Anyone here a Muslim? If so question for you...

[Priceline]

never read the Bible myself but doesn't the old testament have like 1000 things you're supposed to stone people for? from cutting your hair to eating fish on a Saturday, etc..

[falendar]

They can if they choose, if you are going by text, the old testament was succeeded by the new and that's how Christians are now allowed to eat pork wear polyester ect ( yes polyester was banned in the OT) . but the Qur'an never has this so extremists still rely on the kill all who will not convert text. I am religious but I refuse to follow a book written by man because it will inevitably have been corrupted by the writer. the bible and Qur'an both are written by man and in both instances can be proven to have parts written to benefit the writer.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by falendar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They can if they choose, if you are going by text, the old testament was succeeded by the new and that's how Christians are now allowed to eat pork wear polyester ect ( yes polyester was banned in the OT) . but the Qur'an never has this so extremists still rely on the kill all who will not convert text. I am religious but I refuse to follow a book written by man because it will inevitably have been corrupted by the writer. the bible and Qur'an both are written by man and in both instances can be proven to have parts written to benefit the writer.

But all books are written by men. So you just don't believe anything?

[Ennewi]

Originally Posted by falendar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They can if they choose, if you are going by text, the old testament was succeeded by the new and that's how Christians are now allowed to eat pork wear polyester ect ( yes polyester was banned in the OT) . but the Qur'an never has this so extremists still rely on the kill all who will not convert text. I am religious but I refuse to follow a book written by man because it will inevitably have been corrupted by the writer. the bible and Qur'an both are written by man and in both instances can be proven to have parts written to benefit the writer.

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But all books are written by men. So you just don't believe anything?

I think what he means is, as with any information, one must always consider the source, be it a news outlet or a historical text or the back of a cereal box. Bias is inherent, as are motives. And considering that Muhammad, Jeshua and Siddhartha were all said to be illiterate, the source is sketchy at best. That said, the actual etymology behind what is written down, in respect to the Abrahamic religions at least, shares a common, unmistakable theme that gets lost in translation and, to a greater extent, interpretation.

Though dated, this documentary pretty much answers the OP's question with the same resounding "yes"...at least in theory, in practice it's all going to (holy) shit. Good luck finding a copy of that documentary btw, can't even remember the title of it but do remember watching the whole thing in a Religious Perspectives course, which makes me an expert on the subject obviously [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

[Slathar]

LOL NERDS ARGUING ABOUT CAZIC THULE VERSUS MITHANIEL MARR HURRRRRRRRR SHUT UP AND HAVE A BURRITO LOL




NEXT

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Ennewi [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think what he means is, as with any information, one must always consider the source, be it a news outlet or a historical text or the back of a cereal box. Bias is inherent, as are motives. And considering that Muhammad, Jeshua and Siddhartha were all said to be illiterate, the source is sketchy at best. That said, the actual etymology behind what is written down, in respect to the Abrahamic religions at least, shares a common, unmistakable theme that gets lost in translation and, to a greater extent, interpretation.

Though dated, this documentary pretty much answers the OP's question with the same resounding "yes"...at least in theory, in practice it's all going to (holy) shit. Good luck finding a copy of that documentary btw, can't even remember the title of it but do remember watching the whole thing in a Religious Perspectives course, which makes me an expert on the subject obviously [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

Yeah that's pretty much my point though. Bias will always exist. So if the basis for non belief in something is that men with bias wrote it, then there is nothing that can be believed or trusted.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

then there is nothing that can be believed or trusted.

This ^^ One can only be reasonably certain of one's own instantaneous existence. All else, including one's past and future, must be accepted with varying degrees of associated uncertainty. Welcome to the reasoned world of a skeptic <3.


On topic though and to nobody in particular:

I think the fundamental difference people continue to ignore (though it has been pointed out many times) is the foundation upon which these religions stand. The teachings of Christ promote peace & acceptance. The crusades are example of the danger of empowering any institution absolutely. Doing so will necessarily attract those who wish to wield that power whether they agree with the principles of the institution or not.

The Qur'an teaches intolerance. Read it. That is a problem because even though many or even most muslims do not violently enforce intolerance, it is still a fundamental cornerstone of their religion. If you have not practiced a religion from birth (let alone not at all) you cannot understand the magnitude of this problem (for the rest of us). As already indicated in this thread, the Qur'an is not just a book of faith, it is a system of governance and while killing another muslim is sin, killing a non-muslim is not. Read it. That is a problem.

As for the old testament, well with regards to Christianity that is checked by the new testament or the teachings for Christ for which Christianity is named. So if as a Christian you are relying on the old testament to preach intolerances that were clearly overturned in the new testament, then your doing it wrong.

I'm agnostic, so no horse in this race, I just get sick and tired of the knee-jerk "Islam is a religion of peace" nonsense when people haven't read a verse of the damned book. Islam is a threat to the civilized world. It boasts the most robust self-defense and most powerful/seductive expansion mechanisms of any religion, with 100% intolerance of alternative systems.

[Rararboker]

But not all books try to explain something they can't understand or grasp.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Rararboker [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But not all books try to explain something they can't understand or grasp.

No not all books. But that wasn't the reasoning put forward either.

[Brutal_X]

all religions are the spawnn of ignorance. no single religion is better, nor worse than the other. I mean, if you don't follow gods rules and "sin" you are sent to a place of eternal fire and suffering. Similarly, if you were not deemed fit in Hitler's eyes (jewish, gay, gypsy) etc., you were sent to be a slave, be gassed, or be burned. I guess the difference is that god loves you for the individual you are. sleep well padawan.