Political Crossfire Forums

[dtwizzy2k5]

Demonic Spoon wrote: Quote: Can't the same be said of Moses and his 10 commandments?


It can be said about pretty much every religion.

Cant be said abuot Christianity. Jesus has credibility because he never did anything wrong and also he performed miracles. Those two things give him great credibility and show his divinity.

[TheTME]

dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Quote: Can't the same be said of Moses and his 10 commandments?


It can be said about pretty much every religion.

Cant be said abuot Christianity. Jesus has credibility because he never did anything wrong and also he performed miracles. Those two things give him great credibility and show his divinity.



Umm, no. Neither of those things can be proven about Jesus.

[TheTME]

dtwizzy2k5 wrote: TheTME wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: My reply to futuredoc:
Is some normal guy coming out of a cave in the desert claiming to have talked to God and writing a book one of the criteria for a "true scripture"? I mean, anybody can write a book. What gives Muhammad any credibility whatsoever?

My reply to TheTME:
I see your point now. When put into context it seems to make sense. But then why have all these generations of Christians eaten pork and why does the church not prohibit it? If pork was prohibited from the beginning, then wouldnt the first Christians have upheld that tradition through all of their later generations? Isnt it possible that maybe Jesus said something of dietary laws that isnt necessarily written in the NT and was passed down through oral tradition?



No, nothing was said by Jesus. Like I said, Acts 10 focuses around peter, a disciple who was always around Jesus. Peter did not want to eat the different animals because it was contrary to law. If Jesus had alreay told the disciples something different, I am sure he would have chowed down right when he saw the animals. The earliest followers of Jesus upheld the law at first. The reasons early christians ignored kosher is for Peter's vision and that it wouldn't discourage gentiles from converting.

But why isnt Peter's vision as valid as Jesus's words to Muslims? I mean, Peter practically followed Jesus around everywhere and was as close to him as anybody.


Because they are Muslims and believe in the Quran. If I am not mistaken, they believe his followers made things up and exaggerated things. Can't you just accept that people have other beliefs than you?

[Showboat]

futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

[Muslima]

so, when I choose to not be online in the forum, serious disscusions go on, what a luck!

[dtwizzy2k5]

TheTME wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Quote: Can't the same be said of Moses and his 10 commandments?


It can be said about pretty much every religion.

Cant be said abuot Christianity. Jesus has credibility because he never did anything wrong and also he performed miracles. Those two things give him great credibility and show his divinity.



Umm, no. Neither of those things can be proven about Jesus.

Well, there isnt any record of Jesus having ever done anything wrong. Thats not technically proof, per se, but it is convincing.
And i never said that the miracles could be proven, but they can be believed to be true because of written accounts/oral traditions. And when believed to be true, that gives Jesus credibility.
Muhammad, on the other hand, isnt even recorded to have produced any miracles or anything that would give him any credibility whatsoever.

[dtwizzy2k5]

Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

[mendosan]

dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

I feel sorry for people who can't eat pork they will never know my love of Bacon rolls and Salami.

[TheTME]

dtwizzy2k5 wrote: TheTME wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Quote: Can't the same be said of Moses and his 10 commandments?


It can be said about pretty much every religion.

Cant be said abuot Christianity. Jesus has credibility because he never did anything wrong and also he performed miracles. Those two things give him great credibility and show his divinity.



Umm, no. Neither of those things can be proven about Jesus.

Well, there isnt any record of Jesus having ever done anything wrong. Thats not technically proof, per se, but it is convincing.
And i never said that the miracles could be proven, but they can be believed to be true because of written accounts/oral traditions. And when believed to be true, that gives Jesus credibility.
Muhammad, on the other hand, isnt even recorded to have produced any miracles or anything that would give him any credibility whatsoever.


Mark 8:

11The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. 12He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it." 13Then he left them, got back into the boat and crossed to the other side.


Why do you need miracles for something to be credible?

[dtwizzy2k5]

TheTME wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: TheTME wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Quote: Can't the same be said of Moses and his 10 commandments?


It can be said about pretty much every religion.

Cant be said abuot Christianity. Jesus has credibility because he never did anything wrong and also he performed miracles. Those two things give him great credibility and show his divinity.



Umm, no. Neither of those things can be proven about Jesus.

Well, there isnt any record of Jesus having ever done anything wrong. Thats not technically proof, per se, but it is convincing.
And i never said that the miracles could be proven, but they can be believed to be true because of written accounts/oral traditions. And when believed to be true, that gives Jesus credibility.
Muhammad, on the other hand, isnt even recorded to have produced any miracles or anything that would give him any credibility whatsoever.


Mark 8:

11The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. 12He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it." 13Then he left them, got back into the boat and crossed to the other side.


Why do you need miracles for something to be credible?

Way to take something out of context to support your argument :roll: So what are you trying to imply, that since Jesus said that quote anybody and everybody can call themselves a prophet without proving it and still be credible?
Well in that case, bow down to Prophet Dtwizzy!

[TheTME]

Uh, no. First off, the quote was not out of context. Second off, miracles of those days could be the Criss Angel stuff of today, there is a likelyhood all religious teachers from Moses and Jesus to L. Ron Hubbard are all false. And appearently Muhammad did perform miracles:


http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=596

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=muhammad+miracles&btnG=Google+Search

[cool_chick]

mendosan wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

I feel sorry for people who can't eat pork they will never know my love of Bacon rolls and Salami.

I hear ya there.....or..mmmmm....my favorite....baby back ribs......or ham....or pork chops....

[Showboat]

dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

And when the reply is that it's undercooked pork that is harmful and that's the reason it's not allowed.... then why is chicken ok?

[cool_chick]

Showboat wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

And when the reply is that it's undercooked pork that is harmful and that's the reason it's not allowed.... then why is chicken ok?

I'm under the impression chicken problems are a result of modern storage methods. In other words, in the "old days", one would kill the chicken, then eat the chicken within hours. From what I understand, problems with salmonella arise as a result of the chicken being dead for days/weeks. From what I understand, salmonella doesn't develop that fast for the first scenario....

[Showboat]

cool_chick wrote: Showboat wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

And when the reply is that it's undercooked pork that is harmful and that's the reason it's not allowed.... then why is chicken ok?

I'm under the impression chicken problems are a result of modern storage methods. In other words, in the "old days", one would kill the chicken, then eat the chicken within hours. From what I understand, problems with salmonella arise as a result of the chicken being dead for days/weeks. From what I understand, salmonella doesn't develop that fast for the first scenario....

Oh... I wasn't aware of that. Although can't you get it from raw eggs? Or is that the same i.e. not freshly laid?

[Muslima]

Showboat, I thought you were over this issue!

it might not be harmful to eat it, as in to get sick or whatever, and yes I know it sooooo delicious, no need to list the types because we know them even if we don't eat them (this is for mendosan)

but it is filthy!

http://www.jamiat.org.za/al-jamiat/ipork.html

http://www.giveshare.org/Health/porkeatdanger.html (I didn't have the time to read it, for notice).

and as I have told you before, I have a hygeine and sanitation certificate from The Royal Institute of Public Health, and according to what I have studied, how could you clean something that is filthy from its roots?

[Showboat]

Muslima wrote: Showboat, I thought you were over this issue!

it might not be harmful to eat it, as in to get sick or whatever, and yes I know it sooooo delicious, no need to list the types because we know them even if we don't eat them (this is for mendosan)

but it is filthy!

http://www.jamiat.org.za/al-jamiat/ipork.html

http://www.giveshare.org/Health/porkeatdanger.html (I didn't have the time to read it, for notice).

and as I have told you before, I have a hygeine and sanitation certificate from The Royal Institute of Public Health, and according to what I have studied, how could you clean something that is filthy from its roots?

ok, I haven't got over it... Pork is fine.

Your first link is from an Islamic web site, so you might think it has a slight agenda with regards to pork.

Quote: Consumption of swine-flesh creates lowliness in character and destroys moral and spiritual faculties in a man.


I've eaten pork in a convent and at home with catholic priests, neither could be described as moraly low by a Muslim.

Quote: The Europeans perhaps hate the mention of dog's meat in the same way as the Muslims shun pork.


Nope, it's because we keep dogs as pets, and no one wants to eat their beloved Fido. I personally wouldn't be to bothered about it.

Quote: Another wrong notion about swine-flesh is that its consumption lengthens life-span, although this is a pure myth and absurdity. On the contrary, people, who abstain from pork and liquor, have a longer span of life. The Muslims in Central Asia bear a testimony to this truth.



Hmmm. According to the CIA World Factbook:

Tajikistan - 90% Muslim - life expectancy 64.94 years
Kyrgyzstan - 75% Muslim - life expectancy 68.49 years
Uzbekistan - 88% Muslim - life expectancy 64.58 years
China - 1-2% Muslim - life expectancy 72.58 years

Quote: The pig is naturally lazy and indulgent in sex, it is dirty, greedy and gluttonous. It dislikes sunlight and lacks the spirit and will to "fight."

You've never been charged by a wild boar then. Those bastards will fight. Also while on the subject of boar. They are very clean animals, domestic pigs only appear filthy because of the way they are kept by humans. If they are kept as pets (Yes some people do) they are clean animals.

Quote: One in six people in USA and Canada have germs in their muscles - trichinosis 8 from eating pork infected with trichina worms. Many people so infected have no symptoms. Most of those, who do have, recover slowly. Some die; some are reduced to permanent invalids. All were careless pork caters".

He continued "No one is immune from the disease and there is no cure. Neither antibiotics nor drugs or vaccines affect these tiny deadly worms. Preventing infection is the real answer."



That's odd, it can be cured:

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/trichinosis/DS00689/DSECTION=8

It's is also in horse, bear and walrus meat. Are they banned?
From the same site:

Quote: In recent years, bear meat has become the most common cause of trichinosis in the United States.


Well it took about 10 mins to discredit that website.

The second website is a work by J H Kellogg. He was a Seventh day Adventist, who also prohibit pork. He invented Corn Flakes because he thought they would stop children masterbating. Quite frankly he was a fundamentalist nut job. That paper was also written in 1897.

Got anything medical, modern and without a prior agenda?

[Muslima]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/news/national/2001/12/28/Consumers/pork_011228.html
http://vegana.wordpress.com/2006/07/29/10-reasons-not-to-eat-pigs-pork/
http://www.nooran.org/EN/Q/4.htm


well you might have discredited the sites in 10 min or less, but you can't discredit the fact that prok meat is full of bacteria. in the quran it says that it is filthy, up to now, every scientific sentence in the quran has been proven right.

pigs are the laziest animals I have ever known, it might be clean in its environment but it is not clean from the inside.

I don't what in forbidding pork is so bothering.

[Showboat]

Quote: http://www.cbc.ca/story/news/national/2001/12/28/Consumers/pork_011228 .html

What they say here is that pork might be worse than poultry for bacteria? Is poultry forbidden in Islam?



Quote: http://vegana.wordpress.com/2006/07/29/10-reasons-not-to-eat-pigs-pork /

This is a vegan website, that basically says pigs have feelings too. I notice it also says pigs are very clean animals if left to themselves. Thanks for confirming that for me. :)

Quote: http://www.nooran.org/EN/Q/4.htm

It's a religious website. They're always rather liberal with the truth to suit their agenda.

It doesn't bother me that pork is forbidden but I just think it's pointless these days to enforce a law that was worthwhile and effective 1400 years ago.



Quote: up to now, every scientific sentence in the quran has been proven right.


That's not entirely true, is it?

Quote: [18.86] Until when he reached the place where the sun set, he found it going down into a black sea

Hmmmm.

Quote: [23.14] Then We made the seed a clot, then We made the clot a lump of flesh, then We made the lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, then We caused it to grow into another creation, so blessed be Allah, the best of the creators.


Flesh and bones are formed together, bones arnt made and then "clothed" with flesh.

[cool_chick]

Showboat wrote: cool_chick wrote: Showboat wrote: dtwizzy2k5 wrote: Showboat wrote: futurdoc wrote:
now back to science which is totaly supported in islam if u want me to explain to you the harmful reasults of eating such unclean food from the medical point of view it would be fun for me " i like medical talks :)" or if u want to read it elsewhere its up to u

thanx for reading

Hahaha since when was eating properly cooked pork harmful? And science supported in the koran? please enlighten me doc.

For a start, It gets embriology all wrong, bones formed first and then coated with flesh, not actually how it happens is it? Although that is what scientists believed in the 7th C.

:clap: Thank you. Muslims always say how "scientifically harmful" eating pork is but thats just not true at all. Eating properly cooked pork isnt any more harmful than eating any other meat.

And when the reply is that it's undercooked pork that is harmful and that's the reason it's not allowed.... then why is chicken ok?

I'm under the impression chicken problems are a result of modern storage methods. In other words, in the "old days", one would kill the chicken, then eat the chicken within hours. From what I understand, problems with salmonella arise as a result of the chicken being dead for days/weeks. From what I understand, salmonella doesn't develop that fast for the first scenario....

Oh... I wasn't aware of that. Although can't you get it from raw eggs? Or is that the same i.e. not freshly laid?

Good question, I don't know....

I would presume it depends on how long the eggs sit....

Man, I wish someone specifically educated on these matters was around....LOL