Correcting misconceptions

[tariki]

Hello again @toty

You appear unwilling to enter into any genuine debate. 

So I will depart from this thread. 

All the best

 

 

 

 

[PaulS]

13 hours ago, toty said:

Scripture is clear that Hell is a real, dreadful place of eternal torment
It is only fair that God punishes the wicked.

This is a classic example of how Christianity and Islam alike need to de-humanise others to believe the dogma they have been taught.  Calling our loved family and friends, who might not believe the same religious stories as others, does simply not make them 'wicked'. But of course, if we start thinking of love and forgiveness, then that doesn't fit the religious narrative and threat of eternal punishment.

13 hours ago, toty said:

The notion of the immortality of the soul (without an accompanying body) is of gentile origin, not Jewish. Daniel 12:1-2 speaks to the issue: (1) .” . . but at that time your people shall be delivered, every one whose name shall be found written in the book. (2) And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” The point here is that both the wicked and the righteous will be reunited with their bodies in resurrection and as such (i.e., as whole persons, body and soul) will either go to heaven or hell.

I thought the name of this thread was 'correcting misconceptions'?  You certainly don't seem to understand early references to Sheol as a permanent place for the dead (no resurrection).  The notion you are providing developed later on, as did even later the Christian idea of hell. Their simply is no single, consistent presentation of the eternity of a soul within the bible. You are suffering from dogma - not understanding.

 

[romansh]

On 8/7/2024 at 10:03 AM, toty said:

see here
You will be shocked

Yes I am shocked ... that some people think this is in anyway meaningful.

The science of the real world is astonishing. And some people want to embellish it with Naik's Qur'anic lies. There are really good science books out there. The Qur'an is not one.

For the record and passers-by:

@toty:

• Exhibits troll-like behaviours
• Pastes similar spam all over the internet with pseudonyms like @akay
• Does not engage with people or discussion
• When it comes to science he is illiterate
• Is philosophically naïve
• Loves Zakir Naik and the Qur'an. They are his golden idols
• toty is a liar, lies by omission, and accuses people of being mercenaries of the church without justification

While this is not toty's fault as such, after all, he is a product of his environment. If anyone doubts what I have written, I welcome people to peruse toty's posts to confirm what I have written.

[toty]

As I mentioned before, I answer from the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran.

 

 

. The Bible Says that Jesus Recognized, Prayed, & Worshipped the Only True God

Jesus prayed to God with the words:

John 17:3 “…that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”

Jesus prayed to God all night:

Luke 6:12 “he continued all night in prayer to God.”

…because:

Matthew 20:28: Just as the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve.

How did Jesus pray to God?

Matthew 26:39 ‘…he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father…”

Even Paul said:

Hebrews 5:7 “During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.”

Who was Jesus praying to when he fell on his face with loud cries and petitions? Was it himself? Was Jesus crying in tears to himself pleading to be saved from death? No man, sane or insane, prays to himself! Surely the answer must be a resounding ‘No.’ Jesus was praying to “the only true God.” Jesus was the servant of the One Who sent him. Can there be a clearer proof that Jesus was not God?

The Quran confirms that Jesus called for the worship of the Only True God:

“Truly, God is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him (alone). This is the straight path.” (Quran 3:51

 

https://www.facebook.com/100059866625821/videos/1377908373104887

https://www.facebook.com/100059866625821/videos/316951581162029

[PaulS]

14 hours ago, toty said:

Who was Jesus praying to when he fell on his face with loud cries and petitions? Was it himself? Was Jesus crying in tears to himself pleading to be saved from death? No man, sane or insane, prays to himself! Surely the answer must be a resounding ‘No.’ Jesus was praying to “the only true God.” Jesus was the servant of the One Who sent him. Can there be a clearer proof that Jesus was not God?

The concept of the 'Trinity', or Jesus being a special part of God, was a later development after the collection of writings that even later became the bible. It became part of the 'dogma' of Christianity.

 

[PaulS]

Seems the pain is set to continue for young girls unfortunate enough to be born into Taliban-dominated, Muslim, Iraq.  Iraq Muslims, who belong to the dominant Sunni sect of Islam, look likely to soon be subjected to marriage laws dating back to the day of Mohammad! 

"...conservative politicians in Iraq are trying to lower the legal marriage age to nine. The justice ministry introduced a bill to parliament that passed its first reading last Sunday. The bill amends the law to allow people to choose between the religious authorities or the civil judiciary for decisions on family affairs. If passed, it would allow girls to wed at nine and boys at 15. The move prompted protests in Baghdad and other cities as well as international outrage on social media. Women’s rights activists said it would legalise child rape."

 

[tariki]

Well, I might be wrong, but it seems that our friend toty has been silenced! Safe now to creep back onto the thread and have the final word in peace!

At one point in our "dialogue" with toty I sought to speak of the difference between what I would see as the Word as spirit, and the Word as letter. It fell on deaf ears. 

Sadly, the Word as "letter" - since the Reformation, the printing press, and mass literacy - has dominated religious thought, at least for the majority. Even those opposed to Religion in general usually attack literalist interpretations of scripture. 

But here is Karen Armstrong on the subject:-

There is much to be learned from older ways of thinking about religion. We have seen that far from regarding revelation as static, fixed and unchanging, Jews, Christians and Muslims all knew that revealed truth was symbolic, that scripture could not be interpreted literally, and that sacred texts had multiple meaning and could lead to entirely fresh insights. Revelation was not an event that had happened once in the distant past, but was an ongoing, creative process that required human ingenuity. They understood that revelation did not provide us with infallible information about the divine, because this would always remain beyond our ken.

That is it really. There is the word, a word, and there is Reality itself, a point also emphasised by Alan Watts:-

What we have forgotten is that thoughts and words are conventions, and that it is fatal to take conventions too seriously. A convention is a social convenience, as, for example, money, but it is absurd to take money too seriously, to confuse it with real wealth. In somewhat the same way, thoughts, ideas and words are "coins" for real things.

 "Real things" have empathy, wisdom; they are a constant novelty. We must try to get in touch with Reality.

PS. Oh dear! It seems that our friend has made a comeback, his entries in red! 

😀

 

Edited August 16 by tariki

[PaulS]

13 hours ago, tariki said:

PS. Oh dear! It seems that our friend has made a comeback, his entries in red! 

@totyhas been warned numerous times about posting large swathes of cut and paste sermons, and for not engaging in discussion/addressing points or questions raised by others.

A notable difference with this forum compared to many other religious-related forums, is that alternate views are welcomed and debate/discussion embraced. But the reciprocity expected is that members will abide by the guidelines.

No action has been taken against @toty other than their posts will continue to be moderated or hidden if they can’t respect what they signed up for when joining here.

[tariki]

7 hours ago, PaulS said:

@totyhas been warned numerous times about posting large swathes of cut and paste sermons, and for not engaging in discussion/addressing points or questions raised by others.

A notable difference with this forum compared to many other religious-related forums, is that alternate views are welcomed and debate/discussion embraced. But the reciprocity expected is that members will abide by the guidelines.

No action has been taken against @toty other than their posts will continue to be moderated or hidden if they can’t respect what they signed up for when joining here.

Hi Paul, thanks for the clarification.

[PaulS]

1 hour ago, tariki said:

Hi Paul, thanks for the clarification.

Do his posts appear as 'Hidden' with an explanation at the top? Just wondering how it appears to other users.

[tariki]

54 minutes ago, PaulS said:

Do his posts appear as 'Hidden' with an explanation at the top? Just wondering how it appears to other users.

When I sign in they appear in a light red colour with your explanation on top. If I have not signed in they do not appear at all.

[PaulS]

4 hours ago, tariki said:

When I sign in they appear in a light red colour with your explanation on top. If I have not signed in they do not appear at all.

Can you still read the entire post?  Maybe it’s a Moderator thing - you’re still listed as such.

[tariki]

1 hour ago, PaulS said:

Can you still read the entire post?  Maybe it’s a Moderator thing - you’re still listed as such.

Yes, the whole post is there in red, but no videos. But nothing at all if I am not signed in. 

 

Oh yes,I remember, I was moderator of the "Other Wisdom Traditions" section. 

😀

[PaulS]

What about you @romansh? Can you see any part of the posts I have put on ‘Hide’?

[romansh]

1 hour ago, PaulS said:

What about you @romansh? Can you see any part of the posts I have put on ‘Hide’?

I am not sure how I would see hidden parts? So I suppose the answer might be "No."

[PaulS]

2 hours ago, romansh said:

I am not sure how I would see hidden parts? So I suppose the answer might be "No."

When hiding a post, the program ask me to provide a reason, which I thought might display to all users (as it does in red to Moderators) - see below.  Otherwise there doesn't seem to be any recognition that a post was hidden. 

 

[toty]

The best evidence that the gospels and Acts of the Apostles are mere works of fiction is scientific or historical or literary evidence,

We can even establish by literary analysis that the original New Testament gospel was a work of fiction. Rhoads, Dewey and Michie point out, in Mark as Story that the narrator would need to have had unlimited omniscience to know everything he wrote. They say:

The composer of this story has used sophisticated storytelling techniques, developed the characters and the conflicts, and built suspense with deliberateness, telling the story to generate certain insights and responses in the audience.

Literary evidence can also be used to demonstrate that the Acts of the Apostles is a work of fiction. For example, in An Introduction to the New Testament, Raymond E. Brown points to several problematic issues:

In his undisputed letters Paul gives us no information about the first missionary journey.

doubt has been raised about the Apollos episode at Ephesus as Lucan theologising

Since there is no confirmation in the undisputed (or even the pseudonymous) Pauline letters of the appeal to Caesar and the journey to Rome, some who challenge the historicity of Acts dismiss the account of Paul's hazardous sea journey in Acts 27:1-28:14 as novelistic fiction.

[tariki]

An open letter to @toty as he has now posted again, and I assume the post will soon disappear into cyberspace or convert into pale red for the eyes of moderators only!

Really, mate, you are as good as wasting your time here. This is a Progressive Christian site - no one here as far as I know takes the words of the New Testament as being inerrant, or literally. Christianity, where it still lives and breathes, looks more towards the "Universal Christ", and the support for such a Reality is not found by pouring over old texts, however previously venerated.

Theology has moved on, it really has. 

But if you do still wish to "search the scriptures daily" (for in them they think they have life) - either to support them (Quran) or refute them (New Testament) - then at least pay attention to the way to do this according to the Catholic Church, as far as the Christian scriptures are concerned:-

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2)

Alas, your own nit-picking falls far short of this, and is itself the work of a literalist who appears to have missed the true spirit of either Faith or Religion. 

(And just to add, if I wished myself to have a label around my neck, it would be "Pure Land Buddhist")

But no matter. All the best. But you really need to actually enter into the actual intent and spirit of this Forum - otherwise just hang up your typing finger and retire gracefully. 

[toty]

no one here as far as I know takes the words of the New Testament as being inerrant, or literally.

This is what I mean

The book of God never changes, and no one is allowed to add or delete from it,
the New Testament was not written on paper until 300 years after Christ

And according to the words of Christian scholars

 the Bible is not the true words of God now

There were no manuscripts until the beginning of the second century

manuscripts was the size of a small card

How do we care about a book that has no origin?

Even today's manuscripts are of dubious authenticity, and each manuscript is not identical to the other

Christ spoke the Aramaic language

However, you will not find the original source of the Bible as a reference for Christians in the Aramaic language, but only translations in different languages such as Greek and other languages. You do not have a reliable and original source to correct the mistakes of the writers and the incorrect translation.

The Bible was not recorded directly
But
After 300 years after the Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him

Bible verses are written down

Without trustworthy witnesses

Because they were not present at the time of Jesus, peace be upon him

Even the Old Testament was written down

One thousand years after the death of the Prophet moses peace be upon him

Jesus did not write the bible that was revealed by God. Not even was it written immediately after his departure. He did not order or desire at any time in his life to write anything on his behalf. Therefore, the Bible which is in circulation today is not a representation of Jesus' teachings.

Out of the total of 27 Books of the New Testament, more than half is authored by Paul. As opposed to Paul, the Master has not written a single word of the twenty-seven books. If you can lay your hands on what is called "'A Red Letter Bible," you will find every word alleged to have been uttered by Jesus - in red ink and the rest in normal black ink. Don't be shocked to find that in this so called Gospel of Jesus, over ninety percent of the 27 Books of the New Testament is printed in black ink!

None of the original manuscripts have survived from the early Christian period. The most ancient complete manuscripts (Vatican MS. No. 1209 and the Sinaitic Syriac Codex) date from the fourth century, three hundred years after Jesus’ ministry.  But the originals?  Lost.  And the copies of the originals?  Also lost.  Our most ancient manuscripts, in other words, are copies of the copies of the copies of nobody-knows-just-how-many copies of the originals.
No wonder they differ

 

[tariki]

@toty, in your last post you simply compare the Biblical text and its origins (as you understand it) with how you believe the Quran originated (called into question by modern scholarship) You fail to actually address the fundamental points made in my own posts. 

Rather sad. Rather pointless.

[tariki]

2 hours ago, toty said:

no one here as far as I know takes the words of the New Testament as being inerrant, or literally.

 

This is what I mean

 

Take the above. You ignore my own:-

 

"Christianity, where it still lives and breathes, looks more towards the "Universal Christ", and the support for such a Reality is not found by pouring over old texts, however previously venerated.

Theology has moved on, it really has."

 

 You ignore it, ignore the implication that those of the spirit are NOT seeking for some "inerrant" and "infallible" text. 

Truth is found elsewhere. Your own unstated pushing of the Quran (which you consider to be all the things the Bible is not) is simply irrelevant in this context. 

 

[tariki]

3 hours ago, toty said:

 

Will your salvation from hell and entry into heaven depend on a false belief, or is it better to compare religions and search for the true religion?

Once again, you fail to engage in genuine debate. 

 

Myself, I have for 50 or so years "compared" religions. In simple words, my "salvation" rests in the very nature of Reality itself. Such Reality is the causal basis     of any genuine "salvation". NOT belief in and allegiance to any particular book and then seeking to fulfil what are considered to be its demands, thus passing some sort of test set by some transcendent Being. Thus "faith" and "belief" are polar opposites. Faith trusts in the very nature of Reality, those of a particular belief trust in their "works'. As you do. Good luck, you will need it!

 

We are simply not on the same page!

Edited August 18 by tariki

[romansh]

4 hours ago, toty said:

However, you will not find the original source

You will not find the original source of the Qur'an either. Those sound waves have long gone.

[romansh]

4 hours ago, toty said:

no one here as far as I know takes the words of the New Testament as being inerrant, or literally.

 

This is what I mean

So why do you keep repeating yourself?

[romansh]

17 hours ago, PaulS said:

When hiding a post, the program ask me to provide a reason, which I thought might display to all users (as it does in red to Moderators) - see below.  Otherwise there doesn't seem to be any recognition that a post was hidden. 

 

On another forum (football) they use the same platform as this one. I can hide my own posts ... useful for the odd double post. It does not give any notification.