The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Would it be fair

Would it be fair
Posted by AssyrianMuslim (Guest) - Saturday, May 17 2008, 23:43:04 (CEST)
from 75.219.194.48 - 48.sub-75-219-194.myvzw.com Commercial - Windows Codename Longhorn - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

If things aren't to be taken literally, then I can fairly say that the "crucifixion" of Jesus wasn't literal but metaphoric, or that "death" "rise from the dead" and "suffer" could also be taken differently. In fact I could start an entire denomination based on that and the Chrisistans have doing this for a long time now. There are 34,000 different kinds of Christian denominations and this means too many different doctrines and understandings of the same verses. I will read something one way and Jumblat will come and tell me something else. Poor Jumblat will say one thing and another Christian from another doctrine church will come and rebuke him and say he is wrong and the list will go on forever. The bottom line is that one can get all kinds of different interpretations from the Bible books. That is how these books are. They are unclear and can create all kinds of difficulties. If pancho wanted to he could go in somewhere in the Bible and find something to make a prophecy about himself and start ww3 or another new religion for that matter.

I agree that not everything is alway literal even in the Quran when it calls certain people "blind" "deaf" it means that they are not seeing the message" or wanting to "understand". There are such cases in the Quran and the Bible, but that is not the issue. The issue is that there are places where Jesus does not call himself "prince of peace" but said he came to bring a "sword" "fire" etc. We don't need a Christian to tell us that because we know he didn't bring peace since it has been some 2,000 years since he lived and there is no peace. But the bottom line is that Christians been programmed since childhood to believe that poor Jesus the blondish haired blue eyed haandsome man couldn't harm a fly so they feel embarrassed or puzzled when they encounter stories of Jesus going wild on the Jews in the temple. He is recorded as having over turned the tables and whipped them out with wire out of the temple. When such cases are encountered, Christians feel embarrassed. I am not embarrassed of the Quran nor am I saying that Jesus was a warmonger, but the problem is with Christians interpreting literally when convienient and only metaphoric when embarrassing.

I know there are verses of fighting in the Quran because I know we are allowed to defend ourselves against injustice, oppression and any types of wrong doings, but we are also commanded to be just, honest, patient, have mercy, be willing to forgive and not go over board when having to fight. We do not go an kill entire nations because of one person, starve people to death, destroy their means of lively hood or kill innocent family or people of the guilty, but we know that the Quran allows us to defend ourselves ans speaks of fighting. The word "sword" is nowhere in the Quran and I challenge anyone to find it in the Quran. The word for sword is "saif" in Arabic and anyone is free to go look for it. I also challenge anyone to bring me a verse from the Quran where it commands us to kill people unjustly, kill babies, plants, women, and even animals and find a verse where we are told "spare no one". That is of course not the issue here anyways but the point is that Christians have to be fair and consistent when applying this method to the Bible.

If "swords", "fire" and other things aren't literal, then I can fairly say that "death" "rise from the dead" "suffer" "crucifixion" and other things aren't literal. For example in the book of Genesis, god is displayed as being a liar and the devil as truthful by telling Adam and Eve to eat from the tree and not to be worried. God is reported to have threatened they would "die" if they ate from that particulat tree. Well it happens that they lived for over 900 more years afterwards and did not "die". Christians interpret that to be not really "die" but something else. In that case, "death" can be taken that way in the case of Jesus as well and I can say that he wasn't for real when he is reported to have spoke about his "death" "rise from the dead" "suffering" and other cases. I think that is a fair approach or am I not?



---------------------


The full topic:



Content-length: 4520
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-ms-application, application/vnd.ms-xpsdocument, appli...
Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate
Accept-language: en-us
Cache-control: no-cache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Cookie: *hidded*
Host: www.insideassyria.com
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?.07Yc.
Ua-cpu: x86
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9