Islam is of the Devil?

#127
#127
TennTradition said:
Wasn't the unibomber a big anti-technology guy? While he was a mathematician, I would not call him someone who worships science...but maybe that is the engineer in me connecting science and technology.
Click to expand...

I just through that out as someone who used the context of scientific advancement as rationale to do bad.

It's about people and their justifications - science only people can do bad things and use science to justify it.
 
#128
#128
volinbham said:
Hmmm - like the Unibomber?

People who believe only in "science" do some pretty bad things to.

I think we'd have to put Hitler in the "science" crowd.
Click to expand...

The unibomber was certainly a anti-technology guy.

And painting Hitler's motivations as anything other than socially, racially, politically, and economically motivated is pure delusion, with all due respect. Besides, the guy was Catholic, courted the Catholic Church, and talked about his faith extensively in Mein Kampf.
 
#130
#130
rjd970 said:
The unibomber was certainly a anti-technology guy.

See comments to TT

And painting Hitler's motivations as anything other than socially, racially, politically, and economically motivated is pure delusion, with all due respect. Besides, the guy was Catholic, courted the Catholic Church, and talked about his faith extensively in Mein Kampf.
Click to expand...

Those same comments could be made for the "religious violence" you cite.

See comments MV

People use "science" to justify harm and killing. It's about people; not science or religion.
 
#131
#131
volinbham said:
:) I hear he didn't like Jews either...

Just saying, he used "science" and "scientific method" for justification of much of his genocide.
Click to expand...

yeah he did, throw Himmler(sp?) in there too. The things that guy did in the name of scientific research were horrifying.
 
#133
#133
rjd970 said:
Perhaps I should qualify. While I think the thought process that leads someone to the conclusion that snake healing is sound healthcare and Jesus actually died for our sins are cut from the same cloth, I understand there are differences. For instance, I don't lie awake at night worrying about what Quakers are plotting like I would about Islamic fundamentalists. This isn't a mistake.

Obviously there are different outcomes depending on the religious belief, but the process of justfication is one in the same. Good people will be good. Bad people will be bad. Religious and supersitious reasoning will undoubtedly (as it already has in history) get good people to do bad things, and think it's noble. I think this is a dangerous proposition for society to have to deal with. The stakes are too high. Pretty soon we are going to have somebody who legitimately believes in the metaphysics of martydom armed with something a lot more sinister than small explosives or hijacked airliners.
Click to expand...

Ah, but it is in those very differences and nuances you speak that this black/white means of weighing and critiqing the pros and cons of religion you cite, IMO, show cracks.

Like VB I have an exraordinary time delineating your sides of the religion/war comparison. Have there been wars fought over the topic? Yep. How this somehow leads anyone to believe bloodshed would have magically ceased in the absence of religion is beyond me though. Moreover, while impossible to quantify, there is no possible way to empirically state that religion HAS NOT mitigated violence. The indisputable fact that one of the basic tenets of most religions is that actions you take in life will follow you beyond your death is a powerful motivator for being, as you describe, a "good" person.

In fact, I disagree in priciple with your statement that "Good people will be good. Bad people will be bad.". By and large "right and wrong" are learned values. I mean, it's what "Lord of the Flies" was all about. Humans out for their own well being (as individuals or in groups) don't exactly have a stellar history of seeing beyond their own self interests. Religion is one means of mitigating this. Can it be twisted and convoluted into something ugly. You bet. Has it? Yep. But as a species we've shown we don't need no stinking religion to go about killing each other. How much influence did religion really have in WWI? WWII? Vietnam? Korea? The only even remotely significant contribution I can think of at all is the divine view the japanese took of the emperor, and that seems a stretch in the context of trying to argue that Japan was fighting a "religious" war.

Those wars I cite are said to have a body count of some 30 million. That's LOTS of dead people. I'd be interested in any realistic statistics in how many have died in specific "religious" wars.
 
Last edited:
#134
#134
volinbham said:
Those same comments could be made for the "religious violence" you cite.

See comments MV

People use "science" to justify harm and killing. It's about people; not science or religion.
Click to expand...

Completely different ideas. Justification is in the eye of the beholder, motivation is apparent to everyone else.

Take the Jews/Palenstinian conflict. Is there any doubt this is primarily religious based? We here justification of violence due to socio-economic injustices and political grievences, but the motivation is really theological and religious claims to the land.
 
#135
#135
hndog609 said:
Ah, but it is in those very differences and nuances you speak that this black/white means of weighing and critiqing the pros and cons of religion you cite, IMO, show cracks.

Like VB I have an exraordinary time delineating your sides of the religion/war comparison. Have there been wars fought over the topic? Yep. How this somehow leads anyone to believe bloodshed would have magically ceased in the absence of religion is beyond me though. Moreover, while impossible to quantify, there is no possible way to empirically state that religion HAS NOT mitigated violence. The indisputable fact that one of the basic tenets of most religions is that actions you take in life will follow you beyond your death is a powerful motivator for being, as you describe, a "good" person.

In fact, I disagree in priciple with your statement that "Good people will be good. Bad people will be bad.". By and large "right and wrong" are learned values. I mean, it's what "Lord of the Flies" was all about. Humans out for their own well being (as individuals or in groups) don't exactly have a stellar history of seeing beyond their own self interests. Religion is one means of mitigating this. Can it be twisted and convoluted into something ugly. You bet. Has it? Yep. But as a species we've shown we don't need no stinking religion to go about killing each other. How much influence did religion really have in WWI? WWII? Vietnam? Korea? The only even remotely significant contribution I can think of at all is the divine view the japanese took of the emperor, and that seems a stretch in the context of trying to argue that Japan was fighting a "religious" war.

Those wars I cite are said to have a body count of some 30 million. That's LOTS of dead people. I'd be interested in any realistic statistics in how many have died in specific "religious" wars.
Click to expand...

To state that the crusades, inquisition, conflicts from Israel, Dublin, Baghdad, and Bosnia would have happened anyway is a stretch...especially with Israel and the crusades. They absolutely would have magically disappeared, or been mitigated without the religious component. Plain and simple.

And what you take with you after you die is not as benign as you assert either. It is precisely the same reason fanatical muslim and crusaders died in waves for their cause.

Somebody like Hitler and his nazi thugs were bad, it didn't matter what they believed. Serial killers, rapists, and child molesters are going to do what they do whether they are atheists, Christian, or Muslim. Also, there are perfectly fine upstanding atheists (and believers from all over the world) that are reasonable enough to see the absurdity in killing for an ideal. Do you honestly think the 19 hijackers on 9/11...all middle class educated men from otherwise good homes with no particular political gripes to note...were not motivated to do a horrendous thing because of promises told to them that awaited them in the afterlife? The component that sticks out here is a set of dogmatic beliefs driving good people to do bad things, that by all other accounts, they would have never done. There are plenty of dogmas that drive people to kill, it is just Religion is the one that has the most frequency.

Take a total sum of everybody killed in religious wars, and add it the daily bomblasts we see on the news, the length of the inquisition, withcraft hunts, innumerable execution in Islamic fundamentalists states...and I bet they are either on par, or worse.
 
#136
#136
volinbham said:
Hmmm - like the Unibomber?

People who believe only in "science" do some pretty bad things to.

I think we'd have to put Hitler in the "science" crowd.
Click to expand...

Hitler would be under a combination of both. He'd be like the spawn of the bad extremes of both sides
 
#138
#138
rjd970 said:
To state that the crusades, inquisition, conflicts from Israel, Dublin, Baghdad, and Bosnia would have happened anyway is a stretch...especially with Israel and the crusades. They absolutely would have magically disappeared, or been mitigated without the religious component. Plain and simple.

And what you take with you after you die is not as benign as you assert either. It is precisely the same reason fanatical muslim and crusaders died in waves for their cause.

Somebody like Hitler and his nazi thugs were bad, it didn't matter what they believed. Serial killers, rapists, and child molesters are going to do what they do whether they are atheists, Christian, or Muslim. Also, there are perfectly fine upstanding atheists (and believers from all over the world) that are reasonable enough to see the absurdity in killing for an ideal. Do you honestly think the 19 hijackers on 9/11...all middle class educated men from otherwise good homes with no particular political gripes to note...were not motivated to do a horrendous thing because of promises told to them that awaited them in the afterlife? The component that sticks out here is a set of dogmatic beliefs driving good people to do bad things, that by all other accounts, they would have never done. There are plenty of dogmas that drive people to kill, it is just Religion is the one that has the most frequency.

Take a total sum of everybody killed in religious wars, and add it the daily bomblasts we see on the news, the length of the inquisition, withcraft hunts, innumerable execution in Islamic fundamentalists states...and I bet they are either on par, or worse.
Click to expand...

I think you missed his point about how much violence may have been mitigated by religion - it's an unknowable but certainly mankind is a warring species and clearly doesn't need religious motivation to wage war or commit violent acts. It has been conducted under virtually every motivation and justification under the sun.

There is certainly religiously motivated violence but there has been a great deal of good done by religion - the calculus is near impossible.

If your argument is that weak minds can be swayed by religion but "science" doesn't have that power I would disagree. Weak minds can be swayed by belief in any system. I would suggest that eco-terrorists are motivated by scientific data about the environmental damage caused by man.

As to the Middle East problems, I would bet that it is now as much about bad blood, land, money and past abuses as it is about religious beliefs.
 
#139
#139
In fact, Israel was the center of trade and a major financial player in older times. So it was not invaded based on any religious front. It was invaded to gain control of trade.
 
#140
#140
When Kentucky was voting for or against gay marriage this was posted on a church's sign in Lexington............

"There's nothing civil about a sodomite union."
 
#141
#141
I think the problem with the world is not the select few extremists who make war, but these crazy people who think they are able to cast the first stone as if they are clear of sin.

What I love is people who manipulate the Bible. I love it when people say that the Bible is literal and that everything in there happened like clockwork. People throw out verses and say that this is it, yet refute it when it doesn't back their point.
If the Bible said that Islam is of the devil, then fine. If it said that, then these Bible thumpers would have been on this kick for thousands of years. Shockingly, though, it doesn't say that Ishmael was bad. The Jewish tradition actually implies that Ishmael loved his brother Isaac unconditionally. But I guess this crazy man forgot that the origin of the Islamic religion traces back to Abraham...
Abraham is the one who had sex with Hagar. Hagar was not his wife. Does that make him "of the devil?"
 
Last edited:
#142
#142
volinbham said:
Clearly religion fills a specific set of needs in mankind. Likewise, it may yield answers/knowledge that Western-style scientific inquiry cannot.
Click to expand...

Such as spiritual needs for instance.

rjd970 said:
What has religion proven with respect to anything?
Click to expand...

That adherance to a higher moral code produces a more peaceful, orderly and productive society?

turambar85 said:
The theory of evolution by natural selection is a coherent picture that makes sense, and, as some would say, is the only possible explanation for the existence of the life on this (or any) world.
Click to expand...

"As some would say" has no meaning, some would say most anything.

Your theory does not explain the beginning of life on this (or any) world.

lawgator1 said:
Any thread that has gsvol posting at regular intervals is suspect.
Click to expand...

Suspect of what, having intelligent, coherent posts??

MontereyVol said:
Maybe thats the problem?
Click to expand...

Whose problem? Yours??


MontereyVol said:
1.Have you read the Koran?

2. Do you understand what the rift is in interpreting it?
Click to expand...

1. Some of it as well as most other religious texts including the Tao which is not really a religion although many think it is.

Along with the hate speech in the Koran, there is some very good poetry.

I am fond of one verse; "Verlily felicity is tied in the hooves of horses until judgement day."

My dad used to have a coffee cup with this verse printed on it; "Horse, thou art truly a creature without equal, for thou fliest without wings and conquerest without sword."

2. Probably far more that you do.

Excerpts for 'answering islam.':

Muslims who take upon themselves to destroy their alleged enemies in the name of God, can rightly claim to be following the commands of God in the Qur'an and imitating their prophet as their role model.

The following are only some of the verses in the Qur'an that can and have been used in the history of Islam in support of violence in the name of God and the glories of martyrdom in a holy war.

2:190-193 "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you ... And slay them wherever ye catch them ... And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression and there prevail justice and faith in God ..."

2:216 "Fighting is prescribed for you and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But God knoweth and ye know not."

2:224 "Then fight in the cause of God and know that God heareth and knoweth all things."

3:157-158 "And if ye are slain or die in the way of God, forgiveness and mercy from God are far better than all they could amass. And if ye die, or are slain, Lo! It is unto God that ye are brought together."

3:169 "Think not of those who are slain in God's way as dead. Nay, they live finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord."

3:195 "... Those who have ... fought or been slain, verily I will blot out from them their iniquities and admit them into Gardens with rivers flowing beneath; a reward from the presence of God ..."

4:101 "... For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies."

4:74, 75 "Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of God whether he is slain or gets victory, soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). Those who believe fight in the cause of God and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil, so fight ye against the friends of Satan, feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan."

4:89 "They but wish that ye should reject faith as they do, and thus be on the same footing as they. But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of God. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them…"

4:95 "Not equal are those believers who sit at (at home) and receive no hurt and those who strive and fight in the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than those who sit (at home).

5:36 "The punishment of those who wage war against God and His apostle and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land. That is their disgrace in this world and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter."

5:54 "O ye who believe. Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God guideth not a people unjust."

8:12-17 "Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips off them. This because they contend against God and his apostle. If any contend against God and his apostle, God is strict in punishment ... O ye who believe. When ye meet the unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them. If any do turn his back to them on such a day, unless it be a stratagem of war ... he draws on himself the wrath of God and his abode is Hell, an evil refuge (indeed)."

8:59-60 "Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly). They will never frustrate (them). Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of God and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know ..."

8:65 "O apostle! Rouse the believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred. If a hundred they will vanquish a thousand of the unbelievers, for these are a people without understanding."

9:5 "... fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) ..."

9:14 "Fight them, and God will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame ..."

9:29 "Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya [religious tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

47:4 "Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks, at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) ... but if it had been God's will, he could certainly have exacted retribution from them (himself), but (he lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the way of God, he will never let their deeds be lost."

61:4 "Truly God loves those who fight in His cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure."

And there are many many more such verses.gs



MontereyVol said:
1. The rift is amongst the Scholars of Islam (albeit a very silent group) The Koran is broken into sections and what makes it important is the order in which you read. The final section is what dictates the way in which the Muslims feel is how their lives must be.

2. Some scholars believe the book was "re-ordered" to suit the warlords some time ago and that copy is what is being used today. It is widely believed that Muhammad in his final years was peace loving and taught tolerance of other religions.
Click to expand...

1. How can one believe what any muslim scholar says in light ot the rule of taqqiya??

2. Widely believed by who??? Many falsehoods are believed by many people.

This directly from the last day of Muhammed's life on Earth as he sent out a war party to be led by Usama bin Zayd:

Quran 4:71: O you who believe! Take your precautions, and either go forth (on an expedition) in parties, or go forth all together.

Quran 4:72: There is certainly among you he who would linger behind (from fighting in Allâh's Cause). If a misfortune befalls you, he says, "Indeed Allâh has favoured me in that I was not present among them."

Quran 4:73: But if a bounty (victory and booty) comes to you from Allâh, he would surely say – as if there had never been ties of affection between you and him – "Oh! I wish I had been with them; then I would have achieved a great success (a good share of booty)."

Quran 4:74 Let those (believers) who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the Cause of Allâh; and who so fights in the Cause of Allâh, and is killed or gets victory, We shall bestow on him a great reward.

Quran 4:75: And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the Cause of Allâh, and for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help."

Quran 4:76: Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allâh, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Tâghût (Satan). So fight you against the friends of Shaitân (Satan); ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitân (Satan).

(Doesn't sound even remotely peace loving and tolerant to me)gs

turambar85 said:
So is gravity, mate.
Click to expand...

Strange, I had always thought of gravity as a fact of life, not just a theory, silly me.

Jewbaccah said:
In fact, Israel was the center of trade and a major financial player in older times. So it was not invaded based on any religious front. It was invaded to gain control of trade.
Click to expand...

I asked you some questions back a few pages, if you saw them and answered, then I missed them.

I wondered (not that it is any of my business), do you consider yourself Sephardic, Ashkenazi or Misrahi??

Are you familiar with Arthur Koestler's book "the 13th tribe?"

I have a friend who took some classes under Kestler he would never believe Koestler committed suicide.

Considering the ten lost tribes, I've always thought it as a bit amusing when someone begins any sort of anti-Jewish talk, for all they know, they might just be more Jewish themselves than they know.
 
#143
#143
volinbham said:
If your argument is that weak minds can be swayed by religion but "science" doesn't have that power I would disagree. Weak minds can be swayed by belief in any system. I would suggest that eco-terrorists are motivated by scientific data about the environmental damage caused by man.

As to the Middle East problems, I would bet that it is now as much about bad blood, land, money and past abuses as it is about religious beliefs.
Click to expand...

I never said weak minds are swayed by religion. There are some very smart people that believe in God too. I think the 911 hijackers is a good example. If you read the 911 report they were mostly engineers and scientists, some with graduate degrees. Francis Collins, who worked on the human genome project talks regularly about Jesus and his metaphysical conversion. Religion doesn't just appeal to the stupid masses, and IMO that is one of its greatest dangers. It allows somebody to be smart enough to build an atomic weapon and still believe dying for his religion is a noble thing. It allows men to have dark age beliefs about how the world works and still be armed with 21st century weapons.

I completely disagree with your Middle East assertion. While those are a component, the religious aspect is still the root of the conflict. If Isreal didn't believe it was their promised land they wouldn't be there in the first place, and if Islam didn't preach war and martyrdom there wouldn't be near the violence there is.
 
#144
#144
rjd970 said:
I
I completely disagree with your Middle East assertion. While those are a component, the religious aspect is still the root of the conflict. If Isreal didn't believe it was their promised land they wouldn't be there in the first place, and if Islam didn't preach war and martyrdom there wouldn't be near the violence there is.
Click to expand...

Religion is a recruiting tool that the educated use to propogate violence. They keep the masses illiterate in order to keep their land, money, and power.

Come to think of it, maybe we should take a closer look at the NEA....
 
#145
#145
I’ve read many discussions on the internet about religion. These discussion seem to be an exercise in futility. Nothing is settled, so why waste time discussing these matters?

Because I am a Christian and my faith requires that I tell others about Jesus and what He has done for me. He saved my soul. I realize I cannot force anyone to believe on Jesus. Telling you about this is my part, what you do with it is yours. Salvation is on an individual basis - between God and you.

The question was asked, “Is Islam of the devil?”

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 14:6

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 4:12

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
John 10:1

Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep
John 10:7

These verses - among others - cut out Islam, and any other belief that doesn’t have Jesus Christ as the centerpoint.
 
#146
#146
rjd970 said:
I never said weak minds are swayed by religion. There are some very smart people that believe in God too. I think the 911 hijackers is a good example. If you read the 911 report they were mostly engineers and scientists, some with graduate degrees. Francis Collins, who worked on the human genome project talks regularly about Jesus and his metaphysical conversion. Religion doesn't just appeal to the stupid masses, and IMO that is one of its greatest dangers. It allows somebody to be smart enough to build an atomic weapon and still believe dying for his religion is a noble thing. It allows men to have dark age beliefs about how the world works and still be armed with 21st century weapons.

I would say your examples are still tied to weak minds. Intelligence in some areas doesn't mean someone is of "sound mind". Likewise, those without high IQ's can be of sound mind. People that mindlessly kill others are weak minded in my book regardless of how intelligent they are.

I also find it interesting that you feel belief in a religion to be a dangerous thing. So what if Francis Collins believes in Jesus and talks about his belief? It probably brings him peace and ultimately makes him more productive.

I completely disagree with your Middle East assertion. While those are a component, the religious aspect is still the root of the conflict. If Isreal didn't believe it was their promised land they wouldn't be there in the first place, and if Islam didn't preach war and martyrdom there wouldn't be near the violence there is.
Click to expand...

I think if you get to the psychological root it is not religion per se but it notions of justice, a desire to be heard and a desire for self-determination and betterment driving many of the actions. As Lex suggested, religion is the communication vehicle through which leaders suggest these things will be delivered but if not for the deep seated feelings described above, the religious belief would not result in the behavior you see.
 
#147
#147
MWRaider said:
I’ve read many discussions on the internet about religion. These discussion seem to be an exercise in futility. Nothing is settled, so why waste time discussing these matters?

Because I am a Christian and my faith requires that I tell others about Jesus and what He has done for me. He saved my soul. I realize I cannot force anyone to believe on Jesus. Telling you about this is my part, what you do with it is yours. Salvation is on an individual basis - between God and you.

The question was asked, “Is Islam of the devil?”

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 14:6

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 4:12

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
John 10:1

Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep
John 10:7

These verses - among others - cut out Islam, and any other belief that doesn’t have Jesus Christ as the centerpoint.
Click to expand...

So the nicest Jewish man ever is going to hell? Same with the incredbily kind and gentle Hindu? What about the millions of natives in Africa who have never known anything but their tribe?
 
#148
#148
rjd970 said:
Francis Collins, who worked on the human genome project talks regularly about Jesus and his metaphysical conversion.
Click to expand...

So here is an example of science and religion co-existing.

Why is it problematic for this scientist to be "religious"?
 
#149
#149
crusse10 said:
So the nicest Jewish man ever is going to hell? Same with the incredbily kind and gentle Hindu? What about the millions of natives in Africa who have never known anything but their tribe?
Click to expand...

Just quoting you the scripture. Do with it as you will.

However, the only one you are responsible for is yourself.
 
#150
#150
MWRaider said:
Just quoting you the scripture. Do with it as you will.

However, the only one you are responsible for is yourself.
Click to expand...

Quoting scripture is the problem. The Bible wasn't meant to be taken out of context. It was written specifically to people in history. The Bible was not written by God. It was divinely inspired, yes. But it was written by men. It was subject to their own views. It was also subject to them changing facts or quotes, which was done. There were not 2 separate sermons on the (mount/plain). It was one sermon that was altered because the author of Luke wrote for people who were poor, while the man behind Matthew was writing for the rich. The writer of Luke couldn't get his point across to the poor by telling them that they need to be "poor in spirit." Those people, in order to convert, had to hear "blessed are the poor."

The writers of the Bible wrote to convince people that their way was the best. If it meant saying that others are doomed, then that's what was written. At that time, though, nobody in the area knew of the tribes of Africa at all. But if Jesus was asked that if someone in Africa was going to hell, I doubt he'd say that they were doomed.

Thinking about the Gospels literally makes it even more difficult to think quoting the Bible is the best idea. The Gospels were written 40-100 years after Jesus' death. The writers never even knew Jesus. All they had to go off was stories they knew. The writer of Mark (the first Gospel written, thus the most concise version) had no previous text to use. Luckily for Matthew and Luke, they had a text available, so they edited Mark to fit their stories and their arguments.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top