Liverpool FC Forum

by **lakes10** » Wed May 04, 2011 5:34 pm

the truth is that no one knows what any of the books say as they have been interpreted over the years so many time.

how would the world feel if it turned out that the last pagers of the books had been lost and on them pages it said.
""All events, characters and institutions in this Book and any similarity to any person, black or white, or to any actual events, or institutions is coincidential"

by **lakes10** » Wed May 04, 2011 5:50 pm

how they come about

Bible

Like many ancient works, the oldest parts of the Bible were passed along orally before they were ever written down. Many devout Jews and Christians believe that the full text of the Bible was given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai. Though the Bible's earliest origin may always be a matter of faith, it remains a fact that after the Bible was recorded, many different versions existed. It wasn't until the first century B.C.E. (Before the Common Era, aka B.C.) that Jews settled on the canon of their scripture, and it was around 400 C.E. (Common Era, aka A.D.) that Christians agreed on all the books of their New Testament. Today, countless translations and interpretations of the Bible exist in English and many other languages.
The oldest written parts of the Bible found were transcribed in three languages. What scholars call the Hebrew Bible (the same books Jews call the Tanakh or Written Torah and Christians call the Old Testament) was first written in Hebrew with a few chapters of the books of Ezra and Daniel recorded in Aramaic. Hebrew had long been the language of the Jewish people, so their scriptures were passed down in Hebrew. Some of the books of the Hebrew Bible may have been written as far back as 1,400 B.C.E., although most of the text was probably written between 900 and 400 B.C.E

The Quran

The Quran (English pronunciation: /kɒˈrɑːn/ kor-AHN; Arabic: القرآن‎ al-qur’ān, IPA: [qurˈʔaːn], literally “the recitation”), also sometimes transliterated as Qur'an, Kuran, Koran, Qur’ān, Coran or al-Qur’ān, is the central religious text of Islam,[1] which Muslims consider the verbatim word of God (Arabic: الله‎, Allah) and the final divine revelation—Final Testament.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] It is regarded widely as the finest piece of literature in the Arabic language.[9][10][11]

Muslims believe that the Quran was verbally revealed through the angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) from God to Muhammad gradually over a period of approximately twenty-three years beginning in 610 CE, when Muhammad was forty, and concluding in 632 CE, the year of his death,[4][12][13] and that the Quran was memorized, recited and written down by Muhammad's companions, called Sahabas, after every revelation dictated by Muhammad. Most of Muhammad's tens of thousands of companions learned the Quran by heart and recited it repeatedly in front of Muhammad and/or his companions for approval.

Shortly after Muhammad's death The Quran was compiled into a single book by order of the first Caliph Abu Bakr and at the suggestion of his future successor Umar. Hafsa, who was Muhammad's widow and Umar's daughter, was entrusted with that Quran text after the second Caliph Umar died. When Uthman, the third Caliph, began to notice slight differences in Arabic dialect he asked Hafsa to allow him to use the text in her possession to be set as the standard dialect, the Quraish dialect now known as Fus'ha (Modern Standard Arabic). Before returning the text to Hafsa Uthman made several thousand copies of Abu Bakr's redaction and, to standardize the text, invalidated all other versions of the Quran. This process of formalization is known as the "Uthmanic recension".[14] The present form of the Quran text is accepted by most scholars as the original version compiled by Abu Bakr.

what come first...the chicken or the egg.

the egg, why? eggs have been laid for many years before birds come about.

its only down to they way you look at what read and how you read it....but it also matter how many times someone has rewritten it before you get to read it and what you are told about it before you read it.

take the jehovah witness, they will let a child died from lack of blood, why well it say in the book they must not take blood.

well during the time the book was done killing was seen as taking blood. so what the book means is not to kill. yet they read it as not to take blood into their bodies...but they will eat meat, a friend of mine that is a Jehovah's Witnesses sat down to eat a rare steak wil blood running out of it. i pointed out that in the book it said must not take blood.......he did not eat it lol, a few days later he told me he can eat it as its not human, i pointed out that it did not say human blood in the book but just blood lol.

we can twist so many this when it comes to faith...thats why its called blind faith, they dont see the others point of view.

by **Igor Zidane** » Wed May 04, 2011 6:02 pm

Did he just say blessed are the cheesmakers?

by **Bad Bob** » Wed May 04, 2011 6:23 pm

lakes10 wrote:its only down to they way you look at what read and how you read it....but it also matter how many times someone has rewritten it before you get to read it and what you are told about it before you read it.

Another vitally important point, especially the last line. Of the relatively few people that actually bother to read them extensively, no one comes to read the Bible or Q'ran completely unencumbered by layers of interpretation, tradition and expectation. We hear distilled versions of the stories long before we read them first hand and these shape how we read and interpret them (including what sections to read carefully and what sections to skip over or skim). The same goes for critical appraisals of these books: we hear or read the criticisms raised by others before we have a proper look ourselves and, depending on our disposition towards the critique, we tend to read accordingly.

by **Igor Zidane** » Wed May 04, 2011 6:37 pm

F.UCK RELIGION

by **lakes10** » Wed May 04, 2011 6:51 pm

RUN FOR COVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by **lakes10** » Wed May 04, 2011 7:02 pm

Osama Bin Laden: Photos will not be released - Obama President Barack Obama has decided that photos of the dead Osama Bin Laden should not be released.

US officials have been discussing whether to publish pictures of Bin Laden's body to counter conspiracy theories that he did not die.

But the White House has been concerned that the "gruesome" images could inflame sensitivities.

The al-Qaeda leader was shot dead in a raid on Monday by US special forces in northern Pakistan.

The BBC's Paul Adams in Washington says clearly President Obama has decided that releasing the photos is not worth the risk.

by **Bad Bob** » Wed May 04, 2011 7:18 pm

lakes10 wrote:Osama Bin Laden: Photos will not be released - Obama President Barack Obama has decided that photos of the dead Osama Bin Laden should not be released.

US officials have been discussing whether to publish pictures of Bin Laden's body to counter conspiracy theories that he did not die.

But the White House has been concerned that the "gruesome" images could inflame sensitivities.

The al-Qaeda leader was shot dead in a raid on Monday by US special forces in northern Pakistan.

The BBC's Paul Adams in Washington says clearly President Obama has decided that releasing the photos is not worth the risk.

Probably a wise move, TBPH. Conspiracy theorists aren't going to let it go just because a photo makes the rounds--they'll just claim it's been 'shopped' in some way. (Just look at all the nonsense still be stirred up by these 'birther' saddos despite the fact that Hawaii has authenticated and released both the short-form and long-form versions of Obama's birth certificate now.) Since the conspiracy theorists are still going to run wild with this story no matter what gets released you can't do anything about them. The better move is to keep things under lock and key and not give the radical Islamists something extra to froth about. I'm guessing a mug shot of a perforated Bin Laden would inflame things as much or more than a cartoon Mohammed or a Florida whack-job burning the Qu'ran.

by **Greavesie** » Wed May 04, 2011 7:25 pm

don't see why Obama should think they have any sort of duty to release pics in all honesty. I agree with Bob, those who think America are bullsh!tting with eeverything they say will continue to come up with conspiracy theories no matter how much evidence ges thrown their way, thats the way it goes.

by **Bad Bob** » Wed May 04, 2011 7:32 pm

Plus, you can bet that there will be a certain segment of the American population that will take said image and emblazon it on posters, t-shirts and the back of their pick-up trucks, adding more fuel to the fire.

by **neil** » Wed May 04, 2011 8:36 pm

Personally I'd absolutley staggered if binlid isnt being waterboarded right now or paticipating in some other delightful pastime 'giving out' on every taliban/al qeida fruit who has acquired any elevated position in the last 10 years. Dead and secretly dumped at sea? In the words of the great jim royle...my arse

by **Kenny Kan** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:26 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
lakes10 wrote:its only down to they way you look at what read and how you read it....but it also matter how many times someone has rewritten it before you get to read it and what you are told about it before you read it.

Another vitally important point, especially the last line. Of the relatively few people that actually bother to read them extensively, no one comes to read the Bible or Q'ran completely unencumbered by layers of interpretation, tradition and expectation. We hear distilled versions of the stories long before we read them first hand and these shape how we read and interpret them (including what sections to read carefully and what sections to skip over or skim). The same goes for critical appraisals of these books: we hear or read the criticisms raised by others before we have a proper look ourselves and, depending on our disposition towards the critique, we tend to read accordingly.

While you think that true, and to an extent it maybe. Those passages that have been quoted from the Koran are clear in what they say.

How and why people band around the word ''interpretation'' so much concerning such explicit statements are probably apologetic to, and sympathize with, the way Islam is perceived by people like myself in the western world.

Bob, it's like me telling you to ''f.uck off'' then you carding me, by your logic I could say ''no, Bob you've interpreted what I have said is wrong, all I meant was 'go away please''

But because it's ancient ''holy'' scriptures of a certain faith that are in fact condoning violence non-believers in the fog of the politically correct world put it down to ''misinterpretation''. It's as though extremists are being portrayed here as people who are not intelligent enough to, and or are unable to interpret their own book, in my eyes that couldn't been further from the truth. Certainly as the number of extremists tied to the Islamic faith who use the Koran as their moral and motivational starting point in carrying out extreme acts would also suggest otherwise.

by **metalhead** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:31 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
metalhead wrote:Again I'm not expert in Islam, I just see the Quran the way I and others read it

Key point there, mate. No matter what the text says (and, let's face it, there's some pretty reprehensible stuff codified in the holy books of all three Abrahamic religions) it's down to the faithful to interpret the words and act accordingly.

Sadly, some members of all three faiths choose a narrow, literal interpretation and use it as a justification for persecuting or harming others. Thankfully such fundamentalists are in the minority of each faith, although it might not seem so given their coverage on the news (whether its Islamic fundamentalists flying planes into buildings or Christian fundys bombing abortion clinics).

I think it bears repeating often that the vast majority of the faithful in each of these religions are moderates: people who either drop the reprehensible passages of their holy books from their contemplation of the faith altogether or who bracket these passages off as a product of another time and another place, a 'lost in translation' situation etc. I'm sure doing so causes many moderates no shortage of discomfort but they obviously take enough away from the uplifting aspects of their faith to maintain their place in the flock.

Speaking personally, I can't reconcile the contradictions in the bible between love and hate, tolerance and prejudice, equality and hierarchy and so I chose to give the whole organized religion thing a miss. I know many people raised Christian who've made the same decision and I'm sure there are many Muslims and Jews that have followed a similar path. And yet, due to my nationality and my ethnic background, I know I am still presumed to be a Christian in the eyes of the Muslims and Jews I have interacted with in my life, with all of the baggage that that no doubt entails. I sometimes wonder what they must think of me when they read about how the bible condones slavery or wife-beating or executing the wicked?

Point is, faith is a complex issue that cannot simply be reduced to what passages get written down in the holy book. How those passages (and the other building blocks of faith, such as rituals, dietary practices, etc.) get interpreted is all important.

I'm on the same boat buddy, I'm not a devout muslim, I don't preach what the Quran tells me for example praying 5 times a day, no alcohol, etc... However, I am a believer, I do follow and believe certain aspects of my religion. I think you make a valid point saying that the holy books through time might have been lost in translation, who knows what prophet Jesus (pbuh) or prophet Mohammad (pbuh) would have done today and how would they have reacted to the events of terrorism, U.S policies and extremism.

going back to analyzing Islam, we cannot assume that one religion is responsible for death of thousands of people because a group has read its book in a completely different way than any other individual. Even Al Qaeda are responsible for the deaths of many muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan! Where in the Quran does it tells us to kill people who preach the same religion? The Quran preaches freedom of thought and free will, while Al Qaeda does not follow such creed and forces people to submit to their philosophy rather than oppose it, if you oppose it you are considered a pagan and a traitor to god! A devout muslim, who follows Islam, who prays 5 times a day, who gives money to the poor, who does the pilgrimage every year and who reads the Quran everyday is called a pagan and a traitor for not following a monstrous philosophy. According to the extremists and fanatics, this devout Muslim is an enemy of God! Furthermore, when we analyze the Quran you look at it as a whole, we cannot assume that that different verses in the Quran preaches violence and hate! we must look at the chapter, and look at why there is a verse that is condemning non-believers to hell and God will turn them to apes. We must look at the verses before and after, and as I explained in my lengthy post these verses are about the oppression, the mischief, the hypocrites and the men with bad deeds. The Quran does not contradict itself nor does it deviate from its true purpose. Its crystal clear that according to the book non-believers are men without knowledge and its up to us to guide them to the truth.

[Qur'an 5:13] "But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few - ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind."

very simple

curse the mischief, but if they ask for forgiveness give it to them

[Qur'an 13:11] "Allah does not change a people's lot unless they change what is in their hearts."

This is another classic example of God's way of giving us the power of free will. According to this God does guide the people, but if people do not believe God does not force them to accept what they believe, they are free to choose and no one is forcing them otherwise, but the non-believers ask God for forgiveness he will forgive them.

Al Qaeda or Taliban does not exercise this choice, they do not see it this way for some reason.

The Ottoman empire did not force people to become Muslims nor did it tell its people to kill the non-believers, in fact they promoted different religions in their area, they encouraged non-Muslims to build churches and Jewish synagogues and encouraged free thinkers and inventors. Islam was considered a prominent religion during that era. Even some of the brightest minds of the Arab worlds during the Ottoman empire figured out mathematical rules and equations. Al Khwarizmi invented the modern day algebra, quadratics and algorithms, he was also a devout Muslim. He also innovated Geometry and other mathematical rules that we use today. the gunpowder was used by the Arabs before it reached Europe!

Why is it now that some consider it as a religion of violence, when it was a religion that promoted freedom? is it because a minority group that is so fixated by the media created stereotypes?

by **metalhead** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:34 pm

Kenny Kan wrote:Certainly as the number of extremists tied to the Islamic faith who use the Koran as their moral and motivational starting point in carrying out extreme acts would also suggest otherwise.

Its because these extremists are not driven by moral codes that the Quran has set. These extremists use the Quran as an excuse to exercise their power on the weak and the illiterate.

Why would they kill their own people following the same religion?

by **burjennio** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:35 pm

Im just gonna say it.

If I had to choose between Osama Bin Laden and Manchester Utd its Osama all the f*cking way :angry:

Liverpool FC Forum

Osama bin ladin

Who is online