Why

[Robban]

The Bible is actually very clear. The problem with the various interpretation of Christianity is a result of going outside of Scripture to look for answers - The Book of Mormon, Catholic Tradition, the thoughts of any specific later day "prophet" etc.

I have asked Muslims why they can't be Quran only since they consider the Quran so complete? Why do they need they hadith?

We have indicators from the Bible what is sin and basically we do all fall short, all are saints and sinners.

Example;
If you know the written Torah by heart, what good is it to you?

Without the oral tradition?

A Classic example,
Abraham, What was he doing the first 75 years of his life?

The written Torah does not say much about it.

That,s just one example, there are hundreds,

Without the oral tradition, makes Saducees.

Tradition dear Watson, tradition.

 

[smaneck]

Smanek, that is also the chapter that states, 002.106 None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?

This is a reference to the Qiblih being changed from Jerusalem to Mecca. But the reference to there being no compulsion in religion was never abrogated. It appears in the same sura which allows for jihad against those who have persecuted Muslims.

 

[smaneck]

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
211 attacks with 1458 dead. This does not include the injured.

Why is this subject taboo? I am not attacking Muslims. I am questioning Islam.

No, you are attacking Islam. A questions waits for answer. You do not.

We all know if it were Christianity doing this Christianity would be attacked.

They are and they have been.

It would be pointed out to us that those being violent are not following Jesus's teachings.

Why is Islam protected?

Muslims themselves point out that the terrorists are not following Muhammad teachings.

Do we all know that deep down they are following Mohammad's teachings?

Only ignorant people who haven't the foggiest idea what Muhammad taught believe this.

Are we so enamored with the thought of multiculturalism that we can not be honest about questionable ideologies?

Or maybe some of us have actually studied Islam and not with a view of finding ammunition with which to attack it.

 

[smaneck]

Heironymus I have been banned from many sites and had many a post deleted over the years Muslim and Christian for bringing up the question. All I am doing is pointing to true events.

In other words, you are not really asking questions you are claiming to know the answers.

I absolutely know we do not want to do to Muslims what we did to the Japanese during World War II (internment camps and the bomb), but we must work against inequalities and violence!! Does that mean we are to allow those who hold believes of inequality and violence to reign over us, to try and change our ideology? Wouldn't that be a step backwards?

Historically the Islamic world was the most egalitarian civilization on earth, much more than the very hierarchical Europe or India. And by the way, Muslims don't reign over us.

 

[smaneck]

Certainly, it's not everybody who is covering up. It's mainly the White House which has the intention of tearing down the country so that it can be rebuilt into a third world nation, plus the partisans who jump to defend him whenever their leader says anything. So that's to identify the usual constituencies, the Media, Hollywood, etc.

I think there is a separate folder for conspiracy theories.

 

[Fizzywig]

I have seen and believe that Scripture is interpreted by Scripture. I will admit that you must follow the colloquial, definition of words used, customs, history of the times, etc to understand.

I would see it differently. To say that scripture interprets scripture is one claim too far, simply because of the implication is that each verse and its intent interacts with all others. Yet there are over 1000 pages in most Bibles, the sheer number of all the possible combinations and inter-relationships is virtually infinite.

Rather, it is the weight given to specific verses, and after such "weight" is given, how that informs us as we read other passages. Thus, a human being who gives weight to the verse....."Faith, hope and love, but the greatest of these is love" will see other passages in the light of that weight (or call it "Pre-eminence") Again, those who take to heart "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy" will take such words with them when they read others passages where mercy is promised. Thus as I have argued elsewhere, reading the Bible is like a roschach test in many ways - we in fact judge ourselves as we read.

Of course, may will appeal to the totally circular argument that one needs the "spirit" to understand, the spirit that is given to "true believers". If the circular nature - even the self-commendation - of such thinking is not apparent then really there is not much more to be said.

Thomas Merton on the reification of faith.....

Real meaning of the phrase we are saved by faith = we are saved by Christ, whom we encounter in faith. But constant disputation about faith has made Christians become obsessed with faith almost as an object, at least as an experience, a "thing" and in concentrating upon it they lose sight of Christ. Whereas faith without the encounter with Christ and without His presence is less than nothing. It is the deadest of dead works, an act elicited in a moral and existential void. To seek to believe that one believes, and arbitrarily to decree that one believes, and then to conclude that this gymnastic has been blessed by Christ - this is pathological Christianity. And a Christianity of works. One has this mental gymnastic in which to trust. One is safe, one possesses the psychic key to salvation......

As I see it the "encounter with Christ" can also be the "encounter with the Tao", with the Absolute, with the "Void", with "Krishna", with "Allah" and so on, with Reality itself. The spirit blows where it will.

To see this is to begin to see the efficacy of Grace. Which is pure gift. Given, not earned or attained. Often irrespective of our own interpretations, which even if correct will never "save" us as such.

 

[simplegifts]

Not really, what you mention are secondary issues. For example Baptism and OSAS, being saved is a journey. Depending on where you are in your life will depend on the answer and which Scripture leads you to the answer concerning the question about Baptism and OSAS.

The important fundamentals are very clearly stated = ie, God is one; the Deity of Christ; Christ has resurrected and is coming again; salvation is by grace and faith alone; the bible is the Word of god, inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life; Christ died that we might be saved.

 

[Fizzywig]

Not really, what you mention are secondary issues. For example Baptism and OSAS, being saved is a journey. Depending on where you are in your life will depend on the answer and which Scripture leads you to the answer concerning the question about Baptism and OSAS.

The important fundamentals are very clearly stated = ie, God is one; the Deity of Christ; Christ has resurrected and is coming again; salvation is by grace and faith alone; the bible is the Word of god, inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life; Christ died that we might be saved.

Sorry, your response is in my eyes incoherent.

You refer to the needs of those who would think themselves saved as a secondary issue. You speak of a journey, yet if there is disagreement on how the journey starts there is real dispute. Again, in a Faith that asks us to love our neighbour as ourselves, the fate of billions of our neighbours is NOT secondary. The eternal fate of billions is NOT secondary.

God is One? There are constant disputes concerning the Trinity, with some Christians rejecting the doctrine. Again even the deity of Christ is disputed (oh yes, they would be JW's, but that is beside the point in this discussion. They see themselves as the true Christians) The exact nature of the resurrection is disputed, with some arguing for what is virtually the resuscitation of a corpse, others arguing for a more "spiritual" nature to Christ "rising". Coming again? Have you not heard of those who argue that he has already returned? The Bible the Word of God? Again, no, Christ is declared by some the actual "Word", and the Bible merely the witness to that Living Word. Many Christians argue that the Bible is in fact not inerrant and has no need to be, and would dispute that it being "inspired" infers any such thing. Again, the simple words "Christ died" are open to various understandings regarding the exact nature of the atonement, not to mention the words "The lamb who was slain before the foundation of the world" which throws further disputations into the mix.

So there you are. The disputes remain. Many Christians would dispute with you as to what is fundamental and what is not, as I would. The nature of each dispute is relevant to very fundamental things, and the only thing that is clear is that those who claim that the Bible is clear on fundamentals are wrong.

Salvation is by Grace? Ah! At last. But not unique to Christianity, and in fact seen more clearly by some in other Faiths that are not given to what can only be called Bibliolatry,..i.e. the reliance upon the word as text and a particular interpretation of it rather than the Living Word, the giver of Grace.

 

[Arthra]

Someone raised the issue about the Qur'an being specific about the conditions for war... Let me cite a few examples:

The grounds for warfare is essentially defensive:

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight) because they are wronged -- and verily, Allah is Most powerful for their aid --

40. (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right -- (for no cause) except that they say, "Our Lord is Allah." Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid His (cause); for verily Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (Able to enforce His Will).

(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 22)

Making peace an honorable goal:

61. But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the one that heareth and knoweth (all things).

(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 8)

Condition on which fighting is forbidden:

90. Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them).

(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 4)

God will, perhaps, establish good will between yourselves and those of
them whom ye take to be your enemies: God is Powerful: and God is Gracious,
Merciful.

God doth not forbid you to deal with kindness and fairness towards those
who have not made war upon you on account of your religion, or driven you forth
from your homes: for God loveth those who act with fairness.

From Surih 60 (Rodwell)

134. Those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men; for Allah loves those who do good.


(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 3)

 

[simplegifts]

Sorry, your response is in my eyes incoherent.

You refer to the needs of those who would think themselves saved as a secondary issue. You speak of a journey, yet if there is disagreement on how the journey starts there is real dispute. Again, in a Faith that asks us to love our neighbour as ourselves, the fate of billions of our neighbours is NOT secondary. The eternal fate of billions is NOT secondary.

God is One? There are constant disputes concerning the Trinity, with some Christians rejecting the doctrine. Again even the deity of Christ is disputed (oh yes, they would be JW's, but that is beside the point in this discussion. They see themselves as the true Christians) The exact nature of the resurrection is disputed, with some arguing for what is virtually the resuscitation of a corpse, others arguing for a more "spiritual" nature to Christ "rising". Coming again? Have you not heard of those who argue that he has already returned? The Bible the Word of God? Again, no, Christ is declared by some the actual "Word", and the Bible merely the witness to that Living Word. Many Christians argue that the Bible is in fact not inerrant and has no need to be, and would dispute that it being "inspired" infers any such thing. Again, the simple words "Christ died" are open to various understandings regarding the exact nature of the atonement, not to mention the words "The lamb who was slain before the foundation of the world" which throws further disputations into the mix.

So there you are. The disputes remain. Many Christians would dispute with you as to what is fundamental and what is not, as I would. The nature of each dispute is relevant to very fundamental things, and the only thing that is clear is that those who claim that the Bible is clear on fundamentals are wrong.

Salvation is by Grace? Ah! At last. But not unique to Christianity, and in fact seen more clearly by some in other Faiths that are not given to what can only be called Bibliolatry,..i.e. the reliance upon the word as text and a particular interpretation of it rather than the Living Word, the giver of Grace.

Please reference your statement -which Christians and where did they find their information. I stand by my statement. If they do not agree with the fundamentals they have found their information from outside the Bible.

I think one of the vague free verses in the Quran is how to find a sure way to salvation, fight, subdue, and/or kill for allah.

 

[simplegifts]

In other words, you are not really asking questions you are claiming to know the answers.



Historically the Islamic world was the most egalitarian civilization on earth, much more than the very hierarchical Europe or India. And by the way, Muslims don't reign over us.

Give them time. That is a directive from Mohammad through his Quran. Look at what is happening in France and Germany.

 

[Fizzywig]

Please reference your statement -which Christians and where did they find their information. I stand by my statement. If they do not agree with the fundamentals they have found their information from outside the Bible.

I think one of the vague free verses in the Quran is how to find a sure way to salvation, fight, subdue, and/or kill for allah.

The examples I gave were of Christians who subscribe to Sola Scriptura. You are free to avoid the conclusions.

Your choice. We learn and grow or we cling to our comfort zone.

 

[smaneck]

Give them time. That is a directive from Mohammad through his Quran. Look at what is happening in France and Germany.

What's happening in France and Germany is they are falling victim to ISIS' death throes. As ISIS loses their territory in Iraq and Syria (and thus their claim to the Caliphate) they are using acts of terrorism in a last ditch effort to prove they are not irrelevant. Acts of terrorism won't help you take over state.

 

[simplegifts]

The examples I gave were of Christians who subscribe to Sola Scriptura. You are free to avoid the conclusions.

Your choice. We learn and grow or we cling to our comfort zone.

Really? I ask again which groups are these? Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists? What other groups?

While some groups do not pronounce creeds they do agree with what the statements are saying. The Apostles creed. A great example of the fundamentals - http://www.prayerfoundation.org/nicene_creed_scripture_basis.htm

 

[Fizzywig]

Really? I ask again which groups are these? Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists? What other groups?

While some groups do not pronounce creeds they do agree with what the statements are saying. The Apostles creed. A great example of the fundamentals - http://www.prayerfoundation.org/nicene_creed_scripture_basis.htm

Yes, really.

 

[simplegifts]

This is a reference to the Qiblih being changed from Jerusalem to Mecca. But the reference to there being no compulsion in religion was never abrogated. It appears in the same sura which allows for jihad against those who have persecuted Muslims.

That changing of the Qiblih - brings up a very serious fault, the confusion of Mohammad!

002.006 As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.
002.007 Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur)
...
002.010 In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).
002.011 When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"

And so what are they instructed to do, their way of making peace!! Get rid of and/or subdue the non-Muslims.
005.032 On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
005.033 The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

 

[simplegifts]

Yes, really.

So are you done with this line of questioning, or do you not really know?

 

[smaneck]

That changing of the Qiblih - brings up a very serious fault, the confusion of Mohammad!

It looks like you are the one who is confused. What do any of those passages have to do with the Qiblih? Fitnah which is being translated as "making mischief in the land" refers primarily to acts ranging from subversion to terrorism. The reference to cutting off hands and feet and crucifying was about an act of terrorism which had recently been committed.

 

[Fizzywig]

So are you done with this line of questioning, or do you not really know?

I was not questioning. Originally I just commented that the Bible is not clear, this demonstrated by the countless interpretations of various Christians throughout the ages, especially since the Reformation. You have failed to answer this. And, given our discussion, it is now apparent to me that Christians would also be in dispute regarding what doctrines are actually fundamental!

EDIT:- I'm not sure what it is I do not really know (!!) I did actually state quite clearly the various opinions were drawn from those who would subscribe to Sola Scriptura.

 

[Fizzywig]

The sad thing is that I would say that the Bible is in fact "quite clear", i.e. That we are "saved by grace". And that is the only fundamental.

Alas, much "small print" is insisted upon, depending upon the denomination, obscuring that which IS clear.