarities.  I was attending a church, and offered to help with the little ones in nursery.  I was looking for books to read them and came across one that "taught" speaking in tongues.  That was the beginning of the end of my attendance there.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 19, 2015)

Christ's best gift was individualism. He showed that God was in every living thing. There was no need to have rulers that were direct descendents from the Gods. This allowed people to turn into themselves and construct there own internal temples. One can only imagine how many apple carts that overturned.

Mohamad like Christ was a very rich man who else would have time for something like this. As he walked down the streets 500 years later about the time the New Testament was being put together, all he could see were whores on the corners, money changers, and extreme poverty sound familiar?  So he met with Gabriel and decided to build a book of conduct for his people, because - well they really needed it. Ironically his works, the Old Testament , and Psalms all came from the Egyptian book of the dead, but that's another story. Being a pragmatist he decided to use the KISS principle (keep it simply stupid ) and include the basics. He liked the internal temple stuff, but knew that mamma was to busy trying to stop the neighbor kid from stealing her babies food, and his old man was trying to get in her pants all the time. Solution: cut off the kids hand and put a cover over mamas mouth and make her look ugly. (Sort of what the feminists did in the 60s).  

Fast forward to to when both sides have taken these prophets literally and what do you get---  people who still can't define assault rifle.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Just what I've read so far made me think about interpretation.  Each person can interpret something differently if they read for themselves.  I wonder with Muslims, if they "all" read it for themselves.  I know the bible is constantly misinterpreted.  Well, I should clarify, it is misinterpreted in "my opinion".  I sat in church for years and listened to what others said the bible said, before I finally started reading it for myself.  Boy did that change a lot of things for me, for the good I might add.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

YW Denise, I was hoping that would help, I know it did for me.
All religions have their idols. Catholics, IMO, are the worst for idolizing. The quran forbids idols, that is why they have no symbol and no face to symbolize the prophet Mohammad.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Christ's best gift was individualism. He showed that God was in every living thing. There was no need to have rulers that were direct descendents from the Gods. This allowed people to turn into themselves and construct there own internal temples. One can only imagine how many apple carts that overturned.
> 
> Mohamad like Christ was a very rich man who else would have time for something like this. As he walked down the streets 500 years later about the time the New Testament was being put together, all he could see were whores on the corners, money changers, and extreme poverty sound familiar?  So he met with Gabriel and decided to build a book of conduct for his people, because - well they really needed it. Ironically his works, the Old Testament , and Psalms all came from the Egyptian book of the dead, but that's another story. Being a pragmatist he decided to use the KISS principle (keep it simply stupid ) and include the basics. He liked the internal temple stuff, but knew that mamma was to busy trying to stop the neighbor kid from stealing her babies food, and his old man was trying to get in her pants all the time. Solution: cut off the kids hand and put a cover over mamas mouth and make her look ugly. (Sort of what the feminists did in the 60s).
> 
> Fast forward to to when both sides have taken these prophets literally and what do you get---  people who still can't define assault rifle.



Sounds like you know something about Mohammed, and the Quran.  I have only read like the first page.  Can you tell me (give me a "sneak peek") whether the god of the Quran is finite, or infinite?


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 19, 2015)

nwlady said:


> Sounds like you know something about Mohammed, and the Quran.  I have only read like the first page.  Can you tell me (give me a "sneak peek") whether the god of the Quran is finite, or infinite?


The God in the Quran is the only one true God. That's all it says I think.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Ok, they might mean infinite by that then


----------



## Sunny (Jan 19, 2015)

Grumpy Ol' Man said:


> If we read the Bible... the Old Testament... Colorado's recent vote to allow gay marriage and legalize marijuana is Biblical.  In Leviticus we are told, "If man lies with man, he shall be stoned."



True, the Bible, especially Leviticus in the Old Testament is of the same cruel, primitive mindset as the Koran. Probably going back to Biblical days, the Jews were just as guilty of this stuff as the Islamist fanatics. And in Christianity, we don't even have to go back that far; there was the Spanish Inquisition, fundamentalist puritanism, etc.

But the big difference is: that was then, this is now. These Islamists cannot be let off the hook by pointing out the cruelties and ignorance of other religions in bygone ages. Even the most rigidly orthodox Jews and Christians are not bombing innocent people, flying planes into buildings, subjecting people to strokes of the lash(!) for expressing their own opinions, etc.  

So this is apples and oranges. We cannot shrug off the Muslim atrocities by pointing out that at some time in the past, other religions were "just as bad."  The Muslim religion seems to be permanently stuck in about the 12th century.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 19, 2015)

Allah is infinite just as the Christian God, both are mind before matter beliefs. (Science is matter before mind belief) In both religions the earth, we and the sun were one before the separation, Christians call it the creation. Both got it from the Egyptians. Early humans lived day to day with the Gods. No one lied because the gods were listening. The Trogan horse was the storey of the first "trick". The battle for Troy was fought over the Pallidium not Helen. As our selves became more aware we became more to be like matter and was cut of from communication from the gods. This contact is still evident in the stone worn by Indian's, the third chakra, and practiced by various mysteries, the Rosicrucian, the Sufis and Freemasons to name a few.

the Koran is written and taught in the Bard tradition which goes back to thr Druids, Celts, and Norse traditions and is intended for use in illiterate peoples. Sitting around the campfire and telling heritages goes way back. And you always wondered why movies were so popular. Both forms of communication appeal at the subconscious level of Jung's seven archetypes.

Thoughts become words
words become actions
actions become behavior.

six million people were killed in the Inquistion and crusades, who knows by the conquistadors. Looks like they have some catching up

two great dates occurred in Christianity  ---/ were when Atilla the Hun died on his wedding night with a nose bleed, and Charlemagne defeated the movement of Islam across Europe and you thought it had something to do with the Christians. Either one of these events could have wiped out Christianity


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 19, 2015)

nwlady said:


> Definitely agree, plus the fact He did claim to be God, and the God of the OT was no pacifist.



I think Jesus referred to himself as "son of man" which referred to an OT prophesy about the messiah. Correct me anyone who has the time to clarify this point. It was others who used the words "son of God" (Peter, Roman soldier at the cross)and this may have been written into the stories later. I think Paul is probably the writer who most points to divinity.

The god of the OT is a tribal interpretation/understanding of the divine. Jesus preached, through the parables, a very different interpretation, one that could be universal and encompass non Jews. No-one before him had ever dared to address God as Daddy as he did in what we call the Lord's Prayer. (Abba is a very familiar Hebrew word for father).


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 19, 2015)

nwlady said:


> I may be off track, but if the OP brings up Quran, seems appropriate to mention more on it, as well as other religions having similarities.  I was attending a church, and offered to help with the little ones in nursery.  I was looking for books to read them and came across one that "taught" speaking in tongues.  That was the beginning of the end of my attendance there.



I'd be out of there too. I'd bin the book before I left.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 19, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I think Jesus referred to himself as "son of man" which referred to an OP prophesy about the messiah. Correct me anyone who has the time to clarify this point. It was others who used the words "son of God" (Peter, Roman soldier at the cross)and this may have been written into the stories later. I think Paul is probably the writer who most points to divinity.
> 
> The god of the OT is a tribal interpretation/understanding of the divine. Jesus preached, through the parables, a very different interpretation, one that could be universal and encompass non Jews. No-one before him had ever dared to address God as Daddy as he did in what we call the Lord's Prayer. (Abba is a very familiar Hebrew word for father).



I don't believe Jesus ever claimed to be GOD... or the Son of God..  And never spoke of the Trinity.  That was all done by man inventing a religion.


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 19, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I don't believe Jesus ever claimed to be GOD... or the Son of God..  And never spoke of the Trinity.  That was all done by man inventing a religion.


My understanding too. In our congregation we have people who still believe in Christ's divinity but many do not or are at best ambivalent about it, including our minister. It makes no difference to their commitment to try to live out the teachings embedded in the gospel narratives.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I think Jesus referred to himself as "son of man" which referred to an OT prophesy about the messiah. Correct me anyone who has the time to clarify this point. It was others who used the words "son of God" (Peter, Roman soldier at the cross)and this may have been written into the stories later. I think Paul is probably the writer who most points to divinity.
> 
> The god of the OT is a tribal interpretation/understanding of the divine. Jesus preached, through the parables, a very different interpretation, one that could be universal and encompass non Jews. No-one before him had ever dared to address God as Daddy as he did in what we call the Lord's Prayer. (Abba is a very familiar Hebrew word for father).



John 1:1 

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 

This, in my way of thinking, is just one place it is said that Jesus was God.  Matthew says, but also, I am thinking of the places where Jesus said it himself.  One place: Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied."
Jesus replied, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and yet  you still don't know who I am? Anyone who has seen me has seen the  Father! So why are you asking me to show him to you?"[SUP]6[/SUP]

John 14:9  Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> My understanding too. In our congregation we have people who still believe in Christ's divinity but many do not or are at best ambivalent about it, including our minister. It makes no difference to their commitment to try to live out the teachings embedded in the gospel narratives.



I tell folks I lost my faith, but I haven't lost the good teachings of the bible.  I think I'd like your church Dame


----------



## rt3 (Jan 19, 2015)

Lots of people with the same name of Jesus at the time. Sort of like going to Mexico. All the Gospels are a case of they said, that they said that he said. Interesting though that the Koran comes straight down by the man himself, and written in such a way that it can't be redefined.


----------



## Debby (Jan 19, 2015)

rt3 said:


> ....... In both religions the earth, we and the sun were one before the separation, Christians call it the creation. ....../QUOTE]
> 
> 
> This one little part rt3, I would have to disagree with you.  I was in the Seventh Day Adventist Church for twelve years, and we never believed that we and the sun and earth were 'one' before a separation.  The Christian belief is that God is.....and He created all that is.  Just out of His Word, He spoke and all that is came into existence.
> ...


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 19, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Lots of people with the same name of Jesus at the time. Sort of like going to Mexico. All the Gospels are a case of they said, that they said that he said. Interesting though that the Koran comes straight down by the man himself, and written in such a way that it can't be redefined.



I believe "if" God is real/exists, no man's/woman's itti, bitti brain is going to figure him out.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 19, 2015)

Debby said:


> rt3 said:
> 
> 
> > ....... In both religions the earth, we and the sun were one before the separation, Christians call it the creation. ....../QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## rt3 (Jan 19, 2015)

Anyway we have Islam to thank for our number system and batteries. Ever tried doing algebra in Roman numerals ?


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 19, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Anyway we have Islam to thank for our number system and batteries. Ever tried doing algebra in Roman numerals ?



Chinese numerals are deadly to deal with too. That's why the Romans and the Chinese both invented, separately, the abacus.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

Sunny said:


> True, the Bible, especially Leviticus in the Old Testament is of the same cruel, primitive mindset as the Koran. Probably going back to Biblical days, the Jews were just as guilty of this stuff as the Islamist fanatics. And in Christianity, we don't even have to go back that far; there was the Spanish Inquisition, fundamentalist puritanism, etc.
> 
> But the big difference is: that was then, this is now. These Islamists cannot be let off the hook by pointing out the cruelties and ignorance of other religions in bygone ages. Even the most rigidly orthodox Jews and Christians are not bombing innocent people, flying planes into buildings, subjecting people to strokes of the lash(!) for expressing their own opinions, etc.
> 
> So this is apples and oranges. We cannot shrug off the Muslim atrocities by pointing out that at some time in the past, other religions were "just as bad."  The Muslim religion seems to be permanently stuck in about the 12th century.



The other religions changed with the times over the years. I hear the Vatican holds true the words of all the old texts. This is not printed, IMO, so that people CAN change with the times with their religions. Makes sense to not encourage death and barbaric destruction upon the world.
I was told the Quran does not allow for change. I have not studied or read everything in it, quite boring actually, but there is on just about every page barbaric destruction upon all who don't follow it. IMO, its almost like it was written by or told by God's fallen angel and a false prophet. It truely is evil most of it. We simply cannot live by those laws in today's  peaceful society. I don't know how Islam thinks it can.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 20, 2015)

One has to be leery of religions who's dogma and rulings can change by a bunch of men getting together and voting on it..   If MAN can change the tenants of a religion, how much is divinely commanded?   In other words.. if man can change it, God didn't make it.  Most organized religions were invented by man.... for MAN.. and I mean that in the universal and gendered sense.. and like most things man does... for power and for profit.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Debby said:
> 
> 
> > The Mormons and Catholics would disagree with you.
> ...


----------



## rkunsaw (Jan 20, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> One has to be leery of religions who's dogma and rulings can change by a bunch of men getting together and voting on it..   If MAN can change the tenants of a religion, how much is divinely commanded?   In other words.. if man can change it, God didn't make it.  Most organized religions were invented by man.... for MAN.. and I mean that in the universal and gendered sense.. and like most things man does... for power and for profit.



I agree with this. Reading the bible and then listening to religious leaders distorting and making excuses for it is what led me to become an atheist.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I don't believe Jesus ever claimed to be GOD... or the Son of God..  And never spoke of the Trinity.  That was all done by man inventing a religion.




John 10:29-30 "...*29 **My Father*, which gave them me, *is greater than all*; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.  
*30   **I and my Father are one.  *........
*36 *Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 
*37 *If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 
*38 *But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that *the Father is in me, and I in him*."


Sounds like he's assuming the status of God there.  
Then there's the following in John 1:


*1 *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and* the Word was God*........
*10 *He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
*11 *He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
*12 *But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
*13 *Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
*14 **And the Word was made flesh*, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."


The Word was God...and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I'd be out of there too. I'd bin the book before I left.





Freedom of speech?  Religion?


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 20, 2015)

Well GOD is the Father of ALL of us....... SO if I were speaking of Him... I would say the same...   God is in every one of us too... NO?  God sent every one of us into the world.. No?  

You can read what you want in all your examples...  It's all conjecture of what he may have meant.. and can be interpreted in different ways.

Show me a passage where Jesus says  I AM GOD.. and you are to worship me.

Another thing you are forgetting is that the New Testament  was written by MEN long after Jesus was alive..  SO how much poetic license you think was involved?  How much was actually remembered or invented?   How much was simply imagination?


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

I'm not forgetting that the NT was written much later at all.  I was in the SDA church for twelve years and if anything, those people are big on Bible study.  We had several Concordances in the house, plus all sorts of other 'explanatory' books to aid in Bible study.  I also was a member of the church board and organized DVBS two or three years and I taught children's classes as did my husband.  And there were the mid week Bible studies.  And for those who weren't immersed in the church, a Concordance is a book that looks at every word in the Bible and explains the origins, number of uses (of said word) and the definitions, etc.

What must be remembered as we study it now is that sometimes cultural and societal traditions were also at play as in the admonition by Paul I think, that women should not cut their hair and cover their heads in church. 

But as for those verses, I think if you look at most church's understandings of them, they would assure you that these are statements of divinity which is one of the reasons why the Jewish priests of the day were so hot to do away with him.  Those statements (whether the original claims or the later written statements) were seen as blasphemous.

The following link supports the belief that God isn't IN ALL THINGS.  Wouldn't that be more a pagan or pantheistic belief?


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> I'm not forgetting that the NT was written much later at all.  I was in the SDA church for twelve years and if anything, those people are big on Bible study.  We had several Concordances in the house, plus all sorts of other 'explanatory' books to aid in Bible study.  I also was a member of the church board and organized DVBS two or three years and I taught children's classes as did my husband.  And there were the mid week Bible studies.
> 
> What must be remembered as we study it now is that sometimes cultural and societal traditions were also at play as in the admonition by Paul I think, that women should not cut their hair and cover their heads in church.  But as for those verses, I think if you look at most church's understandings of them, they would assure you that these are statements of divinity which is one of the reasons why the Jewish priests of the day were so hot to do away with him.  Those statements (whether the original claims or the later written statements) were seen as blasphemous.




Ah yes.... the SDA.... Don't they follow the teachings of Ellen White (1827-1915) the self proclaimed prophet who claimed to have visual experiences and talked directly to God?


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Well GOD is the Father of ALL of us....... SO if I were speaking of Him... I would say the same...   God is in every one of us too... NO?  God sent every one of us into the world.. No?
> 
> You can read what you want in all your examples...  It's all conjecture of what he may have meant.. and can be interpreted in different ways.
> 
> ...





http://www.everystudent.com/wires/whodoyousay.html
That link has some verses that seem to be making the statement that Jesus was God.  One example:

*Jesus Said He Existed Before Abraham*
"Your father Abraham rejoiced as he looked forward to my coming. He saw it and was glad."
    The people said, "You aren't even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham?"
    Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"[SUP]4




[/SUP]"...that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins"-


*Jesus Said He Was the Same as God*
"The Father and I are one."
    Once again the people picked up stones to kill him.
    Jesus said, "At my Father's direction I have done many good works. For which one are you going to stone me?"
    They replied, "We're stoning you not for any good work, but for blasphemy! You, a mere man, claim to be God."[SUP]13



Obviously the people of the day had no problem with perceiving the claims to divinity.[/SUP]


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Ah yes.... the SDA.... Don't they follow the teachings of Ellen White (1827-1915) the self proclaimed prophet who claimed to have visual experiences and talked directly to God?




Very good QuickSilver.  Yes Ellen White was the leader of the church.  Martin Luther also had a church named after him and he had different views on church teaching of the time and Menno Simons started the Mennonite Church.  And then there's the Anglican church that was separated from the Roman so that an English King could get a divorce.  (I think that's the way it happened)

Anyway, what you should know is that the SDA church doesn't veer from what is in the Bible itself.  There are a couple of different understandings and one would be that they don't believe that sinners will roast and suffer for all eternity (unlike your typical Baptist or Catholic teaching) but that those who aren't believers will merely stay in the darkness of the grave.  'Punishment' is separation from God.  I remember once having a discussion with a Mennonite cousin who got really angry at the thought that 'God wouldn't roast sinners forever'.  I thought he was going to throw us out of his house, he was so mad.  Compassionate guy huh?  Preferred the idea of lots of suffering for anyone who wasn't 'like him'.

SDA's also believe that the example of Daniels good health on vegetables only, plus the Genesis admonition to eat plants was God showing that the vegetarian diet was intended for humans which is why most Adventists are vegetarian.The SDA church has a very strong health message and that belief is demonstrated in several hospitals across the US with the most well known being Loma Linda University Medical Centre in California.

As well, there is a strong message against outward adornment as in jewellery.  So most traditional Adventists in America and Canada won't wear even wedding rings.  Instead of engagement rings, young men often give their intendeds a nice watch because a watch is a practical and useful thing.  In Europe, I think the admonition against jewellery is not so prevalent.  When my daughter got married, her fiancee's pastor Grandfather from Germany, did the part of the ceremony where the rings are exchanged.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

This is sooo true Quick, That's another way of looking at it. All over Christianity the same bible was rewritten and interpreted to suit the tribe(so to speak).
Within those Christian tribe, being Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist, etc. I think they kept the 10 commandments intact (words to live by) and they don't focus so much on the evils but focus on the goodness of the words and stories so man can live peacefully and in harmony.  Never harming others and never having evil tendencies toward others. Much of it is common sense to communication and relations with others. How to be treating, how to treat others. Some of that is said in the Quran as well, they choose to only interpret and focus on the evil words.
In Islam people of the whole world are infidels unless they convert to Islam. This is stated in the Quran. Infidels get slaughtered, butchered, raped and tortured. It is written so in their belief.

I thank God, the papal in the Vatican have secretly avoided print of such evil rules. Can you imagine a world living as Islam rules? I know I can't. I'd rather have a God, a Good God to believe in.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

Quoting scripture doesn't mean anything. I live in a 3 state area surrounded by Mormons and (no affiliation) Catholics (no affiliation). They and every  any "church" member I have met" read that stuff, take what they want and become hypocrites. None "take on the Mantle" as Mormons put it. One of my hobbies is collecting early Masonic, Catholic, and Mormon literature so I can argue with them about who stole what first.
Don't think of the Sun as it exists today, but as a consiousness, and as this consciousness "looked at itself" it began to precipitate into matter. Early Christians actually believed in re-incarnation, what happened to all that? Did the council of Nice forget to include that for some reason?

One can  be atheist but still be agnostic., If you think someone owns the stairway to heaven, because they claim to know/own the definition of God/ good luck.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> Very good QuickSilver.  Yes Ellen White was the leader of the church.  Martin Luther also had a church named after him and he had different views on church teaching of the time and Menno Simons started the Mennonite Church.  And then there's the Anglican church that was separated from the Roman so that an English King could get a divorce.  (I think that's the way it happened)
> 
> Anyway, what you should know is that the SDA church doesn't veer from what is in the Bible itself.  There are a couple of different understandings and one would be that they don't believe that sinners will roast and suffer for all eternity (unlike your typical Baptist or Catholic teaching) but that those who aren't believers will merely stay in the darkness of the grave.  'Punishment' is separation from God.  I remember once having a discussion with a Mennonite cousin who got really angry at the thought that 'God wouldn't roast sinners forever'.  I thought he was going to throw us out of his house, he was so mad.  Compassionate guy huh?  Preferred the idea of lots of suffering for anyone who wasn't 'like him'.
> 
> ...




I am VERY familiar with SDA as well as Martin Luther.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

flowerchild said:


> This is sooo true Quick, That's another way of looking at it. All over Christianity the same bible was rewritten and interpreted to suit the tribe(so to speak).
> .....




I don't think the Bible has ever been 'rewritten'.  It has been translated into various languages and in some instances, probably some modern cultural understandings have crept in, but never rewritten.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

So just curious QuickSilver, how are you familiar with the SDA church?  It's a little more obscure than say the Baptist church or Pentacostal .  Were you a member or did you have a family member who belonged?


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

> Debby you quoted:
> *38 *But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that *the Father is in me, and I in him*."


I interpreted this to mean he's saying the father is in him. God is within us! Jesus was a prophet and some called him the Son of God. But he was just a prophet spreading the good words of God. He did this (my interpretation) to carry the word of rules on how to live with our fellow man in a good way. I think because of all the holy wars that proceeded his birth this came  to be a necessary. Think that's written somewhere in the bible. It's been a very many years since I read the bible (grin).


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby what happened to the Book of Enoch, Book of Thomas, and the Dead Sea Schrolls?
Translating=rewritten
how do you translate from one language to another that doesn't have the identical grammar structure?
the Mormon's Joseph Smith rewrote the King James Version, as an example. 
scribes were used during the middle ages because no one could read or write, you can'T convince me license wasn't abused.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

You can't just take one verse and hang your hat on that when it comes to Bible study.  You have to look at all the rest of them as well and part of the reason is that much of his words were by way of parables and examples as well as references back to the OT.  The Jews of that era were very aware that (in their opinion) he was making claims of divinity and that's why they took him before the Roman governor.  If he had just been giving them advice on how to get along with one another, it wouldn't have been such a problem for them. 


Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"[SUP]4

Exodus 3:14 says:  [/SUP]New International Version
God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

So God told Moses 'I Am' and then Jesus tells someone (in reference to himself) 'I Am' and makes specific reference to himself being 'before the birth of Abraham.


----------



## Davey Jones (Jan 20, 2015)

How does a Muslim close the door? 
 A: Islams it.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Debby what happened to the Book of Enoch, Book of Thomas, and the Dead Sea Schrolls?
> Translating=rewritten
> how do you translate from one language to another that doesn't have the identical grammar structure?
> the Mormon's Joseph Smith rewrote the King James Version, as an example.
> scribes were used during the middle ages because no one could read or write, you can'T convince me license wasn't abused.





The early church fathers decided which books would be included in the Bible, which as you probably know is not actually one book so much as it is 66 (?) individual books/letters that have been gathered into the one.  Personally, I've never read the manuscripts that you mentioned although I have heard of them.  It would be interesting to know exactly why they weren't included wouldn't it?

And a translation isn't a rewrite. rewritten) [ with obj. ]write (something) again so as to alter or improve it
The message/principle remains the same regardless of which Translation you read and those translations are made with the original language/context in mind. They update the language used, but the message is still 'on point'. 

As for the Mormon book, I've never read it, but it's my understanding that Joseph Smith added 'books'  to the original and the additions aren't recognized by the traditional Christian church.

License was most definitely not allowed when it came to translating the Word of God.  That would be definitely be grounds for 'the rack' I would think.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 20, 2015)

> The early church fathers decided which books would be included in the Bible, which as you probably know is not actually one book so much as it is 66 (?) individual books/letters that have been gathered into the one.



This is exactly my point..  MEN decided what to include and what to exclude.. How so?   What gave them the authority to decide what was the "word of God" and what wasn't... AND please tell me HOW did the "Word of God" make it's way from God down to a mortal who decided to write a book?   When people start saying and believing they are channeling  GOD... they have crossed the line into mental illness.   People today hearing voices and making such claims would be hospitalized.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> This is exactly my point..  MEN decided what to include and what to exclude.. How so?   What gave them the authority to decide what was the "word of God" and what wasn't... AND please tell me HOW did the "Word of God" make it's way from God down to a mortal who decided to write a book?   When people start saying and believing they are channeling  GOD... they have crossed the line into mental illness.   People today hearing voices and making such claims would be hospitalized.




Well, I guess you would have to ask a theologian how the early church decided which books/letters were inspired.  Good question.

What you might dismiss as mental illness, people of faith might call inspiration.  Personally, while I am no longer a religious person, I am still very much a spiritual person and I believe that it is possible for a greater Consciousness to 'speak' to us through new understandings or realizations that come to us in times of intense searching for wisdom and how to deal with life's issues.  

I think a 'test' of those new understandings would be to determine if they are beneficial to you as well as the world in general.  If a 'new understanding' was to tell you to go out and kill someone who was giving you grief, definitely not inspired in the theological sense.  But if you were struggling with a relationship and a 'new understanding' gave you a different perspective that either healed the gulf or at the very least enabled you to find a way not to take it personally and so to disengage from the struggle, that could be called inspired.  That's how I would differentiate.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> I believe that it is possible for a greater Consciousness to 'speak' to us through new understandings or realizations that come to us in times of intense searching for wisdom and how to deal with life's issues.
> 
> I think a 'test' of those new understandings would be to determine if they are beneficial to you as well as the world in general.  If a 'new understanding' was to tell you to go out and kill someone who was giving you grief, definitely not inspired in the theological sense.  But if you were struggling with a relationship and a 'new understanding' gave you a different perspective that either healed the gulf or at the very least enabled you to find a way not to take it personally and so to disengage from the struggle, that could be called inspired.  That's how I would differentiate.


I agree with this analogy too Debby.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

rt3 said:


> Debby what happened to the Book of Enoch, Book of Thomas, and the Dead Sea Schrolls?
> Translating=rewritten
> how do you translate from one language to another that doesn't have the identical grammar structure?
> the Mormon's Joseph Smith rewrote the King James Version, as an example.
> scribes were used during the middle ages because no one could read or write, you can'T convince me license wasn't abused.



That's a good question rt. They must of had good reason to illuminate those documents from the Bible. I'm sure those books and docs are sitting in the Vatican right now and they know all about it.
Why did we change from the old testament to the new? Anyone know?


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

flowerchild said:


> That's a good question rt. They must of had good reason to illuminate those documents from the Bible. I'm sure those books and docs are sitting in the Vatican right now and they know all about it.
> Why did we change from the old testament to the new? Anyone know?




I looked up the Book of Enoch and for whatever reason, it was determined that it isn't inspired.

As for changing from the OT to the NT, well in a nutshell:

The OT was written by the Jews about the God they worship and it included a host of rituals and symbols that pointed to how to please God and directed the believers to watch for a coming Messiah who would make all 'right with God' and reunite God and man.

The sacrifices of animals were to remind the people that 'the wages of sin are death' and that only by the shedding of blood can there be a remission of sin or a return to the 'pre-sin' state. 

The NT books explain how Jesus is that Messiah and his death was the final sacrifice for all the sins of man and that included the gentiles whom up til that moment were thought to be outside the love of God. And the resurrection of Christ illustrates his divinity and that through death (the acceptance of His death) one can come back to the Father.

Christians consider the OT more like support or background for the New Testament and that Jesus replaces the old sacrificial system and is the 'gate' to salvation.  So no one has 'changed' from the OT to the New so much as the emphasis is changed and the New allows in non-Jewish believers.  I think that's how the change could be explained.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

> The OT was written by the Jews about the God they worship and it included a host of rituals and symbols that pointed to how to please God and directed the believers to watch for a coming Messiah who would make all 'right with God' and reunite God and man.



O.O I forget. Grin
I work with a guy who is from the old country, they practice the OT. Just was wondering, he's kind of quiet about it.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

What do you mean about him practising the OT?  Does that mean he doesn't believe in Jesus as the Messiah and he still practises making animal sacrifices?  Sounds more like an old fashioned Jew.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

The Old Testament was copied by the Egyptian priest Moses, from The Book of the Dead and other Egyptian teachings. So 
they copied a folklore from the Isis and Osiris stories about being set in a boat as a baby, Osiris sealed in a box and each put out to water. The Old Testament is a storey that tells about the evolution on mankind both physically and on the consious level. It is hard to imagine today, because our consious selves have different levels. In those days people didn't lie, at least in the sense of trying to deceive someone, they actually believed whatever they were saying. Communication did not equal manipulation. Most Christian tales point to the serpant and the garden of Eden as the first deception. I thin you mean eliminate in your post, but there is an early group, the Illuminati , and also the Book of Enoch has reference to it, that the Garden of Eden is a storey of mankinds change from a vegetable state to more awareness state. Mixed with this is the concept of re-incarnations. Let's skip to communication equals manipulation. 
Christ was an initiate of  both Sufi esoteric mystism, and Egyptian philosophy. His gift was an increase in people's awareness that all living things contained God and nobody owns the keys. His re- incarnation, excuse me resurrection , or whatever ground hog storey you want to consider, typifies Eygyptian philosophy. Fast forward 500 years when Rome is falling apart and a bunch dudes are meeting at Nice. "Hey we need to write the Bible" , but we can't put this Book of Enoch stuff in it would mean we are not a direct link with God.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

O.O I actually did not know the OT came from the Egyptians. Learn something new every day! Cool. I like the Egyptian stories, fascinating.  I did know that Moses had written much of the bible.
Huh!!! so the rewrite of the Romans was the bases of the NT. I see!
Hey thanks. I'll have to check out some history if I can find any. Curious now.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> What do you mean about him practising the OT?  Does that mean he doesn't believe in Jesus as the Messiah and he still practises making animal sacrifices?  Sounds more like an old fashioned Jew.


He's from Ukraine, that's what he told me once that he learned the OT, but he didn't elaborate on it. No, I think he believes in Jesus, I'm mean I didn't ask him. But now my curiosity is raised, I will, he's in in another hour.
I work in a primarily Jewish doc hospital, I never know much about Jews until I worked here either.
I was raise Catholic. that's pretty much all I know. I do not practice anything however and will never be Catholic.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> You can't just take one verse and hang your hat on that when it comes to Bible study.  You have to look at all the rest of them as well and part of the reason is that much of his words were by way of parables and examples as well as references back to the OT.  The Jews of that era were very aware that (in their opinion) he was making claims of divinity and that's why they took him before the Roman governor.  If he had just been giving them advice on how to get along with one another, it wouldn't have been such a problem for them.
> 
> 
> Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"[SUP]4
> ...



I agree Debby,

I still do not believe there is a better way to live than what Jesus laid out in the bible.  But one thing I also believe, is that the bible is "at least" supposed to be one Word.  And read as such.  In any book it isn't smart to take words out of context, as if it's written right, the words surrounding it are included
 in the Author's meaning.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

rt3 said:


> The Old Testament was copied by the Egyptian priest Moses, from The Book of the Dead and other Egyptian teachings. So
> they copied a folklore from the Isis and Osiris stories about being set in a boat as a baby, Osiris sealed in a box and each put out to water. The Old Testament is a storey that tells about the evolution on mankind both physically and on the consious level. It is hard to imagine today, because our consious selves have different levels. In those days people didn't lie, at least in the sense of trying to deceive someone, they actually believed whatever they were saying. Communication did not equal manipulation. Most Christian tales point to the serpant and the garden of Eden as the first deception. I thin you mean eliminate in your post, but there is an early group, the Illuminati , and also the Book of Enoch has reference to it, that the Garden of Eden is a storey of mankinds change from a vegetable state to more awareness state. Mixed with this is the concept of re-incarnations. Let's skip to communication equals manipulation.
> Christ was an initiate of  both Sufi esoteric mystism, and Egyptian philosophy. His gift was an increase in people's awareness that all living things contained God and nobody owns the keys. His re- incarnation, excuse me resurrection , or whatever ground hog storey you want to consider, typifies Eygyptian philosophy. Fast forward 500 years when Rome is falling apart and a bunch dudes are meeting at Nice. "Hey we need to write the Bible" , but we can't put this Book of Enoch stuff in it would mean we are not a direct link with God.




Where do you get the following:  
'the Garden of Eden is a storey of mankinds change from a vegetable state to more awareness state'

As for the resurrection story, maybe an early example of what we now call a NDE?

And the OT wasn't written by Moses or copied from anywhere that I ever heard.  Christian teaching is that the OT was written over hundreds of years by many different people.  In fact the whole Bible isn't really a single book so much as it is many books, with a common thread running through it and all pointing the Jews to how God should be worshipped and obeyed and to look forward to a Savior.

As for the Rome and Nice part, not sure about that but I did find this link:  http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/the-bible/history-of-the-bible/
where it says '

The first official list was insisted on at the Church Council of Carthage towards the end of the 3rd century AD – rather than at the Council of Nicaea, as is commonly thought.'


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

flowerchild said:


> He's from Ukraine, that's what he told me once that he learned the OT, but he didn't elaborate on it. No, I think he believes in Jesus, I'm mean I didn't ask him. But now my curiosity is raised, I will, he's in in another hour.
> I work in a primarily Jewish doc hospital, I never know much about Jews until I worked here either.
> I was raise Catholic. that's pretty much all I know. I do not practice anything however and will never be Catholic.





Maybe he's Russian Orthodox.  I don't know much about the Orthodox church but that would certainly be the right area for him to be practising that wouldn't it?  Maybe when he says he's practising the OT, maybe he's referring to keeping the original Saturday Sabbath as Jews do.

When I was in my 'searching' mode, the very idea of telling some guy about my 'sins' just creeped me out.  I felt that my sins were between me and God so the Catholic church wasn't on my radar at all at the time.

And just for the record, Moses did not write much of the Bible as it was written over a period of about a 1000 years.  http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/the-bible/history-of-the-bible/

And I'd seriously question the NT being a 'rewrite by the Romans'.  From the same link (the Bible Society)
'

During the 1st century AD, a collection of Christian Scriptures made up of accounts of the life of Jesus and letters of the apostle Paul;
The 2nd century AD saw a collection develop called ‘Gospel and Apostle’. ‘The Gospel’ was four accounts of the life of Jesus known as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. ‘Apostle’ was the collection of the letters written by Paul and, later, for writings by other apostles;
In the middle of the 2nd century AD, groups on the fringe of the Christian movement started to come up with their own gospels and letters. This forced the mainstream Church to define which works were part of the New Testament;
The first official list was insisted on at the Church Council of Carthage towards the end of the 3rd century AD – rather than at the Council of Nicaea, as is commonly thought.'


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

Good point Denise.
But then if you think about the Quran, there is no chronologic order of things, there is no story. It's a chant. So how can this be just one word or even bases for a religion that is supposed to be followed?


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

You mean how can the Quran, or the bible be one Word Debby.  Wasn't sure what you meant?


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

I have heard that the Quran isn't really a 'story' type book so much as it is a collection of definitive statements but beyond that I'm really not in a position to comment on it.

However, regarding the Bible, I think today Christians refer to it as the Word of God because of its inspired (and inspirational) status.  Maybe it would be like referring to 'the family of Man' as in we're talking about a whole bunch of families that taken together are accounted for as 'the family of Man'.  Does that make any sense?

The Word of God is actually a whole lot of 'words inspired by God to teach people about Him'.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> I have heard that the Quran isn't really a 'story' type book so much as it is a collection of definitive statements but beyond that I'm really not in a position to comment on it.
> 
> However, regarding the Bible, I think today Christians refer to it as the Word of God because of its inspired (and inspirational) status.  Maybe it would be like referring to 'the family of Man' as in we're talking about a whole bunch of families that taken together are accounted for as 'the family of Man'.  Does that make any sense?
> 
> The Word of God is actually a whole lot of 'words inspired by God to teach people about Him'.



Yes Debby Here's an easy read, although I just did the first two pages, but I found it really interesting from Flowerchild

http://clearquran.com/index.html


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

Thanks Denise.  I read the first couple as well but I think I'll bookmark it and browse periodically.  But I'm a little annoyed at you my dear and at Flowerchild!  As if I don't have a long enough reading list!  Harrumph.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

Just another addition to my post to you, Debby I was taught Jesus was the Word of God incarnate, the bible was the "written" Word of God, and the Holy Spirit was the interpreter of the Word.  I was taught triune God, all God, but each also separate in there "parts" .  I could relate because I feel I am 3 parts, well, sometimes more than one personality, LOL, but my physical/body, my spirit, and my soul.  Not meaning I am a god, but meaning that the bible did say he created us in their image.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 20, 2015)

I gotta run ,but I asked him, he's Orthodox Catholic. But he says he fled his country many years ago and now doesn't care about his country. Says it's too slow, lol.


----------



## Debby (Jan 20, 2015)

I learned the same things Denise.  

But here's something that Christians typically ignore.  Did you know that Jesus said that 'we are gods'.  Yes he did, and he did it here:  John 10:34
International Standard Version
Jesus replied to them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said, "You are gods"'?



Psalm 82:   

*6*“I said, ‘You are “gods”;you are all sons of the Most High.’*7*But you will die like mere mortals;you will fall like every other ruler.”



So don't let anybody talk down to you Your Highness!


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

Ok, here's what my English Standard Version says, which I'm not saying is wrong or right k:

*John 10:34English Standard Version (ESV)*

 [SUP]34 [/SUP]Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 

Isn't that a possessive apostraphe?

Also, on the other verses:


*Psalm 82 English Standard Version (ESV)*

*Rescue the Weak and Needy*

*A Psalm of Asaph.*


When I read this I see God "reaming" this bunch.  The g is not capitalized so I am thinking they call themselves gods.

82 God has taken his place in the divine council;
    in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
[SUP]2 [/SUP]“How long will you judge unjustly
    and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
[SUP]3 [/SUP]Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
    maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]Rescue the weak and the needy;
    deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”


 [SUP]5 [/SUP]They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
    they walk about in darkness;
    all the foundations of the earth are shaken.


 [SUP]6 [/SUP]I said, “You are gods,
    sons of the Most High, all of you;
[SUP]7 [/SUP]nevertheless, like men you shall die,
    and fall like any prince.”[SUP][a][/SUP]


 [SUP]8 [/SUP]Arise, O God, judge the earth;
    for you shall inherit all the nations!

the verse in red is different then the one in ESV.  That's where I get very concerned about translations, it's another confusion.  But it is still not a capital which the bibles I've read are usually careful about that.  Again, it's in our interpretation.  Also by saying we are sons, or they were, is true if you believe, because God created all according to the bible.  So sons yes, prodigal sons, maybe


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

Debbie you need to read more than the bible
here is a list of works that lack official inspiration
Dead Sea Scrolls
all the Cathederals in Europe with Gothic design
John Milton . Paradise lost
Dantes inferno 
Byron, Keats and Shelly
Bacon and Newton who both practiced alchemy and esoteric mystism
the Egyptian Book of the Dead


i could go on but I fear it would be fruitless , your quotes will only lead you in circles


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

If I read all those books I'd be more confused then anything.  I respect the fact you've read so many books, I've always thought that made people smarter, and I sort of put them on a pedestal.  But I'm ok too, having not read as many and honestly, I get brain-overload pretty easy.  And just maybe, we "don't need" to read all those books.  If we "want" to, that's another thing.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

It is important to remember to read things that communication=information.  Not communication=manipulation 

for ever quote in the holly beblie there is a contradiction and at least one misquote.


----------



## Warrigal (Jan 20, 2015)

Debby said:


> Freedom of speech?  Religion?



Passionate opposition. My freedom of speech.

Not kidding, Debby. 
There are some appalling publications out there designed to push certain ideas that lead to abuse of naïve people seeking spirituality. 

One evening we had someone come to our church to spruik the "Toronto Blessing" which provokes hysterical behaviour in susceptible people. After one young woman collapsed on the floor in an apparent faint, one of the elder women stood up, stepped over her body and exited the building muttering something like "That's it, I'm leaving". The rest of us were feeling much the same way but were too polite to do anything about it. We've never had a repeat performance in our church but in a neighbouring church a lot of casting out of demons went on, including some involving very young children with behaviour problems.

I have been passionately opposed to biblical fundamentalism and the kind of evangelism that promotes it for all of my adult life and I do bin literature that is aligned with it but not in someone else's church though, so while I would want to bin the material that NWLady saw, I wouldn't actually do it.

People assume that all Christians have the same politics, philosophy, values and beliefs. We don't. We can be as passionate about things we perceive as being wrong as anyone else on this planet. And we can also turn a blind eye when it suits us. We're human, and therefore fallible, just like anyone else. What we hope will save us from ourselves is the example set by Jesus of Nazareth, who is our guiding light and moral compass. Divine or not? It doesn't matter to me. Show me a better ideal to follow or just leave me alone to get on with my life and I'll leave you alone too, but if someone opens a conversation, I will always join in.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

Forgot, to say it is all someone saying Christ said something, and never an original quote. Which has already been pointed out but somehow needs repeating again ....... And again ......  And again ...... And


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 20, 2015)

Well, I think that if the bible brings comfort, and peace to someone, I am all for it.  It's the misuse of the bible that upsets me.  I don't make fun of it because just because I have lost my faith in it, doesn't make it an untruth.


----------



## rt3 (Jan 20, 2015)

Yes the truth IS out there Skully.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 21, 2015)

I was doing a bit of browsing and found a pretty good site explaining the History of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The book of Giants seems a bit far fetch and almost syfy-ish.
http://www.gnosis.org/library/scroll.htm


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 21, 2015)

Yes...  I think there was a lot of smoking and chewing of herb back then too....  lol!


----------



## rt3 (Jan 21, 2015)

Plants used to cause altered states of consious were definitely involved. Probably not as much as today. Also seizures etc. however it doesn't change much. IF a group of people did stuff because their leader had words in the other world that changed history does't make the history any less real even by western interpretation.


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 21, 2015)

> Well, I think that if the bible brings comfort, and peace to someone, I am all for it.  It's the misuse of the bible that upsets me.  I don't make fun of it because just because I have lost my faith in it, doesn't make it an untruth.


Denise, I agree with you. For many the bible is the ultimate way of life and brings them much peace.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 21, 2015)

This is the value of most religions.. it gives people something to lean on, and peace that everything is in someone else's hands.. (GOD).  I personally would rather be the one in charge of my own life, taking the credit OR the blame for all events.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 21, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Yes...  I think there was a lot of smoking and chewing of herb back then too....  lol!



Maybe so, but there's always been a need with "most" people to believe in God, something to save us from ourselves and each other.  If you look at when Jesus came, it was horrible times, more horrible then we now complain about, at least in this country.  Maybe Jesus wasn't God, but He gave people hope.  I believe peace of mind can go on no matter the outside circumstances.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 21, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> This is the value of most religions.. it gives people something to lean on, and peace that everything is in someone else's hands.. (GOD).  I personally would rather be the one in charge of my own life, taking the credit OR the blame for all events.



If it ever came to having to lean on a person or God, thanks, but I'll lean on God.


----------



## Denise1952 (Jan 21, 2015)

flowerchild said:


> Denise, I agree with you. For many the bible is the ultimate way of life and brings them much peace.



Yes, and many christians I've met were actually "following" Christ (no one is perfect of course, still human) and the New testament (I mean they were following Him and the NT).


----------



## flowerchild (Jan 21, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> This is the value of most religions.. it gives people something to lean on, and peace that everything is in someone else's hands.. (GOD).  I personally would rather be the one in charge of my own life, taking the credit OR the blame for all events.


You are right about that Denise. Hope is a good thing, hang on and hope gets us thru the tough times!


----------



## flowerchild (Jul 21, 2015)

nwlady said:


> Maybe so, but there's always been a need with "most" people to believe in God, something to save us from ourselves and each other.  If you look at when Jesus came, it was horrible times, more horrible then we now complain about, at least in this country.  Maybe Jesus wasn't God, but He gave people hope.  I believe peace of mind can go on no matter the outside circumstances.



You and me both!


----------



## Underock1 (Jul 21, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> One has to be leery of religions who's dogma and rulings can change by a bunch of men getting together and voting on it..   If MAN can change the tenants of a religion, how much is divinely commanded?   In other words.. if man can change it, God didn't make it.  Most organized religions were invented by man.... for MAN.. and I mean that in the universal and gendered sense.. and like most things man does... for power and for profit.



_All _religions were invented by man. I agree with everything else you say.


----------



## Shalimar (Jul 21, 2015)

Actually, some of the Israeli Jews bombed all manner of innocent people last summer. Accused of some war crimes also, and attempts to assassinate unfriendly press. Exactly what century is Warren Jeffs stuck in?  My own experience of ritual abuse was sanctified by pseudo Christian biblical travesty stuff. People will twist any religion, or political base for their own evil ends, if so motivated. We are a violent species, finding all manner of reasons to abuse and kill each other.


----------



## Underock1 (Jul 21, 2015)

People need to feel that there is some control over the accidents of nature. Having a God, gives them someone they can call on to "fix" things. The problem is that the God, ( whichever one that may be ), that they look to for help is just the imaginary creation of another human being. Given the thousands of different Gods that have come and gone, it is obvious, at least to me, that even if there is a God, no one has a clue about its nature, what it thinks, or what it wants, if anything.
Acceptance is the key. "Everything that has a beginning has an ending. _Make your peace with that, _and all will be well".


----------



## 3horsefarm (Jul 21, 2015)

You ROCK, Underock!


----------



## Underock1 (Jul 21, 2015)

3horsefarm said:


> You ROCK, Underock!



At 82, that is one of the main activities. Thank you for the complement, 3horse. 
                                                    :hatoff:


----------

