Jump to content

What is the one true faith (or lack thereof)?

killbot1000
 Share

Which is the one true faith (or lack thereof)?  

176 members have voted

  1. 1. Which is the one true faith (or lack thereof)?

    • Atheism
      55
    • Christianity
      47
    • Buddhism
      10
    • Islam
      16
    • Hindu
      5
    • Taoism
      3
    • Shinto
      1
    • Agnosticism
      11
    • Zoroastrianism
      0
    • Scientology
      3
    • Mormonism
      2
    • Sikhism
      1
    • Jainism
      0
    • Judaism
      6
    • Jedi
      16

448 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

consolation
consolation
Posted
Posted
The Quran doesn't have contradictions as far as I know. It's basically a complex book and different situations require different solutions. The Quran mentions these solutions in different chapters and so makes it look like its contradicting. This then brings debate among the Muslims as to what is a general interpretation which can be a lengthy process and one the average person (myself included) is unable to always understand. That’s why when Muslims do not understand something they go to a more knowledgeable person in the Quran.

 

That argument can be used for ANY text or utterance. The Sybils of Delfi used to give vague/contradictory answers; you'd trot off to the priests who interpreted them for you, the interpretation must have come heavily influenced by whatever bee got into the priests bonnet. Sound familiar? It's a really old racket. I wish the human race would just move on from such childishness and accept responsibility for their actions, I'm 100% with Marx on this one.

Mebster
Mebster
Posted
Posted
That argument can be used for ANY text or utterance. The Sybils of Delfi used to give vague/contradictory answers; you'd trot off to the priests who interpreted them for you, the interpretation must have come heavily influenced by whatever bee got into the priests bonnet. Sound familiar? It's a really old racket. I wish the human race would just move on from such childishness and accept responsibility for their actions, I'm 100% with Marx on this one.

Not any text but possibly others.

The bible is different. It says there were X number of people here on this day at this time and then on another passage it says there were Y. And that's worrying.

Show me somewhere where the Qur'an does the same.

wildcat69410
wildcat69410
Posted
Posted
I believe people should think for themselves, I find it really really wierd when obedience is more important than having a brain...If you ask me, thats exactly whats wrong with this world...

 

No, the problem with this world is that people with a brain think themselves to be far too important. What's wrong with humility?

 

Not any text but possibly others.

The bible is different. It says there were X number of people here on this day at this time and then on another passage it says there were Y. And that's worrying.

Show me somewhere where the Qur'an does the same.

 

The reason for miniscule Biblical contradictions as those is simply because the conflicting books were written from different perspectives, at different time periods. When two different perspectives record the same event, contradictions are bound to occur.

Mebster
Mebster
Posted
Posted
No, the problem with this world is that people with a brain think themselves to be far too important. What's wrong with humility?

:)

 

The reason for miniscule Biblical contradictions as those is simply because the conflicting books were written from different perspectives, at different time periods. When two different perspectives record the same event, contradictions are bound to occur.

Whatever happened to "The bible is the inerrant work of God"? Jk.

 

With the upmost respect I find it difficult to understand how Christians follow a book which has so many contradictions in it. It doesn't matter if these are a result of human error because people interpreted it in different ways or a mass misprint because of an infected Mac (ok Macs don't get viruses really - must be a PC). It's the "Holy Bible" isn't it? Where’s the holiness in it if it has contradictions? How can the book that you or I (we all) are supposed to lead our lives by (separately of course) have soooo many errors in it? What do you accept and what do you leave? It doesn't hit me with a lot of confidence and this is why it amazes me (I’m sorry to say this) that people actually convert to Christianity (although most of these people where there more or less anyway). And also which Bible exactly do you then follow as they all differ quite a bit with some missing out entire passages? And why do you follow that? Because it's lighter?

 

It always makes me laugh when I remember a particular episode of the Simpsons.

Hurricane Neddy: A hurricane is approaching Springfield. The residents panic and stack up on supplies for a just in case situation. Ned a devout Christian however is the only calm person. Everyone prepares their homes by boarding up the windows doors. Everyone goes into their hurricane shelter and waits for it all to be over. They all come out pleased that their houses are standing and safe... all except Ned. His house has been complete destroyed. He has no homeowner's insurance (having considered insurance "gambling") and so has lost everything. The church puts him and his family up and he begins to wonder why God has done this to him. That's when he has a one to one with God, "Why me, Lord? Where have I gone wrong? I've always been nice to people. I don't drink or dance or swear. I've even kept Kosher just to be on the safe side. I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff."

 

So true Ned. So true.

wildcat69410
wildcat69410
Posted
Posted
With the upmost respect I find it difficult to understand how Christians follow a book which has so many contradictions in it. It doesn't matter if these are a result of human error because people interpreted it in different ways or a mass misprint because of an infected Mac (ok Macs don't get viruses really - must be a PC). It's the "Holy Bible" isn't it? Where’s the holiness in it if it has contradictions? How can the book that you or I (we all) are supposed to lead our lives by (separately of course) have soooo many errors in it? What do you accept and what do you leave? It doesn't hit me with a lot of confidence and this is why it amazes me (I’m sorry to say this) that people actually convert to Christianity (although most of these people where there more or less anyway). And also which Bible exactly do you then follow as they all differ quite a bit with some missing out entire passages? And why do you follow that? Because it's lighter?

 

I'll start off by defending Christianity, then I'll move on. First off, the errors you mention primarily deal with ones of PERSONAL perspectives. As in Paul's PERSONAL perspective of what he witnessed personally of Jesus Christ's life. As personal testimony can be radically different from someone elses due to a difference in perspective, fallicies are natural to occur. The fact is however, that the message stays the same. The core values of the religion don't change.

 

As for following a specific version, I just stick with the good old KJV or if necessary, NIV. It is true that denominations often alter the bible to support their specific set of Christian beliefs, but that's due to man made alterations, not due to holy errors.

 

Now, moving on, the Qu'ran is not without similar errors. For example, if we look to Sura 22:47,32:25 it states that Allah's day is equal to 1,000 years. However, in Sura 70:4, it states that it is 50,000 years long. This isn't even individual testimony here, this is just a plain contradiction. There are even more. Sura 56:7 mentions three distinct groups of people for judgement. However, 90:18-19, 99:6-8, etc mention only 2. Yet another contradiction, and this one far more important than the length of Allah's day. Islam isn't perfect either...

 

As for examining Christianity versus Islam, they are both similar at certain points, and yet distincly different at others. To try to compare the two is almost a fruitless matter, as nothing can really be proved until the end of days. Even to compare the impacts upon society that each religion has had is fruitless, as both have made incredibly important impacts upon the world. In the end, I respect Islam in the same way I respect Christianity. Not because either one is right or wrong, but because each one holds the value of someone greater than us all.

 

 

Thanks for the laugh, btw. :)

Mebster
Mebster
Posted
Posted
If you ask me, thats kind of an ignorant view to have...
What? Who?

 

Anyway I'll reply a little later.

 

wildcat69410, you need a few jokes in topics such as these. Otherwise we would just have johan's, gwprod12's and killbot1000's seriousness. Once again.....

killbot1000
killbot1000
Posted
  • Author
Posted

What I found ignorant was that wildcat only has respect for a religion if it has a belief in "someone" greater than ourselves. And honestly, many other religions that dont have these ideas have just as much to offer (buddhism for example) To presume that you have all the answers is simply ignorant...

wildcat69410
wildcat69410
Posted
Posted
What I found ignorant was that wildcat only has respect for a religion if it has a belief in "someone" greater than ourselves. And honestly, many other religions that dont have these ideas have just as much to offer (buddhism for example) To presume that you have all the answers is simply ignorant...

 

Religion, if you haven't noticed, isn't adopted because it has "so much to offer". It's adopted because of its beliefs, not its offerings.

 

And how exactly am I ignorant for having respect for a religion that I share a common ideal with? Simply because I don't share an ideal with Buddhism doesn't mean I am ignorant. In the same way, you don't share an ideal with Christianity or Islam, yet are you ignorant? Oh the irony!

killbot1000
killbot1000
Posted
  • Author
Posted
Religion, if you haven't noticed, isn't adopted because it has "so much to offer". It's adopted because of its beliefs, not its offerings.

 

And how exactly am I ignorant for having respect for a religion that I share a common ideal with? Simply because I don't share an ideal with Buddhism doesn't mean I am ignorant. In the same way, you don't share an ideal with Christianity or Islam, yet are you ignorant? Oh the irony!

 

 

its not irony, and its not about respect, I can respect christianity just fine, I just dont agree with it, and religions actually do offer something, otherwise nobody would follow them, they give people something they cant obtain without it, this is precisely the reason people follow one religion or another, actually most of it has to do with geography, if you are born in indonesia, you will probably be muslim, if you are born in sweden youll probably be atheist, if you are born in america, youll probably be christian, it actually has very little to do with choice, even though everybody has it.

 

It just makes me cringe when people respect one thing over another simply because they agree with it...I mean, I can respect many things that im totally opposed to, and its not really an issue, just keep it in mind...

wildcat69410
wildcat69410
Posted
Posted
its not irony, and its not about respect, I can respect christianity just fine, I just dont agree with it, and religions actually do offer something, otherwise nobody would follow them, they give people something they cant obtain without it, this is precisely the reason people follow one religion or another, actually most of it has to do with geography, if you are born in indonesia, you will probably be muslim, if you are born in sweden youll probably be atheist, if you are born in america, youll probably be christian, it actually has very little to do with choice, even though everybody has it.

 

Well, apparently Religion doesn't provide something people can't obtain without it, as there are thousands of Athiests in the World, yourself included, who reportedly live life just fine without it. I'm not trying to sound clicheish here, but the primary opinion felt throughout most religions is, "Ask not what your God can do for you, ask what you can do for your God." Generally speaking, you simply do whatever you can for your God, and whatever you may receive in return, good or bad, is taken as well.

 

It just makes me cringe when people respect one thing over another simply because they agree with it...I mean, I can respect many things that im totally opposed to, and its not really an issue, just keep it in mind...

 

I tend to respect something not simply because it exists, but because of the conclusion that it reaches. When two widely diverse religions as Christianity and Islam come to a conclusion of a being greater than us all, that's something I can seriously respect. For no matter how many differences may come between us as a religion, the fact still remains that we can come to a similar end-game scenario. I have no problem respecting something I disagree with, I disagree with Islam on many levels. However, to say that respecting something that I agree with, solely for that reason, is ignorance, is ignorance in itself. A common relationship of ideals is respectable.

Swad
Swad
Posted
Posted

Wow, ok, I was asked to weigh in on this conversation so I shall.

 

Both sides: my challenge to you is to present actual contradictions. And I mean true, theological/historical contradictions, not just a litany produced by a quick Google search. For example, the Bible says that Judah both hanged himself and fell onto a field where his body splattered. How do we explain this? The Qu'ran states that Allah cannot command evil and yet there are passages (Surah 17:16) which would seem to indicate that those under his command are encouraged to act immorally just so that he can destroy it.

 

Some of these contradictions are straw men... some are not. For example, in 2 places Paul says blessed is he who is/is not married. Contradiction? Nope. He's just showing that both sides present their advantages (assuming that marriage means anything... but that's another discussion...) So make sure what you're pointing out is an actual contradiction.

 

On the whole God/Jesus thing, we've got to work with the view of the Trinity here, whether we like it or not. This is obviously tricky since there's no way to really prove or disprove it - which sounds a lot like what "faith" really is - but an understanding of Jesus is not complete without accepting that he, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are 3 in 1. Mind boggling? Yes. But to argue that Jesus was something else, based on the New Testament, is going to take a lot of theological work on the part of the debater. Christians argue that Jesus by his nature was fully God and fully Man.

 

Finally, translation of the New Testament is unlike translation of Qur'an, where translation of any kind is seriously frowned upon. To truly "read" either, all of us would have to read the original manuscripts in their original tongue, something I know none of us have done. Therefore, translations are our best bet. And, for the record, NIV, KJV, NLT... it doesn't matter - there aren't any theological differences between them. (You do run into a schism between the Protestant bible and the Bible w/ Apocrypha, but even then the message is the same.)

 

With those thoughts... proceed. Good discussion.

Mebster
Mebster
Posted
Posted
Both sides: my challenge to you is to present actual contradictions. And I mean true, theological/historical contradictions, not just a litany produced by a quick Google search. For example, the Bible says that Judah both hanged himself and fell onto a field where his body splattered. How do we explain this? The Qur'an states that Allah cannot command evil and yet there are passages (Surah 17:16) which would seem to indicate that those under his command are encouraged to act immorally just so that he can destroy it.

Thanks for your input Mash. Always Helpful.

 

Ok let's look at the Qur’an quote you made, Surah 17:16. I can only assume you read a translation which might have looked like this:

"If we are to annihilate any community, we let the leaders commit vast corruption therein. Once they deserve retribution, we annihilate it completely". (Qur'an, 17:16)

 

At first glance that may seem like Allah is telling the people to misbehave and then destroying them for doing so but notice the word let does not mean Allah tells them to cause havoc but that Allah waits for them to cause it to an extreme level ("vast corruption") before they are annihilated.

 

I also found this on the internet on some anti-Islam site.

("And when We would destroy a township We send commandment to its folk who live at ease, and afterward they commit abomination therein, and so the Word (of doom) hath effect for it, and we annihilate it with complete annihilation."(Qur'an, 17:16)

 

Notice that Allah sends commands with the intention of destroying the people, not saving them. In other words, Allah has already decided beforehand that he will destroy the town and will do so by sending them commands that they will not perform.)

 

Are these commandments of ones to cause chaos or ones to correct them self? Also when you think of the word commandment (as did the translator), do you not think of the holy 10 commandments?

 

Viewing other translations help clear the message:

"When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly."

 

Yusuf Ali (most popular english translation):

"When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly."

 

Dr. Munir Munshey:

"When We resolve to ruin a town, (and before We actually destroy it), We first order its affluent inhabitants (to obey). They carry on their lives of sin. So the prediction (against them) comes to pass. Thereafter, We finish them off completely."

 

Sher Ali:

"And when WE intend to destroy a township, WE command its people who live in comfort to adopt the way of righteousness but they transgress therein, so the sentence of punishment becomes due against it, so WE destroy it with utter destruction."

 

Shakir:

"And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."

 

Sale:

"And when We resolved to destroy a city, We commanded the inhabitants thereof, who lived in affluence, to obey our Apostle; but they acted corruptly herein: Wherefore the sentence was justly pronounced against that city; and We destroyed it with an utter destruction."

 

Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan:

"And when We decide to destroy a town (population), We (first) send a definite order (to obey Allah and be righteous) to those among them (or We (first) increase in number those of its population) who are given the good things of this life. Then, they transgress therein, and thus the word (of torment) is justified against it (them). Then We destroy it with complete destruction."

 

Rodwell:

"And when we willed to destroy a city, to its affluent ones did we address our bidding; but when they acted criminally therein, just was its doom, and we destroyed it with an utter destruction."

 

So Allah tells the people to do good but they continue to do evil even though they have been given so much in blessings from Allah (wealth, etc). For this reason they are destroyed.

 

In Islam there is a devil. I don't know how it works in Christianity but the Islam version is probably not the same from what I understand it is in Christianity. There is no devil underground waiting for you to enter his hell (or is that not it). Allah controls both heaven and hell and the devils name is Iblis and is a Jinn. He will enter hell too on the day of judgement. He is the one that whispers evil thoughts to tempt people (some don't need the whispers of course) to do evil. Allah only commands good.

 

Will talk about Christianity later.

Mebster
Mebster
Posted
Posted
Just a theological question, Ace, on which I am truly ignorant. So Allah controls heaven and hell? If that's the case, isn't Allah both good and... evil? At that point doesn't he cease being Allah?

Mash you're questions are always welcome but in this case I’m not sure I’m fully understanding what it is and so rather than answering what I think you're asking would you please rephrase it for me.

 

Much appreciated.

________________________________________________________________

locuras, I’m sorry to hear that dude. I really am. But make some use of this time and read the Qur’an and then go to your wife and tell her about it and then she will be like WOW and you two will live happily ever after. (Inshallah – I hope)

(EDIT: OR "WOW you've joined Al-Qaeda in Alaska.... this is exactly what my lawers needed to hear!"

 

I really am sorry to hear that. But know that it’ll get easier with time. Just take it one day at a time. Talk to the community if you need to. Might help. We’re here dude. All the best.

gwprod12
gwprod12
Posted
Posted

I think what Mash may be referring to is the "God is everything" + "God is pure good" paradox

 

If God is pure good, why, since he is all-powerful, does he allow bad to exist?

 

EDIT: One explanation I've heard is that God wants Satan to exist in order to prove that God is pure good. Which doesnt make sense, since good shouldnt want to allow evil free reign. It's circular logic.

 

Obviously this doesnt directly correlate to Islam, but I think you can see the direction I'm going.

killbot1000
killbot1000
Posted
  • Author
Posted

The whole good/evil theme is a common mythological theme from the middle east, all of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again. Ever wonder why all the abrahamic religions came out of the middle east? When the place where you live is a desert, the written word becomes holy rather than the nature around you, its common, its been done, its old. The religion that everybody forgets is Zorroastrianism, but this religion dominated the middle east in mesopotamian times, and it basically has the same {censored} as christianity/Islam/and Judaism. Most people would shrug Zorroastrianism off as not real, or a superstition, why shouldnt anybody do the same for Islam, Christianity, and Judaism?

anandbatra
anandbatra
Posted
Posted

mmm.. I don't think it's correct to include Hinduism in the poll. Hinduism isn't a religion; it's more a way of life.

 

That's why a person from Punjab and Kerala are both termed as hindus when:

 

1. They speak different languages(They won't understand each other's languages)

2. They pray to different gods

3. They have different customs and traditions

4. They don't look the same

5. They celebrate different festivals

 

But, still, both of them are classified as Hindus. So, I guess, it's not a religion. You can marry any person from any faith, pray to any god of any religion, not follow any customs, ridicule your own gods and much more. Still you'll be classified as a Hindu. There are certain sects which believe in idol worship, and some which condemn idol worship. It's not a religion, but a way of life. I guess that's why religions like Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism have their roots in India. :)

 

As far as the one true faith is concerned, I think it is Zoroastrianism. Parsis are the coolest ppl I've ever met with!

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...