lpetrich

SOMMS, which God? Someone here made a similar case for Allah and Mohammed and Islam.

Also, it would be MUCH more reliable to implant a revelation in everybody's consciousness. That way, awareness of it will be independent of translators and interpreters and the like, and it will be apparent for all of humanity.

Imagine that you are an omnipotent being who would like to send a message. Would you be happy to see your message misunderstood and misrepresented? I am far from being omnipotent, and I don't like that happening to me.

GunnerJ

I can hear SOMMS revving up the "demonic imposter" defense right now...

Megatron

You heard that too, eh?

Hmm... might as well cut it off at the pass... and ask a simple little question.

SOMMS: "How do you know the demonic imposter wasn't Jesus?"

[ March 01, 2002: Message edited by: Zero Angel ]</p>

Technos

No matter how many times we tell them it isn't, they keep on carrying the notion that christianity is somehow special. Well, I'm sure it's special to them, in about the same way Santa and Pokemon are special to many children. I wonder if they realize that all gods look alike to us...

hinduwoman

Poor SOMS is outgunned by everyone else here. But he simply doesnot realize it.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

HRG,
Glad you asked. Why don't I convert to Islam?

-Be completely miraculuous.
Islam's 'miracle' the Quran is not completely miraculous...it is a book. I can take the book somewhere and have it copied. Perhaps it was written by man, perhaps it wasn't.
Jesus' resurrection IS miraculous. No one could have perform such a feat. No man ever has. I can't 'copy' the miracle Jesus performed.

-Be unambiguous.
Maybe, maybe not. The Quran: Is God the only one who could have made the Quran? No. Could I have written the Quran? Possibly. SOMEBODY had to write it. That somebody could have been someone else than God.

The Resurrection: Is God the only one who could died and come back to life? Uh...yeah. Could some man have died and then come back to life. No.

The resurection is VERY unambiguous as to who could have perfomed such a feat...the Quran does not have this unambiguity.

-Have documentation:
Authenticty of documentation is not a strong point of the Quran as the entire original work was completely destroyed by Othman, third Caliph shortly after is was made and a new 'authentic' verson was constructed.

The New Testament on the other hand has huge amounts of verified documentation that support its authenticity.


There is no other classic work in mankinds history that is as well-supported as the New Testament. Period.

However, here are a few more reasons why I don't convert to Islam.
-It's origin is too opportunistic and suspicious for me. That is to as say that Mohamed was a 6th century man who first attempted being a prophet of Judaism and Christianity. It wasn't until AFTER these religions rejected him as a prophet that he began making claims of biblical errancy and commanded that his followers face Mecca during prayer.

-Rationally, I can't do what Islam requires me to do...that is: To FIRST accept the Quran as the Word of God THEN interpret the world accordingly.
This is simply blind acceptance.

When I read the New Testament, I read the New Testament for what it is...a first century account of the life of Jesus Christ. I read it as a historical document FIRST. THEN AS REASON
DICTATES I accept it as the Word of God.

-Theologically, Islam doesn't make alot of sense to me. That is to say:
IF God did exist AND man separated himself from God through sin
THEN there is nothing man can do of his own accord to 'force' his way back into God's presence. God MUST be the one who allows/initiates this process.

This is completely opposite of what the Quran holds...that if one does enough 'good things' then one can 'force' their way back into God's presence.

If God exists...THEN we can't 'force' God to do anything.

Thoughts and comments welcomed,


Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

[ March 03, 2002: Message edited by: Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas ]</p>

Mad Kally

Off to Disneyuniverse with you, little loon boy!

Malaclypse the Younger

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

It should be noted that you have little evidence that Jesus actually performed any miracle. All you have are a few dubious reports that he did so.

I also suspect that the Quran asserts "miracles" other than its own existence.

Again, you are not applying your criteria consistently. Could I have written the bible? Perhaps so; I have a reasonably vivid imagination.

The bible is much more ambiguous with regard to theology than the Quran.

Since you do not have very good evidence that the resurrection actually occured, the question is, could only God have caused those stories to be written? Uh... no.

Oh please. These statements indicate nothing less than a lack of even superficial understanding of the historiocity of both documents.

This statement is simply ignorant.

The origin of christianity is not opportunistic?

Can you even hear yourself?

Stop! You're killing me!

This is logic!? You're simply pulling arbitrary premises out of your... hat.

Your understanding of Islamic theology is obviously inept.

Since you ask, it is in disgust of this sort of ridiculous "reasoning" that I maintain my atheism.

GunnerJ

Um... when was "Islam's miracle" established to be the Koran?

Correction:

"The claims of Jesus' resurrection are completely ordinary. Pleanty of people could have made such claims. Pleanty of similar claims have been made. We can make many copies of a fabricated story. Even if such an event happened, we have no idea how common such an event may be, as we would have to investigate other claims of ressurection after that point."

This is much closer to the truth.

::Watches the F-15 that was the point of the question preform a sonic boom over SOMMS's head and watches SOMMS take no notice:: Since all we have are claims of the ressurection, this standard applies also. Please do a little more thinking before each post.

Prove it! By what reasoning do you assert that the god of Xian cult mythology is the onlt being who could POSSIBLY have ever died and returned to life?

Unsupported bullshit assertion.

Arguing from a false premise.

...and the entire Bible was compiled by the early church based soley on what their current beliefs were. Once again, MISSING THE POINT.

So strange, then, that whenever this wild assertion is thrown around, none of the "verified" "documentation" that "support" the NT's "authenticity" is presented with it. Hmmm...

Well, it's nice of you to say that, but vague, unsupported, bullshit assertions carry no weight here.

::Watches that F-15 double back and strafe the ground SOMMS sits on, as he stares into space, before it drops a tactical nuke on the Statue of Liberty, while SOMMS comments nonchalantly on the weather to a random passerby, who is gawking in horror::

Pot, kettle, black.

WRONG. You read it as you have been told to by cult members, with no basis for calling the conflicting hagiographies known as the Gospels historical.

Then we are left with two possibilities:
-Your reason has failed you
-You have not read the the conflicting, unsubstantiated cult-propaganda/hagiographies known as the Gospels

I'm leaning towards the first, and as evidence, I submit your next "point."

Sure, as long as we're assuming the unsubstantiated dogma of one cult in order to judge another. But you have never established that your statement, "if God did exist, and man separated himself from God through sin,
then there is nothing man can do of his own accord to 'force' his way back into God's presence." It is, in fact, nothing but an ugly non sequitur that can only be supported by presupposing the Xian cult dogma. So much for letting reason dictate anything.

And, until you establish that you non sequitur-ious, invalid, cult dogma-based assumption that "if God did exist, and man separated himself from God through sin,
then there is nothing man can do of his own accord to 'force' his way back into God's presence," you have no argument against it.

BTW, when did "reason" ever dictate that if another cult's dogma conflicts with your cult dogma, then by an invalid, non sequitur-ious, unsupported line of pseudo-reasoning, the other cult's dogma must be wrong?

More unsupported bullshit assertion that refutes your claim of using reason to dictate your decisions.

Well, as a comment, I'd appriciate a little more thought on your part.

Pitshade

First you need to show that Jesus did in fact die and come back, then you need to show how only the JC god could have done this. Remember that many cultures have ressurection stories in a similar vein. (Osiris, Persephone)

If this is so cut-n-dried, you should have no trouble citing contemporary non-christian accounts of the life of Jesus and the ressurection.

By your logic, I take it you are Calvinist? Traditional christian views of salvation include works as well. Examples of this are baptism, repentence, acknowleging Jesus as lord and savior. Without these works, no one can be saved.