Breakout thread from: Why did Allah create mankind?

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:00 am

Why would a being as powerful as a God or Allah or whatever need to â€˜be servedâ€™ for?

Creating a race of people just to have worshipers would suggest an egotistic self centered God.

And if this was the reason for our creation, and that there was only one creator, then wouldnâ€™t make sense that all humans would have 1 religion, why would the creator of all things let there be over 4,200 religions in the world?

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:13 am

mikeinie;1088877 wrote: Why would a being as powerful as a God or Allah or whatever need to â€˜be servedâ€™ for?

Creating a race of people just to have worshipers would suggest an egotistic self centered God.

And if this was the reason for our creation, and that there was only one creator, then wouldnâ€™t make sense that all humans would have 1 religion, why would the creator of all things let there be over 4,200 religions in the world?

That Not God / Allah / El Shaadi / Etc Etc . That Man ;....

Post by **spot** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:25 am

Daniyal;1088868 wrote: You ought to stop the tricknowldge :wah:

I'd ask exactly the same of a Christian who posted the Christian equivalent of that first post. I'm not being confrontational, I'm trying to build a conversation.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:59 am

The sooner muslim and christian just accept that there is no such thing as god/allah -whatever you care to call him they sooner they will stop killing, and trying to persuade others to join in killing, each other over who is right about the way to worship their imaginary friend.

It's about time that those who do not share this ridiculous fantasy started exerting themselves and started being a little less tolerant of the hatred and bigotry it causes.

Blessed are the godless for they shall not hear the voices telling them to kill the unbeliever.

Fyrenza · Post by **Fyrenza** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:07 am

mikeinie;1088877 wrote: Why would a being as powerful as a God or Allah or whatever need to â€˜be servedâ€™ for?

Creating a race of people just to have worshipers would suggest an egotistic self centered God.

And if this was the reason for our creation, and that there was only one creator, then wouldnâ€™t make sense that all humans would have 1 religion, why would the creator of all things let there be over 4,200 religions in the world?

In Christianity, we think of God as the Creator of All.

We are vessels ~ like a vase, or a cup or a bedpan. We were created with a purpose ~ some to be beautiful, some to be useful and some to hold the excrement. When we create these things, they are merely inanimate objects, unable to make any decisions regarding their purpose.

God created us to love Him, BY CHOICE. Although He created each of us for a specific purpose, each of us has free will, and can choose to walk away/turn our back on Him, or accept His forgiveness.

That's more like a pet or a child, imho, and we do think of God as our Heavenly Father, who cares about us, loves us, gives us EVERYTHING we have and has promised us a room in His house for eternity.

God never changes. He cannot tolerate unrighteousness, and He demands sacrifice as payment for sin. He sent Jesus to His people, the Jews, but they reject Him. (Evidently, so do the Muslims) But, because even the dogs get scraps from the table, WE, the infidels, are offered entrance to His Kingdom, because the only perfect human being, Jesus, was the sacrifice for our sins. Christians accept this fact.

God wants to share everything with us, but we have to want to share ourselves with Him, too. We acknowledge His authority over us, and we thank Him for His loving-kindness towards us.

Post by **spot** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:12 am

gmc;1089015 wrote: Blessed are the godless for they shall not hear the voices telling them to kill the unbeliever.

What we've aimed at in these religious forum spaces is that posters can discuss a specific religion in its own context by withdrawing here to do it. This is the Islam forum, it's sort of protected. It discusses Islam in terms of Islam. Anyone can discuss Islam in terms of how outsiders view it in all the other forum areas but it's a waste if there's no place where one can discuss a particular religion free of sniping.

So, general religion is a place for discussing religion as a subject, the Christianity forum allows Christians to discuss Christianity without being heckled by non-Christians, and so on.

I could split the thread into "Why did Allah create mankind?" and "Discuss the thread: Why did Allah create mankind?" if that helps? It would give everyone a place appropriate for what they want to say. My main concern is to allow sara's thread to stay on topic because it's polite to do that.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:27 pm

spot;1089027 wrote: What we've aimed at in these religious forum spaces is that posters can discuss a specific religion in its own context by withdrawing here to do it. This is the Islam forum, it's sort of protected. It discusses Islam in terms of Islam. Anyone can discuss Islam in terms of how outsiders view it in all the other forum areas but it's a waste if there's no place where one can discuss a particular religion free of sniping.

So, general religion is a place for discussing religion as a subject, the Christianity forum allows Christians to discuss Christianity without being heckled by non-Christians, and so on.

I could split the thread into "Why did Allah create mankind?" and "Discuss the thread: Why did Allah create mankind?" if that helps? It would give everyone a place appropriate for what they want to say. My main concern is to allow sara's thread to stay on topic because it's polite to do that.

No need I shall make no further comment. I normally take no part in religious discussion unless it is an invited free for all. I was just feeling antsy-no offence intended.

Maybe a thread about why should anyone have to pussyfoot around expressing an opinion on religious belief for fear of upsetting the "unco guid"

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:40 pm

Fyrenza;1089022 wrote: In Christianity, we think of God as the Creator of All.

We are vessels ~ like a vase, or a cup or a bedpan. We were created with a purpose ~ some to be beautiful, some to be useful and some to hold the excrement.

Sounds like a particularily nasty sect of Christianity.

laneybug · Post by **laneybug** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:47 pm

Jester;1089333 wrote: I think I can help here, exchange the word 'serve' for the word 'agree'...

The service due God isn't servitude, it's an acknowledgement that He is who he says he is and that we are who he says we are. He is the creator, we the created.

God created no religion at all. Man did that, it's out of confusion and purposeful and willfull selfishness that religions exist.

I agree with everything you said here, except for the last part. God may or may not have created religion. Who knows.

I believe man created religion out of an intrinsic need to 'acknowledge' their god, whoever that may be. Some have followed religion out of confusion or selfishness, true. I think it's unfair, though, to the label the whole of religious followers of any religion as that.

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:04 pm

Not To Change The Subject But What The Diffrent Between Man And Mankind ?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 5:54 am

Jester;1089335 wrote: No matter how you slice it your dealing with mankind, religion or not, man will kill man.

Yes but bring religion in to it and you can justify a whole new level of atrocity.

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:04 am

Jester;1090929 wrote: Thats not true religion then, its an excuse to commit evil under a falsley righteous edict.

The trouble with that is you're abandoning the faith of your fathers. You presumably regard the burnings in Salem as evil, for example, but not the people responsible for the burnings. Presumably you think they were expressing their true faith in the way they understood that faith. Presumably what you see as mistaken is what they understood to be the will of God. If you think the ministers themselves were evil then you're cutting yourself off from most of your heritage because most Christians were like them and you'd have trouble saying most Christians of the past were evil.

Or, I suppose, you might think the Salem burnings were right?

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:41 am

For some reason you think they were the exception. I suggest that any history of Christianity would show they were the typical normal believers of their day. What changes over time is what most people regard as good or evil. If you think you can measure their behaviour by your own view of good and evil you're condemning most Christians who ever lived as behaving evilly. The other way to look at it is that they did good the way they'd been taught was good and that's all any of us can ever do.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:45 pm

Jester:-6

Welcome back. You are just in time for Christmas. May all the blessings of the season be we you and your family. May the peace of Christ be with you.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:49 pm

I do wish each of those here and their families, no matter their faith or lack thereof, the peace and happiness that the Spirit brings to all.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:05 pm

Jester;1091025 wrote: Evil is evil, period. It transcends all culture, all nations, all peoples- What is labeled as evil in scritpure is still evil today. What is both pure and Holy and perfect is the same today as ever before. How man deals with it is what life is all about. Then why did you criticize the death penalties passed on the Salem witches? That's biblical, it's labelled as an evil and denounced as grounds for the death penalty. "Now a man or a woman who is a medium or a spiritist shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones, their bloodguiltiness is upon them".

Where do you stand on "If there is a man who lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death; you shall also kill the animal"? Evil is evil, period. It transcends all culture, all nations, all peoples? Do we stay on message when we get to "If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, one who commits adultery with his friend's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death"? You're not living in the same world as the rest of us if you're still answering yes.

Where do you stand on the divorced remarrying? "They shall not take a woman who is profaned by harlotry, nor shall they take a woman divorced from her husband".

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:32 pm

Adding all these provisos and exceptions is plain unbiblical. Of course they were witches, they said themselves in evidence they were witches. The church at the time of Leviticus WAS the civil leadership. Evil is evil, period. It transcends all culture, all nations, all peoples? But you'd rather take New Testament times as your lodestone than the time of Moses? So what was good for Moses wasn't good for Paul? Paul thought it less evil than God told Moses it was? What is labelled as evil in scripture is still just as evil in the time of Paul but not quite so punishable? I suppose I should bring up the Christian acceptability of slavery now, shouldn't I, that's traditional. Slavery's not an evil in either Testament.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 1:58 pm

spot:-6

Some good points.

Let's not forget we are also required to stone misbehaving children.

The problem is that many folks who take the Bible literally pick and choose, which is what they claim others do. It's a kind of do as I say not as I do. It is a policy applied to God as well. He can do whatever He wants, even if you or I did it it would be a sin. I think that is a rather warped view.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:04 pm

spot:-6

I must say, though, that some do the picking and choosing with a marvelous creative dance. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:06 pm

Jester;1091079 wrote: Slavery in the terrible sense of what occured in both our countries would fall outside of treating people biblically.

And yet you'd have found it very difficult to find any priest or Christian who condemned slavery, as it was being practised, in the early eighteenth century. On the contrary, when it came to discussing abolition in the late eighteenth century it was the churches who stood up most strongly in claiming that what was practised was ordained by God and that enslaving the black nations was a biblical obligation imposed on the white races.

What's perceived as evil is determined by society. It's a lot easier to justify slavery by taking the bible as the guide to acceptability than it is to condemn slavery. You salve your conscience by saying the bible doesn't mean slavery as it was practised three hundred years ago but, firstly, Christians in general thought it did then, and secondly I think it meant that sort of practise to the people of the first century too. That's exactly how slaves were treated in the Roman empire - they were worked to death for profit.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:08 pm

For those interested in the historical Jesus the following site is well worth the time.

FRONTLINE: from jesus to christ - the first christians: watch the full program online | PBS

It is a scholarly look at the issue from many different scholars.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:10 pm

spot:-6

Absolutely.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:20 pm

Jester;1090929 wrote: Thats not true religion then, its an excuse to commit evil under a falsley righteous edict.

Define true religion then because, throughout history, all of the religions we've had have been used to justify atrocity.

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:28 pm

Jester;1091094 wrote: There is a large difference between 'the churches' and individual believers. I have long disagreed with the mainline clergy, my disagreements with Ted ought to suffice as proof of that. I'm an individual believer and I'm the generation which had to switch opinion half way through. I was brought up thinking the African National Congress was a terrorist organization, that Nelson Mandela was a dangerous murderer, that apartheid was divinely ordained, that the black races were the inferior progeny of Ham subjugated for all time to their superior white masters and that the Bible guaranteed exactly that. It was what I heard at Sunday School and it was what I was told from the pulpit. It took quite an effort of will on my part to turn all that training aside and discover other truths but I'm quite certain my Sunday School teachers were accurately telling me what the Bible said.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:29 pm

Absolutely nothing can justify slavery either in the past or now or in the future.

That being said it is very difficult to judge the past based on today's knowledge, experience, culture and wisdom. All things must be judged on the bases of their own milieu and that includes the Bible.

This is a new era and for the Bible to be a living book it must be reinterpreted or it is simply a dead issue.

Shalom

Ted

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:31 pm

Jester;1091025 wrote: Evil is evil, period. It transcends all culture, all nations, all peoples- What is labeled as evil in scritpure is still evil today. What is both pure and Holy and perfect is the same today as ever before. How man deals with it is what life is all about.

It is as easy to stand against evil today in the midst of the time we live as it is to stand againt evil in any time frame in history.

Times havn't changed at all, the measure of behavior is the same, different circumstances exists but there really is nothing new under heaven.

So Exodus 22:18 is incorrect when it says :-

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"?

That was the justification used both in Salem and by Mathew Hopkins in England who, with the support of the English Church and the active participation of the majority of Christians in this country, put over four hundred "witches" to death.

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:36 pm

And - it may be a trivial question - but are we not entirely prohibited by the Bible to allow women to preach in church? I know that's not entirely evil but it's still a pretty despicable notion for stand up for nowadays.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:36 pm

There are problems with the world adultery. In Jesus day it was not considered adultery for a married man to step out and have sex with an unmarried non virgin.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:38 pm

Jester;1091095 wrote: True religion in its purity is an action to assit and help those who need it. I think we should clarify here that by saying religion I am refering to denominations/sect/groups that form a religious hierarchy.

But what does that mean?

Could you point to a denomination that embodies True Religion?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:40 pm

spot:-6

That's what you get because it was men who wrote the Bible. It was the patriarchal view. Paul had female followers and preachers and then late on he seems to have changed and told women to shut up in church. Actually the last letters attributed to Paul come from some of his followers and were written after his death.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 pm

There have been breeches and divisions in the church since it began. Now, all of a sudden, 2000 years later some claim to have finally got it straight. LOL.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:49 pm

Jester;1091109 wrote: I grew up studying the bible daily, I was never told the color of a mans skin mattered other than to discribe someone in a crowd. I was specifically taught the opposite as you. Under the bible I read and study all are equal under God.

Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.

When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, he said,Cursed be Canaan!

The lowest of slaves

will he be to his brothers.He also said,Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem!

May Canaan be the slave of Shem.

May God extend the territory of Japheth

may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,

and may Canaan be his slave.And that, dear children, is why we put signs up saying No Blacks or Irish on the lodging house doors.

You might not have been taught it but it was one of the core values of the British Empire.

Post by **spot** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 pm

Jester;1091121 wrote: I'd say thats a perfect example of how man corrupts the biblical narrative to advance thier own prejudices.

The true church of God or any of Gods ministers have no business teaching that lie. I can see how it would be difficult to over come that prejudice. What is the difference between usurping the new testament mandate for excommunication of witchcraft/sorcery for murder and teaching that slavery/hatred of blacks is proper based on this passage? Both are evil and will be answered for and God will hold these men responsible for that they taught and did.

I'm delighted to hear it but I go back to my initial point which is MOST Christians thought for hundreds of years that this passage was an authority to own black slaves. By all means you're correct in your interpretation but by saying there are eternal evils you're cutting yourself off from large sections of earlier believers. This is the Church Triumphant you're dissing, the Saints who've Gone Before into Glory and stand dressed in white on the day of judgement. They're the ones who believed the bible told them these things. I find Christianity meaningless if I have to say they practised evil. All I can say is that they did the best they could with the understanding they had, and the understanding changes with time, and with it the distinction between good and evil changes.