Political Crossfire Forums

cool_chick · Joined: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 19967 Location: Chicago

jeechoscopy wrote: cool_chick wrote: David Kelly wrote: Why are we the only 2 posting?

With all due respect, I've noticed a defensive posturing at Jeech's post on your part, which in turn puts the opposing opinion on the defensive (which apparently he does not choose to do). The question asked how do they view Christianity.....even if you don't agree, that's ok....

I suspect you'd get more responses if you didn't put those who offer their view on the defensive.

This is in no means meant to fault you. Please, please dont' take it the wrong way. It's hard when your beliefs contradict theirs, but if you want people to open up, you have put your personal beliefs aside and just listen....

Everyone who is religious is going to think that their religion is the right one and other's deterred from it. For example, I feel the Greek Orthodox is the true Christian religion, the one's who adhere to the original teachings of Christ, and the Catholics broke off (they only took the pope with them) because they wanted to change the teachings. Catholics feel completely opposite, that the Orthodox broke off of Catholicism. This is, in the end run, unprovable either way (not having been there at that time, only words brought down from each "side" is what we have now), and as such, I completely respect the Catholics belief regarding this....it's cool by me.....

If we could just learn to sit back and listen more.....there would be much less misunderstanding....

Reasons my defence
1- There are still, some Muslims who debate or act offencively; they are few out of the rest who're not affected by the heavy propaganda against Muslims or Islam. But I'm overwhelmed!!!
2- The thing that would keep me deffencive is a fear of civilizational clash. I don't want to see put, billions of people in that "political driven" clash.
3- Have you ever got the chance to call your beloved ones when you are under a collapsed house, when everthing was caved in? Always looking forward to "understanding" from YOU.

Jeechoscopy, I was talking about David Kelly, not you......

And trust me, I do understand. I can't imagine what it must be like for you, to be an innocent, average person just going through life trying to be the best person that you can, and consistently being accused of believing bad things and loving death, and told you were taught something that you weren't even taught, all this simply because of your religion, that you deserve to die...you somehow "asked for it" or something.... I can imagine how overwhelming that must be for you....

Dragoon · Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 1440 Location: California

Mainstream Islam is at fault for the fundies, just as mainstream Christianity. The fundies find their justification by going back to the fundemental laws of their religion, which the followers of said religion subscribe to.

David Kelly · Joined: 14 Jun 2006 Posts: 451 Location: Kissimmee, FL

Dragoon wrote: Mainstream Islam is at fault for the fundies, just as mainstream Christianity. The fundies find their justification by going back to the fundemental laws of their religion, which the followers of said religion subscribe to.

Wrong, they only look at some parts and ingnore others. OBL looks at the "kill the infidels" part as does GWB. Now, as both call the other infidels it can get nasty. (And yes I do know that it's not in the Bible, but the Bible isn't the only text.

Anyway, any other Muslims have views of Christianity?

eynon · Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject:

David Kelly wrote: What does Jesus look like?

my bet, Ben Stiller with a short beard and deep tan...... :)

Saracen · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 15867 Location: On Earth

David Kelly wrote: Please, I only want Muslims (as this is there subforum) and Christians (as this is our religion I'm talking about) to post.

So, how do you view us and our teachings?

Hi. Now, as a person who does not adhere to the Christian faith, I do not believe in any of the Christian beliefs that are not compatible with my religion of Islam (i.e. I don't believe in the Trinity, nor do I believe in Original Sin, etc.). However, as a Muslim, I don't view Christianity as a bad religion at all. I see Christianity as a sister religion like Judaism is.

I don't believe Jesus Christ was divine, but I revere him because he was a Prophet and a Messenger, just like Muhammad (peace be upon them both) was.

I view much of Christian teachings as compatible with Islamic teachings because there is a Oneness in the Message that God sent to Mankind, in both the Bible and the Koran. Ok... you might have heard that Muslims believe that the Bible was corrupted, albeit not in its entirety.

So, in effect, if you want my opinion on Christianity and its beliefs, I think you'll get the impression if I just add this golden verse that I hold as sacred and meaningful as any of the verses found in the Koran:

But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you, and persecute you

Granted, I'm Muslim, and I will never be a Christian nor a Jew, but that doesn't mean I don't have to appreciate their teachings or even believe in some of them, especially those that are compatible with mine.

Hope that helps. ;)

Blinky · Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 2214

John wrote: TheTME wrote: John wrote: Muslima wrote: Christainity only makes me wonder how come christains are not prohibited from doing anything and what makes you believe that Jesus is the son of god, otherwise I don't find it harmful or bad.

No problems in dealing with christians, too!

We're prohibited from doing all kinds of things.

And we believe that Jesus is the Son of God because He is. He said He was and died and rose on the third day as proof. That's a historical fact.

No other explanation can explain the existance of Christianity other than the Resurection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

Historical fact? Prove it.

I think all religions are the Great Shaitan.

Nothing that happened in history can be proven. We rely off creditable sources..

Do you have any evidence that the New Testament isn't a creditable source?

Why should the onus be on anyone to prove a negative? You seem to think that the New Testament is a credible source - what do you base this on?

Wizard From Oz · Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 10265 Location: Kansas

Quote: But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you, and persecute you

And there endeth the lesson.

It bugs me a little at times to see so many people looking for things that divide us. The above quote would not look out of place in any holy book I know. Maybe one day we will understand to celebrate the things that bring us together.

To wander a little off topic, I have always thought that the question of God and our relationship to him is like a giant rubics cube. Islam Christians the Jews, in fact all the great religions, have a little piece of the puzzle, and one day someone will come along and tie it all together in a spiritual version of the grand unified field theory

cool_chick · Joined: 26 Dec 2004 Posts: 19967 Location: Chicago

MG1962 wrote: Quote: But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you, and persecute you

And there endeth the lesson.

It bugs me a little at times to see so many people looking for things that divide us. The above quote would not look out of place in any holy book I know. Maybe one day we will understand to celebrate the things that bring us together.

I have to agree as well. Sarc, hun, I am not your enemy. Unless he's not talking about us, and he's talking about the Hotdogs of the world who are hellbent on their destruction....

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22873

Blinky wrote: John wrote: TheTME wrote: John wrote: Muslima wrote: Christainity only makes me wonder how come christains are not prohibited from doing anything and what makes you believe that Jesus is the son of god, otherwise I don't find it harmful or bad.

No problems in dealing with christians, too!

We're prohibited from doing all kinds of things.

And we believe that Jesus is the Son of God because He is. He said He was and died and rose on the third day as proof. That's a historical fact.

No other explanation can explain the existance of Christianity other than the Resurection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

Historical fact? Prove it.

I think all religions are the Great Shaitan.

Nothing that happened in history can be proven. We rely off creditable sources..

Do you have any evidence that the New Testament isn't a creditable source?

Why should the onus be on anyone to prove a negative? You seem to think that the New Testament is a credible source - what do you base this on?

Luke, who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts is accepted by historians to be a creditable historian.

The historical worth of the Acts of the Apostles is not to be expressed merely in such negative terms. In itself it often carries its own evidences of accuracy, of intelligent grasp of its theme, of fullness of information. Its stories are not thin and colorless but packed with variety and substance. There is reason for the modern scholar to ponder them carefully, to examine them in detail and to compare them point for point throughout the volume. . . . The data which throw light on the history in Acts are also the data which confirm its place in history. But there is a difference in the approach. To a large extent the material with which I shall deal is capable of an apologetic use. It can be cited to show that the author of Acts is dealing with facts and reality.
-Historian, Henry J. Cadbury, a professor from Harvard University

Saracen · Joined: 01 Dec 2005 Posts: 15867 Location: On Earth

cool chick wrote: I have to agree as well. Sarc, hun, I am not your enemy. Unless he's not talking about us, and he's talking about the Hotdogs of the world who are hellbent on their destruction....

Yeah, I know what you mean.

Blinky · Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 2214

John wrote: Blinky wrote: John wrote: TheTME wrote: John wrote: Muslima wrote: Christainity only makes me wonder how come christains are not prohibited from doing anything and what makes you believe that Jesus is the son of god, otherwise I don't find it harmful or bad.

No problems in dealing with christians, too!

We're prohibited from doing all kinds of things.

And we believe that Jesus is the Son of God because He is. He said He was and died and rose on the third day as proof. That's a historical fact.

No other explanation can explain the existance of Christianity other than the Resurection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

Historical fact? Prove it.

I think all religions are the Great Shaitan.

Nothing that happened in history can be proven. We rely off creditable sources..

Do you have any evidence that the New Testament isn't a creditable source?

Why should the onus be on anyone to prove a negative? You seem to think that the New Testament is a credible source - what do you base this on?

Luke, who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts is accepted by historians to be a creditable historian.

The historical worth of the Acts of the Apostles is not to be expressed merely in such negative terms. In itself it often carries its own evidences of accuracy, of intelligent grasp of its theme, of fullness of information. Its stories are not thin and colorless but packed with variety and substance. There is reason for the modern scholar to ponder them carefully, to examine them in detail and to compare them point for point throughout the volume. . . . The data which throw light on the history in Acts are also the data which confirm its place in history. But there is a difference in the approach. To a large extent the material with which I shall deal is capable of an apologetic use. It can be cited to show that the author of Acts is dealing with facts and reality.
-Historian, Henry J. Cadbury, a professor from Harvard University

John, the historian you have cited (and credited simply as a "Professor" at Harvard) is a Quaker.

He was Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard University, director of the Andover-Harvard Theological Library , and chairman of the American Friends Service Committee (a Quaker organisation).

Chances are that his opinion that the bible is historical fact are slightly biased. And when I say slightly, I mean completely.
Other historians may agree that a man named Jesus existed and even that he claimed to be the son of god, however they do not accept that he rose from the dead, performed miracles etc. based on a book.
Events detailed in the bible have never, and will never, be verified. It is not evidence, but blind faith instilled in you by others that has lead to your curent position.

Muslima · Joined: 13 Nov 2005 Posts: 1563

cool_chick wrote: Unless he's not talking about us, and he's talking about the Hotdogs of the world who are hellbent on their destruction....

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

David Kelly · Joined: 14 Jun 2006 Posts: 451 Location: Kissimmee, FL

Thank you for not flaming this thread people.

It seems to me that true Muslims view Christianity in a good way. This is what I thought already, but was wondering if Americas hate for all things Islam might have changed minds.
Glad it hasn't.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22873

Quote: Events detailed in the bible have never, and will never, be verified.

Wanna bet? :-D

Quote: It is not evidence, but blind faith instilled in you by others that has lead to your curent position.

You wouldn't believe me if I told you. But know this.....God is real and He has proven Himself to me. You only call me blind because you do not have the Faith to truly see. You're the one who is blind and refusing to believe the colors that I'm describing to you.

Quote: Other historians may agree that a man named Jesus existed and even that he claimed to be the son of god, however they do not accept that he rose from the dead, performed miracles etc. based on a book.

So what is the logical explanation to what happened to Jesus' body? Wouldn't His dead corpse have ended all debate over this Christian "cult" that sprang up with thousands of followers around 33 AD?

Blinky · Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 2214

john wrote: You wouldn't believe me if I told you. But know this.....God is real and He has proven Himself to me. You only call me blind because you do not have the Faith to truly see. You're the one who is blind and refusing to believe the colors that I'm describing to you.

Without wanting to insult you personally John, I don't believe you.
But assuming you are right and god has proven himself to you, why has he not proven himself to me? Am I less worthy than you?

As a side note, how did he prove himslef to you?

john wrote: So what is the logical explanation to what happened to Jesus' body?

You are missing the point. There is zero evidence to suggest that what is described in the bible happened, apart from the bible itself. Jesus rising from the dead is not a proven fact, so I wouldn't worry about trying to explain the cause of it yet.
If I write a book saying that I died a few years ago but rose from the dead several days later, would you believe me?

jeechoscopy · Joined: 25 Nov 2005 Posts: 1754 Location: Faisalabad

cool chick wrote: Jeechoscopy, I was talking about David Kelly, not you......

And trust me, I do understand. I can't imagine what it must be like for you, to be an innocent, average person just going through life trying to be the best person that you can, and consistently being accused of believing bad things and loving death, and told you were taught something that you weren't even taught, all this simply because of your religion, that you deserve to die...you somehow "asked for it" or something.... I can imagine how overwhelming that must be for you....

cool chick, before you consider anything wrong about a Muslim who assume the Muslim world some innocent, I would admit to remind you that all that headed in the name of pursuing terror, is quite a political wave. We Muslims don't see a Christian world is heading it but we see we are the best used nation by the west.... not by Christianity. Though, it's obvious a Christian world is against Muslim world. I'm overwhelmed by this hypocrisy from Christians.

David Kelly wrote: Thank you for not flaming this thread people.

It seems to me that true Muslims view Christianity in a good way. This is what I thought already, but was wondering if Americas hate for all things Islam might have changed minds.
Glad it hasn't.

That has been my point, and still now.
Thanks to God that we Muslims didn't consider America as an Christian country while we are profiled particularly in the west, one from the "Islamic terrorist countries" .... Not fair!!
Comparing Islamic countries and Christian countries would not bring a huge difference in faith but the political, economical and weaponry differences. I'm overwhelmed by the power of the west.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 22873

Quote: Without wanting to insult you personally John, I don't believe you.

I'm fine with that. No insult taken. :)

Quote: You are missing the point. There is zero evidence to suggest that what is described in the bible happened, apart from the bible itself. Jesus rising from the dead is not a proven fact, so I wouldn't worry about trying to explain the cause of it yet.
If I write a book saying that I died a few years ago but rose from the dead several days later, would you believe me?

Yes...there is evidence. Thousands of people believed it happened in a short period of time. There were hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw Jesus risen from the dead.

These people were Jews. Jews happen to be some of the most hardheaded people on the planet....especially when it comes to their religion. All these people didn't change so radically over a lie. That makes no common sense what so ever.

Christianity is the specific believe that Jesus rose from the dead. It started because a bunch of people really believed it happened. There is no other logical explanation.

TheTME · Joined: 09 Aug 2006 Posts: 115

John wrote:

So what is the logical explanation to what happened to Jesus' body? Wouldn't His dead corpse have ended all debate over this Christian "cult" that sprang up with thousands of followers around 33 AD?

The New Testament fixes public announcement of the supposed resurrection, not three days immediately following the crucifixion event, but after a period in which some of Jesus' followers regrouped following their initial shock and disappointment and formulated their future plans. Public announcement of a resurrection was set for the Jewish festival of Shavuot, "The Feast of Weeks," approximately fifty days following the crucifixion (Acts 2:1, 22-24). By that day, Jesus' corpse would have been sufficiently decomposed to prohibit positive identification.

In the post-Shavuot period, exhuming the corpse would have been a pointless endeavor. A mishnah states: "They must not give evidence [of identity in respect of a dead man] except on [proof afforded by] the full face with the nose, even though there were also marks on its body or on its clothing. No evidence [of a man's death] must be given before his soul has departed, even though they saw him with his arteries cut or crucified or being devoured by a wild beast. They must give evidence [of identification] only during the first three days [after the death. After this period the decay of the corpse makes identification impossible or uncertain.]. . ." (Mishnah Yevamot 16:3). The general rule followed was that of identification within three days. In contrast, almost two months after death, in the warm Judean climate, forensic identification of Jesus' corpse would no longer be possible (cf. John 11:39).

Blinky · Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 2214

John wrote: Quote: Without wanting to insult you personally John, I don't believe you.

I'm fine with that. No insult taken. :)

Quote: You are missing the point. There is zero evidence to suggest that what is described in the bible happened, apart from the bible itself. Jesus rising from the dead is not a proven fact, so I wouldn't worry about trying to explain the cause of it yet.
If I write a book saying that I died a few years ago but rose from the dead several days later, would you believe me?

Yes...there is evidence. Thousands of people believed it happened in a short period of time. There were hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw Jesus risen from the dead.

These people were Jews. Jews happen to be some of the most hardheaded people on the planet....especially when it comes to their religion. All these people didn't change so radically over a lie. That makes no common sense what so ever.

Christianity is the specific believe that Jesus rose from the dead. It started because a bunch of people really believed it happened. There is no other logical explanation.

I don't doubt thats how Christianity began. But just because a bunch of people believed something to have happened, does not mean that it did.
It is common sense to question what you are told. When questioning something, you should also demand proof of what you are being told. Heresay (as the bible is) is not proof of anything. The bible is an account of what happened according to its author(s). As I said before, I could write anything I wanted down on paper, claim it to be true, bring my children up believing it to be true, and convince a bunch of other people that it is true as well. It wouldn't change the fact that I made it all up.

How did god prove himself to you, john? I am genuinely interested. :)