• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

How Jesus ended up as God

syed putra

Alfrescian
Loyal
And the hadith. It was the final moslem book, compiled about 150 years after the first version of the quran came out. What we do know of muhammad or mahomet, and of islam, comes largely from the hadith
Historians do not take hadiths seriously as it was written by hearsay wrt Mahomet. At one time they thought Mahomet was a fictitious character until the parched agreement was found wrt medina peace accord with his name on it. Carbon dated to about the time he existed.
And now, the theory is that whatever it was sbout mahomet, it was erased, eradicated, exterminated. Nothing about him survived. Zero.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
I've mentioned this before to people. Not here, so I write now. If you just follow Christ's examples and throw out the rest of the book, it's pretty darn good.

If Jesus came to earth only to preach and give us rules for living, then faith in him even as a prophet is worthless. There are many do-gooders and motivational speakers today who can fulfill this role. And given that nearly all of them don't have a historical record of banditry, killing people or pedophilia, they might make better role models than prophets or religious figures from the ancient world.

If the rest of the Bible gets thrown out, then the part about Jesus makes no sense. The earlier books of the Bible gives prophecies about Jesus' coming, his place of birth, the significance of blood sacrifice to atone for sin. You might as well read an autobiography of John Tan if you need help for self improvement.
 

syed putra

Alfrescian
Loyal
N these mudslimes see Christians as infidels because of idolatry. They should look in the mirror
They are indeed misguided. The abassids that took over the Islamic empire after a civil war were remnants of a meccan idol worship family. They were the one who were instrumental in creating the hadiths, erasing any written history about Mahomet, anf turning a way of life into a religion.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
N these mudslimes see Christians as infidels because of idolatry. They should look in the mirror

moslems see everyone as infidels, including moslems who don't share their beliefs. mahomet's closest companions were killing each other for the same reason.

When moslems accuse others of wrongdoing, the moslems have always done the same wrongdoing on a very much larger scale and are proud of it. They just don't like it being done to themselves.
 

syed putra

Alfrescian
Loyal
So if I follow the laws, God loves me. If I don't follow the laws, I'm going to hell? How about I follow 95% of the laws? Good enough to go to heaven?
Nope. As it turns out, syariah is also similar to that of the Jewish " talmud".

Initially Jewish ideas found their way into Islam but the process’s subsequent reversal can be spotted in matters of finance and commerce. Talmudic law matured in Baghdad in a commercial, Islamic environment and Shmuel had already declared that when it came to civil law “The law of the land is the law”. This gave the geonim flexibility in commercial matters to amend or even abrogate Talmudic sanction as necessary.

We can see an example of this flexibility in the laws governing money transfers. The Talmud had instituted that, as a precaution against fraud, merchants could not transfer money by bills of exchange even when these were countersigned by witnesses.

However a geonic ruling overturned this ruling on the basis that people were already doing it, and that it was in accordance with the Islamic laws that regulated merchants: “It is true that the sages said we should not send money by bills of exchange, even if witnesses have signed them. However, since we have seen that people use them we have begun to accept them in court in order not to impede trade between people, and we give judgement according to the traders’ law; neither more nor less” (Teshuvat Hageonim).

Mark Cohen (in Under Crescent & Cross – The Jews in the Middle Ages) points out that this “shared judgement of Muslim and Jewish legal experts … could only occur in a market atmosphere that knew no confessional boundaries”.

An extensive survey by Gideon Libson has shown similarities between the rulings of a tenth-century gaon, Shmuel ben Hofni, and Islamic legal writing of the same period. Of course, as Libson concedes, the fact that there are similarities between two legal rulings in different systems doesn’t necessarily mean that one system was dependent upon the other; they may both have independently derived their rulings from a third source that they each knew.

But with all the other evidence of contact and cross-influences between the faiths, it’s pretty likely that the Talmudic and Islamic systems of law influenced each other.

Talmudic and Islamic scholars cross-fertilized in legal matters because they lived in the same mercantile society. But the two traditions didn’t just overlap when it came to the law. Story telling was an art in the folklore-rich Arabian world.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
We can see an example of this flexibility in the laws governing money transfers. The Talmud had instituted that, as a precaution against fraud, merchants could not transfer money by bills of exchange even when these were countersigned by witnesses.

However a geonic ruling overturned this ruling on the basis that people were already doing it, and that it was in accordance with the Islamic laws that regulated merchants: “It is true that the sages said we should not send money by bills of exchange, even if witnesses have signed them.

There is nothing religious or immoral about transferring money by bills of exchange. Worries about fraud is legitimate, but it has nothing to do with religion. Money transfer over vast distances without physically transporting it has been done in ancient China successfully.


Flying cash (飛錢) is a type of paper negotiable instrument used during China's Tang dynasty invented by merchants but adopted by the state. Its name came from their ability to transfer cash across vast distances without physically transporting it.[1] It is a precursor to true banknotes which appeared during the Song dynasty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_cash
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
moslems see everyone as infidels, including moslems who don't share their beliefs. mahomet's closest companions were killing each other for the same reason.

When moslems accuse others of wrongdoing, the moslems have always done the same wrongdoing on a very much larger scale and are proud of it. They just don't like it being done to themselves.
That is why mainstream Christians like Catholics will b extinct soon..like sheeps to the slaughter
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Book Review: Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth by Reza Aslan
2517ba741d849592072baaaaa1adc323
by Rick on April 11, 2020

**** Recommend it

When it first came out in 2013, this book took a lot of heat from religious scholars that did not agree with Reza Aslan’s point of view. I think there were some sour greats too because it shot to the top of the NYTs best seller’s list and the the many works of these scholars’ on the same material did not. One of their main points was that since Reza Aslan was not saying something new about the material, somehow the book had no value. It is the same reaction that scholars give Malcom Gladwell too. These two authors synthesize deep research on complex subjects outside their field and try to make it readable and entertaining for the masses. When you do that, you are going to explain some of the deep-level details wrong or at least with not enough nuance to be completely correct. In other words, instead of writing an entire book on the subject or a chapter, the idea might get a sentence. For a non-scholar like me, I find that valuable.


From my side, the big hit on Aslan’s “research” is that he clearly states in numerous examples that the accepted gospels of the New Testament— Mark, Matthew, Luke and John— and other religious documents written at the same time are pure fiction, but then he cites them routinely to make his points. From his point of view, he would probably say that he was trying to get at the historical meaning of the Gospels by analyzing what they said not as historical truths but by analyzing what they were trying to say. He also states in the foreword that biblical scholars unanimously agree that if a fact is present in all four of the Gospels, then it is likely a historical truth. I find that ludicrous.

But I did find the book fascinating. Aslan gave me some things to think about in areas that I had not considered before.

Here is what I learned:

  • The bulk of Aslan’s ideas came from a 1967 book called “Jesus and the Zealots” written by S.G.F. Brandon
  • During Jesus’ ministry (28-30 CE), there were 72 disciples. Some were women and named in the Gospels. But the inner circle, The Twelve, were the principal bearers of Jesus’s message—the apostoloi, or “ambassadors”—apostles sent off to neighboring towns and villages to preach independently and without supervision. They would not be the leaders of Jesus’s movement, but rather its chief missionaries. Yet the Twelve had another more symbolic function, one that would manifest itself later in Jesus’s ministry. For they will come to represent the restoration of the twelve tribes of Israel, long since destroyed and scattered.
  • The texts used by scholars to research the historical Jesus were not written by historians. In fact the idea of a historian who checks and triple checks every fact was unknown to these writers. They were trying to craft a consistent message, dogma, or doctrine. They weren’t interested in historical facts.
  • Jesus was not the only messiah running around Jerusalem. Before and after his death, there were boatloads of them. Rome considered all of them seditionists and when they caused enough trouble, Roman leaders would have them crucified.
  • Jesus was not the only miracle worker running around Jerusalem either. There were tons. Magic was a thing back in the day and showmen and miracle workers not associated with religion were legitimate ways to make a living.
  • The two other men crucified with Jesus had a sign on their cross labeled “lestai” which meant bandit or Thief. But these words meant seditionist back in the day, not just simple thievery. Rome reserved crucifixion for revolting slaves as an example to deter. Jesus’s sign reads “ ‘titulus’ meaning KING OF THE JEWS. His crime: striving for kingly rule; sedition. And so, like every bandit and revolutionary, every rabble-rousing zealot and apocalyptic prophet who came before or after him—like Hezekiah and Judas, Theudas and Athronges, the Egyptian and the Samaritan, Simon son of Giora and Simon son of Kochba—Jesus of Nazareth is killed for daring to claim the mantle of king and messiah.”
  • The famous biblical story of Pontious Pilate, washing his hands of the entire matter, is likely pure fiction. He signed the death orders of many jews during his reign and likely didn’t give Jesus a second thought.
  • The biblical story of Mary and Joseph traveling to Bethlehem for the census is likely pure fiction too. Jesus was born in Nazareth, a small backwater. Mary was also likely an unwed mother.
  • The biblical story of Jesus on a rampage inside the Jerusalem Temple represents what Jesus was about compared to the other Messiahs. Rome’s playbook after conquering a land was to appoint local leaders to run things and to collect taxes. They let the conquered people keep their religions. In Jerusalem priests worked for the Romans, not the Jewish people. The poor had no way to even access the temple. You had to pay big money even to get close and most of that went to the local Jewish priests (plus taxes off the top for the Romans.) Jesus thought that anybody in the religion could have access to God without having to pay money. He thought the the Jewish priests were corrupt. The Jewish priests wanted Jesus crucified, not the Jewish people.
  • Jesus’ reign lasted only two years from the time he came into Jerusalem until his death.
  • “Jesus was part of a large family that included at least four brothers who are named in the gospels—James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas—and an unknown number of sisters who, while mentioned in the gospels, are unfortunately not named.”
  • James, Jesus’ brother, became the leader of the movement after Jesus’ death. He was well respected by the Jewish people and devout to the Tora. He followed all the rules as well as preached about Jesus’ way of bringing God to everybody.
  • Paul was a rebel. He preached Jesus’ way but said you didn’t have to follow the Tora Rules.
  • Team James mostly stayed in Jerusalem. They hated what Paul was doing outside of Jerusalem and brought him back a couple of times to chew his ass. When the Romans razed Jerusalem in 70 CE, they destroyed all of the writings of Team James. After the destruction, the bulk of the writings that survived came from Paul as he wrote letters to Jewish leaders outside Jerusalem. His promise that you could be close to God without having to follow the Torah appealed to gentiles especially in Rome and thus became the incipient split of Christianity and Jewish faith.
I enjoyed this book. I never understood why the Jews wanted to crucify one of their own until I read this. I never understood how Christianity split from the Jewish faith. I never understood the relationships between Jesus, John the Baptist, and Paul and I defiantly didn’t know about the significance of Jesus’ brother, James. I recommend it.
or being the anglophile you are, you can just watch the life of brian.

But as always, the big demons are the priests.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
God, Scripture and Prophet can never be separated. All are interlink. The prophet/messenger had to warn the people, to be good and not evil. He had to bring the people together and worship the creator and not to go astray. Prophet cant live forever. But the message is eternal i.e. Quran.
says the people who wrote the Koran. If god says it himself, I will believe it. Until then it's their word vs mine. Ownself say ownself is message of god is definitely NOT proof by god / of god / from god.

Until the day god says the Koran is his message, the only people saying it are the self-serving priests and whoever follows them. In short, you are not following god, but you are following people who insist they are the ones with god's message without proof. Only pompous boasters will claim they know god when it is unknowable. I'm not following pompous boasters. In fact, I think they will have to answer to god when they pass on why they keep using his name. Good luck to all of them. I don't want to spend all eternity answering for leading people without the right to do so. It's not their right to claim god's anything.

I see no god in religion only self-interest. Self-interest from the leaders who want followers who give them money and whatever else another human can give. Self-interest from followers who don't want to be left out of the good side of something all-powerful as they describe it. Nothing godly about religion. ok, ok. I will concede a few moral things here and there, but it's nowhere near god. Also because it was written by men a few non-moral things here and there too. Humans are capable of beauty, but they are not capable of being perfect. The Koran is a product of that.
 
Last edited:

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
If Jesus came to earth only to preach and give us rules for living, then faith in him even as a prophet is worthless. There are many do-gooders and motivational speakers today who can fulfill this role. And given that nearly all of them don't have a historical record of banditry, killing people or pedophilia, they might make better role models than prophets or religious figures from the ancient world.

If the rest of the Bible gets thrown out, then the part about Jesus makes no sense. The earlier books of the Bible gives prophecies about Jesus' coming, his place of birth, the significance of blood sacrifice to atone for sin. You might as well read an autobiography of John Tan if you need help for self improvement.
I heartily disagree. What else do you need to know other than forgiveness which he taught? About how if you look back at your home you will get turned into salt pillars? About how too much knowledge will lead you to being cast out? Oh wait, how about if your wife can't have a kid, both of you should ask the maid instead? A lot of interesting Jewish folk stories there for sure.

Of course, if you choose to believe in prophecies, who am I to discourage you? Freedom to you to do so.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
But with all the other evidence of contact and cross-influences between the faiths, it’s pretty likely that the Talmudic and Islamic systems of law influenced each other.

Talmudic and Islamic scholars cross-fertilized in legal matters because they lived in the same mercantile society. But the two traditions didn’t just overlap when it came to the law. Story telling was an art in the folklore-rich Arabian world.
excellent. yes it was.
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
Historians do not take hadiths seriously as it was written by hearsay wrt Mahomet. At one time they thought Mahomet was a fictitious character until the parched agreement was found wrt medina peace accord with his name on it. Carbon dated to about the time he existed.
And now, the theory is that whatever it was sbout mahomet, it was erased, eradicated, exterminated. Nothing about him survived. Zero.
except his name and some stories?
 

nightsafari

Alfrescian
Loyal
C.S. Lewis was a christian and wanted to evangelise. By putting forth only two options in his argument, he is compelling people to say Jesus is god. Because Jesus obviously was not a lunatic. Crafty fucker this C.S.Lewis. Hence his view is biased and should be tossed out. We want the opinions of secular, unbiased people.
biased narrow minded fact-ignoring religion follower. As a follower of religion needs to be.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Show your proof.

Prophecy:
"Then God said, 'Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him'" (Genesis 17:19).

Fulfillment:
"Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, 'It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned'” (Romans 9:7).

Prophecy:
"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:14).

Fulfillment:
"The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).

Prophecy:
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times." (Micah 5:2).

Fulfillment:
"When he had called together all the people's chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. 'In Bethlehem in Judea,' they replied, 'for this is what the prophet has written:

"'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.'" (Matthew 2:4–6).

Prophecy:
"The animals you choose must be year-old males without defect, and you may take them from the sheep or the goats" (Exodus 12:5).

Fulfillment:
"How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!" (Hebrews 9:14)
 
Top