If you know what I know, then why aren't you a Muslim too?

1) Your first argument doesn't make any sense, in that these three religions are admitedly accumulative in terms of their textual basis...as such the only text in question is the original.

2) I don't think you understand the nature of the Pharoah's role in the Egyptian religion...not that I am completelly versed in it myself, but I do know enough to know that the Pharoah 'prayed' often...he lead religious offerings to various gods for various functions. He represented a god, but remember that this was a polytheistic belief system.

3) What basis do you have for stating that Ramses claimed that there was no one greater? The first experiment in monotheism ever recorded was enacted by the Pharoah Aknahten, when he did away with the worship of all gods to worship Ahten, the Sun God, and he worshipped along with eveyone else. Worship was not antithetical to Pharoahs. I really don't think you understand this subject as muc as your conclusions would require.

 

Sane, how can you debate over religions when (and I don't mean to be rude) you don't even follow one of the simplest restrictions of your own religion (consuming alcohol)?

 

Adam & Eve: then who told them to get out of the GofE? Did God just send them an eviction notice in the mail?
Cain & Abel: When he asked Cain what happened to his brother

I just don't get the whole coy deity routine. If he wants us to worship and obey him then why not be upfront about it?

hmm guess you haven't paid too much attention to my posts over the years. i'm the resident wacko Atheist around here. I don't actually believe God spoke to these people of course since I don't believe he exists. I was just challenging your view that Moses was the sole person who he supposedly spoke to.

 

If more people understood this, better decisions could be made in life...You have to embrace the now, except man at large seems to focus too much on the past, the future,...myself no exception..

 

Maybe that's the point.

Maybe we're supposed to spend a lot more time trying to make ourselves better and a lot less time worrying about what everyone else is doing.

 

I do know what you know, and I am a Muslim.

 

1) But, even if you accept that, his praying wouldn't be unusual, and therefore not indicative of the maening you were ascribing to it.

2) The Torrah was in itself built upon by the recorded messages of the following religions. As such they themselves do not offer alternate versions nor confirmation of the events at the Red Sea. As such there is one sinlge source for the event you claim; the Torrah. Consider also that the Torrah wasn't compilated until the Babylonian captivity, and as scuh was well out of the hands of Moses, etc.

3) Being the most recent of an acculumative set of religious texts doesn't make the last 'correct' any more than the New Testament made the Old Testament correct. I could write a 4th compilation...would that invalidate the three preceding ones? I am neither a believer nor a disbeliever in Islam; I find a lot of admirable ideas in it's teachings...but you tend to confuse your faith and verifiable fact. I also don't object to your trying to convince others of this...I understand that thinking you possess the truth brings with it a certain shift of behaviour that those who don't think they possess a spiritual truth often dismiss without being able to relate to..but on the other hand acting as if something is self-evident because you believe it is not the way to go, and your reasoning often starts off with a supposition as fact and builds from there, and i don't think that you see that.

4) There aren't 3 holy books which confirm the events of Ramses and the Red Sea, there is one, which two subsequent txts built upon...Do you understand this? And either way, 3 religious texts are not the ultimate evidence of anything even if they all reported it. If there were 3 seperate ancient texts all reporting the event from the time in question, that would be a much stronger source of credibility...as such you merely have one supposed account.

5) Religious experts agree with relgion? Interesting...do you know that the CIA claims that the CIA had nothing to do with kennedy's assassination?

 

What, exactly have you learned that you knew you would learn (by the way, that is not really learning)? You basically started this by saying "I am cool because I know something. You guys are not cool." How is that good for anything? I guess you have learned that you are cool because you set up the parameters in such a way that you have no choice but to be cool? Sounds good to me.

I think you misunderstood the game. The real question is why would a perfect being create people from which to receive worship if said perfect being was perfect? In such a scenario, God is either egotistical and needs the reinforcement or has low self esteem and needs the reinforcement. Or is just mean and decided slaves were cool. If a being is perfect, it needs nothing else to complete it and it would desire nothing else, because it is perfectly content. Can you dig it?

By the way, I do not expect you to answer any of this because it is way too cool for you to understand. Keep responding poorly, though, and I wll respond with the right, cool, answer. Then we can call it a "religious discussion."

 

If you are convinced about what you know, and that what you know is correct ... then why don't you follow it the right way?

Pretty pointless to claim it's right and not do as it says?

 

I assume that the significance of Al-Yahom (Day) as being 365 applies to the number of days in a year. Why wouldn't that number be 354 since that is the number of days in a 'Muslim Year'?

 

Don't Jews and Muslims actually have the same God, as well as Christians?

Just thought it was that way.

 

Rimbaud is on top of his game. Good show.

Recap: God doesn't need anything, even worship, because He is perfect. God would be vain to demand worship, and therefore is not perfect.

Here are 4 statements any belief system needs to rationalize.

1)God Exists
2)God is all good
3)God is all powerful
4)Evil exists

Here is the biblically Christian answer as I understand it:

I believe God is Love in the truest sense, unconditional and all-encompassing. I believe love is integral to God's character and thus must be present in His actions and relationships. Although love is evident within the relationship of the Holy Trinity, it can only be better described within the context of other options apart from love. Humanity is set apart from animals and machines by its free will, but the caveat for free will to be truly free is the option of choices apart from God's desire. As St. Augustine describes, this other option, evil, is a wrong relationship between created beings and God. Now we are back to the crux of unconditional love, God loving those that are undeserving of His love due to the evil we cause.

God created us for the purpose of loving us in the truest sense, unconditionally. The Bible says evil will only last temporarily, but He is eternal. God doesn't demand our worship, He only reminds us that He is the only one deserving of our worship.

 

That's fine. I certainly don't begrudge anyone different choices or ideas than I have. I forgot to put in my post that I do believe I'm right... But of course that leaves the possibility that I could be wrong. Maybe at the end of my time here I'll find I was dead wrong. But like I was saying each person should believe firmly what he believes and to his own master stand or fall. So I will do just that.

As far as heaven goes I just want to add one thing. I used to study a lot more than I have recently, but I believe in the bible (I'm not sure about the Qu'ran) heaven is more often referred to by Jesus as by his fathers side, or the kingdom of heaven being inside of all of us than it is an actual place. So to me it's not as much about who's getting there and who isn't. What human has the final decision that others will or won't go to heaven. So I try not to worry about that so much.

It's kind of like Mrs. JB said: Maybe people should worry more about working on themselves than on others and what their imperfections are or where they will end up after they die. Or like Jesus said: Pull the log from your own eye, before worrying about the splinter in your neighbor's.(The saying is in the second person. I wasn't actually directing that anybody.)

Anyway thanks for the talk. And I have tried to read an English interpretation of the Qu'ran before. I haven't finished yet, and I hope to have more time to devote to it.

 

Sane,
In answer to your question about what I believe about the reason we are here: We are here to worship, know and serve God. I believe Christianity, Judeaism and Islam all teach that.

As to weather I have studied other religions: yes. I have studied Eastern religions only lightly but have studied Judeaism and Islam much more extensively.

I don't think I am a Christian because I was raised a Christian. But I'm a Calvinist and if you know something about that branch of Protestantism than this position is self explanatory.

So, why aren't I a Muslim? Very simple, because I know without any doubt that I am a sinner. I just can't help myself. I know that God is holy and I am not worthy to stand in his presence. I know from experience that even if I tried my hardest to live a life without sin, I wouldn't make it through an hour without sinning. I don't think Islam would work for me (to be entirely honest I don't think Islam would work for anyone) because it is a system in which I would have to live as close to a perfect life as possible in order to gain God's mercy. Christianity isn't like that in so far as it teaches that man cannot reach God but that God has reached down to man and paid for his sins. I'm not worthy of ever standing in God's presence EXCEPT that I have accepted His payment for my sin (His mercy) and consequently receive the right to call Him my Father (His grace). Why would I trade that relationship to God for a system I know I would fail at?

Besides all that, I think there are a lot of logical and historical reasons to believe that Christianity is, in fact, true. But the above is an explanation of the more practical reasons why, if it is true, it is a truth worth embracing.

 

gootan,

This is a thread about how cool muslims are. Therefore, your Christian post is meaningless. Sane has already established that Christians are dumb and way-not-cool, so only his answer to the stupid game means anything.

 

mr. rimbaud, I submit. My derailing attempt has failed.

 

Love. The act of love requires the beloved. Your argument also entails that nothing exists, if you want to draw your conclusion further.