- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question for our Leftist posters, Jesus vs Mohammed....
Posted on 4/22/19 at 11:43 am
Posted on 4/22/19 at 11:43 am
We know that both these men were very real human beings....
Based on what we know of their lives and their teachings, who was the more decent human being?
Now, try not to start foaming at the mouth and go off course and "but muh Westboro Church!", simply answer the question if you are capable....
IMO, an honest, unbiased look at these two men paint them as polar opposites: Jesus didn't own slaves, he didn't advocate for murder or conquest by the sword and he didn't bugger a 9 year old kid.
For me the bottom line is this: One can love and pray for muslims, but still DESPISE islam itself....
PS:
And before any of you spit and spittle "Old Testament was really brutal and stuff" remember, Christ said he was here to make everything new...
Based on what we know of their lives and their teachings, who was the more decent human being?
Now, try not to start foaming at the mouth and go off course and "but muh Westboro Church!", simply answer the question if you are capable....
IMO, an honest, unbiased look at these two men paint them as polar opposites: Jesus didn't own slaves, he didn't advocate for murder or conquest by the sword and he didn't bugger a 9 year old kid.
For me the bottom line is this: One can love and pray for muslims, but still DESPISE islam itself....
PS:
And before any of you spit and spittle "Old Testament was really brutal and stuff" remember, Christ said he was here to make everything new...
13
Posted on 4/22/19 at 11:49 am to oogabooga68
Jesus is Christ.
Mohammed was a prophet for Satan and laid the roots for the antichrist
Mohammed was a prophet for Satan and laid the roots for the antichrist
Posted on 4/22/19 at 11:57 am to Pdubntrub
quote:
Jesus is Christ.
But I'm talking about them as men, and the manner in which they lived their lives....
The point is, the Left go out of their way to defend a slave-owner and a misogynist....
If he were alive today, he would be banned from Twitter and every Social Media platform for the way he treated people, yet they hate Christ more...
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:01 pm to oogabooga68
Partially reposted from OT Lounge:
Followers of the three Abrahamic religions believe that that God came from the same place and spoke through some of the same people. The difference between the three Abrahamic faiths is which prophets those faiths put the most emphasis on listening to. In Christianity, the most important prophet is Jesus, who is seen as the son of God, a divine being in his own right. His teachings are the focus of the religion. Jesus's teachings included novel concepts that do not appear in the other religions such as voluntary charity, shunning materialism, forgiveness and atonement for sins on Earth, loving your enemies, and forgiveness rather than revenge towards those who wrong you.
In Islam, it is Muhammed who is seen as the Messiah. It is thus his teachings and philosophy that is given the most weight and is considered to be governing. His principles seem to be based on submission to the will of Allah and spreading faith by the sword.
In Judaism, they don't believe the Messiah has come yet. So, the prophet they give the most weight to is that of Moses, who wrote the first 5 books of the Old Testament. In those books, you will find the rules given by God to govern a society that will be healthy, relatively crime free, honorable, insular, and increase rapidly.
Some of those rules (but far from all) were adopted by Islam. While those rules also informed Christian civilizations, many do not abide by those laws, seeing Jesus as replacing them, rather than supplanting them.
In reality, Jesus did not tell people to stop following the laws handed down in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, but rather that mankind should not be in charge of enforcement of those laws, that God is the ultimate judge (rather than man), that those laws represent a standard worth striving for, that forgiveness and atonement for failing to live up to those standards is available on earth, that those whose sins are forgiven are granted eternal life in heaven while those who sin unrepentently spend eternity in Hell, and that some simpler rules of thumb to follow (the beatitudes and the golden rule) tend to be an easy way to avoid breaking most of them.
These are key differences, but do not necessarily mean that the God itself is different despite these different religions calling their one God by different names.
Followers of the three Abrahamic religions believe that that God came from the same place and spoke through some of the same people. The difference between the three Abrahamic faiths is which prophets those faiths put the most emphasis on listening to. In Christianity, the most important prophet is Jesus, who is seen as the son of God, a divine being in his own right. His teachings are the focus of the religion. Jesus's teachings included novel concepts that do not appear in the other religions such as voluntary charity, shunning materialism, forgiveness and atonement for sins on Earth, loving your enemies, and forgiveness rather than revenge towards those who wrong you.
In Islam, it is Muhammed who is seen as the Messiah. It is thus his teachings and philosophy that is given the most weight and is considered to be governing. His principles seem to be based on submission to the will of Allah and spreading faith by the sword.
In Judaism, they don't believe the Messiah has come yet. So, the prophet they give the most weight to is that of Moses, who wrote the first 5 books of the Old Testament. In those books, you will find the rules given by God to govern a society that will be healthy, relatively crime free, honorable, insular, and increase rapidly.
Some of those rules (but far from all) were adopted by Islam. While those rules also informed Christian civilizations, many do not abide by those laws, seeing Jesus as replacing them, rather than supplanting them.
In reality, Jesus did not tell people to stop following the laws handed down in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, but rather that mankind should not be in charge of enforcement of those laws, that God is the ultimate judge (rather than man), that those laws represent a standard worth striving for, that forgiveness and atonement for failing to live up to those standards is available on earth, that those whose sins are forgiven are granted eternal life in heaven while those who sin unrepentently spend eternity in Hell, and that some simpler rules of thumb to follow (the beatitudes and the golden rule) tend to be an easy way to avoid breaking most of them.
These are key differences, but do not necessarily mean that the God itself is different despite these different religions calling their one God by different names.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:13 pm to Pdubntrub
quote:
Jesus is Christ.
Mohammed was a prophet for Satan and laid the roots for the antichrist
I don't believe this is remotely true, but I find it hard to argue against with all the evidence backing up your statement.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:16 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
We know that both these men were very real human beings...
Gonna have to stop you there... we don’t know for a fact that Jesus existed. There is zero contemporaneous writing about his life. Not a leftist, and don’t believe in either ideology, fyi.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:23 pm to Pdubntrub
quote:
IMO, an honest, unbiased look
i laughed
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:33 pm to kingbob
quote:
His principles seem to be based on submission to the will of Allah and spreading faith by the sword.
...and owning slaves and treating women like shite and diddling kids and torturing people and I could go on.....
The point is, as a human being, mohammed was a piece of zhit....
The Left are quick to tear down the legacy of Confederate Soldiers , Founding Fathers, and anyone not deemed pure, but seem to have a hardon for protecting the legacy of what was indeed a very, zhitty, misogynistic, violent azzhole....
I guess I'm trying to find a logic in that insanity....
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:37 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
I'm trying to find a logic
NEVER do this when dealing with leftists.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:43 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
I guess I'm trying to find a logic in that insanity....
The logic is simple: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
If you look at the broader aims of the progressive philosophy, it seeks to replace all institutions with that of an all-encompassing state. Private industry is replaced by state-owned/operated utilities. Private charity is replaced with government-run entitlement programs. Private schools are replaced with government-run schools under the Prussian model. Responsibility for harming consumers is taken out of the hands of the tort system and the free market and instead given to government bureaucrats who decide what is and what is not safe to consume. The responsibility for organizing social gathering and inspiration is taken from churches and given to government universities, schools, and libraries.
Step by step, the progressive ideology seeks to replace all of the independent pillars of society with government. With Christianity serving as the dominant religion in Western countries, and that religion preaching a religious identity separate from that of the state (render unto Caesar what is Caesar's), it must be crushed and replaced by worship of the state. Voluntary charity must be replaced with compulsory service. The bonds of holy matrimony are an impediment to the destruction of the nuclear family, which can exist without reliance on the government.
Everything is done to break the populace away from self-reliance to force them to rely on the state and be ruled by the state in a slow and inexorable descent into authoritarian communism. Islam serves both as a boogie-man to frighten people into supporting increased intrusion in the name of protection as well as a useful ally in destroying Christian institutions which serve as pillars of communities and peoples separate from that of the socialist state.
As long as Christianity exists separate to the progressive state, Islam will be an ally of those who wish to replace Christianity with the state. Once this is accomplished, the Communists will turn on the Muslims just like they do to all of the other useful idiots. Communism is the social and economic equivalent of dividing by zero. It creates a hole of consumption that can never be filled until it eventually destroys everything and everyone around it. It does not build, only destroys. Islam is much the same way. There is a certain "no true Scotsman" quality about progressivism, SJWs, Communism, and Islam. It is why they are natural allies in the short term, but why they will eventually destroy one-another and themselves.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:47 pm to Masterag
quote:
Gonna have to stop you there... we don’t know for a fact that Jesus existed. There is zero contemporaneous writing about his life. Not a leftist, and don’t believe in either ideology, fyi.
This is actually correct. There is no Roman record of his prosecution, etc., and the Romans kept records. However, that doesn't make me question any aspect of my Christian faith.
But to the question, since you people make up this fantasy about "liberals loving Islam," which is bizarre and completely made up by you, why don't you tell us what "liberals" actually "believe."
This thread is supposed to be a prompt for a right wing sausage party. So how about y'all just get it on among yourselves.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 12:50 pm to Masterag
quote:
There is zero contemporaneous writing
i think maybe Tacitus wrote about him.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:02 pm to MyNameIsNobody
Tacitus was born half a century after Jesus’ death. It would be like you writing about someone with no photos, Wikipedia, books, magazine articles, nothing but word of mouth going back nearly a century.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:04 pm to TBoy
Religion sometimes breeds arrogance.
My God is better! Nu uh, my God is better!
My God is better! Nu uh, my God is better!
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:09 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
We know that both these men were very real human beings....
We know nothing of the sort. It's faith.
quote:
Christ said he was here to make everything new...
He also said he was here to uphold Mosaic Law:
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
...and later, here:
quote:
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
...is exactly why Islam requires women to cover up - to prevent the men from committing adultery through lust.
Now do David vs Jesus...
Posted on 4/22/19 at 1:32 pm to oogabooga68
I read the Koran in college for a term paper and I've got to give Moe credit for one thing.
Think of the lifestyle of people in the that region in the first century. If 3 Arabs were traveling through the desert and they encountered 1 Arab traveling alone there was no reason not to kill him and take his stuff.
There were no cops or witnesses. Moe taught that such a crime was extremely displeasing to Allah and that he is watching everything you do. Christians and Jews taught the same thing... 'God sees you.'
The threat of damnation probably saved thousands of lives from murder.
Think of the lifestyle of people in the that region in the first century. If 3 Arabs were traveling through the desert and they encountered 1 Arab traveling alone there was no reason not to kill him and take his stuff.
There were no cops or witnesses. Moe taught that such a crime was extremely displeasing to Allah and that he is watching everything you do. Christians and Jews taught the same thing... 'God sees you.'
The threat of damnation probably saved thousands of lives from murder.
This post was edited on 4/22/19 at 1:32 pm
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:24 pm to Masterag
quote:
Gonna have to stop you there... we don’t know for a fact that Jesus existed. There is zero contemporaneous writing about his life. Not a leftist, and don’t believe in either ideology, fyi.
I think this is an overstated (and frankly overrated) observation often taken at face value as truth.
It implies that simultaneous and conteporaneous are exactly synonymous. And then it salts the field of debate and discussion and denies the Christian the opportunity to bring the entire New Testament to bear on the question of whether or not Jesus existed claiming it is neither accurate nor "contemporaneous".
The Synoptic gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke:
Mark. Probably Peter's disciple, translator, and scribe and writing what may be, in effect, Peter's gospel. AD 50-70
Matthew. AD 50-70. Ongoing debate as to which is the earlier gospel. My bias is that Mark is older.
Luke. Gentile convert. Physcian. Companion of St. Paul. His gospel is very likely based significantly on eye witness accounts that may include Jesus's mother, Mary, making his account of Jesus's birth unique. The Acts of the Apostles is essentially part two of his gospel and both were apparently used as cathecisms for new converts. Luke 62 AD. Acts, as early as 63 AD.
John's gospel.
Originally assigned extremely late dates, scholarship now has settled in between 80 and 90 AD. There's outliers for earlier and later. That he does not make any mention of the Temple destruction in 70 AD could argue for an earlier date, but because John focuses more on the diety of Christ, 70 AD has less weight than with the synoptic gospels.
Using 33 AD as Jesus's Crucifixion and Resurrection, the Synoptic gospels and John's gospel are all written between 17 and 60 years of the events they cover.
This is before the New Testament epistles are brought to the discussion.
To suggest that Jesus never existed for lack of contemporaneous documentation seems odd. To do so is to single out the New Testament holding it to higher standards of textual integrity than all other ancient texts. If we're not careful we'll be denying that someone crossed the Rubicon.
Posted on 4/22/19 at 2:53 pm to Abadeebadaba
quote:
Religion sometimes breeds arrogance. My God is better! Nu uh, my God is better!
There is only one God and Jesus was his son!
Posted on 4/22/19 at 3:25 pm to lsu480
quote:
There is only one God
quote:
Religion sometimes breeds arrogance. My God is better! Nu uh, my God is better!
Yuppppppppppppp
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News