Islam: Our Partners in Peace...

[ForeverAutumn]

If you truly believe that, then canada is a more backwards and gullible country than I originally thought.

Actually, I like most canadians I've met. My only issue seems to be with a few here that exhibit that little man/big ego "moral superiority" attitude in massive doses about which I read.

Your words, here and in the past, tell a different story. But assuming that what you say is true...your problem is with only one or two people...then let me just say that when you put down a whole country based on the opinion of one or two people it makes you look bigoted and ignorant. I'm not saying that you are either of these things. I'm just saying how you appear in case you'd like to work on some self-improvement.

[markw]

Your words, here and in the past, tell a different story. But assuming that what you say is true...your problem is with only one or two people...then let me just say that when you put down a whole country based on the opinion of one or two people it makes you look bigoted and ignorant. I'm not saying that you are either of these things. I'm just saying how you appear in case you'd like to work on some self-improvement.

Are you saying that wnat I see here is atypical of the average canadian? For a suposedly small minority, you make a very vocal showing on this forum. How can I deny that when forming an opinion? Perhaps you should do more to show your country in a better light. After all you don't see Americans posting out of the clear blue on what they percieve to be problems with canada, do you?

[ForeverAutumn]

Are you saying that wnat I see here is atypical of the average canadian? For a suposedly small minority, you make a very vocal showing on this forum. How can I deny that when forming an opinion? Perhaps you should do more to show your country in a better light. After all you don't see Americans posting out of the clear blue on what they percieve to be problems with canada, do you?

I could say the same about you as an American. But I don't judge all Americans based on the opinions of just one or two.

I actually came back here to delete my comment. Not because I don't believe in what I was saying, but because I didn't like the way that I was behaving and portraying myself. I don't see the point in continuing this conversation, so I'm not going to.

[Feanor]

Your words, here and in the past, tell a different story. But assuming that what you say is true...your problem is with only one or two people...then let me just say that when you put down a whole country based on the opinion of one or two people it makes you look bigoted and ignorant. I'm not saying that you are either of these things. I'm just saying how you appear in case you'd like to work on some self-improvement.

There's a contradiction implicit here. On the one hand Markw wants the USA to be recognized as a world leader. But craving that recognition, he overlooks that with the recognition inevidably comes scrutiny.

How come Americans don't seem to criticize Canadians as much as vice versa? See above; also, most Americans never give Canada a second thought.

[markw]

There's a contradiction implicit here. On the one hand Markw wants the USA to be recognized as a world leader. But craving that recognition, he overlooks that with the recognition inevidably comes scrutiny.

How come Americans don't seem to criticize Canadians as much as vice versa? See above; also, most Americans never give Canada a second thought.

Why should we give it a second thought? Nothing really going on up there, is there? Otherwise why should our comings and goings bother you so? Haven't you got your own life, destiny, and identity?

Scrutiny is one thing and we're big enough to handle that. But, it seems that (some of) our neighbors from the north seem to get their jollies by trying to denigrate us at every point. This is even more strange in that they seem to have totally been enveloped by our culture and seem to have no problems living that life. Now, why don't you see what you can do to augment to it instead of totally trying to become us? I mean, let's be real. Aside from Quebec, canada might as well be the US.

Why don't we bother criticizing canada? I guess being the main go-to guy of the free world we have bigger issues to worry about than trying to drag down our neighbors. But, if schadenfreude is a major portion of your culture, then have at it, eh?.

[Mr Peabody]

It's one thing to say you don't believe, and disagree with Christianity but then it's another for that same person to try to tell the world what a Christian is. Feanor it would be a full time job to correct your inaccuracies regarding the Bible. I say Bible opposed to using "christianity" due to the word becoming so misused and represented by many of the groups you hold up as examples. Both them and you are misguided to say the least.

[Feanor]

It's one thing to say you don't believe, and disagree with Christianity but then it's another for that same person to try to tell the world what a Christian is. Feanor it would be a full time job to correct your inaccuracies regarding the Bible. I say Bible opposed to using "christianity" due to the word becoming so misused and represented by many of the groups you hold up as examples. Both them and you are misguided to say the least.

Do you have a particular "inaccuracy" of mine that you care to point out?

[JohnMichael]

It's one thing to say you don't believe, and disagree with Christianity but then it's another for that same person to try to tell the world what a Christian is. Feanor it would be a full time job to correct your inaccuracies regarding the Bible. I say Bible opposed to using "christianity" due to the word becoming so misused and represented by many of the groups you hold up as examples. Both them and you are misguided to say the least.

I am amazed by those who profess to be Christians who do not emulate Jesus. My definition is someone who is loving, forgiving and a person of peace. The bible was written by many people over many hundreds of years. Of course the translation errors from languages to languages. Then different faiths selected the books they wanted. I could not be a bible literalist with all the errors. Then of course on top of that we have ministers who preach to support their biases using chosen parts of the bible.

[Mr Peabody]

I am not going through the entire thread to debate you point by point, I don't have the time. In addition, by not having any faith you are not on the same playing field.

As a recent example, no where does the Bible teach women are second class citizens. With that being said, the Bible does state, if I may paraphrase, "Christ is the head of the church, man is the head of his household". Men are to love, respect and honor their wives but God put into place an order of authority. One has to take the Bible in it's entirety or not at all. People like to believe God is love and He is but they refuse to accept that He also warns of a not so pleasant eternity for the disobedient.

[bobsticks]

One has to take the Bible in it's entirety or not at all...

No one doesn't and I would point out that the most fervent of the Far Right idealogues in this country never do. I could write something pithy to illustrate the point or one could just take a stroll down Leviticus Lane turn left at Numbers Boulevard and hit that nice little cafe at the end of Rue de Paul's Epistles for a steaming hot cup of hypocrisy.

All that said, it's still unconscionably wrong to censor the dingbat.

[Feanor]

I am not going through the entire thread to debate you point by point, I don't have the time. In addition, by not having any faith you are not on the same playing field.

As a recent example, no where does the Bible teach women are second class citizens. With that being said, the Bible does state, if I may paraphrase, "Christ is the head of the church, man is the head of his household". Men are to love, respect and honor their wives but God put into place an order of authority. One has to take the Bible in it's entirety or not at all. People like to believe God is love and He is but they refuse to accept that He also warns of a not so pleasant eternity for the disobedient.

Your paraphrase illustrates my point. One may argue for a benign interpretation, but the same words have been used a various times in history, including the present day by some, to vigorously subordinate women.

"Taking the Bible as a whole" is a matter of smoothing over the Book's many contradictions -- when people have done that they are come to a wide range of conclusions on almost every issue. For my part, I contrast the jealous, vengeful, and genocidal god of the Old Testament with the (relaitvely) compassionate god of the New Testament. (Some heretical theologians have actually declared that they are different gods.) Personally I consider the Old and New Testaments not reconcilable. Muslims, of course, consider both of those complilations to be full of errors and distortions.

[Hyfi]

I am not going through the entire thread to debate you point by point, I don't have the time. In addition, by not having any faith you are not on the same playing field.

As a recent example, no where does the Bible teach women are second class citizens. With that being said, the Bible does state, if I may paraphrase, "Christ is the head of the church, man is the head of his household". Men are to love, respect and honor their wives but God put into place an order of authority. One has to take the Bible in it's entirety or not at all. People like to believe God is love and He is but they refuse to accept that He also warns of a not so pleasant eternity for the disobedient.

I don't want to start a huge religious debate here and I would not consider myself to be an Atheist, but the book is just a book. It has already been proven that it was manipulated into its current form by rearranging, editing, and burning anything that may sway the story attempting to be told.

Most of the book is written in code because each different sect tried to hide what it was doing. Scrolls found at the Dead Sea location contain books of the bible written well before the book was put together, but had been changed later when the book was assembled.

All 4 gospels totally contradict each other but are supposed to be true and when marked in red, the actual words of Jesus. The 4 books were written so long after the fact that nobody would have remembered conversations word for word to be able to quote them.

The book as a whole is all written in correspondences and were never intended to be taken in the literal sense, until Organized Religion, Christianity, decided that they could control the masses with fear. You can go to 10 churches on Sunday and get a totally different view of the same passage due to mis-interpretations.

One cannot preach about the All Loving, All Forgiving God and then turn around and tell you to be fearful. It is not logical. It is one or the other or a farce. We are all the same, made up of the same stuff and in the scheme of all things bigger, we are all one.

Many here are probably not too familiar with Emanual Swedenborg, or the New Church. (Pretty sure Mr. P and I have exchanged some thoughts on his book Heaven and Hell which is a good suggested read in one of the newer translated forms) The link below is to some of Swedenborgs writings which is his enlightened interpretation of the opening books of the bible. He goes basically phrase by phrase and explains the intent of the passage, the correspondences and meaning, and then points out all the related passages in the rest of the book so when you read them, you can refer back and understand what it was intended to mean. I reccomend these readings for anyone who thinks they know the book or want to understand it better.

http://www.magister.msk.ru/library/b...g/swedenb1.htm

If any here ever saw the Robin Williams movie "What Dreams May Come", the whole premise of Hell was taken straight out of Swedenborg's Heaven and Hell. If you read thru the link above, it is a lot to go thru and it took me a good bit of time, you will recognize elements of the movie such as the scene when they were in the boat going thru what is called 'Faces of the Water" Also if you read Heaven and Hell, you would recognize why the movie had Levels of Hell as well as noticing that Like Minded people go with the same when in heaven or hell which is actually the lowest (farthest place from God).

[GMichael]

(Mike opens the door slowly and slips onto the couch unnoticed)
Hey LJ, got anymore popcorn?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

(Mike opens the door slowly and slips onto the couch unnoticed)
Hey LJ, got anymore popcorn?

Move over Mikey, and pass the popcorn and coke. Oh...fasten those seatbelts!

[GMichael]

Move over Mikey, and pass the popcorn and coke. Oh...fasten those seatbelts!

Sorry, no Coke. Got some beer though, and coffee is almost ready. Would ya like a brew of one kind or another?

[GMichael]

Rough crowd.

[Feanor]

Rough crowd.

I'm bailing, GM. I can hancle the roughness but I haven't patience for the "Shut up and be grateful" line of argument from American chauvinists.

[GMichael]

I'm bailing, GM. I can hancle the roughness but I haven't patience for the "Shut up and be grateful" line of argument from American chauvinists.

But....
But.....
But I'm a nice American chauvinists.

[Mr Peabody]

Feanor, God is the same today as He was in the beginning. He first communicated with patriarchs of the families, then the Jews received the Law, commonly referred to as the Ten Commandments but the law was much more vast and then the New Testament or Covenant with God in which He communicates through His word. The NT has warning of the same vengeance, it just hasn't come to pass yet. So there's still time for you.

Hyfi, the Bible does not contradict itself. It's just those who are enemies of it and ignorant of it's content who twist words to slander it. The "Four Gospels" are in harmony. They were written by four different men to four different audiences. So one text may emphasize a point more or elaborate more on an issue. The men who wrote the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit which fell upon them on the day of Pentecost. Jesus told the apostles He would send them a "helper" referring to the Holy Spirit. One of the gifts was ready recall of the things Christ taught them.

It's true that you can go to 10 different churches and receive 10 different interpretations. In fact, if you look hard enough you'd find just the right church that allows you to do whatever fits you. That is not God's fault nor the Bible. It's the fault of those who don't accept God's authority and His word in it's entirety. As one visits these various churches, it's their responsibility to look into the Bible to see if they follow the pattern written within, if not, then you are in the wrong place. The NT states the road to salvation is narrow and the road to destruction is wide. If the NT was all about only one thing as Feanor stated then it would be only one road for every one and we could do what we want.

[Feanor]

...

Hyfi, the Bible does not contradict itself. It's just those who are enemies of it and ignorant of it's content who twist words to slander it. The "Four Gospels" are in harmony. They were written by four different men to four different audiences. So one text may emphasize a point more or elaborate more on an issue. The men who wrote the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit which fell upon them on the day of Pentecost. Jesus told the apostles He would send them a "helper" referring to the Holy Spirit. One of the gifts was ready recall of the things Christ taught them.

....

A good book I read recently on the subject of the gospels and also the early history (1-600 CE) is the following. The author discusses at length the relative content, consistency, and historical context of the gospels, Letters of Paul, and Acts of the Apostles ...

Charles Freeman: A New History of Early Christianity

... see Amazon.com

Note that reviews of this book are across the spectrum -- I tend to feel is is a very informative read, and other people are quite indignant.

[Hyfi]

A good book I read recently on the subject of the gospels and also the early history (1-600 CE) is the following. The author discusses at length the relative content, consistency, and historical context of the gospels, Letters of Paul, and Acts of the Apostles ...

Charles Freeman: A New History of Early Christianity

... see Amazon.com

Note that reviews of this book are across the spectrum -- I tend to feel is is a very informative read, and other people are quite indignant.

All one has to do is Google "Contradictions in the Bible" or "Contradictions of the four Gospels" to learn all one needs. I got 190,000 hits on the latter.

Nuf said.

Edit:

Mr P-

Mat 28 - 28:8 So 10 they left the tomb quickly, with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

Mark 16 - 16:8 Then 7 they went out and ran from the tomb, for terror and bewilderment had seized them. 8 And they said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

So which one is it and how come the divine blessing of recalling everything exactly as it happened and was said didn't help out too well here?

That is just one easy one to see. Thousands more available on demand.

[JohnMichael]

Question everything and do not drink from the communal kool-aid vat.

[GMichael]

Question everything and do not drink from the communal kool-aid vat.

That's not Kool-aid my friend. But you sure are right about not drinking it.

[ForeverAutumn]

Feanor, God is the same today as He was in the beginning. He first communicated with patriarchs of the families, then the Jews received the Law, commonly referred to as the Ten Commandments but the law was much more vast and then the New Testament or Covenant with God in which He communicates through His word. The NT has warning of the same vengeance, it just hasn't come to pass yet. So there's still time for you.

LOL! That was funny!

[JohnMichael]

LOL! That was funny!

Almost as funny as his judging me a Sad Excuse of Humanity.