Fish is haram 4 Quran Alone adept according to Sunni Cheikh

Layth

I am most certainly a monotheist. The reason I still call myself a Christian is because of my own interpretation of Christianity. I do not believe that you have to accept Jesus as the "Son of God" or that he was divine, nor the existence of the trinity (which makes no sense at all). I believe that to be a Christian you just have to accept the message God gave us though Jesus (commonly called Christ). To me that makes most people Christian EXCEPT those that believe in the trinity and that Jesus was somehow God, they are not Christians, they are just as pagan as the "traditionalists" in the other religions.

What if I said 'I am a satanist except that I do not believe in any of the practices or sayings or beliefs of satanism.'

Obviously such statement makes no sence and hence my affiliation with satanism would be false/empty.

If you reject jesus being the son of God, and you reject the trinity, and you reject the doctorine of instant fogiveness gained through the belief in jesus, then youare not a christian nor does it make sence that you continue to affiliate yourself with such a system (its like somone rejecting the sunna but insisting to be called 'sunni'!).

Maybe I am wrong, but I tend to believe that, using my interpretation of Christianity, there is very little difference between Christianity and Islam. Now I know I will get a lot of criticism here for saying that, but, that is what I believe.

Hmmm. One is pagan and will gurantee you admission to Hell, while the other is God given and gives those who submit to its teachings a far better chance of being accepted by God and admitted to Paradise.

Rev_John

What if I said 'I am a satanist except that I do not believe in any of the practices or sayings or beliefs of satanism.'

Obviously such statement makes no sence and hence my affiliation with satanism would be false/empty.

If you reject jesus being the son of God, and you reject the trinity, and you reject the doctorine of instant fogiveness gained through the belief in jesus, then youare not a christian nor does it make sence that you continue to affiliate yourself with such a system (its like somone rejecting the sunna but insisting to be called 'sunni'!).

Hmmm. One is pagan and will gurantee you admission to Hell, while the other is God given and gives those who submit to its teachings a far better chance of being accepted by God and admitted to Paradise.

I don't believe that God cares what label you give yourself or what religion you belong to. I believe God only cares what is in your heart and mind. God does not have a religion, he/she is above that (I say he/she because I also do not believe God has a gender).

Layth

I don't believe that God cares what label you give yourself or what religion you belong to. I believe God only cares what is in your heart and mind. God does not have a religion, he/she is above that (I say he/she because I also do not believe God has a gender).

If that is your belief, why then do/did you remain affiliated to the label 'christianity'?

MUNZIR_ALI

If that is your belief, why then do/did you remain affiliated to the label 'christianity'?

He is a "christlim" or "mustrian" he calls him that.

Rev_John

He is a "christlim" or "mustrian" he calls him that.

That is true laugh

For want of a better label I suppose, also to try to bring some sense back into the Christian community. It can only be changed from the inside.

Layth

For want of a better label I suppose, also to try to bring some sense back into the Christian community. It can only be changed from the inside.

That is fine - I woud have called myself "Nazarene" after undersanding your position since that was the name of the true deciples of Jesus rather than the fake sect called 'christianity' which sprung-up later

I did have a look at your website and had a couple of questions about your views

You call Jesus the 'greatest teacher' yet at the same tme see to accept other messengers/prophets. Are they not also 'great' therefeore making none 'greater'?
You seem to reject the concept of Hell and rather teach that God is love? So, there is no judgement, or is judgement superficial whereby we all end-up in Heaven (or is there no heaven either)?

Rev_John

That is fine - I woud have called myself "Nazarene" after undersanding your position since that was the name of the true deciples of Jesus rather than the fake sect called 'christianity' which sprung-up later )

I did have a look at your website and had a couple of questions about your views

You call Jesus the 'greatest teacher' yet at the same tme see to accept other messengers/prophets. Are they not also 'great' therefeore making none 'greater'?
You seem to reject the concept of Hell and rather teach that God is love? So, there is no judgement, or is judgement superficial whereby we all end-up in Heaven (or is there no heaven either)?

Very good questions.

No, I don't believe that any prophet is any greater than another. Each one brought a message (sometimes the same message but in a different way).
Yes I do reject the common concept of hell. I do not believe there is such a "place". I believe that hell is the separation from God. If you imagine being a small child that has done something wrong and your father or mother sends you too your room until you realise your error, that would be hell for that child. But once you come out of your room and apologise, then your mother or father will probably give you a hug. That is how I see our relationship with God.

Rev_John

That is fine - I woud have called myself "Nazarene" after undersanding your position since that was the name of the true deciples of Jesus rather than the fake sect called 'christianity' which sprung-up later )

I did have a look at your website and had a couple of questions about your views

You call Jesus the 'greatest teacher' yet at the same tme see to accept other messengers/prophets. Are they not also 'great' therefeore making none 'greater'?
You seem to reject the concept of Hell and rather teach that God is love? So, there is no judgement, or is judgement superficial whereby we all end-up in Heaven (or is there no heaven either)?

Sorry I missed your first question.

Most Christians wouldn't know what "Nazarene" meant, most would think it meant I was saying I came from Nazareth.

Meteora

lol john's avatar is...cool.

Not sure what it is, but if it's Apple's version of a reverend, iReverend then that would be friggin awesome. yay

Rev_John

lol john's avatar is...cool.

Not sure what it is, but if it's Apple's version of a reverend, iReverend then that would be friggin awesome. yay

rotfl No it is a photo of me that I made into a silhouette

TheAlinatore

lol john's avatar is...cool.

Not sure what it is, but if it's Apple's version of a reverend, iReverend then that would be friggin awesome. yay

rotfl Nice! Seriously though, it is a cool Av!

Meteora

a cool rev

noble

Peace Layth,

I do not agree with you. Allah refers to those of the People of the Book who say that God is the third of three, and tell them to stop, He did not say they were not any more People of the Book, what they called themselves at the time and now is irrelevant.
What you are talking about are the first cohort who followed Jesus who were of Nazareth.
By the time the Quran was revealed / being revealed the Council of Nicaea had already convened, and priesthood order implemented that the Quran refers to as having been added to please Allah but that He did not ordain it.
So the Christians are indeed part of the People of the Book, and they still have the same problem, abandon the trinity (i.e at same stage as time of the Prophet), even if in some other areas, with Protestantism, there has been some progress where coming back to the Bible itself and stopping relying on Priests is concerned, which by the way we need with our sectarians...
So please Layth, kindly do not go extreme on us...

Salam

Noble aka Nabster

salam nabster,

Just to comment, I want to point out that Christians are not 'people o the book', so any meat (other than fish) prepared by this group would be foul.

MUNZIR_ALI

rotfl No it is a photo of me that I made into a silhouette

You look like a mafia don. Hey boss. Got any new missions for me? I your # 1 Mobster!

Rev_John

You look like a mafia don. Hey boss. Got any new missions for me? I your # 1 Mobster!

laugh The fish mafia?

I tend to agree with theNabster, Christians are people of the book, just a little misguided.

MUNZIR_ALI

laugh The fish mafia?

I tend to agree with theNabster, Christians are people of the book, just a little misguided.

No! Human mafia

Sorry for this offtopic post.

Layth

Salam Nabster,

So please Layth, kindly do not go extreme on us...

Here is my evidence, if you still think I am 'extreme' after this, then I will be glad to bear such label

572 Rejecters indeed are those who have said ?God is the Messiah, son of Mary.? And the Messiah said ?O Children of Israel, serve
God, my Lord and your Lord. Whoever sets up partners with God, then God will restrict the Paradise from him, and his destiny will be the Fire; and the wicked will have no supporters.?

573 Rejecters indeed are those who have said ?God is a trinity!? There is no god except One god. If they do not cease from what
they are saying, then those who reject from among them will be afflicted with a painful retribution.

1988 And they said the Almighty has taken a son!
1989 You have come with a gross blasphemy.
1990 The heavens are about to shatter from it, and the earth crack
open, and the mountains fall and crumble.
1991 That they claimed that the Almighty had a son!

You see, the verses above tell us that there was a blasphemous pagan sect that emerged from the people of the book who used to make these false and idolatress claims - these people were never 'people of the book' but are clearly labeled by the Quran as kuffar/rejecters (refer to 572-73).

Now 1,400 years later, we have it that this blasphemous and deviant sect has become the prominent and loudest voice for claiming to be the original message of Jesus - so, do we follow along and falsely support what they say by repeating their lies that they are indeed 'people of the book' and 'followers of christ', or, do we call them out for the blasphemous pagans/rejecters that they are?

The Quran is very specific and sometimes prophetic in its choice of words...God used the word 'hadith' to describe works that will be followed other than His word, and men went and called their lies 'hadiths. I am of the firm belief that the true followers of God and the Quran will only call themselves 'Muslims' as God named us, and we see in-front of our eyes how the sects are somehow forbidden from using this name alone without adding their sect name 'sunni/shia/derzi, etc.' as if by force.

Now, this takes me back to my discussion with brother John...I am looking at his rational for using the word 'christian' when it is a word/name used by a deviant sect...My rational is that a follower of christ would hold to the name 'nazarene, as God has taught us in the Quran, even if that name is no longer well known or liked (I did look it up on wikipedia, and it still seems to be used in small circules).

So to sum up all this chatter

'nazarenes' = people of the book
'christians' = deviant/blasphemous rejecting sect

MUNZIR_ALI

'nazarenes' = people of the book
'christians' = deviant/blasphemous rejecting sect

So I guess Rev john is a nazlim then?

Rev_John