Prophet Muhammad vs Jesus Christ

Post Reply New Topic

The issue of slavery is a very deep one.

Slavery had to exist because part of the OT laws allowed for a person to *VOLUNTARILY* become the slave of another person. Some sold themselves into slavery to pay off debts. Some wanted to remain slaves and became lifelong bondservants. The OT also required slave owners to release their slaves (not those who voluntarily became bondservants) during the years of Jubilee. Slavery was not designed to be a lifelong, against one's will situation. This also plays a part in NT theology, and one would not understand Paul's reference to being a bondservant of Christ without understanding the OT slavery system.

Slavery, when it was done right, was not evil. It served a purpose. Of course, there are always evil people. The slavery of Negroes was in no way reflective of the OT system, and neither is the hidden slavery going on today.

Women's rights... Huge topic of discussion. I'm not going to get into it.

Ummm... I don't have a problem with any of it. As a collection of writings, typical of a broad period (somewhere between 500 and 800 years, if I recall), I find it wonderful reading, especially when understood in the context of several culturally significant aspects, such as how they thought back then and how very differently we think now. It's especially good when you can reference things like the Ptolemaic system, the style, language and grammar of different writers, and the rich tapestry that went into informing the stories.

But to answer your question, there is a lot of it out there. I forget most of the reading I have done on it, but I can certainly give you one or two samples to start you off. If you want more, just ask.

I'll try to find something from very recent, but this one is at least fairly recent, and also contains a link to the combined parts of the Flood story.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060408080043/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html

Here's another from a Jewish scholar, though he's a bit light on detailing each point:
http://www.mesacc.edu/~thoqh49081/handouts/torahclues.html

Here's a slightly fuller discussion of several points:
http://stevendimattei.com/moses-write-torah-2/

Here's a PDF from a scholar who goes into considerable detail, for a short-ish thesis on the topic.
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/doc-hyp.pdf

One fascinating argument between scholars is with some saying that Deuteronomy is the only book actually written by Moses, but most scholars disagree. Here's something from Jewish scholars on that one:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5132-deuteronomy#anchor9

If you wish, I could provide more. I learned about this almost 40 years ago while studying theology, so you'll forgive me if I'm a little slow with the detail, and I like to check how current I am. Much has changed with JEDP, but the core of it has remained the same.

Um, you realize Islam came after both Judaism and Christianity, right? And that it got pretty much the majority of it's texts from each of it's holy books and distorted them?

Then again, Muhammad was in favor of killing for apostasy, waring with other people, having underage brides and multiple wives.

What he's saying is that its false choice: muhammed vs jesus.

Its like choosing between Jesus vs moses.

If you pick Jesus then you get Moses as part of the package. Likewise if you pick Mohammed you get both Moses, and Jesus, in the deal. So it aint exactly "either/or".

The Jews stop at the Old Testament, and consider followers of Jesus to be heretics most foul, who tack on the false NT onto the canon.

Christians stop at the NT and say "you can niether add nor subtract" books to their canon.

And then the Muslims tacked on the Koran (which informs us that we werent done yet at the NT, but now Mohammed is the "seal of the prophets").

Later STILL an American named Joseph Smith ignored the Koran, but like the Muslims ALSO tacked on an extra book to the OT and the NT. That being the "Book of Mormon".

So we got quite a buffet!

You can get the 1)Moses only package, (2) The Moses and Jesus package, or (3)Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, package. or the (4)Moses, Jesus,Adam Smith package.

But which ever package you pick you have to despise pickers of the other packages as "infidels"!

^^^

Yup, it's usuAlly more about the tribe and less about THEONE.

AND YEAH, that's part of THEONE2 AND three (triUNE) in two of the four BUT not THEONE1.

I for one TREND TOWARD THEONE2 more than anything else, as THEONE PROVIDES THIS AVENUE most of ALL TO ME2.

What I'm trying to do is get Azaam to use language that doesn't equivocate. Either the Jews and Christians are wrong or they are not. Either they worship a false God or they do not. This is not like the difference between Catholics and protestants (unless someone is like Mel Gibson, thinking all protestants are damned).

In essence, either the God you worship will get you to heaven or he won't. Jesus said, no one gets to heaven except through him and through no one else. Is that true, Azaam? The God of the Jews and of the Christians laid down the 10 Commandments. Is that the true God, Azaam? Abraham and Isaac and Moses and their descendants all followed God. Did they follow the true God, Azaam? Either they did or they didn't.

I think the mainstream Muslim belief is that the Jews and Christians worship the same God of Abraham, it's just that their teachings got distorted through time, and God revealed the final and correct version of worship to the prophet Mohammed. So they worship the same God, they just do it the wrong way.
Abraham and Moses are prophets according to Islam, it's just that the people who came after misinterpreted their teachings (according to Muslims).
And that Christ is the only way to heaven is only in the New Testament, I don't think it is in the Koran at all. Even the crucifixion/ressurrection are very different from the Christian version.
I'm not religious myself, only interested in it for historical reasons.

Then you're locked into believing that there are no scientifically valid alternatives to the absurd presumption that nothing caused/causes everything to become what it will be for no reason and in direct contradiction to well known, easily demonstrable, Natural Laws.

You're chucking out the baby, bathwater and the bathtub because of a pathological fear and disdain of the rather grubby baby.

Strike out the word 'fear', and yup. I have great disdain for the grubby baby of YEC.

Actually, a follower of Muhammad or the Q'uran does not get Jesus too, because Jesus claimed to be more than a prophet, and more than human.

He predicted his own death as suffering and execution.

The Q'uran teaches that Jesus was never on the cross at all, that another man was made to die in His place, and miraculously made to look like Him.

Further, that teaching is that he went away, married, raised a family, and died of old age.

Without the Crucifixion, He did not die for us.

Without the Crucifixion, there could be no Resurrection.

Without His death and Resurrection, we cannot trust that we are saved through His sacrifice, since their teaching is that He made no sacrifice of His life in the first place.

Believing and following the Q'uran requires that one not believe Jesus' own words that He was the Son of God and could forgive sins and give eternal life.

Because the Q'uran teaches that He was only a prophet.

Just one of many reasons why YEC is a joke:

A cleverly presented sales-pitch, embellished with an ever-so-pretty picture show doesn't make the impossible possible.

YEC is not the baby. Science and reason are the baby. YEC is only one of the protests made by the baby being discarded into the sewer of subjectivism.

I maintain that you have a genuine fear of science and reason because you intuitively know that your ideology cannot stand any reasonable scrutiny by it.

You can maintain any thought you like David, but wishing it won't make it so. Interesting that you use the word "fear" though. Religious people have used fear to "guide" the thinking of people since long before Adam was a boy.

YEC is just plain idiocy, perpetrated by people for whom reason stops at a fundamentalist approach to scripture.

Oldavid you realize you CAN be religious and still believe in evolution, right?

I'm Catholic and I believe evolution happened. There is too much proof to deny it at this point.

Throw it out, and flush it down the sh*tter.

It's my view that religion is a cultural entity. You are born a Muslim or a Christian and you live in a society next to other Muslims or Christians. To argue that one is superior to the other is to invite attacks from the other side, which then leads to violence and then retaliation from the side being attacked. The worse Muslims and Christians are the converts, because they have denounced their cultural heritage and are living in no-mans land.

As for any factual evidence of our existence coming from ancient religious texts, I prefer to defer to the scientists, because it is science that advances the cause of civilisation, not religion.