Myx,
Why don't you read the Quran first, then talk to a Muslim and then decide? I have.
luvyaback,
Robyn
holy crap that was a fast reply. As to this. Unfortunately, there is not many Moslems (read 0) that I've had the pleasure of running into in person. Though, just recently I've gotten the chance to read on this other MB where I debate knucklehead Jehovah's Witnesses (one who was tracked down, turned in, and lectured in a JC for her internet involvement, one who I just quit talking to after calling him swine, and another who's been one all his life, and simply just won't be moved) but ANYWAYS, there were three who just appeared out of the blue and were quite fiesty, learnt alot from there posts. As to reading the Qu'ran to decide if it is inspired? Trust me, I've learned not to take just the negative side of things.... Though, I don't think in all things one must necessarily read the source to reckon if it is inspired or not. For a good example the Book of Mormon, um, JS was a nutter, he wrote in 16th century english when he was a 19th century american, and everything I know of it, I know is nonsense (no archaeological evidence for the Nephite civilation, the bogus translation of the Egyptian papyrus, etc). Anyways, I don't think I need to go to a kingdom hall and meet practicing Witnesses and read their WT and AWAKE! to know that it's false. And yes, that is from reading "negative" material (aka direct historical quotes). I think sometimes you know when you see the affect it has on peoples lives, like how the Muslim women are oppressed so often times in Moslem countries. Or how the JW parents of an eight year old refused to take her back stating that "she wasn't the same child" after a life saving blood transfusion. Both together kinda seal the punch.
I like to think sort of in philosophical terms about things, it's not the three sound legs that lames the ass, but the broken one, an all that.
btw, how the hell does one get those nifty smilies on this blivvin MB? I can't seem to find them! Oh, and, I would love it if you'd go visit my JW friend on the MB where I'm having a hell of a time talking to him, just to scare him. Just post your experience would be awesome! haha that'd so freak him out. When I first started talking to him, he had to make sure I wasn't a "disgruntled ex" donchaknow in order to protect his spiritual wellbeing (blindness)
Anyways, sorry, I do go on a bit don't I? I don't post as much as I'd like to, cos I don't have time, but mostly because I feel it is more a board for exes to get together, and I'm a bit out of place in that.
Myxomatosis
JoinedPosts by Myxomatosis
-
30
Is the Koran an Inspired Book?
by Happythoughts infrom what i gather--in my opinion--here i go again the book is very negative; it's obsessed with the punishment in the hereafter for the "unbelievers" (an oft cited word in the book) and speaks of them being : chastised in the fire.
" i lost count of the number of times this phrase is used.
the book does not present a loving god--but a vindictive harsh one, more concerned with punishment than life and forgiveness.
-
-
Myxomatosis
-
30
Is the Koran an Inspired Book?
by Happythoughts infrom what i gather--in my opinion--here i go again the book is very negative; it's obsessed with the punishment in the hereafter for the "unbelievers" (an oft cited word in the book) and speaks of them being : chastised in the fire.
" i lost count of the number of times this phrase is used.
the book does not present a loving god--but a vindictive harsh one, more concerned with punishment than life and forgiveness.
-
-
Myxomatosis
Rodbar: This website is just as ignorant of Islam as the JWs are of the Catholics. And just as biased.
Myx: perhaps your right. I myself supplied this because it seems only to me from what I've read in a positive, pro-Muslim light, that this was accurate.
Indeed it does have a Christian slant...so does this site : www.macgregorministries.com have a Christian slant on the teachings of the Watch Tower, can you tell me if what they state about the Watch Tower is inaccurate? As long as it is in context, complete, and what is really stated in their publications, and the personal experiences on islamreview are not fabricated there is no reason to attack it by calling it ignorant.
luv,
Myxomatosis -
30
Is the Koran an Inspired Book?
by Happythoughts infrom what i gather--in my opinion--here i go again the book is very negative; it's obsessed with the punishment in the hereafter for the "unbelievers" (an oft cited word in the book) and speaks of them being : chastised in the fire.
" i lost count of the number of times this phrase is used.
the book does not present a loving god--but a vindictive harsh one, more concerned with punishment than life and forgiveness.
-
-
Myxomatosis
here's a good site I think on Islam, which is more from a Christian perspective, though I've read much about Islaam directly.
http://www.islamreview.com
has a really interesting interview with one of the 9/11 hijackers Mums, really shows you the mindset that they are brought up with. frightening.
the Qu'ran I think gets a bit more militant towards the end, and the verses in the forefront that are more peaceable are overridden by these, as there is also a verse that says if there is a contradiction, take what comes last in the Qur'an.
Myxomatosis -
13
The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict - Josh Macdowel
by yxl1 inafter spending my lunch break chatting with some born again christians who were street witnessing in my area, they suggested i read this book.
they said it would answer all the criticisms i highlighted in the bible.
has anyone read it?
-
-
Myxomatosis
I've read some of the first one "ETDAV" as we have it.
Josh, like Lee Strobel author of "The case for Christ" (which you might also wish to check out) was setting out to disprove Christianity when he started investigating (prompted probably by annoying born agains, who he wanted to sock it to.)
It's quite technical, but I think he really does his research, and it is not about creationism, it's about Jesus Christ.
I certainly would recommend you read it and draw your own conclusions.
I understand why you are anti-biblical. I would be too I believe if I had been in a false religion who used the Bible to control and frighten.
Myxomatosis -
7
The Star, God's Plan or Malicious Plot of Satan?
by ignorance is strength ini'm not talking about stars in general; such a subject about stars in general would be ridiculous.
i'm specifically talking about the star that the three magi saw that led them to jesus.
the wt holds that this was a malicious plot of satan's to bring jesus to herod.
-
-
Myxomatosis
lol, I remember first reading that and the pasta I was eating falling back onto my plate out of sheer disbelief. how idiotic. here's a site addressing this.
it's just a pretend discussion.
http://www.jwinfoline.com/Documents/Christmas/Is_Christmas_pagan.htm -
19
WATCHTOWER IS DUMBING DOWN
by integ infrom what i've noticed lately, the wts seems to be explaining everything away with a new approach; that of dumbing everything down to just a couple of key points in their everchanging, contradictory, edicts and doctrine.
they seem to be avoiding 'deeper' scriptural interpretations that invariably get them into trouble with people who actually don't take everything the fds say as absolute truth, and instead are feeding the rank and file and the "doubters" that dare question the changing doctrine, with a couple of what they feel are key "truths".. 1) who else is using god's name today?
2) who else are doing "god's work" of preaching the good news of the kingdom?.
-
-
Myxomatosis
sorry for the Bible haters out their (which I understand, being sickened nearly physically when I read Scriptures when used by the WT)
It would seem that the 'name' that one is supposed to be *ummm* using if one happens to accept the New Covenant made through Christ (in other words a Christian) that the name you should be using is not the name Yahweh ( not 'Jehovah' which I have to admit, I have a very great aversion to.) but Yeshua Hamasiach, or, Jesus Christ. Even in their New World translation, it is clear that Yeshua inherited His Father's name (aka, His whole being)
Hebrews 1:4 tells us in the New World Translation, "So he has become better than the angels, to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs." Jesus inherited his name from his father
for a bit more on the ridiculousness of the Watch Tower crying foul about Jehovah
http://jwinfoline.com/Documents/Jehovahs_name/who_removed_jehovah_from_nt.htm
soo...erm. it's all rather silly. Jesus never was recorded using the NAME Yahweh, but 'Father'. interesting. Not that I have disrespect for the name Yahweh, on the contrary. It is just the Watch Tower trying to create a corner on the market, when most Christians are aware of the OT 'names' of G-d (El Elyon (G-d most High) El Shaddai (G-d Almighty) Elohim, Adonai, El, YWHH, and yes, Jehovah)
This is a simple matter of a superiority ploy. We know God's name, we share God's name, and you don't, so nyah!
Interesting, Paul preached Christ (crucified.)
anyways, "all fullness of deity dwells in bodily form" says Paul re: Christ.
sorry to put a bit of Biblical commentary up. they've got it all bunkered, Biblically too.
regards,
Myxomatosis
*why do I have to feel so tongue tied
why do I have to feel so stupid*
-Radiohead
Myxomatosis -
33
John 1:1 for nonbelievers.....
by logansrun ini've often felt that the most objective person in a situation is the one who has no stake in the outcome.
this holds true to religious issues as well.
we all know freddie franz translated john 1:1 as "the word was [a] god" and the rest of the christian world flew through the roof.
-
-
Myxomatosis
Hello,
thought I'd clear this up.
Panda says: So while Ireneaus accepted John into the Bible canon he did not accept the above interpretation of John 1. If we consider as Ptolemy did that "Wisdom ...participated with God," that is the primal Father or Silence needed the divine energies of Wisdom to create. But then again even Ireneaus admits that "before the world ...the unknown Source " was un-nameable, and un-named "since there are no words to describe this source."
Myx: Wrong! Irenaeus quoted John 1:1 exactly as it is "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"
Remember, Irenaeus is a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was a disciple of John the Baptist... pretty cool
ch. 11, book 3 Against Heresis: Irenaeus quotes John, The Word, being Monogenes with the Father, was God. The creator off all things visible, invisible, including Archangels. :)
"...and that Monogenes was the beginning, but Logos was the true son of Monogenes; and that this creation to which we belong was not made by the primary God, but by some power lying far below Him, and shut off from communion with the things invisible and ineffable. The disciple of the Lord therefore desiring to put an end to all such doctrines, and to establish the rule of truth in the Church, that there is one Almighty God, who made all things by His Word, both visible and invisible; showing at the same time, that by the Word, through whom God made the creation, He also bestowed salvation on the men included in the creation; thus commenced His teaching in the Gospel: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made.122 What was made was life in Him, and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not."123 "All things," he says, "were made by Him; "therefore in "all things" this creation of ours is [included], for we cannot concede to these men that [the words] "all things" are spoken in..."
Against Heresis Book 3 ch. 8
"If, then, he had not pointed out Him who binds and spoils his goods, but had merely spoken of him as being strong, the strong man should have been unconquered. But he also subjoined Him who obtains and retains possession; for he holds who binds, but he is held who is bound. And this he did without any comparison, so that, apostate slave as he was, he might not be compared to the Lord: for not he alone, but not one of created and subject things, shall ever be compared to the Word of God, by whom all things were made, who is our Lord Jesus Christ."
ch. 8 prt. 3
Jesus is the creator, and the Word, that is God, (John 1:3, Colossians)
"But the things established are distinct from Him who has established them, and what have been made from Him who has made them. For He is Himself uncreated, both without beginning and end, and lacking nothing. He is Himself sufficient for Himself; and still further, He grants to all others this very thing, existence; but the things which have been made by Him have received a beginning. But whatever things had a beginning, and are liable to dissolution, and are subject to and stand in need of Him who made them, must necessarily in all respects have a different term [applied to them], even by those who have but a moderate capacity for discerning such things; so that He indeed who made all things can alone, together with His Word, properly be termed God and Lord: but the things which have been made cannot have this term applied to them, neither should they justly assume that appellation which belongs to the Creator."
Irenaeus, as one example of many, identifies the Son as God (and all other "gods" such as in Psalm 82 elsewhere in his books, he calls false.)
ch. 9, prt 3
"For inasmuch as the Word of God was man from the root of Jesse, and son of Abraham, in this respect did the Spirit of God rest upon Him, and anoint Him to preach the Gospel to the lowly. But inasmuch as He was God, He did not judge according to glory, nor reprove after the manner of speech. For "He needed not that any should testify to Him of man,84 for He Himself knew what was in man."85
The way Irenaeus expands on the Word (who he identifies, as John did, as Jesus) is rather fascinating. :::
From Irenaeus against heresis (mostly the Gnostic teacher Valentinus).From looking at the heresies themselves it is clear that the heretics derived their doctrines from different titles of God and Christ,like LOGOS,MONOGENES,CHRIST,...etc. -every name they use is a Greek term taken out of context to name a character in their heretical writings.But Irenaeus defeats every heresy with the truth. Such as the following.
_____________________________________________________________________
Chapter VI-The Holy Ghost, Throughout the Old Testament Scriptures, Made Mention of No Other God or Lord, Save Him Who is the True God.
1. Therefore neither would the Lord, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the apostles, have ever named as God, definitely and absolutely, him who was not God, unless he were truly God; nor would they have named any one in his own person Lord, except God the Father ruling over all, and His Son who has received dominion from His Father over all creation, as this passage has it: "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool." Here the [Scripture] represents to us the Father addressing the Son; He who gave Him the inheritance of the heathen, and subjected to Him all His enemies. Since, therefore, the Father is truly Lord, and the Son truly Lord, the Holy Spirit has fitly designated them by the title of Lord. And again, referring to the destruction of the Sodomites, the Scripture says, "Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven." For it here points out that the Son, who had also been talking with Abraham, had received power to judge the Sodomites for their wickedness. And this [text following] does declare the same truth: "Thy throne, O God; is for ever and ever; the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity: therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee." For the Spirit designates both [of them] by the name, of God-both Him who is anointed as Son, and Him who does anoint, that is, the Father. And again: "God stood in the congregation of the gods, He judges among the gods." He [here] refers to the Father and the Son, and those who have received the adoption; but these are the Church. For she is the synagogue of God, which God-that is, the Son Himself-has gathered by Himself. Of whom He again speaks: "The God of gods, the Lord hath spoken, and hath called the earth." Who is meant by God? He of whom He has said, "God shall come openly, our God, and shall not keep silence; " that is, the Son, who came manifested to men who said, "I have openly appeared to those who seek Me not." But of what gods [does he speak]? [Of those] to whom He says, "I have said, Ye are gods, and all sons of the Most High." To those, no doubt, who have received the grace of the "adoption, by which we cry, Abba Father."
______________________________________________________________________
One thing of extreme importance to note in this. When it speaks of the Son talking to Abraham here it is referring to Genesis 18.
And in Genesis 18 it is Jehovah that appears to Abraham and talks to him. Kinda interesting I'd say.
_____________________________________________________________________
More specific to John 1:1 I would say is Book II ch.28 - Re: LOGOS
"Ye seem to affirm gravely and honestly enough that ye believe in God; but then, as ye are utterly unable to reveal any other God, ye declare this very Being in whom ye profess to believe, the fruit of defect and the offspring of ignorance. Now this blindness and foolish talking flow to you from the fact that ye reserve nothing for God, but ye wish to proclaim the nativity and production both of God Himself, of His Ennoea, of His Logos, and Life, and Christ; and ye form the idea of these from no other than a mere human experience; not understanding, as I said before, that it is possible, in the case of man, who is a compound being, to speak in this way of the mind of man and the thought of man; and to say that thought (ennœa) springs from mind (sensus), intention (enthymesis) again from thought, and word (logos) from intention (but which logos? for there is among the Greeks one logos which is the principle that thinks, and another which is the instrument by means of which thought is expressed); and [to say] that a man sometimes is at rest and silent, while at other times he speaks and is active. But since God is all mind, all reason, all active spirit, all light, and always exists one and the same, as it is both beneficial for us to think of God, and as we learn regarding Him from the Scriptures, such feelings and divisions [of operation] cannot fittingly be ascribed to Him. For our tongue, as being carnal, is not sufficient to minister to the rapidity of the human mind, inasmuch as that is of a spiritual nature, for which reason our word is restrained within us, and is not at once expressed as it has been conceived by the mind, but is uttered by successive efforts, just as the tongue is able to serve it.
But God being all Mind, and all Logos, both speaks exactly what He thinks, and thinks exactly what He speaks. For His thought is Logos, and Logos is Mind, and Mind comprehending all things is the Father Himself. He, therefore, who speaks of the mind of God, and ascribes to it a special origin of its own, declares Him a compound Being, as if God were one thing, and the original Mind another. So, again, with respect to Logos, when one attributes to him the third place of production from the Father; on which supposition he is ignorant of His greatness; and thus Logos has been far separated from God. As for the prophet, he declares respecting Him, "Who shall describe His generation? " But ye pretend to set forth His generation from the Father, and ye transfer the production of the word of men which takes place by means of a tongue to the Word of God, and thus are righteously exposed by your own selves as knowing neither things human nor divine."
Against Heresis book 3 ch. 9, prt 1
2. Then again Matthew, when speaking of the angel, says, "The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in sleep."70 Of what Lord he does himself interpret: "That it may be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, Out of Egypt have I called my son."71 "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us."72 David likewise speaks of Him who, from the virgin, is Emmanuel: "Turn not away the face of Thine anointed. The Lord hath sworn a truth to David, and will not turn from him. Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy seat."73 And again: "In Judea is God known; His place has been made in peace, and His dwelling in Zion."74 Therefore there is one and the same God, who was proclaimed by the prophets and announced by the Gospel; and His Son, who was of the fruit of David's body, that is, of the virgin of [the house of] David, and Emmanuel; whose star also Balaam thus prophesied: "There shall come a star out of Jacob, and a leader shall rise in Israel."75 But Matthew says that the Magi, coming from the east, exclaimed "For we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him; "76 and that, having been led by the star into the house of Jacob to Emmanuel, they showed, by these gifts which they offered, who it was that was worshipped; myrrh, because it was He who should die and be buried for the mortal human met; gold, because He was a King, "of whose kingdom is no end; "77 and frankincense, because He was God, who also "was made known in Judea,"78 and was "declared to those who sought Him not."79
_____________________________________________________________________ -
31
What are your 5 favorite songs?
by joelbear inmine
imagine by john lennon he went to paris by jimmy buffett raindrops keep falling on my head by b j thomas the voice by the moody blues express yourself by madonna
-
-
Myxomatosis
eeehhh, 7 fav, ok.
1. Radiohead "Let Down"
2. Radiohead "How to disappear completely" "EIIRP"
3. System of a Down "toxicity"
4. Garbage "You look so fine"
5. STP "still remains"
6. Coldplay "don't panic" "the scientist"
7. The Beatles "A day in the life" -
8
Personal Testimony of Chris Stire
by Tower Man inhi guys,.
i have a new testimony from an ex-jw on my site.
it's a good one from canada!.
-
-
Myxomatosis
Hi there,
thanks for that!! I really loved it! I'm so pathetic as a Christian, I question so much. I've read so much, but stories like that are so powerful, who couldn't be moved? I always cry when people say they accepted Jesus, esp. when they were in a cult such as JW. just somethin' about me I guess. Again, thanks.
luv
Myxomatosis -
13
Trinitarians, Did Jesus reveal himself as God?
by ClassAvenger ini'm a person that believes in the trinity, but i have a question.
i know jesus didn't reveal to all the people to whom he preached as god himself, and it was not something that he directly taught (or at least i think he didn't), but i know from what i've read that the disciples knew and taught it.
my question is, did jesus tell them, or did they have this revealed when they were anointed by the holy spirit?
-
-
Myxomatosis
Hello Gumby,
Gumby: Many believe if Jesus truely existed, he never claimed equality with god or to be him. They feel the church deified jesus as the stories grew and an official messiah was desired.
Myx: I think the history thing has already been done spectacularly on other threads, so I won't get into it. About the church deifying Jesus? errr...no. Jesus did that (have you read any of Polycarp (disciple of John the Baptist) or Ignatius (disciple of Polycarp)?) They and the other early Church Fathers quote the gospels extensively, in their writings, before the Roman empire through Constantine adopted Christianity, you could reconstruct the entire New Testament throughout. This man Jesus, was either Lord, lunatic or liar.
Gumby: Others believe he never existed other than a mythical figure, a spirtitual one, and men LATER penned the gospels AFTER the" letters," and gave Jesus a local fleshly history, born through a virgin woman, he came from heaven............just like the OTHER beliefs in the area at the time Jesus was to have existed. The only difference is, the other beliefs that had many identical characteristics as Jesus...........is these myths were MUCH older.
Myx: Yeah, when I typed in 'pagan view of Christianity' I read alot of it. It would seem to me though, that these people are being incredibly dishonest if you look into it. Here's a site that questions the accusations.
www.heartofisrael.org
very good site
I know you don't believe in Him, but I don't think anyone should listen to the horribly ignorant theories about a reconstruction of pagan myth. It's really sad what they say.
Myxomatosis