Translations of the Holy Qur'an chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Translations of the Holy Qur'an

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Translations of the Holy Qur'an Posted: 2/1/2008 12:17:24 PM
I'm just wondering would it be useful to visit my local Mosque, and possibly see what translations (or interpretation as it seems to be called) they happen to use?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Translations of the Holy Qur'an Posted: 1/20/2008 6:18:11 PM
I've recently become interested in studying Islam more in depth, and was curious as to what English translation is the best one to read. I know there are many, however is there actually an English translation that is accepted in the Islamic world by scholars, clerics, laypersons and so forth? Any help with this would be great.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 3 (view)

Question about Flyleaf Posted: 8/20/2007 3:50:33 PM
Yes, Flyleaf are made up of Christian musicians, however I wouldn't call them a "Christian band" per sa. Although there are references to Christian faith and moralities in their lyrics I'd place them in the catagory with bands such as Demon Hunter, Zao and the defunct Training For Utopia in that they aren't a Christian band but rather Christians IN a band, which has a very distinct difference.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 7 (view)

Milking their glory days... Posted: 6/12/2007 3:25:00 PM
The question shouldn't be are the bands of yesteryear milking their past, but rather is the music that they happen to be making today still relevent? Neurosis have been around since the early 1980s and are still creating music that is relevent, and refreshing. King Crimson is another case in point of a band who seems to evolve with the times while still maintaining their original ethos.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 43 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 6/12/2007 12:27:36 PM
Okay, this thread is losing my interest so this will be my last post in it. I'll only say that if you are ignorant enough to believe that ONLY the books that make up the current Bible are relevent and considered to be scripture (chosen by power hungry men I might add) them you are actually A LOT dumber than I had initially believed you were... It's also kinda interesting that the books that make up the Bible are full of shady characters such as rapists, murderers, adulterers, thieves, drunks, prostitutes, etc. I guess that's pretty fitting...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 40 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 6/11/2007 1:09:15 PM
fiddler, You've made all the assertions I was going to make, and said them eloquently. I'm getting the feeling though that the only "scholars" he finds reliable are the ones who make assertions which fit into his neat little black and white mold of "proper" Christianity, and thus discard the researched -- and reliable -- work of scholars such as Professor Elaine Pagels (who has extensively studied and written about the "Gnostic" writings, and as a professor of religion at Princeton she must have no idea about religious history, or the implications of these texts in the early church ). Also many, MANY respected scholars accept the "Gnostic" scriptures as authentic, and very much useful to understanding the earliest roots of the Christian faith which is why they are widely available to anyone. Also Mr. RD, I'm not going to tell you where Jesus quoted from the Book of Enoch, why don't you READ the Book of Enoch yourself, and find the quotations and analogies yourself. They are there and there are more than one.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 37 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 6/10/2007 8:10:32 PM
I seriously doubt that he was "theorizing" as you suggest. I think he was merely talking out of a different orifice than his mouth. I have no idea why you want to defend people who are basically clueless and could not answer for themselves. Actually I am not theorizing. The mere mention of these "heretical" books in the Old Testament shows that Jesus himself was likely very, very familar with them as they were very much considered scripture , and that being that he was the "Son of God" and all likely quoted from them. In fact if you want to get technical the greatest of all Messianic "prophecies" is contained within the pages of the Book of Enoch however it does contradict aspects of Jesus' ministry (which I'm sure is why the book was suppressed for over a thousand years by the Church). Coincidently, parts of Mark's Gospel were removed for much the same reason as they closely tie in with Isaiah's prophecies about Israel. Also remember the "Bible" you are reading has been edited and changed so much that it no longer resembles what it initially was...Imagine taking specific passages that may contradict something you personally believe, and changing it to fit what you want it to, now multiply that by a thousand and you have a good idea of what happened to the very few texts that were even allowed to make up the "Holy" Bible. For the record, I am educated and have been a theology student. Unlike you in your blind faith I have the ability to question the books of the Bible (as well as the countless volumes which were removed and supressed for various reasons) and their depiction of Jesus. I have seen, and studied volumes which paint a very different picture of your "Messiah", and just so you know (as I am getting the indication that you don't) there are over THIRTY other books which deal with the Jesus story, his relations (Yes, he did have brothers and sisters and yes they did play a very important role in the formation and doctrines of the first "Christian" church) and what happened to his followers following his death (There are more than just the Book of Acts)...perhaps you should do a little research into your faith before saying I'm talking out of my ass.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 37 (view)

Why Have Christians Lost Their Jewish Roots? Posted: 5/31/2007 8:19:11 AM
Any normal person would conclude from this that you think that Catholics are different from Christians. They are different from one another...Yes, Catholicism is considered a form of Christianity, but it's also the one that was most profoundly absorbed by Pagan influence from the Roman Empire where it was allowed to thrive whereas other forms of Christianity which had little Pagan influence at the time were brutally repressed.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Why Religion? Posted: 5/30/2007 9:29:26 AM
For myself personally the motive for the rituals, ceremonies and such is to get a better understanding of my place on this living, breathing Earth. I am a living being who is a part of the Earth, NOT above it in any way. I rely on the Earth for my sustanance such as food, water, air, etc. The Creator created all of these things, and wants his children to have an understanding of the environment which surrounds them, and why he made things the way they are.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 4 (view)

Why Religion? Posted: 5/29/2007 3:28:36 PM
Matt, There are certain rituals and ceremonies that happen to be a part of the communion with God, however everyone's experience within those chosen rituals and such are all different. Every human's path to God is a different one, and what may be right for some, may not be right for others. It all depends on the individual and how deep of a communion with God they wish to have. Some will use herbs and plants, others will use the Sun Dance, still others will meditate on the prescence of God. It's basically the individual's connection to God, and their faith which is most important not what the collective popualtion believes. Basically God is NOT religion, but rather a spiritual bond between yourself and your Creator. God created us all differently for a reason, and all of our experiences will be different from another's.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Why Religion? Posted: 5/29/2007 2:15:58 PM
I'd like to question why religious denominations seem to go out of their way to preach that they alone are "God's Chosen" and that only their believers will enter Heaven? The reason I ask is that I am of Native American descent, and although I do not follow any "Western" religious denomination I am spiritual, and do believe in a Higher Power whichever you choose to call it. I have morals, and principles which aid me in the governance of my life. I for the most part am a good person, although I do have my human faults as we all do. I've never killed, or harmed anyone. I've only ever tried to treat my fellow human beings with respect, and it's those principles that were installed in me through my Native American customs and culture. I'm curious why the denominations feel that my people, who have a tribal history and a very spiritual connection to the Earth and Creator of all things are often viewed as "heathens", "savages" and such. Why do these denominations feel that my faith is "tainted" and "evil"? Is it because we don't believe in Jesus Christ, the Prophet Muhammad or any other prophet out there who happened to write a book? Why are my people who understood the way of Earth, and the way of life the ones who are going to burn in Hell? I mean my people did live harmoniously for thousands of years before contact with the white man, and the religious practices he brought with him. Basically what I am asking is why can't my spirituality and belief in a God figure as well as worshipping him according to my people's customs be enough to get me into Heaven?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 8 (view)

A Time of change Posted: 5/27/2007 2:46:00 PM
I respect Islam, and I do enjoy the prose and poetry of the Qur'an by why may I ask do you ONLY reference Surah 99? There are far more yet with every single one of your posts, no matter what the topic you reference the 99th Surah only, which is also strange given the context you are using it in when those specific passages are references to the Day of Judgement when all will stand before God, and be judged according to their works. I'm curious if that is the only Surah in the Qur'an you've read?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 45 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/26/2007 3:41:09 PM
trippy, I had a similar conversation with a Muslim sister (if Islam were so harsh on women and oppressive to them why would she have even talked to me?) and she told me much of the same thing. Wearing a Hijab was in no way making her any less of a women, and in no way opressed her, and that she was doing it for God not anyone else. To be honest I personally think seeing a woman wearing Hijab is actually culturally beautiful. That's just my own opinion though...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 42 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/26/2007 1:13:40 PM
What is wrong with Western women becoming Muslims? I think you have to turn off your television and stop listening to what Bill O'Rielly thinks he knows about Islam and how it's portrayed by Westernized media. The Prophet Muhammad was quite specific that men and women were equal on all counts. The Qur'an says the same thing. It is not Islam that causes women to be oppressed. Nine times out of ten it's more cultural than it is religious. Remember the Taliban infused more of their Pashtun (most of the Taliban's leaders were of the Pashtun tribal background) tribal beliefs than they did the tenents of Islam. The Taliban were also made up mostly of military commanders who fought against the Soviets and students of the Madrasahs who learned the very distorted and intolerant version of Islam that was supported by the United States during the 1980s. The Saudis are the same way, infusing more of a tribal backgroud and culture than the tenents of Islam. Believe it or not there are very liberal Islamic countries in the Middle East (Afghanistan was a prime example of a VERY liberal Islamic state prior to the war during the 1980s; women were doctors, lawyers, members of government, etc., even Palestine has very liberal views of their women) who aren't oppressing their women and have women as a very important part of society (in fact most of them do unfortunately the one's that are oppressing the women are used as the scapegoats and are the one's who get all the media attention in the West). Instead of listening to what obviously racist, "religious" bigots are saying to justify their ignorance pick up the Qu'ran and read it objectively. Read a biography of the Prophet Muhammad and what he taught. I'm sure you'll be more than surprised to see that Muslims don't believe at all what you think they believe.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 24 (view)

Why the Bible is not perfect Posted: 5/25/2007 5:04:29 PM
It is proposturous to believe that anything in the Bible is historically accurate in any way. Many of the "events" in the Bible were moral teachings set to story as was -- and continues to be -- customary amongst the Jews. Don't believe me? Try, and create a chronology using the supposed ages of the early prophets, as well as the geneologies written in Genesis over a period of 4000 years (the supposed time from the creation of Adam to the birth of Jesus Christ). It's not possible. The geneologies themselves span over a period of about 16, 000 years. As for Paul, NONE of his letters are in any way "divinely inspired". These letters were actually "teaching" tools for the early believers as can be reflected in what they say, and how they are often presented. In fact the ONLY book in the New Testament that can be considered to be divinely inspired is "The Book of Revelation", which was a dream the Aposotle John had, which could have been just that, a dream. I'm not saying that the books of the Bible don't have value, just that one should not blindly believe that they happened beyond a 100 percent doubt. Wars have been caused because of that.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 8 (view)

Dogma? Posted: 5/25/2007 4:47:51 PM
That is initially what Jews believed it to be. Lucifer was a renegade who rebelled against God, and was punished (along with those who followed him) for his transgression. I can't imagine what suddenly being devoid of the prescence of God, and being cast into nothingness was like for those who rebelled (many simply being led astray by Lucifer for his own purposes) especially after being in the prescence of the divine since their initial creation. I'm however losing my point here... It actually wasn't until much later that "Hell" became the "eternal pit of suffering" that it currently is in Christian doctrine -- it should be noted that some actually believe that "Hell" isn't actually "eternal" at all considering that Lucifer, and his minions will be destroyed in the End Times meaning "Hell" would cease to exist as well as those beings (angels, demons and humans) who were cast into "Hell" for whatever reason. This is only logical as if the final battle between good and evil must commence in evil's eventual destruction than evil in itself must cease to exist as a whole in every form with good being the victor and becoming ALL that exists. Also, there are many scriptural passages that back up this assessment, as well as the possibility of those who are experiencing "Hell" to be redeemed as Jesus himself did supposedly end up in Hell following his death, and did minister to those souls who ended up there? Why would he have bothered to go there if NOT to save those souls who were suffering there?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 21 (view)

Are we better off with or without Posted: 5/25/2007 3:49:09 PM
Man, and our nature is truly the problem, NOT God's, NOT religion's...WE are the problem, and if there is a God he has been exceptionally patient with us, and our faults when he could have easily wiped us out if he desired to do so. Truly a "father-figure" who loves us all no matter what religion we happen to follow.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Dogma? Posted: 5/25/2007 3:35:31 PM
One of the best scenes I thought was actually cut from the film (but is in the "Deleted Scenes" on the DVD). It's the scene where Azrael has everyone in the bar, and he basically explains that Hell was initially "nothing more than the abscence of God" and that if "we were ever in his prescene we would understand that that would be punishment enough" until humans came along and created the "construct of evil" due to our unwillingness to own up to being the engineer of our own suffering (and instead place the blame onto the "fallen"), and come to a reasoning for them thus causing us to believe that God could never forgive us for them. We then started arriving in Hell due to the doctrines we set up, bringing our guilt, fear and suffering with us and creating a "pit of suffering" and thus making Hell what we currently believe it to be now. In essence WE created Hell, turning the cold and solitude into pain and misery. This may not make much sense to the laymen, but anyone who has a basic knowledge of the war in Heaven between the Faithful (those who stood by God) and Renegades (those who sided with Lucifer to rebel against God) and the expulsion of the Renegades from Paradise knows what this means (especially if you know WHERE these renegades were thrown to).

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 28 (view)

Why Have Christians Lost Their Jewish Roots? Posted: 5/25/2007 3:15:53 PM
That's exactly what I was saying however it's apparent that I'm not dealing with someone very intelligent, and someone who seems more interested in being confrontational for the sake of doing so without giving any real argument to counter what I have said.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 7 (view)

Are we better off with or without Posted: 5/25/2007 12:14:05 PM
With God, we have The attack on the World Trade Center The Taliban Sectarian violence in Iraq and elsewhere ‘Honour’ killing It's interesting that you mostly pointed out the crimes of a few supposed "Muslims" yet neglected the crimes committed daily by Jews and Christians AGAINST Muslims. Muslims didn't just wake up one day, and decide, "Hey, I think we should attack America for their freedom, and properity". No, your foreign policy and they way you have occupied and disgraced this people is why they have decided to fight back. I wonder why people seem to neglect to see the fact that "public enemy #1" Osama bin Laden comes from a family who embraced Americanized ideals, and made billions of dollars through American companies, and economics -- and still do. He himself also made his millions that way.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 38 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/25/2007 12:07:09 PM
This thread is supposed to be a discussion of some aspects of Islam, and instead of that, it is hatemongering of the many for the actions of a vocal and twisted few, by so-called Christians who show themselves to be little better than those they profess to hate. I'm glad someone else saw that as well. Yet another act of Christian hypocrisy. I'm thinking if Jesus were alive today he'd nail himself to the cross not to save these people, but to get away from them and the ways they have distorted his teachings. I'm pretty sure Jesus wasn't a bigot, a racist or a hatemonger (based on the scriptural accounts of him) yet these so called Christians use his name to mask their hatred, intolerance and bigotry of others. You should be ashamed of yourselves, and I'm sure Jesus is weeping for you all.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 25 (view)

Why Have Christians Lost Their Jewish Roots? Posted: 5/25/2007 12:01:58 PM
You do know that Catholic is Christian doctrine and theology don't you? Actually there are very distinct differences in the Protestant and Catholic doctrines. If you can't see them, than there is no use pointing them out to you as seeing that you are Catholic pointing out the obvious "blasphemies of doctrine" and "hypocrisies" within your faith would do little good as you are blinded by the "guidance" of the "infallible" Pope.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 20 (view)

Why Have Christians Lost Their Jewish Roots? Posted: 5/24/2007 7:29:40 PM
All of the sudden people are claiming "facts" about Christianity that suggest since the Catholic church was founded in the Roman empire elements of Paganism had to be intergrated into the church to appease the citizens of society that were worshiping pagan religions. Unfortunately that's exactly what happened during Constantine's reign during The First Council of Nice. This is actually well documented (even by those who participated) and can easily be found in MANY history books, even those that are more mainstream. Hell, even theology students are taught that. One of the most respected texts dealing with the infusion of Pagan elements in Christian doctrine is Hislop's "The Two Babylons". This book is a part of university curriculum for students of theology. I would know, I studied religion for some time and remember lengthy discussions about the Pagan elements infused in Christian and Catholic doctrine and theology. You are joking right?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 5 (view)

Movie about Jesus being a myth Posted: 5/24/2007 7:10:08 PM
Didn't I start a thread about this same film a couple of days ago?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 21 (view)

The God Who Wasn't There Posted: 5/23/2007 12:58:24 PM
For the purpose of trying to armtwist the non-believer into believing they have no "reasonable" choice except to choose one of two choices. That's why it is a "FALSE" dichotomy - because there are not only two choices. Only the wicked deal in absolutes.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/23/2007 12:56:35 PM
I believe the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said something to the effect of "Women are the equal halves of men". In the Qu'ran women are viewed as equal to men. It is very unfortunate that certain passages in the Qu'ran, which are there more to guide the role of the woman as wife and mother as well as worshipper of Allah are often misinterpretted by zealous men, who see that as a way to oppress the same women who are their fellow believers, their wives, and the mothers of their children.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 4 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/23/2007 12:38:38 PM
Salam, Let us hope that this board isn't so intolerant as to delete your thread because you happen to be Muslim, but with some of the religious extremists here I actually wouldn't doubt they complain. You definitely have my support.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 2 (view)

Theories in Islam Posted: 5/23/2007 12:29:16 PM
I agree one hundred percent. I personally have a very deep respect for the Islamic practice and religion. As a faith it reveres the very same prophets that the Jews and Christians believe in; it is also in the Qur'an that Muslim followers are to respect and care for ALL people of the book meaning Christians and Jews -- and Islamic history has a very long history of actually PROTECTING those two faiths and allowing their traditions and practices to grow prior to the Crusades (and even after in the case of Judaism). The unfortunate aspect is that today the negative aspects of Islam (the fanatics, who really can't read obviously as the Qur'an condemns killing except in the case of defending one's self) which were fabricated by the media trying to find a "boogiemonster" and a "scapegoat" for their intolerance. I'm really not sure where the rift happened between Islam and Judaism as the two were very, VERY close for a very long time (protecting each other from the persecution of others), and co-existed quite well even teaching each other things. Hopefully they will reconcile in time.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Why Have Christians Lost Their Jewish Roots? Posted: 5/23/2007 10:53:35 AM
I'm just curious to know why Christians have chosen to distance themselves from their religion's Jewish roots as opposed to embracing them, and likely gaining a better understanding of their faith and the person known as Jesus (or Yeshua as he was likely known to Hebrew and Aramaic speakers)? The reason I ask is that some Christians have very anti-Semetic tendencies, and seem to think that Christianity sprung up from nowhere without a history rooted very deeply in Jewish culture, practice, experiences and people. Why is that? Jesus was a practicing Jew was he not, and keep Mosaic law? He and the disciples did read the Tanakh did they not? The Prophets of the Old Testament were all Jews were they not? I'm just wondering why worshipping Jesus (Yeshua) became seperate from Jewish practice when the two are so interconnected, and share so much of the same theology and doctrine? Even scripture says he didn't come to start a new religion of any sort, but to fulfill the prophecies of Jewish prophets. I mean if you remove the pagan elements of the Christian faith that was adapted you have Judaism. I do feel the two can be reconnected, and can learn much from each other. Also from what I can see scripturally you CAN be a practicing Jew, and believe in Jesus as the promised Messiah. Any thoughts?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 11 (view)

The God Who Wasn't There Posted: 5/23/2007 9:35:46 AM
I wouldn't call Baigent and "authority" on anything. His books, "The Holy Blood & The Holy Grail", "The Messianic Legacy" and even his new book, "The Jesus Papers" have been debunked so many times by evidence, archeology that I no longer trust anything he puts to paper. He himself has even said that "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" and "The Messianic Legacy" have little evidence to support the claims made in them. "Jesus and the Lost Goddess" was an interesting book though. It really goes into the possible history of the Gnostics, as well as the Gnostic texts themselves. The "Jesus" of the Gnostics is a very, VERY different Jesus than the one you'd read about in the Gospels, and I think the reason people are beginning to study the Gnostic texts so in depth is that they paint a picture of Jesus as being human, and having flaws in his personage. You don't get that from the Gospels.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 9 (view)

The God Who Wasn't There Posted: 5/23/2007 9:08:03 AM
When provided with historical references that Jesus most likely didn't exist, instead of offering actual evidence to support their position, Christians cry "Satan". The thing is Christians CAN'T use any kind of evidence to support their claims that Jesus was a real person as all they have is four books which begin the New Testament to support their claims. FOUR BOOKS! Those books in themselves can't even be taken as "historical" as none of them can seem to agree as to what Jesus did, what he said, or even how he was supposedly born (read the stories of his birth in the Gospels, and you'll see what I mean). The only thing they can seem to agree on is that he was crucified -- which isn't new considering the idea of a "crucified saviour" has been written of throughout history, even in Babylon which no doubt influenced later Judaism during the Jewish exile and enslavement there. That would be like myself reading "The Silence of the Lambs", "Hannibal", "Red Dragon" and "Hannibal Rising" and using those fictional stories to try, and prove that a historical figure known as Hannibal Lecter in fact existed based on those books without having any other form of evidence to support my claim. This is exactly what Paul did. Paul did not know Jesus personally, nor did he initially know anyone who supposedly knew Jesus personally -- in fact NONE of the Gospels had even been written yet during Paul's ministry. Paul relied on people's stories of Jesus (which may have in fact been mysticism themselves) and grafted out of those stories the Jesus that is worshipped today -- the meek, lamb-like saviour who suffered and was crucified for the sins of the world. Even James (whom if Jesus did in fact exist would have known Jesus better than likey any of his followers considering this was his Earthly brother) disagreed immensely with this personification of Jesus, and even in the book of Acts there are many theological and doctrinal disagreements between James (the leader of the Jerusalem Church) and Paul (the supposed apostle of this Church). This may, or may not have led to James' death. Even Peter, who's teachings would be completey distorted over the years leading to what is now known as the Catholic Church, disagreed with much of what Paul was teaching about Jesus. Peter himself believed that the Jesus story was specifically for Jews, and in order to be redeemed one had to become a Jew themselves. I actually find it ironic (and a little strange) that the Pope is considered "infallible" and unable to sin when Peter himself was in fact crucified upside down because he did not feel he was worthy to die the same way that his "master" did. So really what it comes down to is who do you believe? Peter and James who supposedly knew Jesus personally and spent many years with him, or Paul who didn't know Jesus and 'created' his Jesus out of stories that were told -- and we all know what can happen to a story when it's told many times b many different people?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

The God Who Wasn't There Posted: 5/22/2007 9:37:41 AM
I actually saw this documentary last night, "The God Who Wasn't There" and it really laid out a very convincing argument that the person known as "Jesus Christ" didn't even exist in a physical form. I'm not talking about the kind of documentary thrown together by some anti-Christian, but a film that does some heavy research (claims which I spent all last night researching on my own) and inclusing the commentary and opinions of some very, VERY repsected Theologists. I'm just wondering if anyone here has also seen the film, and what they thought of it.

SeededEarth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 9 (view)

Were the fallen angels of Genisis the gods of the acient people Posted: 5/20/2007 12:58:05 PM
I'd say if you are interested in persuing this topic to look into some of the Apocryphal works, such as "The Book of Enoch" (which has a very detailed description of the war in Heaven, and the angels being cast out; as well as of the children that they bore to human women, the Nephilim or "The Giants"), as well as the "Book of Jubilees"...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 4 (view)

Technology Vs. Faith: Which Will Save Us? Posted: 5/19/2007 8:32:24 PM
I am reminded of a quote from one of my "teachers" which goes, " Every tool no matter how selfless the intention can also be the most destructive of weapons".

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

Technology Vs. Faith: Which Will Save Us? Posted: 5/19/2007 7:28:05 PM
I recently finished reading the book, "In The Absence of the Sacred" by Jerry Mander, and got to thinking particularly about the current state of our "intelligence" and "evolution" as a species -- if we can even be called that anymore. There is little doubt in anyone's minds that we have evolved quite rapidly in our technological advances in the last hundred years or so, and although there have been a lot of advances in the positive direction (medical technology is one example), there have also been a lot of destructive ones that are a threat to our future as cultures, and civilizations (Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons being a few as well as germ experiments being conducted by "scientists" presently) to forms of technology which serve little purpose than to keep us docile and unaware (television, cell phones, etc.). When these forms of technology have run their course, and are deemed as "obsolete" by society they are discarded and condemned to the dump to make way for the "next best thing" no matter it's cost, purpose, etc. This in turn got me thinking about the way that religions are viewed in the current social structure. When one looks at religions such as Judaism, Christianity or Islam, one sees very young religions compared to some others, and ones that have seemingly lost their relevence in today's world. If you look back throughout history one sees dominant cultures with very different "beliefs" and though those religions were strong and ruled large portions of the world, they were much like technologies of today in that once they lost their relevence they were cast aside, and were no longer practiced by the people who had initially practiced them. The Sumerians, Egyptians, Romans, Druids, Mayans, Aztecs and Incas (to name only a few throughout history) all saw their civilizations fall as technologies advanced and their religious practices fell with them (or were absorbed into other forms of theological thought as in the case with Roman Catholicism). This epoch is no different as technology and science continue to advance at rapid rates, thus threatening spiritual practice as "superstitous". Although it may not seem as such I do believe there is a God in some form -- although not as he is often written of in "holy" books. To me God is a spiritual bond, not a religious practice so my question is when the Western religions fall (and they will as all have done throughout history) and as our technology grows and expands thus explaining everything, will there actually be a need for the concepts of "religion" and "faith" or will these concepts be discarded (as they currently are being) to make way for a new form of "worship"? Which will survive technology or faith? P.S. When responding to this thread please try, and think outside of your particular faith as I am referring to the concept and practice of faith, and not religious denominations -- which in themselves are irrelevent to this particular post.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 13 (view)

The Christian Right: America's Taliban? Posted: 5/18/2007 7:53:20 PM
Oh yes, and the OP paints a picture of Christianity with the red paint of blood The thing is, Christian history is bloody, and is indeed painted with the blood of others. Simply because you don't want to accept your history as a Christian doesn't mean I am going to forget it. There are 150 million dead Native peoples buried on this Continent to show just how "tolerate", "loving" and "accepting" your faith truly is. Let's also not forget what happened to those of African descent who came into contact with "good" Christians. The blood IS on the hands of your faith, and should be acknowledged as such instead of the lies about the "love" and "tolerance" your religion claims to have. Maybe people wouldn't mock and point out the hypocrisy in your faith if you stopped lying and told the truth about your history -- but that doesn't gain converts does it?

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 10 (view)

The Christian Right: America's Taliban? Posted: 5/18/2007 5:17:44 PM
Dove, Chrisitians have a very long, and sordid history of shoving their beliefs down the throats of others. Look at the Inquisition as a good example of that where people were tortured, maimed and mutilated because they chose not to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. It was also during this period that the Church began interferring in political issues, and in turn influenced their outcome -- mostly on the negative end. Wars, revolutions, witch hunts, and genocides have all been inflicted in the name of Christianity in the past and to some degrees here in the present. I ask why is my questioning of the practices and dogmas of Chrisitianity damaging to the world as a whole? Is it because it should be the only religion in the world? If that's the thought than that IS damaging. It can also be said that Christianity as it exists today is not the proper Christianity due to the fact that much paganism and occultism was inserted into the faith by Constantine during the First Council of Nice. This was a political move, and led to the distorted -- ie. Non-Jewish -- version of Christianity you see today. Yes, it is true missionaries are usually the first to come in the case of a disaster, but they also often have a Bible in their right hand, and preach their ideas upon a people that already have a religion in hopes of converting them. Many times the missionaries never leave, and in many ways cause a lot of problems for the people already living there, as well as creating schisms in tribal thought and ideas.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 7 (view)

The Christian Right: America's Taliban? Posted: 5/18/2007 12:34:47 PM
The initial point of this thread was to show that religious extremism, and religious fundamentalism is very much alive in this country -- many times supported by our supposedly "elected" officals who seem to agree with every point. It annoys me with this fraudulent "War On Terror" (it's just a continuation of the Crusades if you ask me) and all of this talk about fighting against religious extremism (of course that depends on the perpetrators themselves as the U.S. is very much allied with Saudi Arabia who could care less about human rights and violate them regularly; the "Big Brother" state of Pakistan, who are harbouring and supporting key members of the Taliban regime; and who could forget Israel who are committing what is classified as genocide against the Palestinians) when they have religious extremists and religious terrorists here. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

The Christian Right: America's Taliban? Posted: 5/17/2007 1:14:21 PM
Although I personally do not adhere to any form of organized religion, I do personally feel that other's have the right to believe as they want to believe. That is of course unless they act as the Christian/Religious Right do in forcing their ideas and opinions down my throat, and attempting in every way to force me to believe as they do. Here are just a few of the ways the Religious Right want to to force you to live, exist and be: They oppose same-sex marriage laws and to other measures to extend benefits patterned on civil rights to homosexuals. They oppose social policies designed to facilitate women working outside the home. They oppose a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, even in cases of rape and incest. They oppose ANY religion which does not use the Bible, and feel that those religions should be restricted. They support the presence of religion in the public sphere and official activities, often supported by the claim that the United States was "founded by Christians as a Christian Nation". They believe that society as a whole should be governed according to the "laws" written in the Bible. They believe prayer should be mandatory in schools. (I wonder what this means to people of other faiths. No wait, see point 4) They support the idea of "creationism" being taught in school as opposed to the theory of evolution or any other form of science, history, etc. which conflicts with Biblical accounts. These are policies that the Religious Right want put into effect in the form of laws, meaning that whethere you are a Christian or not you are forced to live as one. It should also be noted that the most well known Islamic fundamentalist government, the Taliban in Afghanistan implemented EVERY SINGLE ONE of these policies in Afghanistan during their reign. So it can safely be said that the Religious Right are very much extremists in the very same way as those they claim to abhor and fight against...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 23 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 5/13/2007 8:56:38 AM
In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered In todays' world we call that "genocide" (especially if you take scripture at face value meaning there wasn't anywhere NEAR the amount of people on the planet -- or Israel itself for that matter that there are today), and again this is the "God" we are commanded to worship? It makes me sick actually...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 13 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 5/11/2007 4:30:33 PM
So essentially what you are saying with that comment is that the God who is universally worshipped by Christians and Jews was a made up creation of an exiled people? This is actully starting to make a lot more sense...

SeededEarth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 10 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 5/11/2007 3:36:16 PM
Another example could be one of the Ten Commandments, "Thou Shalt Not Kill". This is a decree by God, and is explained to mean just that yet what follows in the rest of the Bible is "God's Chosen" killing on a mass scale in the name of the SAME God who said NOT to kill...LOL Man, this book just gets worse, and worse...

SeededEarth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 4 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 5/11/2007 1:32:14 PM
LOL Yet no mention of any of the facts I have put forward just simple criticism of how I put them forward. That is a typical fundamentalist response... Is God NOT blood thirsty in the Bible commanding that his people kill any and all he sees fit to do so? I mean do not entire populations of people get wiped out in the name of God simply because they were in the "promised" land? Yeah, there's definitely a God I WANT to worship. Also it is widely accepted that the KJV of the Bible is quite racist in it's depiction of Jews (it actually attempts to make the claim that Jesus himself was seperate from the Jews and NOT a worshipping, practicing Jew himself). It is also very sexist, but we'll not get into that here. And for the record, there ARE many passages, verses and pieces missing from the Gospels themselves. Why do you think that is? I have a good idea, but that in itself has more to do with politics and control that religious practice.

SeededEarth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 1 (view)

The Bible: Some Thoughts Posted: 5/11/2007 12:13:41 PM
I was recently discussing The Bible with a friend of mine, and do have some thoughts on the "scriptures" themselves (please note these are my own opinions based on research I have done and although some are backed up with fact it isn't my intention to offend anyone) First is the Bible as a whole. The Bible's Old Testament in it's current form is NOT the Bible that was used by Orthodox Jews before, during or after the time of Jesus (or even the scriptures Jesus himself read). There were many, many others books which were part of the original Tanakh which were later removed by Church (which by the way in itself is a Pagan institution) authorities as being "heretical" to the teachings of Jesus, which in itself is wrong as Jesus himself felt these books were scripture, and he quoted them quite regularly. Two such books he quoted from were The Book of Enoch and The Book of Jasher, "scripture" which is now deemed as "heretical" by supposed "Men of God". Also, if you actually read through the Old Testament the children of Israel (God's supposed chosen people) commit acts so disgusting and horrible in the name of God that I honestly though i was going to throw up when I read them. Murder, rape, incest, genocide, torture, racism, bigotry, human sacrifice and intolerance all can be found within the confines of the first 5 books of the Bible themselves! I guess this was just a sign of things to come... Second, The Gospels. My problem with the Gospels is that not one of them is written by anyone who knew Jesus personally or had any contact with him during his travels and ministries. Mark's Gospel is the only Gospel written by someone who might have remotely had some connection to Jesus -- through Peter, and even this specific Gospel was written specifically for Jews and refers more to the redemption and restoration of Israel than anything to do with mankind's redemption as a whole. It should also be noted that in English translations (which are horrible by the way) the Gospels became very anti-Semetic (The King James Version being a prime offender of this), placing blame and hatred upon the Jews for Jesus' death -- when according to the Christian faith this was prophesied, and was SUPPOSED to happen. This would also let Judas off the hook as it was prophesied that he would betray Jesus so essentially he was doing nothing wrong, and only what God had decreed he would do. And Thirdly, the difference between God in the two Testaments. In the Old Testament God is very vengeful, temperamental and wrathful who had no problem wiping out thousands to millions of people just for the sake of doing so (let us also not forget the inflictions he allowed to be inflicted upon poor Job). The God of the Old Testament craved blood, destruction and war (Leviticus 27 is a good example of this, "Anything devoted to destruction is most holy to the Lord"). He then seems to have a change of heart (not really when you actually look at the New Testament itself) and becomes a God of love, compassion and tolerance -- He stil needs his blood lust satisfied by sending Jesus to be tortured and crucified when a simple decree could have also sufficed -- yet underneath all of that is the intolerance towards others who are not Jewish, as well as the desire to be redeemed and saved through violence (which the Church would follow to a T in their attempts to convert most of Europe & the Americas by force during the Middle Ages through war, torture, witchhunts and again intolerance). God of Love? Not from where I am standing, and the fact that people cannot see the hypocrisy is astonishing to me. Read that book again, and I'm sure you'll see the hypocrisy in it. It should also be noted that these are the first people to call Islam a "violent religion"...LOL

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 18 (view)

Was Jesus the Savior of did he just play the script out? Posted: 4/26/2007 3:56:44 PM
I have a thought to add... The idea of a "Messiah" coming to redeem his people is a Jewish concept, and of Jewish origin. If Jesus were the Messiah as promised throughout the books of the Tanakh (Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim) of which I am sure Jesus (Yeshua) was very familiar then that Messiah was specifically for the Jewish people -- as is written specifically in the scriptures themselves. In fact to many King David was considered to be the Jewish Messiah... Jesus himself was a devout Jew and did follow Jewish custom, prayer and practice so hypothetically wouldn't that mean that in order to truly understand the Messiah and his ideas one must also follow those same Jewish practices such as studying the Tanakh, celebrating the feasts and festivals, etc.? What seems to bother me most about this is that Christians (thanks more to the truly eschewed ideas that Paul preached) have hijacked Jewish holy books, and made them their own, all the while forgetting the Jewish roots of their faith. According to scripture itself Jesus didn't come to abolish Mosaic Law, but to fulfill it. For example, Jesus made regular pilgrimages to the Temple, he fasted according to Mosaic Law, even his parables have very Jewish ideas in them. Christians also seem to forget that EVERY prophet, disciple or apostle mentioned in the scriptures was (and remained) a devout Jew and that Messiah or no Messiah, their Jewish faith was given to them by YHWH and that the law given to Moses would still be expected to be maintained. Perhaps Christians should look to the Jewish origins of their faith...the answers I'm sure lie there.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 13 (view)

Was Jesus the Savior of did he just play the script out? Posted: 4/25/2007 3:27:44 PM
If Jesus was in fact a real person (which I highly doubt given the evidence) he was simply living a life that had been lived many, many times before throughout history. Many cultures, and religious practices have their stories of a "savior" who was born of a virgin, preached the exact message (word for word in some cases), was persecuted and crucifed (even in some cases between two thieves just as the Gospels say). I won't go into too much detail here, but I do suggest for those interested in researching this check out Kersey Grave's book, "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors or Christianity Before Christ". Just one more thing to add, remember that Jesus was NOT considered a God until the First Council of Nice held over 300 years after the supposed death of Jesus, and very long after anyone who supposedly knew him had passed from existence by Romans who were looking for something to help them maintain a control they were losing in the Holy Land.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 53 (view)

Why don't other faiths go door to door...why just Christians? Posted: 4/15/2007 5:45:15 PM
Theirishpoet,i've nothing against Christianity or Christians but its them who are mostly hostile towards Islam.Incase you don't know Muslims also hold Isa(as) in the highest regard and consider him to be a true Muslim...one who submits to the will of Allah!. I also have nothing against Christianity, and you do make a very valid point. In the post-9/11 world their seems to be a lot of hostility towards Muslims and Islam in general. Our supposed media has played a very large part in that. You can only see those images of bearded, turbaned men holding AKs and chanting "Death To The West!" so many times before you start to believe it, and believe that all Muslims feel that way, which is far from the case. I have atteneded the Mosque in my city many times, and have only ever experienced love, respect and the desire to worship Allah. I actually remember one time while I was sitting and listening to the Imam speak (about the love one should have for Allah ironically) my legs had fallen asleep. When it was time to rise for the prayer I thought okay, I stand up and the blood should start circulating, but no I fell over. I remember a brother coming from three rows back(!), picking me up and holding my arm until the circulation in my legs had come back. I was never made to feel as if I had done anything wrong, or had acted "unrighteously". No, I was actually assured by many of the brothers that it has happened to them in the past. Yes, the Qur'an has specific instructions on how one should wage war if it becomes necessary, and yes I am sure they can be misleading to someone who doesn't understand the culture that the Prophet Muhammad came from nor the reason Allah -- by way of the angel Gabriel -- gave those verses to mankind. One should also never forget that the prophets of the Bible (whom Muslims also hold in very high esteem) were also given similar verses and they are scattered all through the Bible (the Book of Isaiah being one example of how to conduct warfare, and for what reasons as well as going on to explicitly describe methods of killing, etc.) All I'm saying is that maybe Christians should turn off their television sets, stop reading their newspapers, and go and talk to a Muslim and ask them questions. You'll no doubt be surprised at what you learn, and you will no doubt also see the similarities between the two religions. The misunderstanding and ignorance has to stop, and we have to learn to accept each other for our differences.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 18 (view)

Why don't other faiths go door to door...why just Christians? Posted: 4/7/2007 6:43:49 PM
Actually not all Christian denominations believe that Jesus was divinely conceived by a Virgin. Many Gnostics (who are actually closest to what the original Christians -- the followers of Jesus, his brothers, etc.) believe that Jesus is the biological son of Joseph and although they believe in him being the Jewish Messiah doubt that he is the Son of God.

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 16 (view)

Why don't other faiths go door to door...why just Christians? Posted: 4/7/2007 6:38:19 PM
Agreed. You can't really lump all Christian denominations together as they are all different along with different interpretations of various scriptures, etc. Islam for the most part (with the exception of groups such as Shiites and Sufis who make up a small minority) believe in the same principles and interpretations of the Qu'ran's scripture. Muslims no matter where they are in the world pray at the same times everyday. Think about that for a minute. Over 1 billion people praying to Allah 5 times a day at exactly the same time...Beautiful...No wonder Islam is growing so rapidly...

seededearth

Joined: 11/27/2005

Msg: 6 (view)

Why don't other faiths go door to door...why just Christians? Posted: 4/6/2007 8:02:06 PM
I'm guessing with Islam being the largest religion in the world now they are trying to get their numbers back up...LOL

Show ALL Forums