Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > General Conspiracy Discussion > Opinions
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-07-2006, 09:38 PM
Akbar Akbar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 403
Default How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles


The Jews were very angry with Jesus when they found out that he did not come to deliver the world to them for their control. Jesus was a true servant of God and stayed the mission of serving God. The Jews decided to crucify Jesus by stopping his mission and replacing it with theirs. They invented a new Jesus whose mission it is to deliver the world to the Jews. In the Bible it states that Jesus would be riding a donkey in the city, which menas that the false Jesus of the Jews would be on the backs of the masses who would be carrying the Jews to world dominance. Here is an example of a high priest in the son of god order playing the role of trying to destroy America to deliver the world to the Jews.

http://www.iamthewitness.com/by_MichaelCollinsPiper3.htm

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-07-2006, 09:57 PM
madcow madcow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 121
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

ALLAH THE MUSLIM GOD
ALLAH, Muslim (1) name for the Supreme Being. The term is a contraction of the Arabic al-llah, (2) "the God." Both the idea and the word existed in pre-Islamic (3) Arabian tradition, in which some evidence of a primitive (4) monotheism can also be found. Although they recognized other, lesser gods, (5) the pre-Islamic Arabs recognized Allah as the supreme God. Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia, Volume 1, page 401.


HISTORY OBSERVED


1) Allah is the evolved name for the Muslim Supreme Being god.

2) Allah is actually the title for the Muslim Supreme Being god and not a name.

3) Allah was borrowed by Mo-ham-mad from pre-Islamic polytheistic Arabian tradition.

4) Jews and Christians were in the pre-Islamic Arabia as they were in India at this time.

5) Allah was recognized as the chief god of pagan Arabia like Zeus was for the Greeks.


NON-CHRISTIAN ATTRIBUTES


Qur'an 19:89-93 And they say: The Beneficent has taken to Himself a son. Certainly you make an abominable (1) assertion! The heavens may almost be rent apart, and the earth torn asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces, that they ascribe a son (2) to the Beneficent! And it is not worthy of the Beneficent that He should take to Himself (3) a son. There is none in the heavens and the earth (4) but comes to the Beneficent as a servant.

1) Mo-ham-mad accuses King Solomon of making an abominable assertion.

Proverbs 30:4 Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son's name, If you know?

2) Mo-ham-mad accuses all Christian apostles of making abominable assertions.

Matthew 14:33 Then those who were in the boat came and worshiped Him, saying, "Truly You are the Son of God."

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God."

John 1:34 "And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God."

Hebrews 10:29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

3) Mo-ham-mad accuses Jesus Christ of making an abominable assertion.

John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

4) Mo-ham-mad will bow before Jesus Christ in judgment on Judgment Day.

Philippians 2:9-11 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Conclusion: The Christian God should not be confused with the Muslim false god.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-08-2006, 01:32 AM
Ozziecynic's Avatar
Ozziecynic Ozziecynic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: A Land of Convicts & Rogues known as Downunder
Posts: 487
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Akbar:
:-o :-? So why are you such expert on Christianity all of sudden Akbar? Jesus was the not just a messenger(prophet)he WAS God in human form!.
It seems it is not enough for you to be Muslim that hates western civilisation but you feel you must all also fabricate falsehoods about christianity!.
Why not just stick to what you know your know nothing about christianity and probly never will you cannot fool those of us whom are christians and have read both the OT and NT and understand it throughly!. :-?
__________________
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely
Lord Acton.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-09-2006, 09:39 AM
Akbar Akbar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 403
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Madcow,
It makes you look foolish to try to explain the name of Allah. It's simple, in Arabic the name for God is Allah. Of course that name was in use before Mohammed, as was previous revelation. He only brought the understanding of God back to it's pure form, so mankind could better understand God. Arabic is the best language for expressing God's word.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-09-2006, 10:00 AM
Akbar Akbar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 403
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Oz,
I know more about Christianity than your best Christian leaders. Everything that I share about Christianity is found in the Bible. When I say that the worst crime in the sight of God is to associate anything with him it is in the Bible. When I say that Muslims worship the same God that Jesus did, it is in the Bible. In the Bible someone came to Jesus to give him praise and he said why call me good, all good comes from the father. In the Bible, Jesus refuted the belief that God came in human form by responding to his disciples when they asked about God, Jesus told them that know has every seen God with their physical eyes. The belief of the trinity, god in human form, all of the Christian rituals are borrowed from paganism. The Egptians, Greeks, and Romans believed in the trinity concept, god in human form, and similar rituals as the Christians currently do. The early Christian leaders felt that they needed to mix paganism with Christianity in order to get the masses of people to accept it. They were sincere, but some of the Jews that were with them were not. They wanted to control the Gentiles.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-09-2006, 08:13 PM
madcow madcow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 121
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Qur'an 4:171 O People of the Book, exceed not the limits in your religion nor speak anything about Allah, but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only a (1) messenger of Allah and His word which He communicated to Mary and a mercy from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you. Allah is only one God. Far be it from His glory to have a (2) son. To Him belongs (3) whatever is in the earth. And sufficient is Allah as having charge of affairs.

1) Mo-ham-mad proclaimed that Jesus Christ is only a messenger.

Correction: Jesus Christ was not a message boy for the false god Allah.

John 6:35 And Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst."

John 8:18 "I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."

2) Mo-ham-mad proclaimed that Jesus Christ is not the Son of God.

Correction: Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Proverbs 30:4 Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son's name, If you know?

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

1 John 2:22-23 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

3) Mo-ham-mad proclaimed that Allah owns everything.

Correction: Jesus Christ is in control and owns everything.

Psalm 2:7-8 "I will declare the decree: The LORD has said to Me, 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You. Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession.'"

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth."

Colossians 1:17 And He is before all things, and in Him (Christ) all things consist.

Conclusion: Mo-ham-mad is a antichrist and was not a "book" person.



Qur'an 5:116 And when Allah will say: O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to men, take me (1) and my mother (2) for two gods besides Allah? He will say: Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right to (say). If I had said it, you would indeed have known it. You know what is in my mind, and I know not (3) what is in Your mind. Surely You art the great Knower of the unseen.

1): Mo-ham-mad declared Jesus Christ was not God or equal with God.

Correction: The Son is honored the same as the Father and are one God.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 5:22-23 "For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him."

John 10:30 "I and My Father are one."

2): Mo-ham-mad thought the Trinity was three gods that included Mary.

Correction: The Trinity is one God revealed as three distinct separate persons.

Matthew 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you."

John 15:26 "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me."

3) Mo-ham-mad declared that Jesus Christ did not know the Father.

John 7:29 "But I know Him, for I am from Him, and He sent Me."

John 8:19 Then they said to Him, "Where is Your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also."

John 8:55 "Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, 'I do not know Him,' I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word."

John 10:15 "As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep."

John 10:37-38 "If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."

John 14:7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him."

Conclusion: Per John 8:55, Mo-ham-mad is a liar.



Qur'an 6:6 And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: O children of Israel, surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Torah and giving the good news (1) of a Messenger (2) who will come after me (3), his name being Ahmad.

1) Muhammad declared that the good news is about himself.

Correction: The good news or gospel is about Jesus Christ.

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel (good news) of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you; unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.

2) Muhammad declared himself a similar messenger to Jesus Christ.

Correction: Jesus Christ warned of false prophets like Muhammad who would come.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves."

3) Muhammad declared that he was prophesied as coming after Jesus Christ.

Correction: Jesus Christ prophesied about the Holy Spirit coming after Him.

John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you."

John 15:26 "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me."



Qur'an 4:157: And for their saying: We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah, and they killed him not (1), nor did they cause his death on the cross (2), but he was made to appear to them (3) as such. And certainly those who differ therein are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge about it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for certain (4).

(1) Muhammad declared that Jesus Christ was not killed.

Correction: Jesus Christ fulfilled numerous prophecies when He did die.

Matthew 27:35 Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: "They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots."

(2) Muhammad declared that Jesus Christ did not die on a cross.

Correction: The Roman cross was the common form of execution.

Mark 15:29-30 And those who passed by blasphemed Him, wagging their heads and saying, "Aha! You who destroy the temple and build it in three days, save Yourself, and come down from the cross!"

(3) Muhammad declared that someone else died in the place of Jesus Christ.

Correction: Everyone including His mother knew it was Jesus Christ.

John 19:26-27 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.

(4) Muhammad declared that Jesus Christ was not killed.

Correction: Roman soldiers were experts at killing and the apostle John was a witness.

John 19:34-37 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, "Not one of His bones shall be broken."



Qur'an 23:50: And We made the son of Mary and his mother a sign, and We gave them refuge on a lofty ground having meadows and springs.

Qur'an footnote: According to a saying of the Holy Prophet, Jesus lived 120 years. This verse tells us that, being delivered from the hands of his enemies, he was given shelter at some other place, and the description of that place as indicated in this verse, along with the fact that Kashmir has a tomb, which every available evidence shows to be the tomb of Jesus himself, leads us to the conclusion that Kashmir is the land referred to in this verse.

Note: Muhammad declared that Jesus Christ escaped to Kashmir and died a natural death.

Correction: Jesus Christ rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples.

John 20:26-29 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, "Peace to you!" Then He said to Thomas, "Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing." And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-10-2006, 04:02 PM
Akbar Akbar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 403
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Mohammed is the return of Christ and according to your logic, you will not enter heaven until you accept him. There is only evidence that Mohammed was the only prophet to only live. All the other Prophets including Jesus named in revelations were only personified concepts. Mohammed is the real thing. What other human being has accomplished what he did in his own lifetime?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-10-2006, 05:38 PM
madcow madcow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 121
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran



New York Times

March 2, 2002

By ALEXANDER STILLE

(Note from the editors of RIM.ORG: this article is reproduced here as printed in the New York Times, for non-profit educational purposes; it presents insight into ongoing academic studies of Quranic manuscripts by Western scholars; it is written from a secular perspective. Biblical manuscripts and parchments have been studied critically with great freedom for centuries of the history of the West, and the enormous number of manuscripts, and manuscript families up to the recent Dead Sea Scrolls attest to the unique veracity of the Bible. Openess and critical scholarship, debate and discussion are a part of Western tradition -- and as Christians in the West realize, present nothing to fear, for God's truth will stand firm and sure. Islam by contrast has maintained the image of the Quran's indubitability through fear and intimidation, a tradition dating back to the work of caliph Uthman who by the power of the sword sought to eliminate variant forms of the Quran.)



To Muslims the Koran is the very word of God, who spoke through the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad: "This book is not to be doubted," the Koran declares unequivocally at its beginning. Scholars and writers in Islamic countries who have ignored that warning have sometimes found themselves the target of death threats and violence, sending a chill through universities around the world.

Yet despite the fear, a handful of experts have been quietly investigating the origins of the Koran, offering radically new theories about the text's meaning and the rise of Islam.

Christoph Luxenberg, a scholar of ancient Semitic languages in Germany, argues that the Koran has been misread and mistranslated for centuries. His work, based on the earliest copies of the Koran, maintains that parts of Islam's holy book are derived from pre-existing Christian Aramaic texts that were misinterpreted by later Islamic scholars who prepared the editions of the Koran commonly read today.

So, for example, the virgins who are supposedly awaiting good Islamic martyrs as their reward in paradise are in reality "white raisins" of crystal clarity rather than fair maidens.

Christoph Luxenberg, however, is a pseudonym, and his scholarly tome ""The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran" had trouble finding a publisher, although it is considered a major new work by several leading scholars in the field. Verlag Das Arabische Buch in Berlin ultimately published the book.

The caution is not surprising. Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" received a fatwa because it appeared to mock Muhammad. The Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed because one of his books was thought to be irreligious. And when the Arab scholar Suliman Bashear argued that Islam developed as a religion gradually rather than emerging fully formed from the mouth of the Prophet, he was injured after being thrown from a second- story window by his students at the University of Nablus in the West Bank. Even many broad-minded liberal Muslims become upset when the historical veracity and authenticity of the Koran is questioned.

The reverberations have affected non-Muslim scholars in Western countries. "Between fear and political correctness, it's not possible to say anything other than sugary nonsense about Islam," said one scholar at an American university who asked not to be named, referring to the threatened violence as well as the widespread reluctance on United States college campuses to criticize other cultures.

While scriptural interpretation may seem like a remote and innocuous activity, close textual study of Jewish and Christian scripture played no small role in loosening the Church's domination on the intellectual and cultural life of Europe, and paving the way for unfettered secular thought. "The Muslims have the benefit of hindsight of the European experience, and they know very well that once you start questioning the holy scriptures, you don't know where it will stop," the scholar explained.

The touchiness about questioning the Koran predates the latest rise of Islamic militancy. As long ago as 1977, John Wansbrough of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London wrote that subjecting the Koran to "analysis by the instruments and techniques of biblical criticism is virtually unknown."

Mr. Wansbrough insisted that the text of the Koran appeared to be a composite of different voices or texts compiled over dozens if not hundreds of years. After all, scholars agree that there is no evidence of the Koran until 691 - 59 years after Muhammad's death - when the Dome of the Rock mosque in Jerusalem was built, carrying several Koranic inscriptions.

These inscriptions differ to some degree from the version of the Koran that has been handed down through the centuries, suggesting, scholars say, that the Koran may have still been evolving in the last decade of the seventh century. Moreover, much of what we know as Islam - the lives and sayings of the Prophet - is based on texts from between 130 and 300 years after Muhammad's death.

In 1977 two other scholars from the School for Oriental and African Studies at London University - Patricia Crone (a professor of history at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton) and Michael Cook (a professor of Near Eastern history at Princeton University) - suggested a radically new approach in their book "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World."

Since there are no Arabic chronicles from the first century of Islam, the two looked at several non-Muslim, seventh-century accounts that suggested Muhammad was perceived not as the founder of a new religion but as a preacher in the Old Testament tradition, hailing the coming of a Messiah. Many of the early documents refer to the followers of Muhammad as "hagarenes," and the "tribe of Ishmael," in other words as descendants of Hagar, the servant girl that the Jewish patriarch Abraham used to father his son Ishmael.

In its earliest form, Ms. Crone and Mr. Cook argued, the followers of Muhammad may have seen themselves as retaking their place in the Holy Land alongside their Jewish cousins. (And many Jews appear to have welcomed the Arabs as liberators when they entered Jerusalem in 638.)

The idea that Jewish messianism animated the early followers of the Prophet is not widely accepted in the field, but "Hagarism" is credited with opening up the field. "Crone and Cook came up with some very interesting revisionist ideas," says Fred M. Donner of the University of Chicago and author of the recent book "Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing." "I think in trying to reconstruct what happened, they went off the deep end, but they were asking the right questions."

The revisionist school of early Islam has quietly picked up momentum in the last few years as historians began to apply rational standards of proof to this material.

Mr. Cook and Ms. Crone have revised some of their early hypotheses while sticking to others. "We were certainly wrong about quite a lot of things," Ms. Crone said. "But I stick to the basic point we made: that Islamic history did not arise as the classic tradition says it does."

Ms. Crone insists that the Koran and the Islamic tradition present a fundamental paradox. The Koran is a text soaked in monotheistic thinking, filled with stories and references to Abraham, Isaac, Joseph and Jesus, and yet the official history insists that Muhammad, an illiterate camel merchant, received the revelation in Mecca, a remote, sparsely populated part of Arabia, far from the centers of monotheistic thought, in an environment of idol-worshiping Arab Bedouins. Unless one accepts the idea of the angel Gabriel, Ms. Crone says, historians must somehow explain how all these monotheistic stories and ideas found their way into the Koran.

"There are only two possibilities," Ms. Crone said. "Either there had to be substantial numbers of Jews and Christians in Mecca or the Koran had to have been composed somewhere else."

Indeed, many scholars who are not revisionists agree that Islam must be placed back into the wider historical context of the religions of the Middle East rather than seeing it as the spontaneous product of the pristine Arabian desert. "I think there is increasing acceptance, even on the part of many Muslims, that Islam emerged out of the wider monotheistic soup of the Middle East," says Roy Mottahedeh, a professor of Islamic history at Harvard University.

Scholars like Mr. Luxenberg and Gerd- R. Puin, who teaches at Saarland University in Germany, have returned to the earliest known copies of the Koran in order to grasp what it says about the document's origins and composition. Mr. Luxenberg explains these copies are written without vowels and diacritical dots that modern Arabic uses to make it clear what letter is intended. In the eighth and ninth centuries, more than a century after the death of Muhammad, Islamic commentators added diacritical marks to clear up the ambiguities of the text, giving precise meanings to passages based on what they considered to be their proper context. Mr. Luxenberg's radical theory is that many of the text's difficulties can be clarified when it is seen as closely related to Aramaic, the language group of most Middle Eastern Jews and Christians at the time.

For example, the famous passage about the virgins is based on the word hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply "white." Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for "houri," which means virgin, but Mr. Luxenberg insists that this is a forced misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one respected dictionary of early Arabic, hur means "white raisin."

Mr. Luxenberg has traced the passages dealing with paradise to a Christian text called Hymns of Paradise by a fourth-century author. Mr. Luxenberg said the word paradise was derived from the Aramaic word for garden and all the descriptions of paradise described it as a garden of flowing waters, abundant fruits and white raisins, a prized delicacy in the ancient Near East. In this context, white raisins, mentioned often as hur, Mr. Luxenberg said, makes more sense than a reward of sexual favors.

In many cases, the differences can be quite significant. Mr. Puin points out that in the early archaic copies of the Koran, it is impossible to distinguish between the words "to fight" and "to kill." In many cases, he said, Islamic exegetes added diacritical marks that yielded the harsher meaning, perhaps reflecting a period in which the Islamic Empire was often at war.

A return to the earliest Koran, Mr. Puin and others suggest, might lead to a more tolerant brand of Islam, as well as one that is more conscious of its close ties to both Judaism and Christianity.

"It is serious and exciting work," Ms. Crone said of Mr. Luxenberg's work. Jane McAuliffe, a professor of Islamic studies at Georgetown University, has asked Mr. Luxenberg to contribute an essay to the Encyclopedia of the Koran, which she is editing.

Mr. Puin would love to see a "critical edition" of the Koran produced, one based on recent philological work, but, he says, "the word critical is misunderstood in the Islamic world - it is seen as criticizing or attacking the text."

Some Muslim authors have begun to publish skeptical, revisionist work on the Koran as well. Several new volumes of revisionist scholarship, "The Origins of the Koran," and "The Quest for the Historical Muhammad," have been edited by a former Muslim who writes under the pen name Ibn Warraq. Mr. Warraq, who heads a group called the Institute for the Secularization of Islamic Society, makes no bones about having a political agenda. "Biblical scholarship has made people less dogmatic, more open," he said, "and I hope that happens to Muslim society as well."

But many Muslims find the tone and claims of revisionism offensive. "I think the broader implications of some of the revisionist scholarship is to say that the Koran is not an authentic book, that it was fabricated 150 years later," says Ebrahim Moosa, a professor of religious studies at Duke University, as well as a Muslim cleric whose liberal theological leanings earned him the animosity of fundamentalists in South Africa, which he left after his house was firebombed.

Andrew Rippin, an Islamicist at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada, says that freedom of speech in the Islamic world is more likely to evolve from within the Islamic interpretative tradition than from outside attacks on it. Approaches to the Koran that are now branded as heretical - interpreting the text metaphorically rather than literally - were widely practiced in mainstream Islam a thousand years ago.

"When I teach the history of the interpretation it is eye-opening to students the amount of independent thought and diversity of interpretation that existed in the early centuries of Islam," Mr. Rippin says. "It was only in more recent centuries that there was a need for limiting interpretation."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-11-2006, 04:15 AM
Ozziecynic's Avatar
Ozziecynic Ozziecynic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: A Land of Convicts & Rogues known as Downunder
Posts: 487
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

8-) :-?
Quote:
I know more about Christianity than your best Christian leaders. Everything that I share about Christianity is found in the Bible.
Well if that were really the case then you would know for a start that to be a Christian one is saved by faith in Jesus christ alone, yet you fail to grasp this and make the mistake that most non christians and even a few false christians often make that works takes priority over being saved by Grace, which was proved false very early in chrisitan history by St Augustine and hasnt changed since, although often challenged by apostates and heathens like yourself!.
However most importantly you dont recognise Christ as your saviour because you are a heathen Muhammdan therefore you soul is dammned for eternity akbar!.

Quote:
In the Bible someone came to Jesus to give him praise and he said why call me good, all good comes from the father. In the Bible, Jesus refuted the belief that God came in human form by responding to his disciples when they asked about God, Jesus told them that know has every seen God with their physical eyes. The belief of the trinity, god in human form, all of the Christian rituals are borrowed from paganism. The Egptians, Greeks, and Romans believed in the trinity concept, god in human form, and similar rituals as the Christians currently do. The early Christian leaders felt that they needed to mix paganism with Christianity in order to get the masses of people to accept it. They were sincere, but some of the Jews that were with them were not. They wanted to control the Gentiles
All bollocks akbar and the source of this crap would be? Or did you just fabricate them on the run?.Jesus wanted to prove he was the Saviour and therefore God not the opposite as you falsely claim.
Christ said he was not the father,true as you claim however this did not abrogate the fact that he was still an aspect of God and therefore part of the Holy Trinity.The concept of the trinity is all Spiritual or Metaphysical if you prefer a philosophical explantion akbar, and hard to explain to a non christian like yourself!.

I think you are materialisic for a Muslim akbar in your attitude you have accused me of using heart over mind on few occasians fair enough when dealing with most rational serious subjects which require some intellect this would be a correct observation!.
However when one is speaking of religion emotion over intellect is exactly what is required as at the end of the day religion is a spiritual matter, not a matter of intellect or politics.
If religions had to be measured by a completely rationalist scale for reasons of common sense acceptance they would all obselete by now and we would all be Dialectic materialists living in something like the USSR, infact isnt that what the NWO is all about!.Given the way the Muslim Muhjahudeen defended themselves against the soviets in the 80s this something you would also despise I assume!. :-?

Btw I am starting to sound very Serious Again!
Oh well just for likes of akbar but I will be cutting down my reponses from now on akbar
although I couldnt let this travesty of post by you pass without rational correction!.! :-P :-D
__________________
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely
Lord Acton.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-11-2006, 06:07 PM
Akbar Akbar is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 403
Default Re: How the Jews used son of god to enslave Gentiles

Oz, You refute your own Bible. Let me tell you the secret. The true Christ is the elevation of your soul through God's word. The trinity is not about God, it is about man. We are three parts: physical, mental, and spiritual. Our spiritual make up is the greatest part, but we have to live by the law of God in order for the other two parts to reenforce the spiritual. You will never connect with the beauty in your Bible until you love and respect the holy Quran. So yes all of the symbolism in the Bible, I can tell you the meaning of all of them. Praise be to God!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I love Jews! The Anti-Zionist Jews... must see video with Rabbi Domb SeC Opinions 0 02-07-2007 02:46 AM
PLATO - The Prophet for the Gentiles SeC Opinions 0 01-08-2007 04:26 AM
why gentiles kept in the dark corsair522 General Conspiracy Discussion 0 09-16-2006 05:58 PM
Conspiracy: Jews are terribly persecuted. Jews are especially holy rushdoony Alternate History 3 07-20-2005 04:36 PM
Jews Start War Between Russia & U.S...Jews Rule World? CRAPOLA! truebeliever The effects of the NWO 10 02-19-2005 02:29 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.