Author Topic: Islam : Cult?  (Read 883 times)

nibs

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
  • Karma: 1
  • aco forever
Re: Islam : Cult?
« Reply #30 on: May 07, 2006, 10:30:50 AM »
So you believe that the word of God that Muhammad received may have been an altered word of the angel? If so, doesn't that go against what Islam is? I'm not sure I'm just asking.

i'm not saying it was altered.  i believe it was unaltered.  that does not mean i understand everything i need to know about the message and the purpose and nature of that message.
islam is a principle, or a group of principles; and those principles are inherently true.  the qu'ran describes those principles both directly and through allegory; and would be true even if the angel gabriel had not delivered it. 
and i do believe that the angel gabriel delivered it.

Quote
Even if you replace Jesus with The Word in te letters of Paul I still disagree with much of what Paul says.

you've touched on those disagreements before.  i agree with you that paul's messages were the ideas of man and a message for the times.  my concern was worshipping a man, or separating elements of god into their own entities;  looking at it metaphorically eliminates that separation.   
 
Quote
What with this whole worshipping a man business? Know one worships a man in Christainty. We worship God. The same God that created the Universe. The same God that lives inside each of us.

i don't disagree with worshipping god.  i don't disagree with your ideas here.
but i hear people pray to jesus, or in christ jesus name.  i see images of a baby, a man and that man's mother.  catholics pray to saints and mary.  the catholic church claims that is an intermediary between christians and god.  people say that christ will return and rule on earth for some period of time.  suggesting that during this period he will be worshipped as god.  these are the ideas that i disagree with. 

Quote
And the same God that entered Mary's womb and told the people how to live. That is how Christians see it. Jesus for us wasn't some guy who the Lord spoke to. He was the Lord in flesh form for 33 years or whatever it was, but he existed long before those 33 years years and long after.

i took a closer look at the gospel of john, and it does state clearly that the word was god.  thus it does imply that jesus was god incarnate in the flesh.  this is not idea that i accept.

and thus i was wrong, for that is not an idea that i can agree with; even metaphorically.

Quote
How do you know the church just made up the step bother theory? And if the Church made it up and changed the Bible then why wouldn't they leave that out? Also, just like John there is no roof that Matthew himself wrote that (just getting the info out there).

they couldn't change the book of matthew as it existed before the catholic church was formed.  people knew the gospel of matthew before the catholic church.

Quote
The verse you quoted still shows no proof that they were younger brothers and sisters or that they were Mary's children. It says that He was the son of Mary, but not that the others were. The Bible also never explains what happened to Joseph, leading many to believe he was a much older man who died when Jesus was still rather young. It is very plausible that he was an older man with children who had lost his wife and needed a younger woman to mother his children and that's how he was arranged to Mary. I am not saying I know for sure that this is the case. I am not so bold that I can pretend to know something like this for certain.

the reason this is a debate is because the catholic church insists that mary was always a virgin.  the perpetual virgin.  otherwise noone would actually care how james and jesus were related.  the point that i was making earlier was that as brothers they lived in the same household, and surely james own understanding of jesus' nature should be favored over others and not discredited.  whether or not they shared the same mother is only an issue of contention for catholics, who pray to mary and insist she was always a virgin.

the catholic church has invented numerous theories to support their doctrine which could easily be proven as blasphemous.   

are jesus and james even brothers at all if they have both different fathers and mothers as you suggest?  these ideas of the catholic church and the orthodox church suggest that matthew is the one who is wrong for even suggesting that jesus has any brothers and sisters
« Last Edit: May 07, 2006, 10:38:05 AM by nibs »
"a four letter word is going out to every single enemy" - kam