Islamophobia.

[smaneck]

Y
Syrian refugees who have not been legally allowed into this country do not have the protections of the Constitution. That is why they can be detained in confinement areas even though they have not committed any other crime besides illegal entry.

None of them have illegally entered the country. There are some governors who are illegally trying to keep them out, however.

 

[ecco]

The US, founded by George Washington who rode a pale horse, is the 4th Christian "horseman" to rule the earth for Jesus.

Did George know this? After all, he was an affirmed Deist, not a Christian.

 

[ecco]

Neither did Muhammad call for the killing of people who did not want to convert. He called for the killing of those who were persecuting Muslims and kicking them out of their homes.

Maybe you should do a little checking before you post.

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."​

 

[Hank77]

Neither did Muhammad call for the killing of people who did not want to convert. He called for the killing of those who were persecuting Muslims and kicking them out of their homes.

Are you saying that when Muhammad went out conquering across the Arabian Peninsula that he did not kill the tribes who would not submit to him? Are you saying that he did not command his followers, his army, to kill these people? What was he defending when he killed those people, who was he defending?
Are you saying that he did not command the killing of those who became apostate to Islam?
History answers these questions.

You totally misunderstand what is at stake. Again, Muhammad never authorized the killing of people just because they didn't agree with His teachings. But unlike Jesus, as governor of Medina He had a community to protect. Jesus did not. Therein lies the difference. As soon as Christianity obtained any political power it was much more intolerant than Islam.

Jesus Never killed anyone or taught the killing of anyone and neither did the Apostles.
That is the difference.
Muhammad was a man of war and death, Jesus was a man of life and gave His life for others and so did His Apostles.

If Islam does not teach conquer by war and death and teaches peace, then Muhammad did not live Islam.
So which is it? Is Islam a religion of peace and Muhammad didn't live Islam? Or does it teach conquer by war and death and Muhammad lived Islam?

 

[Hank77]

None of them have illegally entered the country. There are some governors who are illegally trying to keep them out, however.

I did not say any of them have entered illegally. The point is that until any of them are legally in this country they are not protected by the US Constitution.

 

[interpreter]

The verse in Lukes isn't Jesus giving a command. It's a parable that points out actions a king would be likely to take in said scenario. While it certainly makes allusion to the situation of Christ (who was a king etc..) it doesn't imply that he would do the same thing a violent earthly king would do thankfully. He is merely trying to awaken them to the extremity of the situation.

Christ tells us explicitly to love our enemies in order "to be like your Father in heaven" who "makes his sun to shine on both the just and the unjust." IE our Father loves and does good towards everyone and we should be like him. See Matthew 5.

All commentaries that I have ever read say Jesus is the king of the parable, and it is talking about the return of Jesus with a kingdom. That happened in 312 AD when the sign of the Son of Man appeared in the clouds and Jesus appeared to St. Constantine and said, "By this, conquer." Ever since that day, Christian nations have been ruling the earth and killing the enemies of Jesus as commanded. Our personal enemy has nothing to do with the enemies of Jesus. We are commanded to love the one and kill the other.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief.

At the same time that our Constitution prohibits state establishment of religion, it protects the free exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to be strictly neutral. And government should not make it more difficult for Christians, Jews, Muslims, or other believing people to practice their faith. - Ronald Reagan

 

[ecco]

Jesus Never killed anyone or taught the killing of anyone and neither did the Apostles.

Pardon me for butting in, but, are you intentionally ignoring the Old Testament in this discussion?

 

[smaneck]

Are you saying that when Muhammad went out conquering across the Arabian Peninsula that he did not kill the tribes who would not submit to him?

Most tribes were converted peacefully, not conquered. The only ones who were conquered were the ones who killed missionaries and formed alliances with Mecca.

Are you saying that he did not command his followers, his army, to kill these people?

He authorized His followers to fight and kill those who persecuted them and kicked them out of their homes.

Are you saying that he did not command the killing of those who became apostate to Islam?

Yes, apostasy could be punishable by death because it generally meant changing sides in the middle of a battle. Those who did not seek to war with Muslims were not supposed to be subject to punishment of any kind. As one medieval jurist put it:

"The reason to kill an apostate is only with the intent to eliminate the danger of war, and not for the reason of his disbelief. The punishment of disbelief is far greater with God. Therefore, only such an apostate shall be killed who is actively engaged in war; and usually it is a man, and not a woman. For the same reason, the Holy Prophet has forbidden to kill women. And for this very reason, an apostate female could be killed if she in fact instigates and causes war by her influence and armed force at her disposal. She is not killed because of her apostasy, but for her creating disorder (through war) on earth."

History answers these questions.

Yes, it does and history shows there has been much more forcible conversion done in the name of Christianity than in the name of Islam.

Jesus Never killed anyone or taught the killing of anyone and neither did the Apostles.

Jesus had no community to protect. The Prophets of the Old Testament who were responsible for the protection of a community not only killed and taught killing they also insisted on genocide whereas Muhammad explicitly prohibited the targeting of non-combatants.

 

[smaneck]

Pardon me for butting in, but, are you intentionally ignoring the Old Testament in this discussion?

The generally do or argue "but this was a special case."

 

[LostMarbels]

These are the words of the Bible. Kill women and children, rape the young virgins.

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."(Numbers 31:16-18)​

Never said the Christian Bible does not have violence in it. However, there is a lot going on in that verse not understood by some and is an entirely different discussion. Their is a difference in OT, and NT Christianity. In the OT the Christ had not yet arrived.

(Mat 5:38-39) Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

(Mat 5:43-46) Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

(Pro 24:17-18) Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth: Lest the LORD see it, and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him.


Where is it stated in the Koran that nonbelievers are to no longer be beheaded? Where is it stated that Allah blesses both the believers and non believers? You see.... those scriptures in the Koran are still in effect since they have never been countermanded by Allah, But Jesus put an end to it commanding those that follow him to bless, love, forgive, and pray for your enemies.

 

[smaneck]

Where is it stated in the Koran that nonbelievers are to no longer be beheaded?

The only place in the Qur'an which even mentions beheading non-believers is where God commands the angels (not men) to do at the battle of Badr.

Where is it stated that Allah blesses both the believers and non believers?

“And when harm touches you upon the sea, those that you call upon besides Him vanish from you except Him. But when He brings you safely to land, you turn away (from Him). And man is ever ungrateful”

[al-Isra’ 17:67].

“Say : Who rescues you from the darkness of the land and the sea (dangers like storms), when you call upon Him in humility and in secret : If He (Allah) only saves us from this (danger), we shall truly be grateful.

Say : Allah rescues you from it and from all distresses, and yet you worship others besides Allah”

[al-An‘aam 6: 63-64]

“Is not He (rather than your gods) Who responds to the distressed one, when he calls Him, and Who removes the evil, and makes you inheritors of the earth, generations after generations. Is there any ilah (god) with Allah? Little is that you remember!”

[an-Naml 27:62]

And He gave you of all that you asked for, and if you count the Blessings of Allah, never will you be able to count them. Verily! Man is indeed an extreme wrong-doer, - a disbeliever

[Ibraaheem 14:34].

A Kafir incidentally, literally means an ingrate not an unbeliever. It is one who has received God's blessings (as we all do) but is ungrateful for them.

Any other questions?

 

[LostMarbels]

Any other questions?

Yes.... absolutely. Many, many more.

 

[LostMarbels]

In an attempt to get a better understanding and context of the scripture provided, I am researching them. Words in blue are mine.

[al-Isra’ 17:66-70].It is your Lord who drives the ship for you through the sea that you may seek of His bounty. Indeed, He is ever, to you, Merciful. And when adversity touches you at sea, lost are [all] those you invoke except for Him. But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away [from Him]. And ever is man ungrateful. Then do you feel secure that [instead] He will not cause a part of the land to swallow you or send against you a storm of stones? Then you would not find for yourselves an advocate. Or do you feel secure that He will not send you back into the sea another time and send upon you a hurricane of wind and drown you for what you denied? Then you would not find for yourselves against Us an avenger. And We have certainly honored the children of Adam and carried them on the land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created, with [definite] preference.

I have come to the decision that this group of verses are part of the same paragraph. Since the verse you provided starts with "and", which is conjunction. The very next verse begins with an pronoun so I thought it would be a good beginning.

We see that "IT" is defined as the Lords mercy in giving you safe passage on the sea.

In the next verse:
And when adversity touches you at sea, lost are [all] those you invoke except for Him. I take this to mean any who call on any-other God but Allah are lost. 2nd part of the verse:
But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away [from Him]. And ever is man ungrateful. I take this to be describing an individual who has been delivered by Allah's mercy to dry land, and has turned away from Allah; being ungrateful of Allah's mercy.
In the next verse:
Then do you feel secure that [instead] He will not cause a part of the land to swallow you or send against you a storm of stones? Then you would not find for yourselves an advocate. I takes this to mean that this individual should not feel safe in turning his back on Allah, and judgement may befall this individual; Also it is stated none can stand in this individuals defense for their act of ungratefulness.
In the next verse:
Or do you feel secure that He will not send you back into the sea another time and send upon you a hurricane of wind and drown you for what you denied? Again, this is taken as a statement that this individual could face Allah's judgement for their ungratefulness and/or denial of Allah. The 2nd part of the verse: Then you would not find for yourselves against Us an avenger. I find the second part interesting. Because here we have a verse stating it would be reasonable for Allah to kill you by sending you back to sea in a hurricane. This way, by dying at sea, none will avenge your death. If someone perceived this individuals death as untimely or unfair it would not bring the same anger as an execution, that is at the hands of men. After all.... people die at sea. But an execution can lay blame on the individuals that carried it out.
The next verse:
And We have certainly honored the children of Adam and carried them on the land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created, with [definite] preference. Since Islam views Adam as the first prophet of Islam because the Qur'an promulgates that all the prophets preached the same faith of submission to God. Also with Adam's role as the father of the human race is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Muslims also venerate his wife, Eve, as the "mother of mankind". This lead me to believe that the "children of Adam" refered to are the faithful to Islam in accordance to that faith. And with that being said, the faithful are preferred with [definite] preference.

This above verse was in response to my question: Where is it stated that Allah blesses both the believers and non believers?

How is this what I asked for? What am I missing?

 

[smaneck]

In the next verse:
And when adversity touches you at sea, lost are [all] those you invoke except for Him. I take this to mean any who call on any-other God but Allah are lost. 2nd part of the verse:

No, it means the other gods can't help you.

But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away [from Him]. And ever is man ungrateful. I take this to be describing an individual who has been delivered by Allah's mercy to dry land, and has turned away from Allah; being ungrateful of Allah's mercy.

Except it is not clear he was a believer in the first place, only that Allah and not those other gods saved him. He may very well have called out to Him in desperation but as one god among many.

I

n the next verse:
Then do you feel secure that [instead] He will not cause a part of the land to swallow you or send against you a storm of stones? Then you would not find for yourselves an advocate. I takes this to mean that this individual should not feel safe in turning his back on Allah, and judgement may befall this individual; Also it is stated none can stand in this individuals defense for their act of ungratefulness.

Okay.

In the next verse:
Or do you feel secure that He will not send you back into the sea another time and send upon you a hurricane of wind and drown you for what you denied? Again, this is taken as a statement that this individual could face Allah's judgement for their ungratefulness and/or denial of Allah

They could. Don't you as a Christian believe that an unbeliever will face God's judgement?

.

The 2nd part of the verse: Then you would not find for yourselves against Us an avenger. I find the second part interesting. Because here we have a verse stating it would be reasonable for Allah to kill you by sending you back to sea in a hurricane. This way, by dying at sea, none will avenge your death. If someone perceived this individuals death as untimely or unfair it would not bring the same anger as an execution, that is at the hands of men. After all.... people die at sea. But an execution can lay blame on the individuals that carried it out.

The next verse:
And We have certainly honored the children of Adam and carried them on the land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created, with [definite] preference. Since Islam views Adam as the first prophet of Islam because the Qur'an promulgates that all the prophets preached the same faith of submission to God. Also with Adam's role as the father of the human race is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Muslims also venerate his wife, Eve, as the "mother of mankind". This lead me to believe that the "children of Adam" refered to are the faithful to Islam in accordance to that faith. And with that being said, the faithful are preferred with [definite] preference.

That would be incorrect. The term of humanity in Arabic is Adamiyyat. The children of Adam are all of humanity.

This above verse was in response to my question: Where is it stated that Allah blesses both the believers and non believers?

How is this what I asked for? What am I missing?

That the "children of Adam" are believers and non-believers alike.



[/QUOTE]

 

[LostMarbels]

Ok... this is progress. Please understand I am sitting down reading the Koran and trying to have an educated discussion. I still do not see what you do but I am at least making an attempt to see your point of view. What I am asking is: is there a clear cut definitive scripture in the Koran commanding believers to not seek retribution, or to not visit punishment upon non believers?

(Rom 12:18-21) If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

See what I mean? That is clear cut, and to the point. No need at all to guess it's meaning.

 

[smaneck]

Ok... this is progress. Please understand I am sitting down reading the Koran and trying to have an educated discussion. I still do not see what you do but I am at least making an attempt to see your point of view. What I am asking is: is there a clear cut definitive scripture in the Koran commanding believers to not seek retribution, or to not visit punishment upon non believers?

That's an entirely different question than what you were asking before. Before you were asking if Allah blessed believers and unbelievers and I therefore provided the evidence that He did. You also asked where the Qur'an says to stop beheading people and I pointed out that it never said to start beheading people. But now it seems you are changing the topic entirely. The Muslims were in an entirely different position than Christians during Paul's time or Christ's. Their situation was much closer to that of the Hebrew people when they were besieged by enemies on all sides. When one is personally wronged forgiveness is appropriate, whether the person is of one one religion or not.

“Be quick in the forgiveness from your Lord, and pardon (all) men – for Allah loves those who do good.”

[Surah ali Imran; 3:133-134]

Likewise there is a hadith which represents the Prophet as saying the following:

“Do you know what will cause you to have high walled palaces in Paradise (as a symbol of great reward) and will cause you to be raised by God?” When they replied in the negative, he said,

“To be forgiving and to control yourself in the face of provocation, to give justice to the person who was unfair and unjust to you, to give to someone even though he did not give to you when you were in need and to keep connection with someone who may not have reciprocated your concern.”

Similarly the Prophet said that the best of people are those who are slow to get angry and quick to forgive. On the other hand the worst of people are those, he said who get angry quickly but are slow to forgive.

However, forgiveness against an aggressor who continues to attack a community is inappropriate. Should we forgive the terrorists who launched that attack in Paris and let them go? No, that would be foolish as well as unjust because they would just go out and kill some more.
In other words, if someone attacks me, I should forgive. If, on the other hand, they attack my son I have a responsibility to protect him.

It seems to me that if you are total pacifist who doesn't believe in armies or police of any sort you can criticize what the Qur'an says, otherwise it would be hypocritical. Muhammad did not attack anyone because they didn't accept His message. Warfare was authorized to protect the community from persecution, period.

 

[LostMarbels]

I'm not arguing the right to defend, and I am going to look into all scriptures presented to me. I do not however think this is a commandment concerning the non-believers, but the brotherhood of the faith. One thing I would like to point out is that there is a definitive moment in the Christian bible where the retribution of wrongs is no longer condoned.

O you who have believed, do not consume usury, doubled and multiplied, but fear Allah that you may be successful.
And fear the Fire, which has been prepared for the disbelievers.
And obey Allah and the Messenger that you may obtain mercy.
And hasten to forgiveness from your Lord and a garden as wide as the heavens and earth, prepared for the righteous
Who spend [in the cause of Allah ] during ease and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people - and Allah loves the doers of good
And those who, when they commit an immorality or wrong themselves [by transgression], remember Allah and seek forgiveness for their sins - and who can forgive sins except Allah ? - and [who] do not persist in what they have done while they know.

So again. The verse you posted begins with a conjunction, and is in a paragraph speaking to those that believe in Allah, and addresses seeking forgiveness for transgressions. This verse does not speak about forgiving the non-believer. This is just a message to the believers, about believers offending other believers, and a promised reward for those who do good.

The Muslims were in an entirely different position than Christians during Paul's time or Christ's. Their situation was much closer to that of the Hebrew people when they were besieged by enemies on all sides.

Yes, I agree. But the commandments in the Koran haven't changed. The same rules still apply.

You also asked where the Qur'an says to stop beheading people and I pointed out that it never said to start beheading people.

You said it was about angels in the battle of Badr. But Al-Anfal 8 is bring things into remembrance. All threw out it is commanding "remember". That means it is talking about the past and bringing it into remembrance to relate it to the present.
Al-Anfal 8:5
[It is] just as when your Lord brought you out of your home [for the battle of Badr] in truth, while indeed, a party among the believers were unwilling,

See here? It is just as.... Or 'as if'. This is not from the battle it's self.

[Remember, O believers], when Allah promised you one of the two groups - that it would be yours - and you wished that the unarmed one would be yours. But Allah intended to establish the truth by His words and to eliminate the disbelievers

This is not a defensive stance. The intention of Allah in this verse is to eliminate the disbelievers Please note: the wording of this verse is not "in the defense of my people". It is speaking of conquest by eliminating people.

[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip."

Beheading and mutilation.

That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger - indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.

That verse is a quantifier. so... this is how I dealt with it. Why I dealt with it, and by this above verse it is now condoned by Allah. It is given a rational explanation. So why bring this into remembrance, remind people that Allah condones this action against unbelievers, and even give a reasoning of why it is condoned? Why? Because this is as if...... As if the last time it was done, it is still ok now.

O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. So you see those in whose hearts is disease hastening into [association with] them, saying, "We are afraid a misfortune may strike us." But perhaps Allah will bring conquest or a decision from Him, and they will become, over what they have been concealing within themselves, regretful.

Al-Maidah 5 51-52

Perhaps Allah will bring conquest on the Christians and the Jews and make them regretful.....

O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous.
And whenever a surah is revealed, there are among the hypocrites those who say, "Which of you has this increased faith?" As for those who believed, it has increased them in faith, while they are rejoicing.
But as for those in whose hearts is disease, it has [only] increased them in evil [in addition] to their evil. And they will have died while they are disbelievers.
At-Tawbah 9:123-125

These are direct undiluted commandments. I have seen no separation from that was then and this is now.

BTW: this is from the Koran, not some web page. Online Koran.

 

[smaneck]

I'm not arguing the right to defend, and I am going to look into all scriptures presented to me. I do not however think this is a commandment concerning the non-believers, but the brotherhood of the faith.

There is no reason to assume that unless the passages says that.

So again. The verse you posted begins with a conjunction,

You make too much of conjunctions. They are much more common in Arabic.

This verse does not speak about forgiving the non-believer. This is just a message to the believers, about believers offending other believers, and a promised reward for those who do good.

Of course it is addressed to believers but nowhere when it speaks of forgiving does it specify one should only forgive believers.

Yes, I agree. But the commandments in the Koran haven't changed. The same rules still apply.

That's where the Baha'i Faith comes in. We are to Islam what Christianity is to Judaism. However, I'm not a total pacifist either are you?

You said it was about angels in the battle of Badr. But Al-Anfal 8 is bring things into remembrance. All threw out it is commanding "remember". That means it is talking about the past and bringing it into remembrance to relate it to the present.

What you are supposed to remember is how God intervened and insured their victory.

See here? It is just as.... Or 'as if'. This is not from the battle it's self.

Sorry, that doesn't make any sense to me.

[Remember, O believers], when Allah promised you one of the two groups - that it would be yours - and you wished that the unarmed one would be yours. But Allah intended to establish the truth by His words and to eliminate the disbelievers

Bad, bad translation. Here is what it actually says:

And when Allah promised you one of the two bands (of the enemy) that it should be yours, and ye longed that other than the armed one might be yours. And Allah willed that He should cause the Truth to triumph by His words, and cut the root of the disbelievers;

Here is the background behind the Battle of Badr which is the very first time Muslims use violence. After the Muslims left Mecca the Meccans expropriated all of their property and put it on a caravan to sell in Damascus. Muhammad authorized the ambushing of that caravan so they could get their stuff back. The plan was to ambush it when it reached the watering hole at the wells of Badr. However, spies in Medina got word to the Meccans what awaited the caravan, so the caravan was diverted and instead a large army appeared at the wells. Muslims were hopelessly outnumbered so their victory was regarded as a miracle. What this verse is saying is that God had intended for them to meet a large army rather than a relatively helpless caravan so that it might be plain that the victory was His and His alone. By "cutting the root off" the unbelievers what is meant is not extermination. It is rather like saying "I'll cut your legs out from under you." In other words they will no longer have a leg to stand on.

This is not a defensive stance. The intention of Allah in this verse is to eliminate the disbelievers

Only according this weird and inaccurate translation. wayaqtaAAa dabira alkafireena literally means to cut the roots off the ungrateful.

Please note: the wording of this verse is not "in the defense of my people". It is speaking of conquest by eliminating people.

Please note, you are using a bogus translation.

Beheading and mutilation.

By angels not mean, as the text clearly says.

So why bring this into remembrance, remind people that Allah condones this action against unbelievers

,

No, that is not what people are supposed to remember. What they are supposed to remember is rather like what happened with King Jehoshaphat. Remember him?

Don't have time tonight to go into the problems with the rest of your interpretations tonight. Maybe tomorrow.

BTW: this is from the Koran, not some web page.

Online Koran.

A bad translation of the Qur'an, done by Salafis.

 

[ecco]

Never said the Christian Bible does not have violence in it. However, there is a lot going on in that verse not understood by some and is an entirely different discussion. Their is a difference in OT, and NT Christianity. In the OT the Christ had not yet arrived. ... But Jesus put an end to it commanding those that follow him to bless, love, forgive, and pray for your enemies.

If you truly believe what you posted, then you must admit that the OT is not to be trusted. If the OT is not to be trusted, why should anyone believe the NT can be trusted?

Some people believe the OT is just as valid as the NT. These people acted in accordance with their understanding of the OT and felt they were justified in owning slaves. That's the beauty (or horror) of scripture, everyone takes what they want from it and everyone justifies their actions by believing they are following god's way.

If you truly believe what you posted, then you must admit that the OT is not to be trusted. Yet, if I'm not mistaken, you believe the Genesis story. How do you know that god won't send another of his selves to earth to say "We wrote Genesis to appeal to the knowledge of those people long ago, none it it was "really true"?