Post #14,153
10/19/01 10:37:39 AM
|
Abraham: "The Father of a Crowd of Nations"
It just occurred to me that this statement has now proved to be true, hasn't it?
Abraham is a key prophet for Muslems, Christians and Jews.
(Hagar & Sarah)
He received a covenant from God due to his outstanding faith and obedience.
Reasons for reaching this conclusion:
The first mention of prophet in the Hebrew bible refers to Abraham.
Isamics also believe Abraham was the first prophet, and that he was Muslem.
Jesus and his disciples referred to Abraham more than 70 times in their conversations and writings. James added that Abraham backed up his faith with righteous works (not wicked deeds like Sodom and Gomorrah).
We also know that Abraham was told to command his children to do righteousness and justice. Gen: 18:16-19
|
Post #14,163
10/19/01 11:35:26 AM
|
I can see where your going with this
I can see where your going with this, but it won't really work.
Moderate and Liberal Muslims have already rejected bin Laden, even if they have not done so loudly.
Fanatic Muslims consider what he is doing to *be* an act of righteousness and justice.
Except for a small subset of Satanists, nobody defines their own religous acts as evil.
Jay
|
Post #14,356
10/20/01 9:57:29 PM
10/21/01 2:18:54 PM
|
I wish I knew.
Actually, I was just doing a bit of research and thought I'd ask for input on this idea.
Where did you think I was going with this train of thinking?
I'm not sure I really understand what either of us are getting at.
I think I was saying that we are all children of the same Father.
Wasn't I?
edit P.S: I just found a link (provided by Ben) that mentions Abraham.
[link|http://www.submission.org/muhammed/jihad.html|
Jihad in Islam (Submission)
]
Approximately fourteen hundred years ago, prophet Muhammed ,the last in the line of the prophets of Islam (Submission), delivered the Quran, the Final Testament. Islam (Submission in English) was founded by Abraham. Ever since the Renaissance, its believers have been subjected to difficulties. From the Inquisition in Spain and Andalucia to the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Chechnya, the Muslim people have endured colonial regime and economic and military oppression. By the means of media, Islam (Submission) has been given a sinister image in the eye of the public opinion, this notorious image is mainly due to the ignorance and misunderstanding of the media and public. A word which is often heard and associated with the acts of certain individuals, claiming to act in the name of Islam, is the Arabic word: Jihad. Its significance plays an extremely crucial role in the image of Islam. But what does this so widely known word mean?
Jihad has a great significance in the lives of Muslims (Submitters in English). Like any language, Arabic has unique words which have a particular meaning which cannot be translated precisely. The best translation known for such a word is the following: a sincere and noticeable effort (for good); an all true and unselfish striving for spiritual good.
Jihad as presented in the Quran and any of the other scriptures implies the striving of spiritual good. This Jihad particularly involves change in one's self and mentality. It may concern the sacrifice of material property, social class and even emotional comfort solely for the salvation and worship of God ALONE. As a result, one who practises Jihad will gain tremendously in the Hereafter*.
"The Hereafter is far better for you than this first (life.)"(93:4)
"Say, "O my people, do your best, and so will I. You will surely find out who the ultimate victors are." Certainly, the wicked will never succeed."(6:135).
The Jihad involves noticeable effort for righteousness. This means that the effort concentrated in the Jihad is a step in the true and ultimate path of Islam (submission); the effort imposed on one's self. Thus Jihad is solely individual, self-centered and self-interested. This effort is only the doing of good for salvation and pardon of God. The Quran points this out in the following verse:
"The day will come when every soul will serve as its own advocate, and every soul will be paid fully for whatever it had done, without the least injustice." (16:111).
" The day will come when each soul will find all the good works it had done brought forth. As for the evil works, it will wish that they were far, far removed. GOD alerts you that you shall reverence Him alone. GOD is Compassionate towards the people. " (3:30).
Edited by brettj
Oct. 21, 2001, 02:18:54 PM EDT
|
Post #14,585
10/22/01 1:22:12 PM
|
Re: I wish I knew.
I thought you where trying to build up an argument for peace between Christians/Jews/Muslims. Abraham may be the only person that is equally and deeply respected in all three religions.
I think I was saying that we are all children of the same Father. Wasn't I?
What about Hindus, Buddhists, Pagans, Atheists, American Indians and every other non-Jewish based religion?
The web site you mention as rather liberal, I would describe it as liberal to the point of being revisionist. Not in the sense of intentional fraud but rather in the sense that they accept only their particular and very liberal version of Islam as being valid, and so can freely write off anything they don't happen to agree with as not being really Muslim.
As for the word "Jihad", in my understanding in the Koran it can really only be taken as refering to physical violence. However, in the material associated with the Koran it is often redefined to cover the internal struggal of faith as well as the external struggal of war.
Jay
|
Post #14,625
10/22/01 3:14:54 PM
|
Believe a distinction is made about 'jihads', though.
The inner one has to do with (via usual metaphor, "the war against oneself") - becoming ~wise/enlightened. The outer - with pedestrian wars n' stuff. The second is meant to be instituted only via post-graduates of the former.
In essence a most 'wise' distinction IMhO - but that doesn't stop those who flunked the inner work from ignoring their own holybook - and behaving quite homo-sappish, in God's Name (natch).
(This general idea, across all beliefs - as well as claimed un- non- or anti- such named classes)
As to conversion - as it is ever an emotional response to an 'epiphany' - why would we imagine that the methods of logical debate would have much more than slight relevance?
A.
|
Post #14,638
10/22/01 3:53:13 PM
|
Re: Believe a distinction is made about 'jihads', though.
Um, yes. But my point really had nothing to do with the nature of the inner jihad. My point was that the Koran itself doesn't include any reference to it, and thus only certain Muslims accept it at all. Even among those that accept that it exists there are varying degrees of import placed in it.
I think that, in some ways, you could draw a parallel between jihad and the trinity in Christianity. For Christians that believe in the trinity, it is an obvious concept and they see evidence of it in the bible. Those that don't believe in the trinity don't see why it exists and don't see any evidence in the bible. The parallel also holds true in that those that believe in the trinity are reaching further in finding evidence in the bible then those that don't follow it.
I'm not sure what your point about conversion pertains to, but I would reply that it depends on the person.
Jay
|
Post #14,653
10/22/01 5:29:14 PM
|
Concede on Koran omission
I think, not having read it entirely or recently. Perhaps the rationale is found in the Sharia, supposedly derived from 'principles' - thus subject to even more interpretation.. I pretend no more certainty about 'all the Muslims' than I believe there IS such a thing as, 'The Murican Peepul'. Imagine the actual diversity of individual practitioners (!) I can't.
As to emotion in conversion - even in supposedly intellectual pursuits, isn't the Aha! (when you get lucky) rather compelling evidence that a breakthrough is always accompanied by an emotional (pleasure / satisfaction)? That is: I don't believe it is possible to 'convert' (either way) from what is always a combination of mind/heart - without that which many call, an epiphany. (But of course - no one can ever know what another actually 'felt' except by deeming their report an honest one).
A.
|
Post #14,772
10/23/01 10:18:26 AM
|
Conversion
If you limit the domain to religion, I would agree that the majority of conversions involve an epiphany. Heck, from what I've read, every conversion to fundamentalist Christian has involved a strongly emotional and relatively fast conversion.
However, this isn't true of conversions to atheism. Some of the experiences of conversion to atheism that I have read have taken a long and meandering path that didn't involve anything that might be called an epiphany.
And when it comes to science, I can personally attest to being forced to accept position I didn't like by weight of evidence. Such situation don't involve the joy of discovery and understanding that comes with most science.
Jay
|
Post #14,832
10/23/01 6:27:27 PM
|
I think that's an
astute observation. Nor can I pretend to 'understand' the process by which (say) a once "stark, rapid emotional decision" is later undermined? nibbled at by ducks? .. leading to a sort of "Oh Well - it seemed Right at the time" resignation.
Y'know? Maybe another case of, 'all generalizations are false including this one'. I suppose you've just demonstrated that the 'suddenness' may be a most frequent component: but 'mind/heart' may indeed change over time as well, with either more experience or deeper contemplation.
Ashton
|
Post #14,661
10/22/01 7:01:29 PM
|
I'm not sure what other religions believe.
They surely are not part of Abraham's crowd of nations but I imagine that some of them believe in mono-theism.
And yes, you are right that I was looking for a common thread that the three religions have. To be honest, I am shocked at how many things these religions have in common. These commonalities tend to increase my faith in religion. Is that common?
|
Post #14,775
10/23/01 11:01:11 AM
|
Re: I'm not sure what other religions believe.
They surely are not part of Abraham's crowd of nations but I imagine that some of them believe in mono-theism.
Monotheism would be the rare exception, but it's not exclusive to religions descended from Judaism. Many forms of paganism have a one god / many names concept that is essentially monotheism.
And yes, you are right that I was looking for a common thread that the three religions have. To be honest, I am shocked at how many things these religions have in common. These commonalities tend to increase my faith in religion. Is that common?
I don't see why you would find it at all shocking. Islam builds on Christianity which builds on Judaism. It's perfectly natural that they share a lot in common.
I suspect you may be over impressed by how much they have in common because you have the common Christian misconception of Christianity as being a uniquely different religion. In fact, when Christianity was first being spread among the Romans one of the commonest complaints was that it plagiarized other older religions.
Jay
|
