Mohammed - Prophet of Peace

[kochman]

That's a weird way to go about it - so far he's alienated 66% of the globe with his "No way will you ever see any evidence" shenanigans

Well, there is tons of evidence, in fact... we've gone over it, not going to go over it again... if you don't believe, you aren't going to because I posted things on the internets.

 

[HannibalBarka]

So what? Irrelevant.

I'm not a PhD, but I know enough, way more than most. I've studied this topic long and hard to come to my conclusions, including talks with Muslims while over there in that lovely part of the world.

My point stands, abrogation has been addressed in the Koran, and says that specifically later versus trump.

The later versus are more warlike... as Moham had gotten the upper hand.

The fact that it was compiled OUT of order is mighty convenient when one wants to misunderstand the religion... as most people don't know about the order situation... I did.

No they weren't .If some one wants to have the "peacefull" interpretation of the Koran, he can reads :

1. From Let there be no compulsion in religion: Surat Al baqara, 256
2. If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! Surat Yunus, 99
3. So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, Thy duty is to convey the Message; and in Allah's sight are (all) His servants, Al Il Imrane, 20
4. The Messenger's duty is but to proclaim (the message). But Allah knoweth all that ye reveal and ye conceal Al maida, 99

Albaqara and Al Imran are chronologically among the latest Surates by the way

And the abrogation inthe Koran did really concerns very specific things especially the process of gardually prohibiting alcohol

 

[HannibalBarka]

Now to be more serious, I don't think Mohammad was a man of peace in the Hippie way. He was no "turn the other cheek". But than again I don't know why would that be taken against him. He was harrassed for many years, his followers were tortured and banned, he had to flee to save his own life, no wonder he did fight back!!! to take a modern comparison, Jesus was more like Chamberlain, and Mohammad like Churchil ;-)

 

[_random_]

Nevertheless, the fundamental basis of the religion cannot evolve. Being open to different meanings is nice but ultimately once we're not about the Bible anymore & simply pick & choose from it you're not a real Christian, you're a Unitarian Universalist or something like that. Which is fine, far better than being a Christian IMO, being open to picking & choosing from the smoghboard of spiritual stuff out there but certainly Yahweh would not approve.

This seems really dumb. Again, I'd like to ask:

What exactly is your experience with Christianity if you don't mind my asking?

 

[Quackers]

I kinda agree with MB and Narz if you disagree with the fundamentals of the religion you cannot be a part of it. You can fudge it and slide over it and pretend your in the right - it's like a Marxist who doesn't believe in the ownership of the means of the production by the prolateriet, that doesn't make him a Marxist anymore as it is so naturally a part of what Marxism is you cannot unattach yourself from it.

So by all means inject your moral relatvist, humanist + secular values into your church, but don't expect anybody to call you a christian.

 

[kochman]

I kinda agree with MB and Narz if you disagree with the fundamentals of the religion you cannot be a part of it. You can fudge it and slide over it and pretend your in the right - it's like a Marxist who doesn't believe in the ownership of the means of the production by the prolateriet, that doesn't make him a Marxist anymore as it is so naturally a part of what Marxism is you cannot unattach yourself from it.

So by all means inject your moral relatvist, humanist + secular values into your church, but don't expect anybody to call you a christian.

Can you provide some examples of what would make someone not Christian?

 

[Narz]

Why do you think it's a choice between religious truth being entirely self-evident, and being a series of obscure revelations made only to a minor tribal confederacy in the Levantine? between two and four thousand years ago? Why isn't there a middle-ground, in which religious truth is attained through reason and reflection, as in Buddhism, Platonic philosophy, Taoism, and so on? Presumably you do not think that the tenets of Buddhism are "self-evident", given that you're not a Buddhist, but you also cannot deny that Buddhists practice their religion through free will.

Not to mention God's not really giving us much of a choice if it's either "believe in me, I exist, I swear!" or "don't believe in me? your choice, you'll just burn in hellfire for eternity!".

This seems really dumb. Again, I'd like to ask:

I agree, that's why I'm not Christian & find the religion as laughable as the Greek myths (but less entertaining & more gruesome).

My experience is that I went to church & Sunday school as a kid because I was forced, never really bought into it, haven't gone since & as an adult. Not sure what else to say. The whole love thy neighbor bit is good, the whole God thing is kind of goofy & sad.

 

[Narz]

to kochman & random, if someone thought the idea of God and/or Jesus was kind of neat but didn't really care about the Bible nor made any interest to learn about church doctrine or goto church would you consider them a Christian?

 

[Dachs]

to kochman & random, if someone thought the idea of God and/or Jesus was kind of neat but didn't really care about the Bible nor made any interest to learn about church doctrine or goto church would you consider them a Christian?

What church's doctrine? There are a great many churches, some of which are a good deal stricter on the 'doctrine' thing than others.

 

[General Pilates]

I kinda agree with MB and Narz if you disagree with the fundamentals of the religion you cannot be a part of it. You can fudge it and slide over it and pretend your in the right - it's like a Marxist who doesn't believe in the ownership of the means of the production by the prolateriet, that doesn't make him a Marxist anymore as it is so naturally a part of what Marxism is you cannot unattach yourself from it.

So by all means inject your moral relatvist, humanist + secular values into your church, but don't expect anybody to call you a christian.

Except that 'the fundamentals of a religion' can be interpreted in a multitude of different ways.

 

[_random_]

I agree, that's why I'm not Christian & find the religion as laughable as the Greek myths (but less entertaining & more gruesome).

So you don't believe in Christianity because you dislike your strawman of it? Keep in mind that for the majority of the world's Christians, the Bible is one aspect of a divinely established tradition that continues into the present. Others say it's a book with some good ideas and some irrelevant ones. You've really only succeeded in attacking conservative Protestantism, and you've done that pretty poorly. If you were a better man, I'd think you were trolling.

My experience is that I went to church & Sunday school as a kid because I was forced, never really bought into it, haven't gone since & as an adult. Not sure what else to say. The whole love thy neighbor bit is good, the whole God thing is kind of goofy & sad.

Dismissing theism as "goofy" seems remarkably flippant, but you'd probably get more ground there, since that wouldn't require you to grasp much particular religious teaching, which seems to be an area where you struggle.

to kochman & random, if someone thought the idea of God and/or Jesus was kind of neat but didn't really care about the Bible nor made any interest to learn about church doctrine or goto church would you consider them a Christian?

I guess. I'd question their sincerity, but "Christian" as a label has lost whatever meaning it had at Antioch, so I don't really care who applies it to themselves.

 

[kochman]

to kochman & random, if someone thought the idea of God and/or Jesus was kind of neat but didn't really care about the Bible nor made any interest to learn about church doctrine or goto church would you consider them a Christian?

What church's doctrine? There are a great many churches, some of which are a good deal stricter on the 'doctrine' thing than others.

Dach's question is apt... I mean, there are many, many variations of Christianity.

 

[Narz]

What church's doctrine? There are a great many churches, some of which are a good deal stricter on the 'doctrine' thing than others.

Any. Say someone doesn't follow any doctrine but just thinks Jesus is cool from the hodgepode they've heard about him.

So you don't believe in Christianity because you dislike your strawman of it?

My strawman of it? Man strawman is becoming kind of like the word that starts with f and rhymes with truck, stick in anywhere in a sentence have it mean anything.

I don't believe in Christianity because it is ridiculous in my mind. No less ridiculous than Scientology or cargo cults.

I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings. It's nothing against you personally.

Keep in mind that for the majority of the world's Christians, the Bible is one aspect of a divinely established tradition that continues into the present. Others say it's a book with some good ideas and some irrelevant ones. You've really only succeeded in attacking conservative Protestantism, and you've done that pretty poorly.

Ultimately all Christians believe in Jesus & heaven & the basics outlined in the Bible (10 commandments, the true life is in heaven, supernaturalism, etc.). If they don't, in my eyes they aren't Christian. Just because the large majority of Christians are too lazy to read the Bible doesn't mean I'm ignorant.

If you were a better man, I'd think you were trolling.

Better? I'm good enough for me & that's all that matters baby.

Dismissing theism as "goofy" seems remarkably flippant

Yup. Eventually almost everyone will have that attitude. People now dismiss the idea that homosexuality is a brain disorder flippantly whereas 40 years ago it was considered true by the psychiatric community.

, but you'd probably get more ground there, since that wouldn't require you to grasp much particular religious teaching, which seems to be an area where you struggle.

I struggle in a lot of areas. Thank you for your Christian empathy!

I guess. I'd question their sincerity, but "Christian" as a label has lost whatever meaning it had at Antioch, so I don't really care who applies it to themselves.

Ok. You could have just said you don't care straight off & saved us both some time.

Ultimately your post & attitude towards me sums up how I feel about Abrahamic religion nicely. No matter what followers claim to believe (compassion, nonjudgement, tolerance) ultimately the priority seems to be being right, having the one true faith & others are wrong (God sanctioned the slaughter of the calf-worshipers, even the most ignorant Christian is aware of this). This is goofy & dangerous. Islam is no exception. People can argue over definitions 'till the cows come home while Muslims blow **** up. "Oh but they're not the true ones" other Muslims might say and phony Unitarian types will similarly try to distance themselves from nutjobs like Palin & Santorum but ultimately believing in things on faith & specifically on a deity who demands obedience above reason will produce these types inevitably (even if less hardcore followers don't really believe in faith or at least have enough human decency to keep that crap private).

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

God wants people to come because of Faith with their own Free Will...
Rather than a bunch of mindless slaves who do not have to make any decisions because it is so evident.

Question: Why would something being evident make one a mindless slave?

About Free Will.
I argued this in other threads, I do like the God who relies on people who come to faith of their own free will. It means he accepts that there are people who will come to the conclusion that the evidence does not support the existence and will not punish them but reward them equally because they used that free will (which he granted them) to make up their own mind.

This God would not mind me being an atheist. This God would smile upon me because I didn't abandon his gift of reasoning and free will (not arguing those who have faith have abandoned reasoning, I'm arguing that for me to have faith would go against my reasoning)

 

[aronnax]

All these threads on Islam is giving me 'Meet Muslim Singles' adverts. I guess Google's logging of our data is pointless to people to talk about everything.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

phony Unitarian types will similarly try to distance themselves from nutjobs like Palin & Santorum

Unitarians aren't Christian though. They don't need to distance themselves from people of a different religion.

 

[Oerdin]

No they weren't .If some one wants to have the "peacefull" interpretation of the Koran, he can reads :

1. From Let there be no compulsion in religion: Surat Al baqara, 256
2. If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! Surat Yunus, 99
3. So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, Thy duty is to convey the Message; and in Allah's sight are (all) His servants, Al Il Imrane, 20
4. The Messenger's duty is but to proclaim (the message). But Allah knoweth all that ye reveal and ye conceal Al maida, 99

Albaqara and Al Imran are chronologically among the latest Surates by the way

And the abrogation inthe Koran did really concerns very specific things especially the process of gardually prohibiting alcohol

The problem is the peaceful stuff mostly comes early in the Koran and the older and more powerful he gets the more militant and fanatical Mohammed got. According to Muslim teachings when the Koran contradicts itself, as it does all the time, then the later parts supersede the earlier parts.

 

[_random_]

My strawman of it? Man strawman is becoming kind of like the word that starts with f and rhymes with truck, stick in anywhere in a sentence have it mean anything.

I believe I was using it in the proper sense, as you were criticizing your perception of Christian doctrine rather than actual Christian doctrine.

Yup. Eventually almost everyone will have that attitude. People now dismiss the idea that homosexuality is a brain disorder flippantly whereas 40 years ago it was considered true by the psychiatric community.

Why do you say that?

Ultimately your post & attitude towards me sums up how I feel about Abrahamic religion nicely. No matter what followers claim to believe (compassion, nonjudgement, tolerance) ultimately the priority seems to be being right, having the one true faith & others are wrong (God sanctioned the slaughter of the calf-worshipers, even the most ignorant Christian is aware of this). This is goofy & dangerous. Islam is no exception. People can argue over definitions 'till the cows come home while Muslims blow **** up. "Oh but they're not the true ones" other Muslims might say and phony Unitarian types will similarly try to distance themselves from nutjobs like Palin & Santorum but ultimately believing in things on faith & specifically on a deity who demands obedience above reason will produce these types inevitably (even if less hardcore followers don't really believe in faith or at least have enough human decency to keep that crap private).

Honestly, I was pretty uncharitable toward you. Chalk it up to GIFT I guess. Regardless, I'd like to apologize. I'm a total asshat, but this really doesn't reflect how I ought to be as a Christian.

 

[kochman]

Question: Why would something being evident make one a mindless slave?

Actually, it wouldn't. There are still people, even if they were looking right at a resurrected Jesus, for example, that wouldn't believe.

Anyhow, I don't really question God's motives... because it's moot.

About Free Will.
I argued this in other threads, I do like the God who relies on people who come to faith of their own free will. It means he accepts that there are people who will come to the conclusion that the evidence does not support the existence and will not punish them but reward them equally because they used that free will (which he granted them) to make up their own mind.

This God would not mind me being an atheist. This God would smile upon me because I didn't abandon his gift of reasoning and free will (not arguing those who have faith have abandoned reasoning, I'm arguing that for me to have faith would go against my reasoning)

You could be right... I'm not the judge!

 

[HannibalBarka]

The problem is the peaceful stuff mostly comes early in the Koran and the older and more powerful he gets the more militant and fanatical Mohammed got. According to Muslim teachings when the Koran contradicts itself, as it does all the time, then the later parts supersede the earlier parts.

Not really. As I said in my post, Albaqara and Al Imran, where I took the "peaceful" Kuran are chronologically among the latest Surates, ie sent to Mohammad in Medina, when he become strong