Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
Other religious discourse
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:Muriel, I've spent so much time today thinking about the archbishop of Canterbury in the context of my own spiritual experience. While searching my mind and spirit, his words came over and over.
And as the day closed it dawned on me that till the moment, I had a dearth of pure thought. 'What's a pure thought?' I wondered. After some reflection I saw that a pure thought is one that is totally selfless, and loving. A kind of thought that involves transcending day to day relationships and reality. A kind of thought that's of 'God'. Thoughts of the true Self.
It's interesting that though no man has seen God with his physical eye, seeing the true Self with the spiritual eye one can see 'God' so clearly.
'Indwelling' was the word that came to my head upon these thoughts. And thus was the archbishop's puzzle resolved. He was thinking about the mystical using religious symbols and his socio-political role. He wasn't having the thoughts of the true Self. He was careful and experiencing things around his social status and context. And his context is full of doubt. Sorry brother, I was engaged elsewhere. Pure thought has no trace of self. I still do not understand how there then be a 'true self'. I also still do not understand how there can be 'spiritual life'. Does it have emotions, senses, thoughts? Hence I also think the archbishop is no archbishop in more ways than this one of 'doubts'. Also, as far as I can tell, I have not noticed another me, the spiritual me, I am just one indivisible entity. One body, one mind, one thought, one feeling, one emotions. One Soul.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA. JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA. GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel, I've spent so much time today thinking about the archbishop of Canterbury in the context of my own spiritual experience. While searching my mind and spirit, his words came over and over.
And as the day closed it dawned on me that till the moment, I had a dearth of pure thought. 'What's a pure thought?' I wondered. After some reflection I saw that a pure thought is one that is totally selfless, and loving. A kind of thought that involves transcending day to day relationships and reality. A kind of thought that's of 'God'. Thoughts of the true Self.
It's interesting that though no man has seen God with his physical eye, seeing the true Self with the spiritual eye one can see 'God' so clearly.
'Indwelling' was the word that came to my head upon these thoughts. And thus was the archbishop's puzzle resolved. He was thinking about the mystical using religious symbols and his socio-political role. He wasn't having the thoughts of the true Self. He was careful and experiencing things around his social status and context. And his context is full of doubt. Sorry brother, I was engaged elsewhere. Pure thought has no trace of self. I still do not understand how there then be a 'true self'. I also still do not understand how there can be 'spiritual life'. Does it have emotions, senses, thoughts? Hence I also think the archbishop is no archbishop in more ways than this one of 'doubts'. Also, as far as I can tell, I have not noticed another me, the spiritual me, I am just one indivisible entity. One body, one mind, one thought, one feeling, one emotions. One Soul. Which body do you have?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA. JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA. GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me. You will stay in the Qur'an! You muslim! There is no difference in my questions. They are the same question! One question! So Allah did not ransom the boy - despite the verse 37:107 We ransomed him with a great sacrifice - yet Allah according to you said those very words. Allah has schizophrenia?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel, I've spent so much time today thinking about the archbishop of Canterbury in the context of my own spiritual experience. While searching my mind and spirit, his words came over and over.
And as the day closed it dawned on me that till the moment, I had a dearth of pure thought. 'What's a pure thought?' I wondered. After some reflection I saw that a pure thought is one that is totally selfless, and loving. A kind of thought that involves transcending day to day relationships and reality. A kind of thought that's of 'God'. Thoughts of the true Self.
It's interesting that though no man has seen God with his physical eye, seeing the true Self with the spiritual eye one can see 'God' so clearly.
'Indwelling' was the word that came to my head upon these thoughts. And thus was the archbishop's puzzle resolved. He was thinking about the mystical using religious symbols and his socio-political role. He wasn't having the thoughts of the true Self. He was careful and experiencing things around his social status and context. And his context is full of doubt. Sorry brother, I was engaged elsewhere. Pure thought has no trace of self. I still do not understand how there then be a 'true self'. I also still do not understand how there can be 'spiritual life'. Does it have emotions, senses, thoughts? Hence I also think the archbishop is no archbishop in more ways than this one of 'doubts'. Also, as far as I can tell, I have not noticed another me, the spiritual me, I am just one indivisible entity. One body, one mind, one thought, one feeling, one emotions. One Soul. Which body do you have? I do not understand. Which body? Are you implying 'body' has options?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel, I've spent so much time today thinking about the archbishop of Canterbury in the context of my own spiritual experience. While searching my mind and spirit, his words came over and over.
And as the day closed it dawned on me that till the moment, I had a dearth of pure thought. 'What's a pure thought?' I wondered. After some reflection I saw that a pure thought is one that is totally selfless, and loving. A kind of thought that involves transcending day to day relationships and reality. A kind of thought that's of 'God'. Thoughts of the true Self.
It's interesting that though no man has seen God with his physical eye, seeing the true Self with the spiritual eye one can see 'God' so clearly.
'Indwelling' was the word that came to my head upon these thoughts. And thus was the archbishop's puzzle resolved. He was thinking about the mystical using religious symbols and his socio-political role. He wasn't having the thoughts of the true Self. He was careful and experiencing things around his social status and context. And his context is full of doubt. Sorry brother, I was engaged elsewhere. Pure thought has no trace of self. I still do not understand how there then be a 'true self'. I also still do not understand how there can be 'spiritual life'. Does it have emotions, senses, thoughts? Hence I also think the archbishop is no archbishop in more ways than this one of 'doubts'. Also, as far as I can tell, I have not noticed another me, the spiritual me, I am just one indivisible entity. One body, one mind, one thought, one feeling, one emotions. One Soul. Which body do you have? I do not understand. Which body? Are you implying 'body' has options? Are you saying there's only one body?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:
Are you saying there's only one body?
Why not?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA.
JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA.GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me. Prove it.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA. JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA. GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me. You will stay in the Qur'an! You muslim! There is no difference in my questions. They are the same question! One question! So Allah did not ransom the boy - despite the verse 37:107 We ransomed him with a great sacrifice - yet Allah according to you said those very words. Allah has schizophrenia? @muriel you are the one with " dementia". You seem to have challenges of memory loss.
|
|
|
Rank: User Joined: 8/15/2013 Posts: 13,237 Location: Vacuum
|
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
symbols wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA.
JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA.GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me. Prove it. @symbols google is your friend, search "nicaea council 325". It is the Catholic Church which led in the major changes in the scriptures. It was during the rein of Roman Empire when Constantine The Great and his people convened people at what was popularly known as Nicaea Creed. They brought in many changes, which no prophet of God preached before.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/20/2008 Posts: 6,275 Location: Kenya
|
@muriel, by now you should begin to get the picture. Do going to heaven require somebody to die? Does God say " Someone has to die in order for you to get saved?" Does God say " I come down and became man, and die in order for me to forgive you"?  Simply stated: it means that if you repent God will forgive you. If God forgives you, there is no need of any sacrifice. I read somewhere where Jesus (pbuh) taught saying in Matt 9:12-13: " Go and learn what this means: I will have mercy not sacrifice, I am come to call sinners to repentance" Remember every time Jesus (pbuh) used to remind people that " it is written in the scripture", which in my understanding referred to the old testament. And one of this comes from Hosea 6:6, where Hosea tells people that God is telling them: " For I desired mercy and NOT sacrifice: and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Again we are seeing here that God is saying that He is Most Merciful, ready to forgive any and all sins. And that in order forgive, God does not need sacrifice. This is the knowledge that God wants you to know. All the other verses people try to use to justify require you to really strain the words and stretch their meaning to arrive at any notion of killing somebody to get salvation. So what baffles me is why would God require Jesus to sacrifice himself? Is this not a contradiction, among the many biblical contradictions?Please again, no offence. I'm just seeking rational dialogue from those who would like to explain this to me. God does not need sacrifice. It is very explicit. There are no two ways about it. It is very clear, decisive and to the point.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/19/2013 Posts: 2,552
|
AlphDoti wrote:symbols wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:AlphDoti wrote:Muriel wrote:Alphdoti
With me you will stay in the quran. I will afford you no diversions.
If the teaching that allah can ransom someone is unislamic then who put that particular teaching in the quran that Allah 'ransomed' someone?
At least that is an easy question that you can answer. Can you answer it? @muriel you are now going round in cycles. Post #104 I already told "who". Those words were said by God Almighty. Post #106 All the answers since you asked this question are there. Print them and read. Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #114 I have told you many times that this idea of atonement, just drop it, it is not Islamic teaching. It is the most none-sensible idea in the world! Post #115 There is no atonement. No one dies for your sins. You carry your own sins. And you get your own rewards from good work. Quote:
And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice
If they were said by Allah, do you believe it that Allah can ransom someone? @muriel, your question is constructed wrongly. Just like the brain teaser of the sh50+sh50=sh100 borrowed from two individuals... I already responded to this. Nobody was to be forgiven by the sacrifice of a son. This was just a test, it was a trial, by Almighty God to Abraham (pbuh). That's why Allah said "thou hast already fulfilled thy vision". This was not to kill anyone. This was not to wipe anybody's sins. It was just testing Abraham's willingness to the work of Allah (Almighty God). Post #109 Ransom means substitutePost #711Post #776 Bla bla bla kupiga tu domo. You have not responded to anything. So what if nobody was to be forgiven? So what if it was just a test? So what if it was a trial? So what no one was to be killed? So what if it was not to wipe anybody's sins? So what if it was testing Abraham's willingness? Allah speaks in the past tense as in he has already done the deed of ransoming. - "We ransomed him". My questions are - do you believe that Allah 'ransomed' the boy? Consequently, do you believe Allah can 'ransom' anyone? SO what is the difference between this question and what you asked before that? You have a deeper problem. There is no atonement my brother. That was the idea of Roman Empire, led by Constantine the Great in the year 325, during the Nicea Council. NO PROPHET OF GOD TAUGHT THAT IDEA.
JESUS (pbuh) NEVER TAUGHT THAT IDEA.GOOGLE: " Nicea Council" and see if the answer there is different from mine. Because you don't believe me. Prove it. @symbols google is your friend, search "nicaea council 325". It is the Catholic Church which led in the major changes in the scriptures. It was during the rein of Roman Empire when Constantine The Great and his people convened people at what was popularly known as Nicaea Creed. They brought in many changes, which no prophet of God preached before. I found this.You can use google to try and dispute what he's saying or you can show what the previous prophets and Jesus said versus what is being said now.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
AlphDoti wrote:@muriel, by now you should begin to get the picture. Do going to heaven require somebody to die? Does God say " Someone has to die in order for you to get saved?" Does God say " I come down and became man, and die in order for me to forgive you"? Simply stated: it means that if you repent God will forgive you. If God forgives you, there is no need of any sacrifice. I read somewhere where Jesus (pbuh) taught saying in Matt 9:12-13: " Go and learn what this means: I will have mercy not sacrifice, I am come to call sinners to repentance" Remember every time Jesus (pbuh) used to remind people that " it is written in the scripture", which in my understanding referred to the old testament. And one of this comes from Hosea 6:6, where Hosea tells people that God is telling them: " For I desired mercy and NOT sacrifice: and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Again we are seeing here that God is saying that He is Most Merciful, ready to forgive any and all sins. And that in order forgive, God does not need sacrifice. This is the knowledge that God wants you to know. All the other verses people try to use to justify require you to really strain the words and stretch their meaning to arrive at any notion of killing somebody to get salvation. So what baffles me is why would God require Jesus to sacrifice himself? Is this not a contradiction, among the many biblical contradictions?Please again, no offence. I'm just seeking rational dialogue from those who would like to explain this to me. God does not need sacrifice. It is very explicit. There are no two ways about it. It is very clear, decisive and to the point. Alphdoti, A picture formed in my mind a long long long time ago. A picture of how lazy you are to answer questions. And how bankrupt you are of articulation. And how you do not read the Qurán. And how you know nothing of the Qur'an. And how apostate you are in disbelieving allah. After you have finished talking to yourself about irrelevant things, like a madman sokoni, please acknowledge to me whether or not you believe that Allah, who said that they ransomed a boy, actually did ransom the boy. Hiyo tu. Other discussions, or 'rational dialogue' you purport to want you are absolutely free to have them with someone else, not me, not now.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 9/21/2007 Posts: 326
|
this thread has left me thoroughly disappointed, I cant understand why a simple question cannot get a simple answer but instead long winded commentary. there certainly is more than meet the eye in here. may the thread bbuh,saw. Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 3/2/2007 Posts: 8,776 Location: Cameroon
|
Mo wrote:this thread has left me thoroughly disappointed, I cant understand why a simple question cannot get a simple answer but instead long winded commentary. there certainly is more than meet the eye in here. may the thread bbuh,saw. There is a certain religion I realized, has to be defended coz it makes no sense at all. acres and acres of explanations that leave you even more disillusioned  I stopped reading those long boring posts. TULIA.........UFUNZWE!
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
Other religious discourse
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|