Showing posts with label Comparative Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comparative Religion. Show all posts

Sunday, April 20, 2008

No Original Sin

ahumanb@yahoo.com

No Original Sin. It goes against logic and humanity. It's also an unethical belief.

By Sami Zaatari

Bible says: "The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them." [Ezekiel 18:20]

As we all know several Christians believe in the doctrine of original sin, that all humans are born with sin, and that we are basically stained from birth. Much like many other Christian beliefs, the doctrine of original sin has no real basis within the Bible, and is merely an invention by the Church and Christians, much like the Trinity, and divinity of Jesus Christ.

Jesus himself never taught such a thing as original sin, rather Jesus explicitly taught the opposite of original sin! When we go read the Gospel of Matthew 18 verses 1-4 we read this interesting incident:

"At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven."

So notice what happens here, the disciples ask Jesus who will be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, and Jesus uses a child as an example, now ask yourself this, why would Jesus use a stained sinner as an example of the greatest in heaven! Christians believe that no one with sin can enter heaven, as sin cannot be around God, so how could Jesus use an example of a SINNER?!

Obviously Jesus did not believe children are born with sin, and it makes perfect sense as to why he would use a child as an example, because as we all know children are innocent people, and indeed the greatest one in heaven will have to be like a child, innocent, humble, and pure. Original sin says the opposite, original sin does not even spare the young children as it teaches that ALL humans are BORN with sins, naturally this includes babies and children!

So if Jesus believed in original sin, that all humans are born with sin, then how could use a sinner as an example of the greatest person in heaven, can you compare a sinner with the greatest in heaven, does that make any sense?

And Allah Knows Best!

http://muslim- responses. com/No_Original_ Sin/No_Original_ Sin_

------------ --------- ------

"The future religion of the educated, cultured and enlightened people will be Islam."
- - George Bernard Shaw

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

The Veil in Christianity

"Islahonline" islahonline@gmail.com

The Veil in Christianity



Introduction



Picture of Mary and a Nun

A common misconception is that Muslim women are the only ones who cover their hair. It may be true that Islam is the only religion in which most women follow its directives to cover the hair, but it is not the only religion to have such directives.

It is particularly interesting to look at the case of Christianity, since Christianity is the predominant religion in the West, and it is Westerners, including observant Christians, who are often the first to criticize Islam because of the hijab (modest dress, including headcovering) .

Is Covering the Hair a Religious Commandment for Christian Women?

There can be only one answer to this: yes, it is! Simply open the Bible to the First Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 11. Read verses 3-10.

But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraces his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered disgraces her head, for it is the same as if she were shaven. For if a woman is not covered, let her be shaven. But if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. A man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. But woman is the glory of man. For man was not created for woman, but woman for man. This is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority over her head, because of the angels.

The meaning of this passage is plain enough. We can make the following syllogisms:

Syllogism 1

Praying with an uncovered head is a disgrace

Having a shaved head is the same as praying with an uncovered head

Therefore, having a shaved head is a disgrace

Syllogism 2

If it is a disgrace for a woman to have a shaved head, she should cover her head

It is a disgrace for a woman to have a shaved head - see syllogism 1

Therefore, a woman should cover her head

In other words, the passage means what it says. Have you ever wondered why Catholic nuns dress like they're wearing hijab (Muslim hijabi women, have you ever been mistaken for a nun? I have, more than once). Have you ever wondered why Mary the mother of Jesus (peace be upon them both) is always depicted in Christian art with her hair covered? Did you know that until the 1960s, it was obligatory for Catholic women to cover their heads in church (then they "modernized" the service)?

There are some interesting points that can be made about the Christian directive.

1) The explicit purpose of the Christian woman's headcovering, as stated by Paul, is that it is a sign of man's authority over woman. The explicit purpose of Islamic hijab is modesty. Strange how so many Westerners think that the purpose of hijab is a symbol of male authority. Maybe they know that that's what it is in their own religion (Christianity) so they assume that Islam must be the same...!

2) The Christian woman is to cover her head whenever she is praying, whether it be at the church service or just personal prayer at home. This may mean that if she is not praying at home, she is uncovered around male guests who are not related to her; or if she is praying at home, that she is covered around her own husband and family. If any more proof were needed than Paul's own words that the Christian headcovering is not about modesty, this must certainly be it!

This puts hijab in a whole new perspective, doesn't it! To my non-hijabi Muslim sister who feels that hijab is a sign of oppression for the Muslim female, please do read the above and then read the Quran. Believe me, if Allah SWT meant for hijab to be a sign of male authority, the Quran would be as unambiguous about it as Paul is in the Bible. Isn't this difference the kind of thing that attracted you to Islam in the first place?

Do Any Christian Women Today Cover Their Heads?

It is true that most Christian women do not, and many don't take other teachings of the Bible (against pre-marital sex, adultery, etc) literally either. However, there do seem to be a growing number of Christian women out there who are committed to following the Bible as it is written.

http://www.invitati on2truth. com/islam/ Hijab10.html

Gary Millar on Christian missionaries
How Christian missionaries Mislead People http://www.invitati on2truth. com/shop/ download/ garymillar. mp3

Islahonline

__._,_.___

Monday, April 7, 2008

Kenyataan bekas seorg Biarawati!!

"ust" ust_siber@yahoo.com


Harap dapat dimanfaatkn apa yg kristian sedang lakukan kepada umat islam.
Klik pautan [link] dari youtube dibawah:








Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Some facts about different religions

Ahumanb@

Some facts about different religions
Judaism: The word 'Bible' is not in the Bible. Moses (PBUH) didn't have any idea about the Bible either! He never preached any religion by the name of 'Judaism'. The word 'Judaism' doesn't even exist in the Bible! If that is the case then where did the words like 'Judaism' and 'Bible' come from? And what religion did Moses preach? If it was not Islam then what is?
Christianity: The word 'New Testament' is not in the New Testament. Jesus (PBUH) didn't have any idea about the New Testament either! He never preached any religion by the name of 'Christianity' . The word 'Christianity' doesn't exist anywhere in the Bible or New Testament! Even Jesus never heard the word 'Jesus' during his lifetime! He never preached absurd Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Ghost)! The word 'Trinity' doesn't exist in the New Testament. Jesus never claimed to be God or the begotten Son of God. It is also an absurdity! He never told his followers to worship him. In fact he used to pray to God. Where did the words like 'Christianity' , 'New Testament' and 'Trinity' come from then? And what religion did Jesus preach? If it was not Islam then what is?
Hinduism: The word 'Rig-Veda' is not in the Rig-Veda. The word 'Bhagavad-Gita' cannot be found in the Bhagavad-Gita. The words 'Hindu', 'Hinduism' and 'Sanatana Dharma' do not exist in the Vedas and Bhagavad-Gita. Sri Ram or Sri Krishna never preached any religion by the name of 'Hinduism' either. None of them claimed to be the Creator of the Universe in human form. It is also an absurdity! Sri Ram didn't have any idea about Ramayana. Similarly, Sri Krishna didn't have any idea about Mahabharata and Bhagavad-Gita. The concept of 'Avatar' (God in human form) and 'Samsara' (cycles of birth and death) do not exist in the Vedas. So, where did the words like 'Hindu', 'Hinduism', 'Vedas', 'Bhagavad-Gita' , etc. come from? And what religion did Ram and Krishna preach? If it was not Islam then what is?
Buddhism: The word 'Tripitaka' is not in the Tripitaka. The words 'Buddhism' and 'Buddhist' do not exist in the Tripitaka either. Buddha never preached any religion/philosophy by the name of 'Buddhism'. If so, then where did the words like 'Tripitaka' and 'Buddhism' come from?
Islam: The words 'Islam', 'Quran' and 'Muslim' do exist in the Quran [2:185; 4:82; 5:3; 2:128; 2:131; etc.]. Muhammad (PBUH) did indeed claim to be a Messenger of God - a logical and rational claim. He also preached a religion by the name of 'Islam' (Peace and Submission to God). Quran was also written down during his lifetime under his supervision.
Now, if all the religious scriptures are considered to be divine, for the sake of argument, then Islam will be the only divine Religion in the World [Quran 3:19; 3:85]. This is the fact and reality - believe it or not! There is NO compulsion in religion [Quran 2:256; 109:6; 6:104; 18:29 ; 10:99; 17:15 ; 76:3].


------------ --------- -------
"The future religion of the educated, cultured and enlightened people will be Islam."
-- George Bernard Shaw

Easter: Christian or Pagan?

http://musliminsuff er.wordpress. com/


bismi-lLahi- rRahmani- rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful



=== News Update ===

Easter: Christian or Pagan?

Crossification

The following article is excerpted from:

Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled

by Acharya S

Contrary to popular belief, Easter does not represent the "historical" crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In reality, the gospel tale reflects the annual "crossification" of the sun through the vernal equinox (Spring), at which time the sun is "resurrected," as the day begins to become longer than the night.

Rather than being a "Christian" holiday, Easter celebrations date back into remotest antiquity and are found around the world, as the blossoming of spring did not escape the notice of the ancients, who revered this life-renewing time of the year, when winter had passed and the sun was "born again." The "Pagan" Easter is also the Passover, and Jesus Christ represents not only the sun but also the Passover Lamb ritually sacrificed every year by a number of cultures, including the Egyptians, possibly as early as 4,000 years ago and continuing to this day in some places.

Easter is "Pessach" in Hebrew, "Pascha" in Greek, "Pachons" in Latin and "Pa-Khonsu" in Egyptian, "Khonsu" being an epithet for the sun god Horus. In Anglo-Saxon, Easter or Eostre is goddess of the dawn, corresponding to Ishtar, Astarte, Astoreth and Isis. The word "Easter" shares the same root with "east" and "eastern," the direction of the rising sun.

The principal Mexican solar festival was held at the vernal equinox, i.e., Easter, when sacrifices were made to sustain the sun. In India, the vernal equinox festival is called "Holi" and is especially sacred to the god Krishna. The Syrian sun and fertility god Attis was annually hung on a tree, dying and rising on March 24th and 25th, an "Easter celebration" that occurred at Rome as well. The March dates were later applied to the Passion and Resurrection of Christ: "Thus," says Sir Frazer, "the tradition which placed the death of Christ on the twenty-fifth of March was ancient and deeply rooted. It is all the more remarkable because astronomical considerations prove that it can have had no historical foundation�." This "coincidence" between the deaths and resurrections of Christ and the older Attis was not lost on early Christians, whom it distressed and caused to use the "devil got there first" excuse for the motif's presence in pre-Christian paganism.

The rites of the "crucified Adonis," another dying and rising savior god, were also celebrated in Syria at Easter time. As Frazer states:

"When we reflect how often the Church has skillfully contrived to plant the seeds of the new faith on the old stock of paganism, we may surmise that the Easter celebration of the dead and risen Christ was grafted upon a similar celebration of the dead and risen Adonis, which, as we have seen reason to believe, was celebrated in Syria at the same season."

The salvific death and resurrection at Easter of the god, the initiation as remover of sin, and the notion of becoming "born again," are all ages-old Pagan motifs or mysteries rehashed in the later Christianity. The all-important death-and-resurrect ion motif is exemplified in the "Parisian magical papyrus," a Pagan text ostensibly unaffected by Christianity:

"Lord, being born again I perish in that I am being exalted, and having been exalted I die; from a life-giving birth being born into death I was thus freed and go the way which Thou has founded, as Thou hast ordained and hast made the mystery."

In the gospel tale, there are two dates for the crucifixion: the 14th and the 15th of the month of Nisan, and within Christianity the date for Easter was debated for centuries. There continue to be two dates for Easter: the Western Catholic and Eastern Orthodox, thus demonstrating that this holiday is not the historical date of the actual crucifixion of a particular man. The dates are, in fact, astronomical, astrological and astrotheological.

In explaining this roving date, one "distinguished churchman," as Catholic Church historian Eusebius called him, Anatolius, revealed the meaning of Easter and of Christ, as well as the fact that astrology was a known and respected science used in Christianity. Said Anatolius:

"On this day [March 22] the sun is found not only to have reached the first sign of the Zodiac, but to be already passing through the fourth day within it. This sign is generally known as the first of the twelve, the equinoctial sign, the beginning of months, head of the cycle, and start of the planetary course.... Aristobolus adds that it is necessary at the Passover Festival that not only the sun but the moon as well should be passing through an equinoctial sign. There are two of these signs, one in spring, one in autumn, diametrically opposed to each other...."

In establishing the "Paschal festival," Church father Anatolius thus based his calculations on the positions of the sun and moon during the vernal equinox.

The need to time the Easter celebration - or resurrection - to coincide with the vernal equinox demonstrates that "Christ" is not an historical personage but the sun. This fact of Easter being the resurrection of the Sun has been well known for centuries, just as "the Savior's" birth at the winter solstice has been recognized as another solar motif. Another obvious clue as to Christ's nature is the fact that the "Lord's Day" is Sunday.

Concerning Easter, in his "Letter I. for 329" Bishop of Alexandria Athanasius (c. 293-373) remarks, "Again, 'the Sun of Righteousness, ' causing His divine beams to rise upon us, proclaims beforehand the time of the feast, in which, obeying Him, we ought to celebrate it�" Christ is thus the Sun of Righteousness, with "divine beams."

The Easter calculations were recomputed in the seventh century by the Christian author(s) of the Paschal Chronicle or Alexandria Chronicle, which seeks to establish a Christian chronology from "creation" to the year 628. The Paschal Chronicle determines the proper date for Easter as March 21st and the date of Christ's resurrection as March 25th (or, midnight, March 24, three days after the beginning of the equinox). In his various calculations, the Chronicle author discusses solar and lunar cycles, including the 19-year lunar cycle, by which he reckons the crucifixion and resurrection, concluding: "This is consistent with the prior determinations of reputable men in the calculation of the heavenly bodies." To wit, Christ's death and resurrection are based on astrotheology.

The Chronicle author further confirms that Christianity is a continuation of the ancient "Pagan" astrotheological religion when he states that the "Annunciation of our Lady," i.e., the conception of Christ by the Virgin Mary, likewise occurred on March 25th, the vernal equinox, exactly nine months prior to the December 25th birthdate, the annual rebirth of the sun.

source: http://www.truthbek nown.com/ easter.htm

For more information, please see:
Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled.

===



-muslim voice-
____________ _________ _________ ________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW
__._,