The problems posed by the scripta defectiva of early versions of the Koran inevitably led to the growth of different centers with their own variant traditions of how the texts should be pointed or vowelized. Despite ‘Uthman’s order to destroy all texts other than his own, it is evident that the older codices survived.

Charles Adams says, "It must be emphasized that far from there being a single text passed down inviolate from the time of ‘Uthman’s commission, literally thousands of variant readings of particular verses were known in the first three (Muslim) centuries. These variants affected even the ‘Uthmanic codex, making it difficult to know what its true form may have been."

Some Muslims preferred codices other than the ‘Uthmanic, for example, those of Ibn Mas’ud, Uba ibn Ka’b, and Abu Musa. Eventually, under the influence of the great Koranic scholar Ibn Mujahid (died 935), there was a definite canonization of one system of consonants and a limit placed on the variations of vowels used in the text that resulted in acceptance of seven systems.

But other scholars accepted ten readings, and still others accepted fourteen readings. Even Ibn Mujahid’s seven provided fourteen possibilities since each of the seven was traced through two different transmitters, viz,

1. Nafi of Medina according to Warsh and Qalun

2. Ibn Kathir of Mecca according to al-Bazzi and Qunbul

3. Ibn Amir of Damascus according to Hisham and Ibn Dakwan

4. Abu Amr of Basra according to al-Duri and al-Susi

5. Asim of Kufa according to Hafs and Abu Bakr

6. Hamza of Kuga according to Khalaf and Khallad

7. Al-Kisai of Kufa according to al Duri and Abul Harith

In the end three systems prevailed, those of Warsh (d. 812) from Nafi of Medina, Hafs (d. 805) from Asim of Kufa, and al-Duri (d. 860) from Abu Amr of Basra.

At present in modern Islam, two versions seem to be in use: that of Asim of Kufa through Hafs, which was given a kind of official seal of approval by being adopted in the Egyptian edition of the Koran in 1924; and that of Nafi through Warsh, which is used in parts of Africa other than Egypt.

As Charles Adams reminds us:

It is of some importance to call attention to a possible source of misunderstanding with regard to the variant readings of the Quran. The seven (versions) refer to actual written and oral text, to distinct versions of Quranic verses, whose differences, though they may not be great, are nonetheless substantial. Since the very existence of variant readings and versions of the Quran goes against the doctrinal position toward the Holy Book held by many modern Muslims, it is not uncommon in an apologetic context to hear the seven (versions) explained as modes of recitation; in fact the manner and technique of recitation are an entirely different matter.

Guillaume also refers to the variants as "not always trifling in significance." For example, the last two verses of sura LXXXV, Al Buraj, read: (21) hawa qur’anun majidun; (22) fi lawhin mahfuzun/in. The last syllable is in doubt.

If it is in the genitive -in, it gives the meaning "It is a glorious Koran on a preserved tablet"—a reference to the Muslim doctrine of the Preserved Tablet. If it is the nominative ending -un, we get "It is a glorious Koran preserved on a tablet." There are other passages with similar difficulties dealing with social legislation.

If we allow that there were omissions, then why not additions? The authenticity of many verses in the Koran has been called into question by Muslims themselves. Many Kharijites, who were followers of ‘Ali in the early history of Islam, found the sura recounting the story of Joseph offensive, an erotic tale that did not belong in the Koran.

Hirschfeld questioned the authenticity of verses in which the name Muhammad occurs, there being something rather suspicious in such a name, meaning ‘Praised’, being borne by the Prophet.

The name was certainly not very common. However the Prophet’s name does occur in documents that have been accepted as genuine, such as the Constitution of Medina.

Most scholars believe that there are interpolations in the Koran; these interpolations can be seen as interpretative glosses on certain rare words in need of explanation.

More serious are the interpolations of a dogmatic or political character, which seem to have been added to justify the elevation of ‘Uthman as caliph to the detriment of ‘Ali.

Then there are other verses that have been added in the interest of rhyme, or to join together two short passages that on their own lack any connection.

Bell and Watt carefully go through many of the amendments and revisions and point to the unevenness of the Koranic style as evidence for a great many alterations in the Koran:

There are indeed many roughness of this kind, and these, it is here claimed, are fundamental evidence for revision. Besides the points already noticed—hidden rhymes, and rhyme phrases not woven into the texture of the passage—there are the following:

Abrupt changes of rhyme
Repetition of the same rhyme word or rhyme phrase in adjoining verses
The intrusion of an extraneous subject into a passage otherwise homogeneous
A differing treatment of the same subject in neighbouring verses, often with repetition of words and phrasesbreaks in grammatical construction which raise difficulties in exegesis
Abrupt changes in length of verse
Sudden changes of the dramatic situation, with changes of pronoun from singular to plural, from second to third person, and so on
The juxtaposition of apparently contrary statements; the juxtaposition of passages of different date, with intrusion of fare phrases into early verses.


In many cases a passage has alternative continuations which follow one another in the present text. The second of the alternatives is marked by a break in sense and by a break in grammatical construction, since the connection is not with what immediately precedes, but with what stands some distance back.

The Christian al-Kindi (not to be confused with the Arab, Muslim philosopher) writing around 830 C.E. criticized the Koran in similar terms:

The result of all this (process by which the Quran came into being) is patent to you who have read the scriptures and see how, in your book, histories are jumbled together and intermingled; an evidence that many different hands have been at work therein, and caused discrepancies, adding or cutting out whatever they liked or disliked. Are such, now, the conditions of a revelation sent down from heaven?


Is such a book trustworthy?




MORGANITE

Not just Koran...
I don't find any religious book trustworthy becase there are so many different ways to interpret. Stupid, evil people have done that to their liking and have caused so much death and grief throughout the history. It is still happening today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rkim291968

Not just Koran ...
I don't find any religious book trustworthy becase there are so many different ways to interpret. Stupid, evil people have done that to their liking and have caused so much death and grief throughout the history. It is still happening today.

---

That is a very interesting take.

Can you be more specific and give examples of as many sacred books as posslble and explain how you believe they have contributed to mankind's ills?




MORGANITE


:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morganite

That is a very interesting take.

Can you be more specific and give examples of as many sacred books as posslble and explain how you believe they have contributed to mankind's ills?

:)

---

Is that really necessary? Take fundamental muslims, Taliban e.g. and see how they are interpreting Koran.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rkim291968

Not just Koran ...
I don't find any religious book trustworthy becase there are so many different ways to interpret. Stupid, evil people have done that to their liking and have caused so much death and grief throughout the history. It is still happening today.

---

Agree completely. It is like the conversation I was having with a co-worker the other day. He is a devout Harvest church adherent. He referenced some obscure quote in the bible to refute the supposition that Jesus had a son, who was born in France.

I told him, we have a manufacturing facility a mere 800 miles away from us. Things are happening at this moment, with currently living witnesses, event being recorded real time--in writing, in English, yet it is difficult to get a straight story out of our manufacturing plant. With the Bible, or any other holy script, you have events that happened a couple of millenias in the past, halfway around the world, all the witnesses are dead, and things were written down in a dead language after being passed down by word of mouth, often for generations. Is any of it reliable? I doubt it.

That said, the Q'uran is probably more reliable than the Bible, simply because it is a newer document.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Agree completely. It is like the conversation I was having with a co-worker the other day. He is a devout Harvest church adherent. He referenced some obscure quote in the bible to refute the supposition that Jesus had a son, who was born in France.

I told him, we have a manufacturing facility a mere 800 miles away from us. Things are happening at this moment, with currently living witnesses, event being recorded real time--in writing, in English, yet it is difficult to get a straight story out of our manufacturing plant. With the Bible, or any other holy script, you have events that happened a couple of millenias in the past, halfway around the world, all the witnesses are dead, and things were written down in a dead language after being passed down by word of mouth, often for generations. Is any of it reliable? I doubt it.

That said, the Q'uran is probably more reliable than the Bible, simply because it is a newer document.

---

That's a good real life example. Even simple e-mails exchanges at my work are often misinterepted and cause a lot of mishap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

With the Bible, or any other holy script, you have events that happened a couple of millenias in the past, halfway around the world, all the witnesses are dead, and things were written down in a dead language after being passed down by word of mouth, often for generations. Is any of it reliable? I doubt it.

---

There is no need to "doubt" in this matter. It is simple to research and verify. There are source documents in existence today in libraries and museums around the world that date to within decades of the original writings that form the Christian Greek scriptures (the New Testament.) There is no question that the NT is accurate and uncorrupted.

And while we do not have manuscripts of that age for the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament), there is much other evidence of their integrity. Fragments of some OT books were found in the Dead Sea caves that date to the 2nd century BCE. They reveal no significant corruption of the texts. There are many other similar cases but the Dead Sea Scrolls are probably the most well-known.

With the wealth of manuscripts, scrolls and papyrus fragments available today, it is uninformed to claim that the Bible texts are somehow unreliable or fraudulent. Secular and religious scholarship does not agree.

If you are interested, this URL has interesting info about how we have arrived at our modern Bible:

Comparing Translations

I can't vouch for the author's theology but I find his analysis of Bible scholarship to be very interesting and easy to follow.

Quote:

---

That said, the Q'uran is probably more reliable than the Bible, simply because it is a newer document.

---

Frankly, I view the age of the Quran as a weakness. To me, if I had to start from scratch looking for the genuine written word of our Creator, I would start with the oldest books. It makes perfect sense that God's word would be one of the first documents recorded by mankind, if not the first.

Chris

While some things in certain versions of the bible show that they have not been corrupted they also demostrate everything in the bibles they are and there corruptions, asn also directly by people who abused them at those times, especially with Gospals which do not have authors.

The Al Qur'an iis the word of God according to JP ii
http://www.politicalinformation.net/.../Jp2koran2.jpg

Why

Do a search about JP's investigation on the crucifixion of Jesus and if you can find it anymore, JP discovered that the Quran had over 25 proofs of been the word of God and asks believers of every faith to believe only in one god and stop the wrongdoing.

This link also has some interesting facts to read up on.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/comparative.html

I am not saying the Bible is totally corrupted as is, I am saying there is clearly written corruption in it and some repented and some did not yet as we see today who still use the bible (Torah and Gospels) as well as the rest of it to destructive ends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

There is no need to "doubt" in this matter. It is simple to research and verify.

---

Research only gets you so far, if it is researching old texts. Even the old texts are based on information passed on by word of mouth. I trust archaeological evidence, such as concrete artifacts much more. But then, you're still open to interpretation.

As for the Q'uran being less reliable, due to it's newness, that is probably true, if you are referring to identical events covered by the Bible and the Torah. However, as far as events that occurred during Mohammed's time, I would tend to believe that they are recorded more accurately than the Bible covers Jesus' life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Research only gets you so far, if it is researching old texts. Even the old texts are based on information passed on by word of mouth. I trust archaeological evidence, such as concrete artifacts much more. But then, you're still open to interpretation.

---

So your doubt is not really so much about the subsequent written transmission as it is about the trustworthiness of the original message?

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "archaeological evidence" and "concrete artifacts." To me, an ancient scroll recovered from a cave or a papyrus fragment found in an Eqyptian excavation would definitely qualify. Can you expand on this a little bit?

Quote:

---

As for the Q'uran being less reliable, due to it's newness, that is probably true, if you are referring to identical events covered by the Bible and the Torah. However, as far as events that occurred during Mohammed's time, I would tend to believe that they are recorded more accurately than the Bible covers Jesus' life.

---

I agree that the Quran would be the most reliable source of info about the teachings of Islam and Mohammed's time, but I don't think it's valid to say that it must be more accurate than the Bible simply because it is more recent.

The Bible has withstood many centuries of criticism, scrutiny and attacks by opposers and enemies. In my opinion, the Bible's long history supports its accuracy and reliability rather than the other way around. It's kind of like a very old and respected legal precedent or court case. Such a precedent deserves respect because it is old and has withstood more challenges.

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "archaeological evidence" and "concrete artifacts." To me, an ancient scroll recovered from a cave or a papyrus fragment found in an Eqyptian excavation would definitely qualify. Can you expand on this a little bit?

---

Well, for one thing, the content of what is written on the scrolls, I tend to take with a grain of salt. However, the study on the parchment material, perhaps radiocarbon dating, that sort of thing I trust more. I mean, if the scrolls document a world wide flood, do I take that literally? No.

But geological evidence points to a flood that might have innundated the entire region. Not the entire world, but it was the whole world to them. So, I believe the geological evidence, but not the written word from that period.

This is not to say that I totally discount ancient scripts. I tend to trust details from scripts that are likely free of bias and competing interests. If I were to use northeast Asian history as an example (a field I'm comfortable speaking about), I place very little credence on written Japanese texts as it relates to its place in the hierarchy of nations in the early period of Japan's formation as a nation state.

Japan was a relatively new nation formed circa AD 200, by immigrants from Korea, and the chief aim of the ancient Japanese texts such as the Kojiki and Nihongi were to bolster the idea that Japan was just as old and distinguished as China and Korea. So they fabricated a long line of emperors dating back several thousand years, made claims of having a subordinate state in Korea. Archaeological evidence showed massive cultural and technological transfer into Japan from the Korean peninsula, thus making the Japanese claim very unlikely. The sheer paupacity of archaeological artifacts from pre-AD 200 makes their claim of antiquity highly unlikely.

But, the fabrications are understandable when one realizes that Korea and China deridingly dubbed Japan as "Wa," (Wae in Korean), which comes from the Chinese character for "small" or "fraile." These ancient texts were attempts to escape such belittlement.

But as far as Japanese records of who gave birth to whom, and how so and so it related to so and so, there is little reason to doubt them, because they are free from competing interests.

So, going back to the Bible as a reliable document, all the competing interest during that period throws much of it into doubt, in my opinion. You have the Romans trying to suppress a rebellion in its colony, the Jews trying to suppress someone they viewed as a heretic, and the Christians trying to assert their rights. Trying to piece together events from three competing points of view is difficult I think. I think the written scripts should be corroborating evidence, rather than the primary source. Archaeological artifacts should be the primary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

... the study on the parchment material, perhaps radiocarbon dating, that sort of thing I trust more... geological evidence

---

OK, I follow. You prefer the "hard" sciences. There are, of course, many archaeological sites that confirm the Bible record.

As for the flood, I don't think the geological evidence is so much missing as it is misinterpreted. I think geological evidence that many attribute to glacial activity is in reality flood damage. And I saw a program on cable awhile back about a geologist who claimed that very thing about an area in North America--I think it was the Mississippi River basin or something. He wasn't talking about THE flood, just A flood. But his point was how similar the effects were. Yet his colleagues were publishing papers and claiming that it was obviously glacial. He was attacked and ridiculed by his colleagues but they eventually were forced to admit that he was right. I wish I could remember what program that was...

Anyway, science is not perfect and we must be open-minded about other explanations. Not gullible: open-minded. As I've said before, science has a long history of saying, "D'oh!"

Quote:

---

So they fabricated a long line of emperors dating back several thousand years, made claims of having a subordinate state in Korea... the fabrications are understandable when one realizes that Korea and China deridingly dubbed Japan as "Wa," (Wae in Korean), which comes from the Chinese character for "small" or "fraile." These ancient texts were attempts to escape such belittlement.

---

That's interesting. I don't know a lot about Far East cultures and I didn't know this about Japanese history. But from what I've read, few civilizations were eager to record their own failures.

But the Bible is very different in that regard. To me, a powerful hallmark of Biblical authenticity is the frank and honest disclosure of MAJOR shortcomings and unfaithfulness by the writers. If someone wanted to forge or embellish their history, why put themselves in such unfavorable light? What reason would they have to claim that they descended from slaves in Egypt? Or that their greatest kings fell into adultery and idolatry?

The Bible record contains many exposures and admissions of gross wrongdoing. Why? To my mind, the only logical answer is because it's genuine.

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rkim291968

Is that really necessary? Take fundamental muslims, Taliban e.g., and see how they are interpreting Koran.

---

It would be very helpful to those interested in the subject if you would explain in some detail (so that we could follow your arguments and understand your interpretation), precisely, and in some detail, what it is that you find wrong with sacred texts.

I have heard about Taliban but which parts of the Koran are they interpreting in ways that disagree with how you interpret it?





MORGANITE



:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

But the Bible is very different in that regard. To me, a powerful hallmark of Biblical authenticity is the frank and honest disclosure of MAJOR shortcomings and unfaithfulness by the writers. If someone wanted to forge or embellish their history, why put themselves in such unfavorable light? What reason would they have to claim that they descended from slaves in Egypt? Or that their greatest kings fell into adultery and idolatry?

The Bible record contains many exposures and admissions of gross wrongdoing. Why? To my mind, the only logical answer is because it's genuine.

Chris

---

Well, I think another factor is that the whole point of the Bible, is not simply a faithful record of history, but an attempt to drive home a certain moral message. Exposing wrongdoings is a vital part of any didactic story. Of course, since God is the only one infallible, according to the Bible, all others, including Kings, would be subject to failure. Plus, didn't God allow the Jews to be enslaved by the Egyptians because of some shortcoming in their faith? Again, a moral message.

Quote:

---

Japan was a relatively new nation formed circa AD 200, by immigrants from Korea, [... ]

But as far as Japanese records of who gave birth to whom, and how so and so it related to so and so, there is little reason to doubt them, because they are free from competing interests.

---

I understood the Japanese to be a mixture of Korean and Chinese. Is this correct?




MORGANITE




:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morganite

I have heard about Taliban but which parts of the Koran are they interpreting in ways that disagree with how you interpret it?

---

There are many contradictory passages in the Q'uran, in my opinion. I have read parts of it, though I could never get through the entire thing, because after a while, it seemed to repeat itself. Every major passage seems to end with something like, "God is all-forgiving and wise," or something like that. It was a period in my life when I was in love with a Muslim girl, and wanted to see if conversion was even a remote possibility. Sadly, the answer was no. Some parts seem to encourage tolerance and kindness, while others advocate revenge on your enemies. Some passages seem to encourage killing infidels, while sparing the women and children. I found the token gesture of humanity kind of laughable. Overall, I found passages that encourages violence against infidels to far outnumber tolerance, however. But, anyone can cherry pick certain passages to support whatever radical/moderate views they have.

I found the entire book to be lacking any sort of clarity, or unifying theme, besides the message that God is good. Strangely enough, I think its rambling nature is what mystifies believers even more. Believers think that the Q'uran is the literal words of God. The parts that do not make sense can be explained away as they unknowable nature of God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morganite

I understood the Japanese to be a mixture of Korean and Chinese. Is htis correct?




MORGANITE




:)

---

Genetically speaking, almost entirely Korean, with minor input from the aboriginal people that lived in pre-historic Japan. Studies seem to indicate that the Ainus of northern Japan are a genetic mix of Korean migrants and aboriginal Japanese, but with a larger input from the aboriginal part.

Linguistically, Korean and Japanese are related. Not really close like Spanish and Portuguese. Probably not even as close as English and German.

I believe the Qur'an is true in its wisdom and teachings, it does not even take sides with Arabs but calls for unity to one God, something shocking got the people at that time. as well as tell how the people who CAN NOT READ and hear the word and are patient with there religion should not provoke war since Mohammed let them practice there religion, pay there own tax rate and sign a peace treaty.

And it directs everything towards God been the disposer of man's affairs and reminds the reader to look in the past over and over to understand who invites you to peace and who it is that invites you self destruction as well as how to tell the difference between evil and good of the Bible (torah and Gospels).

One must remember something very important about the Qur'an before making the same mistakes I did which I think are common been a bible study person, the Yassuf Alli version of the Qur'an (english) is one of the best versions to get because it explains it chronological order of revelations and details to whom some of the chapter where addressing (the enemies of Mohammed and Islam ) as for example his Uncles tribe the Quaresh, and all the pagans arguments and war declarations against islam and the idea of unity and the one true God, but you can not tell this at a glance unless you read this all in arabic because of the variations. I do not speak arabic but the Yasuf Alli version called "The meaning of the Holy Qur'an" also adds explinations to many bilingual miss interpretations.

I agree with most of the posts here about many problems with all the scriptures been abused by people who miss understand them.

What I do not agree with "Morgentide" an his agenda for attacking the Qur'an while yet claiming that the Talmud is 100% clean when it teaches ethnic cleansing of Arab and black jews and all non jews as well and is obviously a anti semitic ideology itself.

I mention the Talmud since it is a Anti Semitic Rabbinic book and calls all racist alike it up for blame games to justify hate trends because of Rabbinic inventions in it. while many teaching in it are good it does inded have some Evil Rabbis as well making scary statements and no one has proven it pure and clean yet.+ even in a court of law as France attempted to do when they discovered Israel got Nuclear Weapons some how and lied about it.

So there are in fact anti semitic people disguised as jews as much as Christians and muslims who are not at all true to any of the 3 faiths, the Qur'an warns the reader of such people and reminds man about the one true God, the Torah and the Tenack, the gospels and man's purpose in earth, and also states that it does not matter what religion one claims they fallow as long as they do God's will, be good and remember the last day when they meet there lord.

Further more, the Qur'an goes on to say that if any so called Jews are true to there covenant then ask them to wish for death to meet there due portion of the hear after as promised by there lord for there virtues, and if you witness terror in there eyes it is because these are not jews but liars or what I believe today are Zionists.

So yes the Qur'an is a valid word of God as long as anyone who reads it does not mix racial ideologies with it been a black or arab poeples God or Book but the God of Abraham.

As far as parts not understood in the Qur'an, all I can say that it has codes (letters) to protect it from corruption as the Torah did, and they stood for meanings we now understand but before both Arabic and Hebrew where officially spoken languages, and both Semitic peoples from the cradle of the human race which brings us all to the conclusion of our fathers.

There is no evidence to any other people pre dating who we now refer to as Arabs in Iran, Syria and Iraq which means we all descended from these areas from the beginning and the so called Theories of evolution are simply Theories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Well, I think another factor is that the whole point of the Bible, is not simply a faithful record of history, but an attempt to drive home a certain moral message.

---

This is certainly true, although I would say it is more than an "attempt." ;) It succeeds completely. The history and science is secondary to the message. Yet, I find even that fact to be significant. The science and history is not used for "gee-whiz" effect, as if the writers were trying to impress or justify. Often it is totally incidental or even obscure.

One more point worth considering is how firmly the Bible is grounded in dates and places. It is not like other holy books that seem far more "once-upon-a-time"-ish, like fables or myths. Not so with the Bible. Events are placed in historical context with very detailed locations. That too has the ring of authenticity to me.

If someone's going to forge a book, why make it so easy to expose by using easily verifiable things like dates and places? It'd be like a criminal purposely leaving clues at a crime scene.

Chris

Shalom

The Koran is for those who did not practice the Torah and are lost from the truth, it's a guidance for them.

The Koran does not call for the destruction of Judaism or Christianity as we also witnessed in Spain and Israel for 800 years of peace, but when the reader understands its truth they should stick to there covenants as much as I should if I understand the Torah,


The Koran clearly says God has sent prophets to there people with the same moral messages to deliver them from destructive ends and demonstrates that.

But again, if you made your covenant with been Jewish then you are, if your muslim then you are and since there is one God then stick to your faith if it is peace your after. I am educated not to Judge otheres for there faith if they have any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

If someone's going to forge a book, why make it so easy to expose by using easily verifiable things like dates and places? It'd be like a criminal purposely leaving clues at a crime scene.

Chris

---

Who knows why people do what they do? Claims of people living to be 800 years of age is clearly refutable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Claims of people living to be 800 years of age is clearly refutable.

---

How?

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Who knows why people do what they do? Claims of people living to be 800 years of age is clearly refutable.

---

Well I have a question for you, how much different do you think the people 800 or even 5000 years ago were from the people just several generations ago before we had electricity and other so called modern comforts that speed up communications?


As for me, I usually always say, just because some people are obsessed and love or worship material things, new ideas and have all kinds of short comings they failed to see from there lusts and impatience from status of wealth, power or greed still does not make them better people then anyone before them who also fell into perdition from been absorbed by there things which blinded them away from true happines, and while yet good people where around them as examples or they could of read a bible or even Koran or some other books with a little glimpse of hope for guidance .

So, unless I totally do not believe in God. I would not exactly take the chance to argue with God's message unless I had solid proof for myself like JPII and others did. we all have our own deeds to face, no one else can take our place id we are evil can they, Jesus certainly never promised salvation to Satan or evil people so what makes some people think he will take the blame is a sin alone.

Shalom

I was born into my religion, so as I was growing up I witnessed many people and some of the lessons I myself would have learned the hard way if I did not have a Torah.

But whether or not anyone has access to any scriptures or not, if they are honest they can themselves learn the lessons for we all have our own deeds whether Good, Bad, open or secret to live with.

But over all, I agree with the statement you just made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tower4Love

The Koran is for those who did not practice the Torah and are lost from the truth, its a guidance for them.

---

I would assume that this statement is based on what the Koran says rather than the Bible. Do you have any scriptural support for this belief? Or do you not accept the Bible?

Just trying to understand the basis for your beliefs before I go any further. I don't want another G4-450 debacle... ;)

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baidarka

Who knows why people do what they do?

---

This suggests that you view the Bible writers as ignorant, which is not only untrue, but also leads to another point to consider. Bible critics often use two different yet contradictory objections to the authenticity of the Bible.

On the one hand they will claim that the Bible writers were so ignorant and primitive that you can't believe a word they say. On the other hand they will claim that they were so smart and sophisticated that they could pull off The Forgery Of All Forgeries and get the entire world to fall for it.

If you can't get one to stick, try the other!

But if you just reason on what the Bible itself really says, without any kind of prejudice, I think you would find conclusive evidence that the Bible writers were exactly who they said they were and that what they wrote is true and accurate.

And the really tough question that we haven't talked about is, how do you explain Biblical prophecy?

And MORGANITE--I apologize for getting off topic!

Chris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

This suggests that you view the Bible writers as ignorant, which is not only untrue, but also leads to another point to consider. Bible critics often use two different yet contradictory objections to the authenticity of the Bible.

On the one hand they will claim that the Bible writers were so ignorant and primitive that you can't believe a word they say. On the other hand they will claim that they were so smart and sophisticated that they could pull off The Forgery Of All Forgeries and get the entire world to fall for it.

If you can't get one to stick, try the other!

But if you just reason on what the Bible itself really says, without any kind of prejudice, I think you would find conclusive evidence that the Bible writers were exactly who they said they were and that what they wrote is true and accurate.

And the really tough question that we haven't talked about is, how do you explain Biblical prophecy?

And MORGANITE--I apologize for getting off topic!

Chris

---

Yours was the first deviation that made sense and didn't have me scurrying for there bomb shelter.



MORGANITE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisl

I would assume that this statement is based on what the Koran says rather than the Bible. Do you have any scriptural support for this belief? Or do you not accept the Bible?

Just trying to understand the basis for your beliefs before I go any further. I don't want another G4-450 debacle... ;)

Chris

---

Shalom

Yes indeed it is from the Qur'an, which also contains the laws (10 commandments) and lessons from the Torah. you can not judge a single word in a book without reading it can you?


Koran
[28.43] We did reveal to Moses the Book after We had destroyed the earlier generations, (to give) Insight to men, and guidance and Mercy, that they might receive admonition.
[28.44] And thou (Muhammad) wast not on the western side (of the Mount) when We expounded unto Moses the commandment, and thou wast not among those present;
[28.45] But We raised up generations, then life became prolonged to them; and you were not dwelling among the people of Madyan, reciting to them Our communications, but We were the senders.
[28.46] And you were not on this side of the mountain when We called, but a mercy from your Lord that you may warn a people to whom no warner came before you, that they may be mindful.
[28.47] If (We had) not (sent thee to the Quraish),- in case a calamity should seize them for (the deeds) that their hands have sent forth, they might say: "Our Lord! why didst Thou not sent us a messenger? We should then have followed Thy Signs and been amongst those who believe!"
[28.48] But (now), when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, "Why are not (Signs) sent to him, like those which were sent to Moses?" Do they not then reject (the Signs) which were formerly sent to Moses? They say: "Two kinds of sorcery, each assisting the other!" And they say: "For us, we reject all (such things)!"
[28.49] Say: Then bring some (other) book from Allah which is a better guide than both of them, (that) I may follow it, if you are truthful.
[28.50] But if they do not answer you, then know that they only follow their low desires; and who is more erring than he who follows his low desires without any guidance from Allah? Surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
[28.51] And certainly We have made the word to reach them so that they may be mindful.
[28.52] (As to) those whom We gave the Book before it, they are believers in it.
[28.53] And when it is recited to them they say: We believe in it surely it is the truth from our Lord; surely we were submitters before this.

It states clearly that the Torah was given to Moses and the people who followed it recognize the word of God also in the Qur'an when they heard it, but its was directed to warn and guide the Quraish tribe, and a example like all prior prophets sent to there people to guide them, read it yourself.

The Bible Contains the 'Torah' (1st 5 books of Moses)known as the Hebrew Bible, yet "Targum Onqelos on the Five Books of Moses" where in Hebrew and Aramaic (arabic) with Hebrew Vowels to spell out the Tenach, these are the most important basis of Jewish beliefs and the holiest book.

The Koran contains what is known (in) arabic as the 'Sharia' (laws) but actually means the same thing and repeats the same stories in the "Torah/Tenach" known to other faiths as the Hebrew Bible. to again Guide them back to the laws which it clearly states.

Muslim is a verb, and in arabic actually means doing do the will of God, his commandments in the Torah.

The Talmuds on the other hand which G4-450 keeps mentioning where Rabbinic corruption's and in only aramaic (arabic) an not at all Hebrew.

The Gospels where also in Aramaic or simply Greek.

Simple

I quote from your posting to Christ:

We did reveal to Moses the Book after We had destroyed ... <snip>

Is this God speaking as "We," or is it the Prophet and his companions?


BTW - the Gospels were written in Koine, the commercial and common form of Greek that became the written language of Palestine and surrounding areas following the process of Hellenization that naturally followed in the wake of its conqueror, Alexander Magnus.

Thank you in advance for your answer.




MORGANITE



:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tower4Love

Shalom

The Bible Contains the 'Torah' (1st 5 books of Moses)known as the Hebrew Bible,

---

Salaam,

The Hebrew Scriptures, or Hebrew Bible, either term is acceptable, is properly called by Hebrews, TANAK, or Tenech, etc. depending on your version of Hebrew.

The Tanak contains the Torah, or Pentateuch, and supplies the "T" in TNK. The "N" is supplied by the Nabiim (Prophets), and the "K" is supplied by the Ketrubim, or Writings).

Thus, an acronym for Torak, Nabiim, Ketubim is formed from their first letters: TNK, with vowels added to allow it to be expressed vocally as Tanak, or some variation.



The remainder of your sentence is disjointed and makes no sense. There is something missing and I am unable to determine your intention:

[BOLD"yet "Targum Onqelos on the Five Books of Moses" where in Hebrew and Aramaic (arabic) with Hebrew Vowels to spell out the Tenach, these are the most important basis of Jewish beliefs and the holiest book."[/BOLD]

You start to say something that the Tarrg. Onk. Says, but you do not complete the thought.


Historically, there is evidence that the scribes were making oral paraphrases of the Hebrew Scriptures into the Aramaic vernacular as early as the time of Ezra (Neh. 8:1-8).

These paraphrases were not strictly translations, but were actually aids in understanding the archaic language forms of the Torah. That is, the sense of what was written was translated, rather than the actual words. Words written on one language to express thoughts and ideas, hardly ever translate directly into another language if the meaning rather than the form is to be maintained. Literal translations become linguistic mush, but dynamic translations convey the writer's intention.

The necessity for such translations arose because Hebrew was becoming less and less familiar to the ordinary people as a spoken language, but it was still spoiken.

By the close of the last centuries B.C.E. this gradual process had continued until almost every book in the Old Testament had its oral paraphrase or interpretation (Targum). These are similar to commentaries and serve the same purpose.

During the early centuries AD. these Targums were committed to writing, and an official text came to the fore, since the Hebrew canon, text, and interpretation had become well solidified before the rabbinical scholars of Jamnia (c. AD 90), and the expulsion of the Jews from Palestine in AD 135.

The earliest Targums were apparently written in Palestinian Aramaic during the second century AD.; however, there is evidence of Aramaic Targums from the pre-Christian period.

These early official Targums contained the Law (Torah) and the Prophets (Nebiim), but the Writings (Ketubim) were included in unofficial Targums in later times.

It is interesting to note that a pre-Christian Targum of Job was written in Palestinian Aramaic and discovered in Cave 11 at Qumran. Cave 4 contained a Targum of the Pentateuch. These unofficial Aramaic Targums were superseded by official text in the second century AD.

You mention Onkelos in your incomplete sentence. During the third century AD, there appeared in Babylonia an Aramaic Targum on the Torah. This Targum was possibly a recension of an earlier Palestinian tradition but may have originated in Babylonia.

It has been traditionally ascribed to Onkelos (Ongelos), a name probably confused with Aquila (Aquila is the name of the scholar who made a slavishly literal Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament as a substitute for the LXX; the confusion of the names was undoubtedly enhanced by the rigid rendering of the text of this Targum, which is itself regarded as a recension by many scholars.)

Another Babylonian Aramaic Targum accompanies the Prophets (Former and Latter), and is known as the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel. It dates from the fourth century AD, and is freer and more periphrastic in its rendering of the text. Both of those Targums were read in the synagogues: Onkelos along with the Torah, which was read in its entirety, and Jonathan along with selections from the Prophets (haphtaroth, pl.).

Just as the Jews abandoned their native Hebrew tongue for Aramaic (In Jesus time they spoke Aramaic) in the Near East, so they abandoned the Aramaic in favor of Greek (Jesus quoted from the LXX) in such Hellenistic centers as Alexandria, Egypt. During the campaigns of Alexander the Great, the Jews were shown considerable favor. In fact, Alexander was sympathetic towards the Jews as a result of their policies toward him in the siege of Tyre (332 B.C.E.).

It was during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus (after the death of Alexander the Great) that full political and religious rights were granted to the Jews. It was in that period (c. 250-c. 150 BCE), that the Hebrew Old Testament (Tanak) was translated into Greek-the first time it had ever been extensively translated. The leaders of Alexandrian Jewry had a standard Greek version produced, known as the LXX (It should be noted that the term Septuagint applies strictly to the Pentateuch, which was probably the only portion of the Old Testament translated during the time of Ptolemy II Philadelphus.), the Greek word for “seventy.”

It was translated during the third and/or second centuries B.C.E. and was purported to have been written as early as the time of Ptolemy II in a Letter of Aristeas to Philocartes (c. 130-100 B.C.E.).

Understanding the make-up of the Hebrew Scriptures is, as you suggest, simple, but only when you have the facts at your fingertips.

It might be that you are aware of these facts and intended to include than rather than give the impression that you do now know them, which aspects of your post suggest,and that somehow your post became corrupted.

If it does nothing else, it provides a vivid demonstration of how frail the art of copyists and scribes are, even when copying sacred texts.


I will address one other poiint. You seem to indicate that Aramaic is Arabic, when you wrote of "Aramaic (Arabic) "

That is absolutely not true.

Aramaic was the lingua franca of much of the Near East from about 7th century BC until the 7th century AD, when it was largely replaced by Arabic. A thing cannot be replaced by itself!

Classical or Imperial Aramaic was the main language of the Persian, Babylonian and Assyrian empires and spread as far as Greece and the Indus valley.

After Alexander the Great destroyed the Persian Empire, Aramaic ceased to be the official language of any major state, though continued to be spoken widely. It was during this period that Aramaic split into western and eastern dialects.

Aramaic was once the main language of the Jews and appears in some of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is still used as a liturgical language by Christian communities in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, and is still spoken by small numbers of people in Iraq, Turkey, Iran, Armenia, Georgia and Syria.

Aramaic has also been written in versions of the Latin, Hebrew and Cyrillic alphabets, though the Syriac is the most widely used script to write Aramaic.

Arabic is an entirely different language. The Arabic script was derived from the Nabataean Aramaic script, and has been used since the 4th century AD, but the earliest document, which is an inscription in Arabic, Syriac and Greek, dates from 512 AD.

The Aramaic language has fewer consonants than Arabic, so during the 7th century new Arabic letters were created by adding dots to existing letters in order to avoid ambiguities.

Further diacritics indicating short vowels were introduced, but are only generally used to ensure the Qur'an was read aloud without mistakes.

There are two main types of written Arabic:

1. Classical Arabic - the language of the Qur'an and classical literature. It differs from Modern Standard Arabic mainly in style and vocabulary, some of which is archaic.

All Muslims are expected to recite the Qur'an in the Arabic. However many have to rely on translations to understand the text because they do not understand Arabic.

2. Modern Standard Arabic - the universal language of the Arabic-speaking world which is understood by all Arabic speakers. It is the language of the vast majority of written material and of formal TV shows, lectures, etc.


MORGANITE


:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by morganStien

I quote from your posting to Christ:

We did reveal to Moses the Book after We had destroyed ......

Is this God speaking as "We," or is it the Prophet and his companions?

---

Try reading it again Morganstine, I take English is not your first language.

Koran
[28.43] We did reveal to Moses the Book after We had destroyed the earlier generations, (to give) Insight to men, and guidance and Mercy, that they might receive admonition.


Today, you're a example of the same generations then, still ignorant and never evolved to succeed in happiness. have you found any happiness yet besides the kicks you get from been devious and a liar?

We do not need more racist like you willing to lie in order to attack Islam, Judaism or any other people you are terrorized about like the GErman Nazis where when they dragged there people into a hole from xenophobia.
Bush, Ariel Sharon and the losers they sent to rid of to war have been enough problems to the climate this year, so before more hurricanes or earth-shakes hit California lets try to stick to the subject.

You posted ca 'WE' trust the Koran, I take it you invited people who did not trust the koran but rather hoped pagans joined you with there obsessions in hoping to seek in there darkness by turning everything into a mystery in order to get a piece of the pie in the hear after.

So try reading before you start copy pasting from the anti islam or anti jewish and just anti semitic websites skin heads who claim to be jews or muslims use as a way to start trouble between people online like your trying with lies.

Here is a buddy of yours BTW :)
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...203body_ap.jpg

The son of Israel's prime minister has been formally indicted on corruption charges, the justice ministry has said.
The indictment of Omri Sharon, announced last month, follows an investigation into corruption in the funding of his father's party.

The charges relate to Ariel Sharon's 1999 bid to lead the Likud Party and to be its candidate for prime minister.

Attention will be focused on how the charges affect the prime minister, who has consistently denied involvement.

If found guilty, Omri Sharon faces up to five years in prison over charges of violating campaign finance laws.

You have written:

" .... "Morgentide" and his agenda for attacking the Qur'an while yet claiming that the Talmud is 100% clean ... "

Two things.

First, my name is MORGANITE. not MORGANSTEIN, not MORGANTIDE, and not any other of your insulting inventions.

Second, I do not have an 'agenda,' either for attacking the Qur'an or for promoting the Talmud as 100% clean, whatever that is meant to mean.

I have not attacked the Qur'an, and I have never made any representation whatsoever regarding the Talmud.

That you say I have, means that you are a liar, and I now call on you to furnish supporting evidence for your allegations.



He who lies to serve his God serves the Shaitan, and by doing so he spits on God and becomes Shaitan himself.


I have challenged you to bring your evidence to support your statements about my 'agenda.'

If you are a man, you will now tell the truth and admit that you are a liar. If you do not, then we shall all see what kind of person you are.



MORGANITE

"We" is God talking to other Gods?

Scientology is the way to go. No one has refuted it yet. If only I had enough money to ascend the pyramid <sigh>.

Why Koran can be trusted:
1- it is a religious book that never changed from more than 1400 years ; it is the same book that prophet Mohamed taught his followers ;after death of prophet Mohamed by nearly six month khalifa abu bakr decided to collect the Koran in one book because many of Koran memorizers were killed in wars so he charged one of the Muslims to handle the collecting of Koran from men's harts and sheets and he told him that any phrase to be written in the book it must be found written in sheets and have two witnesses on it that they must say it from memory so the mission was accomplished and the book was called moshaf that means a book contains Koran between its two ends and after khalifa abu bakr died by nearly 15 years khalifa authman made several copies of Koran and sent it to all Islamic regions ; so Koran never changed because it was kept in harts and sheets and today if you compared the copy of Koran with a Muslim in America you will find it the same as with a Muslim in china .
2- Koran is several miracles in one book ; it was a challenge for Arab the nation that had no skill before Islam except in poetry ;the Arab poets stood puzzled against challenge of Koran although Koran was made from the same language they speak but they could not fabricate something like it with its powerful structure and superior words and meanings and for non Arabs it was a miracle in sociality and morals and science and economy and all the fields that have human activity ; the meaning of Koran words are flexible and renewed that make Koran valid for every time and every place.
To know more about Koran and Islam you can visit the following sites:
www.Harunyahya.com
www.Al-islam.com
www.Islam-guide.com
www.Islamworld.net
www.Islamfinder.com
www.Al-sunnah.com
Thetruereligion.org
www.Discover-islam.net

Well

Besides the fact that no science has superseded the Koran and even the bible, and the fact that the Koran clearly states that no science will be possibly superseded it even until the and of time before there own destruction, it is best to just seek the wisdom and guidance in it.

The Abdul Yassuf Ali "meaning of the holy Koran" should be read a few times patiently with the commentaries,
-Explained in detail are the times the revelations came to MOhammed,

-Describing the situations and evidence against those who attacked him from the start

-it refutes the lies that Mohammed was a quaresh when through out the koran they where theee pagans of mekah and Mohammed's very enemies after his uncle died, alike abraham he had to stick to his beliefs rather then how some people in these posts believe race, blood or genes have to do with there choices.

-It contains direct links to the torah and gospels when they are mentioned as evidence against those who threatened the peace treaties and the consequences they paid before time with God,

-It contains detailed revelations that became apparent hundreds of years after a actual koran existed like the world was round, the seas are split in two, places where things took place, evolution of man, the earth and the expansion of the universe but also goes further in proving it contains the same God of the Torah by greeting those of it who kept true to there word and provides them the proof to decide for themselves.

-It also exposes and refutes all paganic systems and clearly explains them and there systematic limits based on there theories which could only bring short comings and hope rather then facts and truth sustainable as also the bible has but contains falsehood by mans hands in it.

-It spells out what a hypocrite is in the bible and in the koran and how they seek powers or gains in argument, even go as far as killing over there own blind addictions to there materialism, ideologies and other ignorant reasons for power since they do not get God's blessing and are blindly un happy like satan all there lives unless they repent.

-And finally it Guides people by making it clear that until peace tries after peace treaties are broken (which happened) then and only then would a believer cut off those who are rebellious, and also exposed any false muslims who believed others HAVE to be ones by teaching that God guides only just people .

-Over all, the Koran states that it is the word of the same merciful God of the Bible, who will grant this life as test to all and give all a free choice to do what they wilt, and that this life is about many chances to repent but Terror in the bible and destruction of evil tyranny in many ways not perceived will be the same for the cursed non believers,

-And for the west, we learned in the U.S. that it gave us meanings to things like freedom of speech, equal rights, scientology's and the use of the arabic number system and I can go on

But my point is that we can not just simply judge the koran as false because some people here still live in the dark ages because they are addicted to false fairy tails that Jesus was not from the middle east and the theory of evolution as Hitler put to practice with GErmans been the best race and other ignorant things not yet but proved the enemies of the koran as well been the same of humanity which impulsively attack innocent lives from there own diseases like racism, which is the roots of all hatred and Satans very own kind.

So I do not think the science in it the koran is going to convince people as much as the science in the Bible since they share the same stories and even though the koran has allot more to show, I think its best to look at some of the more advanced civilizations and ask how come they never superseded mother natures fury as we see the US coast getting smacked with and also predict worse to come.

Quote:

---

You have written:

" .... "Morgentide" and his agenda for attacking the Qur'an while yet claiming that the Talmud is 100% clean ... "

Two things.

First, my name is MORGANITE. not MORGANSTEIN, not MORGANTIDE, and not any other of your insulting inventions.

Second, I do not have an 'agenda,' either for attacking the Qur'an or for promoting the Talmud as 100% clean, whatever that is meant to mean.

I have not attacked the Qur'an, and I have never made any representation whatsoever regarding the Talmud.

That you say I have, means that you are a liar, and I now call on you to furnish supporting evidence for your allegations.



He who lies to serve his God serves the Shaitan, and by doing so he spits on God and becomes Shaitan himself lie me. :)


I have challenged you to bring your evidence to support your statements about my 'agenda.' even though i have posted many aims of mine which contradicted my points into arguments to confuse you from the truth.

If you are a man, you will now tell the truth and admit that you are a liar. If you do not, then we shall all see what kind of person you are.



MORGANITE

---

Here is a (tiny) list of your deceptive attacks and racial theories which go against the topics, discussing anything with truth, any teachings from any culture, generation or book that upholds scientific facts that the whole human race started where the very people you hate are, Iraq, iran and Syria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morganite

1-Can we trust the Koran?
Who is "we" MorganStine?
2-Charles Adams says ......
Charles Adams had published books on islamic law but lied in order to blend people with the influence of Mohammed on pagans linked to the koran which goes against idol worship of Mohammed itself., many racist and Islam phoebes use this long legal text book to force there prey in giving up on seeking the truth for themselves in order to win a argument, spells a hypocrite to me.
Example; Charles Adams claims islam teaches to kill non muslims, but there is no evidence in any of the so called first peace treaties in the world by Mohammed other then the pagans breaking them and been threatened to live Medina or Mecca that they where attacked other then self defense if attacked at all to be forced to leave.,
And this also is completely not even to do with your topic, but that you use the same tactics by starting one called "Can (we) trust the koran", (we) calling support in proves your arguing to win a case against your very own xenophobia, which should be re titled "can i "Morgenite" trust ethnic minorities or arabs" since you forgot your own fathers and have based it all on your (morganstine's) racial ideologies to really attack the the very imaginary enemies you hate as a racist again.

BTW- Qur’anic texts have evolved in translations to modern Arabic, you can still get the classic arabic ones if you like to read in arabic, most are.
3-As for your racist ideologies, you mentioned in various posts that you believe all chinese people are the kindest race, you stated some could not be chinese because chinese are all, VERY RACIST INDEED.

4- In the topic Islam and Judaism, you raved on with insults because you could not bare anyone who says no to you with your long fake historical apotheosis on Judaism, where you claimed christianity to be from Judaism when indeed existed before Jesus and blended into roman paganism by Saul ( a Jew) who after years of murdering believers decided to change his name to Paul and even attempted to stop the cult Rome launched to counter attack Jews who Paul betrayed by breaking into sects a new religion of his own using Jesus.


5-After i posted a link to provide evidence to all this you tried to sidetrack it by claiming i was trying to take credit for it when i simply shared the link with you to help you see, but instead like a hypocrite, you insist on arguing for your cause, which was anti Semitic of-course and support ethnic cleansing in all religions in the middle east.


6-And it took over 4 pages of posts before you realized the topic was not the name of God, and for you to finally of found a link in the defense of the Talmud but it also admitted to containing Anti Semiticism in the Talmud itself but stated that the Rabbi who wrote these things was doing it out of humor, yet its there...and you have not a proof top deny it.

I can go on MorganSTINE, your opinions of a modern trend of typical Zionist media blended with new age wanna be eastern pop culture theories did not cover up your zen of philosophical lies for been racist.

Are you man enough to take back every thing you said or is it that you have a "GOD COMPLEX" here?

So far i posted information in my topics and with out even asking why anyone came to there concussions you attacked them for it, this could not be more biased and un helpful to learn anything from another.

The one thing a person does if they want to discuss something is share information not use it for there own ends, NO ONE IN THESE FORUMS TOOK YOUR FREEDOM AWAY BUT BUSH morgastine, HE PASSED LAWS TO INVADE YOUR LIFE AND YOUR FEARS, GET IT? ,
Osama was and will never be after you unless your part of the murder system which caused the deaths of over 10,000 children in Afghanistan, tortures and rapes and other crimes against humanity alike the nazis, and with the nazis it was nothing to do with 6 million or 1 single person, it is the fact that they murdered period so do NOT be fooled by the same types of people who put things between other people lives like oil, religion, money or abuse of power.

So either way, if you had not figured it all out yet, wether you like it or not, black or white, there is only one god and we all came from the same place, so you will be called up for your deeds (good or bad) and i for mine, but there could not be such a possible belief in any of your posts since you fail to see others as human beings here MORGANSTINE with all your the Frankenstein of Zionism media.

So, i wish you well and hope you find happiness someday, because anyone who has to use the tactics you do are not trying to prove anything but that they are haters trying to deceive others to invite them into the terror-dome in your xenophobic racist mind, this the curse of curses for your heart is sealed up from happiness and hard like steel, maybe its time you change, after all , this is what life is about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Scientology is the way to go. No one has refuted it yet. If only I had enough money to ascend the pyramid <sigh>.

---

From the looks of your avatar, you should discuss this further after growing up kid, science does not make better people, Hitler and his SS lost remember?

Just look at all the MORGANSTIENS from the labs of man made things and compare them to the universe, then you may understand God.

Quote:

---

From the looks of your avatar, you should discuss this further after growing up kid

---

Oh if you only knew. I am most likely older than you.

Quote:

---

then you may understand God.

---

Don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Oh if you only knew. I am most likely older than you.

---

yeah, right... your a example of the people who repeat the same mistakes in history, not very original there KIDS , time to EVOLVE no? :)

Since when could age change a person in sin today from a person in sin 3000 years ago who also loved idols enough to consider them a God of Worship and willing to kill anyone or fight for them (money, cars, power etc. sins)?

No difference at all, they still lie in the hopes that they will win there argument to live recklessly on the bottle like babies but replaced with alcohol.

Now I remind you I believe people can have there free choice, but have you found anyone attacking you or others who idol worship and put there trust in everything BUT mother nature and God who created it? I have yet to even prove Mohammed did.

So it's the other way around, a reckless person will start the wars and destroy everything in a tantrum just like a baby for the things he or she depends on for happiness (money, power, sex etc etc. SINS), and they do this blindly with out been aware they are sick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Don't think so.

---

I agree you do not understand too, the simpons are just a fragment of our imagination.

But not to surprise you with the cold truth, I am not asking you change for me, or going to lie like others around here with the Christmas wishful thinking to pacify stubborn sinners in hopes that one of these idols can be replaced with another to pass the pain of a false promise,

I will say though, that accepting the One True God for all humanity is like accepting that everything in the world Is God's and learning to live in it with others as yourself, think about this and where the word Peace comes from now, again only you and yourself can reach this conclusion and come out of the cartoon cocoon.