what in the devil's name is 666?
-
Again?.this is not what your book of faith states?
All mankind is fallen...just as stated in Holy Bible, and later copied into the Koran.
Mankind has always been on earth/land since his creation 230.
The garden is an elevated state of mind attained through peace and obedience to the God.
Just as those humans lived on the earth/land so do we. There was no mythical place from which they "fell".
They were debased individually because of their act. Their "descent" was in the state of mind and bliss they were in.
You may, as I do sometimes feel as if I am in 'heaven' here on earth. When that is broken you may also experience that descent into a lower state of mind due to breaking of the peace and disobedience.
If you were not in the fallen state, then you would, at this moment, be residing in Eden?of which you are not?thus, you are paying for the original sin just like the rest of us.
A state which is in one's individual mind.
You and all your Christian brethren may feel in that fallen state because you are trapped in your false paradigm.
The importance of deeds is in one of the shortest chapters of the reading. Witness...
1031 By the ages.
1032 The human being is utterly lost.
1033 Except those who believe and lead a righteous life, and exhort one another to uphold the truth, and exhort one another to be steadfast.We are told that the essence of that belief is belief in the One God; and belief in the accountability you face for your actions (the Last Day).
No one can bear the burden of another. That's the message of truth.
We don?t carry the sins of others humans?however, we do carry the original sin.
There is a logical falsehood in what you say.
I agree that no human can bear the burden of another. But I don't recognise what this "original sin" is. Was "Adam" born with the original sin also or did he commit it?
If he committed it then it is his sin is it not? And being something he did then it cannot be the sin of any other human.
So if no human can bear the burden of another human then we cannot bear the burden of "Adam" if he was a human.
The paradigm of "original sin" is patently false.
Please tell us why we are not in the garden right now?.if we are not carrying the original sin??
You can be in the 'garden' right now if you wanted. You keep yourself out.
Salvation has always remained the same.
Salvation is through obedience to the Creator God of the Universe.
I know that attaining the goal has always been the same for every human and my beliefs are consistent with that; whereas even your admission in the next section that there is a difference in OT times and NT times accedes that it was not the same creating another logical problem for you.
So if we replace 'salvation' by 'attaining the award' then I agree with both the statements above as long as we mean ONE Creator God.
People in OT times achieved Salvation by abiding by Yahweh?s commandments.
People in NT times achieve Salvation by acknowledging that Jesus is Lord.
A difference, when you had agreed that it was the same for all humans.
The God is a completely just and fair you would agree. There will be no excuse a human should be able to give to show another human had an advantage over them. So a person in the OT time, and one in the NT time may argue that the requirements for their counterpart were easier or more dificult as the case may be - and argue that had they been born at another time they might have succeeded.
Whereas I believe it was the same for every single person ever born including Isa.
The paradigm you hold has many holes and failures such as this. Why would the God suddenly change character like what you propose? Does this not betray to you that what you believe is human originated doctrine that is ever changing and subject to whims and desires?
-
Very well put Oben
the bible itself said no human carry the burden of another
peace bro
-
Again?.this is not what your book of faith states?
All mankind is fallen...just as stated in Holy Bible, and later copied into the Koran.
Mankind has always been on earth/land since his creation 230.
As stated in Genesis?
The garden is an elevated state of mind attained through peace and obedience to the God.
What is your scriptural basis for this assertion??
Just as those humans lived on the earth/land so do we. There was no mythical place from which they "fell".
Who ever said that the Garden of Eden was a ?mythical? place?
Genesis clearly gives us a geographical topology.
They were debased individually because of their act. Their "descent" was in the state of mind and bliss they were in.
Please show us a scriptural basis for your assertion that the fall was ?a state of mind?.
You may, as I do sometimes feel as if I am in 'heaven' here on earth. When that is broken you may also experience that descent into a lower state of mind due to breaking of the peace and disobedience.
Why would I feel that ?Heaven is here on Earth???
Apple Pie wrote
If you were not in the fallen state, then you would, at this moment, be residing in Eden?of which you are not?thus, you are paying for the original sin just like the rest of us.
A state which is in one's individual mind.
You and all your Christian brethren may feel in that fallen state because you are trapped in your false paradigm.
You just side-stepped the question.
Why are you not living in the Paradise (mental or physical) from which your original parents were expelled from??
The fact that you are here with everyone else proves that you are partaking in the Original Sin that they committed?otherwise you would be in the ?mental bliss?, that you want Paradise to be?
The importance of deeds is in one of the shortest chapters of the reading. Witness...
1031 By the ages.
1032 The human being is utterly lost.
1033 Except those who believe and lead a righteous life, and exhort one another to uphold the truth, and exhort one another to be steadfast.We are told that the essence of that belief is belief in the One God; and belief in the accountability you face for your actions (the Last Day).
Most excellent.
You just gave us a sura that was fully exegeted in the Christian section, along with sura 81, and sura 100 ? all of which are 100% Biblical Book of Revelation material.
By the way, thanks for recommending that your very own Koranic material be placed in the Christian section. After all?this is what it is?
You can find the sura 103 exegesis here?
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=69488#69488
Unfortunately, your Khalifa knock-off rendering does little to tell us of its source, nor of the Arabic behind the rendering.
This entire sura was copied from Revelation chapter 14.
WaalAAasri
103.1 And/by the time during which peoples pass away and become extinct.
Inna al-insana lafee khusrin
103.2 Certainly the human is in punishment for sin.
Illa allatheena amanoo waAAamiloo alssalihati watawasaw bialhaqqi watawasaw bialssabri
103.3 Except whom they believed and they did the righteous deeds, and bequeathed one another on account of the truth, and bequeathed one another on account of the patience.
Feel free to read the entire exegesis?here is a snapshot of what you must believe as truth?
wde h upomonh twn agiwn estin oi thrountes tas entolas tou qeou kai thn pistin ihsou
Rev 14.12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are the ones keeping the commands of God, and the truth of Jesus.
kai hkousa fwnhs ek tou ouranou legoushs grayon makarioi oi nekroi oi en kuriw apoqnhskontes ap arti nai legei to pneuma ina anapahsontai ek twn kopwn autwn ta gar erga autwn akolouqei met autwn
Rev 14.13 And I heard a voice out of Heaven saying to me, Write Blessed are the dead, the ones dying in the Lord from now. Yes, says the Spirit, they shall rest from their labors, and their works follow with them.
Pay special attention to what is stated?
Revelation is quite clear. A person?s ?ergon?, or deeds, follow ? or lag after them ? not before them.
If you take the time to exegete the Arabic (that you are entrusting your eternal soul towards...dubious that you will), then you would discover that sura 103 is stating the very same thing by the prolific usage of the perfect tense of the words in 103.3.
The prefect tense explicitly refers to completed action.
Not what you are doing, or what you are going to do?.but what already has been done.
Thus, deeds, while important, are not going to get you into Heaven.
Now?.what is going to get you into Heaven??
As it is, the same sura 103 tells us how.
The first thing mentioned (for the ones achieving Salvation) in 103.3 is to have a belief.
A belief in the Truth, and a belief in the Patience.
? Observe what has just taken place
A. The Koranic account twice proclaims the divinity of Jesus by identically mimicking the assertion of the Truth; i.e. ?alhaqqi? ( a name of ?allah?) as directly compared to the Truth ?pist is? of Jesus as proclaimed in Revelation
B. Jesus is the Truth
C. ?allah? is the truth
D. The Koranic account again proclaims the divinity of Jesus by identically mimicking the assertion of ?alsabri?, or the patience, as directly compared to the ?hupomone?, or patience of the ?hagios?, or most holy/saints as proclaimed in Revelation
E. Jesus is the patience
F. ?allah? is the patienceIt is crystal clear.
Not only did your sura 103 example come straight out of the Book of Revelation, but the classic Arabic clearly states that Salvation is first achieved through a belief in deity (i.e. originally applied to Jesus...then later copied to ?allah?).
Secondly, Salvation is achieved through the good deeds that you do after your belief in Jesus.
Here is Salvation from your very own book of faith?
? Belief in Jesus
? Good deeds FOLLOW you?not PRECEDE youYou cannot work your way into heaven.
Period.
Apple Pie wrote
Quote
No one can bear the burden of another. That's the message of truth.We don?t carry the sins of others humans?however, we do carry the original sin.
There is a logical falsehood in what you say.
I agree that no human can bear the burden of another. But I don't recognise what this "original sin" is. Was "Adam" born with the original sin also or did he commit it?
Sin existed before the creation of Adam & Eve.
Satan was the first to sin.
Sin was then imputed into mankind in the Garden.
If he committed it then it is his sin is it not? And being something he did then it cannot be the sin of any other human.
So if no human can bear the burden of another human then we cannot bear the burden of "Adam" if he was a human.
The genealogy contained in Genesis chapter 5 tells us why we are all sinners.
The paradigm of "original sin" is patently false.
It is clear that the Adamic story has its roots in the Book of Genesis, where it is clear that Adam sinned and all offspring are sinners.
Additionally, the zaboor proclaims that we are born into sin.
Apple Pie wrote
Please tell us why we are not in the garden right now?.if we are not carrying the original sin??
You can be in the 'garden' right now if you wanted. You keep yourself out.
Show us a scriptural basis for this assertion?
Apple Pie wrote
Salvation has always remained the same.
Salvation is through obedience to the Creator God of the Universe.
I know that attaining the goal has always been the same for every human and my beliefs are consistent with that; whereas even your admission in the next section that there is a difference in OT times and NT times accedes that it was not the same creating another logical problem for you.
There can be no logic issue with obeying the Creator God of the Universe.
So if we replace 'salvation' by 'attaining the award' then I agree with both the statements above as long as we mean ONE Creator God.
What would be your scriptural basis for the word substitution?.?
Apple Pie wrote
People in OT times achieved Salvation by abiding by Yahweh?s commandments.
People in NT times achieve Salvation by acknowledging that Jesus is Lord.
A difference, when you had agreed that it was the same for all humans.
Obedience is obedience.
What part of obedience do you disagree with?.?
The God is a completely just and fair you would agree. There will be no excuse a human should be able to give to show another human had an advantage over them. So a person in the OT time, and one in the NT time may argue that the requirements for their counterpart were easier or more dificult as the case may be - and argue that had they been born at another time they might have succeeded.
Whereas I believe it was the same for every single person ever born including Isa.
The paradigm you hold has many holes and failures such as this. Why would the God suddenly change character like what you propose? Does this not betray to you that what you believe is human originated doctrine that is ever changing and subject to whims and desires?
Again?what part of obedience do you disagree with?.?
Salvation is the same.
Obedience to God.
Since you are having difficulty separating Islam from your book of faith, perhaps this Adamic summary will help clarify your Biblical origins?
- What material Adam was created from
Dust 3.59
Earth 11.61; 18.37; 22.5; 30.19; 35.11; 40.67
Loam 23.12
Nothing 19.67
Water 22.5; 23.13-14; 25.54; 40.67; 71.14; 75.37-38; 96.2 - The formation of the first Human Being 7.11; 15.29; 32.9; 38.72; 40.67; 64.3; 82.7-8
- The original appearance of Adam 95.4-6
- Adam's choice 3.33
- Adam names everything 2.30-33
- Worship of Adam. Satan's Fall 2.34; 7.11; 15.28-38; 17.61; 1850; 20.116; 38.71-82
- Satan's profession 4.118-119; 7.16-17; 14.22; 15.39-43; 17.62-65; 36.60-62; 38.83-84
- The creation of Eve 4.1; 7.189; 30.21; 39.6; 42.11
- Allah gives Adam the interdiction 2.35; 7.19
- The constitution of the prohibited tree 23.20; 24.35; 95.1-2
- Allah's covenant with Adam 20.115
- Allah exhorts Adam 20.116-119
- Seduction by Satan 7.20-21,27; 20.120
- The fall of man 7.22-23; 20.121
- The curse 2.36; 7.24-25; 20.55; 22.66
- Adam's repentance and restitution 2.37; 7.23; 20.122
- Eve's pregnancy. The fall of the first human beings 7.189
- Expulsion from paradise 2.36; 7.24; 20.123
(Ref Light of life)
Sound familiar?..?
Looks like you need to become more cognizant of what your Koran teaches instead of what Islam is force-feeding you?.
Take care?
- What material Adam was created from
-
peace Apple Pie,
You would be correct if everything in the quran and bible was literal. But, alas, its not.
Please show us how your reasoning applies to the example given in the three ayahs of sura 103... wink
-
peace,
I think that surah simply states that the people who sin will be punished, except for those who believe and do good deeds. I don't think it means mankind as a whole is being punished because of the 'original sin.'
Believe in what....?
Good deeds based upon what....?
-
Believe in God.
Which God...?
The God of the Holy Bible....from whence this sura was copied from...?
Or..
The god of the Koran who wrapped itself in Biblical deity?
Good deeds based on instinct and God's system.
The "good deeds" described in the Arabic of your book of faith apply to "The Truth"...which is Jesus in the Book of Revelation...and "allah" in your book of faith.
Which one do you ascribe to pleasing...?
-
There's one God. People have different ideas about what God actually is, but it still remains only one God. And there's only one truth. And i hope you understand that this isnt about koran vs bible, this is about understanding the truth.
Can we count on you to support the Holy Bible, then....?
-
Hi Apple Pie,
There's one God. People have different ideas about what God actually is, but it still remains only one God. And there's only one truth. And i hope you understand that this isnt about koran vs bible, this is about understanding the truth. )
Can we count on you to support the Holy Bible, then....?
R u from some christian missionary with a target number for conversions? U seem to be working real hard on that.
People out here know the Quran and the Bible. So, lets leave it to them to decide for themselves, shall we? Its ones personal wish and responsibility.
There is no need for preaching one's religion or mocking the other's religion.
Peace!
-
Hi Apple Pie,
There's one God. People have different ideas about what God actually is, but it still remains only one God. And there's only one truth. And i hope you understand that this isnt about koran vs bible, this is about understanding the truth. )
Can we count on you to support the Holy Bible, then....?
R u from some christian missionary with a target number for conversions? U seem to be working real hard on that.
It's no trouble...
People out here know the Quran and the Bible.
Not likely....as we can see for ourselves...
So, lets leave it to them to decide for themselves, shall we? Its ones personal wish and responsibility.
There is no need for preaching one's religion or mocking the other's religion.
Who's mocking...?
-
HI Apple pie,
There is no need for preaching one's religion or mocking the other's religion.
Who's mocking...?
Stand before a mirror and u shall see the person.
Peace!
-
Peace,
There's perhaps one thing that Apple Pie has a fixation upon which they believe is some kind of irresistable refutation of the reading. And that is the allegation that the Koran is plagiarised.
The reality of the situation is probably better explained by way of parable. When painters paint, they all use canvas and paints with identical hues - does that mean they plagiarise from each other?
When there is a shared history, is a newer text going to deny the antecedent and come up with a brand new understanding?
Apple Pie has the following problems...
-
He wishes the Koran was something quite different to what he believes in. That would make it easier to deny and dismiss. There would be sufficient difference that he could ignore it without guilt or worry in his heart.
-
Failing this he uses the commonality of origins and congruity of themes as a reason to suppose plagiarism. The problem here is that the commonality should be the very reason he sees the truth in the newer but pure message of monotheism in the Koran.
The Koran does not bring a NEW message; it brings a REPEATED message to mankind.
This is what Apple Pie is confusing with his accusations.
Regards.
-
-
peace Apple Pie
I would support the bible, if what the bible said was verifiable. If it makes sense, why not? But the thing is, that the quran makes sense too. And i believe them to be part of the same message.
You can test the Holy Bible as truth by testing its physically verifiable statements regarding creation.
-
Peace,
There's perhaps one thing that Apple Pie has a fixation upon which they believe is some kind of irresistable refutation of the reading. And that is the allegation that the Koran is plagiarised.
The reality of the situation is probably better explained by way of parable. When painters paint, they all use canvas and paints with identical hues - does that mean they plagiarise from each other?
When there is a shared history, is a newer text going to deny the antecedent and come up with a brand new understanding?
And..when the authors of the Koran repeatedly tell us point-blank that they merely copied the previous scriptures....what does this tell us....?
Don't keep turning your head from this blatant fact.
shockApple Pie has the following problems...
-
He wishes the Koran was something quite different to what he believes in. That would make it easier to deny and dismiss. There would be sufficient difference that he could ignore it without guilt or worry in his heart.
-
Failing this he uses the commonality of origins and congruity of themes as a reason to suppose plagiarism. The problem here is that the commonality should be the very reason he sees the truth in the newer but pure message of monotheism in the Koran.
The Koran does not bring a NEW message; it brings a REPEATED message to mankind.
This is what Apple Pie is confusing with his accusations.
Regards.
Most interesting that you have absolutely NOTHING to say regarding my rebuttal to your previous post.
What happened to your cherry-picked sura 103....?
I must admit, you could not have picked a better example out of the entire Koran that supports the Biblical paradigm of how one attains eternal Salvation through Jesus Christ, than in sura 103.
We both know that sura 103 is entirely Book of Revelation material.
Period.
Stop.
End of story.
Why not step up to the plate and finally admit this to yourself.
As it is, you do nothing at all.
Zero.
Zippo.
Nadda.
Not even so much as verifying the classic Arabic in which you are basing your eternal soul towards.
You are running on pure adrenaline...
-
-
Peace Apple Pie,
why can't you, for once, pretend that the koran is a newer edition of the bible, instead of the koran being the result of plagiarism of the bible. Try to look at it that way for a moment and maybe you'll see what we're talking about here.