National day of Prayer Sept. 25, 2009?????

[J-P]

Muhammad - Wikipedia. And we all know that Wiki is the infallible and inerrant source for all information, right?

From what I know, although I am by no means a scholar of the subject, there are no Muslim documents that antedate Mohammad. The Jewish scriptures trace back to Moses. That's all the point I was trying to make. There has been animosity between the house of Isaac and Ishmael dating back to Abraham, but whether Mohammad founded the religion or restored the religion, Islam and it's writings begin with him.

 

[T-TownVol]

The similarities between Islam and Christianity are amazing.

and that is exactly how it is "designed" to be

 

[emainvol]

Kill all the Muslims! I think we should behead every last one of those towel-wearing sand worshippers. Jesus ftw!

 

[gsvol]

Islam is traced back to Abraham as well.

The pseudo-religion of islam dates back to Muhammed, PERIOD!

That illaterate demigod made many lurid claims, from Adam up through Jesus (and Gabriel) but what he promoted was moon worship pagan beliefs while trying to incorporate Judaism and Christian beliefs into his new religion.
(He somewhat incorporated some aspects of Zoroastriaism as well.)

If islam is so indeed open to spiritual revelations, why then their drive to eliminate the Bahains?

 

[emainvol]

The pseudo-religion of islam dates back to Muhammed, PERIOD!

You are correct in stating that Islam dates back to Muhammed, however, I am curious as to your definition of religion. I don't really get your use of the term "pseudo-religion."

 

[OrangeEmpire]

What's wrong? You guys all wanted a day of prayer

Good post!

:hi:

 

[gsvol]

ISLAM ON Capitol hill

Pay attention to the VERY BOTTOM of the page!!!!!!!!!

Throughout most of the world of islam, the belief is that with obamba in the white house, islam has conquered America.

Quoted from the webpage: "The peace, beauty and solidarity of Islam will shine through America's capitol."

Kinda like it shined for Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl, etc, etc? God help us... :dry:

And "solidarity"?!? Come on...

Solidarity with socialism but then once we are conquered, bin Laden has said; "socialists are infidels also, we will deal with them later."

Read my mind.

Hard to read a blank page.

The similarities between Islam and Christianity are amazing.

So amaze me, list the similarities between Christianity and islam.

Do you perceive any differences??

Correct... it goes all the way back to Abraham.

Not Adam??

Muhammad would be aghast!!!

You are correct in stating that Islam dates back to Muhammed, however, I am curious as to your definition of religion. I don't really get your use of the term "pseudo-religion."

A complete sham of a religion, it is all about material gain and political domination.

Good post!

:hi:

How so??

You lost me there. :hi:

Maybe you want to quote newsweak?

 

[pejp]

Throughout most of the world of islam, the belief is that with obamba in the white house, islam has conquered America.

How so? Who are these Muslims that tell you this?? Would be nice if you could back up any of these statements with anything other than your own prejudices.

The similarities between Islam and Christianity are amazing.

I can give you the main similarity...they're both religions! Lets be honest here...the whole concept of religion is pointless. Christianity is equally as worthless as Islam. Arguing religion is like a group of bald men fighting over a comb..a complete waste of time.

I really find it funny how someone can be so sickeningly ignorant, yet claim to believe in Christan values.

 

[BigPapaVol]

How so? Who are these Muslims that tell you this?? Would be nice if you could back up any of these statements with anything other than your own prejudices.



I can give you the main similarity...they're both religions! Lets be honest here...the whole concept of religion is pointless. Christianity is equally as worthless as Islam. Arguing religion is like a group of bald men fighting over a comb..a complete waste of time.

I really find it funny how someone can be so sickeningly ignorant, yet claim to believe in Christan values.

Get over yourself. Religion is one of the largest and most lucrative industries in the world.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[dickens821]

What's wrong? You guys all wanted a day of prayer

We did???

 

[gsvol]

How so? Who are these Muslims that tell you this?? Would be nice if you could back up any of these statements with anything other than your own prejudices.



I can give you the main similarity...they're both religions! Lets be honest here...the whole concept of religion is pointless. Christianity is equally as worthless as Islam. Arguing religion is like a group of bald men fighting over a comb..a complete waste of time.

I really find it funny how someone can be so sickeningly ignorant, yet claim to believe in Christan values.

Talk about sickenly ignorant?? Talk about your own ignorant self!!!

Any prejudices I may have or have not are miniscule compared to you ignorance.

If you are just another drive by then fair thee well.

If you want to stick around and find out what muslims tell us, then I will pony up quotations from Moammar Qadaffi who has close contact with Obama through Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright in his well broadcast statements to the world of islam, also statements by the chief iman of islam in Egypt as well as the fact that Obama's first TV interview was to al-Jazeera TV which is broadcast to muslims the world over and just what Barrack Hussein said it that interview.

"Nowhere is it written that a man must be saved."

The only thing pointless in this thread is your concept of religion. :zeitung_lesen:

 

[J-P]

I can give you the main similarity...they're both religions! Lets be honest here...the whole concept of religion is pointless. Christianity is equally as worthless as Islam. Arguing religion is like a group of bald men fighting over a comb..a complete waste of time.

I really find it funny how someone can be so sickeningly ignorant, yet claim to believe in Christan values.

Check back with us when you're done spouting off your college professors' propaganda and have actually weighed the evidences for yourself. :dry:

 

[rjd970]

Check back with us when you're done spouting off your college professors' propaganda and have actually weighed the evidences for yourself. :dry:

Evidences for what?

 

[J-P]

Evidences regarding the existence or non-existence of God, whether all religions are indeed the same, whether any religion has a basis in truth, whether macro evolution can indeed be proven, whether the big bang theory can be proven, what are the most supportable theories regarding the origins or life, etc, etc...

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

I can give you the main similarity...they're both religions! Lets be honest here...the whole concept of religion is pointless. Christianity is equally as worthless as Islam. Arguing religion is like a group of bald men fighting over a comb..a complete waste of time.

I really find it funny how someone can be so sickeningly ignorant, yet claim to believe in Christan values.

Perhaps it is you that is ignorant... meaning, simply, that you are not aware of the truth. I completely agree with your first statement regarding religion, and if you study the book of Romans you will see that Jesus was also against religion which is what makes Christianity different. Religion has been the cause of many wars and much hatred in the world, and we (Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, etc.) are the ones who turn Christianity into a religion. Christ's desire, based on the book of Romans, was not to create a new religion but to do away with religion. I think this is one of the reasons some of the fastest growing and largest churches today are non-denominational.

 

[rjd970]

Perhaps it is you that is ignorant... meaning, simply, that you are not aware of the truth. I completely agree with your first statement regarding religion, and if you study the book of Romans you will see that Jesus was also against religion which is what makes Christianity different. Religion has been the cause of many wars and much hatred in the world, and we (Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, etc.) are the ones who turn Christianity into a religion. Christ's desire, based on the book of Romans, was not to create a new religion but to do away with religion. I think this is one of the reasons some of the fastest growing and largest churches today are non-denominational.

I think your splitting hairs here.

Christianity...just like Islam, Hinduism, etc...has basic tenants that need to be taken on faith, so in that regard they are very similar. Didn't Christ teach the virtues of faith? They way you are describing it makes Christianity sound more like a philosophy...which if left at charity, golden rule, Jesus teachings on social justice, etc...is fine. But when you add in the fact that in order to be Christian you have to believe Christ is your savior and he died and resurrected 3 days later...it's a full fledged religion. And the dogmas subscribed to Christianity are no different in flavor to those of other religions.

And religion is as much about group identification as anything else and Christianity is just as good at that as the others.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

I think your splitting hairs here.

Christianity...just like Islam, Hinduism, etc...has basic tenants that need to be taken on faith, so in that regard they are very similar. Didn't Christ teach the virtues of faith? They way you are describing it makes Christianity sound more like a philosophy...which if left at charity, golden rule, Jesus teachings on social justice, etc...is fine. But when you add in the fact that in order to be Christian you have to believe Christ is your savior and he died and resurrected 3 days later...it's a full fledged religion. And the dogmas subscribed to Christianity are no different in flavor to those of other religions.

And religion is as much about group identification as anything else and Christianity is just as good at that as the others.

I'm not sure I understand your groupings based on faith. I have faith that my dog will let me know when she needs to go outside and therefore not piss in the house, but there is no way that I can prove she will do this everytime. Does that mean the faith I have in my dog should be compared with Muslims or Hinduism... or Christianity?

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you are saying, but it actually seems to support what I said earlier. Christianity, in its purest form, is a gift and we have the free will to choose to accept the gift or not. It doesn't cost anything, it can't be earned (as some religions believe), but is simply the acceptance that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and died for our sins... that's it. I am certainly not trying to describe Christianity as a philosophy; however, I believe that what Jesus wanted was more of a movement, which includes a movement away from "religions". The term Christianity didn't even exist until hundreds of years after Christ's death because people (as you state and I agree) seem to have to put a label on everything... including religion.

Yes, Jesus taught the virtues of faith and many other things. And if people chose to live by these teachings it would indeed be a better world, but that is also the difference in Christianity and religion. Religion would say that I have to accept and live by these principles, and in doing so I will therefore be closer to God. A true Christian on the other hand (IMO) believes that Christ died for our sins, and it is because of this sacrifice that we choose and want to live by these principles... not because we have to.

 

[J-P]

Is blind faith virtuous?

Christ spoke to people who had witnessed Him giving eyesight to the blind, healing lepers and invalids with a touch, walking on water, calming a tempest with just a command and even raising the dead back to life. Thousands followed Him around because of these wonderful things that He did. He was asking them to look at the things He had said and done and believe that He was Who He claimed to be and had given evidence of being through miraculous deeds. Some believed He was demon possessed and that is why He could do what He did, because their man made religious beliefs clashed with what He was putting forth, but He asked people to look at the facts and conclude whether He spoke the truth or not. He was not asking them to blindly believe, He had shown them proof and was asking them to accept what they had witnessed.

Likewise, we have the written record of several of His closest followers who record statements like "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life--.... what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also.... These things we write". After telling and writing of what they had seen, many of them accepted a painful death rather than recant their witness. They could have received a pardon and saved their lives very easily.

In jury trials, the jury does not witness the events around which the trial revolves, yet they are able to consider the testimonies of the witnesses, their credibility, the physical evidence, etc. and arrive at a conclusion of what the truth is surrounding the differing stories and viewpoints. They are not asked to blindly believe one witness over another because he is from the same "identification group" as they are or because they are more comfortable with what they heard from one witness than what they heard from another. They are charged with considering all of the evidence and testimonies and determining what the truth is, because lives are in the balance.

Likewise, Christ and His followers ask the same thing. We give our witness and what proofs we have and simply ask that you carefully consider what is put forth. Eternal spirits are in the balance.

Admittedly, in modern times many Christians themselves have begun to believe the lie that Christ must be accepted blindly, and so have very little to put forth in explanation besides fear tactics.

 

[rjd970]

IBlvNTmWrk, J-P....

I've had numerous discussions on here about the merits of evidence for and against the existence of a creator, specifically a God, more specifically the OT one, and even more specifically a refined NT one. I have studied the Bible and the Qu'ran (and Hadith's) and I am pretty familiar with the evidence. Such discussions generally end in circular arguments and no proper meeting of the minds. Suffice to say, I don't find the reasons to believe in Christianity compelling in the least.

We do agree on a number of things though. We agree if one of us is right, than the other is wrong. Either Jesus offers the one true path to salvation (John 14:6), or he doesn't. We both agree that to truly be Christian is to believe all other faiths are wrong. If I reject Jesus, I am making the worst possible mistake for my eternal salvation. We can all agree on this.

So consider, the fact that I still reject the claims of Christianity, and all faiths, even that of a creator...and I publicly state it...should give you an idea of just how credible I find your reasons for believing this. No offense intended, it's just the way I see it.

Jesus had much to say about how we should act, and he wasn't talking nonsense. People and places in the Bible are very real today...and they are very old. But when we talk about resurrections, walking on water, and other miracles...that is where archeology and history end, and faith begins. Outside the Bible, there is no independent evidence Jesus performed any miracles, or that he rose from the dead, and every miralce and myth associated with his life...to the very last one...are borrowed from other near east religions. And because the Bible says there were witnesses means nothing. According to a Hadith, people witnessed Muhammed ascending to heaven on a winged horse. Does that make that nonsense any more believable?

It is what it is. I'm not going to change your mind, and that's fine. But saying Christianity, or parts of it anyway, isn't blind faith...or it isn't a religion...is disengenous IMHO.

 

[J-P]

I'm at work and don't have time to look them up, but there are extra-biblical records of Jesus the Nazarene having existed and having been "a magician". I believe recorded by some Roman historian. It's been a while since I read it, so I'm speaking from my faulty memory. Also of there having been some recorded explanation of an "eclipse" at the time of His crucifixion, which more modern astronomy has shown to not have been possible, and of strange happenings in Palestine at the time of His life.

There is also the evidence of prophesy, many detailed events that have been proven to have been recorded long prior to their fulfillment and defy conventional explanation.

I have also considered whether the authorship of the Gospel accounts is legitimate, the veracity and credibility of the authors, the size of the time gap between the writing of the original scriptures and the currently existing copies, the likelihood of wildly erratic lies being able to survive and spread at a time when many thousands of witnesses were still living to refute the accounts and put the lies to rest, the fact that the whole matter could have been laid to rest by producing the body, which at one time had been under the watch of Roman centurion guards, etc, etc. and I conclude that a reasonable jurist would have to render a verdict that leans toward the credibility of the Gospel accounts.

After all, I would be a fool to want to believe a lie, right?

However, I don't consider myself responsible for convincing others, only for being prepared to offer explanations of what and why I believe, a belief that I don't find to be unreasonable nor disingenuous. A belief that has made miraculous differences in thousands of lives throughout history and even today.

You are at liberty to formulate your opinions and I am at liberty to formulate mine and it sounds like we have to agree to disagree on this point.

'Nuff said, huh? eace2:

 

[rjd970]

Flavius Josephus was the Roman historian.

 

[rjd970]

I'm at work and don't have time to look them up, but there are extra-biblical records of Jesus the Nazarene having existed and having been "a magician". I believe recorded by some Roman historian. It's been a while since I read it, so I'm speaking from my faulty memory. Also of there having been some recorded explanation of an "eclipse" at the time of His crucifixion, which more modern astronomy has shown to not have been possible, and of strange happenings in Palestine at the time of His life.

There is also the evidence of prophesy, many detailed events that have been proven to have been recorded long prior to their fulfillment and defy conventional explanation.

I have also considered whether the authorship of the Gospel accounts is legitimate, the veracity and credibility of the authors, the size of the time gap between the writing of the original scriptures and the currently existing copies, the likelihood of wildly erratic lies being able to survive and spread at a time when many thousands of witnesses were still living to refute the accounts and put the lies to rest, the fact that the whole matter could have been laid to rest by producing the body, which at one time had been under the watch of Roman centurion guards, etc, etc. and I conclude that a reasonable jurist would have to render a verdict that leans toward the credibility of the Gospel accounts.

After all, I would be a fool to want to believe a lie, right?

However, I don't consider myself responsible for convincing others, only for being prepared to offer explanations of what and why I believe, a belief that I don't find to be unreasonable nor disingenuous. A belief that has made miraculous differences in thousands of lives throughout history and even today.

You are at liberty to formulate your opinions and I am at liberty to formulate mine and it sounds like we have to agree to disagree on this point.

'Nuff said, huh? eace2:

Just because I am curious...what would constitute proof to you that the claims of the bible are false...ie..what evidence would it take to get you to reject the claims of christianity?

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

I take no offense whatsoever, especially to anyone who presents there perspectives with any level of reasoning. Both of you present good points. I think RJ brings up two different perspectives. First, at the highest level, why should one believe in a Creator. Many scientists, astronomers, and physicists (including some atheists and agnostics) have stated that (given the evidence and/or lack thereof) it is actually a bigger leap of faith to believe that somehow everything (the universe, people, etc.) evolved out of nothing than it would be to believe in creationism. And if you think about it, this makes good sense. When you think about the intracacies of the human body (much less the universe), I find it very hard to believe that there wasn't a Hand involved. Or to look at it another way, those who don't believe in a Creator are left with the strong academic theory of "sh!t happens" as that is what there basic belief boils down to. Given the options I find it very easy to believe in a Creator.

That brings up the second issue, which is whose Creator should I believe in since as you have said there are many different religions. I agree with JP, there is actually quite a bit of evidence that supports Jesus being the Son of God. The eye witness testimony that has been recorded by numerous individuals, at different times/places, and yet still recounting the same essential story. Not believing in Jesus, based on what has been written and recorded, would be the same as not believing in Caesor or Pontius Pilate. Many who study history have found that the Bible (including the OT) is indeed accurate. It's references to Kings, tribes, etc. have been proven by archaeologists and supported by other historical writings as well. The same is true for the NT. I don't think any reasonable person would deny that Jesus existed as his life (and death) is also referenced in many writings outside of the Bible. So the real issue, and only question (IMO), is whether or not one believes that Christ is our Savior. I believe that He is, though as some would argue... where is the proof? The counter argument could be, if you are correct in believing in Christ then you will go to heaven. If you do not believe in Christ (but he was/is our Savior), you will not go to heaven but will go to hell. If this is all one big joke and God/Christ does not exist, then you were right and we both die. Again, given the options of the potential outcomes, reason would suggest that there is more upside in being right about Christ than believing that there is no Creator. Or from your perspective, to offer another analogy, would be to view yourself locked in a burning room with certain death looming if you do nothing. There are three doors in the room with one of them "possibly" leading to safety outside, but you are only allowed to choose one of the doors. Rather than taking a chance (a leap of faith, if you will) you seem to be content to remain in the burning room rather than risk choosing a door and possibly being wrong about the decision. Your death is certain, whereas those who choose (and are willing to take a leap of faith) the outcome is still unknown.

 

[J-P]

Just because I am curious...what would constitute proof to you that the claims of the bible are false...ie..what evidence would it take to get you to reject the claims of christianity?

I'll have to think about that one a little while, because it is the complete opposite from the direction I went. I used to think it was fairy tales and inventions from men, but I now believe it is indeed the only true revelation from God. I have also seen the huge benefit and comprehension that has brought into my life and the life of my family, from being a drug user, alcohol abuser, cigarette smoker and pornography addict to having shaken most of those things. There is a harmony in my family life and my life in general that was not there before. So I'm not sure I could ever be convinced that the claims of Christianity should be rejected.

But I also now believe that has nothing to do with me. It is something that God's grace began in my life, and He will preserve it and bring it to completion. (I know, I'm sounding like a terrorist again.... Ha, ha).

 

[J-P]

IBlvNTmWrk made me think of something else I had to consider when I was considering Jesus. I came to a point where I started to believe that He was a wise and good man, a prophet if you will, but nothing more. But then as I read the gospel accounts about him, I realized I had a problem, because He claimed to be the Christ, the Son of God, one with the Father, and whoever believed in Him would have eternal life. Now if you consider this statement, if He was not speaking the truth, then he would have to be a nut on par with someone who claims to be Napoleon. He could not be a wise man, he would either be evil, telling people to trust their lives to him knowing all the while that he was lying, or a lunatic, but not a wise man. I had to either accept what He Himself claimed (through the written accounts of the gospel writers), or write him off as a liar or a lunatic.