Moontanman Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 it is not necessary you do bad things to people, for instance imagine that you traveled to an Islamic country where there are those people who think they serve God by killing unbelievers they consider you as an enemy whether for your religion or your country's policy. also a person may consider you as an enemy because he or she is jealous of you since you won a competition , etc. These things may be true but are they legitimate reasons for harming other human beings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yahya515 Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 These things may be true but are they legitimate reasons for harming other human beings? They are not, as a Quranist I believe only in Qur'an rejecting all other books that states that you should fight unbelievers and kill them. and other bad things. Qur'an is clear, Qrur'an chapter 2 verse 190 " Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors." fight in the way of Allah means Jihad, those who fight you , those who start fighting you and not those who are peaceful , do not transgress do not start attacking those who are peaceful unless they attack you.nobody should punish anyone for he is unbeliever or for his sins I think this is something God does. I remember a verse in the Bible when the Jewish brought an adulterer woman to Jesus and asked him that how do you think she should be punished he said( nobody is empty of sins) and it is true , however in Islam an adulterer should be punished not because he is sinful( as nobody is empty of sins) but because adultery is a kind of crime like stealing , it is a betrayal . other verse is ".....So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him." also " ......and expel them from wherever they have expelled you" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robittybob1 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 They are not, as a Quranist I believe only in Qur'an rejecting all other books that states that you should fight unbelievers and kill them. and other bad things. Qur'an is clear, Qrur'an chapter 2 verse 190 " Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors." fight in the way of Allah means Jihad, those who fight you , those who start fighting you and not those who are peaceful , do not transgress do not start attacking those who are peaceful unless they attack you. nobody should punish anyone for he is unbeliever or for his sins I think this is something God does. I remember a verse in the Bible when the Jewish brought an adulterer woman to Jesus and asked him that how do you think she should be punished he said( nobody is empty of sins) and it is true , however in Islam an adulterer should be punished not because he is sinful( as nobody is empty of sins) but because adultery is a kind of crime like stealing , it is a betrayal . other verse is ".....So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear Allah and know that Allah is with those who fear Him." also " ......and expel them from wherever they have expelled you" What do you think of ISIS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Who's intention was that? Those that wrote the bible. This was reaffirmed at the First Council of Nicaea. However, there is no evidence that the factual bais of the bible itself were discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yahya515 Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 What do you think of ISIS? it is difficult to develope a specific opinion about ISIS because they mix politics with religion , according to real Islam they are wrong , they have the same Sunni's principles of killing unbelievers . according to politics they may be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robittybob1 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Those that wrote the bible. This was reaffirmed at the First Council of Nicaea. However, there is no evidence that the factual bais of the bible itself were discussed. There are a lot of misconceptions about the First Council of Nicea. Isn't that one of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 There are a lot of misconceptions about the First Council of Nicea. Isn't that one of them? I think that the issue of Jesus as the son of God and this relation to the God the Farther etc was discussed. What, as far as I know, and I am not an expert of this, setting what is canon in the bible was not formally discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
recursion Posted January 4, 2015 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) I am at a loss as to how you could hope to get a proper answer to your questions? The same with your 'mistakes in the bible' thread. If you take the bible as the truth then he was real, the son of God and the Christ. If you do not believe the bible then you can draw other conclusions. If you believe the Quran then he was whatever that tells you he was. None of this is testable in any way and so you can debate for ever with different people. Actually, some of it is logical from a non-group perspective (or a non-group mentality). If Jesus Christ was the living truth, then a being which represents objective truth perfectly would be Jesus Christ. There is a bit of necessity to traverse through the details of truth, which science has significantly ignored (truth in its essence -- what it is, where it comes from, and how we know). However, without that traversal, in order to maintain poignancy and brevity, such a being, representing universal, objective truth, inherent to existence itself as well as the layers of complex manifest reality (temporal reality -- without eternal concepts like sentience and truthiness), could very well be considered the son of God, the living manifestation of God's word (were the word of God to be equivalent to communication of what is true -- a truly internal communication as we must comprehend to understand, not hear and respond). Edited January 4, 2015 by recursion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenBrace Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 He is neither. He was an ordinary man like Muhammad or the Buddha that had a unique message and inspired people. He started a following and was executed for disturbing the peace. His followers viewed him as a martyr and kept the new belief system going. It became an established religion during the time of emperor Constantine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GPS Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) I can only speak for what I was raised to know and that was Christianity, subtype-Lutheran, where Jesus is equated to Christ who is also the son of the father. As it goes, God so loved the world that he sent his only son...a Christ or Messiah to save it by sacrificing himself on the cross. Later the holy spirit came along. It is related to something Christians refer to as the holy trinity-- God the father, the son (Jesus Christ), and the holy spirit. I don't understand it, but the best explanation I have come across is from Dante's Paradiso Canto XXXIII: 115-123 where he see's his final vision, which is of the holy trinity: In the profound and shining-clear Existence Of the deep Light appeared to me three circles Of one dimension and three different colors. One seemed to be reflected by the other, Rainbow by rainbow, while the third seemed fire Breathed equally from one and from the other. O how pale now is language and how paltry For my conception! And for what I saw My words are not enough to call them meager. Note: This is just one religious beleif and is not evidence. Edited May 30, 2015 by GPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky12 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Jesus for me was just a very good man.Similar to what the Dalai Lama is to people today.The son of God I believe was a name given to him by people living at the time.Hence if he was truly the son of God why are there so many religions.For me religion is man made but ultimately taps in scientific proof as well eg energy.The better energy one is the better one flourishes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now