this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4941788.stm - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4941788.stm

is just sick. - yes the brothel is sick, and so is the ad, but im talking about the muslim protest, which (once again) took the form of threats of violence

how can muslims even protest about this, in view of this:

http://www.lexicorient.com/e.o/misyar.htm - http://www.lexicorient.com/e.o/misyar.htm

and this:

http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20000407-042210-7478r - http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20000407- 042210-7478r

also this: sahih bukhari vol.6 book60 no.139 -----?????????

we, in the west, are sick to death of listening to muslim threats and moralizing.  as well as this constant fantasy that you are somehow being insulted by everything we say and do - get your own house in order, and then you will be qualified to address the prostitution issue

also check out the situation in that great theocracy, whose capital city is tehran:

http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/2/2568 - http://www.iranian.ws/cgi-bin/iran_news/exec/view.cgi/2/2568

So bro Fredi where did you get more sick. Here "...is just sick. - yes the brothel is sick, and so is the ad,......" or here "we, in the west, are sick to death of listening to muslim threats and moralizing..." But why should you be sick in second place since you already got sick in the first place? Logically, you can only say, "more sick". Isn't it? Yes, the second occurance makes sickness worse.

You know, we could all flood the forum with disturbing, sick headlines. Even as I type I am listening to Oprah do a show about female teachers having sex with their 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students right here in the capitol of evangelical Christiandom. Are all good Christian teachers molesting their students. It must be so because I keep reading about it in the news and hearing about it on TV.

When people want to do something, they can usually find justification. They can twist and turn and make almost anything seem acceptible if that's what they really want. But the sin is on them, and they must answer for what they do to God.

Fred, why don't you take a page from your own book and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

Neither America nor Deutschland have their own longhouses in order.  FACT.

See that 10-story tall mostly naked German Fraulein?  See her??  That makes my Fatherlands look good?  That's good for my Fatherlands?  Deutschland benefits from the WHORING of its daughters?

He said they had accused the brothel of insulting Islam by using the flags.

It will only be me.  I, and I alone of all the Sons of Deutschland, I, one voice all by my lonesome self, I still say at the top of my lungs:

THIS ADD INSULTS THE FATHERLANDS

I have no understanding why German Fathers let this debauchery happen to their own daughters.  It is not masculine.  The word "Father" means "Protector".  How is a man PROTECTING his family when this happens to his daughters?  And, looking at millions of German families together in aggregate, how are German men PROTECTING their families with this mile-high sign??

What is happening to my FATHER-lands?

My advice to non-Whites: do not ever, for any reason, under any circumstances, no matter how much gold your enemies have to give you, do not ever ever ever ever ever ever ever allow yourself to be this shamed.  I guarantee you, by the time it comes to this, you will be living in a world of hurt.  Your life will seriously suck by the time this level of bull**** is inflicted on you.  I have warned you, which is the best I can muster at present.  But you do NOT want to brag about having the "largest brothels" in the world -- that is NOT a source of PRIDE, FYI.  Not that this should require explanation, but apparently it does.  And ladies, ladies, please think it through -- all the way through -- before you decide that this is "liberation". 

Selling your body to others is "liberation" and "freedom"?  Really???  Please engage your fore-brains for a while before you buy this line.  I guarantee you all will rue the day you allow this bull**** to be inflicted, by your enemies, on your lands, families, daughters, mothers, sisters, and would-be wives.  That's my claim anyway, believe me or not.

See that woman again?  She is not an isolated human being all by herself... she, somewhere, has a FATHER.  Where is her FATHER in all this?  Is he PROUD that his daughter is DISPLAYED before all the world??  See, why doesn't this PISS SOME GERMAN FATHER OFF TO HIGH HEAVEN???  Where is her father in all this?  Wow, he's nowhere to be found!  Where is he??

Ladies, let's say you were my daughter.  Why would I want you to work in a brothel and have your picture painted on the side of a building?  Can you please explain that to me?  Can you please tell me just why I should want that for you?  See, I can't reckon it.  I can't see it.  I can juggle, and I can swim, and I can do math, but I can't figure that out.  I'd want you to have a good husband, and a family, and "go forth, be fruitful, and multiply", but not this.  Whatever, I guess it makes sense somehow, I don't understand though.  My understanding of history is that only the womenfolk of defeated people crushed in battle get treated this way.

I for one feel insulted that the Flags of Deutschland and America are still on that painting.  I'm baffled as to why I'm alone on this.  Pimp & ho, crack whore MTV "cultcha" is not the Height of "Western" "civilization".  No, dude, sorry, but it really ain't. 

I would just like to point out that most bipedal homonids are apparently blind as bats.  See, like, before "Western" culture turned into Crack Ho MTV "cultcha", my America was strong, and we were exploring SPACE and putting men on OTHER HEAVENLY BODIES.  See?  See?  That's STRENGTH, that's VIGOR, that's MIGHT, that's POWER.  Putting men on the MOON is hard core, it is a massive testamony of STRENGTH, MIGHT & MAIN.

But today, mired in MTV crack ho pimped b*tch "culcha", America and the West are weak.  We're fully of corruption, and full of sh**, and we can't even build the 2000 ton Saturn V rockets we could 30 years ago!  America couldn't go back to the moon if it wanted to!  See??  That's WEAK.  That's FLABBY.  That's PANZY.  That's LOSER.  It's no longer, "I CAN, WATCH ME", it's "Uh, I can't, but, um, hey I've got nothing to prove, I'm to hip for that". 

2000 ton rockets landing on the Moon = BALLS STRENGTH POWER TOUGH

2000 ton rockets rusting in empty museums = WEAK PANZY LOSER QUEER

And you know what?  This really should not be a challenge question.  We COULD 30 years ago...  We CAN'T today...  See??  See how this is OBJECTIVE, UNAMBIGUOUS?  See how this is not open for INTERPRETATION??

America WAS STRONG without the crack ho b*tch cultcha...

America IS WEAK with MTV cultcha...

Which do you want folks??  PLEASE THINK!!  PLEASE ENGAGE YOUR BRAINS -- GOD GAVE YOU BRAINS FOR A FRIGGING REASON YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A CLUE!!!!  SEEING THE TRUTH UNDERGIRDING GOD'S BIDDINGS AND GOD'S LAWS REALLY DOES NOT TAKE ROCKET SCIENTISTS-- JUST OPEN YOUR EYES!!!!!  As America and Europe have become MORE DEBAUCHED, America and Europe have become MORE WEAK.

Almighty God is all about STRENGTH!  What, you worship and follow Almighty God and you turn into a panzy wuss??  Hell no!  Almighty God = STRENGTH.

Do God's Will => STRENGTH

Do OPPOSITE of God's Will => WEAKNESS

This should be easy.  E-a-s-y.

WHY IS THIS HARD??  WHY IS THIS A FINAL JEOPARDY CHALLENGE QUESTION THAT STUMPS US ALL???

Mishmish wrote: You know, we could all flood the forum with disturbing, sick headlines. Even as I type I am listening to Oprah do a show about female teachers having sex with their 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students right here in the capitol of evangelical Christiandom. Are all good Christian teachers molesting their students. It must be so because I keep reading about it in the news and hearing about it on TV. When people want to do something, they can usually find justification. They can twist and turn and make almost anything seem acceptible if that's what they really want. But the sin is on them, and they must answer for what they do to God. Fred, why don't you take a page from your own book and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

mish - noone is saying christians dont fail.  and i am not throwing stones.  throwing stones is for real.  the woman in the story you quoted from was guilty of adultery, and in danger of being stoned.  the Lord said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - this did not mean he did not point out evil wherever it occured. and so i should do the same as he, that is obvious.  and he certainly did not condone her sin, but forgave her, as God, telling her "go and sin no more"

you are also not taking into account the fact that islam and christianity do not propose the same thing.  islam claims to cover all aspects of life, social and governmental.  christianity does not include the governmental, unless in the context of the church.  you may point out the failures of christians, and rightly so, but i am pointing out the miserable failure of islam to fulfill its promises, which have never been carried out.  in this site it is obvious to me that noone is even sure what these promises are, in the social and governmental sphere

with regard to the brothel in cologne, i will say this - prostitution is legal in germany.  german christians do not like it.  neither do muslims.  i have not heard of any christians turning up armed with sticks and knives, threatening violence.  and yet if they were inclined to violence they would have reason.  this establishment is called "pascha", which in many languages is the word for easter or passover.  it is, i understand the russian orthodox word for easter.  i dread to think what pandemonium would have ensued if they had called it "eid"

also, the question raised by sahih bukhari vol6 book60 no.139 has not been addressed as yet

fredifreeloader wrote: this establishment is called "pascha", which in many languages is the word for easter or passover.  it is, i understand the russian orthodox word for easter.  i dread to think what pandemonium would have ensued if they had called it "eid"

You are correct p�scha is actually Greek for Passover.  The Eastern Orthodox Church uses it as Easter.  Its interesting they use it for Brothel in Germany.  I wonder what the word means IN GERMAN.

Well, What's your point about hadithic reference. I couldn't get it?  On what aspect of it do you want me to comment, though I am simply not qualified to explain  the ahadith literature in isolation? This is simply because of its peculier nature. Nevertheless, here is the referred hadith:

 Volume 6, Book 60, Number 139:

Narrated Abdullah:

We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women with us. So we said "Shall we castrate ourselves?" But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman by giving her even a garment, and then he recited: "O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you."

Angela wrote: fredifreeloader wrote: this establishment is called "pascha", which in many languages is the word for easter or passover.  it is, i understand the russian orthodox word for easter.  i dread to think what pandemonium would have ensued if they had called it "eid" You are correct p�scha is actually Greek for Passover.  The Eastern Orthodox Church uses it as Easter.  Its interesting they use it for Brothel in Germany.  I wonder what the word means IN GERMAN.

Oh! In this way one can easily look at the word "mecca" where Muslims now have to make sure that they write "Mekkha" to distinguish it as their holy city than from the brothel. But obviously all are not so carefull, including myself. But can this really make both as same. I don't think so. But ofcourse there is no dearth of extremists, and certain Muslims are obviously no exception to it.

no ahmad, he allowed them to marry a woman temporarily -

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/060.sbt.html - http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhar i/060.sbt.html

Says who?? The text of the hadith needs to be looked at without the "()" understanding of the translator, first. Its explanation comes after wards. Isn't it?

fredifreeloader you are also not taking into account the fact that islam and christianity do not propose the same thing.  islam claims to cover all aspects of life, social and governmental.  christianity does not include the governmental, unless in the context of the church.  you may point out the failures of christians, and rightly so, but i am pointing out the miserable failure of islam to fulfill its promises, which have never been carried out.  in this site it is obvious to me that noone is even sure what these promises are, in the social and governmental sphere [/QUOTE wrote: Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."  This verse was used in another thread here

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." 

This verse was used in another thread here to discribe Jesus. Apparently someone was supposed to unite government and religion, a task also believed to be part of the job of the Messiah of Judaism.

I think the difference between Islam and Christianity in this respect is that Muslims actually do try to have Islam cover all aspects of life.

In early Islam the practice of Muta'a was allowed. But The Prophet forbade it later as it did not meet the criteria of marriage revealed in the Quran. Once something was revealed in the Quran, the old practices were forbidden.

I think this is also the case in Christianity: eating pork, turning the other cheek, etc...

I'm not really sure what you are objecting to. There are some Muslims in Egypt and Saudi practicing something that most scholars and the Islamic world  have said are not correct. This is an innovation of the religion and a sin.

actually, mish, the government will be on His shoulders, but that is future, when he comes to reign on earth.  (most of the old testament prophecies relating to Christ are yet to be fulfilled at His second coming). at present Christ does not reign in this sense, the political, administrative sense.  He will rule the world then in every sense of the word.  christianity does not aspire to political, administrative, legal power in the present age of grace.  there is no rule of law for christians in the sense that if somone offends, they will be punished by human christian authority.  our law in that sense is the law in whichever land we happen to live.  there is of course discipline in the church, whereby a person may be excommunicated from the local church if they have offended badly, spiritually, with a view to repentance and re-admission, but that is not the same as law in the social sense, and it certainly does not apply to non-christians 

i was reading earlier today about muslims in sweden who were calling for muslim laws to be applied to muslims in that country, with normal swedish law still applying to swedish non-muslims.  it is inconceivable to me that christians would make the same demand.  (it would have to be, i would think, some new, rather weird sect which would make such a demand).  the structure is not there for it for one thing, and we are called upon, in the holy Scriptures, to be subject to whatever rulers we are under.  christians view themselves as being in the world, but not of the world, our citizenship is in heaven, as the bible says. 

now you are saying that the practice of temporary marriage (we would call it prostitution) has been stopped by muhammad, as it did not fit in with the criteria of marriage.  can you give a reference for this?  and how could muhammad stop this, as he himself did not comply with the laws on marriage.  was he above the very law he was transmitting?

In what way did the Prophet(PBUH) not comply with the laws of marriage. The Prophet was allowed more than 4 wives because he made political and contractual alliances. Until the death of Khadija, the Prophet had only one wife. Then he married Sawdah, then Aisha, and they remained his only two wives until he was 56 years old.

Yes, I look around me and see the celestial citizenship of Christians. Thank goodness no Christians have chosen governorship, otherwise there might have been wars between Catholics and Anglicans and Prostestants, and religious persecution leading some to flee their homeland and go to new countries where they committed genocide against indigenous people in order to set up their Christian puritanical  governments.... Heck, we have a Christian President and a Christian Prime Minister at war in Iraq right now. perhaps someone should remind these men that as Christians they have no place in government.

If you, as a Christian, have no part of the government of this world, why should you care if it is Shariah or not?

At the time of the Prophet(PBUH) the Christians and Jews who lived among the Muslims were not subject to Shariah Law, as that was not their belief. Shariah Law is for Muslims only.

[1] The Prophet (saw) said: "O people! I had permitted temporary marriage of women to you. Now, Allah has forbidden it for you until the Day of Resurrection." (Muslim 2/3255)

[2] Iyas bin Salama reported on the authority of his father that the Messenger of Allah (saw) gave sanction for contracting temporary marriage for three nights in the year of Autas (8H) and then forbade it." (Muslim 2/3251)

[3] Another Companion said: "I contracted temporary marriage with her and i did not come out of this until Allah's Messenger (saw) declared it forbidden." (Muslim 2/3253)

[4] Rabi' ibn Sabra reports from his father that Allah's Messenger (saw) prohibited contracting temporary marriage. (Muslim 2/3259)

[5] Khalid ibn Muhajir reports: "I was sitting in the company of a person and someone came to him asking for a religious verdict about Mut'ah and he permitted him to do it. Ibn Abu Amrah al-Ansari said: 'Be gentle. It was permitted in the early days of Islam for the one who was driven to it under stress of necessity... and then Allah intensified His religion and prohibited it.'" (Muslim 2/3261)

[6] Sabra al-Juhanni reports from his father, saying: "Allah's Messenger (saw) prohibited contracting temporary marriage and said: 'Behold, it is forbidden from this very day of yours until the Day of Resurrection, and he who has given something (as a dower) should not take it back.'" (Muslim 2/3262)

[7] Ali ibn Abi Talib reported that Allah's Messenger prohibited contracting temporary marriage with women on the Day of Khaybar. (Muslim 2/3263)

[8] Ali ibn Abi Talib heard that Ibn Abbas gave some relaxation in connection to temporary marriage, whereupon he (Ali) said: "Do not be hasty Ibn Abbas, for Allah's Messenger (saw) forbade it on the Day of Khaybar forever..." (Muslim 2/3266)

Fred: As you can clearly see, the practice was forbidden. People doing this now are not following Islam.

Perhaps you might view the early practice of this as prostitution. How do you view the practice of concubines, and such. What of incest with your daughters? What of sending your daughter-in-law to your kinsman to lie with him and force him into marriage?

Would you say these things are sick, sick, sick!!!!

In what way did the Prophet(PBUH) not comply with the laws of marriage. The Prophet was allowed more than 4 wives because he made political and contractual alliances. Until the death of Khadija, the Prophet had only one wife. Then he married Sawdah, then Aisha, and they remained his only two wives until he was 56 years old.

yes my thought was that there was non-compliance because he had more that 4 wives, at the finish-up at least.  but the reasons you gave (political and contractual alliances) seem very vague.  they seem to indicate that the law of God can be altered to suit human advantage

Yes, I look around me and see the celestial citizenship of Christians. Thank goodness no Christians have chosen governorship, otherwise there might have been wars between Catholics and Anglicans and Prostestants, and religious persecution leading some to flee their homeland and go to new countries where they committed genocide against indigenous people in order to set up their Christian puritanical  governments.... Heck, we have a Christian President and a Christian Prime Minister at war in Iraq right now. perhaps someone should remind these men that as Christians they have no place in government.

perhaps ive not made myself clear on the government issue.  i havent said there is anything wrong with christians participating in human government at whatever level, if they feel they can contribute to the common good.  i am saying that to set up something which might be called christian government is impossible.  what i mean is that we have no equivalent of shariah law, and this would have to be invented if someone wanted to go down the road of christian government - to do so would be folly in my view.  the spiritual authority invested in church leadership is not transferable to the temporal sphere

If you, as a Christian, have no part of the government of this world, why should you care if it is Shariah or not?

well of course i care about government.  we all want good, fair government based on moral principle

At the time of the Prophet(PBUH) the Christians and Jews who lived among the Muslims were not subject to Shariah Law, as that was not their belief. Shariah Law is for Muslims only.

it is a matter of record how dreadfully disadvantaged non-muslims were and are under this system 

thank you for the references you gave re temporary marriage. but it seems odd to me that nothing about this, either allowing or disallowing it, crops up in the quran

Mishmish wrote: Fred: As you can clearly see, the practice was forbidden. People doing this now are not following Islam. Perhaps you might view the early practice of this as prostitution. How do you view the practice of concubines, and such. What of incest with your daughters? What of sending your daughter-in-law to your kinsman to lie with him and force him into marriage? Would you say these things are sick, sick, sick!!!!

yes i would, actually.  except for the last example you gave.  i presume it is a reference to ruth and boaz.  if so, you have misrepresented the thing dreadfully, and implied something which is clearly not there

Yes, The Prophet Mohammed(PBUH) was different as far as marriage goes.

You say that there is no such thing as a Christian government, what of Catholicism? They not only have a government, they have their own sovereign country. Are you denying now that Catholics are Christians?

You find it bothersome that the Prophet had more than 4 wives, yet Christians believe that Moab, the product of incest between the Prophet Lot and his own daughter, is part of the lineage of Jesus, whom you belive is God.

That God so favored this incestuous relationship that he chose this ancestry for his human form.

The Book of Ruth, please be kind enough to point out the misrepresentation:

 1 One day Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, "My daughter, should I not try to find a home ^[a] for you, where you will be well provided for?

 15 He also said, "Bring me the shawl you are wearing and hold it out." When she did so, he poured into it six measures of barley and put it on her. Then he ^[b] went back to town.

 16 When Ruth came to her mother-in-law, Naomi asked, "How did it go, my daughter?"  Then she told her everything Boaz had done for her

17 and added, "He gave me these six measures of barley, saying, 'Don't go back to your mother-in-law empty-handed.' "

 18 Then Naomi said, "Wait, my daughter, until you find out what happens. For the man will not rest until the matter is settled today."

Yes, The Prophet Mohammed(PBUH) was different as far as marriage goes.

again, it seems as though you are quite happy to place him above the law of allah

You say that there is no such thing as a Christian government, what of Catholicism? They not only have a government, they have their own sovereign country. Are you denying now that Catholics are Christians?

no im not denying that roman catholics are christians, but this does not make them right in combining spiritual and temporal power (even in the very small way in which they now do it), for which there is no justification in the new testament for the present age, quite the reverse

You find it bothersome that the Prophet had more than 4 wives, yet Christians believe that Moab, the product of incest between the Prophet Lot and his own daughter, is part of the lineage of Jesus, whom you belive is God.

That God so favored this incestuous relationship that he chose this ancestry for his human form.

well the sin of lot and his daughters was hardly moabs fault, was it?  how much less could any fault be attributed to ruth.  hers was a beautiful character.  she turned from idols to serve the living God - ruth 1: 16 - and how God blessed her as a result - He is faithful who promised - to say that she was blessed in her life, and that our blessed Lord was descended from her means that God favoured the incestuous relations her forefather allowed himself to descend to, is simply preposterous

well you seemed to be saying that the mother-in-law made her lie with boaz, ie. enticed him to sex, so that he then had to marry her.   but perhaps ive misunderstood you

No, I guess it wasn't Moab's fault. Yet, the lineage of the Messiah was foretold, so Lot's incest would hardly have been a surprise to God. Would it? And, if you think about it, that would have put Lot and his daughters above God's law because they committed fornication. Yet they were blessed. Actually, in the Bible many of God's Messengers and Prophets commit sins against God's Laws.....

Sending your daughter-in-law to trick a man into a situation where he must marry her is sort of well, selling her, isn't it? For 6 measures of barley....

I have another question since we're on the topic of fault.

Christians believe that Adam's sin was so great that all children are born into sin. Yet, you believe that Lot's sin was not that bad because his incestuous child is actually an ancestor to God in human form.

If it is not Moab's fault that he was born of incest, then how can it be my fault that Adam ate from the tree of knowledge?

Let's face it there are differences of opinion. I think it stems from the western notion that values the individual over the collective. And the more non-western one that does not.  When I was visiting Pakistan a dear friend said sure you can do x, y and z, it is your choice just not out in the streets in public. No you cannot compel people to completely stop x, y and z. But there is the notion that some things are not for public domain.  Sometimes strong rules are needed to place the value of group / community over the individual. It is a very different way of looking at people.  

Freddie: you can pick and choose individual examples of different acts or beliefs.  In a sense this clash is more pronounced because the media / western governments want to continue to promote Islam as the �enemy�, and Moslems as �different.� I am not sure beside simply to be a pain why anyone would share in this effort. The world is full of different people. My friend�s father was murdered here in DC. No one mentioned the religious beliefs of the people involved.  This only happens to Moslems. All people need to make an effort to not buy into this behavior. It helps no one.

Please give me any proof that Adam committed shirk....

Ruth was a Moabite, a descendent of Moab, and an ancestor to King David a direct link to Jesus.

According to Romans we all bear Adam's sin.....

5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned�

5:13 for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.

5:14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

5:15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!

5:16 Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.

5:17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

5:18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

5:19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

5:20 The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,

5:21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

New International Translation, I believe. They all say the same thing, with little tweaks here or there, but they all say that by one man's sin all men were made sinners.....

In Islam, Adam being sent from the Garden to earth was his only punishment, and Allah forgave him.

In all of my many years as a Christian I was taught that men are imperfect because of Adam's sin.  That Jesus had to be sacrificed to atone for this sin that we are all born into, and that is why mankind can only seek salvation through Jesus. Why else are babies baptised? They have certainly committed no sin other than birth.

If this is wrong, then I know a heck of a lot of Christians who are completely misguided. It's right here in black and white from the Bible. One man made us sinners, one man took the sin away. Everyone in between actually don't have much to do or say about it, I guess....

Here is King James:

5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Standard English Version:

5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

5:19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous

"In all of my many years as a Christian I was taught that men are imperfect because of Adam's sin." 

this is correct.  but it does not mean that we bear his sin.  we are not born guilty, we become guilty through our own sin, the tendency for which we inherit from adam, and will bear our own sin unless we get it dealt with as you outlined. 

what you say about adam being punished by expulsion from the garden shows how christian doctrine finds an echo of sorts in islam.  if we were pure and spotless at birth, then we would be admitted to the garden straight away.  the fact that we are not indicates that allah is also punishing us  because of adams sin

we do not find infant baptism in the holy scriptures

As far as Moab and the story of Ruth, as a Christian you found it very disturbing and sick that temporary marriage was allowed at one time by the Prophet Mohammed(PBUH), yet Christianity is full of stories of things that would be considered sick and disturbing today.

It was just an interesting sidebar, to me at least, that Jesus, God in human form, is believed to be descended from such sins. Yes, all men sin, but not necessarily in such fashion.

No, Allah is not punishing us because of Adam's sin because men were created to be viscegerents of the earth. That was our purpose, so we are fulfilling that purpose.

In Islam we do not believe that God created man for companionship, as God is not in need of anything.

Allah punished Adam by expelling him from the Garden. Mankind was always meant to be earthly creatures.

Mishmish wrote: No, Allah is not punishing us because of Adam's sin because men were created to be viscegerents of the earth. That was our purpose, so we are fulfilling that purpose. In Islam we do not believe that God created man for companionship, as God is not in need of anything. Allah punished Adam by expelling him from the Garden. Mankind was always meant to be earthly creatures.

wo-up - this is suddenly getting very weird indeed.  are you saying that the garden was not on earth?

if so, and if it was a punishment to be expelled from the garden to earth, then how can you say that man was always meant to be an earthly creature? why was he not placed on earth in the first instance?

if man was created to be vice-regent of the earth, then this means that he must have been created a sinner in order to be expelled from the garden to earth in order to fulfill the purpose of God as vice-regent of the earth.  so God created man imperfect?

If Adam had been created as a perfect man, he could not have been tempted, could he? Adam was a man, and no man is perfect.

Allah states in the Quran:

2:30 Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."

This is clearly man's purpose and reason for being created. If Allah had meant for man to remain in the Garden, then He would have stated He was creating a viscegerent of the Garden, not earth. Allah knew that Adam would choose to disobey, because Allah(SWT) knows everything that will happen. Adam had complete free will, and he and Eve alone bore the consequences of their actions. Allah did not force Adam to disobey, but He knew it would happen.

Most scholars believe that man's descent to earth happened the way it did as lessons to men. It was meant to teach man that Satan is the enemy of man, that he caused Adam and Eve to be tempted and expelled from Paradise so that by avoiding Satan and evil men can return to Paradise. They also learned that Allah punishes those who disobey Him, and that submission to Allah is the only way back to Paradise. Finally, Adam and Eve learned to ask for forgiveness from Allah, and that Allah is Oft-Forgiving for those who repent with sincerity. These lessons were necessary for mankind's viscegerency on earth.

 The Quran states:

2:36 Then did Satan make them slip from the (garden), and get them out of the state (of felicity) in which they had been. We said: "Get ye down, all (ye people), with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be your dwelling-place and your means of livelihood - for a time."

We do not know where the Garden, or Paradise was/is, but it is clear that it was not on the earth as they were sent to earth.  All ye people refers to Adam, Eve, and Satan who were in the Garden together.

ys, mish, i well appreciate what youre saying about the foreknowledge of God and the free will of man.  so the thing is on two levels.  the fall of man ties in with the purposes of God with regard to the idea of vice-regency on earth.  in the bible, adam is created on earth, the garden is on earth, and he was to tend the garden, and have dominion over the species.  but he fell through sin, but this also ties in with the purposes of God, with regard to showing forth his grace in salvation through Christ.

and yet a fall is a fall. and the punishment was expulsion, a punishment applied to the whole of humanity.  when adam and eve were expelled, the whole of humanity was expelled, none have been readmitted, that is obvious (maybe you think you are readmitted when you die, but im talking about this life)  and so we conclude that adams sin affects all of us, irrespective of what the purposes of God might have been, not that we are guilty of his particular sin, but that we all inevitably come to sin

yes adam and eve were created perfect, but this must be qualified.  they were perfect human beings.  this is not the same as the perfection of Christ, whose perfection was divine, and who could not sin.  this may be a bad analogy, but a perfect dog is not worth the same as a human being (even one who is not perfect)

Since Adam and Eve were the only two humans to live in Paradise, then their expulsion would only affect them. They alone would know what they were being deprived of of. The rest of us were never meant to abide there as men, so we cannot be deprived of something we were never meant to have.

So, you are saying that there is no Original Sin, but that all men are guilty only of their own sins? That by virtue of being born men, they are born sinners?

What if there were a person born who committed no sin? Would that person need Jesus as their Savior?

What about the people who were born and died before Jesus? Who is their Savior? They were never able to accept Jesus as a Savior, yet because they were born men, they were born into sin. Are they responsible for their own sins on the Day of Judgement?

"and yet a fall is a fall. and the punishment was expulsion, a punishment applied to the whole of humanity.  when adam and eve were expelled, the whole of humanity was expelled, none have been readmitted, that is obvious (maybe you think you are readmitted when you die, but im talking about this life)  and so we conclude that adams sin affects all of us, irrespective of what the purposes of God might have been, not that we are guilty of his particular sin, but that we all inevitably come to sin"

So you do believe that all men are being punished for Adam's sin?

What do you believe is man's purpose?

�German authorities are readying for a boom in the sex trade with the construction of mega-brothels and sex-huts or "performance boxes" as they are called ��

Source:  http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06050408.html

Sex-huts?  Performance boxes?  Gee, and I thought historians (of the rise of German National Socialism, or Naziism) generally consider the 1920�s Weimer Berlin as �sex-obsessed and decadent.�

Servetus

I do not object to the sin of Ruth, but just as you stated: it is not Moab's fault that Lot sinned, it is not my fault that Adam sinned.

I do not believe in the concept of original sin, nor do I believe that God, who is Just and Fair in all things, would punish all of mankind for the sins of one man.

If, in Christianity, you believe that man's purpose was to dwell in Eden, then the sins of one man and woman have obliterated that destiny. Surely God would have known Adam and Eve would sin, and mankind would be banished from Eden. If it was man's purpose to dwell in Eden, why not just banish Adam and Eve and allow the rest of mankind to fulfill their purpose. If it was not man's purpose to dwell in Eden, what is man's purpose? Companionship with God? Yet, according to the enterpretation of original sin that you have given, man is born unconnected to God, so once again that is not fulfilling our purpose in any way. So, why were humans created?

If we were indeed meant to dwell in Eden, then how could a Just and Fair God send down such punishment on all of mankind? To deprive them of their sole purpose for being created because of one man's sin. And, in the end  we can never fulfill this purpose because when we die, you believe we do not go back to Eden, but to Heaven. So it is all for naught... 

If, from the outset of our birth we are going to hell, then what of babies who die? They are born unconnected to God, yet have never sinned? What about people who are mentally challenged or never learn of Jesus? If the only way to reconnect with God is through Jesus, then are they just out of luck?

Mishmish,

Sin is glorified by the Sinners.  To every mother, a child is born innocent. Jesus was also born an innocent to his mother Maryam.

Regarding Adam and Eve, we know that they did not commit any sin. All they did was to eat a forbidden fruit of a particular tree. They did not make love in the garden. The fact is that Satan tricked them into committing that mistake.

Later, both realised, asked for God's forgiveness and were forgiven. It's just as simple as that. Qur'aan keeps it simple and more factual and it does not blame the woman or the man. It just says that both made that mistake.

God had already plans for the Earth to be ruled and lived on by man. That exactly was the perfect timing to shift man and woman to Earth as they already had eaten of the Tree and were ready to live and multiply on.

Ain't this so simple and easy to understand?  

This concept of "Sin", "The Original Sin" or "the First Sin" was developed later to explain and justify the sad episode of Jesus at the hands of the Jews and the terminated mission or the sad ending of Jesus's short ministry.

The suggested act of God killing himself or killing his son and raising himself or his son does not show any kind of sacrifice for the sake of removal of sin or other crimes. 

Had the son been sacrifised for all, the son should not have been given any life again, otherwise it depicts no sacrifice. All this had nothing to do at all with sin or Sin as Jesus never taught that himself.

There is not a shred of evidence in the NT to suggest that he taught so, in his own words.

BR & Salaams

BMZ

mish - i  have already said that it is not your fault that adam sinned.  and God is not punishing "all of mankind", while it is true that we are all expelled from the garden as a result of adam and eves sin.  original sin is not a punishment, it is the state were born in.  the punishment for sin is in the lake of fire, and God (the Just and the Fair) has provided a full, free and perfect provision of salvation in the blessed Person of Christ and his cross-work, whom and which you deny

as for the purpose of the creation of humans, or indeed the whole creation, it is to bring pleasure to God, and to display his glory and his love.  man has failed in this respect, but God has not failed, and he will yet bring it to completion in the Person of Christ

now as to those babies, mentally challenged and who have never heard the gospel of God, they are left to the mercy of God who has his own ways and means.  we believe that the blood of Christ has completely satisfied the terrible holiness of God with regard to sin, and if a person is not able to receive Christ, God will be merciful to them 

But Fred:

If Adam and Eve were created perfect, then lost that perfection as a result of their sin, and all men born after them were born into that state of sin, then we are being punished for their sin. Otherwise we would be perfect also. Perfect and not born into a state of sin.

You wrote:

"no there is original sin.  it is the state of being born in sin as a result of the sin of adam and eve"

"God is not punishing "all of mankind", while it is true that we are all expelled from the garden as a result of adam and eves sin.  original sin is not a punishment, it is the state were born in."

It can't be both....

Either it is a result of Adam and Eve's sin, therefore a punishment on all of mankind, or it is the state we were meant to be born into. Therefore how can we be held responsible for being created the way God meant us to be? Why would a blood sacrifice in the form of Jesus be necessary in that case?

Either God is punishing all of us for the sin of two, or we were meant to be born imperfect and sinners and we are just fulfilling the purpose for which we were created.

actually, the whole thing with adam, eve and satan is very confusing in islam.  quran 15: 28-44 says satan was kicked out of the garden because he refused to bow down to adam.  in that case how did he get back in to tempt adam and eve?

also, how was he allowed to tempt adam and eve? - quran 15: 42, 43 says "surely as regards my servants, you have not authority over them except those who follow you of the deviators, and surely hell is the promised place for all of them"   --satan himself had agreed not to interfere with the devoted servant of allah.  surely the "great prophet" adam would come into the category of devoted servant rather that deviator

also you said that satan, as well as adam and eve were expelled from the garden.  the reference for this, i take it, is quran 2: 36, since the plural, not the dual is used, and it means "all of you", clearly implying more that 2 persons.  however in quran 2: 38, it states that a guidance would be sent down to them, in which case it does not include satan, for how could God provide a guidance for him, who had already been condemned to hell?

perhaps ive misunderstood, but i thought youd said that they were punished by being expelled from the garden, and that as a result of this i concluded you thought that all of mankind was being punished as a result.  --- we are born in sin, and consequently die.  this was not how God meant it to be, but how it is, as a result of the sin in the garden.  the cross of Christ was necessary to atone for sin, to satisfy the holiness of God, who cannot tolerate any sin, and must punish it

No, actually I made it very clear when I wrote that Adam and Eve were the only two humans expelled from the garden and that God does not punish all of mankind for someone else's sin. Islamically we do not believe man is born into original sin, not do we believe we need anyone to intervene on our behalf. We believe that we alone are responsible for the sins that we commit, and that we alone will answer fully for these sins.

You, on the other hand have stated that it is a punishment from God on all of mankind, and that it is not a punishment from God on all of mankind but rather the way it we were meant to be. Which is it?

Dear Mishmish:

I am very inept at explaining things verbally, but I'll do my best.  You had asked what about people who were born and died before Christ was born.  They had no opportunity to repent or accept salvation.

St Thomas Aquinas explained the doctrine, saying that "when Christ descended into hell, by the power of his Passion he delivered the saints from this penalty whereby they were excluded from the life of glory...."  (The Apostle's Creed in the Church states that after the crucifixion Christ descended into Hell.)  It was at this time that he released the good and faithful souls from their separation from God. It was known as the Limbo of the Patriarchs (Limbus Patrum): where the righteous who lived before Jesus came to earth went. It is this part of "Hell" that Christ descended into. It no longer exists.  There are several scriptural references to this, one is St. Peter, but I'm too sleepy (lazy) to look it up right now.

Thank you Patty.

I have a very simple question, which I have stated above. That's all I really want to know.

"we are born in sin, and consequently die.  this was not how God meant it to be, but how it is, as a result of the sin in the garden.  the cross of Christ was necessary to atone for sin, to satisfy the holiness of God, who cannot tolerate any sin, and must punish it"

I'm sorry, I just reread your post. So you do believe that all men are punished for the two.  So, really we have no choice but to be born into sin because of Adam and Eve's transgression, yet we are punished because of this sin that we have no choice but to be born into? So we are guilty in the eyes of God, until proven innocent?

Do you honestly believe that a forgiving God, one who so loved the world He gave His only begotten Son, would allow all men to be born into sin for the transgression of two? Two, who you believe were perfect and created sinless.

Where is man's free will in this scenario?

My Dear Mishmish,

You asked the following:

"Do you honestly believe that a forgiving God, one who so loved the world He gave His only begotten Son, would allow all men to be born into sin for the transgression of two?"

I do believe this.  Adam and Eve were created by God, and given everything for their own personal pleasure.  The one and only thing He asked them not to do was "eat of the forbidden fruit".   Satan, in the form of a serpent, convinced Eve that if she would only eat of the fruit, she would be as knowledgeable as God, and also that nothing bad would happen to her.  Then he told her that God didn't want her to eat the fruit because He didn't want her to become as powerful and wise as God.  So both Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate the fruit.  Please bear in mind that God can also be an angry God and evidenced many times in the Bible, once in particular in Ezekiel...other times as well.  God found they had disobeyed His one command, and ordered that from that day on ALL human beings would inherit this Original Sin.  The punishment for the sinfulness of Adam and Eve was that all mankind would be born with the stain of Original Sin on their souls.  I'm sure of one thing--we need to be very careful when we are tempted to do something which we are not ABSOLUTELY certain is God's will.  The Bible calls Satan the "master of deceit", and he certainly is that!

But our Loving and Merciful God also had a plan for the redemption of the human race following the "fall" of Adam and Eve.  He sent his Son to us, in human form, to teach us, to establish our Church, select our first early Church Fathers to guide us through the ages, and most importantly to die on a lonely cross.  When he did this he LITERALLY took all the sins of the world on his back.  He truly died for our sins.  And all we have to do to receive eternal life is accept him as our Lord and Savior.  We need to ask for forgiveness and "avoid the near occasion of sin". 

Were there any human who were perfect and sinless, you asked?  Yes, there were two.  Jesus Christ, and His Mother, our Holy Mother, Mary.  She was conceived without sin; hence, the Immaculate Conception.  (The Church is referring to Mary as being immaculately conceived, but some people wrongly believe the Immaculate Conception refers to Jesus.  This is incorrect...it is referring to Mary.)

Hope this is some help, Mishmish.  I'm certainly no theologian.  I just love my Church and my God.....much as you do!

Patty

Fred:

In Islam the word: satan, shaitan, is used to describe the Djinn who have chosen to turn from Allah(SWT) and do evil. Djinn also have free will and may choose good or evil. They may also seek frogiveness from Allah and be frogiven. Therefore they would be given guidance just as man is given guidance.

Iblis was the Djinn who refused to obey Allah and bow to Adam, but there were other Djinn. When the Quran says that satan, or shaitan, tempted Adam and Eve, that does not mean Iblis, as he was banished, it could have been one or more of the Djinn who have chosen evil.

The whole of humainty was never meant to live in the Garden. That was never our purpose, unlike what you are taught in Christianity. If that was man's purpose, then God created man knowing they would NEVER fulfill that purpose, so why create mankind? Because even in death, Christians do not belive they return to the Garden of Eden. So what was the purpose of man? God made man to dwell in Eden and be master of the beasts and fields therein. Yet, according to your doctrine, this will never happen. However, God is Omniscient, so He knew this would never happen. How then could this have been the purpose for which man was created?

Christains also believe that Eve was cursed by God in the way she bears children, because she in turn tempted Adam. Thus cursing all of womankind in like manner. That this one sin was so great that God could not forgive it. Yet God is loving, merciful, and forgiving. God will forgive any sin, except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. But He did not forgive the sin of Adam and Eve. This is in direct contradiction to what the Bible says. Not only did God not forgive this sin, He is punishing all of mankind for it.

Besides, you never did tell me how Satan was able to tempt Adam and Eve if they were perfect?  If they were perfect, they could never have been tempted. They would have been beyond temptation. Perfect means no flaws, and bowing to temptation is a flaw.

Once again, where is man's free will in this scenario? We obviously have none since we are born into sin that we ourselves did not commit.

"also, how was he allowed to tempt adam and eve? - quran 15: 42, 43 says "surely as regards my servants, you have not authority over them except those who follow you of the deviators, and surely hell is the promised place for all of them"   --satan himself had agreed not to interfere with the devoted servant of allah.  surely the "great prophet" adam would come into the category of devoted servant rather that deviator"

Yes, but in Islam we do not believe Adam and Eve were perfect, and they had free will. Thus, in their imperfect human mind, shaitan planted a seed that took root, and their free will kicked in and they disobeyed God. If they had been perfect this could never have happened because they could not have been tricked by shaitan. They would never have given in to temptation because perfect people could not give in. That would be a flaw, therefore that would mean they were imperfect.

In Islam we also believe that God is very Forgiving and seeing that Adam and Eve were sincerely repentent for their disobedience, God forgave them.

Now, in Christianity the story of Adam and Eve teaches that even if you are sincere in your repentence, God is so unforgiving that you will still be severely punished and all of mankind after you will also bear this punishment.

"Now, in Christianity the story of Adam and Eve teaches that even if you are sincere in your repentence, God is so unforgiving that you will still be severely punished and all of mankind after you will also bear this punishment."

No, Mishmish, God will always forgive everyone who asks Him to forgive them.  And we are taught He not only forgives, He also forgets our sins once He forgives them.  "It's as if they had been dropped into the deepest depths of the sea."  (from the Bible).

Peace and Blessings,

Patty

Patty and Fred,

If God forgives and man's purpose was to dwell in Eden then why weren't Adam and Eve allowed to return to Eden, since expulsion was their punishment?

Christians say they believe that God is loving, Merciful and Forgiving. Yet apparently you can only be forgiven by accepting Jesus as God, your savior. So man's sincere repentance is not enough.

From the Bible itself we see that Adam and Eve were banished forever and all of their progeny, mankind, based on one sin, that apparently was not forgiven because we are not in Eden and we are born into original sin. And, from the Bible, the only unforgiveable sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but Adam and Eve did not blaspheme, they disobeyed. These two contradict each other.

You believe that Adam and Eve were created perfect, yet they sinned. You believe that Jesus is perfect because he is without sin. Which are perfect?

You believe that God created Adam in His image, yet Adam sinned. What does this belief say about God?

The Bible says the wages of sin are death. The Bible also says that the wicked shall be severed from the just and be cast into the furnace of Hell where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. So which is correct? Death or hell?

In Revelation:

"And I saw a great white throne and him that sat upon it from whose face the heaven and the earth fled away, and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God and the books were opened, and another book was opened, which is the book of Life, and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it and death and hell (Hades) delivered up the dead which were in them and they were judged every man according to their works."

So are the wages of some sin death and other sins hell?

*This verse does not say that Jesus will intervene with God or that the dead will be judged according to who aacepted Jesus as their savior, but rather by their deeds written in the books according to their works.

Fredi,

From you: "actually, the whole thing with adam, eve and satan is very confusing in islam.  quran 15: 28-44 says satan was kicked out of the garden because he refused to bow down to adam.  in that case how did he get back in to tempt adam and eve?"

Answer: By becoming a serpent, the lowest of the low! Please check the Holy Bible.  Behold, your confusion is gone!

From you: "also, how was he allowed to tempt adam and eve? - quran 15: 42, 43 says "surely as regards my servants, you have not authority over them except those who follow you of the deviators, and surely hell is the promised place for all of them" "

Answer:   The same way he was allowed to test, tempt and try the "God" Jesus, when he was hungry and weak after forty days of non-stop fasting. Please refer to the Holy New Testament.

While you are at it, it would be worthwhile to look at the suffering of poor Job when God and Satan had an agreement, while the poor guy got inflictions upon inflictions! For this, you will have to read the Chapter on Job in the Holy Old Testament.

Mishmish,

"So, are the wages of some sin death and other sins hell?"

I would love to reword this to:

"So, are the penalties for some sin death and other sins hell?"

"The wages of sin is death." can be written in simple English as "The penalty of sin is death." Those who know Semitic and Oriental languages will agree with me on this.

Thus I can simply say, "The penalty for sins is punishment" for even those who are pure and innocent do taste death and die. Death is common to all. Resurrection on the day of Judgement will also be common for all, not an elite. 

Best Regards & Salaam Alaikum

BMZ

Assalamu Alaikum BMZ:

Reword, reword.

Wa Alaikum Assalaam, Mishmish

That is a good tip and I have a huge task of rewording quite alot of quotes from the Holy Scriptures, ahead for me. Please saty tuned. Got to go for a meeting. Good Night

BR

BMZ

mish - i have already touched on the perfection issue.  it is a relative thing.  if youre going to look at cars, to buy a new car, the toyota youre looking at, and thinking of buying, may be in perfect working order, and immaculate throughout (as they put it in the ads) but its still not as good as the big sleek jag parked next to it (no disrespect intended to the manufacturers of toyota motor cars) 

now in genesis 1, everytime God finished part of his creation, and looked at it, he saw it was good.  and at the end of it all in v. 31 - "God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good...."  ----everything he made was totally satisfactory to him, so it must have been perfect, in its place. 

man was also perfect.  but this does not mean he had the perfection of God, and a blade of grass did not have the perfection of man.  the creation, by definition, i would think, cannot have the greatness of the creator.  man was created without sin, but was created human, and therefore could sin, it was his choice

his choice was sin, which changed everything, not only man, but the whole creation -  the very ground was cursed because of adam - genesis 3: 17.  the whole creation is groaning even until now, waiting for the redemption when Christ comes back - romans 8: 22,23.  this is why everything is currently decay and death, and why  nothing works as it should.    -------///////------does islam have an explanation as to why everybody sins?  how can every single person sin, unless it is their nature to do so?  does islam have an explanation as to why everybody dies? - romans 5: 12 gives the reason.  actually romans gives the reasons for a whole lot of things

Mishmish wrote: The Bible says the wages of sin are death. The Bible also says that the wicked shall be severed from the just and be cast into the furnace of Hell where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. So which is correct? Death or hell? In Revelation: "And I saw a great white throne and him that sat upon it from whose face the heaven and the earth fled away, and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God and the books were opened, and another book was opened, which is the book of Life, and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it and death and hell (Hades) delivered up the dead which were in them and they were judged every man according to their works." So are the wages of some sin death and other sins hell? *This verse does not say that Jesus will intervene with God or that the dead will be judged according to who aacepted Jesus as their savior, but rather by their deeds written in the books according to their works.

the Bible teaches that everybody who sins will die as a matter of course, since death is the necessary result of sin, irrespective of whether their sins are forgiven or not.  every sinner will die (except those christians who are still alive when the Lord returns,  they will be caught up together to meet the Lord in the air - 1 thessalonians 4: 16,17 - but that is another story) - but not every sinner will be in the lake of fire - thank God! - those who are saved will be forever with the Lord. 

now you quote from revelation 20: 11-13 - (at least you got the name of the book right, mish, well done! - people are forever calling it "revelations")  - the dead are judged according to their works - correct - which are found written in the books - v. 12 - but - it is the "other book" that determines their fate, namely, the book of life - v.15.  they are judged, from the books, according to their works, which will prove to them that they are without excuse, and can have no plea, except "guilty".  the determining factor, however, will be the inscription, or otherwise, of their names in the book of life.

now this "book of life" is interesting.  revelation 21: 27 calls it the "Lambs book of life".  this is Christs book, as he is the Lamb of God -john1: 29 - "behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world" - he is the sacrificial Lamb of God, selected by him, as the only one holy and fit enough to make atonement for the sins of the world. we have to go back to exodus 12 and read of the passover lamb (a type of Christ), to see the full significance of this wonderful truth.  the enslaved hebrews were told to select, then kill a lamb, and then paint the blood of it on the doorposts of their homes, in order to escape the slaughter of every firstborn that God was going to carry out in egypt.  in v.13 we read the words "when i see the blood, i will pass over you"  this is the blessed position of every believer.  we are "covered" by the precious blood of Christ, the Lamb of God - 1 peter 1: 18,19 - "forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold.......but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:"

so in revelation, we are judged according to our works, but the final decision will be according to our position in Christ, the Lamb of God.  in any event, the holy scriptures teach us in many other places, that we are not saved by our own works, but by His work

the great question for everyone must be - is my name written in the Lambs book of life?

Just a quick note here.  Regarding "the wages of sin is death" actually refers to "spiritual death".  If we are dallying around here committing this sin, or waddling over there committing that sin, well, we are "dead" already to God's will in our lives.....so we are spiritually dead.  And we will remain spiritually dead until or unless we repent and ask God for forgiveness.  The bible says "for ALL have sinned and come short of the Glory of God", so we have all been spiritually dead at one time or another (maybe now even).  It doesn't mean we'll stay spiritually dead, but only until we repent.  Some sins are worse than others. Although all are wrong.  For instance, murder is much worse than idle gossip.  Rape is worse than taking a pencil home from your office.  My church believes the BIG sins which damn your soul are called Mortal sins, but the little ones cause you to be out of God's will and are called Venial sins.  Mortal sins send you to Hell if you do not repent.  Venial sins do not.  But any venial sin will send you to a place where we believe you are kept until you have been cleansed off ALL venial sins too, and are then worthy of the beatific vision (or seeing God face to face.)  If everyone who died could have NO sin on their soul, there would be no one in Heaven.  At least no one I've ever heard of.  All of us are guilty of these tiny sins.  But, hopefully, not all of us will die with Mortal or BIG sins on their souls.

I'm rambling here, sorry.

God's Peace,

Patty

"does islam have an explanation as to why everybody sins?  how can every single person sin, unless it is their nature to do so?"

It is our nature to do so. God CREATED us that way. If God had created us in any way other than this, it would not be our nature.

Yet, here you say:"as a result of the sin in the garden.  the cross of Christ was necessary to atone for sin, to satisfy the holiness of God, who cannot tolerate any sin, and must punish it"

So, we are as God created us, imperfect and sinners, yet God cannot tolerate sinners and must punish us. Why should we be punished for what we had no control over? Why would God create something which he cannot tolerate?

Do you think that anything God creates could be other than what He created? That is why no man is perfect, we were not created to be perfect. You said it yourself, it is our nature.

Yet, you believe that because we are as we were created, and God finds this so unacceptable, we must have a intermediary: Jesus, in order to seek redemption and recieve favor from God, who made us this way to begin with.

In Islam we believe that this life is just a small part of the journey of our soul. We die because we move on to the next part of the journey. God did not create us to be immortal. If He had, then why would we die?

If God had meant men to be immortal, then death and the resurrection would never have been a factor. We would be punished for our sins in this life, sort of like Karma.

Are you  laying physical death at the feet of Adam and Eve also? Another punishment handed down to all of mankind for the sins of two? What an unforgiving God you believe in.

He creates us imperfect and prone to sin, then punishes everyone for the actions of two. Not just by expelling all of mankind from Eden, which was our purpose for being created, and making it impossible to fulfill this purpose by never allowing another human being into Eden, but also condemning all of mankind to physical death. Then He makes it so that we cannot ask Him for forgiveness directly, because we are sinners and cannot be tolerated by our Creator who made us this way, but must seek forgiveness through a third party, who had to be brutally killed to make up for the sin which is just part of the nature of man to begin with.

I do know, from having driven more than one of my Jesuit teachers quite mad [not really], that a judicious use of Occam�s razor is not always appreciated in theological issues, but, however impracticable it might seem, wouldn�t the whole problem of �original sin� be in a sense solved if one generation would not procreate (clone, etc.) and thus not give birth to original sinners?

Maybe that�s what the �zero-population� gang (and early matter-despising Gnostics) are on about?

Serv

Serv:

I don't see how that would work.

If you are speaking of cloning alone, the argument would then be if it is a living human it must have a soul, and having a soul would mean that that soul is in need of salvation. Actual "birth" would be a secondary factor.

If you skip a generation of procreation, well, we wouldn't exist... or is that your point and I am just being dense?

�If you skip a generation of procreation, well, we wouldn't exist... or is that your point and I am just being dense?�

That is exactly my point, Mishmish, and you are not being dense.  Problem (seemingly, if impracticbly) solved. 

Serv

My dear, dear Servetus:

Being (somewhat) reared by Jesuits, you know that God, and God alone, will decide when we will cease to exist.  (On a side note, one of my dearest friends is a Jesuit professor in NY.  I wonder if you know him?  Hmmmm.....  And he's coming to visit on May 24.

Have a Good One!

Patty

You jest, Fredi and that is why you got those biblical answers.  If you had asked seriously, I would have given you a serious reply.

Satan, the serpent of the Bible was not really a snake or truly a serpent in the sense of the name of that creature. It was like calling a person snake because of his/her conniving, contriving, etc.

Qur'aan does not call Satan a snake or a serpent. The arabic word that best describes the situation is As-fa-laa Saa-fay-leen which means lowest of the low. When such a person stoops to a very low level, we can say that he/she is a snake or serpent. As the OT was originally in Hebrew, the Hebrew word would have been close to the Arabic word Asfalaa Saafayleen. That is why all along I explain that the scripture is best understood with an Oriental mind.  One cannot appreciate that in English which is a translation from Greek.

For your answer this would help in the understanding of the event up there.  According to Qur'aan, (please read Surah Al-A'araaf, verses 11-27), when Satan refused to bow down to Adam, he was asked why did he refuse to obey? His answer was,"I am better than he, you created me of fire and him from soil." God said,"Get away from here for how could you behave so arrogantly and you will be finished."

Now see what Satan did. He knew his end was near and he asked God "Let me live till the day of Judgement" (v14) and God said,"OK you have a respite." meaning "Request Granted" (v15).

Then after getting that respite or the assurance of not being finished, Satan gets bolder V16-18 and satrts talking big.

"Satan said,'For letting me down, I will move them away from your true path and then I will attack them from all sides till you will not find them anymore grateful to you." The rest can be read in any translation.

But if you read verses 117-120 of Surah 4 Al-Nisa, you will also find your answer. Please note that I am translating in contemporary English, so don't tell me that Shakir translated like this and Yusuf Ali translated like that, etc., etc. : Prior to the verses, the topic is that some people instead of calling God, call female godesses and follow Satan,"whom God has already cursed.

For Satan arrogantly told God that he would take away a certain part of God's servants, make them deviate, fill them and excite them with vain desires and instruct them to cut the ears of animals and command them to interfere with God's creation. But God says that whoever follows Satan, instead of God, is a loser, for Satan instigates and excites their vain desires but in fact Satan is a deceiver."

Does the Bible say anything like this? I hope this helped.

Best Regards

BMZ

Fred:

There is no original sin. Every child is born innocent until they, themselves, sin. Only then will they be held accountable for that sin, just as they will be rewarded for the good deeds that they do.

If things are not as God meant them to be, and His creations are other than as God created them, then you are saying that God is not in control?

That what has occurred on the earth since Adam and Eve were tempted has been completely beyond God's control? That men were never meant to have children, Jesus was never meant to be born, crucified, and resurrected, that the Day of Judgement was never meant to be? Was it all just improvised?

"this is bizarre. surely life is the only journey, not just a small part of the journey, unless you are suggesting "paradise" is not the final destination, and that you go somewhere else after that"

If life is the only journey, then there is no journey to Paradise?

Only God knows, but we know for certain that some souls will be in hell for only a short period and then Allah(SWT) will show them mercy. This means that their journey will not end in hell. We also believe that there are seven levels of Paradise, so perhaps the last part of the journey will be to reach the seventh level.

Where do you believe your soul was before you were concieved?

bmz wrote -

"Qur'aan does not call Satan a snake or a serpent. The arabic word that best describes the situation is As-fa-laa Saa-fay-leen which means lowest of the low. When such a person stoops to a very low level, we can say that he/she is a snake or serpent. As the OT was originally in Hebrew, the Hebrew word would have been close to the Arabic word Asfalaa Saafayleen. That is why all along I explain that the scripture is best understood with an Oriental mind.  One cannot appreciate that in English which is a translation from Greek."

goodness knows what all this is about.  are you saying the arabic transliteration you gave means "snake"?  and "scripture is best understood with an oriental mind" - well allow me to remind you that neither arabic, hebrew or greek are oriental languages, and if a language is a reflection on the mentality of the people who speak it (which it is), then i would think that puts chinamen, japs, malaysians, singapuris (or whatever the word for you lot is) well out of the equation

Posted earlier:

"Where do you believe your soul was before you were concieved?

didnt have one before i was conceived"

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you... Jer 1:5.

God's Peace,

Patty

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you... Jer 1:5.

yes of course he did, that is the foreknowledge of God.  it does not mean i existed

�you see, i dont know how these myths arise (about people not being meant to have children - no doubt the product of some islamic think tank or something)�

Dear Fredi,

I am not an Islamic think tank: 

Again, it simply stands to reason:  one of the best, most efficient, if impracticable �solutions� to the problem of original sin, it seems to me, is for one generation to not give birth to original sinners. Simple.  I suspect that it is this, or something like it, that led some of the early �Gnostics� (a too broad term) to despise matter (consider, also, the early trend of Christian asceticism, e.g., the [Egyptian] �desert fathers�).

Serv

If Adam and Eve were 'perfection' then they would not have sinned.

"you see, i dont know how these myths arise (about people not being meant to have children - no doubt the product of some islamic think tank or something) - genesis 2: 24 makes clear that sexual union is envisaged before the fall.  genesis 3: 16 shows that pain in childbirth will be greatly increased as a result of the fall.  it does not say that bearing children will be the result of the fall.  /////----no, nothing was improvised.  everything is according to the foreknowledge and loving wisdom of our God.  Christ, for instance is the "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" - revelation 13: 8 - ie. from before the fall of man"

Fred: You are talking in circles and contradicting your own posts. Earlier you said that things were not as they were meant to be, now you are saying that they are as they were  meant to be. Do you even really know what you believe?

Not having children was no myth, merely an example. Of course mankind was MEANT to procreate because that's what we are doing. EVERYTHING we are doing, we were MEANT to do. It's not that hard to understand.

"first of all, there is no paradise in the islamic sense of the word.  if you are talking about heaven, then life itself is the journey there (for those who are going there that is).  the second we die, we are in heaven - 2 corinthians 5: 8 - absent from the body is present with the Lord"

Of course there is Paradise. That is what all Muslims strive for. Have you read the Quran? How can you state that there is no such a place as Paradise?  If, when you die you go immediately to heaven or hell, what is the purpose of the Day of Judgement? Apparently you have already been judged, and are abiding in heaven or hell. Wouldn't a Day of Judgement be redundant in that case? Not to mention extremely cruel to those souls who are already in hell, and then must return there.

Paradise in the Quran:

18:107 As to those who believe and work righteous deeds, they have, for their entertainment, the Gardens of paradise,

23:11 Who will inherit paradise: they will dwell therein (for ever).

9:111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

2:111 And they say: "None shall enter paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

3:185 Every soul will taste of death. And ye will be paid on the Day of Resurrection only that which ye have fairly earned. Whoso is removed from the Fire and is made to enter paradise, he indeed is triumphant. The life of this world is but comfort of illusion.

4:124 And whoso doeth good works, whether of male or female, and he (or she) is a believer, such will enter paradise and they will not be wronged the dint in a date-stone.

5:72 They surely disbelieve who say : Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said : O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evildoers there will be no helpers.

41:30 Lo! those who say: Our Lord is Allah, and afterward are upright, the angels descend upon them, saying: Fear not nor grieve, but bear good tidings of the paradise which ye are promised.

3:133 And vie one with another for forgiveness from your Lord, and for a paradise as wide as are the heavens and the earth, prepared for those who ward off (evil);

Not only do these Ayats mention Paradise, but the hell fire, which we also believe in, and being removed from the hell fire.

Do you believe once you are in hell, that's it? So, if you cheated on your taxes twice, and lied once in a while, you will be condemned for eternity along with someone who committed genocide?

"And it is not your wealth, nor your children that bring you nearer to Us, but only he [will please Us] who believes and does righteous deeds; for such there will be twofold reward for what they did, and they will reside in the high dwellings [Paradise] in peace and security". [34:37]

"But for him who fears the standing before his Rabb, there will be two gardens" [55:46]

fredifreeloader wrote: no indeed you are not , servetus, but i was not talking about your solution to the problem.  i was referring to the notion floating about in this site that, for some reason, sex was off the menu in the garden of eden. mishmish has referred to it, and so did someone else on another thread, i forget who.  this may relate to the nonsense, believed by many in the west, that sex was the original sin, as can be seen by the symbol of the bitten apple, representing sex

Funny how from my sentence this is what you dedeuced. I also asked if the life and death of Jesus or the Day of Judgement were not meant to be. Yet you jumped right on the procreation thing.

Let me make it clear: there is nothing in Islam that states mankind was not meant to procreate. And contrary to Christian doctrine, we do not believe that the manner a woman gives birth, the pain and blood, are part of the punishment of the "fall", but rather the way God intended it to be. We believe that women recieve blessings for suffering during childbirth, since that is one of woman's main purposes for existing at all. And that by fulfilling this purpose in this manner, she is blessed by God.

See, Muslims believe that man was meant to be on earth, that men were never perfect, that everything is in God's control, it is His will, and that we are doing what we are suppose to do. That our jihad, or struggle, in this life is against our own ability to commit sin and our own ability to choose to deviate from the path of righteousness. That WE are the only ones who can choose this for ourselves, and we alone will be judged by the choices we make. We do not believe that we are responsible for the sins of any other, nor can any other be responsible for our sins. Therefore we reject the idea of Original Sin, or the idea of redemption bought at the price of another's life. We commit the sins, we pay for them. We do good deeds, we get the reward for them. It is just that simple.

"Let me make it clear: there is nothing in Islam that states mankind was not meant to procreate."

this was not what i meant to say.  what i meant was that i have heard the idea floated a few times by muslims that the bible teaches no sex in eden, and that it was not Gods original intention.  i was merely seeking to correct this impression (which may be an impression i have, not one which is being given)

will return tomorrow God willing

{If things are not as God meant them to be, and His creations are other than as God created them, then you are saying that God is not in control?

"no"}

Fred, if God is in control, then things are as they are meant to be. There can logically be no other meaning to this sentence.

God created us imperfect with free will and the ability to commit sin. If He had not created us this way, Adam and Eve could never have sinned. It would have been an impossibility. Adam and Eve could NEVER have done something that God did not give them the ability to do. He created them, they could only do what He allowed them and gave them the ability to do. They sinned, therefore God gave them the ability to sin. He created them that way.  If you disagree with this statement, then prove to me how any thing that God has created can do something other than what God has given it the ability to do.

This does not mean that God created people specifically to sin, God created people to be viscegerents of the earth, but He created us with free will and the ability to choose to sin or not. We must make that choice. We are responsible for the choice we make.

God knows who will go to the hellfire and who will go to Paradise, but we decide that ourselves with our actions and our deeds. God knows everything that we will do and every choice that we will make, He is God and knows everything. However, we still have to make those choices. God does not make people choose evil. God just gave us the ability to choose for ourselves. God did not tell any man to spit in the Prophet's face, but God knew that man would make that choice. God MEANT for us to have the choice. If mankind was never to know sin, or fall from grace, or be imperfect, we never would have been given the choice of free will.

"makes you wonder, though, how all those muslims feel they can do just as they please, especially as they think they can earn their own salvation."

Which Muslims are you referring to? There are always people who claim to be adherents to a religion yet do not follow the teachings. Let's see, hhhhmmmmmm. Wait, we need look know further than those two great bastions of religious piety and leaders of our countries, G.W. Bush and Tony Blair. Both avowed Christians who take religion very seriously. G.W. has been known to have personal conversations with God, and Mr. Blair holds a position  position as high church Anglo-Catholic and publicly states that he holds himself accountable to God for all of his decisions... But I guess they forgot the Ten Commandments somehow, or the admonition to :"turn the other cheek".

So it is grace through faith that saves you, not your deeds, even though God has said that all will be judged according to their deeds and what is written in the book.

So, Paul essentially created a kinder, gentler, much easier religion. Who wouldn't want to be a Christian, all you have to do is say Jesus is God. LITERALLY all you have to do is say Jesus is God.

Yes, it's true. Muslims believe that no man knows his fate, only God knows. No man has a monopoly on God's Grace, nor access to God's Wisdom or Omniscience. No man can know the future or what their fate will be on the Day of Judgement. That is why we must strive to do as many good deeds and help as many people as we can, while we can. Because once you start thinking you are going to heaven without having to work for, you get lazy.

"all new to me, (and utterly alien to the Christian mind) do you have any quranic references for this? "

Actually Fred, the different levels of heaven are mentioned in the Bible:

2 Corinthians Verse 12: I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

Not so utterly alien...

and in the Quran:

65:12 Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments and of the earth a similar number. Through the midst of them (all) descends His Command: that ye may know that Allah has power over all things, and that Allah comprehends, all things in (His) Knowledge.

You know Fred, I have a very simple question and would like a simple, logical answer, if possible.

If things are not as God meant them to be, then why, when Adam and Eve disobeyed Him, did He not just stop everything right there?

Adam and Eve were the only two humans, and they were the only two who had sinned. Why not just destroy them and start over?

If man's purpose of creation was to dwell in the Garden of Eden, why not destroy the two sinners, and start over with humans who would fulfill their purpose?

Mishmish wrote: You know Fred, I have a very simple question and would like a simple, logical answer, if possible. If things are not as God meant them to be, then why, when Adam and Eve disobeyed Him, did He not just stop everything right there? Adam and Eve were the only two humans, and they were the only two who had sinned. Why not just destroy them and start over? If man's purpose of creation was to dwell in the Garden of Eden, why not destroy the two sinners, and start over with humans who would fulfill their purpose?

he did not destroy them because he loved them.  thats a simple enough answer, but is it logical?  i dont know and i dont care - is love logical?

he also had the means in place whereby he would, in his grace, redeem his fallen creation

Mishmish wrote: "all new to me, (and utterly alien to the Christian mind) do you have any quranic references for this? " Actually Fred, the different levels of heaven are mentioned in the Bible: 2 Corinthians Verse 12: I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. Not so utterly alien... and in the Quran: 65:12 Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments and of the earth a similar number. Through the midst of them (all) descends His Command: that ye may know that Allah has power over all things, and that Allah comprehends, all things in (His) Knowledge.

still i cannot find any idea of progressing up through the stages of heaven after you die in any of the references you give

"he did not destroy them because he loved them.  thats a simple enough answer, but is it logical?  i dont know and i dont care - is love logical?

he also had the means in place whereby he would, in his grace, redeem his fallen creation"

No logic here at all. God had absolutely no problem destroying sinners at any other time. He destroyed everyone except for those on the arc. He destroyed everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah. He ordered Joshua to slay every living thing. God killed the first born son of every Egyptian because Phaorah would not free the Israelites.

Didn't God love these people?

God loved Adam and Eve so much that even though they were the only two humans, He let them live after disobeying Him so that the rest of mankind born after them would carry the stain of original sin and face destruction or the hellfire? Not to mention, NEVER fulfilling the purpose of their creation to begin with.

Why not just banish Adam and Eve form Eden and allow the rest of mankind to remain there until each person sinned individually?

Fred, just think about it.

I just have two things to say, Mishmish, regarding a portion of your above post, where you mention that Tony Blair is Catholic.  He is not.  His wife is, but he isn't.  (Not that it really matters.)

Also, Catholics also believe deeds, or works, are very important as far as our salvation is concerned.  It is essential to our salvation that we are good stewards.  We are saved through the Grace of God by faith, when we repent of our sins, but we are also reminded of these words in Matthew 25:34-40 -- 'Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.' 37 Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38 And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39 And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?' 40 And the king will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.'

God Help Us All,

Patty

Patty,

I'm sorry if I was mistaken aboout Tony Blair. I read in an article that he held this position. I have read that he attends mass every Sunday and that his children are being raised Catholic.

Our deeds and actions must count toward salvation, how could they not? This would explain why there are so many Catholic charities. Islamically we believe that charity is necessary, but ideally it should be practiced in secret so that we avoid the temptation to feel pride.

Fred:

"still i cannot find any idea of progressing up through the stages of heaven after you die in any of the references you give"

In the original post I said perhaps that was part of the journey. How will we know until we are dead and, God willing, of those in Paradise. Perhaps it is not. I don't know. But I do know that there are different levels of Paradise, just as Christians, it appears, believe so too.