Naughty potty-mouth Robert! With language like that, you'll never make Jesus' team
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Islam: The Straight Path to God
1992 by Muslim America
Introduction
[This introduction was added to the 1978 manuscript for presentation as an
address to a congregation of Christians in Jumada'l-Ula 1404 (March 1984).]
I come to you in the Name of that Benevolent, Most Merciful God Whom you and we worship and serve, and Whose Name in the Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew and other semitic languages is ALLAH; so in Arabic I say "Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Raheem," which means "In the Name of God, the Benevolent, the Most Merciful;" and in His Name I greet you by saying "as-salaamu 'alaikum," which means "God's peace for you."
You have invited me here to represent to you a Faith which belongs utterly to God and not to men, which He in His Wisdom has entrusted to men for their benefit and as a guide for the conduct of their daily affairs. God has then enabled me to know of and to bring here some brief fraction of that faith in one God, who offers salvation to all human kind. It is God therefore Who has created this occasion, making me responsible to Him for expressing to you some of His guidance as recognized by muslims. I ask God to enable me to fulfill this responsibility and to protect me and you from the harm of any error I may make.
We know from the teachings of Islam, and hold as a tenet of faith, that Jesus, whom we call "the Word of God," proclaimed God's Unity and Singularity before he proclaimed anything else; and that he called upon his companions and followers to announce to all humanity an everlasting covenant with God into which every person, Jew or Gentile, could enter unto salvation. We therefore recognize your movement as founded on true Christian premises, and the Law of Islam requires the muslims to aid you in your religious endeavors arising from those premises.
It is a sad consequence of history that both muslims and Christians have forgotten this for the most part, for both were fully informed; however, it is human nature to be forgetful, and it is a blessed thing when one of us can remind another one of us of some benefit that God has bestowed on us mutually. This I do, here today, and note that Islam and the muslims were made known to your spiritual ancestors in the pages of the Holy Bible and again by the testimony of Jesus, just as you are made known to us by the words of the Holy Qur'an and by the testimony of the learned men of the religious sciences in Islam.
Islam: The Everlasting Covenant
A great deal of what is today called Islam did not come from the prophet Muhammad sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam or his companions. This is not a unique aspect of Islam, rather whenever God has made His Law known, it has been quickly confounded with a religion of some other design. This is what Jesus 'alaihi as-salaam taught of the Pharisees and scribes, who with their tradition sought to set the Law aside; and this is the heritage of Christendom as well, which adopted in the first few centuries a number of alien attributes. So also have the muslims elaborated the demands of faith, and we see that practices specifically set apart, as well as some pertaining to other cultures, have been added to Islam and given the force of tradition. Thus we see that in the time of the prophet, the public dress of the women of Medina was not unlike the semi-nudity we see in the world today -- yet only among the faithful was more modest dress the rule, and the veil was not required of the muslims at large but only of the household of the prophet. So it is that practices required of the few have been demanded as well of the many, while the weightier matters of law and faith have been obscured by the mass of ritual.
But Islam as originally set forth has been miraculously preserved intact -- beneath the glaze of historical distortion the Law and Tradition remain. While the Holy Bible attests to the crime of the ancients in tampering with the Holy Writ, the changes in the record of Islam consist of addition alone: the actual and original texts of the Law and the true reports of the Prophet's words have come down to us unaltered. It is not that the realities of faith and Law have been lost from the Holy Bible -- for they decidedly have not -- but that the clear practice of Islam is so readily brought forth from the morass of pious presentments.
Islam arises as practical religion from that unique quality of humanity which places into its care the whole of God's creation. Humanity has possession of the universe in trust, to do with as it will: it has been entrusted and the trust will not be revoked; and humanity individually and collectively have accepted that trust as irrevocable. But man is accountable for that, and this is his burden. To abdicate responsibility is a disaster of unimaginable proportion, a heedlessness beyond comparison because the trust is of such awesome magnitude and the consequences of failure are so immeasurably devastating for those involved.
For man has the capacity to make of the world a semblance of paradise or a hell; and in fact does, in distinct measure, and there exist side-by-side in the world those whose lives are paradisical and those whose lives are hellacious.
This is not to say that this world in which we live is paradise or even that paradise is contained within it -- for this world is accurately described as "a prison for the faithful and a paradise for the deniers of faith." Rather paradise is a separate creation -- the other creation wholly in the care The Almighty. It is not given over to the ravages of mankind's willfulness but is a realm in which all may enjoy the peace of accepting His gracious invitation to dwell therein. And the way of accepting that invitation lies in the way we care for that which has been entrusted to us, which is the world in all it contains.
For the responsible, the consequent which arises from their responsible care is residing in the Gardens of Paradise. For others, the invitation departs from view, becoming increasingly remote and inaccessible as they themselves become removed from responsible pathways. This responsibility to proper care of the trust is called piety; it is demanded in some degree by every religion of every worshipper.
Essential to proper care of man's trust is his relationship with his Creator by which he receives His Guidance. Without the constant help of God, man becomes enmeshed in his awesome responsibility so that the magnitude of his charge along with his utter incapacity become manifest to him, leading to the dark of despair. Or the pleasures that God has provided for His creatures in His kindness take on a greater importance than the Provider or the trust man has accepted from Him. And with surprising frequency men abandon the path of rectitude for the sake of that which seems to them more attractive.
It is thus a function of religion to keep man's worldly focus on the fact of his accountability, to enable him to sense the Presence of his Lord and to be receptive to His Guidance and inspiration. These are the matters which tradition has labeled piety, and it is this that most call religion. In truth, however, it is that awesome trust that demands that man seek God's Guidance; it is the care of that trust in the Presence of God that constitutes the demand of piety; and it is the fulfillment of that responsibility to be God's servants according to His pleasure that characterizes the pious.
But the tragedy to which mankind alone is heir is that of failing to accept God's invitation to be His. For of a surety we belong only to Him, we are each and all like everything else the exclusive possession of God. But we are also ourselves a part of that creation which He has entrusted to our care -- our responsibility includes humanity as well, and each of us is indeed his brother's keeper; we have been entrusted with and keep possession of ourselves, and must choose for ourselves a path to balance desire and duty.
Thus man encounters the risk of choosing for himself the bad in preference to the good -- and it is his blessing and his bane that he recognizes the good he ought to choose. So to protect us from that most tragic error of failing to choose God in preference to anything and everything else, God hides Himself and discloses Himself only to those who will choose Him. For this, the most Merciful Creator provides for man pathways of varying clarity so as to lead them gradually into that Truth which is His Inescapable Presence -- lest the faint of heart should perish or the strong mistakenly resist -- and what differs among the religions is the facility with which the people of each can sense and delight in that Presence.
For each is given the measure of his satisfaction, and is led in the pathway that will bring him nearest to his Lord; and each of His pathways possesses an end in clarity, each fulfills its promise to lead to the Presence of God those who faithfully seek Him. Such is the providence of God that there is no door barring the sincere from Him and that the light of each path is shown to those who seek its End.
Thus it is that muslims do not deny the truth contained in the Holy Bible; indeed, muslims recognize that it describes the path of seeking the guidance of God. For a muslim, the Torah and the Gospel are God's designs by which He enables the Children of Israel and the followers of Jesus to care for their responsibilities: as the trust was placed with all humanity to respect or to abuse so also are the Holy Scriptures a statement of the design of God and His Will concerning those of His servants who read them. Islam, which pursues the example of Muhammad and the Message of God he brought, bears witness as well to the truth that was given to Moses and the Word of the Messiah Jesus: and attests that the pathways of rectitude are available as well to followers of faiths besides Islam.
There are, of course, those who reject the ways of faith, and they are entitled -- God permits them -- to do so. How they then proceed to fulfill whatever they perceive as their responsibilities may or may not accord with the true nature of reality; but however much pleasure they seem to derive from their intercourse with the life of the world, they have lost the dimension of the eternal Presence of God: and heedless of His invitation to Himself, their pleasure is made all the more shallow in that it has an abrupt and unavoidable end. In fact, it is the lament that the delights of the world will perish that states the torment of the inhabitants of hell -- for the Presence of God has no end, and it is that Holy Presence that delights the hearts of those who enter the Garden by walking on His pathways.
Islam: The Clear Path
Man's relations to his Lord that constitute the beginnings of walking in His Presence are the essence of simplicity. We must confess the Reality of God and the fact that He has sent to us men who have taught us of His ways. We must call upon the Creator in earnest, and establish that practice as a regular feature of our lives. We must be generous, spending the dues of the bounty He has given us and sharing it with others. We must fast from the pleasures of the flesh to maintain ourselves beyond the influence of desire. And we must prepare to seek Him as Pilgrims, to abandon all that is familiar with no expectation of return, for the quest of reaching His Presence and gazing upon His Face.
These are the commonalities of the pathways of faith, the links of the chain with which we bind ourselves to God; and if we fulfill these, then God will enable us to carry on that greater responsibility, to care for His creation that He has entrusted to us. But the question that has perennially troubled humanity is the question of specifics in these five observances: what constitutes prayer? What are the dues of wealth? Where is the line which separates responsible renunciation from unnecessary asceticism? And to where should the pilgrim repair in search of the proof of God's Presence?
But even more than these, and underlying any success that we might obtain in those works, is the question of witness and faith how does helpless man, who is born naked, ignorant and hungry, attain to the knowledge of God, to certainty concerning his Maker, and to communion with those God has sent, the example they have left, and the faith and witness they have borne?
For the matter of witness is not so slight as to pronounce a credo of faith, although this may suffice to enter one onto God's pathways. But rather that which He has taught us of the ways He has made for us -- through the example and teaching of those He has sent to walk among us -- that also is essential to the proper care of that which has been entrusted to us. And in a very vital sense, these teachings of the written Word of God, these articles of faith and practice, of Law and custom, these religious canons, are our salvation from the dread of failure in caring for God's creation which has been entrusted to us all with our varying capacities for understanding.
For who can testify that humanity unaided by God has properly cared for even itself? Let alone the soil and the trees and the birds, how has mankind abused itself, with war, captivity and greed? And where is the plan of human design that enables us to resolve our disputes? But within the Scriptures of every faith ordained by Almighty God, there are contained His basic designs for human harmony and responsible care of the creation. In these designs the five fundamentals of witness, prayer, dues, fast and pilgrimage are the means of establishing personal submission to His Will, acceptance of His design; and in the pursuit of God's acceptance and application of His design reside the ways of peace and success with responsibility. This path of responsibility entails observance of His proprieties and judgment by His criteria -- not the formulation of standards and values apart from those that He has woven into the fabric of creation.
Islam itself as practical religion arises from humanity's fundamental responsibility -- but nowhere is it stated that only the muslims apply these concepts to life. Rather the faith of Muhammad describes the whole of humanity as the trustee of God in the earth: and those who keep faith with that trust are responsible only to God, according to the pathway in which He leads each to Himself.
Islam is the path of complete clarity not an end but rather the entire path lies clear and undisguised. The five fundamentals of faith are clarified in Islam, to easily comprehensible duties by which to seek God's Guidance: and when these are faithfully pursued, the pathway of clarity is open and leads directly to God.
The muslim witness entails observance of God's Will as expressed in the Holy Qur'an and by Muhammad and his example and through his teaching. The positive way of seeking the Guidance of God is described in detail -- acceptable prayer and how it is established; proper dues and how they are to be spent; the necessary fast and elements of pilgrimage -- all are set forth as clear practice with their fruit the guidance of God. The Law and Judgment of The Almighty are readily intelligible to the reader of the Qur'an; and while readers of the Holy Scriptures may derive therefrom the true ideals, the Qur'an describes practical applications: the muslim need only apply them.
The social responsibility of the muslim extends over the community of all the faithful; over all women without husbands who have children; over all children when they are out of their homes, or within a house when asked; over the aged and the oppressed, the weak and the destitute, and the illiterate and the insane; and, possessed of a prior claim, over his own household and family. Similarly the accords are forded by Islam to people of other faiths are clearly written and easily comprehensible -- that which the muslims are charged in support of the people of Scripture is not a mere expedient but a matter of Law. Yet the focus of the muslim's attention is his own observance of duty, his immediate personal conduct and manner, and his relationship and covenant with his Lord -- according to clear and recognizable, well-known and establish guidelines for every human activity.
In Islam the right is clearly distinguishable from error, the path is clearly defined and free of crookedness, and the ends of every pathway whether of righteousness or of heedlessness are clear and in view and undeniable: the follower of Islam has only to choose the right path or the error.
But in Islam the danger is greater that one might choose the tragedy of failing his responsibility -- for often error appears the ease, while truth appears surrounded by trial and trouble. The path of responsibility is not always easy to follow, although it is always less difficult than the consequence of pursuing error. Accordingly the muslim is told to struggle with patience and insight to enhance his own salvation -- and reminded at every hour of the day that he will account for himself to his Lord.
The trust of man to care for the world is only fulfilled through God the path of that fulfillment of necessity leads toward Him. And as the Presence of God knows no end, so also are we ultimately and always His possession that returns to Him. Yet on every path are His Signs, directing toward the ways He would have us choose -- and it is proof of His love for humanity that He continues to allow Himself to be known, and His Unity shown, and His Mercy and Compassion enthroned.
And praise belongs to ALLAH, may He preserve us from error!
Perhaps people would like to know what they're talking about ...
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
1 Posted on 09/20/2001 12:39:54 PDT by ankaboot
What I would like to see is a point-by-point refutation of radical Islam by moderate Muslims (with references to specific passages in the Qu'ran).
I'm getting exasperated with the generic bromides being tossed out by moderates (who appear superficially to be unwilling or unable to confront the radicals).
2 Posted on 09/20/2001 12:57:07 PDT by amordei
Perhaps you or others might find this interesting. I ran across it a year or two ago in my learning about Islam. It is basically a letter written by an African concerning Islam titled, An African Asks Some Disturbing Questions of Islam
3 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:00:55 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Thus it is that muslims do not deny the truth contained in the Holy Bible; indeed, muslims recognize that it describes the path of seeking the guidance of God. For a muslim, the Torah and the Gospel are God's designs by which He enables the Children of Israel and the followers of Jesus to care for their responsibilities
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Muslims have borrowed from the rationalist Bible critics in saying that the Bible is full of errors and is unreliable as an historical document.
4 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:05:20 PDT by allend
A thousand pardons if my previous post offends. That was not my intention. Seriously. I did not realize until I read your comments that you might be Muslim. What does ankaboot mean? Again my apologies. Perhaps you would like to comment of the letter however. I will listen.
5 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:06:10 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
We therefore recognize your movement as founded on true Christian premises, and the Law of Islam requires the muslims to aid you in your religious endeavors arising from those premises.
Can we have a good example of this aid?
6 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:10:45 PDT by AlGone2001
Wow...what a blurry read. Lots of words are needed I guess to try to convince us of the old notion that "all roads lead to God" and nobody has a monoploy on truth.
"The muslim witness entails observance of God's Will as expressed in the Holy Qur'an and by Muhammad and his example and through his teaching
If the Islamic faith is the "same" as the Judeo-Christian faith, please explain the problems of contradiction between the koran and the Bible. Jesus said that He was the way and the no one sees the Father except through Him. Muslims don't accept that truth, but essentially believe that a life lied righteously rewards in seeing the Father (For the sake of being brief, I'm not even going to open up the topic of original sin here. The fact that you carry a keyring testifies that you don't believe that people are essentially good, so let's not go there!). The Bible says that we are not saved by our works, but by faith, and this not of ourselves (it's faith God gives us). This contradicts the teachings of the koran.
1)Truth about reality is knowable
2)The opposite of truth is false (the law of non-contradiction). Avicenna said; "All who deny the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until they declare that being beaten and burned is not the same as not being beaten and burned".
Both the Bible and the koran cannot be true as they contradict each other.
So, this mumbo-jumbo that all roads lead to Rome and to God is nonsense. There is absolute truth. The road is narrow and straight and few will find it.
Smooth sales pitch there neighbor, but I'm not buying.
baa
7 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:42:47 PDT by woollyone
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Muslims have borrowed from the rationalist Bible critics in saying that the Bible is full of errors and is unreliable as an historical document.
The Qur'an instructs us to seek knowledge of Scripture from those who read it. Our luminaries have concluded that this indicates those who read it and subsequently accepted Islam, of whom there was no shortage 1400 years ago and of whom there is ... somewhat of a shortage now, I know of very few other than myself. From the time of the Crusades until now, there have been very, very few such authorities in the millennial muslim world, and as a result much ignorance is popularly believed among the old world's muslims.
I read Scripture laboriously in Hebrew and Arabic and the New Testament in Greek. Like English translations from all Semitic tongues, I find translations of Scripture unreliable and never fully rendering what is in the original tongues.
But those many muslims ignorant of Scripture who follow the "rationalists" are not "the muslims" and do not reflect the view of muslim scholarship concerning Scripture.
One of the most illuminating views I've seen from other scholarship has been "The Promise of the Land" by Rabbi Moshe Weinfeld, 1993, University of California Press, ISBN 0-520-07510-2. Rabbi Weinfeld discusses the very real problems experienced in Palestine in demarcing the tribal territories on the basis of Biblical texts. They are very inconsistent, and are not regarded in all cases as historically accurate accounts.
Scripture is one tapestry, it all comes from one God. Where there are inconsistencies, these are the result of human tampering or forgetfulness. It's quite a story, I have found it fascinating for my entire adult life. It saddens me that so many muslims do not realize that Scripture and the history of the kingdom of David, as well as the Qur'an (which is a Recitation) and our Arabic history, is also part of our heritage.
I think Americans will not have the problem of an inability to see things from other than a Jewish or Arab perspective, we are all children of Noah and Noah had three sons, not just one.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
8 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:50:44 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
oops
S/B "a life lived righteously"...sorry.
baa
9 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:52:20 PDT by woollyone
Great post, but you won't convince the bigots who seek to use a national tragedy to condemn an entire religion
they don't like, and in doing so take the focus off the real issue - finding and punishing the guilty terrorists.
They will also say that, despite hundreds of newspaper stories and TV interviews where American
Muslims denounced the 9/11 attacks, Muslims have not "renounced" the attacks to their satisfaction.
They are sick people - seeking to hide their bigotry behind a national tragedy.
was-salaam,
10 Posted on 09/20/2001 13:59:41 PDT by Storm Orphan
We therefore recognize your movement as founded on true Christian premises, and the Law of Islam requires the muslims to aid you in your religious endeavors arising from those premises.
Can we have a good example of this aid?
I guess the following words "It is a sad consequence of history that both muslims and Christians have forgotten this ..." escaped your notice. I would surmise that the history has, too, for which you might consider how much your public education has informed you about one fifth of the human family.
The first example is of course the presence of Jewish and Christian tribes in Madina who were waiting for the revelation. They didn't go there, generations before, by accident, it's a rather out-of-the-way place. They accepted Islam, many of them, but those who did not were fully integrated into the body politic of Islam with their sovereignty, religion, properties, and bilateral relations intact. That they were later expelled from the peninsula -- with their properties and goods -- is more a function of treason than anything else, although there is a statement attributed to Muhammad that makes the Arabian peninsula unique in the world with its prohibition of the establishment of any religion other than Islam. Jews and Christians still carry on worship and services in Saudi Arabia today, but without steeples and bookstores -- not "established" with integrated institutions in the Arabian Peninsula.
However, outside "The Island" it was another story, as you will see in my discussion in another Thread, "Siyasa." The history is quite clear.
As for another example, we can start with the restoration of the site of the Temple in Jerusalem from being the local garbage dump when 'Umar received the keys of the city from the Patriarch of Jerusalem; and the repair and restoration of churches and synagogues in Jerusalem and throughout the muslim domains, from Gibraltar to China, during the first centuries of the Arab dispensation.
During the last three centuries? The empires erected on the ruins of religion have fallen in upon themselves, and that process set in after the death of 'Ali (thirty years after the death of Muhammad). The Arabian Nights stories are of the reign of Harun ar-Rashid, I believe, when poverty had been eliminated -- repeat, eliminated -- through the old world except catholic Europe, hospitals were invented with quarantine wards, inoculations, pharmacy, etc. This represents the last time I know of off-hand when muslims implemented Islam in their political institutions in any significant measure.
To use today's millennial muslim world as some kind of illustration of Islam is ludicrous in the extreme. That's a little like saying that America has free exercise of religion, as if the Mormons had not been hunted down like vermin for their practice of polygamy, completely abandoning freedom of conscience.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
11 Posted on 09/20/2001 14:12:41 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
A thousand pardons if my previous post offends.
Not even slightly.
That was not my intention. Seriously. I did not realize until I read your comments that you might be Muslim.
Seems to me that shouldn't make any difference, actually.
What does ankaboot mean?
It's the Arabic word for "spider." I think it's appropriate for the Web.
Perhaps you would like to comment on the letter however. I will listen.
Not really. There's nothing new there, it's the same old false representations from ignorant hostility and from knowing and calculated hostility. The first refugees from Makka during the early period went to Abysinnia, where they were received and protected by Negus Najjashi, the Christian king and patriarch. The record of the spread of Islam is perfectly clear, it's merely been hidden from Americans by interested parties -- including those who formulated that letter.
Whether the light reflected from someone's face is white or black has nothing whatever to do with skin color. I lived in far south Chicago for years, the only white family for miles in any direction. I'm completely at home in any American neighborhood and in most others as well. One day a sister flashed me a smile from thirty feet away that almost knocked me down. Whitest light I ever saw, I literally took a step backward and flinched. Some people never see that kind of thing, even from people with the same skin color as themselves.
Sadly.
Humanity's pretty special.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
12 Posted on 09/20/2001 14:52:36 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I must ask again; where is/was the AID? Try to be less wordy, and just tell us.
13 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:08:36 PDT by AlGone2001
ISLAM, THE STRAIGHT PATH TO GOD!
Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them (Q. 2:191), to murder them and treat them harshly (Q. 9:123), slay them (Q. 9: 5), fight with them, (Q. 8: 65 ) even if they are Christians and Jews, humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax (Q. 9: 29). Quran takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and tell clearly that no other religion except Islam is accepted (Q. 3: 85). It relegates those who disbelieve in Quran to hell (Q. 5: 11), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (Q. 9: 28). It orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (Q. 2: 193).
Better damn walk it or else, eh?
14 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:09:22 PDT by freedom9
but you won't convince the bigots
Name one...
15 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:09:54 PDT by AlGone2001
They have been crawling from the woodwork. Jim Robinson had to post a thread
calling for the end to too much anti-Islamic bigotry.
16 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:12:37 PDT by Storm Orphan
Lots of words are needed I guess to try to convince us of the old notion that "all roads lead to God" and nobody has a monoploy on truth.
You are of the opinion that death leads somewhere other than to God? You appear persuaded that you have an exclusive monopoly on truth, I don't think I'd waste my time trying to convince you otherwise.
If the Islamic faith is the "same" as the Judeo-Christian faith ...
What a quaint notion, "the Judeo-Christian faith." Could you illuminate it a little? Which faith is that?
The white supremacists down the street say that they are the true heirs of Abraham through Christ. I'm under the impression that the Jews I know have another view. In fact I haven't seen much in the way of any amalgam of Judaism, which is a religion of Law, and Christianity, which is a religion of expectation. Perhaps you can explain how Christmas and Easter are Jewish holidays.
Might I suggest that you start a Thread on it?
Muslims don't accept that truth, but essentially believe ...
It's pretty clear that you are utterly ignorant of what muslims believe.
Avicenna said ...
You mean Ibn Sina, father of pharmacology, I think, whose book -- the longest book ever written -- was the foundation of western medicine for a thousand years. He was muslim, as I recall. I don't remember reading that from him, but then I'm not a pharmacist.
Both the Bible and the koran cannot be true as they contradict each other.
I hear that a lot from people who don't read either one. I hear it even more from people who only read what they want to read in one or the other, and ignore the rest.
In my own experience, of reading both in their original languages, I've found remarkable consistency, so thorough and comprehensive that seemingly minor differences just about jump off the pages.
Like Jeremiah 8:8, which I haven't seen addressed yet by someone like you. Care to explain what it means, and what -- if not Scripture -- the "lying pens of the scribes" was writing?
... I'm not buying.
Good. I'm not selling.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
17 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:13:31 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Both the Bible and the koran cannot be true as they contradict each other.
Correct.
Jesus is either
1. The only way to the Father, or
2. A liar
He is the Lord of Creation. I'll choose answer 1. He can't be both the "only" way and "one" way.
18 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:14:03 PDT by AlGone2001
Well soon we will have to have a warning about jew bashing with all the Muslims becoming freeper for a day!
19 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:17:55 PDT by RnMomof7
To whom are you referring?
20 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:18:55 PDT by Storm Orphan
GUESS
21 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:20:27 PDT by RnMomof7
Perhaps you can explain how Christmas and Easter are Jewish holidays.
Actually, Easter is. The Jews know it as the Firstfruits of the Barley Harvest. It begins three days from the Shabbat.
Christ was resurrected on that day, and was without mistake referred to as the "firstfruits" of the dead.
Jews may not celebrate Christmas, and its date is very loosely placed (as it replaced Saturnalia), but we do know that in its origin, all the parties involved were either Jews or Angels.
Neither Holiday is celebrated in its true light, as we have made them a business. They should honestly be celebrated daily, as we make it our lifestyle to praise the Lord for Christ's birth, sinless life, death and resurrection.
22 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:20:30 PDT by AlGone2001
I note ankaboot has been a member longer than you.
23 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:20:40 PDT by Storm Orphan
Wonderful post! At this time more than any, it is vitally important that we, whether Christian, Agnostic, Atheist, Spiritual or Jew, stand together to assist the good, G-d fearing Muslims that have been terrorized and victimized by these same fundametalist terrorists. (I don't like refering to them as fundametal muslims if I don't have to because they have corrupted the true Muslim religion).
People's of all faiths need to be careful not to add to the victimization of innocent Muslims.
Many Middle Easterners in the USA are Christians who have left or fled the Middle East because in Islamic societies they were either directly persecuted or at best second class citizens. They have come to the West because they were longing for freedom and are absolutely loyal citizens, ready to defend their country as much as any other American. It would be a horrendous injustice to attack them verbally or physically just because they look Middle Eastern.
There are more than six million Muslims living in the USA today. They are largely normal people with hopes and fears, who just want to make a living, who work hard and honest to bring bread on the table and to allow their children to go to college. They also want to live in peace and would never think of committing terrorist acts. Most of them are themselves in utter shock as result of these atrocities. They have done nothing to deserve the hatred of other Americans. They are not guilty, and it is the duty of any upright, freedom loving person to stand up for them, even to give them shelter in their own homes, should others threaten to make them victims of self-appointed revenge.
The greatness of a society built on Christian values shows itself when it will not discriminate for any reason on the basis of race, culture or religion, even when attacked by some people from one specific group. America wants to be a champion of human rights around the world, and needs to make sure, she holds herself accountable to the same standards.
For Christians particularly, we have the command of our Lord to love our neighbor as ourselves; any neighbor, not only those who are like us. But we are called to particularly care for those who are disadvantaged or discriminated against and to stand up for those who can't defend themselves. And at this time this might well include Muslims in our neighborhood who are faced with and might suffer from unreflected anger of other Americans.
Not ALL Muslims are terrorists (plea)
24 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:21:05 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
So I take it that you do not believe that one specific individual wrote that letter of his own experience.?
25 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:23:26 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Do you post anything that isn't stupid?
26 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:23:48 PDT by OWK
I think Americans will not have the problem of an inability to see things from other than a Jewish or Arab perspective, we are all children of Noah and Noah had three sons, not just one.
Good point, and I agree with MUCH of what you say!
27 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:24:50 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
"seemingly minor differences?"
BIBLE
Abraham takes his son Isaac to offer as a sacrifice. . .
Isaac receives the blessing of the Covenant.
QURAN
Abraham takes his son Ishmael to offer as a sacrifice . . .
Ishmael receives the blessing of the Covenant
28 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:30:55 PDT by freedom9
I think Americans will not have the problem of an inability to see things from other than a Jewish or Arab perspective, we are all children of Noah and Noah had three sons, not just one.
I'm sure that we all agree that we should uphold common respect and basic courtesy.
Noah did have three sons, and of course, the Arabs and Jews descended from Shem (hence, Semites).
It is okay to disagree with one's religion without being a racist. I'm sure of that. I love the Jews, but disagree with their stance on Jesus. That doesn't make me an anti-Semite, does it?
Please be sure to make a distinction between accepting others as valuable to God, and making an opinion of their religous beliefs.
The idea of the Muslim religion was introduced to us, so we certainly have the right to disagree, don't we?
And...either Jesus was right, or Mohammed was. I'm with the Maker. If the thread askes me to agree with him that our religions are in umity, I'm sorry to inform you that the two doctrines are entirely different.
29 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:33:35 PDT by AlGone2001
While the Holy Bible attests to the crime of the ancients in tampering with the Holy Writ, the changes in the record of Islam consist of addition alone: the actual and original texts of the Law and the true reports of the Prophet's words have come down to us unaltered
Honest question here. Christ himself said that others would come that would be false prophets in the 'end times'. Now from a Protestant understanding the end times began when Christ ascended into heaven. Revelations is just the return of Christ. So how exactly would Mohammed not be a false prophet?
that Jesus, whom we call "the Word of God," proclaimed God's Unity and Singularity before he proclaimed anything else; and that he called upon his companions and followers to announce to all humanity an everlasting covenant with God into which every person, Jew or Gentile, could enter unto salvation
Well if you're not Jewish, then you're Gentile. Christ wasn't talking about just the Romans. The Samaritans, the man from Africa saved by Paul, or anyone else not Jewish is a Gentile. So the Apostles were called to spread the word to the entire world, not just certain parts, this 'everlasting covenant'(which I assume would be the Gospel) which was the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, the one and only Son of God
I am not bashing, I just don't truly understand how Islam can say that Christianity is just for one group of people. Unless we were born Jewish, we can not fall under that part of the covenant. So the gift of God would be the opportunity for the world that is not Jewish to join as a 'grafted branch' into His Kingdom through His Son
30 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:33:42 PDT by billbears
Certainly, that is more than a "minor" difference. People are killed every day over that "minor" difference.
31 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:34:37 PDT by AlGone2001
I'm not buying that this act was "called for" by Islamic teachings. The terrorist organization has backers richer than the dreams of avarice, and many do not follow the code. They are just making a play on the international stage, and are using religion as a cover.
32 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:37:16 PDT by lds23
So how exactly would Mohammed not be a false prophet?
He was. That does not mean that I hate Muslims, either. I just know tha they are wrong. Honestly, I have a fantastic relationship with God, and it hurts me to see those who do not. I say that from the perspective that Christ Jesus told us that He is the only PATH to God.
33 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:38:53 PDT by AlGone2001
Jesus is either
1. The only way to the Father, or
2. A liar
It was only a matter of time before someone threw out this tired old warhorse.
It is a false dichotomy; Jesus could be a number of things not included in the set you present.
34 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:42:32 PDT by Cernunnos
What I would like to see is a point-by-point refutation of radical Islam by moderate Muslims (with references to specific passages in the Qu'ran).
Well, I'm not qualified according to your criterion of "moderate" muslims, I'm a muslim fundamentalist. But I was able to find what I posted to news://news.grc.com/grc.ten-forward (Steve Gibson's computer privacy and internet security newsgroups) the other day after someone asked about the "fatwa" supposedly from Bin Laden about killing Americans. I've added three words [in brackets].
=======
Now this nonsense "fatwa" ... formally:
Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Raheem.
"According to the Islamic science called "Usul al-fiqh" (Principles
of Jurisprudence), a fatwa is binding when these four conditions are
satisfied:
1) It is in line with relevant legal proofs, deducted from Koranic
verses and hadiths;
2) It is issued by a person (or a board) having due knowledge and
sincerity of heart;
3) It is free from individual opportunism, and not depending on
political servitude;
4) It is adequate with the needs of the contemporary world."
What is omitted is "Amana," or "Trust." The one who issues a fatwa is the one who is specifically and by oath of allegiance empowered to render a decision. Without "Amana," which is the source of authority drawn from the Law, nothing purporting to be a fatwa is binding or actionable, it is merely posturing and pretense.
This so-called "fatwa" fails on all five foundations. There are never "four" of something like this, it is always five: five foundations of Islam, five foundations of the community, and five foundations of the Law.
Here are these lies posing as religion:
"No one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone."
This is false on its face. None of these pretenders knows what is "known to everyone." God knows that, they here pretend to, the language is void in itself.
"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples."
The Arabian Peninsula is not "the holiest of places." Outside the sacred precincts at Makka and Madina, the peninsula is as profane as the rest of the planet save Jerusalem, which is the first and also the third of the holiest of places. The language is void in itself, and the statement that "the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places" is flatly false, there is no evidence whatever that the United States has admission to, let alone occupation or control of, the holiest of places, not Makka nor Madina nor Jerusalem.
The sovereign may invite into the kingdom for which he is responsible any mercenary forces of his choosing for whatever purpose he intends with them. He may even invite the forces of a stronger sovereign and risk being subjugated, unless he holds a superior leash on the stronger sovereign. All of these pretenders' "facts" -- conclusions drawn from thin air and false speech -- fall flat before the testimony of the sovereign and the absence of any evidence of subjugation. The responsible sovereign of Saudi Arabia has explicitly refuted each of these conclusory contentions, and there is no evidence that any possess substance beyond the bald assertion of the pretenders.
The presence of American military personnel and material on the peninsula is entirely at the discretion of the responsible rulers. It creates no conflict with religious law, nor does it interfere with the legitimacy of the sovereign. This element of this so-called "fatwa" is void in its language.
Now I'll strike language that fails "3) It is free from individual opportunism, and not depending on political servitude;" exculpating Saddam Hussein from his failure of the trust of sovereignty over his people, on both grounds that it is not free from individual opportunism and that it does depend on political servitude, specifically the servitude of Osama Bin Laden to Saddam Hussein occasioned by Saddam's support.
"Second ... So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors."
Language without factual support, another pretense of rhetoric. What others "will do" is unknown to these pretenders. This element of this so-called "fatwa" is void in its language.
"Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there."
There is no "if" in a fatwa. It is a statement of the Law with regard to established and articulated facts, there are no "if" or other speculative terms. This element of this so-called "fatwa" is void in its language.
"All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims."
Now these pretenders attribute to "the Americans" the crimes they charge to "Jews and Crusaders," naming two combatant forces and purporting to indict a [distinct and different] people distant and unknown to their contentions. The language is again false on its face, this element of this so-called "fatwa" is void in its language.
The pretenders then purport to sanction violation of God's Law applicable to all muslims, reciting a list of offenses against ALLAH and His Prophet sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam to which they purport to command the faithful. May ALLAH have mercy on those who imagine themselves to have allegiance to these pretenders, it is void.
"We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it."
They have not God's help with this call, it is denied by the authority of the shari'ah as articulated above. God has issued no such order "to kill the Americans and plunder their money," this is a call of pretenders and brigands to brigandage. Any obedience to this claim of allegiance invokes the shari'ah law of brigandage, and where blood is shed the malefactor muslims, on proper evidence of material facts and judicial verdict, are to be crucified, tied and bound erect, cutting off alternate hands and feet, and left to die. This is binding on all with explicit oath of allegiance pursuant to shari'ah.
I find no evidence of sufficient probity to determine Osama Bin Laden a signatory to this pretense and outlawry. May ALLAH have mercy on whoever did not in fact sign it, those who did commit an enormity in pretense of Islam.
=======
Now as you can see from the language "This is binding on all with explicit oath of allegiance pursuant to shari'ah," this is not merely a flat and unequivocal prohibition on ALL MUSLIMS from ANY ACT that is ANY COMPLIANCE with the so-called "fatwa," it is also an explicit order to properly responsible muslims to crucify those muslims who shed blood by any such act. I am confident that muslims living in places where there are constituted public authorities, with different and probably less effective laws, will turn over any such malefactor muslims, preferably alive or just barely.
After all, when you have volunteers to clean up the trash ...
Now who was asking to see something from muslim leaders concerning terrorism? It's been there all the time, it's not only implicit in the entirety of the Law of Islam, it is also explicit and widely expressed and has been all along. Our "free press" has simply been concealing it. For you to know that does not suit their agenda. Why is that?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
35 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:42:52 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I am not bashing, I just don't truly understand how Islam can say that Christianity is just for one group of people.
John 3:16
For God so loved the WORLD,
that He gave His only begotton Son,
that whosoever believeth in Him
would not perish,
but have eternal life.
36 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:43:05 PDT by AlGone2001
It is okay to disagree with one's religion without being a racist.
Absolutely.
37 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:43:06 PDT by Storm Orphan
Actually, we'd like to see them make public appearances to denounce the Fundamentalists.
38 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:44:55 PDT by AlGone2001
Is it possible for Christians and Muslims to be correct about Jesus' role in salvation?
Jesus said it was by HIM ONLY.
That is not the stand of the Muslims.
Either the Holy Bible is wrong, or the Quaran is wrong.
Which is wrong?
C'mon, say it.
39 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:47:06 PDT by AlGone2001
Jesus is either
1. The only way to the Father, or
2. A liar
Jesus is either
1. The only way to the Father, or
2. A liar, OR
3. The early church allowed known mistranslations into the Bible. OR
4. Or the early church turned Jesus into G-d.
Just because you don't like the other options, doesn't mean that they don't exist.
The G-d of the OT, is the same G-d of the NT. So why is it that G-d appears to be so different? Fierce and demanding in the OT and Wishy Washy in the NT. Because the early church was so anti semitic that not only did they strip Jesus of his faith (Judaism), They corrupted his teachings to move people away from Judaism. But, they also knew that the pagans would not accept this strict G-d, that would demand they follow the Commandments. That would demand that they be responsible for their actions. SO, the earlier church, in order to gain as many converts as possible, they changed G-d.
There were many groups that arose after the crucifixtion of Jesus. But, Jesus and his immediate followers NEVER gave up Judaism. NEVER! Some of the groups were more correct than others. Just as there are many branches of Christianity, there are many branches that stem from the true teachings of Jesus.
Something common between Judaism and Islam... food laws. Neither eat pork. And I'm sure someone more knowledgable than myself will know of other common denominators.
40 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:47:33 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Actually, we'd like to see them make public appearances to denounce the Fundamentalists.
I've seen American and many foreign Muslims doing that all week on TV, radio and in the newspapers.
41 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:48:02 PDT by Storm Orphan
Either the Holy Bible is wrong, or the Quaran is wrong.
Or both are.
42 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:48:47 PDT by Storm Orphan
I think Americans will not have the problem of an inability to see things from other than a Jewish or Arab perspective, we are all children of Noah and Noah had three sons, not just one.
I didn't make that quote, I quoted it back to ankaboot.
43 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:50:41 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
It is a false dichotomy; Jesus could be a number of things not included in the set you present.
Yeah, to those who'd like to take the opportunity to insert their own doctrine.
Jesus made claims to be the Judge of all mankind. That looks like the WAY to me. He took my sin. That looks like the WAY to me.
How about Isaiah 9:6, where we learn that the Messiah would be call "Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father." Does that sound like a false dichotomy to you?
44 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:51:01 PDT by AlGone2001
In Matt 19:11, Jesus says that his messages are worded intentionally so that only his intended audience will understand them, and so that others listening will not understand:
But he said to them, "All men cannot understand this saying, except those for whom it is intended."
It seems it is not simply a question of people's inability or unwillingness to understand, it is a question of Jesus intending the message be for only some.
In Matt 13:10, Mark 4:12, and Luke 8:9-10, Jesus admits that he uses parables to intentionally disguise his messages in order to deceive some people so they will not be "saved".
Matt 13:10-15
And the disciples came and asked, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" He answered, "Because you are permitted to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but they are not permitted."
For whoever has, to him shall be given, and he shall have more in abundance. But whoever does not have, even that which he has shall be taken away.
Accordingly, I speak to them in parables, so that seeing, they do not see, and hearing, they neither hear nor understand.
Gives one pause to wonder.
45 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:51:02 PDT by Cernunnos
Either the Holy Bible is wrong, or the Quaran is wrong. Which is wrong? C'mon, say it.
Why is it, that I have a mental picture of a Spanish man in a pointy red hat with a red hot poker?
46 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:51:50 PDT by OWK
Have you ever posted anything which isn't stupid? I think not.
47 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:52:41 PDT by Robert-J
Have you ever posted anything which isn't stupid? I think not.
48 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:52:46 PDT by Robert-J
People have been using religion for a tool for millinia and will continue. Islam just allow itself to be used moreso than many other religions, what with a very militaristic point of view.
What gets me is that people can call Islam's extremists a fringe, yet I can point to dozens of governments that are mostly Islamic, and they crack down on all other religions and views-from the Arabian Peninsula to Sudan to Iran to Afghanistan. And in countries where Islam is a majority there are acts of violence against other faiths, even if it is not state condoned. How can American Muslims explain this? There are not roving bands of Baptists in America hunting down Muslims and hoisting them on a rope like so often happens in amy Muslim-dominated countries.
49 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:52:46 PDT by Cleburne
Great post, but you won't convince the bigots who seek to use a national tragedy to condemn an entire religion they don't like, and in doing so take the focus off the real issue - finding and punishing the guilty terrorists.
I think you don't realize the purpose of the terrorists. Their first purpose was to create exactly this backlash against American muslims specifically and all muslims generally, and to provoke precisely the massive military aggression these people are calling for.
I have said repeatedly that a party has subverted the American republic and taken sufficient control of our political institutions to advance their own interests using American power to support and protect their terrorism. I have also said that I do not believe that this particular party is behind last Tuesday's terror. But this backlash certainly is their product, intention, design, and opportunity, and they are working overtime.
No, of course. No one will convince them. They have their plans, and they've been at it for centuries and decades and especially since the advent of the Web, and "being convinced" is not part of their plans. Convincing *you* most definitely is.
Just mark who they are and learn to recognize their lies, they'll look different tomorrow when they forge more identities -- like airline pilot identities were forged in Tuesday's terror.
But I don't think by them. This is someone else's plans-within-plans, and they're pawns in someone's game.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
50 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:52:46 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I have a mental picture of a Spanish man in a pointy red hat with a red hot poker?
I didn't expect that, but then no one expects...
51 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:53:19 PDT by Storm Orphan
But he said to them, "All men cannot understand this saying, except those for whom it is intended."
It seems it is not simply a question of people's inability or unwillingness to understand, it is a question of Jesus intending the message be for only some.
Jesus set these men up to be Apostles, and He also had to speak around others as there is written biblical proof that some would have attempted to force Him to the throne. Regardless of how you'd like to portray it, Christ was in this actually teaching us a little about patience. It was simplynot time to do what they had been called to do.
52 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:53:57 PDT by AlGone2001
I would say that you and OWK are the bigots.
53 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:54:30 PDT by Robert-J
Yeah, to those who'd like to take the opportunity to insert their own doctrine.
You mean like various instances throught the history of christianity? Like St. Jerome, perhaps?
Jesus made claims to be the Judge of all mankind. That looks like the WAY to me. He took my sin. That looks like the WAY to me.
Jesus is reported to have made those claims in a book that he did not author. Humans, you may have noticed, have a way of, shall we say, judiciously editing things to suit their own purposes.
How about Isaiah 9:6, where we learn that the Messiah would be call "Immanuel, Mighty God, Everlasting Father." Does that sound like a false dichotomy to you?
Which has nothing to do with the original contention.
54 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:54:39 PDT by Cernunnos
Why is it, that I have a mental picture of a Spanish man in a pointy red hat with a red hot poker?
Why do I have a picture of one who hurls insults when actual bilical knowledge escapes?
55 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:55:57 PDT by AlGone2001
I didn't expect that, but then no one expects...
Jess35 groans, rolls her eyes...and throws rotten fruit at Storm Orphan.
56 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:56:19 PDT by jess35
I would say that you and OWK are the bigots.
And I would like to evidence of this.
57 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:56:30 PDT by Storm Orphan
I'd rather have a Scooby Snack.
58 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:57:51 PDT by Storm Orphan
BIBLE Abraham takes his son Isaac to offer as a sacrifice. . . Isaac receives the blessing of the Covenant.
QURAN Abraham takes his son Ishmael to offer as a sacrifice . . . Ishmael receives the blessing of the Covenant
Do you remember Haggar?
59 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:57:55 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
I would say that you and OWK are the bigots.
Fascinating.
What else would you say?
60 Posted on 09/20/2001 15:59:32 PDT by OWK
Perhaps you can tell us why Moslems are only willing to peacefully co-exist with other people of other faiths when they are in the extreme minority. As they are in this country. Why is it that when they approach parity in numbers revolution and civil war happen...the world over. And why is it that wherever they are in a clear majority they persecute Jews, Christians and others.
61 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:00:03 PDT by pgkdan
I see what you are saying.
as-salaamu 'alaikum.
62 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:00:41 PDT by Storm Orphan
Do you remember Haggar?
Wasn't he the guy that was banished to the wilderness for inventing double-knit slacks?
63 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:00:47 PDT by OWK
Perhaps you can explain how Christmas and Easter are Jewish holidays.
Actually, Easter is. The Jews know it as the Firstfruits of the Barley Harvest. It begins three days from the Shabbat.
Christ was resurrected on that day, and was without mistake referred to as the "firstfruits" of the dead.
Jews may not celebrate Christmas, and its date is very loosely placed (as it replaced Saturnalia), but we do know that in its origin, all the parties involved were either Jews or Angels.
Neither Holiday is celebrated in its true light, as we have made them a business. They should honestly be celebrated daily, as we make it our lifestyle to praise the Lord for Christ's birth, sinless life, death and resurrection.
Thank you!
That's the best explanation of the communion I've seen from the religions of the cross. Are you of the Coptic church?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
64 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:01:19 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Jesus is reported to have made those claims in a book that he did not author. Humans, you may have noticed, have a way of, shall we say, judiciously editing things to suit their own purposes.
A book?
It's toofunny that the 4-gospels tell the same story. They did not all know Christ, but they had the same story.
Most of the ASpostles died a death for Christ. Not the stap a bomb to myself kind of death. They were killed by crucifixion, and some later by loins.
Paul, one who earlier had forsaken Christ, took 39-strips for Him on four occasions.
I'd say that this was more than a weekend rendevous.
If you'd like, I'll take you to task on Isaiah 53 and we'll see just let you tell us all how much they were able to "edit" His life story with that passage.
65 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:01:50 PDT by AlGone2001
Look back at Christian history and you will find your answer.
66 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:02:07 PDT by jess35
What about her?
67 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:02:28 PDT by freedom9
Perhaps you can tell us why Moslems are only willing to peacefully co-exist with other people of other faiths when they are in the extreme minority. As they are in this country. Why is it that when they approach parity in numbers revolution and civil war happen...the world over. And why is it that wherever they are in a clear majority they persecute Jews, Christians and others.
Please tell me you understand the degree to which you've just generalized and compartmentalized every Muslim on the face of the planet..
68 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:03:41 PDT by OWK
Why is it, that I have a mental picture of a Spanish man in a pointy red hat with a red hot poker?
That's a pretty stupid post.
70 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:05:22 PDT by pgkdan
It's toofunny that the 4-gospels tell the same story. They did not all know Christ, but they had the same story.
Putting aside for the moment your lovely Goofus & Gallant biblical discourse, you seem confused. All the same story?
Why isn't the virgin birth included in all 4 Gospels? Rather an important detail, wouldn't you think?
Why is the Easter story, told by five different writers, utterly inconsistant?
We could go on and on...
71 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:06:25 PDT by Cernunnos
What other fascinating statements would you like? Say, like, OWK, you're an asshole. OWK, you're a libertarian disruptor. OWK, you're a jackoff. Tell me.
Anything else?
C'mon... get it all out now.
You'll feel better afterward.
72 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:06:50 PDT by OWK
Christ also told us to watch out for a wolf is sheep's clothing... ie (PAUL) who changed the teachings of Jesus. Paul, who stiped Jesus of his faith (Judaism).
Having said that... I will give Paul the benefit of the doubt. Because he does contradict himself in the bible. And I think these contradictions occur because the early church put words into Paul's mouth, in their haste to distance themselves from the Jews and Judaism.
This is also why Easter in honor of Astarte (godess of fertility) was changed/moved from Passover. The quarto decimen.
Christmas was NEVER celebrated in the Bible. The Apostles NEVER celebrated Christmas. It is a pagan celebration. The romanization of Jesus' teachings became Christianity.
Christianity bears little resemblance to what Jesus taught, how he prayed, how he lived. When asked about salvation, he always refered people to the Commandments of G-d.
Faith. Faith OF Jesus. Not faith IN Jesus.
73 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:07:15 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Name for me the country that Moslems populate in parity or majority where this is not so. The Phillipenes? Sudan? Saudia Arabia? Pakistan? India? Indonesia?
74 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:07:56 PDT by pgkdan
What other fascinating statements would you like? Say, like, OWK, you're an asshole. OWK, you're a libertarian disruptor. OWK, you're a jackoff. Tell me.
Naughty potty-mouth Robert! With language like that, you'll never make Jesus' team
75 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:08:27 PDT by Cernunnos
Putting aside from your interesting command of vulgarities, would you please
post your evidence OWK and I are bigots?
76 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:09:36 PDT by Storm Orphan
Name for me the country that Moslems populate in parity or majority where this is not so. The Phillipenes? Sudan? Saudia Arabia? Pakistan? India? Indonesia?
In countries where Muslims represent the majority of the population, do you really believe that all Muslims think with one mind?
Do you recognize the difference between Shiites and Sunnis?
Not all Muslims are the same.
Think a little.
77 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:10:10 PDT by OWK
I say that from the perspective that Christ Jesus told us that He is the only PATH to God.
Jesus is a PATH to G-d. But, Jesus is NOT G-d. He is one of several prophets/paths to G-d.
78 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:10:30 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Turkey and Jordan come to mind.
79 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:11:04 PDT by Storm Orphan
Yes I recognize the difference...and they're both intolerant. Of each other as well as any other religion. Why don't you try to preach the Gospel or distribute the NT in Saudi Arabia? How long do you think you'll keep your head?
80 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:12:50 PDT by pgkdan
I'm not buying that this act was "called for" by Islamic teachings. The terrorist organization has backers richer than the dreams of avarice, and many do not follow the code. They are just making a play on the international stage, and are using religion as a cover.
Religion and politics are one and the same, entwined for the terrorists.
81 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:13:05 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Yeah, to those who'd like to take the opportunity to insert their own doctrine.
The early church already did that for us.
82 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:16:57 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
The greatness of a society built on Christian values shows itself when it will not discriminate for any reason on the basis of race, culture or religion, even when attacked by some people from one specific group. America wants to be a champion of human rights around the world, and needs to make sure, she holds herself accountable to the same standards.
Now if that isn't Genesis 9:27, I haven't read enough. Here is a nation founded in the tents of Shem, and largely the people of this nation remain in the houses of Christianity, whether they agree with the particular theological doctrines of their denominations or not. And Jewish Americans of all three great wings of American Judaism remain likewise and do not, in their hearts, support the ill conduct of their co-religionists or those who claim to be.
But neither are Americans heartless to denounce someone without evidence of guilt, so that we cast them out of our communities or, as in days of old, stone them. Perhaps we all should be more vigilant to eject from our company those who disobey the Lord, however we might understand that, but we are a merciful people of a Merciful God and grateful to Him for His Favor on us, all of us. Lax and improper vigilance has always been our common and most prominent failing.
And there are a few among each community of us who are ... perhaps I should not attempt to generalize, you know who they are.
And I note that you use the G-d formulation common to observant Jews and those who follow the Noachide Covenant of Jewish authorship. Of course I'm curious ...
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
83 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:18:25 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Ah yes, Turkey. Let's hear from our Greek and Armenian friends about the benevolence of Turks. Jordan is preoccupied with Palestinians. Were that problem ever solved, i.e. Israel destroyed I am certain that the Palestinian Christians would next bear the brunt of PLO terrorism.
84 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:18:40 PDT by pgkdan
Your point seems to be that there is no such thing as a peaceful Muslim, once his faith is in the political majority in a given nation.
Sorry, I just don't buy that.
Far too broad a brush you're painting with there.
85 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:21:55 PDT by OWK
I see your strategy.
When shown to be wrong, change the subject.
That would be a fallacy called ignoratio elenchi.
86 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:22:03 PDT by Storm Orphan
Oh, man. This is rich!
You go around accusing everyone who offends your oh-so politically delicate sensibilities a bigot.
What a freakin' hypocrite you are.
87 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:22:17 PDT by hcmama
3. The early church allowed known mistranslations into the Bible. OR
4. Or the early church turned Jesus into G-d.
What is your evidence? Assertions have no validity without evidence.
The New Testament is By Far THE most attested to ancient book in existance. Thousands of copies exist from all over the Meditaranian basin exist from the 4th Century onward, and fragments exist back into the 2nd Century. There is no evidence of mistranslations...major or minor. A word or two here, one or two paragraphs at most--these are ALL the discrepancies between the ancient copies...none of which amount to any change of any major or minor doctrine.
Jesus claimed to be God--and the disciples claimed to see Him physically risen from the dead. These facts are either true or false--you just can't find evidence that the New Testament was tampered with to try to prove Jesus was God, or that the ressurection was added to the story--the whole survival of Christianity (where 10 of the original 12 apostles died gruesome martyr's deaths) was based on people putting their lives on the line for the claim Jesus is alive...
From the only source we have on what He said, Jesus is either a liar, a lunatic or Lord--given the evidence, you can't have it any other way.
88 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:22:21 PDT by AnalogReigns
Are you of the Coptic church?
No, I know someone who is (from work), but know nothing of the faith.
I'm just a Christian, with no hyphens.
89 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:22:29 PDT by AlGone2001
If you're going to follow me around trolling you could at least comment on the subject matter itself.
Your infatuation is flattering, however.
90 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:26:15 PDT by Storm Orphan
It's nice to have a Muslim voice on the forum. I'd like to ask you your opinion, realizing that you are not an expert.
We know there are terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We can get them, and punish them. However, this will not end the problem. There are religious schools who are TEACHING Jihads against America, Israel, and the West. We could close the schools, but they would simply move elsewhere. Should there be an attempt made to crack down on teaching of Jihad against America, Israel, or any other country? If so, how can it be done without enraging the entire Islamic world?
91 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:26:31 PDT by BillinDenver
Oh, man. This is rich! You go around accusing everyone who offends your oh-so politically delicate sensibilities a bigot. What a freakin' hypocrite you are.
Take a deep breath. Calm down.
Now explain your position.
Why do you think he's a hypocrite?
92 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:26:41 PDT by OWK
I never said thatthere is no such thing as a peaceful Moslem...I know there are many. However, Islam is not a religion of peace. It advocates violence and I for one will not in the interest of political correctness pretend otherwise.
93 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:27:25 PDT by pgkdan
Jesus is either a liar, a lunatic or Lord
Or a remarkable teacher mistaken on some subjects.
94 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:27:43 PDT by Storm Orphan
So I take it that you do not believe that one specific individual wrote that letter of his own experience.?
It's not the usual boilerplate, but it contains most of the boilerplate underpinnings. It's not necessary that a committee formulate a new boilerplate, only that the originial writer has the necessary partisan language filters.
Physical color is a metaphor, it is otherwise without substantiality and a peculiar delight for the beholders -- us. It is another of His Mercies to us that we perceive color and taste and so many physical sensations, and yet may know Him directly as well, and He is without any nature that we can comprehend -- such as "physical" comprehension or "spiritual" similitudes.
He has made clear that in His eyes color of skin is not a measure. The Qur'an is not inconsistent with this but rather the most comprehensive affirmation of all those principles that humanity is one family, not that one family is humanity.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
95 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:28:59 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I use the G-d, out of deference to those may be offended by the full name being typed. I also sent you a freepmail.
97 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:30:08 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Why don't you try to preach the Gospel or distribute the NT in Saudi Arabia? How long do you think you'll keep your head?
I was in Riyahd for 77-days (several years before the Gulf War). One is not allowed to drink Pepsi or drive a Ford there, as Jews are on the Board of Directors of each. That's open-minded, isn't it? This was in 1988.
98 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:30:16 PDT by AlGone2001
When shown to be wrong, change the subject.
Where exactly have changed the subject...and where have I been shown to be wrong?
Don't bother to respond, it's tme for me to go to gym i Iwant to get back in time to see President Bush. I'd rather do that than continue to waste time with you.
99 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:31:04 PDT by pgkdan
I never said thatthere is no such thing as a peaceful Moslem...
No you didn't.
You said there is no such thing as a peaceful Muslim, in a country where Muslims represent the political majority.
And you are of course, wrong.
100 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:31:26 PDT by OWK
BIBLE
Abraham takes his son Isaac to offer as a sacrifice. . . Isaac receives the blessing of the Covenant.
QURAN
Abraham takes his son Ishmael to offer as a sacrifice . . . Ishmael receives the blessing of the Covenant
Please bring forward the explicit verse of the Qur'an that names Ishmael as the son of sacrifice. You're either ignorant or a liar. Which is it? There is no such verse.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
101 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:31:53 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
OWK,
You're funny. Kinda crazy, but funny.
102 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:32:09 PDT by Robert-J
sounds like a straight path to hellllllllllll!!
It's not a choice of a religion, or an act that sends us to hell. It's the rejection of Christ that does that.
Honestly, people have the wrong impression of salvation. Christ didn't really come to save us FROM HELL. He came to save us TO GOD. When you look at it in that perspective, you begin to realize His gift. This causes one to serve Him out of love, and not out of fear.
103 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:34:03 PDT by AlGone2001
"Please tell me you understand the degree to which you've just generalized and compartmentalized every Muslim on the face of the planet.. "
The generalization is that wherever individual rights and free will are not honored and protected first and foremost, the majority rule tramples the legitimate interests of the minority. The perticulars of the interest, such as the name, content or descripiton, are not important. It's the fact that most folks don't regard and hold other peoples rights and free will the same as they do their own. This is a simple observation. There is no country where rihgts come first and foremost, majority contentment is the rule.
104 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:37:24 PDT by spunkets
You asked where there are currently nations where Muslims are in majority where this is not so.
Your accusations against Turkey date back to the beginning of the 20th Century, while your accusations about Jordan are speculative.
One could speculate any outcome, and if we are going to mine the past all religions have sought ecumenicalism when in the minority, until they were able to attain majority status through revolution or coercive conversion.
105 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:37:27 PDT by Storm Orphan
I've heard this, but didn't hear that it stretched as far as Abraham being willing to sacrifice Ishmael as he was Isaac. Is that true?
Secondly, if Islam stems from Ishmael and Judiasm/Christianity from Isaac, doesn't it make the two religious branches complete anathema to one another? Only one path can be the correct one.
106 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:38:00 PDT by The Right Stuff
Hey Cernunnos,
I went to your ilovebacon.com site. I liked the picture about "God bless the USA. Now let's go kick some ass."
Damn good motto. Let's kick some moslem terrorist ass up one side of the globe down the other. Then we'll kick them off the globe forever.
107 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:39:15 PDT by Robert-J
Only one path can be the correct one.
Thank you. It is true that the Muslims believe that Ishmael was the one at the oferring stone, or Jehovah Jireh.
108 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:40:30 PDT by AlGone2001
It's not nice to box with a person that wears blinders....pgkdan, is a Stranger In A Strange Land, with tunnel vision.
109 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:42:14 PDT by beowolf
"I would say that you and OWK are the bigots."
While I'm tempted to agree I won't. I'll simply say that they are secular fanatics.
110 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:42:14 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
By the way, I don't feel like trying to understand moslems or appreciating them. I just have this to say, the moslems who live in America better start waving the American flag, and saying "God bless the USA," and "death to osama bin mamma." If they do that, they're fine. I'll still think their religion is stupid, but I won't hold it against them. But if they won't wave the flag, and bless the USA, then kick their moslem asses right out of the country.
111 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:43:17 PDT by Robert-J
Jesus is a PATH to G-d. But, Jesus is NOT G-d. He is one of several prophets/paths to G-d.
Either Jesus is the only path, or He is a liar. Which is true. If you think He's a liar, why don't you just say it. Don't hold back.
112 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:43:17 PDT by AlGone2001
"I'd rather have a Scooby Snack."
As the church lady would say, "Well isn't that special"
113 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:44:25 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Let's kick some moslem terrorist ass up one side of the globe down the other. Then we'll kick them off the globe forever.
Terrorists or moslems?
114 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:45:48 PDT by Cernunnos
I'll be back tomorrow (maybe). I'm gonna sit on the couch with my sweeties. See ya tomorrow.
115 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:45:54 PDT by AlGone2001
While I'm tempted to agree I won't. I'll simply say that they are secular fanatics.
secular fanatic se/ku/ler fin/at/ik (N)
An individual who does not recognize the religious beliefs of Texas Jarhead, as legitimate or rationally sustainable.
Texas Jarhead Unabridged Dictionary.
116 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:47:40 PDT by OWK
Name for me the country that Moslems populate in parity or majority where this is not so. The Phillipenes? Sudan? Saudia Arabia? Pakistan? India? Indonesia?
BTW, it is spelled Philippines, (smile) and I can speak about that. They are in Mindanao, and are a royal pain in the a$$, to other Filipinos in Mindanao. I know, I have friends there. No wonder Gloria Macapagal is fully behind the US. There were more people from the Philippines killed in New York (according to Reuters) than any other country. She would like to deal with the terrorist too, and I think she declared war on terrorists in Mindanao several months ago.
117 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:48:07 PDT by Mark17
I'm not buying that this act was "called for" by Islamic teachings. The terrorist organization has backers richer than the dreams of avarice, and many do not follow the code. They are just making a play on the international stage, and are using religion as a cover.
They are using religion as an attack focus and motivation. Their aim is to eradicate Islam and leave in place the support of terror that pretends to be Islam and pretends to be other things as well.
We do not know whether we are waiting for the imminent appearance of the Messiah of Falsehood. But we are persuaded that it is a live question. There are some other things that happen first, and while all but fewer than a few are long since fulfilled explicitly with the quality of firm Signs, there remain fewer than a handful.
A Sign, of course, points the way, and is absolutely clear and distinguishable from a "wonder" or a "mystery." There is nothing ambiguous or equivocal about a Sign.
Remember that Jesus is reported to have said words to the effect "There will come many in my absence saying I am 'The Messiah' who will bring great signs and wonders, so much so that they might deceive, were it possible, the Chosen People." They came immediately to those left behind when he had returned to his Lord.
They're all over the media and the Web. There's nothing they can do to stop God's Plan.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
118 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:48:47 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I'll be back tomorrow (maybe). I'm gonna sit on the couch with my sweeties. See ya tomorrow.
Enjoy your evening.
119 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:48:56 PDT by OWK
Question for ankaboot, I found this post.
Can you comment on this? Are these quotes accurate?
Thanks
------
A thorough study of Quran and Hadiths reveal an Islam that is not being presented honestly by the Muslim propagandists and is not known to the majority of Muslims. Islam as it is taught in Quran (Koran) and lived by Muhammad, as is reported in the Hadith (Biography and sayings of the Prophet) is a religion of intolerance, inequality, violence, discrimination, superstition, fanaticism, and blind faith. Islam advocates killing the non-Muslims, abuses the human rights of the minorities and women. Islam expanded by Jihad (holy war) and forced its way by killing the non-believers and the dissidents. Apostasy in Islam is the biggest crime, punishable by death. Muhammad was a fundamentalist himself therefore fundamentalism cannot be separated from true Islam. Islam, which means submission, demands from its followers to submit their wills and thoughts to Muhammad and his Allah, a deity that despises reason, democracy, freedom of thought and freedom of expression. I reject Islam a) because of Muhammadís lack of moral and ethical fortitude and b) because of the absurdities in Quran.
a) Muhammad lived a less than holy life. His lust for sex, his affairs with his maids and slave girls, his pedophilic relationship with Aisha a 9-year-old child, his killing sprees, his massacre and the genocide of the Jews, his slave making and trading, his assassination of his opponents, his raids and lootings of the merchant caravans, his burning of the palm plantations, his destroying the water wells, his cursing and invoking evil on his enemies and his revenge on his captured prisoners of war disqualify him as a decent human being let alone the messenger of God
b) An unbiased study of Quran shows that far from being a ìmiracleî that book is a hoax. Once Quran is scrutinized with rational thinking, almost every sentence proves to be false. Quran is replete with scientific heresies, historic blunders, mathematical mistakes, logical absurdities and grammatical errors. Could possibly the author of this Universe be as ignorant as it appears to be in Quran?
Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them (Q. 2:191), to murder them and treat them harshly (Q. 9:123), slay them (Q. 9: 5), fight with them, (Q. 8: 65 ) even if they are Christians and Jews, humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax (Q. 9: 29). Quran takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and tell clearly that no other religion except Islam is accepted (Q. 3: 85). It relegates those who disbelieve in Quran to hell (Q. 5: 11), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (Q. 9: 28). It orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (Q. 2: 193).
It says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water (Q. 14: 17). It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that ìthey shall have a great punishment in world hereafterî (Q.5: 34). ìAs for the disbelieversî, it says that ìfor them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowls and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rodsî (Q. 22: 9). Quran prohibits a Muslim to befriend a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim (Q. 9: 23), (Q. 3: 28). Quran asks the Muslims to ìstrive against the unbelievers with great endeavor (Q. 25: 52), be stern with them because they belong to hell (Q. 66: 9). The holy Prophet demanded his follower to ìstrike off the heads of the disbelieversî; then after making a ìwide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captivesî (Q. 47: 4). As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (Q. 4:34). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (Q. 66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (Q. 2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (Q. 4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the court (Q. 2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Muhammad allowed the Muslims to marry up to four views and gave them license to sleep with their slave maids and as many ìcaptiveî women as they may have (Q. 4:3). He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers raped up to 250,000 Bangali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are unislamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women and then kill them after calling them apostates and the enemies of Allah. This site scrutinizes Islam with Rational Thinking. It rejects time-honored beliefs that cannot stand the probing of reason. It asks questions and encourages independent thinking. It promotes unity of humankind, equality between men and women, abolition of prejudices and freedom from dogmatism and blind faith.
In a world that has become so technologically advanced that even the poorest nations that cannot feed themselves boast having sophisticated nuclear and biological weapons, small misunderstandings can cause catastrophic results. Religion has always been the biggest source of misunderstanding. For religion, people are ready to die, kill and destroy everything else. Only a religious person would believe that he would go to paradise if he kills other human beings. Only a religious person has no regards for the lives he destroys because their faith is not right.
In the past century Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise, and with that terrorisms, revolutions, and upheavals ensued. Millions of lives were lost and still counting. Let us pause for a moment and take a second look at Islam. We may just have made a mistake.
The reason I think Islam is harmful and must go is not due to the fact that Quran says Earth is flat or the stars are missiles that Allah fires at the jinns who climb the heaven to eavesdrop the conversation of the exalted assembly. These tales could even amuse us. Islam must go because it teaches hate, it orders killing the non-Muslims, it denigrates women and it violates the human rights. Islam must go not because it is false but because it is destructive, because it is a danger; a threat to peace and security of humankind. With the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in Islamic countries, Islam has become a serious and a real threat to the survival of our species.
----------
120 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:50:06 PDT by jwa3
"Do you recognize the difference between Shiites and Sunnis?
Not all Muslims are the same"
Wow, two whole sects. ANd come on, for all intents and purposes, a super majority of Muslims are Sunni.
121 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:51:10 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
"Why don't you try to preach the Gospel or distribute the NT in Saudi Arabia? How long do you think you'll keep your head?"
Scratch that, just try bringing a Bible into the country or having a Christian or Jewish prayer gathering in your home.
122 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:53:44 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Okay, religion should be avoided in our endeavors to resolve this issue. Values, however, can't be. I read on one of these posts that the U.S. was the only nation on earth with true Islamic values
Fair enough. It is time for the U.S. to impose those values on the Mideast. That means a Jehova Witness or a Mormon can proseltyze door to door in Mecca with the same degrees of safety as Minneapolis. That means if a Moslem decides to convert to Christianity, he won't fear a death sentence. That means we fight to end slavery in the Sudan. That means strongmen and monarchs are overthrown and dissent is allowed. That means Israel's right to exist is recognized by all.
You willing to sign on?
123 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:53:59 PDT by Tribune7
My point was that not all Muslims are the same.
Do you disagree?
124 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:54:02 PDT by OWK
Wow, two whole sects. ANd come on, for all intents and purposes, a super majority of Muslims are Sunni.
Not quite.
Let's not forget the Ahmaydia, Alawi, Druze, Ismali, Salafy, Sufi and the (rather uptight) Wahhabis.
We now return you to your exclusively bifurcated view of Islam, already in progress.
125 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:55:45 PDT by Cernunnos
America, We Grieve With You
Saudi Arabia is shocked and devastated by the events of September 11th. We share with you the devotedly held values that those unspeakable acts are reprehensible and must be condemned.
We grieve with those who lost loved ones, friends and colleagues as well as for all the injured. We grieve with America whose homeland was attacked by these shameless terrorists. We grieve together with you because our two countries will always work tirelessly in the battle against global terrorism and in the search for peace and justice.
As Crown Prince Abdullah pledged to President Bush on September 13th: "We in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are fully prepared to cooperate with you in every matter conducive to reveal the identity of the perpetrators of this criminal act and bring them to justice."
Let us vow together that such terrorism will never happen again to any nation. America, we stand with you.
ROYAL EMBASSY OF SAUDI ARABIA WASHINGTON, DC
126 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:57:22 PDT by Samaritan
Boy, ole stormy and ONK really got their tag team act down.
127 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:57:48 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Is it possible for Christians and Muslims to be correct about Jesus' role in salvation?
Jesus said it was by HIM ONLY.
That is not the stand of the Muslims.
Either the Holy Bible is wrong, or the Quaran is wrong.
Which is wrong?
C'mon, say it.
LOL! ROFL! (May I use webaphor here?)
There is no "salvation" in Islam for those who deny God's Word that He cast into Mary, the Messiah of Israel, the only person ever to walk the earth without sin or error, born of an immaculate conception, who called the Children of Israel to fulfill their Covenant made at the hand of Moses, whereat they denied him, save a few.
I believe he'll be along presently, and will tell us who we are, and I think that is something you will find in the New Testament, it didn't get edited out by Constantine's bishops. Of course, I could be mistaken as to how long we might have to wait.
But I'm willing to wait until you and I agree that the person standing in front of us is Jesus, and then to see what he says. I'm not too concerned with the outcome of that particular encounter, I know him personally.
C'mon, say it.
Say what?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
128 Posted on 09/20/2001 16:59:35 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Hamslamarmadillos!
129 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:01:50 PDT by sheik yerbouty
He who has ears, let him hear:
The Origins of the Conflict
:
130 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:02:07 PDT by ppaul
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]
It is a false dichotomy; Jesus could be a number of things not included in the set you present.
Maybe you could enumerate a few of them for me?
131 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:02:12 PDT by ThomasJefferson
Boy, ole stormy and ONK really got their tag team act down.
Put 'em in the Sleeper Hold Stormy...
The Sleeper Hold!
(mumbles something about Gemini daggers)
132 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:03:57 PDT by OWK
Maybe you could enumerate a few of them for me?
He could be a teacher whose teachings (and person) have been co-opted over the years for others' purposes.
He could be a teacher from whose teachings we only have a tiny fraction, and thusly a false understanding.
He could be a fictional character.
He could be a teacher who said only part or none of what is attributed to him.
He could be a Mexican.
He could be a divine manifestation of god.
He could be a you-fill-in-the-blank.
133 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:07:53 PDT by Cernunnos
Now you've gone and done it. This song has been rattling around in my head all day, and its finally gonna come out ...
Dropkick me Jesus, through the goalposts of life
End over end, neither left nor to right
Straight through the heart of them righteous uprights
Dropkick me Jesus, through the goalposts of life.
Make me, oh make me, Lord more than I am
Make me a piece in your master game plan
Free from the earthly temptation below
I’ve got the will, Lord, if you’ve got the toe.
(chorus)
Take all the brothers who’ve gone on before
And all of the sisters who’ve knocked on your door
All the departed dear loved ones of mine
Stick ’em up front in the offensive line.
(chorus)
134 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:08:21 PDT by strela
There were many groups that arose after the crucifixtion of Jesus. But, Jesus and his immediate followers NEVER gave up Judaism. NEVER!
Indeed they did not, as the Ten Persecutions attest as well. Those who clung to the Law of Moses were massacred by the pagan Roman emperors for three centuries until Constantine, and then by the trinitarian bishops and the Holy Roman legions for three and a half centuries until Islam was sent down.
And they were waiting in Medina.
And they are still spread all over the world in places where the people weren't able to recall where to go or what to expect, or where only some small part of the Good News was able to reach them -- like in Europe under the Roman empire and church.
That doesn't mean they're not Christians. It just means they're misinformed.
They have a right to that, I don't think it's a crime. My opinion (note that I label it that: my opinion) is that muslims are charged with the responsibility of protecting them according to their claim to be followers of Jesus. I think the muslims in the millennial muslim world have forgotten pretty much about that, or think it doesn't apply.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
135 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:09:14 PDT by ankaboot
"Texas Jarhead Unabridged Dictionary."
I haven't even published yet. How did you get that.
Seriously, I don't expect anyone to adhere to my beliefs but I sure don't like
it when people try to shove secular humanism down our throats as they attempt to
banish religion from the public square.
Furthermore, your pronouncement that my beliefs are "rationally
sustainable" (which you do all over religion threads) demonstrates your
smug attitude of intellectual superiority and highlights the apparent fact that
you believe either you know all the answers or at a minimum you know for sure
that others certainly do not.
136 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:11:02 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Go ahead, I'm ready for your spin.
137 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:11:41 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
"My point was that not all Muslims are the same.
Do you disagree?"
Only a fool would disagree.
Just to preempt any potential wise crack, no I don not disagree.
There are all kinds of people.
138 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:15:40 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Gives one pause to wonder.
I wonder how long it will be before I read
"The time is come, Soldiers of the Cross. Armor up!"
Jews and Christians are warned to prepare for Armageddon by beating their swords into plowshares, Muslims for The Hour by becoming like the better son of Adam: instead, Jews, Christians and Muslims -- many and few -- are actively promoting Apocalypse. Avoid Messianic Apocalyptic Dementia, or believing that you (or those of your communion) are uniquely and divinely anointed and appointed to save the world, or a remnant, or to usher in a new world or a new message for the faithful, while this world falls away into the Fire. This all-time favorite tool of deception is today a main event in media circuses and more often fatal.
But I do think something interesting is happening. I'm waiting to see what. I've been waiting for a long, long time in that frame of mind. It sure looks like dawn to me.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
139 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:17:51 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Jesus is either
(1. The only way to the Father, or
2. A liar, OR )
3. The early church allowed known mistranslations into the Bible. OR
4. Or the early church turned Jesus into G-d.
Just because you don't like the other options, doesn't mean that they don't exist.
So... I guess Jesus was crucified for walking on the grass? Don't think so- not even the Jews deny Jesus' claim of Christhood, they just disagreed.
Indeed, Jesus narrowed one's options to calling Him liar or Lord.
140 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:18:02 PDT by Egg
"Let's not forget the Ahmaydia, Alawi, Druze, Ismali, Salafy, Sufi and the (rather uptight) Wahhabis."
Thanks for the edumacation. I had heard of the Sufi and Wahhabis but not the rest.
Again, however, are not the most two prominent sects vastly larger than the ones you mention here?
141 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:18:05 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Furthermore, your pronouncement that my beliefs are "rationally sustainable" (which you do all over religion threads) demonstrates your smug attitude of intellectual superiority and highlights the apparent fact that you believe either you know all the answers or at a minimum you know for sure that others certainly do not.
Check me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was YOU who initiated this exchange.
Not me.
142 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:23:21 PDT by OWK
I'll simply say that they are secular fanatics.
That's a very interesting term. They'll never admit to such a thing, however......
143 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:26:51 PDT by He Rides A White Horse
"...God's Word that He cast into Mary, the Messiah of Israel, the only person ever to walk the earth without sin or error, born of an immaculate conception, who called the Children of Israel to fulfill their Covenant made at the hand of Moses, whereat they denied him, save a few.
I believe he'll be along presently, and will tell us who we are, and I think that is something you will find in the New Testament...BR>
But I'm willing to wait until you and I agree that the person standing in front of us is Jesus, and then to see what he says. I'm not too concerned with the outcome of that particular encounter, I know him personally."
To that I can say Amen! Is there such a label as Messianic Muslim (I guess not Messianic in the Christian sense)?
Does the concept of millenial reign exist in Islam?
What about Tribulation (I know there is judgement) and if so how similar is it to Revelations or the prophecies of Daniel?
144 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:26:55 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
Only a fool would disagree.
Yup.
Just to preempt any potential wise crack, no I don not disagree.
No wise cracks. I don't consider you a fool by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, you strike me as quite cogent.
There are all kinds of people.
Indeed there are. And it is the kind who said "why are Moslems only peaceful when...??" who were the target of my original comments.
145 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:28:45 PDT by OWK
And would you deny and reject and demonize another group of people coming to monothesism, who honor the Christ as the "pure" prophet?
Has God spoken to you and told you of his plan for the Jews and the Muslims?
146 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:33:09 PDT by Samaritan
"Check me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was YOU who initiated this exchange."
Nice try at redirect.
What does that have to do with your "rationally sustainable" statement or your subtle debasement of people's of faith throughout numerous, and I mean mucho numeroso, threads.
Like I said in #137, I knew you would try to spin.
147 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:34:49 PDT by Texas_Jarhead
I just get the warm fuzzies knowing that they will dispatch Christians to God the moment they're given the chance. Yes, it's a friendly world, boys and girls!
148 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:37:35 PDT by peg the prophet
OWK, an avowed atheist defending a religion. And who said that there was nothing new under the sun?
149 Posted on 09/20/2001 17:54:38 PDT by peg the prophet
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a boy ready to suffer and forbear.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: Now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills one practising Patience and Constancy!"
103. So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah., and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham!
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
Many Moslems teach and agree that the lad in the verses refer to Ishmael. Here's another one for you . . .
124. And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: "I will make thee an Imam to the Nations." He pleaded: "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" He answered: "But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers." . . .
If you claim that Isaac was indeed the son to be sacrificed,
then it follows that Isaac and not Ishmael received the Promise.
150 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:04:02 PDT by freedom9
They are.
151 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:05:11 PDT by freedom9
Curious isn't it? Such a contradiction. Would you have a first born heir (who was circumsized) by a handmaiden or a second born heir by your half sister?
152 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:09:35 PDT by Samaritan
Jews and Christians are warned to prepare for Armageddon by beating their swords into plowshares
Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong.
Joel 3:10
Cricket
153 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:13:54 PDT by another cricket
We know there are terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I don't know that at all.
We can get them, and punish them.
I'm not interested in punishing anyone. I'm interested in eliminating threats to humanity. That might require killing people, which I would like to avoid where possible. I definitely would like to avoid killing the wrong people.
However, this will not end the problem. There are religious schools who are TEACHING Jihad against America, Israel, and the West. We could close the schools, but they would simply move elsewhere. Should there be an attempt made to crack down on teaching of Jihad against America, Israel, or any other country? If so, how can it be done without enraging the entire Islamic world?
I saw those articles, discussing a school in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Funniest thing I'd read in a long time. I'm familiar with the culture and know that educational system, the writer was playing on loaded words in a foreign language for his readers.
What you need to do is translate them from the rhetoric of demonization into words you can understand in terms of American experience, which is not terribly difficult, but it's no snap, either. Especially when we've already been taught to see some things only in a certain way.
So you tell me when you're ready to eliminate ROTC, archery, and rifle teams from American high school and colleges, and close law schools, and discontinue the educational tracking and career-orienting educational curriculae of American children. Then we can talk about gutting religious teachings common to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, to make it say we should stand respectfully quiet while someone rapes or murders us.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
154 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:16:59 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I also sent you a freepmail.
Glad you mentioned that. I don't keep track of freepmail and it doesn't provide me with a copy for my hard drive. I'd prefer people use my ankaboot@muslimamerica.net email address, that's why I post with it. Eventually I may see the freepmail, but I try to check my regular InBox and clear it, and right now I have email waiting that's been there all day on the Muslim America server.
Hmmm ... 56 emails downloading now. Wonder how many have attack attachments this time?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
155 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:22:16 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
close your tags, Spider.
It's nice to have a Muslim voice on the forum. I'd like to ask you your opinion, realizing that you are not an expert.
Actually, if memory serves, "ankaboot" is an Islamic Judge.
He's as close to an Islamic "expert" as anyone to whom I've ever spoken (though I don't speak to many "Islamic experts", so take that with a grain of salt).
I disagree with a great deal of what he writes (religiously and politically), but he's not a bad source for research purposes.
156 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:26:56 PDT by Uriel1975
Jesus is either a liar, a lunatic or Lord
Or a remarkable teacher mistaken on some subjects.
EVIDENCE! Where is the PROOF that the New Testament books are corrupted? The same sources that show Him "a remarkable teacher" also show Him accepting worship, regarded as God, and calling Himself God--then proving it.
Show me His grave...maybe a few bones, then maybe I'll call Him merely a remarkable teacher.
157 Posted on 09/20/2001 18:57:59 PDT by AnalogReigns
Your view.
Faith. Faith OF Jesus. Not faith IN Jesus.
Now what the Bible says
John 1
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.
John 3
10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 6
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.
Sorry, but it is faith IN Jesus that He alone can save us, that He is who he says he is, the only begotten Son of God, and that He died for our sins, and rose again. That's faith of and in Jesus
158 Posted on 09/20/2001 19:19:54 PDT by billbears
Question for ankaboot, I found this post. Can you comment on this? Are these quotes accurate?
Stock slanders, nothing new. 'A'ishah was sixteen when he proposed to her, nineteen when she moved into her own apartments. Someone in Baghdad couldn't remember his own birthday, let alone add, and this mythological child-marriage has been mongered ever since.
Thanks, you can have the falsehood, I'll spend my time and energy with truth. Don't bother expecting me to waste my time, just go on about your business of spreading hate and ignorance, don't let me stop you. Have a good time while it lasts.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
159 Posted on 09/20/2001 19:27:41 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
It is time for the U.S. to impose those values on the Mideast
I see. I wonder whether you do.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
160 Posted on 09/20/2001 19:30:10 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
The early christian church is the liar.
162 Posted on 09/20/2001 20:07:10 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
You said there is no such thing as a peaceful Muslim, in a country where Muslims represent the political majority.
You see what you want to see. I said that in countries where Muslims are the majority, minority religions are banned or persecuted. There, are, of course peaceful Muslims among them...but you cannot deny that religious persecution exists almost anywhere Islam reigns.
163 Posted on 09/20/2001 20:20:12 PDT by pgkdan
Boy, ole stormy and ONK really got their tag team act down.
Do they ever! Neither of them have responded to my question though. If Islam is so tolerant and loving why are Christians, Jews and others so horribly persecuted in countries where Islam holds sway. Countries like our allies Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Why do they foment revolution and revolt in countries where their numbers approach parity with other segments of the population. 20 or 30 million more Muslims in this country and we'd be fighting against the USI, United States of Islam.
Instead, they are content to call anyone who disagrees with Islam a bigot.
164 Posted on 09/20/2001 20:32:36 PDT by pgkdan
Many Moslems teach and agree that the lad in the verses refer to Ishmael.
Many do indeed. But that was not what you asserted, and that is not what I asked for. You stated without any equivocation, a flat and final statement without any hedging or suggestion that you might be mistaken, that the Qur'an says that Ishmael is the son of sacrifice. I asked:
Please bring forward the explicit verse of the Qur'an that names Ishmael as the son of sacrifice.
Clearly those verses, and in fact no verses of the Qur'an, name him.
After my first fifteen years of studying Islam and the religions, I found that quite interesting. It certainly would have answered a clear question had someone been explicitly named, either in the Qur'an or even in a hadith -- a report of something Muhammad said -- but that simply is not the case.
But how again did you say that there is a material question here? That it is impossible for people of Scripture and muslims to co-exist because of this over-riding question? Then why didn't it get definitively answered in the Qur'an, if it's so vital to muslims as that?
You believe the son of sacrifice was Isaac, and you are waiting for the fulfillment. Muslims say the eternal Law mentioned in Scripture has been established throughout the Holy Land exactly as described in Scripture, provide evidences of that through a thousand years of history, and that who was the heir of Abraham appears to be answered by facts on the ground -- although of course the Millennial muslim world has long since fallen into collapse. Still, though, from the Nile to the Euphrates, it is the children of Ishmael who have lived there continuously for the last three thousand years, during which God has driven the Children of Israel out not once, but twice.
I have no problem at all with your desire to wait for the Kingdom of God. You may believe as you wish, there is no compulsion here. I believe I live in that Kingdom. Here in America. Now. My life bears witness to that, as far as I can see, at least sufficiently to persuade me that He has showered me with His Mercy. I really have no interest in arguing with you about it, believe as you wish.
I live by a Law that I believe was sent down by God as He describes in detail in Scripture. I know the Scripture that speaks of it, tells where it is revealed, to whom, how, and what happens in the Holy Land as a result. Those things happened. You're not required to believe that. No one is.
America, with our federal constitutional republic, our freedom of speech, press, faith, assembly, and so on, was one result. You're not required to believe that. No one is.
I believe also that Noah, among others, foretold events now taking place in America. You're not required to believe that. No one is.
As you can see, what *I* believe about this specifically Jewish question -- that is, whether the family of Isaac and Jacob is exclusively that heir of Abraham that Scripture clearly says is the human race -- is of no particular interest to me. I am not a Jew and I am not an Arab. The land belongs to the children of Abraham, excluding wrongdoers -- not people whose ancient ancestors are today alleged to have been wrongdoers, but today's wrongdoers.
And what I believe about the role of Jesus in calling the Children of Israel to fulfill their Covanant by rising up and witnessing to humanity that He was about to establish His Law for a thousand years, followed by a short season, followed by another establishment of His Law that would last forever, that isn't too interesting to you either, I don't think. You're not required to believe that. No one is.
But the Qur'an, contrary to what you stated with such pretended authority, does not name Ishmael as the son of sacrifice. That was my only point, that you were mistaken in what you believe so fervently. Such is certainly the case. But you're not required to believe that. No one is.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
165 Posted on 09/20/2001 20:58:25 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
close your tags, Spider.
That was Freedom9. Thanks, I try to pay attention.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
166 Posted on 09/20/2001 21:01:05 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
We know there are terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I don't know that at all.
Would you agree that bin Laden is a terrorist? Two US governments have said there is enough evidence against him to connect him to the bombings of the US embassies in Africa, the Cole, and most likely the barracks in Saudi Arabia and the most recent calamity. The UN has said he should be given over to the US. What do you need to see? Or do you not believe he is in Afghanistan?
What do you feel about the fatwa issued by Osama telling his followers to kill Americans, civilian and military, until the US abandons it's military bases in Saudi Arabia? In my mind, that's enough to convict him. After all, Hitler didn't personally kill any Jews. He ordered his followers to do it. How is Osama issuing this fatwa to his faithful any different from Hitler ordering the SS to kill Jews? Anyone, anywhere, who preaches death to his followers is guilty of solicitation of murder.
I'm not interested in punishing anyone. I'm interested in eliminating threats to humanity. That might require killing people, which I would like to avoid where possible. I definitely would like to avoid killing the wrong people.
That's what I want too. We have repeatedly requested that Afghanistan turn him over, and they have refused. If they won't or can't do it, we will. If they stand in our way, we will fight our way through them. We don't want to do it. We HAVE to do it, because there is either no desire, or no ability for the Taliban to comply.
So you tell me when you're ready to eliminate ROTC, archery, and rifle teams from American high school and colleges, and close law schools, and discontinue the educational tracking and career-orienting educational curriculae of American children.
I absolutely fail to see how law school, educational tracking and career-oriented education have anything to do with the discussion. The only possible connection I can see is the you are saying Americans don't understand or respect Islamic law or their way of life. Personally, I don't like what I've seen of life under a fundamentalist, Islamic government. People who do like it, have every right to practice it. If the 2/3 of the people of a country want to live under Islamic law, fine, but don't impose that way of life or religion on the remaining 1/3. If you are a Muslim minority living in America, you haven't been repressed or stopped from preaching your religion to people you would like to convert. Doing that in Afghanistan would earn a Christian the death penalty. Christianity has changed over the last 2000 years. Perhaps Islam should do the same.
Then we can talk about gutting religious teachings common to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, to make it say we should stand respectfully quiet while someone rapes or murders us.
Nobody said you should stand still to be rapes or murdered. Perhaps you could tell me who it is that is being raped and murdered.
167 Posted on 09/20/2001 21:37:02 PDT by BillinDenver
I know the Muslims haven't taken over this nation yet and that I haven't moved to the Sudan to be crucified by militant Muslims...But...I keep reading this phrase...someone please tell me what in the world "wash-salaami" means! Does that mean it's kosher?
168 Posted on 09/20/2001 21:55:41 PDT by woollyone
My apologies. I didn't mean to imply that he wasn't an expert on Islam, only that he might not be an expert on the particular topics I was bringing up. That was poorly worded on my part. My apologies for any offense.
169 Posted on 09/20/2001 21:58:15 PDT by BillinDenver
My apologies. I didn't mean to imply that he wasn't an expert on Islam, only that he might not be an expert on the particular topics I was bringing up. That was poorly worded on my part. My apologies for any offense. 169 Posted on 09/20/2001 21:58:15 PDT by BillinDenver
P'shaw. No need to worry about it. I certainly wasn't offended, I just thought I would mention some of ankaboot's Islamic credentials -- purely for your own edification -- since he hasn't posted here in... what has it been, spider, nearly a year?
And, though I have already stated my own tendency to disagree with much of what ankaboot says, I think I know him well enough to expect that he wasn't offended either, not in the slightest. Not his style.
170 Posted on 09/20/2001 22:08:08 PDT by Uriel1975
That was Freedom9. Thanks, I try to pay attention.
Yeah, I saw that after I had posted. Mea maxima culpa.
171 Posted on 09/20/2001 22:10:38 PDT by Uriel1975
The only possible connection I can see is the you are saying Americans don't understand or respect Islamic law or their way of life.
Why should they? There is no reason why they should. Islamic law proscribes a choice for non-Moslems, between conversion to Islam, and the contract of dhimmi, along with the payment of jizya. Who in their right mind would entertain this even as a hypothetical nightmare for Americans?
172 Posted on 09/20/2001 22:43:07 PDT by Goldhammer
My apologies.
I have not seen anything on Free Republic directed toward or about me concerning which anyone need apologize.
I didn't mean to imply that he wasn't an expert on Islam, only that he might not be an expert on the particular topics I was bringing up.
I've certainly lost track of whatever that might have been, although my recollection is that you did not go outside my limited knowledge. Usually when that happens I'll refer to someone else, explicitly, or simply confess ignorance, which I haven't had to do lately.
However, whether I am "expert" or not, or whether I am a judge or not (I am), is immaterial, or should be. My words either stand on their own, or they withstand scrutiny when examined in the light of established sources of knowledge, or they don't. Nothing I say should remain unexamined and accepted blindly. God is the Source of knowledge, not me, I'm walkin' talkin' stinkin' clay and prone to error. Or at least that's my opinion.
That was poorly worded on my part. My apologies for any offense.
Please do not feel that skill in expressing yourself should determine whether or not you do so, or that it is easy to offend me, it's not easy. Or I hope it's not easy.
It's much more pleasant, and a lot easier, to not be offended. And when someone is trying to offend me (and that happens often enough), it's a lot more fun to realize that they're biting their nails in rage when they fail to antagonize me.
To them: Perish in your rage. As God brings His Plan into fruition your rage will close in on you and your heart will stop, your limbs will freeze, and someone will be along to simply push you over with a lightly applied finger, whereupon you will shatter like fragile stone. All that upon which you rely will vanish as Jeremiah and Isaiah told you, and you didn't believe them. You build a wall and plaster it with mud and it will fail you. There is nothing you can do about it.
Time's up.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
173 Posted on 09/20/2001 22:53:47 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
(mumbles something about Gemini daggers)
Gemini Daggers. Good tag team name.
Let's get ready to MUUUMMBBBLLEEE!
174 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:03:31 PDT by Storm Orphan
ankaboot,
Can you tell me what the differences are between Islam and Judaism?
175 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:04:08 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
... since he hasn't posted here in... what has it been, spider, nearly a year?
I think it's been two years, actually. I had written fifty megabytes of preaching and teaching to muslim newsgroups, then posted here for a short time (too short), then went to the security newsgroups hosted by Steve Gibson at news://news.grc.com/grc.ten-forward (and twenty other newsgroups, that's the lounge area), where I've been writing about computer privacy and internet security for two years.
Until Tuesday's terror, that is, when I started writing what is now six megabytes of semi-religious material after some folks started blaming muslims for the terrorism.
I don't recall what brought me back here, I must have a masochistic streak. (smile) I like it here, I have not forgotten the warm welcome I received here as a complete stranger. I won't mention any names, it does look like there's a new crop of trolls here these days in addition to the team bigots and partisans, and those of you I know to have faith as well as courage don't need a new round of flames simply because you know me. "Lightning Rod" is simply my own career choice, I expect people to have more sense than to stand too close to me. (smile)
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
176 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:09:34 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I remember the seeing the screen name 'spyder'. Might have been about the time of the Great Impeachment! LOL *smile*
177 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:14:06 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Well, I for one am glad you are back. I finished the Qu'ran last spring, and I've done my best to
explain the basics to folks, but I fear I'm just underqualified.
Besides, it's getting weird. Folks expect me to be attacking religions, not defending it. Feels ookey. ;^)
as-salaamu 'alaikum
178 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:22:36 PDT by Storm Orphan
I remember the seeing the screen name 'spyder'. Might have been about the time of the Great Impeachment! LOL *smile* 177 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:14:06 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Different FReeper, I'm sure.
Ankaboot has always been ankaboot.
(It means "spider" in Arabic)
179 Posted on 09/20/2001 23:22:43 PDT by Uriel1975
ankaboot,
Can you tell me what the differences are between Islam and Judaism?
We "latter-day" muslims, which includes the Arabs of the former millennial muslim world as well as those upon whom Islam is being sent down in America, are not The Chosen People.
We did not have the honor and privilege of being the first to receive a Revelatory Law from God that established us in the land as the most beneficial community for all those around us, was a light to the world and a practical and visible demonstration of the superiority of God's Kingdom over the kingdoms invented and crafted by men.
We did not have a prophet among us for over a thousand years, continuously, and often many at the same time, we had but one, who lived and died and is buried at Madina.
We were not privileged to go out from the blessed kingdom, from the holy temple, to the nations of the world, to announce the good news that God was about to establish His Endless and Eternal Covenant through whom everyone could come to know God directly, and through which He would establish a kingdom throughout and beyond the Holy Land that would benefit humanity beyond the wildest imaginations of any of us.
We did not get to see Jesus in the flesh when he was walking among the Children of Israel. We're waiting for him now, though.
In terms of Law, for the Children of Israel certain things are permitted and everything else is forbidden. For us, certain things are forbidden and everything else is permitted. The scribes and pharisees of the Arabs, though, have in many instances restored the Judaic prohibitions in spite of the fact that we know the Eternal Law has replaced the Torah entirely, as Scripture says happens.
The Torah is a harsh Law, applicable to the Children of Israel only. When people attempted to imitate the Children of Israel, the Torah required their destruction at the hands of the Children of Israel. We didn't have to do that, we were told to protect people of other faiths and deal only with the criminal behavior of malefactors that the religious communities were not able to deal with themselves according to their respective laws within their respective communities. Islam is a Law of Mercy, not Wrath: We are told that God has inscribed on His Throne "Surely My Mercy Overtakes My Wrath."
And whereas the Children of Israel had to fight their way out of the Sinai desert after forty years of wandering during which they were constantly beset by criminals and attackers, the seventy-two disciples of Jesus paved the way for Islam, and when we arrived we were expected. Only when a regime had decided that sovereignty belonged to them, rather than to God, so that they continued their practices of deflowering virgins on their wedding nights, taxing the people beyond the demands of the Lord, oppressing them with invented laws and prohibitions and serving their own narrow interests and pecuniary goals -- that's when we had to fight, against tyranny and oppression. Otherwise, our business and trade -- and our reputation for integrity in our dealings with all people -- preceded us, and Islam arrived in China by boat long before it reached the other end of China by land through Afghanistan.
What differences did you have in mind?
The Children of Israel had only one Law -- the Torah -- and of course they added to it the decisions of the Sanhedrin, which made it somewhat more oppressive for themselves and others, but it was still only one Law. We have one Law that we apply to ourselves, and must also understand and respect the laws of all those we encounter, to be good neighbors and to secure their houses within which they find faith in whatever form God gives them. Technically, in the strictest sense of the legal provisions, it's not that wide open and liberal that it embraces libertinism and debauchery, but comity has been extended to every community that has not attacked the muslims.
The Arabs, of course, with centuries of conflict from the popes and their financiers, neglected this aspect of things, and instead added a gloss over the words of the Law by adding technical terms that confused the people and deprived them of participation in the conduct of their affairs. Specifically admonished against establishing priesthoods, they did so anyway, based on -- essentially -- lawyering and the charisma of power. And through partisan division, the Arabs and those of the millennial kingdom divided up the knowledge they had been given, so that not only did they lose the knowledge of the Torah and the Psalms and the Gospel, but also the knowledge of Islam itself, scattered in pieces all over the world.
We muslims in America -- at least we indigenous American muslims who were not born to knowledge of Islam -- are having a very enjoyable time finding all that religious knowledge, so much of it right here in America already, from our own heritage.
Islam is not different today from when it was given to the Children of Israel as the Torah, or to the Arabs, but the world has changed slightly. People have not. We find Islam in our political institutions, in the American way of life (as broadly defined as that gets!), and in the people we encounter. It's like coming home. It's like never having left, actually. Adam, Seth, Noah, Shem, Japheth, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Malachi, Haggai and Hosea -- these are our prophets, although they walked among the Children of Israel in their time. We wear the clothes you see in your Sunday school books, those are not "old fairy tales," those were real live people who walked in Jerusalem and migrated south when the Romans came.
According to the Kebra Nagast, which muslim scholars have studied and authenticated in many of its details, Solomon's son (his name was Menelik) by the Queen of Sheba (her name was Bilqis) went to Abysinnia with the first-born sons of the Houses of Israel, the Torah and the Ark of the Covenant, and Solomon's seal ring (and thus the throne of Judah), and no ruler of Israel came out of Abysinnia for thousands of years. When the first muslims fled from Makka, that's where they went -- and they found security there, the same way that muslims fleeing the millennial muslim world come to America and find refuge and welcome here in America.
Differences? Some of the Children of Israel developed ambitions -- you can read about it in Scripture, it's not a secret -- that changed things for those who came after them. It sure changed the people of Europe, who never got the Good News that Jesus brought.
But between Islam and Judaism -- the Judaism of the Torah -- the differences are slight and purely historical. An eye for an eye has now been supplemented with an option of showing mercy to the offender. The Jubilee, which took place every fifty years, now takes place every year, just as Scripture says. We pray shoulder to shoulder, just as Scripture says. And on it goes, page after page, chapter after chapter: we're the people the Bible talks about "When Shiloh comes." He came.
But not in the Bible. In the Bible he never comes, he's just expected.
We've been here for the thousand years described in Scripture from Kedar and Tema, ten thousand saints come from Paran, fleeing the drawn sword and the bent bow, spending three full days and three full nights in the belly of the earth.
And now, even though it's been omitted from Arab "orthodoxy" and is not admitted by the "official" priests, scribes and pharisees of the millennial muslim world, we're here in "the cut-off lands" -- the separated "western" continents, on tectonic plates mentioned in the Qur'an -- for the fifty thousand years mentioned in the Qur'an -- in America. Or at least that's where it's coming down for starters. That's how it looks to us anyway, and although it's pretty impressive to think such things, it has little to do with the way we conduct our day-to-day affairs -- the Law has been established for 1400 years, all we have to do is dig it out from under the crap the Arabs have painted on it.
So I guess that's a difference. We're looking at a whole new Day. Looks like it's just beginning. What fun to be the pioneers and the strangers.
Or were you asking something else?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
180 Posted on 09/21/2001 00:19:50 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
No, I am not spreading hate....I am just wondering about things I see on the boards. There is a lot of disinformation floating around.......I would like to read the Koran for myself. I will go to Amazon and get a copy of Koran.
181 Posted on 09/21/2001 00:21:43 PDT by jwa3
I would like to read the Koran for myself. I will go to Amazon and get a copy of Koran.
You'll pay altogether too much for it there, and they caved in to a letter campaign to cut off access to a bookstore in Palestine (so I'm disgusted with them, as if that matters). I'd suggest you go to the Islamic Book Store (IBS) and get a copy of The Meaning of the Glorious Koran by Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall, New American Library (Mentor Books), which has an Introduction that is a concise and brief history of the revelatory period. That's the bookstore of the Islamic Society of North America in Plainfield Indiana, and their price is much better than Amazon's.
http://www.islamicbookscanada.com/ in Canada, I think, and http://islamicbookstore.com/ or possibly http://www.icna.org/ for the Islamic Circle of North America bookstore. A Google search will save you ten or fifteen dollars, I think.
Just avoid the flowery Elizabethan translations that are saturated with pious commentaries from the translator, and the Shi'ah or Qadiyani partisan distortions, and definitely avoid the beer-baron's rendering, he's added himself in as a latter-day prophet or something.
Gads -- preachers abound like butterflies, and they make God's Promises like cotton candy. Must be the end of the world or something.
You don't want to wait for my translation, believe me.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
182 Posted on 09/21/2001 00:52:36 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Thatnk you so much for all the time you put into that. I appreciate it greatly.
183 Posted on 09/21/2001 01:55:28 PDT by ET(end tyranny)
Thanks for your response....I'll check out the sites. I've never seen a copy of the Koran in a bookstore come to think of it!
184 Posted on 09/21/2001 03:24:31 PDT by jwa3
You see what you want to see. I said that in countries where Muslims are the majority, minority religions are banned or persecuted.
You said (in post 64 of this thread)
Perhaps you can tell us why Moslems are only willing to peacefully co-exist with other people of other faiths when they are in the extreme minority. As they are in this country.
This suggests to me, that Moslems (as in all of them) are never peaceful, when they represent the majority in a given nation. If that's not what you meant, then you shouldn't have said that.
185 Posted on 09/21/2001 04:50:20 PDT by OWK
Want to explain the difference between the Sunni and the Shiites?
186 Posted on 09/21/2001 06:11:11 PDT by allend
He could be a teacher whose teachings (and person) have been co-opted over the years for others' purposes.
That is an illogical conclusion.
I have no doubt that his words have been twisted by men for their own uses. That is why it is of utmost importance to study the Bible in detail, it remains the same and the truth can be found there. I'm only guessing that you are not well versed (no pun intended) in the details found there. Please forgive me if you are well studied.
He could be a teacher from whose teachings we only have a tiny fraction, and thusly a false understanding.
That remains a remote possibility but it would not change what teachings we do have. If you took a mathematics class and missed the last ten minutes, would that make everything that was taught prior to that invalid? I think not.
He could be a fictional character.
This is the most remote possibility of all. No other figure in antiquity has nearly the independant verification of reality as Jesus. Not Plato, nor Cicero, nor Socrates, yet we all take their existence to be a fact. This notion is a nonstarter.
He could be a teacher who said only part or none of what is attributed to him.
Same problem, too much evidence. There are four gospels for instance, which are all somewhat different and include different things but which still agree on many events and teachings and never contradict each other on major points of teaching. This is what is expected of different eyewitness accounts. Any police detective worth his salt will tell you that. There is also ample historical evidence independent of the scriptures provided by historians of the time who were unassociated with the church and recorded things in general, not only these events.
He could be a Mexican.
This is a moronic statement which is way beneath what I have come to expect of your many fine posts in the past.
He could be a divine manifestation of god.
Thats what has been debated by intelligent people of good will for centuries. You and I are just two of them. I believe that he is, based on my study of the question, but I understand that others don't and I understand why and I respect those people's opinions and their right to say what they believe.
He could be a you-fill-in-the-blank.
One thing is certain, he said he was God and that only leaves three options. Either he is a demented lunatic who mistakenly believes he is God, or he is a liar who was trying to control people with his lie, or he is who he says he is.
In the first two cases he doesn't deserve our respect much less our worship. If the last case is true,,,well,,, you fill in the blank.
187 Posted on 09/21/2001 07:31:28 PDT by ThomasJefferson
This suggests to me, that Moslems (as in all of them) are never peaceful, when they represent the majority in a given nation. If that's not what you meant, then you shouldn't have said that.
I concede that I may have given the wrong impression, when I said Moslems I was referring to the general population, as an entity, but not necessarily every individual Moslem. For that I apologize.
The fact remains that Islam remains a problem for the Western world. Period.
188 Posted on 09/21/2001 08:01:57 PDT by pgkdan
I have no doubt that his words have been twisted by men for their own uses. That is why it is of utmost importance to study the Bible in detail, it remains the same and the truth can be found there. I'm only guessing that you are not well versed (no pun intended) in the details found there. Please forgive me if you are well studied.
I am indeed intimately familiar with the bible and the history of the bible. The problem with the admonition to study the bible in detail is that it is fine up to a point, but, again, we are reading what others attributed to him. Did he say those things? Did he say a lot that was left out, to create a certain impression? We are dependent on the accounts of others, so I would suggest that coming to know the Ineffable, completely removed from the text of the bible, is what would be the best recourse. But that a completely diffenet topic.
He could be a teacher from whose teachings we only have a tiny fraction, and thusly a false understanding.
That remains a remote possibility but it would not change what teachings we do have. If you took a mathematics class and missed the last ten minutes, would that make everything that was taught prior to that invalid? I think not.
No, but it could put the first 50 minutes in a completely different context or light.
He could be a fictional character.
This is the most remote possibility of all. No other figure in antiquity has nearly the independant verification of reality as Jesus. Not Plato, nor Cicero, nor Socrates, yet we all take their existence to be a fact. This notion is a nonstarter.
I am quite aware of the evidence for the existance of christ, and it remains, as I indicated, only a possibility.
He could be a teacher who said only part or none of what is attributed to him.
Same problem, too much evidence. There are four gospels for instance, which are all somewhat different and include different things but which still agree on many events and teachings and never contradict each other on major points of teaching. This is what is expected of different eyewitness accounts. Any police detective worth his salt will tell you that. There is also ample historical evidence independent of the scriptures provided by historians of the time who were unassociated with the church and recorded things in general, not only these events.
True, but for the real show-stoppers, the miracles, there exists zero evidence. That which would clearly indicate divinity, other than attributed proclamations, simply has no proof.
He could be a Mexican.
This is a moronic statement which is way beneath what I have come to expect of your many fine posts in the past.
Lighten up, it was meant in comic relief to the stern-browed gravitas of this thread.
He could be a divine manifestation of god.
Thats what has been debated by intelligent people of good will for centuries. You and I are just two of them. I believe that he is, based on my study of the question, but I understand that others don't and I understand why and I respect those people's opinions and their right to say what they believe.
Agreed.
He could be a you-fill-in-the-blank.
One thing is certain, he said he was God and that only leaves three options. Either he is a demented lunatic who mistakenly believes he is God, or he is a liar who was trying to control people with his lie, or he is who he says he is.
Argh. That was the point of my original posting. Certain authors claim that he said he was god. THAT is certain. But there remain several other options than the tired old bromide of liar, lunatic or god.
In the first two cases he doesn't deserve our respect much less our worship. If the last case is true,,,well,,, you fill in the blank.
If the last case is true, I'd hate to bowl against him on league night.
189 Posted on 09/21/2001 09:00:51 PDT by Cernunnos
Oy vey.
190 Posted on 09/21/2001 09:37:40 PDT by Storm Orphan
Certain authors claim that he said he was god. THAT is certain. But there remain several other options than the tired old bromide of liar, lunatic or god.
Well then, they were either telling the truth or they were lying. If you want to make a charge of lying stick against guys like Peter, Paul, Matthew, John, et al., you'll have a tough time.
191 Posted on 09/21/2001 10:08:28 PDT by allend
No, but it could put the first 50 minutes in a completely different context or light.
One and one would remain two.
What do you think he could have said that would change the basic message he was giving? What different context or light would be given to the sermon on the mount for instance? Do you think he would have repudiated his earlier messages? What do you think he might have left out of his recorded messages that would be embodied in this new vast lost collection of teachings?
True, but for the real show-stoppers, the miracles, there exists zero evidence. That which would clearly indicate divinity, other than attributed proclamations, simply has no proof.
To say this is to say that the whole Bible is false. That is what you are saying. Why not just say that and forget the other stuff? You seem to think that there is some things in the new testament which are true but reject others as "someone's account". To do that is to cast doubt on everthing thereby making it into whatever you choose to believe about it. That won't work.
The whole issue of miracles is a long topic, but suffice it to say that we have seen the dead revived, the blind made to see and healings by the millions all performed by modern day doctors. It would be a simple thing for the God of the universe to do those things. You don't believe he is, no problem for me, but it would be easy if he is.
The ultimate miracle was the resurrection. For me it is the crux of Christian belief. If there is no resurrection, nothing else matters. The evidence for the resurrection is vast. But the evidence is found in the Bible so if you reject the Bible you reject the evidence of the eyewitnesses.
The last point I will make is the one about you asking me to lighten up. The question is a serious one before us and to make light of it is to say it is not important and it is to say that those to whom it is important are fools or worse. I am no fool. I may be right and I may be wrong, but I don't believe in blind faith so I have taken it seriously.
Say what you wish, it is your right, but know that you insult people when you do it in a manner unbecoming of one who respects others.
You and I will never agree on this it seems, because you claim (against a two thousand years of scrutiny) that the Bible is false. I say the bible is true in what Jesus said about his divinity therefor no other options except the three I mentioned exist. Within the context of the Bible, you have provided no other options. Only a refutation of the Bible as a reliable account. That is a different question for a different time.
192 Posted on 09/21/2001 10:17:05 PDT by ThomasJefferson
True, but for the real show-stoppers, the miracles, there exists zero evidence. That which would clearly indicate divinity, other than attributed proclamations, simply has no proof.
Again, to say the miracles did not occur, you'll have to say the guys reporting them were lying.
193 Posted on 09/21/2001 10:23:30 PDT by allend
What do you think he could have said that would change the basic message he was giving? What different context or light would be given to the sermon on the mount for instance? Do you think he would have repudiated his earlier messages? What do you think he might have left out of his recorded messages that would be embodied in this new vast lost collection of teachings?
There is no way to know what he may have said or how great (or even if any) the volume of lost teachings may be. That is utterly besides the point.
True, but for the real show-stoppers, the miracles, there exists zero evidence. That which would clearly indicate divinity, other than attributed proclamations, simply has no proof.
To say this is to say that the whole Bible is false.
No, its not.
That is what you are saying.
No, I'm not.
Why not just say that and forget the other stuff? You seem to think that there is some things in the new testament which are true but reject others as "someone's account". To do that is to cast doubt on everthing thereby making it into whatever you choose to believe about it. That won't work.
Of course it works. Some parts of the bible are absurd by their very nature, and other parts square directly with personal experience. This isn't rocket science.
The whole issue of miracles is a long topic, but suffice it to say that we have seen the dead revived, the blind made to see and healings by the millions all performed by modern day doctors. It would be a simple thing for the God of the universe to do those things. You don't believe he is, no problem for me, but it would be easy if he is.
If he/she/it were, anything would be easy.
The ultimate miracle was the resurrection. For me it is the crux of Christian belief.
As it is for many.
If there is no resurrection, nothing else matters.
We disagree.
The evidence for the resurrection is vast.
The evidence, other than biblical accounts, is utterly non-existant. Do you believe sailors in the Age of Exploration actually saw dragons and people with faces in their chests hopping around with one huge leg? Why not, there are innumerable accounts.
But the evidence is found in the Bible so if you reject the Bible you reject the evidence of the eyewitnesses.
Ah, the self-referential evidence.
The last point I will make is the one about you asking me to lighten up. The question is a serious one before us and to make light of it is to say it is not important and it is to say that those to whom it is important are fools or worse.
No, it is not saying that at all. Christ had a sense of humor, I'm sure.
I am no fool.
No one here is suggesting that.
I may be right and I may be wrong, but I don't believe in blind faith so I have taken it seriously.
Great.
Say what you wish, it is your right, but know that you insult people when you do it in a manner unbecoming of one who respects others.
I respect you, but would recommend a little levity.
You and I will never agree on this it seems, because you claim (against a two thousand years of scrutiny) that the Bible is false.
Again, there is an argument to be made for the sprititual validity of biblical claims. But historical accuracy about, for example, a city or battle, is not the same thing as withstanding scrutiny about miracles, divine nature, etc...
I say the bible is true in what Jesus said about his divinity therefor no other options except the three I mentioned exist. Within the context of the Bible, you have provided no other options. Only a refutation of the Bible as a reliable account. That is a different question for a different time.
If you say so.
194 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:07:18 PDT by Cernunnos
Some parts of the bible are absurd by their very nature,
Which parts?
195 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:14:49 PDT by ThomasJefferson
The evidence, other than biblical accounts, is utterly non-existant.
That's kind of like saying, "Other than the fact that ten witnesses saw the defendant do the deed, the prosecutor hasn't got a case." If you're going to discount the evidence, you're going to have to make a charge of lying stick against the Apostles.
196 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:28:12 PDT by allend
My fav is Dt.23:12-14. Gotta bury your poo, because god is out walking and might step in it.
Having the Almighty soil his sandals is, to put it charitably, goofy.
197 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:36:12 PDT by Cernunnos
That's kind of like saying, "Other than the fact that ten witnesses saw the defendant do the deed, the prosecutor hasn't got a case." If you're going to discount the evidence, you're going to have to make a charge of lying stick against the Apostles.
Using the bible to prove the veracity of the bible doesn't wash.
I have a rock in my front yard that is 100% effective against marauding, 8ft. three-eyed space aliens. How do I know it works? Well, not one has ever visited...
Should we also believe the phantasmagorical accounts concerning the buddha? How about Mohammed's chariot ride to the seven heavens? If not, why not?
198 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:45:20 PDT by Cernunnos
Baloney. That passage pertains to the regulations on ritual uncleanliness which were given the Hebrews. In addition to emphasing physical cleanliness to remind the people of the required spiritual cleanliness, most of the regulations made excellent sense hygenically and were way ahead of their time.
199 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:49:42 PDT by allend
Using the bible to prove the veracity of the bible doesn't wash. I have a rock in my front yard that is 100% effective against marauding, 8ft. three-eyed space aliens. How do I know it works? Well, not one has ever visited...
Stop dancing around the issue. Are you going to accuse the Apostles of lying or aren't you?
Should we also believe the phantasmagorical accounts concerning the buddha? How about Mohammed's chariot ride to the seven heavens? If not, why not?
Who were the eyewitnesses and where's their testimony?
200 Posted on 09/21/2001 11:54:43 PDT by allend
The eyewitnesses, at least in buddhism, were his first followers, and their accounts are in the Lalitavistara, the Buddhacharita, and the Mahavastu, among others.
He even beat out christ by a few hundred years with the whole virgin birth gambit.
That buddha, what a kidder.
201 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:13:01 PDT by Cernunnos
23:13 And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee:
23:14 For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee.
That, to me, quite clearly states that god is walking around the camp, and he doesn't want to step in crap, ritually or otherwise.
202 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:15:51 PDT by Cernunnos
Having the Almighty soil his sandals is, to put it charitably, goofy.
I'm sorry if you don't understand the meaning of some passages. Much of the bible, particularly the old testament is a collection of various literary methods. Metaphors and such. The idea of basic sanitation being preached to people in a way that they can understand (in hebrew thought, not greek thought) is one of many messages contained in the Bible. In the new testament, Jesus often taught with parables.
Perhaps your studies didn't cover such subjects.
I don't find the passage goofy when concidered in this light.
203 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:37:46 PDT by ThomasJefferson
Wrong title.............Islam, the straight path to Hell
204 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:42:29 PDT by Puck from Michigan
Yeah, but would Jesus ever cross-check someone?
205 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:45:34 PDT by gjenkins
All of that is just fine and dandy on paper,
I have just one question ...
If Islam stands for Peace, why is EVERY Islamic nation on this earth in constant turmoil at best or a despot hell hole at worst?
206 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:48:41 PDT by the_alfalfanator
23:13 And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee: 23:14 For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee. That, to me, quite clearly states that god is walking around the camp, and he doesn't want to step in crap, ritually or otherwise.
That is not what it said. They had been given regulations on ritual uncleanliness, and God would have been displeased if they had disobeyed them. Nothing there to strain the credulity of a reasonable person.
As for God walking, would it have been more credible to you if they had spoken of God as, "floating?" How about "gliding?" How about, "moving around the camp by whatever manner spirit beings do these things?" Is that fact that they used anthropomorphisms in talking about God a reason for discounting what they said?
As for whatever stories have been told about Budda, I would evaluate them on the same basis as I would evaluate any other piece of historical data:
(1) Were the accounts written by the authors whose names they bear?
(2) Can we demonstrate from the historical evidence the accounts have been transmitted to us substantially the way they were originally written?
(3) Were the authors eyewitnesses or did they have access to eyewitness?
(4) Were the authors intending to assert fact, or were they just using imagry?
(5) Was the authors' testimony scrutinized by impartial eyewitnesses or hostile eyewitnesses?
(6) What was the character of the eyewitnesses?
(7) Did the eyewitnesses have motivation to lie?
207 Posted on 09/21/2001 12:59:14 PDT by allend
The early christian church is the liar.
Yeah, right. I'm sure that you're the only one with the details?
Do tell...
208 Posted on 09/21/2001 13:20:08 PDT by AlGone2001
Bump!
209 Posted on 09/21/2001 13:36:14 PDT by Aerial
Jesus plays to win, bee-yotch. He'd cross check your butt toothless.
210 Posted on 09/21/2001 13:50:42 PDT by Storm Orphan
That is not what it said.
Er, that's the text, word for word.
They had been given regulations on ritual uncleanliness, and God would have been displeased if they had disobeyed them. Nothing there to strain the credulity of a reasonable person.
No, not that in and of itself.
As for God walking, would it have been more credible to you if they had spoken of God as, "floating?" How about "gliding?" How about, "moving around the camp by whatever manner spirit beings do these things?" Is that fact that they used anthropomorphisms in talking about God a reason for discounting what they said?
Considering that the OT is quite specific in other areas about what god is doing, yes, the act of walking around some camp, worrying about stepping in crap is laughable, or, as I previously referred to it as, absurd.
As for whatever stories have been told about Budda, I would evaluate them on the same basis as I would evaluate any other piece of historical data:
As would I.
(1) Were the accounts written by the authors whose names they bear?
Yes.
(2) Can we demonstrate from the historical evidence the accounts have been transmitted to us substantially the way they were originally written?
Yes
(3) Were the authors eyewitnesses or did they have access to eyewitness?
Yes
(4) Were the authors intending to assert fact, or were they just using imagry?
Debatable in both traditions.
(5) Was the authors' testimony scrutinized by impartial eyewitnesses or hostile eyewitnesses?
Both
(6) What was the character of the eyewitnesses?
Buddhist Monks? Pretty much human, like everyone else.
(7) Did the eyewitnesses have motivation to lie?
Yes, in both traditions.
My point is that the miracles attributed to Buddha and to Christ are neon-distractions from the core essence of their respective teachings. Las Vegas smoke and mirrors.
In both cases, there are the religions of the original teacher, and there are the relitions about the original teacher, and that makes all the difference.
Seek the christ behind the Christ.
211 Posted on 09/21/2001 13:58:14 PDT by Cernunnos
Thanks for your highly informative posts here; I've enjoyed reading them. One thing you said particularly struck me:
the Law has been established for 1400 years, all we have to do is dig it out from under the crap the Arabs have painted on it.
You're a Protestant Muslim? ;o)
212 Posted on 09/21/2001 13:58:26 PDT by angelo
5 minutes for trying to check the Lord!
213 Posted on 09/21/2001 14:03:15 PDT by Cernunnos
His goal is to get you holy!
214 Posted on 09/21/2001 14:06:18 PDT by Cernunnos
Cross-checked by Jesus! Hallelujah! I bet that is what Patrick Roy is saying above.
215 Posted on 09/21/2001 14:06:51 PDT by gjenkins
You always hear: "Then the ball was in the air and I just thank God for letting me
catch it and get the touchdown."
You never hear: "Dammit! We'd have won if Jesus hadn't made me fumble."
216 Posted on 09/21/2001 14:21:12 PDT by Storm Orphan
thank you
217 Posted on 09/21/2001 17:25:20 PDT by RnMomof7
LOL, I love armchair scholars asserting their opinion and pretending it's widely known fact.
Hmmmmm....let me try "Its obvious the early Church was wrong when she declared Jesus God. Everyone knows I am God!".<
218 Posted on 09/21/2001 18:54:33 PDT by Conservative til I die
He could be a teacher whose teachings (and person) have been co-opted over the years for others' purposes.
I'm sure His teachings have been corrupted by others. Not saying the teachings as they exist are corrupted versions of His real teachings, but that people have twisted His words for evil purposes.
But to say He was just some teacher whose teachings were corrupted, and was turned into God, the Messiah, etc. is hugely naive, and shows that one is reading only the parts of the New Testament they believe support their beliefs.
I mean, the man was called God by John the Evangelist, one of the 12, amongst other indications in the New Testament.
He could be a teacher from whose teachings we only have a tiny fraction, and thusly a false understanding.
That is why He established His Catholic Church, which has passed down His teachings since Day 1 to today.
He could be a fictional character.
He could be, but there is no evidence to support that claim. I mean, you might as well say "He could be a blue-nosed baboon."
He could be a teacher who said only part or none of what is attributed to him.
219 Posted on 09/21/2001 19:04:21 PDT by Conservative til I die
The early christian church is the liar.
Yeah, right. I'm sure that you're the only one with the details?
He sure does! I mean, He like, read a book somewhere about it! That settles it!
220 Posted on 09/21/2001 19:08:44 PDT by Conservative til I die
I love this art! Granted, the intentions of the artists are well meaning, but this is what I call "trailer park" artwork. I'm guessing you got this from a Mormon or Jehovah's Witness site.
Give me the Last Supper or the Pieta anyday.
221 Posted on 09/21/2001 19:11:45 PDT by Conservative til I die
There is only one way to the true and living God, its through His Son Jesus who died upon the cross for our sins,and rose again. Its only His Blood that can take away our sin.John 14:6 Jesus said " I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
222 Posted on 09/21/2001 19:28:53 PDT by sam I am
Want to explain the difference between the Sunni and the Shiites?
The short answer is "No." (smile) However, that's not acceptable.
The Prophet sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam (he asked us to say that) told us of a fitna, or bloody dispute, that would enter every house of his people, the Arab muslims. This fitna is the Shi'ah, "The Party." Of course, mine is the traditional fundamentalist orthodox, or "Sunni" view, which you might enjoy with a grain of salt.
I'll largely ignore here the instances of rapprochement to illuminate the conflict, perhaps that will simplify the situation -- although my account here should not be taken as comprehensively authoritative but merely an outline. I'll also appreciate not being stoned or beheaded or otherwise crucified for spelling (or other) errors. The Shi'ah annually commemorate events in their histories with flagellation and plenty of whips and blood, personally I have other preferences.
Essentially the Shi'ah -- who came into existence briefly as something of a discrete party at the point when the body politic of Islam shattered into three estranged groups -- claim a hereditary lineal dynastic succession through Fatima, the prophet's daughter, and 'Ali, her husband and the prophet's cousin. Would that it were so simple as that, but history has written more.
'Ali was the fourth and effectively last successor to Muhammad as head of the muslim ummah, the suzerain body politic of Islam. Political ambition motivated the house of Umayya to contest the leadership of the ummah on a pretext, and by an artifice they manipulated an arbitration of the superficial dispute, to which 'Ali, as sovereign, assented. At this, many muslims rebelled on the claim that arbitration in that circumstance was unlawful, becoming the first group to "secede" from the ummah, by reason of which they are called "Khawarij" or "Seceders."
This left 'Ali to the treachery (in the arbitration) of the Umayyads, who became the political fait d'accompli claimant to be the ummah, while those who rejected the treacherous arbitration result and maintained allegiance to 'Ali became the first of the Shi'ah, the "Party" of 'Ali. 'Ali was soon assassinated by one of the Khawarij, and the sons of 'Ali, Hassan and Hussein, were killed by the Umayyads. The Shi'ah quickly became largely hidden by dissimulation and initiatory lodgecraft, in response to the new Umayyad policy for capital homogeneity of compulsory allegiances.
This homicidal approach of the Umayyads, received by the Shi'ah as effective regicide, ultimately became the pattern through twelve generations. The last lineal descendant Imam disappeared in childhood to become "The Hidden Imam" of whom, centuries later, the Ayatollah Khomeini would be regarded as a successor or reappearance -- that the Persians called Khomeini "The Imam" is evidence that he was considered the first lineal successor since the "occultation" of the Hidden Imam. But all that came later.
During the time of the Umayyads, the Shi'ah and the Khawarij made common cause with the Abbasids to execute the largest successful conspiracy in human history. They deposed and annihilated the Umayyads, instituting a reign of Abbasid tyranny that first turned against their allies in revolution, the Shi'ah. This gave the Shi'ah an exaggerated institution of the doctrine of "Taqiyya," or dissimulation, which requires the Shi'ah to conceal themselves, chameleon-like, and rely on initiatory lodgecraft for social cohesion and organization as a discrete party, when they do not hold temporal power.
Or, for that matter, sometimes when they do.
(And as an aside, one of the Umayyad scions, 'Abdur-Rahman, escaped the Abbasids and founded Islamic Spain, wherein occurred the Golden Age of Judaism.)
The Abbasi tyranny, though, did not kill them all, as hidden Shi'ah were among them. And some centuries later, I think in the time of a later dynasty, came the Assassins, predecessors to the present Aga Khan, and successive revolutions in the secretly-held doctrines of the Shi'ah succession. A proliferation of parties too numerous to list emerged from their machinations, and the line of their ideologies leads through some ostensibly Western philosophers as well as the "Khaniqah" sufi orders. Lately, we've seen Khomeini, but Saddam Hussein, among others, has Shi'ah foundations, he is a Shi'ah of the socialist Ba'ath party, while the Gulf States have substantial Shi'ah representation in their own ruling circles.
As an interesting aside, according to security guru Bruce Schneier, Khomeini inherited from the Shah two intaglio presses for currency, which the Persians then used to counterfeit American hundred-dollar bills. During his life, these flooded the United States in the hands of Khomeini's partisans, who did not lack for recruiting incentives. Since the continuous output of these presses would not have been able to make a dent in the money supply, the solution of the U.S. Treasury Department was the new bills we have today. What has become of the political organizing that Persian "students" did during those years is as yet undetermined, I assume that our very capable FBI kept track of it all.
Quickly I should add that there are millions of Shi'ah muslims who do not know this much of their own history and initiatory doctrine, especially but not only here in America, and they are not regarded as outside the pale of Islam by other muslims and indeed, their lives are exemplary and peaceful and not remotely involved in conspiracy. The Khomeini regime found their children very helpful in clearing Iraqi minefields on their way to paradise. But the Shi'ah, even during the bloodiest of their revolutionary initiatives, have always been regarded by Sunni muslims as within the pale. Unfortunately this attitude is not reciprocated within the initiatory doctrines, in Shi'ah doctrine the Sunni muslims are criminal usurpers of the rights of 'Ali to dynastic succession, and apostate.
It is the Shi'ah who have evolved the ostensibly religious rationale for suicide attacks. What I have seen in the way of these "fatwa" edicts is indistinguishable from the sophistry of the dialectic, while the doctrines generally credited with preparing the social climate for the rise of Khomeini were written by 'Ali Shari'ati, a student of Jean-Paul Sartre at the Sorbonne, whose writings are essentially dialectical materialism dressed in religious terminology.
Let's see ... I think that about covers it, but for some legal distinctions.
The Shi'ah practice "temporary marriage," not surprisingly regarded by Sunni muslims as legalized prostitution. This has, however, made the Shi'ah attractive to some Americans. There is also greater emphasis on the intellectual understandings of esoteric glosses on the Qur'an, as well as on the mystiques of initiatory lodgecraft. The Shi'ah see themselves as the elite of Islam, with the Sunni muslims left to ignorant piety, although this may be a rather raw way of expressing this attitude. And finally, the chador -- the body-length black robe completely concealing the woman within -- was imported to the rest of Islam, to the extent that it has, from Persia.
Perhaps we'll hear more from others, who will cover the latter-day innovations that the Sunni schools of law consider terminal apostacy, there are too many for me to enumerate and they do not apply across the spectrum.
But no, I don't want to explain it. Just setting some of it forth is sufficiently disturbing, trying to figure it out to explain it would simply give me a headache.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
223 Posted on 09/22/2001 03:24:56 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
(1) Were the accounts written by the authors whose names they bear?
Yes
(2) Can we demonstrate from the historical evidence the accounts have been transmitted to us
substantially the way they were originally written?
Yes
(3) Were the authors eyewitnesses or did they have access to eyewitness?
Yes
Interesting. Where are you getting your information on the Buddists?
(4) Were the authors intending to assert fact, or were they just using imagry?
Debatable in both traditions.
Maybe in the Buddists', but not in ours.
(5) Was the authors' testimony scrutinized by impartial eyewitnesses or hostile
eyewitnesses?
Both
I don't know about the Buddists, but in the case of the Apostles, their testimony had to survive in an environment of hostile eyewitness who had means and motivation to expose any hoax. However, about the best they could come up with were things like, "He casts out demons by the prince of demons," or, "The disciples came and stole the body."
(6) What was the character of the eyewitnesses?
Buddhist Monks? Pretty much human, like everyone else.
Budda never did claim divinity, and a claim to his divinity was something which evolved after his death. Followers of Budda did not face the persecution faced by the Apostles.
(7) Did the eyewitnesses have motivation to lie?
Yes, in both traditions.
I take it then that you are accusing the Apostles of lying. That will not stand scrutiny. For one thing, these men believed their salvation hinged on the literal truth of what they were saying. For another thing, they had just seen their leader crucified and could reasonably expect the anyone preaching him would suffer a similar fate. Indeed, many or most of them did end up being martyred.
My point is that the miracles attributed to Buddha and to Christ are neon-distractions from the core essence of their respective teachings. Las Vegas smoke and mirrors. In both cases, there are the religions of the original teacher, and there are the relitions about the original teacher, and that makes all the difference.
You are totally incorrect on your understanding the preaching of the Apostles or of their concern for the truth.
Acts 1: 22 "someone who was with us right from the time when John was baptizing until the day when he was taken up from us--and he can act with us as a witness to his resurrection."
1 Cor. 15:13. "If there is not resurrection of the dead, Christ himself cannot have been raised, and if Christ has not been raised then our preaching is usless; indeed, we are shown up as witnesses who have committed perjury before God, because we swore on evidence before God that he had raised Christ to life."
224 Posted on 09/24/2001 06:48:40 PDT by allend
Thanks for the analysis. That's a keeper. I heard a Muslim who was either a Shiite or had Shiite sympathies compare the difference to the the Catholics vs. Protestants. I.e., the Shiites have a self-perpetuating hierarchy with a magisterium, and all are required to believe it. The Sunnis, on the other hand, elect their own leaders and interpret the Koran however they please. Any truth to that?
225 Posted on 09/24/2001 06:56:04 PDT by allend
Dear ladies and gentleman,
FYI we have an activist in here with nothing better to do than argue all day long. Having been asked to shut up about spreading propoganda about his religion and politics on news.grc.com, he proceeds to come here and spread more propoganda. Unemployed and scrounging off state welfare while exercising his freedom of speech which also covers telling lies and twisting anything people post and deliberately quoting out of context.
You should be aware that (ankaboot) aka (Abujamal) aka (Dawud Ahmad Al-Amriki) is well known across many newsgroups as a TROLL. A visit to grc.news.feedback and grc.ten-forward a week or so back will give you an indication of what this guy is all about.
He loves nothing better than to expose peoples names and addresses if they disagree with him or his activist minions. He will argue forever about nothing just for arguements sake and he is best off completely ignored as he always has to have the last word. Ignoring him completely like so many others do upsets him all the more and he goes away with his tail between his legs to spread FUD elsewhere. You will also find his propoganda on muslim groups on deja.
A visit to his website at http://www.muslimamerica.net will give you an idea that this guy is a troublemaker first class. He uses 3 different email addresses that are well known ankaboot@muslimamerica.net abujamal@pchelpers.org and muslims@muslimamerica.net.
Dawud Ahmad Al-Amriki, Muslim America,
P.O. Box 231, Springdale, WA, 99173-0231, tel.
(509) 258-9031, fax 1 (800) Muslims.
Springdale, WA USA
Here are some other useful details about this TROLL that is trying to hide his identity under this new alias. Beware like all TROLLS he has many aliases but he is easy to spot from his email addresses and the propoganda he spreads. He claims the only hope for America is Islam and that if you insult him that you should be careful his more militant brothers do not get to hear of it from him.
Do a little research on him with the above search criteria and you will turn up alsorts of fundamentalist and radical activist crap, screaming for jihad and many more of his cut and paste ramblings posted to enflame and poke a reaction.
Hey Abujamal, Give it up TROLL the game is up. We know what you are. We know what you stand for and we know what you are up to.
*vome*
226 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:27:08 PDT by vome
Thanks but no thanks. I'll keep my faith and belief in the Judeo Christian God, not allah.
I find allah and your koran offensive. The timing of your post is also insensitive. I'm not impressed with any of it.
I'm tired of rading and hearing in the news how followers of this faith are NOT cooperating with the F.B.I. or other officials to stop terrorism. I'm tired of a smiley face being put on a "religion" that denigrates women and promises males a bunch of virgins in a mansion for acting on their belief that America is the great satan.
Yes, I am NOT tolerant of anti-American and ungodly propaganda, ankaboot.
227 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:35:31 PDT by nmh
This is very misleading. Muslims do not believe in the Bible or even Jesus Christ for that matter. There are NO parallels to Christianity with this belief system. You post insulting nonsense.
228 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:38:46 PDT by nmh
I wouldn't worry. As far as I know, Ankaboot doesn't post all that much or have a lot of influence here except among a certain few.
Free Republic has an HTML format and you have to add paragraph tags to make your posts more readable.
229 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:38:48 PDT by vrwc54
230 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:44:13 PDT by BibleBeliever (shellyspace@yahoo.com)
Rational Thinking explores Islam, Quran and Muhammad’s claim to
prophethood.
A thorough study of Quran and Hadiths reveal an Islam that is not being
"Men never do evil so
completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." -Pascal
presented honestly by the Muslim propagandists and is not known to the
majority of Muslims. Islam as it is taught in Quran (Koran) and lived by
Muhammad, as is reported in the Hadith (Biography and sayings of the
Prophet) is a religion of intolerance, inequality, violence,
discrimination, superstition, fanaticism, and blind faith. Islam
advocates
killing the non-Muslims, abuses the human rights of the minorities and
women. Islam expanded by Jihad (holy war) and forced its way by killing
the
non-believers and the dissidents.
Apostasy in Islam is the biggest crime,
punishable by death. Muhammad was a fundamentalist himself therefore
fundamentalism cannot be separated from true Islam. Islam, which means
submission, demands from its followers to submit their wills and thoughts
to Muhammad and his Allah, a deity that despises reason, democracy,
freedom
of thought and freedom of expression.
I reject Islam a) because of
a) Muhammad lived a less than holy life. His lust for sex, his
affairs with
Muhammad’s lack of moral and ethical fortitude and b) because of the
absurdities in Quran.
his maids and slave girls,
his pedophilic
relationship with Aisha a
9-year-old child, his killing
sprees, his
massacre and the genocide of the
Jews, his slave
making and trading, his assassination of his opponents, his
raids and lootings of the merchant caravans, his burning of the palm
plantations, his destroying the water wells, his cursing and invoking
evil
on his enemies and his revenge on his captured prisoners of war
disqualify
him as a decent human being let alone the messenger of God
b) An unbiased study of Quran shows that far from being a
“miracle” that
book is a hoax. Once Quran is scrutinized with rational thinking, almost
every sentence proves to be false. Quran is replete with scientific
heresies, historic blunders, mathematical mistakes, logical absurdities
and
grammatical errors. Could possibly the author of this Universe be as
ignorant as it appears to be in Quran?
Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers
wherever they find them (Q.
2:191), to murder them and treat them harshly (Q. 9:123), slay them (Q.
9:
5), fight with them, (Q. 8: 65 ) even if they are Christians and Jews,
humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax (Q. 9: 29). Quran
takes
away the freedom of belief from all humanity and tell clearly that no
other
religion except Islam is accepted (Q. 3: 85).
It relegates those who
disbelieve in Quran to hell (Q. 5: 11), calls them najis (filthy,
untouchable, impure) (Q. 9: 28). It orders its followers to fight the
unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (Q. 2: 193). It
says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water
(Q. 14: 17).
It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and
“As for the disbelievers”, it says that “for them garments of fire shall
be
feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with
disgrace
and that “they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter” (Q.5:
34).
cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water
whereby
whatever is in their bowls and skin shall be dissolved and they will
be
punished with hooked iron rods” (Q. 22: 9).
Quran prohibits a Muslim to
befriend a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the
brother of that Muslim (Q. 9: 23), (Q. 3: 28). Quran asks the Muslims to
“strive against the unbelievers with great endeavor (Q. 25: 52), be stern
with them because they belong to hell (Q. 66: 9).
The holy Prophet demanded
As for women the book of Allah says that they are
his follower to “strike off the heads of the disbelievers”; then after
making a “wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining
captives” (Q. 47: 4).
inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they
are found disobedient (Q. 4:34). It teaches that women will go to hell if
they are disobedient to their husbands (Q. 66:10). It maintains that men
have an advantage over the women (Q. 2:228). It not only denies the
women's
equal right to their inheritance (Q. 4:11-12), it also regards them as
imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the court
(Q.
2:282).
This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist
unless she can produce a male witness.
Muhammad allowed the Muslims to
Pakistani
marry up to four views and gave them license to sleep with their slave
maids and as many “captive” women as they may have (Q. 4:3). He himself
did
just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they
call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women.
soldiers raped up to 250,000 Bangali women in 1971 after they
massacred
3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that
Bangladeshis are unislamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic
regime
of Iran rape the women and then kill them after calling them
apostates and
the enemies of Allah. This site scrutinizes Islam with Rational Thinking.
It rejects time-honored beliefs that cannot stand the probing of reason.
It
asks questions and encourages independent thinking. It promotes unity of
humankind, equality between men and women, abolition of prejudices and
freedom from dogmatism and blind faith.
In a world that has become so technologically advanced that even the
poorest nations that cannot feed themselves boast having sophisticated
nuclear and biological weapons, small misunderstandings can cause
catastrophic results. Religion has always been the biggest source of
misunderstanding. For religion, people are ready to die, kill and destroy
everything else. Only a religious person would believe that he would go
to
paradise if he kills other human beings. Only a religious person has no
regards for the lives he destroys because their faith is not right.
In the past century Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise, and with
that terrorisms, revolutions, and upheavals ensued.
Millions of lives were
Islam
lost and still counting. Let us pause for a moment and take a second look
at Islam. We may just have made a mistake. The reason I think Islam is
harmful and must go is not due to the fact that Quran says Earth is flat
or
the stars are missiles that Allah fires at the jinns who climb the heaven
to eavesdrop the conversation of the exalted assembly. These tales could
even amuse us. Islam must go because it teaches hate, it orders killing
the
non-Muslims, it denigrates women and it violates the human rights.
must go not because it is false but because it is destructive, because it
is a danger; a threat to peace and security of humankind. With the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in Islamic countries,
Islam
Ali Sina
has become a serious and a real threat
to the survival of our species.
October 2000
Posted on 09/18/2001 21:49:24 PDT by FR_addict
ET said "Jesus is a PATH to G-d. But, Jesus is NOT G-d. He is one of several prophets/paths to G-d.
But God said:John 1:1 ¶In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
John 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, ***even as we are one:****
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
231 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:53:32 PDT by BibleBeliever
Who started this thread? Close red.
232 Posted on 09/24/2001 18:58:46 PDT by BibleBeliever
Camel bump.
Or is it hump?
His,
Bob Z.
rzuvich@crosswinds.net
233 Posted on 09/24/2001 19:44:54 PDT by Bob Z.
Actually, we'd like to see them make public appearances to denounce the Fundamentalists.
I'm a muslim fundamentalist. They're talking about some radicals who've swallowed Marxist-Leninist confrontational politics and dressed it up in religious terminology, like 'Ali Shari'ati did for the Persians after he'd studied at the feet of Jean-Paul Sartre at the Sorbonne for years.
Several parties have dialectical materialist ideologies that their partisans cannot distinguish from Islam. And it does not suit the agendas of the media to differentiate. That does not make that radicalism Islam, it's not.
But with "fundamentalists" they're attacking two groups at once -- muslims and Christians. The aim is to discredit anyone who finds their values in Scripture or the religions of Abraham. It's not a new thing.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
Waiting for the Antichrist
Islam the Straight Path to God
Guide to Events
Message from the Muslim Community
A Political Process for Muslim America
"What I expect from American Muslims"
"Here may be our problem with Islam"
Position of US National Muslim Organizations
Taliban Leader summons religious scholars
US Rejects Afghan Clerics' Ruling on Bin Laden
FBI Obtains Terrorist E-Mails
Farrakhan Warns of Armageddon
A Principled Opponent
A Serious Islam Question
Text of Fatwa by Bin Laden -- False and Void
"Smoking them out" is not new in the Middle East
China's Role in Osama Bin Laden's "Holy War"
234 Posted on 09/24/2001 22:10:24 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Okay, religion should be avoided in our endeavors to resolve this issue.
The most intensely religious event in fourteen centuries, and you think it can be avoided? Guess again.
Values, however, can't be. I read on one of these posts that the U.S. was the only nation on earth with true Islamic values
That would be Message from the Muslim Community and you need to read it more carefully.
Fair enough. It is time for the U.S. to impose those values on the Mideast.
Who made us the mullah of the world? Just how much of a Conquistadore Inquisitorial mentality comes with being the world's only superpower -- unless the terrorists succeed in destroying us? Whatever America's "religion" might be -- whatever eclectic fabric we weave from the multi-threaded tapestry of faith and humanity, what right do we have to shove it down everybody's throat? Hasn't that been what everyone's saying muslims want to do? Who's who here?
That means a Jehova Witness or a Mormon can proseltyze door to door in Mecca with the same degrees of safety as Minneapolis.
That's in the Promised Land given to Abraham. It is the homeland forever of the Children of Abraham, excepting wrongdoers and corruption. We have no call to impose our pluralistic values on those people, they know what's theirs and what they've been told from God, we don't know all of it and possibly never will.
What gives us any right to meddle in the affairs of the Children of Abraham? Who are we? They were given the Book before us, we are coming last. In terms of religion, they are our older brothers -- but they're certainly not going to tell us how to be Jews or Christians or Muslims, how can we tell them they have to throw open their doors to all of our high and noble ideals that we can't live up to ourselves?
That means if a Moslem decides to convert to Christianity, he won't fear a death sentence.
There is no death sentence for leaving Islam, leaving it is its own punishment. There is a loss of citizenship in muslim society, an end to the fraternal obligations that all muslims have to all other muslims, no muslim may inherit from them, their testimony is rejected in shari'ah courts, and their mothers disown them. What is that but civil death? In a society as oriented on mothers as Islamic society is, what is it but a fate worse than death? No muslim wants to rescue such people from that by killing them, that's entirely bogus and a source of hypocrisy in any religious community.
The capital crime in this regard is imposing as shari'ah law a falsification of the Law -- such as Elijah Muhammad, Noble Drew 'Ali, and whoever wrote that garbage "fatwa" calling on muslims to become common thugs, robbers, and brigands and calling that Islam. That is a capital crime, to impose that on anyone as "Islamic law."
The Children of Israel falsified the Law of Moses -- that's what all the prophets from Solomon onward testified and called them away from. The Arabs falsified the Law of Islam within a hundred years of the death of Muhammad and after that it laid the foundations of modern civilization and shone like a sun for a thousand years because that's what God had Promised the People of Scripture long before.
And that is when the rulers resurrected the Mosaic Law as Islamic Law and killed those who left the faith, like you can see even today in the Torah but not in the Qur'an. They falsified it, using the Arabic word for one kind of "change" to refer to another kind of "change" as a priestly technical term. Of course no one dared to challenge that, just as no one dared to challenge the Sanhedrin and the scribes and pharisees who sat in Moses' seat -- until Jesus told the truth about them.
That's considerably different from leaving the muslims and going to greener pastures and remaining at peace with your fellow man.
That means we fight to end slavery in the Sudan.
That also is in the Promised Land. From the Euphrates to the Nile, a vast oval that encompasses the entirety of the Middle East and northeastern Africa. That is what is given to Abraham, the Children of Israel were allowed to establish the Kingdom of David in a small region, but the Kingdom of Solomon extended throughout the entirety of the Promised Land -- for Solomon to save the faithful remnant to Abysinnia and from the Babylonian Captivity. Ethiopia has never been a muslim nation, the throne of Judah continued there until the communists took over in 1975, it was there when we went from Makkah to take refuge with Negus Najjashi fourteen centuries ago.
And you're being sold a bill of goods about the Sudan by some oil interests that want to exploit the Sudanese deposits. Like the falsified soil samples that an American "ally" provided that led to our bombing of an innocent pharmaceutical factory. You can't trust what you're hearing about the Sudan.
That means strongmen and monarchs are overthrown and dissent is allowed.
Freedom of speech, specifically freedom to speak out against oppression and injury and heavy-handed arbitrary officialdom, was revealed with Islam 1400 years ago. That's the origin of the First Amendment of our U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights, one of the "God-given rights" the new government couldn't infringe. Where do you find that in Scripture, that America's founding fathers call it a "God-given right"? It came through the lodges, the Illuminati and the Shrine, to America, as foundation. You don't need to tell muslims about overthrowing tyranny and oppressive corruption, it's our religious mandate. Obviously, the Arabs and their followers, like the Children of Israel, didn't have the gumption.
We'd better have it.
That means Israel's right to exist is recognized by all.
God will judge Israel. Again. There will be no question of Israel's right to exist, the inhabitants of paradise include rank upon rank upon rank of the Children of Israel, Israel will always exist. No one can destroy Israel but God and the Children of Israel. Look in Scripture to find out who, what, where, when and how and so on -- the destruction of Israel comes from the Children of Israel, not anyone else.
You willing to sign on?
I don't need to sign on. I'm already on-line and weapons hot, have been for decades. My weapon is a Pentium III/500 and a keyboard. That's why the anti-Islam brigades have come to Free Republic.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
Waiting for the Antichrist
Islam the Straight Path to God
Guide to Events
Message from the Muslim Community
A Political Process for Muslim America
"What I expect from American Muslims"
"Here may be our problem with Islam"
Position of US National Muslim Organizations
Taliban Leader summons religious scholars
US Rejects Afghan Clerics' Ruling on Bin Laden
FBI Obtains Terrorist E-Mails
Farrakhan Warns of Armageddon
A Principled Opponent
A Serious Islam Question
Text of Fatwa by Bin Laden -- False and Void
"Smoking them out" is not new in the Middle East
China's Role in Osama Bin Laden's "Holy War"
235 Posted on 09/24/2001 23:56:10 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Who started this thread? Close red.
Looks like everyone's stopping in, including the anti-Islam brigades, to attempt to turn it into chaos. I started the Thread. Here are the rest, below my sig.
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
Waiting for the Antichrist
Islam the Straight Path to God
Guide to Events
Message from the Muslim Community
A Political Process for Muslim America
"What I expect from American Muslims"
"Here may be our problem with Islam"
Position of US National Muslim Organizations
Taliban Leader summons religious scholars
US Rejects Afghan Clerics' Ruling on Bin Laden
FBI Obtains Terrorist E-Mails
Farrakhan Warns of Armageddon
A Principled Opponent
A Serious Islam Question
Text of Fatwa by Bin Laden -- False and Void
"Smoking them out" is not new in the Middle East
China's Role in Osama Bin Laden's "Holy War"
236 Posted on 09/25/2001 01:02:29 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
(bump)
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
237 Posted on 09/25/2001 15:17:43 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
I'm sure that we all agree that we should uphold common respect and basic courtesy.
Should you mean Freepers with that "we" I believe you are excluding a few who consider any tactic legitimate that demonizes some others. We have seen in the many Threads in which I've been posting that this includes baiting challenges, crude insults and innuendo, patently offensive characterizations, misrepresentations and outright lies. It is not a requirement of posting here to "uphold common respect and basic courtesy," that is merely Jim's request of his guests.
It appears to me that bin Laden -- and a number of organized parties completely and utterly unrelated to bin Laden -- are bent on demonizing Americans; and there are organized parties bent on demonizing muslims, as we see here at Free Republic as well as elsewhere. When they come to Free Republic they have not come other than with the same hate-filled, racist, demonizing slanders they've been spreading in many other places like public schools in America, news media, and entertainment.
But the declared and demonstrated "enemies" these days are Americans and muslims. Both are called terrorists and the propaganda of the deed is well advanced, there is "evidence" that seems to prove. It all comes from one source, neither American nor muslim but dedicated to the destruction of both.
I've spent considerable time in my life trying to persuade someone or another that there are demonic people so filled with malevolent purpose that they have lost all vestige of humanity, usually in situations where I've been trying to warn them that a particular attack is being mounted on them. I've encountered such malevolent people, and I accept God's warning that there are such people.
But it mostly goes against the grain of Americans, because we want to believe that our fellow man cannot sink so low as to be irretrievably an enemy to themselves and everyone they touch. We believe the worst to be capable of repentance, even as we push the plunger on lethal injections. So with those of my friends who simply could not believe that someone they knew was acting treacherously toward them with specific aims, I've not often been successful, usually with sad results. That's how Americans are, I merely don't know whether this is so about others than Americans. Perhaps it is, we're all of like nature apart from assimilated corruption.
Until, that is, we focus on Bin Laden and invisible, unknown, amorphous muslims bent on the destruction of all that is holy ... then it's an obvious truism, everyone knows that "mooslums" or "Ayrabs" or ... gee, it's a short list. What's wrong with this picture? Whose agenda have we been sucked up into?
Noah did have three sons, and of course, the Arabs and Jews descended from Shem (hence, Semites).
And I descended from Japheth. I carry no genes peculiar to the family of Abraham or to the family of Ham. I don't think that's a criterion of anything but certain regional real estate inheritance rights -- which I am not at all reluctant to consider a good exchange for what I have gained from the House of Abraham -- and my right to visit three holy places in peace. Everyone has reason for gratitude toward the House of Abraham, from whence came the tents of Shem, although of course no one is obligated to know that.
It is okay to disagree with one's religion without being a racist. I'm sure of that. I love the Jews, but disagree with their stance on Jesus. That doesn't make me an anti-Semite, does it?
Well, it certainly shouldn't in my opinion, perhaps you could ask the Children of Israel whether they think it makes you an anti-Semite to claim, against the exclusive claim of Temple Israel, a divinely-mandated sovereignty in and of the Promised Land, which is an indelible element of the religious inheritance of the Kingdom of God. It's that "regional real estate inheritance rights" thing, and I don't think I have much business sticking my nose into all the bloody squabbles over those. I think that particularly from a Christian refugee in America, whose ancestors had lived in the Holy Land in or around Jerusalem for generations, you might learn of another opinion.
The idea of the Muslim religion was introduced to us, so we certainly have the right to disagree, don't we?
Who suggested otherwise? Certainly not the muslims or Islam.
And ... either Jesus was right, or Mohammed was. I'm with the Maker. If the thread asks me to agree with him that our religions are in unity, I'm sorry to inform you that the two doctrines are entirely different.
Jesus was right and Muhammad was right, there's no question about that according to muslims. Perhaps some people disagree about what he said, I don't think that's a matter that has exactly united Christians. I don't see that it "unites" Christians and muslims either.
But the Qur'an tells me that already, and specifically tells me to avoid contention about it. So do you invite that very contention? I think I'd decline, thanks.
Of course, you could always explain how Christian doctrine finds, for non-Christians, another path to God as valid in any way. Or perhaps you could explain how the Torah told the Children to deal with religions other than theirs that shared some apparent features or adopted some similar ritual?
Only Islam and muslims -- and America -- make claims to safeguard freedom of religion. History shows that in both cases there have been fulfillments of that claim and there have been failures of that claim -- ask the Mormons or the Crusaders about State compulsion in religion. But no one else even makes the claim whether in Law or doctrine.
Well, the False Messiah will make that claim, you call him the Antichrist I think. Noah told us about him.
How is it that you didn't know this about Islam?
was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.
238 Posted on 09/26/2001 16:51:19 PDT by ankaboot (ankaboot@muslimamerica.net)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |