Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by surfinjo

  1. I have never denounced Judaism or any other faith. I have never denounced the Torah. You are a [refrain from person attacks] who confabulates what your limited capacity is incapable of justifying with honest confession. Though since you and your Nazi partners can emulate your hero, Hitler, even to the point of producing a hit list of those who dare stand against you it comes as little surprise that you would lie. http://www.masada2000.org/list-A.html
  2. If you say so. Who am I to argue with a heathen?
  3. I can't and won't argue against anyone's faith. But your suggestion that we should discuss the core rather than what people do is exactly my feeling. Perhaps you could think about your obscession with crosses and ancient mythology and concentrate upon what Jesus actually taught us?
  4. Evidently most Muslims do. Evidently most Muslims decorate their mosques. You disagree with this. Re-invenitng your religion. However, I will resist the urdge to attack Islam. Unlike you, but like tha majority of Muslims, I respect the beliefs of others.
  5. Neturei Karta may well me a finge group, though 5000 members s not unsubstantial. The other links deal with other groups. The numbers and the arguments are significant. However to attempt to portray this. But the point of the links is to demonstrate that Zionism isn't about Jews, it's about greed. The slaughter of people in Palestine and Lebanon is unacceptable.
  6. Oh yes, the old argument, 'Disagree with us and we'll call you anti-Semitic.' Sorry, doesn't wash. What Zionism is is well known. If you follow the links there are a number of interesting articles written by prominent and distinguished Jews. They not only describe Zionism, they explain why it is incompatible with Judaism, incompatible with Jewish law, incompatible with international law and incompatible with human decency.
  7. I would attend to your main point if I know what it is. Interesting that you re-invent your religion re #58 I'm grateful to your for announcing that the cross is a core aspect of Christianity. I do hope your time as the self-appointed pontiff of all Christendom is more spiritually rewarding than your time as the re-inventor of Islam has evidently been.
  8. This is a list of sites, run by various Jewish groups detailing why they are utterly opposed to Zionism. They make surprisingly interesting and revealing reading. http://www.nkusa.org/ http://www.israelversusjudaism.org/ http://www.netureikartaru.com/ (Not English language) http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/ http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1637.htm http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/ This is a long list published by Zionists of what they term, Self Hating Jews. Jews who have the courage and integrity to stand up against the outrage and atrocity of Nazi Zionism. If I were a Jew I would be proud to be on that list. http://www.masada2000.org/list-A.html What each of these links demonstrates is that the evil here is not Jews. It's Zionism. I have given this list to many different Jews. All have been utterly surprised by what they have read. That demonstrates that most ordinary Jews are brainwashed by the Zionists. I suggest the Zionists are not real Jews. They have no love for Israel, and no concern for Jewish heritage. They are only concerned with maintaining a military presence in the ME while there is oil. The enemy of Islam is not Jews, it's not Christians, it's not the west. The enemy of Islam is the evil in its midst. The so called Muslim leaders who rant while drawing in the cash from oil. Muslims will never know freedom until they abandon the lie of their leaders. I doubt the founders of Islam ever imagined that the entire leadership structure they carefully set up would be universally hijacked by cynical scum.
  9. I deleted my last message, which was 35. I put it there to highlight that anyone can cite one problem or another with any religious texts or dogma. The whole point of religion is faith. I decided to delete it because, upon reflection, it appeared to be making a comparison. Worse, it appeared to be seeking to undermine the faith of others. That, I am not permitted to do. If anyone took it this last way, I do sincerely apologise. Remember what gave you your faith to begin with and work back from there.
  10. There are on top of most Mosques. Al Aqsa Mosque But if it convinces you......
  11. I had a quick look through. My understanding is that that site is a rather childish response to the utterly silly site, Answering Islam. Some Christians use the cross. Some Muslims use the crescent moon. Some Jews use a sort of star. Wow!
  12. Sadly, what they taught was their own version. One of the first major blasphemies was the presumption that the Church could pardon sin. This grew into the exclusive authority to forgive sin, which developed into the sale of indulgences. It was this last outrage that brought about the reformation, of course. The church cannot be entirely condemned nor wholly blamed. Many good people seriously tried to devote themselves to God's work, as they perceived it. But for too many, the constant manipulation was an excuse for excess. Example. After William the Conquerer invaded England he applied to the Pope for his dispensation from responsibility for the deaths he had caused. At this time, killing was still seen for the evil it is. The Pope ordered him to do penitence for each soul for a specified period of time. When all the deaths were added up it was realised William would need to do penitence 24 hours a day for over 1000 years! No problem. He taxed everyone to the point of starvation. Used the cash to build a series of monasteries which he staffed with monks who each did his penitence on his behalf. His penitence was done in about 10 years. As for the position of Christians in the Muslim occupied areas. We have the Muslims version which paints them as wonderfully decent chaps who were faced with ever complaining subjects. Then we have the Roman version which paints the Muslims as barbaric hoards, bent upon destruction and sacrilege. Few scholars of history take either version seriously.
  13. No. No. No. I think you'll find the vast majority of people in Europe are very much opposed to the behaviour of Israel. The problem for those who are being attacked and persecuted by the Zionists is they don't really know what they are doing. They are attempting understand the Zionists, to fight the Zionists and the justify every action, with reference to their ancient Islamic texts. What they have ended up doing is fighting the wrong battle. It is a bit like breaking your leg and putting a cast onto your arm. While the Palestinian people have my best wishes, I have very little hope for the people of Palestine. They are destined to be utterly annihilated. They and the peoples of the Middle East are facing an enemy which is beyond their comprehension. And it will remain beyond their comprehension until they grow up and face the world as it is rather than how they wish it were.
  14. What I was attempting to outline here was the foundation of the dogma of the Trinity. Not a second God. Just the nature of God. If you think of God in human terms, it makes this concept very difficult to understand. If you think of God as male, for example, it is unlikely you can really comprehend what these people meant by the nature of God. But all of this is the product of the sort of intense curiosity that tends to create these ideas. For my own part, I have little curiosity of the nature of God. I have enough trouble struggling with His Commandments.
  15. What we have here is an example of how our world is currently being deliberately divided. Evil people fill desperate minds with lies. They seek to justify hatred and killing in the name of God. Yet to suggest that God can hate any of us is a presumption that is surely blasphemous. We who tolerate such evil, without comment or condemnation must bear some responsibility.
  16. And if you'd bothered to check you would realise that Easter is set according to the Lunar calender. The distinction I was drawing is entirely appropriate. Now, any chance that Abu Hurairah will enlighten us on his references to Orpheus and the Cross symbol?
  17. I'm surprised you were taken in by that site http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html I don't want you to feel too insulted but I first saw something like this when I was at school. It probably originated in from the Soviet Union either under Stalin or Khrushchev. It was a rather transparent attempt to undermine the West. (You may not be aware of it but Islam is just the latest in a long line of groups that think they can take over the West and establish their own rule.) The cult of Mithra, as practised in ancient Rome was a secretive order mainly confined to soldiers. They had secret meeting places. Secret rites. Initiations. But sadly, there is very little text. What we do know mainly comes from investigation made by he Roman authorities anxious to keep an eye on their underlings. 1. The cult claimed he emanated from a rock, under a tree, next to a river. This was suppose to have been witnessed by some shepherds who were, understandably amazed. The cult practiced their rites in caves or cellars. No birth in caves. No virgins. 2. Mithra was suppose to have wandered around teaching certain secrets to his followers. These were actually secret rites, a bit like Masons. 3. He may have had 12 companions. 4. He may have promised immortality which is nothing new in any religion. 5. It may have been claimed he performed miracles. Again, nothing new. 6. The cult of Mithra use to sacrifice bulls. Some groups drank the blood. The blood was suppose to be symbolic. The sacrifice of Mithra is a new one. 7. Mithra was suppose to be immortal. He was created from rock!! 8. There is no evidence the cult of Mithra practised this. 9. No evidence that Mithra was called good anything. 10. No evidence that Mithra was called any of these. 11. This is perhaps the silliest bit. In English we use the term Sunday. In French it is dimanche. Italian dominica. It is probable that the prefix sun was alluding to son, meaning the Son of God. Nothing to do with Mithra. (Most school boys spotted this one themselves!!). 12 The date of the Easter mass changes every years according to the Lunar calender. The Romans used the Solar calender. (Most school boys spotted this one as well!!). 13. In actuality, it was integral to the cult of Mithra that they had large meals together. Not exactly original. 14. In the version we had this claim wasn't quite so elaborate. It claimed that the Lord's Prayer and some sermons were taken fro Mithra texts. But, of course, there are no Mithra texts!! Have you checked out who Shmuel Golding is? 15. Again, in the version we had this was claimed to be in the Vatican Library. However, if you check the Catholic Encyclopedia you won't find this at all. Just another fib!!
  18. Jesus was not as other men. Jesus was created by God. His destiny was set by God. For all other men, we have free will to do as we choose. The question is, to what extent did Jesus have free will? If Jesus had no free will, then he was as an angel. A servant of God, doing God's bidding without question. But we know that Jesus had some measure of free will as it is recorded that he had doubts about fulfilling His destiny. He may also not have been fully aware of where that destiny would lead Him. So we have a man, created by God, as a man, for a divine purpose. As a man He was able to understand and experience the sufferings and aspirations of men. As a man He was able to present Himself as having experienced the feelings and anguish of Men. As one created with divine purpose He was infused with the knowledge and trust of God. For Him there were no doubts. He was created to impart to us all, the will of God. So, Jesus was not as an angel since he had, at least, some free will. Jesus was not as a man because His destiny was set for Him. His free will was limited and He was infused with the knowledge of God's wishes. So, Jesus was a divinely created man. Early Christians would have struggled with themselves about how they must regard Jesus. His statements and clarifications come directly from God. Not as revealed instructions, but as divinely infused understanding. Therefore, what Jesus said hold the same infallibility of God. They decided that Jesus was of God. Not a god but part of the nature of God.
  19. Jesus was created for all mankind. He was created to teach the people who identified themselves as Jews to fulfil their destiny, given to Moses, to spread the truth of God's commandments. That we cannot be judged by any man for God's law. He did not uphold Jewish law he upheld God's law. His name was given by God as is stated in the Gospels.
  20. Can you say what a Slave of Allah is? I assume a slave of Allah will believe in the oneness of God, which will include all Christians, all Muslims, all Jews, all Zoroastrians, most Hindus, all Buddhists and numerous other faiths. But I tend to doubt you consider most of these to be Slaves of Allah. What are the differences between a Slave of Allah and someone who is not? Can you give a reference to the texts that brought you to this conclusion please?
  21. According to the account in Matthew the name was chosen by God.
  22. Well, you do seem to be referring to the Trinity. What makes you think the early Christian martyrs didn't believe in Jesus' divinity?
  • Create New...