Post 1769
Post 1759
If you believe in the God of Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jesus and Mohammad, then there is no need for conversion. Follow the words of all his prophets and you will be led to the truth. If your "Christianity is based upon the Roman model, first proposed by Saul/Paul and later written into the law of the Roman Empire by Constantine in 312 CE (with the sole purpose of controlling those persons living with the territories controlled by the Empire) then you live in delusion. Besides, Constantine's cynicism and superstition is evident in the fact that Constantine refused baptism until upon his deathbed. And yet, when confronted with the uncertainty of losing his sense of self-sufficiency, he turned to a source outside of himself. The Bible quotes Jesus as saying “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (Jn. 20:29)
Post 1770
Post 1771
Post 1795
Thanks for all the kind words from those who directed positive thoughts towards me. I hope this thread will continue to offer creative suggestions for discovering those principles upon which all the great faith rest.
One last thought - The Bible says God suggests that we "prove" him. Although the original language defines that somewhat esoterically, I think that a modern interpretation would lead one to do everything in their power to learn all that's gone before in that quest. And that's where science comes in. Many find science and religion irreconcilable, but I believe science exists to one day prove to the imperfect man, that a universal energy resides between every molecule of matter everywhere, an universal "space" if you will. Yet that "space" is literally everywhere, from between the molecules of hydrogen that make up the mass of our sun, to the space between every molecule of matter that makes up your big toe. This explains to the natural man, how God's omnipotence is possible. The purpose of meditation is to "forget" the distraction of the material world, e.g., external stimuli, a pain in a joint, the feeling of hunger, the thought of suffering in the world, etc. By focusing on the energy of the Creator that dwells within your own self, you can find the truth that transcends all understanding. One day science will prove that this is accurate. This I believe whole-heartedly.
2;253. Those Messengers! We preferred some to others; to some of them God’s spoke (directly); others He raised to degrees (of honour); and to 'Iesa (Jesus), the son of Maryam , We gave clear proofs and evidences, and supported him with RûhulQudus-A spirit of Truth [Jibrael (Gabriel)].
2:254. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût (free thinker) and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
ABOUT GOD (THE ONE):
"Allâh! Lâ ilâha illa Huwa, the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists. Neither slumber, nor sleep overtake Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission? He knows what happens to them (His creatures) in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter . And they will never compass anything of His Knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursî extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. And He is the Most High, the Most Great."
The second Vatican Council (1962-1965) clearly acknowledged imperfections and obsolescence of certain texts in the Bible, as reflected in the Conciliar Document No. 4 on the revelation.(published by Le centurion, Paris, 1966). The following two sentences define the position of the Catholic Church on the overall worth the text, as well as the impossibility of taking literally certain passages:
“In view of the human situation prevailing before Christ’s foundation of salvation, the books of the Old Testament enable everybody to know who is God and who is man, and also the way in which God, in His justice and Mercy, behaves toward men. These Books, even though they contain material which is imperfect and obsolete, nevertheless bear witness to truly fine teachings.”
The only passages from the Gospels to which we shall later refer are mainly extracts taken from Gospel according to Luke. They are essentially a rewriting of Old Testament material with a few adjustments. Christian researchers have themselves discovered in the composition of the Gospels such as complex variety of sources that-as for the Old Testament we must once again be aware of the circumstances present at the time the text were written, in order to gain more accurate idea of the reality of the situation.
It is a great shame that until very recently, the gospel writers have always be presented as eye-witnesses to the facts they relate. Commentators have provided such wealth of detail on these authors-their professions, for example-that we should apparently be in no doubt as to their status as direct witnesses. In fact they were nothing of the sort. As Cardinal Danielou has shown in his studies of the early days of Christianity, doctrinal rivalries found their expression in the different ways events were related.
Each writer seems to have approached the facts in the light of his opinion and adapted the text accordingly. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, who composed their text between 70 A.D and 110 A.D, provide narratives that are often quite different. Paul wrote his letters many years before them.
According to modern exegete, not a single one of the authors of the New Testament actually witnessed the events he describes. The Gospel writings did not become known until relatively late.
In the introduction to the ‘Tranduction (Ecu-menique de la Bible, Nouveau Testament) [Ecumenical Translation of the bible, New testament] which appear in 1972, we read the following: “Before 140 A.D., there was, in any case, no account by which one might have recognized a collection of Evangelical writings.”
In an extremely helpful diagram, reproduced in la bible, ‘le coran et la science’(The bible, the Quran and Science), they explain how the final versions of the text were preceded by intermediate versions, which were themselves drawn from basic documents, certain of which originated in various Pagan or Jewish communities that were at first quite distinct.
This would explain the variation in tone that we find in the original preaching. Thus, we see how an intermediate document influenced the final version of several Gospel, and it becomes clear that John undoubtedly remained the most individualistic author: His text deals with subjects that are quite different from those contained in the three other gospels.
Father Benoit is clearly aware of the doubts that these new approaches to the texts may engender in certain people’s minds: ‘Some readers, perhaps be surprised or embarrassed to learn that certain of Jesus’ sayings, parables, or predictions of His destiny were not expressed in the way we read then today, but were altered and adapted by those who transmitted them to us. This may come as a source of amazement and even scandal to those not used to this kind of historical investigation.”
For our present purposes therefore, we may state that the inaccuracies discovered in the Gospel basically arise from errors in the Old testament-more precisely in the Sacerdotal version that forms part of the book of Genesis-which the Evangelists merely repeated in their own works. And others will continue to update, after update whereby in between additional verses and taken out verses is practiced.
2:254. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût (free thinker) and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
ABOUT GOD (THE ONE):
"Allâh! Lâ ilâha illa Huwa, the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists. Neither slumber, nor sleep overtake Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission? He knows what happens to them (His creatures) in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter . And they will never compass anything of His Knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursî extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. And He is the Most High, the Most Great."
Post 1774
Post 1798
Today, it is easy to explain the existence of historical inaccuracies, implausible statements or blatant contradictions: the should no longer cause any embarrassment, even though we are fully aware of the incompatibility that is to be found between secular knowledge and certain statements in the old Testament, bearing on the subject of the present work as well as other topics.
The second Vatican Council (1962-1965) clearly acknowledged imperfections and obsolescence of certain texts in the Bible, as reflected in the Conciliar Document No. 4 on the revelation.(published by Le centurion, Paris, 1966). The following two sentences define the position of the Catholic Church on the overall worth the text, as well as the impossibility of taking literally certain passages:
“In view of the human situation prevailing before Christ’s foundation of salvation, the books of the Old Testament enable everybody to know who is God and who is man, and also the way in which God, in His justice and Mercy, behaves toward men. These Books, even though they contain material which is imperfect and obsolete, nevertheless bear witness to truly fine teachings.”
The only passages from the Gospels to which we shall later refer are mainly extracts taken from Gospel according to Luke. They are essentially a rewriting of Old Testament material with a few adjustments. Christian researchers have themselves discovered in the composition of the Gospels such as complex variety of sources that-as for the Old Testament we must once again be aware of the circumstances present at the time the text were written, in order to gain more accurate idea of the reality of the situation.
It is a great shame that until very recently, the gospel writers have always be presented as eye-witnesses to the facts they relate. Commentators have provided such wealth of detail on these authors-their professions, for example-that we should apparently be in no doubt as to their status as direct witnesses. In fact they were nothing of the sort. As Cardinal Danielou has shown in his studies of the early days of Christianity, doctrinal rivalries found their expression in the different ways events were related.
Each writer seems to have approached the facts in the light of his opinion and adapted the text accordingly. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, who composed their text between 70 A.D and 110 A.D, provide narratives that are often quite different. Paul wrote his letters many years before them.
According to modern exegete, not a single one of the authors of the New Testament actually witnessed the events he describes. The Gospel writings did not become known until relatively late.
In the introduction to the ‘Tranduction (Ecu-menique de la Bible, Nouveau Testament) [Ecumenical Translation of the bible, New testament] which appear in 1972, we read the following: “Before 140 A.D., there was, in any case, no account by which one might have recognized a collection of Evangelical writings.”
In an extremely helpful diagram, reproduced in la bible, ‘le coran et la science’(The bible, the Quran and Science), they explain how the final versions of the text were preceded by intermediate versions, which were themselves drawn from basic documents, certain of which originated in various Pagan or Jewish communities that were at first quite distinct.
This would explain the variation in tone that we find in the original preaching. Thus, we see how an intermediate document influenced the final version of several Gospel, and it becomes clear that John undoubtedly remained the most individualistic author: His text deals with subjects that are quite different from those contained in the three other gospels.
Father Benoit is clearly aware of the doubts that these new approaches to the texts may engender in certain people’s minds: ‘Some readers, perhaps be surprised or embarrassed to learn that certain of Jesus’ sayings, parables, or predictions of His destiny were not expressed in the way we read then today, but were altered and adapted by those who transmitted them to us. This may come as a source of amazement and even scandal to those not used to this kind of historical investigation.”
For our present purposes therefore, we may state that the inaccuracies discovered in the Gospel basically arise from errors in the Old testament-more precisely in the Sacerdotal version that forms part of the book of Genesis-which the Evangelists merely repeated in their own works. And others will continue to update, after update whereby in between additional verses and taken out verses is practiced.
Post 1800
To Sultan Pattani and Azzurri - I enjoyed and appreciated your last two posts especially. Thank you for the efforts you project into the spirit of this thread.
I am through for this day, and I wish you all peace and blessings.
thank you very much. i will pray about this and talk to my father. he is the one i turn to on these issues as he has extensively studied church history and has studied and is studying biblical Greek and Hebrew to translate the biblical texts. he is the one more interested in these details. i just take things on faith and trust God to lead me.
it would be nice to say that there is proof that what i believe is true, but there probably isn't. the proof to me has been my own life though, so if to join Islam i must turn my back on Christ or christian scripture...this i will not do, although we will always be brothers and sisters. i will study the matter and pray though, and i greatly appreciate your post.
what i would really like to know is specifically which scriptures are disputed as valid.? i gather that those that claim Christ as the son of God or divine in any way are disputed. i would like to request the Qur'an scriptures that state this please? perhaps a student who is familiar with the Qur'an could save Ym and Iman the trouble? is there no one so prepared? i hope so.....
i read yesterday in Surah 3 that Christ was like Adam. the commentary said this meant He was created as Adam was. this is certainly one possible meaning, although Christ came of a woman. the other possible explanation is that Christ was a new being, not made like others are.
i'm sorry, but i'm afraid you will encounter a lot of this with me. but to find the truth i have found the best method is to explore every other option to the end result. if the result is bad, then that option is rejected. and i will request sooner or later that we do explore the possibility of Christ's divinity. i am not the one to follow that through perhaps, but i do believe this idea must be considered and not just rejected becuz of all the supposed proofs against it. what is at issue is of the utmost importance to christians, so not to be rejected only becuz of attacks. if it will be rejected, it must first be fully considered. i hope that you can understand my feeling on this...?
peace to my brothers and sisters (and Montesino too)
I am through for this day, and I wish you all peace and blessings.
Post 1802
Ym,
thank you very much. i will pray about this and talk to my father. he is the one i turn to on these issues as he has extensively studied church history and has studied and is studying biblical Greek and Hebrew to translate the biblical texts. he is the one more interested in these details. i just take things on faith and trust God to lead me.
it would be nice to say that there is proof that what i believe is true, but there probably isn't. the proof to me has been my own life though, so if to join Islam i must turn my back on Christ or christian scripture...this i will not do, although we will always be brothers and sisters. i will study the matter and pray though, and i greatly appreciate your post.
what i would really like to know is specifically which scriptures are disputed as valid.? i gather that those that claim Christ as the son of God or divine in any way are disputed. i would like to request the Qur'an scriptures that state this please? perhaps a student who is familiar with the Qur'an could save Ym and Iman the trouble? is there no one so prepared? i hope so.....
i read yesterday in Surah 3 that Christ was like Adam. the commentary said this meant He was created as Adam was. this is certainly one possible meaning, although Christ came of a woman. the other possible explanation is that Christ was a new being, not made like others are.
i'm sorry, but i'm afraid you will encounter a lot of this with me. but to find the truth i have found the best method is to explore every other option to the end result. if the result is bad, then that option is rejected. and i will request sooner or later that we do explore the possibility of Christ's divinity. i am not the one to follow that through perhaps, but i do believe this idea must be considered and not just rejected becuz of all the supposed proofs against it. what is at issue is of the utmost importance to christians, so not to be rejected only becuz of attacks. if it will be rejected, it must first be fully considered. i hope that you can understand my feeling on this...?
peace to my brothers and sisters (and Montesino too)
Post 1803
Post 1804
Post 1805
Post 1806
No comments:
Post a Comment