Dubai Forums

I understand now - you agree with everyone who agrees with you. Thanks for clearing that up. uff...you're right. that is exactly what I'm all about. I think it's time to fire my therapist. So apart from Jehova's Witnesses, Scientologists, Zionist Christians (I think you mean 'Jews for Christianity'...

freza - I have nothing more to add on these two verses. If you have some new information about the Greek language, please let me know - otherwise it is closed. Nothing to see here, please move on. Cheers, Shafique ummmm. right. so you won't even acknowledge that you took the scholars words out of c...

spoonman wrote:

freza wrote:smokers in general, people with facial hair, agnostics, extreme liberals, hippies

seems we cant get along then.

lol!

Sure thing - Chapter 3 v 7: He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical . But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord...

There are clear verses that are the basis of the Quran. These are unambiguous. There are some allegorical verses which talk about creation, the nature of God etc. The after life and its descriptions are by necessity allegorical.. got that, some things are allegorical some are not. same as in the Bi...

Yes - not having the slightest knowledge is absolute. Therefore any explanations of the afterlife can only be metaphors that will not reflect reality - in the same way that a blind man who hears descriptions of colour will only really experience colour when he is given the facility of sight. That i...

Knowledge of the afterlife is a reality for the author of the Quran - God. Therefore He uses metaphors that can make some sense to humans. or the true mortal authors of the Quran.. I don't believe God has to borrow from earlier revelations - earlier scriptures are records of revelations by God to e...

Will you drop your council of Nicea argument already. It's tired! And really is that all you have? I stress again, how original my dear! When the fact of Jesus being the basis of Christianity not because he was one more Jewish prophet but because he was the true prophet (according to some), the son ...

edit:

double post

Be cool bro, we're having a "healthy" discussion here, right? Will you drop your council of Nicea argument already. It's tired! I agree it's an old argument - but happens to be the truth though. No problems - I understand it makes you mad. hehehe! I didn't know this childish side of you. Y...

What was bad was what came later - the intolerance shown by those who won the argument about how to interpret the Bible. You obviously haven't done your research about Arius and his followers - Arians were eventually branded heretics and many were persecuted for just holding a different interpretat...

Hold on, the council was brought together to decide which of the competing views of Christianity will be adopted as 'standard' and to choose a Bible. Arius' view was also long standing. The only wrong "interpretation" here is yours. The council of Nicea was convened to discuss the divinit...

Re: Apocrypha/Necea: Determining apocrypha and establishing canon was a process that started quite early on; some claims are that it started as early as A.D. 30 but the most significant cited evidence is found around A.D. 100-125 when an early process of authoritative compilation was found in the th...

Re: Wars of Apostasy: http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/Archive/printarticle.php?lang=E&id=135193 Re: interpretation etc. You seem to take issue with certain established Christian groups following a certain criteria on interpretation. Yet you say that groups that interpret things to fit their agenda ...

hijacker of something for sure.
he he

sweet thread title!

(Dawgy said something cute? a bit shocking..)

shafique wrote:No - my point has always been that the Bible is open to interpretation.

The Bible should be interpreted to extract its entire and correct message. This does not mean it is open for anyone to interpret it as they wish, nope.

shafique wrote:I think we agree that the Bible requires interpretation and can't function as a standalone document by which one lives one's life (you say you need scholars to tell you how to interpret the words of the Bible). I agree with you - but it then comes down to which scholars you choose to believe.

Not necessarily. We've discussed this before. Memory problems I suppose...

shafique wrote:Thanks to the discussion, I now know that there is not even unity amongst all Christian churches as to which books should form part of the NT. So we must even be careful to specify which Bible we are talking about.

No. The Apocryphal books in question might or might not be included in some groups' Bibles - interchangeably. If they are, they're usually under a supplementary section. But If not included, they do not change the core message of the Bible at all. But let's understand why the writings in question are considered for exclusion by some groups. The Apocrypha are of uncertain authorship but overall considered genuine. What decision were Bible scholars to take if they come upon writings whose authorship can not be verified but the writings appear genuine and worthwhile at the same time? It's a damned if they do (include them) and damned if they don't. Your criticism is an example of this damned thing. I think that one group choosing to include Apocrypha writings while another choose to exclude them is actually a sign of a healthy debate - it provides an alternative to an issue which is difficult to decide upon for obvious reasons.

shafique wrote:I think you are still intolerant of other Christians' viewpoints, but extremely tolerant about gays going to heaven and that God ultimately decides on the day of judgement.

haha. I'm not intolerant of Christian viewpoints, I'm just not too fond of absurdities masquerading as religion. btw, how intolerant are you?

shafique wrote:This doesn't make much sense. Contrast the Quran with the Bible - for much of Christian history the Bible was not accessible to the lay-Christian

The Bible propagated in a variety of languages early on in Christian history precisely to be accessible to people of different regions.

shafique wrote:and even today the meanings of words are disputed and the original text is written in languages no longer used.

Are you saying that these factoids invalidate the Bible...in some way? When the meaning of a certain word is disputed and research is exhausted the purpose it to reach a conclusion, not to reach a dispute.

shafique wrote:The Quran is recited in toto by all Muslims, accessible to all and invites criticism and study.How does this equate to a suppression/cover up of the Quran's meanings?

The Quran is accessible to all but the evidence of the authenticity of the Quran - is it accessible to all too?

ah, interesting! I just have some basic questions to start.. When Mohammad first had his other-worldy visions, why did he doubt that it was God who was speaking to him? Why did he need reassurance of his wife to convince him that he was dealing with the divine? Who were the witnesses of Mohammad's s...

Shafique Re: More/Less books in the Bible of different Christian groups....so what? What is the issue here? They differ in the number of books, we discussed this already - some writings are questionable either in origin, authorship, message, some groups think that even if the authorship is uncertain...

You must also realise that prior to being called to prophethood Muhammad, pbuh, was a shy, modest person who chose solitude/meditation rather than more mundane passtimes. He showed no political or social aspirations - choosing to give away wealth rather than amass it. Yes he was shy and modest, but...

I agree with you - you are saying it comes down to one's opinion which books/scholars to believe in. We agree there is not one definitive collection of books called the Bible - it depends on which books you include or exclude. Oh wise one Shafique - why don't you tell those Bible scholars and archa...

Right, it was God who told the angel Gabriel to contact Mohammad. this makes his doubts perfectly OK! silly me! :-) I thought Mohammad was 25 years old when he married the rich widow. Can you clarify this. can you also reference to writings - outside of the Quran - that state that he had absolutely ...

Yes, he was 25 when he married his first wife. (40-25 = 15) My mistake: I misread your statement about the phase of his life I thought you meant that Mohammad was 40 years old when he married the rich widow. However, this is an interesting observation because it seems that after Khadeejah died, his...

I note that you are still refusing to give us the criteria by which to judge Muhammad, pbuh, and show where in the Bible the criteria come from. I'll however put this down to selective reading, and indulge your question. I'm following your example, I was hoping you would feel flattered. actually yo...

Why did he marry other women after his first wife died and chose to marry divorcees and widows? Can you prove that the marriage to Aisha was not consummated after her maturity? We have all her hadith and they paint a picture of a happy, loving marriage that puts mine to shame (the prophet, pbuh did...

hopeless...

you might find what you're looking for at the very extreme end of the Cornyish.

To show there is no stigma in marrying divorcees and widows. Some marriages - such as with Safiyyah, from a Jewish tribe, were political. However they were all marriages - where the women consented. So instead of just SAYING that one should not stigmatize widows and divorcees Mohammad marries many ...

your replies are jaw-dropping unfreakinbelievably disturbing... We've established (well you've only admitted this half-way) the common sense things: Mohammad had political motivations, sure. Nothing wrong with marrying a rich widow which would die before he did and would leave him a fortune upping a...

that thread deserved to get sent to the girly-men (aka romance) forum.

this is actually one of the most coherent threads I've seen in a while. and I'm not being sarcastic. a suggestion for your next poll, please add: <>I'm a MasterBaiter <>I like my Chop-Suey with Ketchup <>I think I'm all that, but I'm really not. <>I'm not conceited, I'm convinced. <>MAC borrowed my ...