Scientific Comparison Between Qur’an And Bible - Page 5

Jesse · 09-27-2007, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Ok... you don't like Hell, I see no problem on it, it's simply a cultural subject. Many have one place for afterlife, others have 2 and Catholics used to have 3 but now closed Limbo.

You are confusing the dogmas with the morality that underlies them. I'm discussing principles of justice and morality. Forget it, I'm not interested in pursuing this debate any further, it is a waste of our time.

Quote:

When you die you'll have time enough to think about it.

You are assuming there is a conscious state after death, of which there is no evidence. It seems to me that death would--If I may be forgiven for a pun--"perish the thought."

Quote:

Why religions should claim that they are not bound to abide by the standpoint of reason, no one knows. If one does not take the standard of reason there cannot be any true judgement, even in the case of religions.One religion may ordain something very hideous.For instance, the Mohammedan religion allows Mohammedans to kill all who are not of their religion. It is clearly stated in the Koran, "Kill the infidels if they do not become Mohammedans." They must be put to fire and sword. Now if we tell a Mohammedan that this is wrong, he will naturally ask : "How do you know that ? How do you know it is not good ? My book says it is." If you say your book is older, there will come the Buddhist, and say, his book is much older still. Then will come the Hindu, and say, his books are the oldest of all. Therefore referring to books will not do. Where is the standard by which you can compare ? You will say, look at the Sermon on the Mount, and the Mohammedan will reply, look at the Ethics of the Koran. The Mohammedan will say, who is the arbiter as to which is the better of the two? Neither the New Testament nor the Koran can be the arbiter in a quarrel between them.

There must be some independent authority , and that cannot be any book, but something which is universal ; and what is more universal than reason ? It has been said that reason is not strong enough; it does not always help us to get the Truth; many times it makes mistakes , and therefore the conclusion is that we must believe in the authority of a church! That was said to me by a Roman Catholic, but I could not see the logic of it. On the other hand I should say, if reason be so weak, a body of priests would be weaker, and I am not going to accept their verdict but I will abide by my reason, because with all its weakness there is some chance of my getting at truth through it; while by the other means, there is no such hope at all.

---Swami Vivekananda

I think Swami Vivekananda was absolutely right in saying that. When I started to read what you quoted, I didn't realize you were quoting. I stopped after the first sentence and thought, "That sounds similar to the saying of a Hindu I had read before." I then did a search on the Internet, found the material, and then came back to find out you were actually quoting it, so I wasted my time in searching for it. Quotation marks are helpful

Quote:

"Yawm" is a flexible term, and is not required to mean 24hrs in either Arabic nor Hebrew.

Could you provide a source (or some verses that use the word in different ways) for saying Arabic's "ayyam" is flexible in its meaning? I sought this information before but was swamped by "science proves Quran" webpages that I never actually found the information I was looking for.

niranjan · 09-27-2007, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesse

I think Swami Vivekananda was absolutely right in saying that. When I started to read what you quoted, I didn't realize you were quoting. I stopped after the first sentence and thought, "That sounds similar to the saying of a Hindu I had read before." I then did a search on the Internet, found the material, and then came back to find out you were actually quoting it, so I wasted my time in searching for it. Quotation marks are helpful

Thanks for the tip, pal.

**WilliamBlue** · 09-27-2007, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesse

Quote:

Ok... you don't like Hell, I see no problem on it, it's simply a cultural subject. Many have one place for afterlife, others have 2 and Catholics used to have 3 but now closed Limbo.

You are confusing the dogmas with the morality that underlies them. I'm discussing principles of justice and morality. Forget it, I'm not interested in pursuing this debate any further, it is a waste of our time.

I think I understand what you were saying and you have a valid point, not a waste of time at all

SirArthur · 09-27-2007, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesse

Quote:

Ok... you don't like Hell, I see no problem on it, it's simply a cultural subject. Many have one place for afterlife, others have 2 and Catholics used to have 3 but now closed Limbo.

You are confusing the dogmas with the morality that underlies them. I'm discussing principles of justice and morality. Forget it, I'm not interested in pursuing this debate any further, it is a waste of our time.

The principle of Hell and Paradise is the most simple principle of bad -> punish; good -> reward... simple and clean as that.
If for cast such dogma and use the term "eternal pain" you say Jesus was bad, so be it. When I refer to Jesus to be a "good fellow" I mean he never rob or killed anyone neither request his followers to do it; unlike the prophet of Islam.

Quote:

You are assuming there is a conscious state after death, of which there is no evidence. It seems to me that death would--If I may be forgiven for a pun--"perish the thought."

I'm assuming nothing, but if there's you'll just know it after your death.

Jesse · 09-27-2007, 10:27 PM

Quote:

The principle of Hell and Paradise is the most simple principle of bad -> punish; good -> reward... simple and clean as that.

It isn't as simple as that.

Disciplining people or removing them from society (i.e. killing them) to prevent them from harming others is one thing. Eternally inflicting pain upon them is quite another. Think of a judicial system where n-years punishments were removed, as well as the death sentence, and only life sentences were given. Also, nobody managed the prison guards so they would come in and beat the living crap out of the prisoner everyday of his life in that cell. Also, the prisoners' life was extended so he or she would never die but would be beaten everyday for all eternity. That's the kind of justice system that Jesus favored.

Punishing people with the intent of molding someones' ethical code or to remove someone from society because their ethical codes cannot be changed is an entirely different matter from eternal vengeance and bloodlust.

Quote:

When I refer to Jesus to be a "good fellow" I mean he never rob or killed anyone neither request his followers to do it; unlike the prophet of Islam.

Compared to Muhammed, sure. It's not hard to be a better person than Muhammed.

Quote:

When you die you'll [you will] have time enough to think about it.

You are assuming there is a conscious state after death, of which there is no evidence. It seems to me that death would--If I may be forgiven for a pun--"perish the thought."

I'm assuming nothing, but if there's you'll just know it after your death.

The quotes speak for themselves, SirArthur.

Apple Pie · 09-27-2007, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesse

Quote:

"Yawm" is a flexible term, and is not required to mean 24hrs in either Arabic nor Hebrew.

Could you provide a source (or some verses that use the word in different ways) for saying Arabic's "ayyam" is flexible in its meaning? I sought this information before but was swamped by "science proves Quran" webpages that I never actually found the information I was looking for.

Any Arabic lexical source should demonstrate this...

Followers of islam attempt to give the illusion that only their book of faith has the "correct" meaning of the word....when, in fact, it is simply attempting to copy its Biblical source...

Jesse · 09-28-2007, 12:09 AM

I wonder why I didn't try searching for "Arabic Lexicon" instead of "meaning of ayyam" and variants of that.

Download "Edward William Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon" for Free

Thanks Apple

SirArthur · 09-28-2007, 04:03 AM

Jesse,

I don't think I'm entitled to judge Hell & Heaven, as I'm not to judge Nature which is unfair in its essence; eg. what harm did a gazelle to be hunted down by a lion? All survival system is a huge chain of unfair links.
Jesus also did not "build" Hell, simply said what he knows or believe it to be. Keeping in line with the Old Testament where the fallen Angel is known for hate humans, and therefore if he hates them will never give them any comfort.

In a way you're then trying to extrapolate human justice to the underworld.

About the "if there's a conscious state after life", you are assuming there is no, which is not proved also.

Apple Pie,

When comes to Quran and Torah, all the Muslims have are "attempts of copying", because when they asked the Torah to insert into Quran (by the time this was compiled) the Jews refuse to allow the access to such. If wasn't for that they had copied the whole 'Genesis' (Bereshit) book, like Christians, unable to do so they got what they can of it from oral tradition.

Jesse · 09-28-2007, 04:19 AM

Quote:

I don't think I'm entitled to judge Hell & Heaven, as I'm not to judge Nature which is unfair in its essence; eg. what harm did a gazelle to be hunted down by a lion? All survival system is a huge chain of unfair links.

Jesus also did not "build" Hell, simply said what he knows or believe it to be. Keeping in line with the Old Testament where the fallen Angel is known for hate humans, and therefore if he hates them will never give them any comfort.

In a way you're then trying to extrapolate human justice to the underworld.

SirArthur, I'm sick of playing these stupid games with you. Nature, Hell, Heaven, Jesus, Satan, Yahweh, Muhammed, Allah, and Josie and the Pussycats are irrelevant. The truth or falsity of Hell, Heaven, Jesus, Satan, Yahweh, Muhammed, Allah, and Josie and the Pussycats is irrelevant. It is the IDEA OF JUSTICE that's important. This is only the EIGHTH time I've explained this to you. No habla Ingles?

Quote:

About the "if there's a conscious state after life", you are assuming there is no, which is not proved also.

I never made that assumption. I said "SEEMS." No habla Ingles?

SirArthur · 09-28-2007, 04:29 AM

Now we go ad hominem... yes I do speak english, pero también hablo español se eso te hace más contente.

Mira, lo que estás intentando de hacer es meter tu justicia en Dios, lo que és de más sin sentido.

Ultimately: YOUR IDEAS OF JUSTICE MEANS NOTHING. YOU ARE TRYING TO VENT YOUR "JUSTICE" AS THE MOST MORAL ON UNDERWORLD. Parlez vous anglais aussi?