Discussion in 'International Politics' started by W.G.Ewald, Feb 24, 2012.
Another Tack: Lessons from the fl... JPost - Opinion - Columnists
Why did the Soviet submarine torpedo the civilian ship, USSR was against the Axis.
That is not clear. The Russians don't like Turks either, and the ship was towed out of Istanbul harbor.
explaining hate towards Jews in other Abramic cultures is fairly easy
since Christianity is a bastardization of Jewish religion with Greek- roman culture
and Islam is a bastardization of Jewish religion with Arab nomadic culture
the mere existence of Jews dents thous religions claim off originality and ultimate truth
beaning rebellious an at times zealot did little to improve our standing in the roman empire
2000 years of persecution and death later we rebuilt our independent society we will remain so forever or die trying
Anyone who makes money is not liked by those who have no idea how to make money!
Note how Subramanium Swamy is after that Chettiar Chidambaram!
Pack, Islam does not claim to be original. It is (you can say claimed) a culmination of faith started by Adam.
All Abrahanic religions are derivatives of the Old Testament.
That is possibly the reason why Christians and Jews are called the People of the Book!
Yup, all three claim to be sons of Abraham, and claim their prophets to be the newer versions of the previous.
Prophet Muhammad, or so the Muslims make it out to be, played it smart by claiming to be the final version. It is illogical though, since if the Muslims claim that the message of the previous prophets (Isaac, Adam, Noah, Saleh, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Solomon, Jesus, etc, etc) was corrupted by humans each and every time they were sent with the divine message; than how do the Muslims claim that Muhammad's message is incorruptible? Did humans somehow cease to be corrupt after Muhammad delivered his message? Add to that the fact that the Quran wasn't even compiled until 200 years after Prophet Muhammad had passed away. Hadiths, and the "sunnah", even longer.
Logically speaking, it makes no sense.
much of the anti-jewish sentiment in the world is born out of jealously, because jewish communities tend to be very successful wherever they go.
they are successful, and this success often stays within their communities, if you combine this with religious elements then you can see why so much anti-semitism existed (and still does exist) in the world.
simply put, these things make it is too easy to turn them into scapegoats for conspiracy theories.
if you said that australian aboriginals are controlling all the banks in the world, then no one would believe them. if you said that about jews, then it can and will make sense to a lot of people. scapegoating 101.
There is a lot of friction in this "prophet" business. For Christians Jesus is the son of god, and not an average-joe prophet . A mere prophet would be (like all other humans) tainted with original sin , which is a fundamental belief of Christianity.
Muslims insist that Jesus was a prophet, and this 'original sin' stuff is a distortion.
Yes, that's true; though I believe it differs with the Christian sects, i.e. Catholicism, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, etc, etc. I'm not too well versed with Christian beliefs I'll admit.
There is a theory that Jesus is nothing but Horus (falcon headed Egyptian God) re-loaded because of the amazing similarites in their life, including names. There might be some truth in that --g given that bible was written only after the death of jesus and his disciples may have decided it is time to take some artistic freedom in writing it, taking some inspiration from the Egyptian lore.
Why sex == sin for Christians ? Anyone.
Who said sex=sin? How did they multiply if it was a sin and all of them true Christians?
Jesus is the Son of God and it is accepted in all denomination.
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three divine persons: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. The three persons are distinct yet coexist in unity, and are co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial.
In the Christian Bible, "sin is lawlessness" (1John 3:4), and so in Western Christianity, salvation tends to be understood in legal terms. Sin alienates the sinner from God. It has damaged, and completely severed, the relationship of humanity to God. That relationship can only be restored through repentance unto Christ and acceptance of Jesus Christ and his death on the cross as a sacrifice for mankind's sin. According to some interpreters, Jesus Christ states in Matthew 22:35-40 what "Christian Law" is:
"Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." -KJV
In Eastern Christianity, sin is viewed in terms of its effects on relationships, both among people and between people and God. Sin is seen as the refusal to follow God's plan, and the desire to be "like God" (Genesis 3:5) and thus in direct opposition to God's desires (see the account of Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis). To sin is to want control of one's destiny in opposition to the will of God.
In the Russian variant of Eastern Christianity, sin sometimes is regarded as any mistake made by people in their life. From this point of view every person is sinful because every person makes mistakes during their life. When a person accuses others of sins they always must remember that they are also sinners and so they must have mercy for others remembering that God is also merciful to them and to all of humanity.
It gets more interesting...
Yep, it seems there were seven different versions of Quran in vogue which were believed to be 'revealed' to Muhammad by Allah. Out of these seven Qurans, one was canonised and others were burned down.
An excerpt from the book "Why I am not Muslim" by Ibn Warraq, pg 105, the author explains the importance of Quran to muslims:
pg 108, the author takes up the issue of presence of foreign words in Arabic Quran:
Now, about the various versions of Quran and problem of numerous interpretations aggravated by the crudeness of Arabic language of the time of compilation:
Then, the author says that the Quran is weak literature wise except the rhetorical part. It seems there are even grammatical mistakes.
After that, he takes up another interesting point of additions and omission of verses in Quran:
Quran seems to have another fundamental flaw: Self-contradictions. The author takes up this matter in pg 114:
I regret that the story of this tragic loss life of was turned into a theological debate.
You've been a member of DFI long enough for this to not be surprising.
Also, you could have used a better title if you wanted to avoid theological debate.
Separate names with a comma.