Forum

> > Off Topic > The truth beneath islamism?
Forums overviewOff Topic overviewLog in to reply

English The truth beneath islamism?

45 replies
Page
To the start Previous 1 2 3 Next To the start

old The truth beneath islamism?

Silent_Control
User Off Offline

Quote
First of all, I do not want to be misunderstood. I do not hate Islamism and I do not try to offend Muslims. I've just done a bit of "research" that raised me some questions and I hope that you fellows will help me understand some things.

As you know, Muhammed/Mehmet/Mahmud/Mohammad, has a crucial role in the Islamic religion. Muhammed stated that he is a prophet and that he is delivering the Word of God.

Jesus Christ stated "But false Christs and false prophets will arise and will make signs and wonders in order to be deceiving if possible, the chosen. 23 But you be looking; I have foretold you everything."

So, practically, Jesus admits that He (Jesus) is the Last Prophet and there will not be any prophet after Him. "I have foretold you everything". This means that all the required information was transmitted to the Apostles and there is no need for a new prophet because there isn't any information left.

And now Muhammed appears and claims that he is a prophet.

And another thing: if we search the dictionary we'll find out that a prophet is a human that received some information DIRECTLY from God as Moses, Jezechel, Daniel, Jeremiah, and finally Jesus.

Muhammed has not received the information directly from God, there was a "middleman", the Angel Gabriel.

So, what do you guys think? Does Islamism have a solid base?

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Phenixtri
User Off Offline

Quote
sigh your basing your own christian/ catholic beliefs off of the new testament >> that document war created & used only as a tool of manipulations twisting the original meanings from the early original versions of the old testament.

My opinion is grounded in historical fact that religion is nothing more than a tool off mass manipulations for geopolitics uses nothing more.

I respect & study the original works of any religions as thos works merely teach one how to live peacefully with others via clever stories. let that be knows before I get flamed >>

in the end modern religion is best described by one man George Carlin

enjoy ppls

George Carlin - Religion is bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o&p=18635D72D4F20756&index=123&feature=BF

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Flacko
User Off Offline

Quote
Of course Ahmadineyad is crazy (if he actually said that, I didn't know about that) but that doesn't mean that islamism doesn't have a base.

The actual last prophet for Islam was Muhammad (even after Jesus), but if you look at other religions from a Chrisian's point of view, no other religion will have a solid base

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

made in Finland
User Off Offline

Quote
Flacko has written
Of course Ahmadineyad is crazy (if he actually said that, I didn't know about that) but that doesn't mean that islamism doesn't have a base.

The actual last prophet for Islam was Muhammad (even after Jesus), but if you look at other religions from a Chrisian's point of view, no other religion will have a solid base

but jews

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
@Silent_Control: Hence the reason that Islam is not Christianity, Muslims believes that:

1. Christ is not a messiah, but is an important prophet who is capable of divinity

and

2. Muhammad, rather than Jesus, is the last prophet.

If you debate this from a Christian point of view, then you have to define both what a False Prophet is and who Jesus Christ is. Understand that Christ proclaims himself to be the son of god rather than an actual prophet, hence from a Christian point of view, the fact that a holy text will both concede to the moral arguments of itself and hold both Jesus and Muhammad with same regards shows humility that Christians value above all else for God is wrathful at the pretentious nature of Humanity above all else. With that in mind, we examine whether Mark 13.22 actually applies in this argument

There are two possible perspectives to take:

1. We reject all arguments that solely accounts for only one side of the debate and does not even pretend to acknowledge the other side. (This is implicit in most debates)

2. We accept the underlying premise but still work towards rejection of the criterion that Islam is a false religion under Christianity.

If we accept perspective one, then due to the fact that every single argument you pushed out disregarded the Islamic point of view while debating the veracity of said point of view, we can automatically disqualify your entire argument. But let's do this the hard way.

Taking perspective 2 into consideration, we first look at Mark 13.22:

For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect--if that were possible.

There are two ultimate criteria for the becoming of the elect, or the Chosen ones: Humility and belief in Christ as well as God. If the ultimate value in Islam is humility and the belief in Muhammad as well as God (the same god of Abraham that Christians value), then if we assert that the belief in the medium of exchange is irrelevant (God >>> angels, Muhammad, Jesus, etc), as you yourself implied:

Quote
And another thing: if we search the dictionary we'll find out that a prophet is a human that received some information DIRECTLY from God as Moses, Jezechel, Daniel, Jeremiah, and finally Jesus.


This takes on the premise that God >> the angel Gabriel, Jesus himself, and Muhammad

-> then to assert that Islam is a false religion based on Mark 12.22 will conclude that Christianity is a false religion based on the same premise (assuming that time is not relevant for the legitimacy of a prophet/messiah, which can be verified by Deuteronomy 13.1 and common sense, the former exists because no one expected Christians that blindly follow the New Testament to have a single ounce of common sense).

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Silent_Control
User Off Offline

Quote
Okay Lee, so your conclusion is that asserting that Islam is a false religion => Christianity is a false religion too.

This means that both religions are false or both are true.

Now, let's suppose that both religions are true.
This means that all of the elements of the both religions can be considered true, which will lead to a contradiction because some "Dont's" in Islamism are "Dos" in Christianity or what Christians are allowed Muslims aren't.
The conclusion is that at least one of the religion is false.

Lee has written
2. We accept the underlying premise but still work towards rejection of the criterion that A is a false religion under B.
.

So, in this case we have to rework your #2.

The result is:

1. Consider religion A true, and bring arguments against religion B.
2. The same but switch A with B.

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
Silent_Control has written
Okay Lee, so your conclusion is that asserting that Islam is a false religion => Christianity is a false religion too.


Actually that's a logical fallacy:

a => b does not imply 'a => 'b(If we miss problem A, we get points taken off does not mean that if we don't miss problem A but instead we miss problem B, we do not get points taken off), hence if we concede to the the assertion that Islam is an irrational religion implies that Christianity is a irrational religion, we cannot assert that Islam is a true religion implies that Christianity is also a rational religion.

Quote
Now, let's suppose that both religions are true.
This means that all of the elements of the both religions can be considered true, which will lead to a contradiction because some "Dont's" in Islamism are "Dos" in Christianity or what Christians are allowed Muslims aren't.
The conclusion is that at least one of the religion is false.


You need much more evidence than that to make an assertion, even if on a theoretical premise.

Since we're debating on pure theology, let me lay out the moral virtues of Christianity and prove that they are conceptual equivalents of those in Islam:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_commandments

1 -> Islam does not allow multiple gods and asserts that Allah, the same Abrahamaic God, is the only god. Christianity believes that God transcends human syntheses such as names, so the two are completely equivalent.
2 -> Islam prohibits not only idols, but also any realistic representation of the natural world as only God should be rationally capable of creation.
3 -> Islams do not say "Allah dammit" when they're pissed, unlike most if not all "Christians"
4 -> Islam asserts keeps the equivalent of the sabbath on Friday. Remember that Christianity already asserted that Spirituality of any form transcends time.
5 -> You are still obligated to honor your parents, as well as your family.
6 -> Thou shalt not murder... To this date, I laugh at those who tells me that Christianity condemns murder.
7 -> 10 Codified explicitly in Christianity, assumed to be common sense in Islam and by the rest of the human population.

From the practicality of the above analysis, I have to say that not only is Christianity not practical, the evangelists of Christianity must be just downright morons.

Lee has written
2. We accept the underlying premise but still work towards rejection of the criterion that A is a false religion under B.
.
Quote
So, in this case we have to rework your #2.

The result is:

1. Consider religion A true, and bring arguments against religion B.
2. The same but switch A with B.


#2 assumes that Christianity is a real religion and brings about proof that Islam is also a rational religion which are explicitly from Christian beliefs. This is a metaproperty of the debate and is not in itself up for debate, because if we nullify this objection, then there is no debate, only the assertion that:

1. Islam is false and Christianity is true.
2. 1. and 2. cannot be changed.

From the above observation on the debate, we end up with the following assessments:

1. Validity of Mark 12.22 as evidence to the assertion that Islam is irrational when we assume that Mark and Deuteronomy are true.

2. Likeliness between Christianity and Islam

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
FN_Nemesis has written
Fapicon i think that God exists because who create the universe?


Who created God?

I do believe that god exists however, but only because I define god as the one entity that cannot itself be created. This does not mean that I believe in a God who concerns himself with trivialities such as why some human fucked another human's girlfriend or why some snobby little kid wants his mommy to buy him some useless toy. In fact, my god is merely a or a collection of particles so tiny, we cannot even conceptualize it.
edited 1×, last 24.10.10 10:43:07 pm

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

StirlizZ-Fapicon
Super User Off Offline

Quote
Anyway islam just copy of christian (which has been stealed from jews) religion. But there one fact: musulans pray to giant black cube. Umm..they call it Khaab.

p.s. Musulman terrorists want to take over the world. And there is their plan:
1. Take over Boing-747 in sky of New Yourk
2. ???
3. PROFIT!

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

FlooD
GAME BANNED Off Offline

Quote
Fapicon has written
p.s. Musulman terrorists want to take over the world. And there is their plan:
1. Take over Boing-747 in sky of New Yourk
2. ???
3. PROFIT!

THIS = WIN

@lee: so for those of us who cbf reading ur 10 paragraphs, could u summarize ur argument(s)?

old Re: The truth beneath islamism?

Vibhor
User Off Offline

Quote
Fapicon has written
Anyway islam just copy of christian (which has been stealed from jews) religion. But there one fact: musulans pray to giant black cube. Umm..they call it Khaab.

p.s. Musulman terrorists want to take over the world. And there is their plan:
1. Take over Boing-747 in sky of New Yourk
2. ???
3. PROFIT!


Who the hell told you that they pray a giant black cube?
Is it the dark version of friendly companion cube?
And you have no evidence to support that the person who did the thing to world trade center was a muslim except the word of mouth which is distributed by equally stupid "religious" people.
To the start Previous 1 2 3 Next To the start
Log in to replyOff Topic overviewForums overview