I grew up atheist and later studied various religious texts and the Old Testament is my favorite. I have nothing against the Quran, but the Old Testament is simply my favorite and so I follow it.
I would like to join an existing religion. The reason is that I find modern culture to be evil and hostile, and I would like to associate with people who share at least some of my values. So let me consider the options.
Most people believe that Jews follow the Old Testament, but this is simply wrong. Today's Jews follow the Talmud which twists the Old Testament beyond recognition. A simple example is the prohibition of mixing meat and milk which can't be found in the Old Testament anywhere. But worse is the racism of Judaism which has no basis in the Old Testament. The religion of modern Judaism not only isn't based on the Old Testament but strongly conflicts with it, making it unworkable for me.
Some traditional Christian groups like the Puritans followed the moral ideas of the Old Testament. But most modern Christians reject the whole idea of moral law, which is horrifying to me. In my opinion, Christianity violates the Old Testament idea of "God is one" by making Jesus into a god. The basic principle of Christianity is accepting Jesus as a god, and this is something I could never do.
I know that the Old Testament is not part of Islam, but what little I know about Islam seems to be based on the same moral principles that the Old Testament stands for. When considering the Shahada "There is no god but God and that Muhammad is His messenger" I see 2 parts. The first part is the same as "God is one" in the Old Testament, so that certainly works for me. And for the second part, though I cannot judge the Quran myself, I also cannot deny that Muhammad has had a huge impact on the world and introduced God to many people, and I consider this to be good enough evidence that Muhammad is God's messenger. So I would have no problem saying the Shahada.
But even if I said the Shahada, my primary dedication would be to the Old Testament which I love. What would change is that I would consider muslims to be my people and I would give charity to them. And I would follow islamic rules within reason, especially in public. But I would still follow the Ten Commandments and keep the sabbath and study the Old Testament, not the Quran. So my question simply is, would this work?
I dont say that anyway. Allah doesnt have a gender ofcourse but HE has a personality according to Quran. But, as you say it is beyond our capability to understand the essence of HIS personality
There are 99 attributes of Allah.It is not within our capacity to think of it.Can a cat think about human body?..Can a mosquite got capacity to think of a cats body?...Our purpose is not finding or discovering...Our purpose is to live practical worshipping Allah swt.Fear Allah..
He said, "I have been very zealous for the LORD, the God of hosts; for the sons of Israel have forsaken Your covenant, torn down Your altars and killed Your prophets with the sword And I alone am left; and they seek my life, to take it away." (1 Kings 19:10)
Moses - 1300s BCElijah - 800s BCDo you need references?
what about it:'' They killed the kings of Midian along with the rest of their slain: Evi and Rekem and Zur and Hur and Reba, the five kings of Midian; they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword.'' (Numbers 31:8)
The main story of Balaam occurs during the sojourn of the Israelites in the plains of Moab, east of the Jordan River, at the close of forty years of wandering, shortly before the death of Moses and the crossing of the Jordan. The Israelites have already defeated two kings in Transjordan: Sihon, king of the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan. Balak, king of Moab, [3]consequently becomes alarmed, and sends elders of Midian and his Moabite messengers, [4]to Balaam, son of Beor, to induce him to come and curse Israel. Balaam's location, Pethor, is simply given as "which is by the river of the land of the children of his people" in the Masoretic Textand the Septuagint, though the Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, and Syriac Peshittaall identify his land as Ammon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balaam
what about it:'' They killed the kings of Midian along with the rest of their slain: Evi and Rekem and Zur and Hur and Reba, the five kings of Midian; they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword.'' (Numbers 31:8)
The Midianites tried to corrupt Israel. So this was self-defense. This is explained in Numbers 25.
The Lord told Moses: “Attack the Midianites and strike them dead. For they attacked you with the treachery that they used against you in the Peor incident. They did the same in the case involving their sister Cozbi, daughter of the Midianite leader who was killed the day the plague came at Peor.”
-- Numbers 25:16-18
I referred to the killing of Balaam and his people in previous post. How you can say this killings was in self defence...? I think You accept him a prophet, a diviner, a magician, in contrast, a corrupted one as well........ But As a matter of fact Balaam himself was not a killer
“Yet they are the ones who, at Balaam’s advice, incited the Israelites to unfaithfulness against the Lord in the Peor incident, so that the plague came against the Lord’s community.
-- Numbers 31:16
Balaam wasn't innocent. He wasn't apostate because he was never an Israelite, he was a priest of Midian.
Now you tell me, are you sure that every single member of Banu Qurayza was guilty of a crime? I doubt that. Sometime communities are held jointly liable.
“Yet they are the ones who, at Balaam’s advice, incited the Israelites to unfaithfulness against the Lord in the Peor incident, so that the plague came against the Lord’s community.-- Numbers 31:16Balaam wasn't innocent. He wasn't apostate because he was never an Israelite, he was a priest of Midian.Now you tell me, are you sure that every single member of Banu Qurayza was guilty of a crime? I doubt that. Sometime communities are held jointly liable.
Balaam wasn't innocent. He wasn't apostate because he was never an Israelite, he was a priest of Midian
So this killing can't be justified as it was not in self defence. Plz clarify it
Now you tell me, are you sure that every single member of Banu Qurayza was guilty of a crime? I doubt that. Sometime communities are held jointly liable
their case was decided as per the rulings of torah. Children who hadn't reached to puberty and women were left alive, rest all the adult were considered liable for the collective effort to violate the treaty in order to exterminate the Muslim community as the whole.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks