OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 10:38:46 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Has anyone ever been like "hmm har" about Islam?  (Read 14667 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #855 on: November 19, 2013, 05:13:50 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,107


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #856 on: November 19, 2013, 05:26:57 PM »

Very impressive…you can quote scripture too…congratulations…not only have you demonstrated immaturity in this discussion, but hypocrisy…If you like, you can wait, and I'll give you an answer tomorrow.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,048



« Reply #857 on: November 19, 2013, 05:32:25 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.
Logged

"Rationalists are admirable beings, rationalism is a hideous monster when it claims for itself omnipotence. Attribution of omnipotence to reason is as bad a piece of idolatry as is worship of stock and stone, believing it to be God." (Mahatma Gandhi)
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #858 on: November 20, 2013, 12:04:19 PM »

Ismail is the Brother of the Jews as you have to go back to were the word was first used to know the meaning of the word. Also you have in the book of Isaiah talking about the unlearned Prophet which clearly can't be Jesus as he was found in the temple at age 12 learning from the high priest and again he is shown to be able to read the Torah in the new testament. Also when they came to John they asked him 3 questions 1) Are you the Christ? 2) Are you Elijah? 3) Are you that Prophet? The third question should stick in your mind what other prophet are they talking about cause in christian terms Jesus is the be all end all Prophet. but yet they (Jews) know of another prophet after the Christ seams kinda odd to ask that question if there isn't another one after him don't you think.

Did anyone have a answer for this? I'd be interested to know it if they do. Thank you.

Poppy, I don't think the answer to this question will satisfy you, as it has never really satisfied any Muslim.  The assumption comes from a theology in your religion that claims that there has to come a prophet who is the seal of prophets after the Messiah.  In Christianity, the seal of prophets, kings, and priests was in the Messiah Himself.  The idea of a Messiah is so strong, even in Judaism, that He is considered to come at the end of the world in Jewish religion.  We too believe the Messiah will come at the end of the world, in a "second coming".  Furthermore, the question is also using writings that seem to reflect an attitude in Islam that what Jews and Christians have has been corrupted, and the "original" is missing.  Please correct me if I'm misconstruing that part of your religion.  So if you feel the need to speak of things in our Bible that pertain to something "you feel" pertains to your prophet, don't you think you have to establish a level of legitimacy of the whole text and the context of this before you can assume this talks about Mohamed?



I am not "any Muslim", I am me, but thank you for your politeness.

I'm sorry Poppy. I didn't mean to be rude or to overgeneralize.  I have many Muslim friends, so I'm just relating to how I remember plenty of times this verse has been presented to me by own friends.  The discussion always ends in a shrug and then, "hey are you gonna finish those fries".  Tongue

How can anyone find the One True God in this madness except that He will guide them uh?

But mina people said to me for the longest time (literally a few years), to ask God and He will show Himself to you and to trust God. Christians said it to me and especially Father Raphel, who I went to see and also in Islam my Imam said the same to me, trust Allah, subhana wa ta ala, to guide and keep you on the straight path. I know that in the bible it says if you ask God for bread, He will not give you a snake.

Then what am I doing wrong? We cannot rely on our feelings and what feels right to us, our feelings are fickle and often lead us away from God and after our own desires, even subconsciously! Even when we are trying our very best to be transparent with Allah. Only He knows our heart and sees our intention.



Logged
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #859 on: November 20, 2013, 12:20:40 PM »



Yes; it's the only way we can understand God. I don't buy into the "other way/it's totally incomprehensible" thing. The only way we'd be able to understand and explain God is through what we observe in this life. And while it may not be 100% accurate, I think it is safe to assume that truths about God are at least in the same ballpark as truths we recognize in this life. Therefore, I think that my question stands, and I would ask you how you would transfer this onto God.


I do agree with you in that things are echoes in this world such as the beauty of Allah in His creation etc. but you can only take that so far before we start to make Allah (swt) into our image, rather than worshipping Allah (swt) in truth.

I don't know that your question still stands because can a person on their own ....love? In my experience, I see they can in this life (to use your analady) because I understand love better when I see it in a action. Fear moves people away and love moves people towards. Fear rejects and love embraces. A lady explained it to me better that way and it stuck in my mind always.

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 12:22:38 PM by Poppy » Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,048



« Reply #860 on: November 20, 2013, 12:26:22 PM »



Yes; it's the only way we can understand God. I don't buy into the "other way/it's totally incomprehensible" thing. The only way we'd be able to understand and explain God is through what we observe in this life. And while it may not be 100% accurate, I think it is safe to assume that truths about God are at least in the same ballpark as truths we recognize in this life. Therefore, I think that my question stands, and I would ask you how you would transfer this onto God.

. Fear moves people away and love moves people towards. Fear rejects and love embraces. A lady explained it to me better that way and it stuck in my mind always.

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.

Quote from: Qur'an 3:151
سَنُلْقِي فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ بِمَا أَشْرَكُوا بِاللَّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا ۖ وَمَأْوَاهُمُ النَّارُ

We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down [any] authority. And their refuge will be the Fire.
Logged

"Rationalists are admirable beings, rationalism is a hideous monster when it claims for itself omnipotence. Attribution of omnipotence to reason is as bad a piece of idolatry as is worship of stock and stone, believing it to be God." (Mahatma Gandhi)
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,491



« Reply #861 on: November 20, 2013, 01:25:46 PM »

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.

I really don't have time for this thread and this probably gets off the OT, but love by is always marked by lack. I don't want JamesR losing his ability to wax romantic anytime soon.

Monads don't love or hate or anything else. They don't even exist. The just are. That's OK. If you worship a completeness, then enjoy I suppose. But I see no point in having a relationship with anything that isn't capable of inspiring fear or joy.

To paraphrase our favorite anarchist, give me a god I can dance to.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,491



« Reply #862 on: November 20, 2013, 01:28:30 PM »

We cannot rely on our feelings

Trust me, you and no one else rely on nothing else.

Your understanding of what is means to be a person and its gross miscalculation will lead you to a god in its image.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,491



« Reply #863 on: November 20, 2013, 01:28:57 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #864 on: November 20, 2013, 01:47:02 PM »



Yes; it's the only way we can understand God. I don't buy into the "other way/it's totally incomprehensible" thing. The only way we'd be able to understand and explain God is through what we observe in this life. And while it may not be 100% accurate, I think it is safe to assume that truths about God are at least in the same ballpark as truths we recognize in this life. Therefore, I think that my question stands, and I would ask you how you would transfer this onto God.

. Fear moves people away and love moves people towards. Fear rejects and love embraces. A lady explained it to me better that way and it stuck in my mind always.

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.

Quote from: Qur'an 3:151
سَنُلْقِي فِي قُلُوبِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ بِمَا أَشْرَكُوا بِاللَّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا ۖ وَمَأْوَاهُمُ النَّارُ

We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down [any] authority. And their refuge will be the Fire.

Justice isn't the same.
Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,048



« Reply #865 on: November 20, 2013, 01:59:09 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.

Trust me, I just had hands-on experience. Tactic 1: Cite a verse from the Bible Tactic 2: Say your interpretation is correct, when questioned... Tactic 3: Cite 2 Timothy 3:16
Logged

"Rationalists are admirable beings, rationalism is a hideous monster when it claims for itself omnipotence. Attribution of omnipotence to reason is as bad a piece of idolatry as is worship of stock and stone, believing it to be God." (Mahatma Gandhi)
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,110


« Reply #866 on: November 20, 2013, 02:04:51 PM »

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.

I could be misunderstanding what you mean by this, but just as a statement it doesn't seem like this is true. Talk to any couple who have been married for a long time, or even just listen to that awful Patty Smyth/Don Henley duet, and you'll probably get the exact opposite message: Love is not complete within itself. I mean, even talking about it in this way (calling it an "it" and asserting things about it) suggests that it somehow exists outside of the context of interpersonal relationships, which other parts of your post appear to contradict (all that stuff about "love in action"). I think this speaks to Orthonorm's about there being no relationship with a monad quite well. If we take something as existing in itself complete and whole, like God or love, then the only way we can have a relationship with it is by coming to it and taking from it. We have to need it, since it obviously doesn't need us (since it "doesn't need anything else"). Actually, HH Pope Shenouda III once gave a very interesting sermon on how to pray that touched on this, saying that true prayer involves taking from God, and I would say that the same is true in our interpersonal relationships with other people. We can certainly leave other people alone and be left alone by others who likewise see themselves as islands unto themselves, but of course this is about as far from love as we can imagine. So, I would say, far from being proper, a love that "doesn't need anything else" isn't any kind of love at all. Love needs others (God, people, etc.) to even make any sense as a thing. Ain't no love in space.

So you are on a good track when you ask if a person on their own can love, but you don't seem to apply that to a person's relationship with God, which is where it really counts (because what could be more important than our relationship with God?)...I can only imagine that this is because Islam's God is so disembodied that it is somehow seen as an affront to His majesty or greatness or oneness or something to suggest that we might relate to Him in a way that has analogues among His creation (which is indeed what we do by calling Him "Father"; I'm thinking here of the Qur'anic verse that says something like "It is beneath Him that He should have a son", when we say He has One, and through that One He has many). I dunno...again, maybe I've misunderstood you (I hope I have, actually), but that just seems so sad.

I continue to not understand the allure of Islam, I suppose. It's tragic, when you really think about it. Islam caused so many to leave God and worship an abstraction just because it's a really big one that they gave a lot of pretty names to. Sad
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 02:06:15 PM by dzheremi » Logged

orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,491



« Reply #867 on: November 20, 2013, 03:57:53 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.

Trust me, I just had hands-on experience. Tactic 1: Cite a verse from the Bible Tactic 2: Say your interpretation is correct, when questioned... Tactic 3: Cite 2 Timothy 3:16

As I said, you don't understand sola scriptura.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,562


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #868 on: November 20, 2013, 04:05:33 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.

Trust me, I just had hands-on experience. Tactic 1: Cite a verse from the Bible Tactic 2: Say your interpretation is correct, when questioned... Tactic 3: Cite 2 Timothy 3:16

As I said, you don't understand sola scriptura.

To be fair, 90% of people here (excluding the few Lutheran converts) don't either. Evangelicals don't understand it as well.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #869 on: November 21, 2013, 02:45:51 AM »

Proper love is complete; it doesn't need nothing else.

I could be misunderstanding what you mean by this, but just as a statement it doesn't seem like this is true. Talk to any couple who have been married for a long time, or even just listen to that awful Patty Smyth/Don Henley duet, and you'll probably get the exact opposite message: Love is not complete within itself. I mean, even talking about it in this way (calling it an "it" and asserting things about it) suggests that it somehow exists outside of the context of interpersonal relationships, which other parts of your post appear to contradict (all that stuff about "love in action"). I think this speaks to Orthonorm's about there being no relationship with a monad quite well. If we take something as existing in itself complete and whole, like God or love, then the only way we can have a relationship with it is by coming to it and taking from it. We have to need it, since it obviously doesn't need us (since it "doesn't need anything else"). Actually, HH Pope Shenouda III once gave a very interesting sermon on how to pray that touched on this, saying that true prayer involves taking from God, and I would say that the same is true in our interpersonal relationships with other people. We can certainly leave other people alone and be left alone by others who likewise see themselves as islands unto themselves, but of course this is about as far from love as we can imagine. So, I would say, far from being proper, a love that "doesn't need anything else" isn't any kind of love at all. Love needs others (God, people, etc.) to even make any sense as a thing. Ain't no love in space.

So you are on a good track when you ask if a person on their own can love, but you don't seem to apply that to a person's relationship with God, which is where it really counts (because what could be more important than our relationship with God?)...I can only imagine that this is because Islam's God is so disembodied that it is somehow seen as an affront to His majesty or greatness or oneness or something to suggest that we might relate to Him in a way that has analogues among His creation (which is indeed what we do by calling Him "Father"; I'm thinking here of the Qur'anic verse that says something like "It is beneath Him that He should have a son", when we say He has One, and through that One He has many). I dunno...again, maybe I've misunderstood you (I hope I have, actually), but that just seems so sad.

I continue to not understand the allure of Islam, I suppose. It's tragic, when you really think about it. Islam caused so many to leave God and worship an abstraction just because it's a really big one that they gave a lot of pretty names to. Sad

Please can I ask you what you understand by the words God is love?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,107


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #870 on: November 21, 2013, 09:20:00 PM »

The question was why.

This is why I gave a longer answer.  I wanted to give you an answer in its context.  In a natural setting, we know why there is suffering.  In a religious setting, we don't know why there's suffering.  You seemed to have missed that every time I wrote this:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.



We don't know why there is suffering.

...

But because I actually believe in explaining my answer so that we can have a discussion, that's why I wrote:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.

We believe in God who took part of nature, and of suffering, and taught us to use suffering as a build-up of character.  God suffered on the Cross.  God loved us so much, He suffered so that He may share in our pain, and teach us that through suffering, we may rise victorious.

We don't know why there is suffering.But we learn to live with it so that we may rise stronger.    "I suffer, therefore I am," an Indian Orthodox Metropolitan once said.  And he went through an amazing amount of suffering.  But what does this teach us?  God did not answer the question "why we suffer".  He showed us a way to help those who suffer, by living with those who suffer and suffering with them.  God did not stay in a lofty position to command us to do good.  He dwelt among us to SHOW US how to do good, even when we suffer.  Even from His infancy, He was not born in a kingdom, nor was he born in the comfort of a home, but in a manger, in the middle of a smelly barn where only animals live and defecate.  He was born in that atmosphere.

Either you don't know how to read, or you're being immature.  Perhaps rather than saying "this is a non-answer", you could say, "I don't understand about this particular part of what you wrote".  That's a dialogue.  That's a discussion.  But what you do is unprofessional, why is why I react the way I do.  But if you continue asking the same question, you're not asking for a dialogue.  You're being a baby.


It's the two or third time you bring this on. For the record, just for the record, I am not an Indian and have nothing to do with the Hindus religion or people. I have been an Eastern Orthodox all my life.

If you got reading problems, I feel bad for you son.  I got 99 problems, but phonics is not one.

I quoted an Indian Orthodox Metropolitan.  Let me requote my passage for you:

Quote
We don't know why there is suffering.But we learn to live with it so that we may rise stronger.    "I suffer, therefore I am," an Indian Orthodox Metropolitan once said.  And he went through an amazing amount of suffering.  But what does this teach us?  God did not answer the question "why we suffer".  He showed us a way to help those who suffer, by living with those who suffer and suffering with them.  God did not stay in a lofty position to command us to do good.  He dwelt among us to SHOW US how to do good, even when we suffer.  Even from His infancy, He was not born in a kingdom, nor was he born in the comfort of a home, but in a manger, in the middle of a smelly barn where only animals live and defecate.  He was born in that atmosphere.

His name is Metropolitan Paulose Mar Gregorios of the Indian Orthodox Church.  He's an Orthodox Christian.  I read his autobiography, a very enlightening and inspiring story of suffering.  He is not a Hindu.  It's an actual Orthodox Christian I'm quoting from who said, "I suffer, therefore I am", who was contrasting Descartes' famous line "I think, therefore I am."


Quote
Why should the suffering of Jesus make me feel better? Light ball moment(doh!)

This is why I said : "What kind of mind is that that feels comfort in someone else's suffering, or just because someone else is suffering with him? "

Now who is the one who is not ruminating and more it is shallow, superficial,lazy and disrespectful?

Now if you said that earlier without repeating your questions or deriding my questions or my faith, perhaps we could have went somewhere.  But based on how you don't even know how to read, I feel bad for you that you can't understand much what I write anyway.

I'll try my best to simplify this for you.  Let's use an analogy, and just in case you don't know what an analogy is, it is an example of a real-life events to help describe a situation or make a point about a situation.

The analogy:  Which doctor would a cancer patient feel more comfortable with?  A doctor who does not know what it's like to have cancer, or a doctor who actually is a cancer survivor?  Which type of doctor would an obese guy listen to for weight loss?  An obese doctor, a thin doctor, or a thin doctor who used to be obese?

The point is that all of humanity suffers from one thing or another have a certain tendency to look to the sky and seek guidance for their own personal suffering.  But which one will humanity feel comfortable with more?  A King who from his lofty position orders guards to do the clean work, or a King who descends from His throne to live with the people, and clean up the mess Himself?  And a King who not only comforts the broken hearted, but also promises to take them to His very Throne itself!

So what type of person would feel comfortable in someone else's suffering?  That's a leading question to something that I never claimed nor have I ever believed.  It's not comfort in someone else's suffering, but in someone else who suffered LIKE ME, or EVEN WORSE than me, and no longer suffers.  In other words, if this person just died, there's no comfort in that.  That's a sick-mind to find comfort in someone who ended his life there.  But He didn't.  We as Christians believe He rose from the dead.  Thus, suffering has an end.  This understanding is a message of hope.  We have comfort not in His suffering, but in His resurrection.


It doesn't look like he had an option : Psalms 109

The betrayal of Judas as described by the Psalms does not mean Judas had no option.  For to say so would be a Calvinist understanding.  But you claim you were an Orthodox Christian.  Therefore, how could someone who used to be an Orthodox Christian say that that Psalm meant Judas had no choice?  Clearly, you had a Protestant upbringing, even if it was "in the Church".  Not every Orthodox Christian is "Orthodox", or even "Christian" for that matter.

Furthermore, the Psalm describes what the wicked man is like and his treason.  While it is traditionally understood as a prophecy of Judas, it has also been understood as it could describe any man.  I'm also convinced that a prophecy carries insight into the nature of man and the nature of God.  It carries insight into how we are brought into salvation, and how man or a nation can be brought into condemnation.  Prophecies thus are not merely predictions, but carry incredible insight.  Psalm 109 can be talking about anyone.  Judas happens to fit that description in the most likely sense.  But when David the psalmist wrote this, he did not have a seance or premonition to write this. He was inspired by the Holy Sprit to share his own experience and insight of man to write this in these particular words, in his own human experience of the enemies who made him suffer.  This later was applied to describe the same case with Judas.  And who better than St. Peter to have shared this verse, because this verse could have easily been applied to St. Peter as well.  In fact, St. Peter did worse.  He denied Christ, swore his denial, and cursed Christ and the people who questioned him.  Judas could have repented like St. Peter, but he didn't.  If Judas did repent, and St. Peter killed himself, the Psalm would be applicable to St. Peter himself.

Quote
I need to see understanding and explanations of why you think so. If not sorry I cannot buy something you are not convinced yourself, or life hasn't taught you, or you don't own it.

You need to understand?  It doesn't seem like so.  If you "needed" to understand, you would have came into this website with a bit more respect and honesty.  I quoted a passage because it explains better than I could.  Now, if you don't like the quote, then that's your business.  But if you need to understand how I interpret the quote, then you could have simply asked, "Can you please explain what this Bible passage means to you?"  But you don't even know how to ask a question.  Instead, you deride an answer.  So, please, don't fool yourself and me to say that you "need" to understand.  If you did, you wouldn't be insulting our religion.  You would come humbly to this website and have a discussion, and you can disagree in a professional and mature manner.



Yet you can.

Where did I define love?  Obviously once again, your reading comprehension needs improvement.  Furthermore, I find it interesting you quoting a passage here:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

Where in this is a definition of what love IS in its very essence?  Here, you can only see what love DOES or its qualities, which is exactly what I was saying earlier.  Furthermore, if there is a perfect definition for love, we would point to God, who "is Love" so to speak.  And yet, here again, we can't even define God.

If I ask "Who is Garuda"?  I could say "Garuda is kind, is a gentleman, is professional."  But that could easily be anyone else with the same qualities.  I only defined your qualities, but I can never define "Who" you are in your very essence.


What is the reason of this nitpicking? I am "frustrated" by your thinking that I might have been an ignorant about Orthodox Christianity, yet I have been an Orthodox Christian all my life, that is the precise reason why I am challenging this beliefs. Because if you analyse them they are full of fallacies and contradictorial notions, as you prooved yourself and when you got exposed you infuriated and exposed your fury in a rudely manner.

In this disregarding of yours you didn't have the decency to answer direct questions directly.

I am discussing beliefs/belief systems, phylosophies, theological issues. Why are you discussing my person?

Because you came into this website rude, unprofessional, derisive on this website's affiliated religion, derisive on God, and unable to have a meaningful discussion or unable to want to understand what the other side is trying to say.  Not to mention many of your posts have been rejected, so I know exactly how you come here just to make havoc of this site.  So if you want respect in this discussion, you have to earn it.

« Last Edit: November 21, 2013, 09:30:18 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,048



« Reply #871 on: November 21, 2013, 09:27:31 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.

Trust me, I just had hands-on experience. Tactic 1: Cite a verse from the Bible Tactic 2: Say your interpretation is correct, when questioned... Tactic 3: Cite 2 Timothy 3:16

As I said, you don't understand sola scriptura.

Is there some 'official' definition I don't understand? If hands-on experience doesn't count, meaning that I am a Protestant and I have debated, listened, followed and was taught by several Protestants, what does?
« Last Edit: November 21, 2013, 09:28:43 PM by xOrthodox4Christx » Logged

"Rationalists are admirable beings, rationalism is a hideous monster when it claims for itself omnipotence. Attribution of omnipotence to reason is as bad a piece of idolatry as is worship of stock and stone, believing it to be God." (Mahatma Gandhi)
Laird
Not yet able to attend an Orthodox Church
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer (Catechumen soon hopefully)
Jurisdiction: Baptist
Posts: 258


Lord, have mercy on me


« Reply #872 on: November 21, 2013, 09:54:50 PM »

Quote
God doesn't put consequences on them, they put these consequences upon themselves. When they reject the essence of Love itself, God, they feel the guilt of it.

 "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."



Sola Scriptura Atheism FTW.

You really don't understand sola scriptura.

Trust me, I just had hands-on experience. Tactic 1: Cite a verse from the Bible Tactic 2: Say your interpretation is correct, when questioned... Tactic 3: Cite 2 Timothy 3:16

As I said, you don't understand sola scriptura.

Then what is it?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,107


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #873 on: November 21, 2013, 10:41:33 PM »

Please can I ask you what you understand by the words God is love?

Oh Poppy, for "God is Love" to be understood, an encyclopedia of books, cannot cover it.  In fact, the whole Bible is a story of what this means.  Christ even himself taught about love as the FOUNDATION of the laws and prophets:

Quote from: Matthew 22
37 Jesus said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.

The two greatest commandments involve love.  Love is the foundation of all things that exist.  Love is the beginning and the end.  Love is the act of Creation.  Love is being Creator.  Love slows down time and makes it fast.  Love gains and love makes you get lost.  Love is a paradox.  Love is undefinable.  Love is illogical.  Love is beyond limits.

When we know what "love" is by our relationships, what perfect, true, and REAL Love is, we know what God is.  If Love is the foundation of all things, including the Law and the Prophets, and God is also the foundation of all things, including the Law and the Prophets, then God is truly love.

And by knowing that perfect love is evident in Christ, and believing that Christ may dwell in our hearts, living the love of Christ means the "fullness of God" dwelling in our hearts.  That is, the love of God is the essence of God:

Quote from: Ephesians 9
17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height— 19 to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

The most important result of Love is the giving of oneself fully to the other.  God is Loving us by doing just that, by dwelling FULLY in us.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2013, 10:45:09 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #874 on: November 22, 2013, 03:36:15 AM »

Please can I ask you what you understand by the words God is love?

Oh Poppy, for "God is Love" to be understood, an encyclopedia of books, cannot cover it.  In fact, the whole Bible is a story of what this means.  Christ even himself taught about love as the FOUNDATION of the laws and prophets:

Quote from: Matthew 22
37 Jesus said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.

The two greatest commandments involve love.  Love is the foundation of all things that exist.  Love is the beginning and the end.  Love is the act of Creation.  Love is being Creator.  Love slows down time and makes it fast.  Love gains and love makes you get lost.  Love is a paradox.  Love is undefinable.  Love is illogical.  Love is beyond limits.

When we know what "love" is by our relationships, what perfect, true, and REAL Love is, we know what God is.  If Love is the foundation of all things, including the Law and the Prophets, and God is also the foundation of all things, including the Law and the Prophets, then God is truly love.

And by knowing that perfect love is evident in Christ, and believing that Christ may dwell in our hearts, living the love of Christ means the "fullness of God" dwelling in our hearts.  That is, the love of God is the essence of God:

Quote from: Ephesians 9
17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height— 19 to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

The most important result of Love is the giving of oneself fully to the other.  God is Loving us by doing just that, by dwelling FULLY in us.

hmm...

Logged
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #875 on: November 22, 2013, 11:43:05 AM »

It seems to me that I have been trying to find answers to the wrong questions then.
Logged
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #876 on: November 22, 2013, 04:24:49 PM »

The question was why.

This is why I gave a longer answer.  I wanted to give you an answer in its context.  In a natural setting, we know why there is suffering.  In a religious setting, we don't know why there's suffering.  You seemed to have missed that every time I wrote this:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.



We don't know why there is suffering.

...

But because I actually believe in explaining my answer so that we can have a discussion, that's why I wrote:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.

We believe in God who took part of nature, and of suffering, and taught us to use suffering as a build-up of character.  God suffered on the Cross.  God loved us so much, He suffered so that He may share in our pain, and teach us that through suffering, we may rise victorious.

We don't know why there is suffering.But we learn to live with it so that we may rise stronger.    "I suffer, therefore I am," an Indian Orthodox Metropolitan once said.  And he went through an amazing amount of suffering.  But what does this teach us?  God did not answer the question "why we suffer".  He showed us a way to help those who suffer, by living with those who suffer and suffering with them.  God did not stay in a lofty position to command us to do good.  He dwelt among us to SHOW US how to do good, even when we suffer.  Even from His infancy, He was not born in a kingdom, nor was he born in the comfort of a home, but in a manger, in the middle of a smelly barn where only animals live and defecate.  He was born in that atmosphere.

Either you don't know how to read, or you're being immature.  Perhaps rather than saying "this is a non-answer", you could say, "I don't understand about this particular part of what you wrote".  That's a dialogue.  That's a discussion.  But what you do is unprofessional, why is why I react the way I do.  But if you continue asking the same question, you're not asking for a dialogue.  You're being a baby.

How can you say God is Love and only Love and hates no one if you don't know why some suffer spiritual anguish unto desperation and commitment of suicidal acts?


Quote
Quote
Why should the suffering of Jesus make me feel better? Light ball moment(doh!)

This is why I said : "What kind of mind is that that feels comfort in someone else's suffering, or just because someone else is suffering with him? "

Now who is the one who is not ruminating and more it is shallow, superficial,lazy and disrespectful?

Now if you said that earlier without repeating your questions or deriding my questions or my faith, perhaps we could have went somewhere.  But based on how you don't even know how to read, I feel bad for you that you can't understand much what I write anyway.

I'll try my best to simplify this for you.  Let's use an analogy, and just in case you don't know what an analogy is, it is an example of a real-life events to help describe a situation or make a point about a situation.

The analogy:  Which doctor would a cancer patient feel more comfortable with?  A doctor who does not know what it's like to have cancer, or a doctor who actually is a cancer survivor?  Which type of doctor would an obese guy listen to for weight loss?  An obese doctor, a thin doctor, or a thin doctor who used to be obese?

The point is that all of humanity suffers from one thing or another have a certain tendency to look to the sky and seek guidance for their own personal suffering.  But which one will humanity feel comfortable with more?  A King who from his lofty position orders guards to do the clean work, or a King who descends from His throne to live with the people, and clean up the mess Himself?  And a King who not only comforts the broken hearted, but also promises to take them to His very Throne itself!

It doesn't matter to answer to the most of that. And bad analogies. One cannot ascribe human functions and titles to God. If the transcendent exists, then it is different than what it is here, and it is beyond any titles, rules, races, sex, job, governments, etc.

Quote
So what type of person would feel comfortable in someone else's suffering?  That's a leading question to something that I never claimed nor have I ever believed.  It's not comfort in someone else's suffering, but in someone else who suffered LIKE ME, or EVEN WORSE than me, and no longer suffers.  In other words, if this person just died, there's no comfort in that.  That's a sick-mind to find comfort in someone who ended his life there.  But He didn't.  We as Christians believe He rose from the dead.  Thus, suffering has an end.  This understanding is a message of hope.  We have comfort not in His suffering, but in His resurrection.

It doesn't make much difference. You are rejoicing because someone went through what you are going through.

Quote
It doesn't look like he had an option : Psalms 109

The betrayal of Judas as described by the Psalms does not mean Judas had no option.  For to say so would be a Calvinist understanding.  But you claim you were an Orthodox Christian.  Therefore, how could someone who used to be an Orthodox Christian say that that Psalm meant Judas had no choice?  Clearly, you had a Protestant upbringing, even if it was "in the Church".  Not every Orthodox Christian is "Orthodox", or even "Christian" for that matter.

Furthermore, the Psalm describes what the wicked man is like and his treason.  While it is traditionally understood as a prophecy of Judas, it has also been understood as it could describe any man.  I'm also convinced that a prophecy carries insight into the nature of man and the nature of God.  It carries insight into how we are brought into salvation, and how man or a nation can be brought into condemnation.  Prophecies thus are not merely predictions, but carry incredible insight.  Psalm 109 can be talking about anyone.  Judas happens to fit that description in the most likely sense.  But when David the psalmist wrote this, he did not have a seance or premonition to write this. He was inspired by the Holy Sprit to share his own experience and insight of man to write this in these particular words, in his own human experience of the enemies who made him suffer.  This later was applied to describe the same case with Judas.  And who better than St. Peter to have shared this verse, because this verse could have easily been applied to St. Peter as well.  In fact, St. Peter did worse.  He denied Christ, swore his denial, and cursed Christ and the people who questioned him.  Judas could have repented like St. Peter, but he didn't.  If Judas did repent, and St. Peter killed himself, the Psalm would be applicable to St. Peter himself.

Too many "ifs".

Quote
Quote
I need to see understanding and explanations of why you think so. If not sorry I cannot buy something you are not convinced yourself, or life hasn't taught you, or you don't own it.

You need to understand?  It doesn't seem like so.  If you "needed" to understand, you would have came into this website with a bit more respect and honesty.  I quoted a passage because it explains better than I could.  Now, if you don't like the quote, then that's your business.  But if you need to understand how I interpret the quote, then you could have simply asked, "Can you please explain what this Bible passage means to you?"  But you don't even know how to ask a question.  Instead, you deride an answer.  So, please, don't fool yourself and me to say that you "need" to understand.  If you did, you wouldn't be insulting our religion.  You would come humbly to this website and have a discussion, and you can disagree in a professional and mature manner.

Our religion deserves to be insulted and disrespected. I don't think I put my foot too much into this, though.

Quote
Yet you can.

Where did I define love?  Obviously once again, your reading comprehension needs improvement. 

Just because you think a certain potential does not exist it doesn't mean that that potential is not there.

Quote
Furthermore, I find it interesting you quoting a passage here:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

Where in this is a definition of what love IS in its very essence?  Here, you can only see what love DOES or its qualities, which is exactly what I was saying earlier.  Furthermore, if there is a perfect definition for love, we would point to God, who "is Love" so to speak.  And yet, here again, we can't even define God.

If I ask "Who is Garuda"?  I could say "Garuda is kind, is a gentleman, is professional."  But that could easily be anyone else with the same qualities.  I only defined your qualities, but I can never define "Who" you are in your very essence.

If we follow that reasoning than we can't define anything and there is no deffinition for anything.


Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,107


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #877 on: November 22, 2013, 04:46:41 PM »

Quote
Our religion deserves to be insulted and disrespected. I don't think I put my foot too much into this, though.

Speak for yourself.  I could have continued with the other points you made in response to my post, but because of this, I won't waste my time with someone who likes to fool around online.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #878 on: November 22, 2013, 04:59:05 PM »

Don't act like you were doing me a favour. You had more to learn from this conversation than you are trying to pretend you were teaching.
Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,048



« Reply #879 on: November 22, 2013, 05:03:54 PM »

The question was why.

This is why I gave a longer answer.  I wanted to give you an answer in its context.  In a natural setting, we know why there is suffering.  In a religious setting, we don't know why there's suffering.  You seemed to have missed that every time I wrote this:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.



We don't know why there is suffering.

...

But because I actually believe in explaining my answer so that we can have a discussion, that's why I wrote:

Quote
Nature is riddled with problems, diseases, storms, and social/psychological problems.  All a part of nature.

We believe in God who took part of nature, and of suffering, and taught us to use suffering as a build-up of character.  God suffered on the Cross.  God loved us so much, He suffered so that He may share in our pain, and teach us that through suffering, we may rise victorious.

We don't know why there is suffering.But we learn to live with it so that we may rise stronger.    "I suffer, therefore I am," an Indian Orthodox Metropolitan once said.  And he went through an amazing amount of suffering.  But what does this teach us?  God did not answer the question "why we suffer".  He showed us a way to help those who suffer, by living with those who suffer and suffering with them.  God did not stay in a lofty position to command us to do good.  He dwelt among us to SHOW US how to do good, even when we suffer.  Even from His infancy, He was not born in a kingdom, nor was he born in the comfort of a home, but in a manger, in the middle of a smelly barn where only animals live and defecate.  He was born in that atmosphere.

Either you don't know how to read, or you're being immature.  Perhaps rather than saying "this is a non-answer", you could say, "I don't understand about this particular part of what you wrote".  That's a dialogue.  That's a discussion.  But what you do is unprofessional, why is why I react the way I do.  But if you continue asking the same question, you're not asking for a dialogue.  You're being a baby.

How can you say God is Love and only Love and hates no one if you don't know why some suffer spiritual anguish unto desperation and commitment of suicidal acts?


Quote
Quote
Why should the suffering of Jesus make me feel better? Light ball moment(doh!)

This is why I said : "What kind of mind is that that feels comfort in someone else's suffering, or just because someone else is suffering with him? "

Now who is the one who is not ruminating and more it is shallow, superficial,lazy and disrespectful?

Now if you said that earlier without repeating your questions or deriding my questions or my faith, perhaps we could have went somewhere.  But based on how you don't even know how to read, I feel bad for you that you can't understand much what I write anyway.

I'll try my best to simplify this for you.  Let's use an analogy, and just in case you don't know what an analogy is, it is an example of a real-life events to help describe a situation or make a point about a situation.

The analogy:  Which doctor would a cancer patient feel more comfortable with?  A doctor who does not know what it's like to have cancer, or a doctor who actually is a cancer survivor?  Which type of doctor would an obese guy listen to for weight loss?  An obese doctor, a thin doctor, or a thin doctor who used to be obese?

The point is that all of humanity suffers from one thing or another have a certain tendency to look to the sky and seek guidance for their own personal suffering.  But which one will humanity feel comfortable with more?  A King who from his lofty position orders guards to do the clean work, or a King who descends from His throne to live with the people, and clean up the mess Himself?  And a King who not only comforts the broken hearted, but also promises to take them to His very Throne itself!

It doesn't matter to answer to the most of that. And bad analogies. One cannot ascribe human functions and titles to God. If the transcendent exists, then it is different than what it is here, and it is beyond any titles, rules, races, sex, job, governments, etc.

Quote
So what type of person would feel comfortable in someone else's suffering?  That's a leading question to something that I never claimed nor have I ever believed.  It's not comfort in someone else's suffering, but in someone else who suffered LIKE ME, or EVEN WORSE than me, and no longer suffers.  In other words, if this person just died, there's no comfort in that.  That's a sick-mind to find comfort in someone who ended his life there.  But He didn't.  We as Christians believe He rose from the dead.  Thus, suffering has an end.  This understanding is a message of hope.  We have comfort not in His suffering, but in His resurrection.

It doesn't make much difference. You are rejoicing because someone went through what you are going through.

Quote
It doesn't look like he had an option : Psalms 109

The betrayal of Judas as described by the Psalms does not mean Judas had no option.  For to say so would be a Calvinist understanding.  But you claim you were an Orthodox Christian.  Therefore, how could someone who used to be an Orthodox Christian say that that Psalm meant Judas had no choice?  Clearly, you had a Protestant upbringing, even if it was "in the Church".  Not every Orthodox Christian is "Orthodox", or even "Christian" for that matter.

Furthermore, the Psalm describes what the wicked man is like and his treason.  While it is traditionally understood as a prophecy of Judas, it has also been understood as it could describe any man.  I'm also convinced that a prophecy carries insight into the nature of man and the nature of God.  It carries insight into how we are brought into salvation, and how man or a nation can be brought into condemnation.  Prophecies thus are not merely predictions, but carry incredible insight.  Psalm 109 can be talking about anyone.  Judas happens to fit that description in the most likely sense.  But when David the psalmist wrote this, he did not have a seance or premonition to write this. He was inspired by the Holy Sprit to share his own experience and insight of man to write this in these particular words, in his own human experience of the enemies who made him suffer.  This later was applied to describe the same case with Judas.  And who better than St. Peter to have shared this verse, because this verse could have easily been applied to St. Peter as well.  In fact, St. Peter did worse.  He denied Christ, swore his denial, and cursed Christ and the people who questioned him.  Judas could have repented like St. Peter, but he didn't.  If Judas did repent, and St. Peter killed himself, the Psalm would be applicable to St. Peter himself.

Too many "ifs".

Quote
Quote
I need to see understanding and explanations of why you think so. If not sorry I cannot buy something you are not convinced yourself, or life hasn't taught you, or you don't own it.

You need to understand?  It doesn't seem like so.  If you "needed" to understand, you would have came into this website with a bit more respect and honesty.  I quoted a passage because it explains better than I could.  Now, if you don't like the quote, then that's your business.  But if you need to understand how I interpret the quote, then you could have simply asked, "Can you please explain what this Bible passage means to you?"  But you don't even know how to ask a question.  Instead, you deride an answer.  So, please, don't fool yourself and me to say that you "need" to understand.  If you did, you wouldn't be insulting our religion.  You would come humbly to this website and have a discussion, and you can disagree in a professional and mature manner.

Our religion deserves to be insulted and disrespected. I don't think I put my foot too much into this, though.

Quote
Yet you can.

Where did I define love?  Obviously once again, your reading comprehension needs improvement. 

Just because you think a certain potential does not exist it doesn't mean that that potential is not there.

Quote
Furthermore, I find it interesting you quoting a passage here:

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.  It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.  Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.  It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

Where in this is a definition of what love IS in its very essence?  Here, you can only see what love DOES or its qualities, which is exactly what I was saying earlier.  Furthermore, if there is a perfect definition for love, we would point to God, who "is Love" so to speak.  And yet, here again, we can't even define God.

If I ask "Who is Garuda"?  I could say "Garuda is kind, is a gentleman, is professional."  But that could easily be anyone else with the same qualities.  I only defined your qualities, but I can never define "Who" you are in your very essence.

If we follow that reasoning than we can't define anything and there is no deffinition for anything.




Suffering exists because we live in a finite and mortal world, it's the way the world works and will continue to work.
Logged

"Rationalists are admirable beings, rationalism is a hideous monster when it claims for itself omnipotence. Attribution of omnipotence to reason is as bad a piece of idolatry as is worship of stock and stone, believing it to be God." (Mahatma Gandhi)
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,110


« Reply #880 on: November 22, 2013, 05:10:54 PM »

How can you say God is Love and only Love and hates no one if you don't know why some suffer spiritual anguish unto desperation and commitment of suicidal acts?

This is an odd question. If I were to commit suicide, would it therefore automatically mean that my parents didn't love me enough, or would at least some of the reason for my predicament lie within myself (my own reaction to problems, my own brain chemistry, etc.)? It seems that you would be more comfortable if God would just program our feelings, but that's no less realistic than supposing that God should wave some kind of magic wand and eliminate our spiritual anguish, as though it has no purpose and is evidence that God is a jerk. Yes, He could make everything better without any effort on our part, but if our conclusion regarding the fact that He doesn't is that He just doesn't love us, then our conclusion is faulty. Do we even treat human parents this way, when their standard is so much lower? A parent who instantly fixes any problem which might come along for their child (rather than supporting and guiding and nourishing them in their own growth) is not really raising a person who can cope with the reality of the world, and at least for Christians the reality of the world in a spiritual sense is that we struggle. A lot. And God is with us no matter what, and He can and will give us the strength that we do not have, but this requires something of us. Some amount of effort. If we give up and kill ourselves, is the proper response "God is a jerk"? If you've ever dealt with anyone with any kind of addiction or compulsion or other problem that is truly beyond their bounds to reign in on their own, you know that they have to get help themselves for it to be most effective, rather than having it forced on them. That's why they say the first step is to admit that you have a problem. We humans have a problem with sin, and if we want to get healthy rather than look for an easy way out that doesn't exist, we have to reach out and take from God. I'm pretty sure I already posted this link in this thread, but it bears repeating that true prayer is taking from God. And God wants to give to us, but He won't force Himself on us or program our souls. We have to ask, beg, plead, pray. We have to reach out.

Quote
It doesn't make much difference. You are rejoicing because someone went through what you are going through.


No. We are rejoicing because we hope to go through what He went through in His resurrection. "We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Amen."
Logged

Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #881 on: November 22, 2013, 05:19:36 PM »

Quote
As for Judas, he was an example of how one turns suffering into tragic despair, and how he freely chose to "give up" rather than to persevere.

It doesn't look like he had an option :

He did. If you happen to attend the Vigils of Holy and Great Thursday and Friday, pay attention - there's a haunting refrain throughout the service: "Judas the transgressor would not understand". That Psalm needn't have been about him.

Quote
Receiving the Bread in his hands, the betrayer
in secret extends those very hands
receiving from the priests the price
of Him who had fashioned mankind with His own hands.
And he remained incorrigible,
Judas the slave and the knave.



AS THE SINFUL WOMAN WAS BRINGING HER OFFERING OF MYRRH,
THE DISCIPLE WAS SCHEMING WITH LAWLESS MEN.
SHE REJOICED IN POURING OUT HER PRECIOUS GIFT.
HE HASTENED TO SELL THE PRECIOUS ONE.
SHE RECOGNIZED THE MASTER, BUT JUDAS PARTED FROM HIM.
SHE WAS SET FREE, BUT JUDAS WAS ENSLAVED TO THE ENEMY.
HOW TERRIBLE IS SLOTHFULNESS!
HOW GREAT HER REPENTANCE!
SAVIOR, YOU SUFFERED FOR OUR SAKES://
GRANT US ALSO REPENTANCE, AND SAVE US.

O, THE WRETCHEDNESS OF JUDAS!
HE SAW THE HARLOT KISS THE FOOTSTEPS OF CHRIST,
BUT DECEITFULLY HE CONTEMPLATED THE KISS OF BETRAYAL.
SHE LOOSED HER HAIR WHILE HE BOUND HIMSELF WITH WRATH.
HE OFFERED THE STENCH OF WICKEDNESS INSTEAD OF MYRRH,
FOR ENVY CANNOT DISTINGUISH VALUE.
O, THE WRETCHEDNESS OF JUDAS!//
DELIVER OUR SOULS FROM THIS, O GOD.

BECAUSE OF THE RAISING OF LAZARUS,
LORD AND LOVER OF MANKIND,
THE HEBREW CHILDREN CRIED HOSANNA! TO YOU,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

AT YOUR SUPPER, O CHRIST GOD,
YOU ANNOUNCED TO YOUR DISCIPLES:
ONE OF YOU WILL BETRAY ME.//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

WHEN JOHN ASKED YOU, LORD,
WHO IS IT THAT BETRAYS YOU?
YOU REVEALED WHO IT WAS BY MEANS OF THE MORSEL OF BREAD,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

FOR THIRTY PIECES OF SILVER
AND A TREACHEROUS KISS, O LORD,
THE JEWS SOUGHT TO KILL YOU,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

AT THE WASHING OF THEIR FEET, O CHRIST GOD,
YOU COMMANDED YOUR DISCIPLES:
DO AS YOU HAVE SEEN ME DO.//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

KEEP WATCH AND PRAY,
LEST YOU BE TEMPTED!
YOU SAID TO YOUR DISCIPLES, O OUR GOD,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 05:21:54 PM by Romaios » Logged
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #882 on: November 22, 2013, 05:31:27 PM »

How can you say God is Love and only Love and hates no one if you don't know why some suffer spiritual anguish unto desperation and commitment of suicidal acts?

This is an odd question. If I were to commit suicide, would it therefore automatically mean that my parents didn't love me enough,

Different. God can actually do something about that.

Quote
or would at least some of the reason for my predicament lie within myself (my own reaction to problems, my own brain chemistry, etc.)?

you mean your construction/constitution.

like some are born skinnier, some fatter, some smarter, some dumber, some uglier, some handsomer.

that's not your doing. and every decision you make is circumstantial.

Quote
It seems that you would be more comfortable if God would just program our feelings, but that's no less realistic than supposing that God should wave some kind of magic wand and eliminate our spiritual anguish, as though it has no purpose and is evidence that God is a jerk. Yes, He could make everything better without any effort on our part, but if our conclusion regarding the fact that He doesn't is that He just doesn't love us, then our conclusion is faulty. Do we even treat human parents this way, when their standard is so much lower? A parent who instantly fixes any problem which might come along for their child (rather than supporting and guiding and nourishing them in their own growth) is not really raising a person who can cope with the reality of the world, and at least for Christians the reality of the world in a spiritual sense is that we struggle. A lot. And God is with us no matter what, and He can and will give us the strength that we do not have, but this requires something of us. Some amount of effort. If we give up and kill ourselves, is the proper response "God is a jerk"? If you've ever dealt with anyone with any kind of addiction or compulsion or other problem that is truly beyond their bounds to reign in on their own, you know that they have to get help themselves for it to be most effective, rather than having it forced on them. That's why they say the first step is to admit that you have a problem. We humans have a problem with sin, and if we want to get healthy rather than look for an easy way out that doesn't exist, we have to reach out and take from God. I'm pretty sure I already posted this link in this thread, but it bears repeating that true prayer is taking from God. And God wants to give to us, but He won't force Himself on us or program our souls. We have to ask, beg, plead, pray. We have to reach out.

And this assumption of yours is based on what experience?

Quote
Quote
It doesn't make much difference. You are rejoicing because someone went through what you are going through.


No. We are rejoicing because we hope to go through what He went through in His resurrection. "We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. Amen."

Will people after the resurrection of the dead(and the last judgement) have free will? Will they still be able to sin? What would happen with them then? Could God not get things right the first time?
Logged
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #883 on: November 22, 2013, 05:43:43 PM »

Quote
He did. If you happen to attend the Vigils of Holy and Great Thursday and Friday, pay attention - there's a haunting refrain throughout the service: "Judas the transgressor would not understand". That Psalm needn't have been about him.

Someone needed to sell Jesus according to the OT. And without the "betrayal of Judas" you have no crucifixion and no resurrection.

I think Judas knew too much. Smiley

Quote
Quote
Receiving the Bread in his hands, the betrayer
in secret extends those very hands
receiving from the priests the price
of Him who had fashioned mankind with His own hands.
And he remained incorrigible,
Judas the slave and the knave.


AS THE SINFUL WOMAN WAS BRINGING HER OFFERING OF MYRRH,
THE DISCIPLE WAS SCHEMING WITH LAWLESS MEN.
SHE REJOICED IN POURING OUT HER PRECIOUS GIFT.
HE HASTENED TO SELL THE PRECIOUS ONE.
SHE RECOGNIZED THE MASTER, BUT JUDAS PARTED FROM HIM.
SHE WAS SET FREE, BUT JUDAS WAS ENSLAVED TO THE ENEMY.
HOW TERRIBLE IS SLOTHFULNESS!
HOW GREAT HER REPENTANCE!
SAVIOR, YOU SUFFERED FOR OUR SAKES://
GRANT US ALSO REPENTANCE, AND SAVE US.

O, THE WRETCHEDNESS OF JUDAS!
HE SAW THE HARLOT KISS THE FOOTSTEPS OF CHRIST,
BUT DECEITFULLY HE CONTEMPLATED THE KISS OF BETRAYAL.
SHE LOOSED HER HAIR WHILE HE BOUND HIMSELF WITH WRATH.
HE OFFERED THE STENCH OF WICKEDNESS INSTEAD OF MYRRH,
FOR ENVY CANNOT DISTINGUISH VALUE.
O, THE WRETCHEDNESS OF JUDAS!//
DELIVER OUR SOULS FROM THIS, O GOD.

BECAUSE OF THE RAISING OF LAZARUS,
LORD AND LOVER OF MANKIND,
THE HEBREW CHILDREN CRIED HOSANNA! TO YOU,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

AT YOUR SUPPER, O CHRIST GOD,
YOU ANNOUNCED TO YOUR DISCIPLES:
ONE OF YOU WILL BETRAY ME.//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

WHEN JOHN ASKED YOU, LORD,
WHO IS IT THAT BETRAYS YOU?
YOU REVEALED WHO IT WAS BY MEANS OF THE MORSEL OF BREAD,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

FOR THIRTY PIECES OF SILVER
AND A TREACHEROUS KISS, O LORD,
THE JEWS SOUGHT TO KILL YOU,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

AT THE WASHING OF THEIR FEET, O CHRIST GOD,
YOU COMMANDED YOUR DISCIPLES:
DO AS YOU HAVE SEEN ME DO.//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

KEEP WATCH AND PRAY,
LEST YOU BE TEMPTED!
YOU SAID TO YOUR DISCIPLES, O OUR GOD,//
BUT JUDAS THE TRANSGRESSOR WAS UNWILLING TO UNDERSTAND.

Perhaps he was just not asked nicely, and didn't receive the proper invitation.

« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 05:47:49 PM by Garuda » Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #884 on: November 22, 2013, 05:51:11 PM »


Someone needed to sell Jesus according to the OT. And without the "betrayal of Judas" you have no crucifixion and no resurrection.

I think Judas knew too much. Smiley


let me guess: a gnostic who considers only the Gospel of Judas canonical?  Smiley
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #885 on: November 22, 2013, 05:54:10 PM »

Someone needed to sell Jesus according to the OT. And without the "betrayal of Judas" you have no crucifixion and no resurrection.

Judas was not indispensable for God's plan of salvation as the Theotokos, for instance, was for the Incarnation. His "role" could have been fulfilled by another or by none at all.  

Perhaps Judas just knew too much. Smiley

Quite the contrary - he knew too little about Christ.

Quote
Perhaps he was just not asked nicely, and didn't receive the proper invitation.

He was treated with all nobility, like a Disciple and an Apostle. Sometimes evil is just gratuitous and comes from "the abundance of the heart".  

You must learn to choose your patron "Saint" with more diligence.  Wink  
Logged
Garuda
Moderated
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



« Reply #886 on: November 22, 2013, 05:54:56 PM »

Quote
let me guess: a gnostic who considers only the Gospel of Judas canonical?  

nope... just a god.
Logged
Trebor135
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 132


« Reply #887 on: April 09, 2014, 02:11:03 PM »

After reading all twenty pages of discussion, I hope to revive this thread and get it back on track now.

Was it Jesus that made your mind up for you? (I mean the issue of Jesus' deity) or was it something else?

I became interested in the Christianity-Islam issue several years ago. One thing that bothered me nearly from the start was how the Qur'an, supposedly a revelation from the omniscient God, completely misunderstands true Christian teachings and slanderously accuses me and my coreligionists of believing a lot of things we deny vehemently:

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/quran_trinity.htm

Have you come across and considered this problem?
Logged

Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #888 on: May 02, 2014, 04:39:31 PM »

After reading all twenty pages of discussion, I hope to revive this thread and get it back on track now.
It's pointless. People would rather instantly gratify their ego than see the importance of staying on topic for someone who really needs to have a proper quality thread that they can refer back to. It would only attract the same people back who are constantly in love with their own words. But thanks for trying so, Allah willing, I will answer your question if you're still about to read it even.

Was it Jesus that made your mind up for you? (I mean the issue of Jesus' deity) or was it something else?

I became interested in the Christianity-Islam issue several years ago. One thing that bothered me nearly from the start was how the Qur'an, supposedly a revelation from the omniscient God, completely misunderstands true Christian teachings and slanderously accuses me and my coreligionists of believing a lot of things we deny vehemently:

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/quran_trinity.htm

Have you come across and considered this problem?

I know, from studying a little of Christianity before I reverted, that other Muslims believe that Christians worship three Gods, which I do try and explain but most don't get that.

With the greatest of respect though, there are so many versions of Christianity, that I'm not sure quite what you're referring to, as the people of the book are not the same now as the people of the book as mentioned in The Qur'an.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2014, 04:40:26 PM by Poppy » Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,651



« Reply #889 on: May 02, 2014, 04:44:12 PM »

You do realize that you are speaking to the Orthodox, right? We existed before, during and after Muhammed and you are saying we aren't the People of the Book? Huh
Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,501



« Reply #890 on: May 02, 2014, 04:48:40 PM »

I'm curious about that comment as well.  Who were the "people of the Book" in the Qur'an that no longer exist now?
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #891 on: May 03, 2014, 04:21:20 PM »

Alpo and Trisagion,

Please realise that in Islam only the scholars are really knowledgeable about these matters. I am here to gather information from you (all) not provide it successfully about Islam.

Having said that, I will ask a mufti and get back to you.

I will answer, but I just have to make sure it is the correct answer and not make a mistake when talking about the words of Allah (azawajal) in the Qur'an.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #892 on: May 03, 2014, 04:22:08 PM »


With the greatest of respect though, there are so many versions of Christianity, that I'm not sure quite what you're referring to, as the people of the book are not the same now as the people of the book as mentioned in The Qur'an.

GREAT! This means you can ask your Muslim friends to stop applying Surah 9:29 to Jews and Christians!

Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Posts: 4,306


« Reply #893 on: May 03, 2014, 04:26:48 PM »

rofl at the Kant tag
« Last Edit: May 03, 2014, 04:27:14 PM by William » Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
Poppy
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Muslim
Jurisdiction: Hanbali fiqh
Posts: 1,030

onlytwatsusetwitter
WWW
« Reply #894 on: May 03, 2014, 04:34:21 PM »

rofl at the Kant tag

Can you please not post off topic comments? It makes it so long to reread this thread and I rli need to have a good thread to read regarding my questions.

Thanks.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #895 on: May 03, 2014, 04:55:08 PM »

Alpo and Trisagion,

Please realise that in Islam only the scholars are really knowledgeable about these matters. I am here to gather information from you (all) not provide it successfully about Islam.

Having said that, I will ask a mufti and get back to you.

I will answer, but I just have to make sure it is the correct answer and not make a mistake when talking about the words of Allah (azawajal) in the Qur'an.

LOL. Define "correct."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,107


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #896 on: May 03, 2014, 05:02:14 PM »

Poppy,

The mufti is going to give a predictable answer.  He will talk about all the different Christian heresies in history, Ebionites, Docetics, Seballianists, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc., and will mention that one or more of them would probably fit the description of "people of the book".  Frankly, it's a very poor argument.  There's divisions in Islam as well considered heretical by your group.  So why use divisions and "heresies" to "disprove" a religion?

Food for thought though.  God is beyond comprehension.  So only He can reveal to us what He is like.  He is complicated as well.  He is not simple to understand.  So don't you think that people who say "God is a very simple one, not a Triune one" are only satisfying their own logical feelings of God, fitting God into man's conception, and not allowing God to reveal Himself to man?  And if God can never have communion with anyone created, how can God even reveal Himself to man?  How did the angel Gabriel know "who God is"?  Is the angel an uncreated creature and Mohamed unable to be as perceptive as Gabriel?  These to me don't make sense.

I hope you receive some clarity in these issues.  But as I delve into the religious divide between Islam and Christianity, there's a lot more issues with Islamic arguments against Christianity that is unfair and makes no sense, and sometimes deceiving.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #897 on: May 03, 2014, 05:25:33 PM »


LOL. Define "correct."

In Islamic context correct means: changing, inconsistent, and biased.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #898 on: May 03, 2014, 05:36:46 PM »

After reading all twenty pages of discussion, I hope to revive this thread and get it back on track now.
It's pointless. People would rather instantly gratify their ego than see the importance of staying on topic for someone who really needs to have a proper quality thread that they can refer back to. It would only attract the same people back who are constantly in love with their own words. But thanks for trying so, Allah willing, I will answer your question if you're still about to read it even.

Was it Jesus that made your mind up for you? (I mean the issue of Jesus' deity) or was it something else?

I became interested in the Christianity-Islam issue several years ago. One thing that bothered me nearly from the start was how the Qur'an, supposedly a revelation from the omniscient God, completely misunderstands true Christian teachings and slanderously accuses me and my coreligionists of believing a lot of things we deny vehemently:

http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/quran_trinity.htm

Have you come across and considered this problem?

I know, from studying a little of Christianity before I reverted, that other Muslims believe that Christians worship three Gods, which I do try and explain but most don't get that.

With the greatest of respect though, there are so many versions of Christianity, that I'm not sure quite what you're referring to, as the people of the book are not the same now as the people of the book as mentioned in The Qur'an.
Which Quran, given all those so many versions of Islam.

and so many versions of the Quran, 7, 10, 14 or more.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,571


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #899 on: May 03, 2014, 06:05:12 PM »

and so many versions of the Quran, 7, 10, 14 or more.

I didn't know that. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Tags: truth philosophy Kant Islam Incarnation immature egotistical idiots 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.231 seconds with 73 queries.