Are you an atheist? (1 Viewer)

[Frothingslosh]

These points are your BS not mine. Sorry buddy, better go back to night school.

First off, learn to use quotes. It's not that difficult.

Second, let's start with this:

Yes, it is what I said but I also gave you the article knowing full well there is a Torah dated some 200 years earlier which actually makes it about the 3300 years old we spoke of earlier. You just want to bash someone and that is fine, I am still here.

Speaking of night school, I suggest you sign up, because in the real world, a text written circa 1155-1225 is not 3300 years old, it is between 789 and 859 years old. For proof, let's pull up some grade school math:

2014 - 1225 = 789 years' difference
2014 - 1155 = 859 years' difference

Now your article said the older bibles predated the newly ID'd Torah by over 200 years. Let's be generous and say 300 years. That means that those older bibles are 1089 to 1159 years old. In case that math, also, is too difficult for you:

200 years older than 1225 is the year 1025. As I went with 300 above, that means we're working with the year 925.
200 years older than 1155 is the year 955. As I went with 300 above, that means we're working with the year 855.

2014 - 925 = 1089 years' difference
2014 - 855 = 1159 years' difference

The next thing your article mentioned was having scraps of the Torah from the 8th century. Notice that it's not '8th century BCE', but '8th century', meaning the 700's. So, let's say that the scraps were written in 700 CE. Falling back to grade-school math, 2014 - 700 = 1314. That means that the oldest known scraps of the Torah are approximately 1300 years old, not 3300. As to the origin, your article didn't even touch on when the Torah was actually written.

So no, your article does NOT prove that the Torah is 3300 years old, and I have twisted nothing. You are the only one lying in this thread - even Aziz is at least restricting himself to the truth as he believes it. Sure, he's twisting things just as much as he possibly can, but he's not intentionally lying.

And you are doing as I stated in one of my previous post,,, Keep it up, Your integrity is slipping away.

Yes, because quoting facts and figures and citing references shows SUCH a lack of integrity. Then again, if integrity has come to mean "Rages at unbelievers, lies, twists and misrepresents facts, and acts unbelievably arrogant", then I will revel in my lack thereof.

How many you want? http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/...odus_egypt.php

Holy crap, did you just cite a source? And you're not completely misrepresenting what it says this time?!? Will wonders never cease!

Although, using this particular source is much like having the Koch brothers in charge of campaign finance reform or health insurance companies writing insurance law; ie - a serious conflict of interest, as the source itself has a vested interest in the data it is providing, which pretty much guarantees a slant. Then again, I'd have a better chance of throwing a Scrabble set onto the floor and having them form a Shakespearean sonnet than I'd have of seeing you use an unbiased source, so I'll take what I can get.

I'll note, however, that your site only uses a single footnote, and overlooks a lot of things, ranging from disagreement over the length of his reign (while documents refer to a 94 year reign, egyptologists can only find references to him in a 62-64 year period). In fact, the 94 year reign idea came from documents written over a thousand years after his death. (Hans Goedicke, The Death of Pepi II-Neferkare" in Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 15, (1988), pp.111–121)

Your site picks Pepi II and runs with the 94 year reign idea simply in order to match up with the fable in the Bible. Still, if the fable requires a reign of over 80 years, then I can't fault one for trying to find one. Assuming, of course, that the 94 year reign from the papers written a thousand years later are correct, as opposed to the 64 year reign from contemporary writings.

Of course, your site then gets his successor's name completely wrong - it's Merenre Nemtyemsaf II, not Antyemsaf. (The latter name has been known to be wrong for some time.)

Of course, so far, all we have is that the Moses story is placed around the time of someone who may have been Pepi II. There's still no proof that the Exodus actually happened, any more than Assassin's Creed's being set in Renaissance Italy (which, like Pepi II, actually existed) means that the Assassins and the Templars actually went to war.

Unfortunately for your chosen site, the fall of the Old Kingdom was due to far more than a sudden, God-inspired famine. There was civil war between the nomarchs, as Pepi's children and heirs almost certainly died before him, and it was coupled with a 100 year-long drought. (Jean-Daniel Stanley et al. (2003). "Nile flow failure at the end of the Old Kingdom, Egypt: Strontium isotopic and petrologic evidence".) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22nd_century_BC_drought)

***

Unfortunately, in your post after this one, you resort to the Gish Gallop - shotgunning a bunch of poorly written, worse-researched links that take up more time to refute than anyone can possibly spend in replying to a single post. What I see skimming through them, however, are basic errors, such as assuming facts not in evidence (the people in pictographs are OBVIOUSLY Semitics! And thus MUST be the tribes of Israel!) (Moses was actually kind of Egypt, and his mother was really Hatshepsut, becuase it's CRAZY to think that SHE could have ruled Egypt!). Oh, there's a terribly-written book called "Moses in the Heiroglyphs", which has one of the most brutal reviews I've seen in some time written HERE. There's an article about someone describing his new paper, which even comes with quotes by an attendee who wasn't impressed, pointing out

“If, in fact, hundreds of thousands of Jews left Egypt, then you should be able to see new settlement patterns in Israel — and archaeologists have excavated Israel, and they don’t see a change in the building structure, in the pottery, all the things you think would change if there was a huge immigrant influx,” Wolpe said.

You have another page trying to shoehorn Moses into the Hatshepsut timeline (again), with no supporting evidence whatsoever. And you have a forum post that simply quotes one of the other links you made.

What you don't have is any proof whatsoever that the Exodus actually happened. Nothing in the historical or archaeological records showing over 600,000 slaves up and leaving Egypt, getting lost for 40 years, and then invading Canaan. The Egyptians were meticulous recordkeepers, and yet their records say NOTHING about this kind of event - one which would have disastrously HAMMERED their entire economy. There is not a single word about the mother of all slave rebellions.

Hell, while doing some quick research, page after page after page from the pro-Exodus crew freely admit that there's not a shred of archaological evidence.

***

Anyway, while I commend you for finding a link that actually tries to say what you said it does, what I asked you for was honest proof. It's a shame that your 'proof' consists of people trying to shoehorn the Moses story into Egyptian history, rather than, you know, actual proof. Things like a record of the Israelite slaves rebelling and leaving, or evidence of a migration of a large nation's worth of people into Israel.

As much as you refuse to believe it, a single non-forged Old Kingdom text describing the exodus of over a half million Israelite slaves after ten obviously miraculous events would be unassailable proof. Too bad it doesn't exist.

 

[Frothingslosh]

You seem to be a master at that.

Seriously, the best you can do when pressed for actual, real, fact is make a snide comment?

Pathetic.

 

[spikepl]

@Frothingslosh

My utmost respect for the Sisyphean task you have taken upon yourself. It is Sysiphean in that it will never conclude, since logic has no reply to faith.

At the same time it is amazing to witness the faithfuls' desperate struggle to stuff their ramblings into a framework of logic and attempt to dress their faith into some sort of scientific coat. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Check out the Russell's teapot - that kind of sums it up nicely.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Oh, I'm fully aware of Russel's teapot, and Sisyphean certainly describes it, doesn't it?

And hell, I forgot to point out Blade's 'proof' links put the Exodus in 5 different points in time. That's not what I'd call compelling proof.

 

[spikepl]

Mr. God is still welcome to contribute to the discussion. But I guess he's busy, as always. (And why is he a he - does he have a dingeling? If so, what does he use it for?).

 

[Alc]

Mr. God is still welcome to contribute to the discussion. But I guess he's busy, as always. (And why is he a he - does he have a dingeling? If so, what does he use it for?).

Oooh, somebody's in for a smiting.
No-one stand too close to spike in the next thunderstorm

 

[spikepl]

HE uses it as a lightning rod? Ouch!

 

[Bladerunner]

First off, learn to use quotes. It's not that difficult.

Second, let's start with this:


Lets start off with what you are, A far left liberal who is a naturalist, and believes that God does not exist.

Speaking of night school, I suggest you sign up, because in the real world, a text written circa 1155-1225 is not 3300 years old, it is between 789 and 859 years old. For proof, let's pull up some grade school math:

It seems that I remember to get the number of years you have to subtract a negative number which result in the addition of all numbers. Lets see if this is right.!

2014 - 2010 = 4 years
2014 - 0 = 2014
2014 - (-1225) = 3239

OOPs Guess we never went to school. no wonder you are a liberal! Better get you a calculator, your brain seems to be fried.....Wonder Why?


All the rest of your gibberish is inconsequential !

From this post forward I will refuse to answer any of your liberal God Hating postings.

 

[Bladerunner]

There are many areas in the world where there are more women to men, this can often happen in different times e.g. during the times of war. The ruling regarding one man marrying up to 4 women applies in those cases. Another reason for this policy is to prevent promiscuity where women who are not attracted for marriage based on varying factors e.g. status or wealth of the women. Females who were orphaned 1400 years ago came under this. So rather than men having countless secret affairs and causing a breakup of morals and hence the society we live in it’s better to have marriages which are open and transparent. Apparently there are about 2000 such marriages in the UK and it’s growing as it was only about 400 in the latter part of the last century. You have a blinkered view of what I say and refuse as always to look at the bigger picture. You’re hate for ISLAM exhumes you to such an extent that you can never be an honest broker. As God says in the Qur’an,

Was this put forth by your God or By your so called Prophet

003.184 And if they deny thee, even so did they deny messengers who were before thee, who came with miracles and with the Psalms and with the Scripture giving light.
003.185 Every soul will taste of death. And ye will be paid on the Day of Resurrection only that which ye have fairly earned. Whoso is removed from the Fire and is made to enter paradise, he indeed is triumphant. The life of this world is but comfort of illusion.

Let's see, you get 72 virgins if you are killed in battle killing infidels!

 

[Bladerunner]

002.190 Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.
002.191 And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

What did the Christians and other groups do to your Islamic terrorist to deserve beheading. You say Islam is a peaceful religion but it is not. First of all Islam was born around 600 AD not any earlier as you suggest. You do not recognise Jesus Christ as I do not recognize your Prophet, whats his name?

By the way, Jesus did proclaim that he was the son of God.






002.192 But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
002.193 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.
002.194 The forbidden month for the forbidden month, and forbidden things in retaliation. And one who attacketh you, attack him in like manner as he attacked you. Observe your duty to Allah, and know that Allah is with those who ward off (evil).

060.005 Our Lord! Make us not a prey for those who disbelieve, and forgive us, our Lord! Lo! Thou, only Thou, are the Mighty, the Wise.
060.006 Verily ye have in them a goodly pattern for everyone who looketh to Allah and the Last Day. And whosoever may turn away, lo! still Allah, He is the Absolute, the Owner of Praise.
060.007 It may be that Allah will ordain love between you and those of them with whom ye are at enmity. Allah is Mighty, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
060.008 Allah forbiddeth you not those who warred not against you on account of religion and drove you not out from your homes, that ye should show them kindness and deal justly with them. Lo! Allah loveth the just dealers.
060.009 Allah forbiddeth you only those who warred against you on account of religion and have driven you out from your homes and helped to drive you out, that ye make friends of them. Whosoever maketh friends of them - (All) such are wrong-doers.

The word infidel was a word coined by Christians to refer to non-Christians. The Qur’an refers to people who are not Muslims as disbelievers. You shouldn’t trust everything you hear from the western media or politicians.



002.256 There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.[/QUOTE]

 

[Bladerunner]

The word infidel was a word coined by Christians to refer to non-Christians. The Qur’an refers to people who are not Muslims as disbelievers. You shouldn’t trust everything you hear from the western media or politicians.

Yes the Christians used it but so does Islam. Since the term is English, It represent its equivalent in Arabic.

"Infidel is an English language word commonly used to translate the equivalent Arabic language word for non-Muslims; kafir (sometimes "kaafir", "kufr" or "kuffar"), and the equivalent Turkish loanword gâvur, literally the one who "covers" and "conceals", is usually translated as "infidel" and "disbeliever".[17][18][19] Other terms sometimes synonymously used in Islamic literature for infidel are shirk, mushirk, and mushrikun.[20][21]"

Its not nice to be a deceiver.


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."



I believe you said Muslims only defended themselves,,,,,,,?

 

[Frothingslosh]

First off, learn to use quotes. It's not that difficult.

Second, let's start with this:

Lets start off with what you are, A far left liberal who is a naturalist, and believes that God does not exist.




It seems that I remember to get the number of years you have to subtract a negative number which result in the addition of all numbers. Lets see if this is right.!

2014 - 2010 = 4 years
2014 - 0 = 2014
2014 - (-1225) = 3239

OOPs Guess we never went to school. no wonder you are a liberal! Better get you a calculator, your brain seems to be fried.....Wonder Why?


All the rest of your gibberish is inconsequential !

From this post forward I will refuse to answer any of your liberal God Hating postings.

Good thing I haven't posted a single God Hating posting!

And you still can't figure out quotes, I see. I pity whoever you write code for.

Anyway, about your kindergarten math:

Reread your own bloody article:

ROME (AP) — An Italian expert in Hebrew manuscripts said Wednesday he has discovered the oldest known complete Torah scroll, a sheepskin document dating from 1155-1225. It was right under his nose, in the University of Bologna library, where it had been mistakenly catalogued a century ago as dating from the 17th century.

dating from 1155-1225

1155-1225

It doesn't say 1155-1225 BC, it says 1155-1225. That's AD/CE. As in, less than a thousand years ago.

Don't slam me just because you can't comprehend the very article you're quoting.

It amuses me to no end, though, that you equate 'rationalism and logic' with God-hating. That says little about me and everything everyone needs to know about you.

As to the rest of your drivel, I'm actually far from far left, nor am I an atheist, which you would know if you could, you know, READ. Being agnostic does not make me far left, nor does a requirement that things make sense, nor does a lack of interest in accepting BECAUSE I SAY SO as proof.

But that's okay, because I understand that in your world view, anyone who doesn't bow down to your incoherent ramblings and utter lack of logic is a dire threat to your very existence. God forbid you actually have to THINK!

Also, naturalist? You say that like it's a bad thing. You do realize, don't you, that every single thing around you, the very computers you work with, are the creations of naturalists? The Bible didn't create modern medicine, modern technology, or even Microsoft Access, no matter how much you apparently wish it did.

 

[Bladerunner]

1. You are a liar
2. Your faith is fundamentally wrong as Jesus (peace be upon him) never claimed to be the begotten son of God, which is one of the pillars of Christianity.

Jesus calls God ‘the Father’ or ‘my Father’ 107 times and refers to himself as ‘the Son of God’ or simply ‘the son’ in context with ‘the Father’ around 30 times. John 5:18 shows that his contemporaries understood him to be ‘making himself equal with God’.

This relationship is further emphasized in the latter half of the Gospel when Jesus claims to be one with the Father (Rom 10:30, 38; 14:10-11; 17:11), existing before creation (Rom 17:5), and owning all that God owns (Rom 16:15; 17:10).

The Father loves the Son (John 15:9, 17:23-29) and the Son loves the Father (John 14:31). Out of that love, Jesus is obedient to his Father (John 14:31), and he loves the Son because of that obedience (John 10:17)

And you call me a liar but want to turn me in to the administrators. It is your muslim way to get things done. I forgive you. You cannot help it, You grew up that way.

 

[Frothingslosh]

As Brave Sir Bladerunner is apparently so mortified about his complete lack of competence with first grade math that he has decided to place me on ignore rather than face the truth, I guess I shall have to leave it to the rest of you to point out to him that he's out of his bloody mind. (Or, more likely, that he's assuming a BC on dates that aren't BC in the article he quoted.)

I guess I'll just watch him and Aziz snipe at each other for the next few weeks.

 

[scott-atkinson]

You guys have got far too much time on your hands...

 

[aziz rasul]

Seriously, the best you can do when pressed for actual, real, fact is make a snide comment?

Pathetic.

If you were reading my posts you will see plenty of real facts which you have chosen to ignore.

Pathetic.

Bladerunner, I have reported your lie and waiting for them to come back to me.

Was this put forth by your God or By your so called Prophet

It is God who has allowed a Muslim to marry up to 4 women. Before the verse was revealed, there was no limit to how many wives you could have. For example David (peace be upon him) had approximately 13 wives.

Let's see, you get 72 virgins if you are killed in battle killing infidels!

Where is your reference? Anyone can quote what they want, I at least wherever possible quote verses from the Qur’an to support my arguments.

What did the Christians and other groups do to your Islamic terrorist to deserve beheading. You say Islam is a peaceful religion but it is not. First of all Islam was born around 600 AD not any earlier as you suggest. You do not recognise Jesus Christ as I do not recognize your Prophet, whats his name?

By the way, Jesus did proclaim that he was the son of God.

You are clearly someone who as a Christian, other Christians would avoid.

Anyone who calls himself a Muslim and carries out an action that is against the Qur’an and Sunnah is wrong in what they do. I condemn governments who bomb Muslims just as I condemn the beheadings of the journalists that recently have taken place by Muslims. I condemn any act of atrocity committed by whomever to whoever.

Please provide evidence from the Qur’an that Islam is not a peaceful religion.

Islam came into being during the time of Adam (peace be upon him). He worshipped the same God that all the other Prophets and Messengers worshipped, so you are factually incorrect.

I recognise Jesus (peace be upon him) in the way he would have wanted not as a begotten son of God, which BTW you have not provided any evidence for. For your information, the term son of God is allegorical way of saying someone who is close to God and giving His message, there is no biological relationship just as when the NT says that Jesus (peace be upon him) is referred to as the son of David, it’s not taken literally. The relationship is there through the family tree but most importantly through the same belief i.e. to surrender to the ONE TRUE God.

In the KJV of the NT in the Gospel of John, the word ‘begotten’ was deliberately added in to suggest a biological relationship. However the original documents do not have the word ‘begotten’ in them. If you don’t believe me check out the NRSV of the Bible which is based on the original known manuscripts. Interestingly the RSV which preceded the NRSV did have this word but they took it out after much deliberation by over 50 Christian theologians who decided that if the NRSV was to reflect the original then they had to take it out. The vast majority of Christians are unaware of this and unfortunately blindly follow something that was manufactured by man.

Yes the Christians used it but so does Islam. Since the term is English, It represent its equivalent in Arabic.

"Infidel is an English language word commonly used to translate the equivalent Arabic language word for non-Muslims; kafir (sometimes "kaafir", "kufr" or "kuffar"), and the equivalent Turkish loanword gâvur, literally the one who "covers" and "conceals", is usually translated as "infidel" and "disbeliever".[17][18][19] Other terms sometimes synonymously used in Islamic literature for infidel are shirk, mushirk, and mushrikun.[20][21]"

Its not nice to be a deceiver.

Thye Arabic word in the Qur’an is KAFIR (singular) or KUFAAR (plural). The word refers to people who know the TRUTH but conceal it. The word INFIDEL is used to denote a non Christian. Hence this word was in the past used by Christians and no one else. Only recently has the media tried it’s best thru it’s vilification of Islam to incorporate this word among Muslims, who in some case are ignorant of the facts begin using it not realising that the English word for KAFIR is a DISBELIEVER i.e. some who REJECTS the TRUE faith. In your post it says ‘usually’, which suggests it’s not by many others. Don’t substitute Christian grown words and place them into the Islamic arena. Its not nice to be a deceiver.

You quoted Qur’an 9:5 but you made no attempt in trying to understand the context of the verse. You are no better than those Muslims who do the same thing and use this verse to kill innocents.

Here are the verses in full:-

1. Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger to those of the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), with whom you made a treaty.

2. So travel freely (O Mushrikun - see V.2:105) for four months (as you will) throughout the land, but know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah, and Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

3. And a declaration from Allah and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah - the 12th month of Islamic calendar) that Allah is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikun) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah. And give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve.

4. Except those of the Mushrikun with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves Al- Mattaqun (the pious - see V.2:2).

5. Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

6. And if anyone of the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Qur'an), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not.

7. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2).

8. How (can there be such a covenant with them) that when you are overpowered by them, they regard not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant with you? With (good words from) their mouths they please you, but their hearts are averse to you, and most of them are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).

9. They have purchased with the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah a little gain, and they hindered men from His Way; evil indeed is that which they used to do.

10. With regard to a believer, they respect not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who are the transgressors.

11. But if they repent, perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat, then they are your brethren in religion. (In this way) We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) in detail for a people who know.

12. But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief (chiefs of Quraish - pagans of Makkah) - for surely their oaths are nothing to them - so that they may stop (evil actions).

13. Will you not fight a people who have violated their oaths (pagans of Makkah) and intended to expel the Messenger, while they did attack you first? Do you fear them? Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are believers.

14. Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people,

15. And remove the anger of their (believers') hearts. Allah accepts the repentance of whom He wills. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

16. Do you think that you shall be left alone while Allah has not yet tested those among you who have striven hard and fought and have not taken Walijah [(Batanah - helpers, advisors and consultants from disbelievers, pagans, etc.) giving openly to them their secrets] besides Allah and His Messenger, and the believers. Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do.

17. It is not for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), to maintain the Mosques of Allah (i.e. to pray and worship Allah therein, to look after their cleanliness and their building, etc.), while they witness against their ownselves of disbelief. The works of such are in vain and in Fire shall they abide.

18. The Mosques of Allah shall be maintained only by those who believe in Allah and the Last Day; perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat and fear none but Allah. It is they who are expected to be on true guidance.

The background is that the polytheists broke a treaty with the Messenger (peace be upon him). They were given 4 months to make amends or war would be declared. Verse 9:5 was revealed during the battle that ultimately took place when the polytheists marched from Makkah to Madina. Hence this war was conducted in self defence as I originally said. If you had made even a little effort to establish the TRUTH, you would have seen that, as it is your words remain empty as always.

1If prophets or those who divine by dreams appear among you and promise you omens or portents,
2and the omens or the portents declared by them take place, and they say, ‘Let us follow other gods’ (whom you have not known) ‘and let us serve them’,
3you must not heed the words of those prophets or those who divine by dreams; for the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you indeed love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul.
4The Lord your God you shall follow, him alone you shall fear, his commandments you shall keep, his voice you shall obey, him you shall serve, and to him you shall hold fast.
5But those prophets or those who divine by dreams shall be put to death for having spoken treason against the Lord your God—who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery—to turn you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
6 If anyone secretly entices you—even if it is your brother, your father’s son or your mother’s son, or your own son or daughter, or the wife you embrace, or your most intimate friend—saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’, whom neither you nor your ancestors have known,
7any of the gods of the peoples that are around you, whether near you or far away from you, from one end of the earth to the other,
8you must not yield to or heed any such persons. Show them no pity or compassion and do not shield them.
9But you shall surely kill them; your own hand shall be first against them to execute them, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
10Stone them to death for trying to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
11Then all Israel shall hear and be afraid, and never again do any such wickedness.
12 If you hear it said about one of the towns that the Lord your God is giving you to live in,
13that scoundrels from among you have gone out and led the inhabitants of the town astray, saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’, whom you have not known,
14then you shall inquire and make a thorough investigation. If the charge is established that such an abhorrent thing has been done among you,
15you shall put the inhabitants of that town to the sword, utterly destroying it and everything in it—even putting its livestock to the sword.
16All of its spoil you shall gather into its public square; then burn the town and all its spoil with fire, as a whole burnt-offering to the Lord your God. It shall remain a perpetual ruin, never to be rebuilt.
17Do not let anything devoted to destruction stick to your hand, so that the Lord may turn from his fierce anger and show you compassion, and in his compassion multiply you, as he swore to your ancestors,
18if you obey the voice of the Lord your God by keeping all his commandments that I am commanding you today, doing what is right in the sight of the Lord your God.

Old Testament Deuteronomy

Jesus calls God ‘the Father’ or ‘my Father’ 107 times and refers to himself as ‘the Son of God’ or simply ‘the son’ in context with ‘the Father’ around 30 times. John 5:18 shows that his contemporaries understood him to be ‘making himself equal with God’.

This relationship is further emphasized in the latter half of the Gospel when Jesus claims to be one with the Father (Rom 10:30, 38; 14:10-11; 17:11), existing before creation (Rom 17:5), and owning all that God owns (Rom 16:15; 17:10).

The Father loves the Son (John 15:9, 17:23-29) and the Son loves the Father (John 14:31). Out of that love, Jesus is obedient to his Father (John 14:31), and he loves the Son because of that obedience (John 10:17)

Again you insist in taking things literally when metaphors are used. The words father and son are used in a metaphorical sense simply to denote that Jesus (peace be upon him) is obedient to God and giving His message. I can give you an example in the Qur’an, where when Maryam (peace be upon her) arrived showing the child she was accused in the following way,

19:27 Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, "O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented.

19:28 O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste."

Maryam (peace be upon her) did not have a brother called Aaron. The Aaron referred to here is Prophet Aaron (peace be upon him) who was the older brother of Moses (peace be upon him). The people were saying that you come from such a noble line, why have you done such a thing.

And you call me a liar but want to turn me in to the administrators. It is your muslim way to get things done. I forgive you. You cannot help it, You grew up that way.

Clearly it’s ‘your’ Christian way to make false accusations. I won’t blame your upbringing as you did with me not knowing anything about me and suggest that this is a natural nasty trait that ‘you’ have. I have met many Christians over the years and they certainly behaved in a much better way than you do. They would be ashamed to be associated with you.

22:30 . . . So avoid the uncleanliness of idols and avoid lying speech.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Aziz, I hate to break it to you (actually, I don't), but unsupported quotes from your book aren't facts, no matter how much you desperately wish they were. Flooding the forum with them doesn't change that fact, nor does grotesquely twisting science and coincidence until they have no relationship with reality in order to 'prove' your point. Seriously, your entire posting history in this thread, other than when you spout your 'everyone is born Muslim' nonsense, is nothing more than you beating your chest screaming "ISLAM IS THE ONLY RELIGION BECAUSE I SAY SO".

The fact of the matter is that the Qu'ran is just as self-contradictory as the Bible and the Torah. Only in the mind of a fanatic such as yourself (and Bladerunner, and Dick7Access, for that matter, bless their hearts) is it required that your holy book be perfect in order for your beliefs to have meaning. Because seriously, that is the fear that drives all of you to reject all logic, all rationality, all intelligent discussion: the fear, deep down, that if any part of your holy books are incorrect, then your entire belief structure must be wrong as well.

Of course, that is no more rational than the nonsensical belief that all newborns - who are barely sentient, much less sapient - are born already knowing and following an abstract religion, and are then led carefully astray. People can and do accept that their holy books - whatever the religion - are not 100% pure truth, and remain faithful to their religion. People can and do question where the book and the real world diverge without becoming atheists. Hell, there are volumes and volumes of philosophy from every major religion on those very points.

Of course, as you're pretty obviously a Shi'i, I guess I'll have to simply point out that just as you cannot write anything in a closed book, neither can a closed mind receive any new knowledge. Perhaps someday you'll understand that.

 

[Frothingslosh]

You guys have got far too much time on your hands...

You have no idea....

Still, discussing things with rabid fundamentalists is always entertaining, and I often can pick up a few bits of new knowledge while doing the research necessary to refute their almost-always-insane claims. That alone makes it worth the effort!

 

[Rabbie]

Aziz, you say that Islam is a peaceful religion. Would you then agree that the beheading of the three hostages by representatives of ISIS is unislamic and would you condemn them.

Also do you agree or disagree with the execution in Iran of a man for heresy?

Personally I am sure you would not personally kill someone for being a non Muslim but would you condemn a muslim who did?

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

I just saw a leader of an extremist group on the BBC News. He said words to the effect "democracy belongs to God".

That may well be. My question would be who relays the message from God to the people?

That is the problem with a religious driven government, who elects intermediaries? (The people who relay the word of God to the congregation)