List why I was not satisfied with my Ex religion

[Who Am I?]

I believe I already addressed what Grace Seeker was looking for way back in this thread, but I can repeat it again if necessary.

Bottom line, I never felt satisfied in Christianity. I never felt like I belonged, I never felt at peace, and I never found any good answers to my questions. Islam has provided all of these in the short time that I have begun to learn about it, which is why I decided to accept it as my faith.

That being said, I have no problems with Christianity aside from the doctrinal issues of the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus, and the questionable origins of the New Testament. Many of my friends and family are still Christians. I'm not going to stop talking to them simply because I'm a Muslim now and they're not. That's not the example taught by Jesus and the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon them). That wouldn't be the best example for me to convince everyone that I am becoming a better man.

I just wanted to find inner peace and be happy with who I am, and I am finding that through Islam. I'm not where I want to be yet, but I feel closer to that goal than I ever have at any time in my life. I don't care about anything else other than that. I don't care about political or doctrinal issues of this and that. I don't care who's right and who's wrong. None of that means anything to me right now. I only know that I feel at peace with my decision to convert to Islam, and I want to continue down this road until I can finally say that I'm proud of who I am.

 

[Just_A_Girl13]

sister I think you misinterpreted my statement and did not understand it in the in the context of our ongoing discussion with Amigo which started from other threads. He has consistently been unable to give proof of his assertions regarding his beliefs and has also constantly ignored requests to provide any proof or evidence from the words of God or Jesus and instead covers himself by constantly talking about love of God, Jesus etc. Surely this is a deception as he is trying to cover the fact he is unable to provide any proof of his assertions regarding his beliefs. Also I did not mean by my statement that he intentionally shows love to Satan but what I meant was that in trying to show the love of God, by worshipping Jesus he actually goes against the most fundamental teachings of God and Jesus which is to worship none other than God himself and not to ascribe partners unto him and also that the sole aim of Satan is to deviate mankind into worshipping those other than God. So in worshipping Jesus he and others who do the same are not showing the love of God but that of Satan who has succeeded in deviating him and others like him in worshipping those other than God.

Ah, my apologies, I see what you were trying to convey now.

 

[Grace Seeker]

This sums up the NT (New Testament) very well.

I accept that it sums up how you view the NT. I do not accept that such a view of the NT represents what is true with regard to the NT.

I honestly thought we were above the level of argueing with Christianity...

Some are. Some aren't.

I believe I already addressed what Grace Seeker was looking for way back in this thread, but I can repeat it again if necessary.

</p>
Yes, you did. And as I said then, I appreciate the sharing that you did.

 

[Amigo]

In the other thread I also asked you about how you communicate with your dead ancestors because you told me you get knowledge directly from your dead ancestors,

Well, go back to those thread and read my answers. Death of the body does not mean death of the soul and spirit.

How do you communicate with the holy spirit? Does he tell you what christ said in your dreams?

Not in dream but in reality. He speaks in the language of God which is truth:
When I see the reactions I am receiving for standing for truth and love as true worship, He tells me that He is with me as He was with Jesus and points out how that's why I am getting the same reactions Jesus received.
Like in Jesus time, people who thought themselves expert in scriptures called him a liar, then they moved on to insulting him and calling him an associate of Satan, and more...

 

[Ramadhan]

Well, go back to those thread and read my answers. Death of the body does not mean death of the soul and spirit.

So jesus did not actually die? So what's all this brouhaha about jesus died to pay the inherited sins?

Not in dream but in reality. He speaks in the language of God which is truth: When I see the reactions I am receiving for standing for truth and love as true worship, He tells me that He is with me as He was with Jesus and points out how that's why I am getting the same reactions Jesus received. Like in Jesus time, people who thought themselves expert in scriptures called him a liar, then they moved on to insulting him and calling him an associate of Satan, and more...

I see. You are basically saying that you are similar to the prophets (pbut) who received direct guidance from God, and God spoke to you in reality.

 

[جوري]

why I am getting the same reactions Jesus received.

lol you're too funny.. does Giordano Bruno ring a bell?
Full name Giordano Bruno
an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician and astronomer. His cosmological theories went beyond the Copernican model in proposing that the Sun was essentially a star, and moreover, that the universe contained an infinite number of inhabited worlds populated by other intelligent beings.[1] He was burned at the stake by civil authorities in 1600 after the Roman Inquisition found him guilty of heresy for his pantheism

Source

one of many speakers of truth burnt at the stake by your church.. you have some nerve calling yourself 'Jesus like' when you and your church are nothing but far removed least of which just plain humanity to those who disagree!


best,

 

[Grace Seeker]

So jesus did not actually die? So what's all this brouhaha about jesus died to pay the inherited sins?

What's so hard about this concept? Jesus died and rose again, and so today lives forever more.

Or are you trying to imply that because he rose again, that this should be understood to mean that he wasn't really killed?

I see. You are basically saying that you are similar to the prophets (pbut) who received direct guidance from God, and God spoke to you in reality.

I won't speak for Amigo, but I would not find this unusual if it were true. Christian teaching holds that the gift of prophecy still exists. And the Holy Spirit does indeed continue to speak to many of God's servants yet today. I don't even preclude it from potentially being true of those who don't even share in the Christian faith -- say Muhammad (pbuh).

But we also hold that one way for those of us to test the genuineness of whether someone is receiving a revelation from the Holy Spirit is whether it is in keeping with that which he has previously revealed to us in the holy scriptures.

 

[Ramadhan]

What's so hard about this concept? Jesus died and rose again, and so today lives forever more. Or are you trying to imply that because he rose again, that this should be understood to mean that he wasn't really killed?

That means it wasn't a real sacrifice. So you are basically saying that Jesus knew he was only going to have an extra 2 days sleep.

And I am afraid you missed this query of mine:

Was there any live witness to the death and resurrection of Jesus (pbuh) that you consider it as absolute truth? You can use the source from your own bible, I would even accept that.

I won't speak for Amigo, but I would not find this unusual if it were true. Christian teaching holds that the gift of prophecy still exists. And the Holy Spirit does indeed continue to speak to many of God's servants yet today. I don't even preclude it from potentially being true of those who don't even share in the Christian faith -- say Muhammad (pbuh). But we also hold that one way for those of us to test the genuineness of whether someone is receiving a revelation from the Holy Spirit is whether it is in keeping with that which he has previously revealed to us in the holy scriptures.

But Amigo definitely claimed that scriptures are not important and immaterial, do you think this opinion is the view of majority of christians?
Remember that Amigo is a catholic and catholics are majority christians. So if you disagree with amigo, doesnt this make your brand of christianity indeed heretical?

 

[Grace Seeker]

That means it wasn't a real sacrifice. So you are basically saying that Jesus knew he was only going to have an extra 2 days sleep.

You will find Christians of different opions as to whether or not Jesus knew that he would also be resurrected. But, regardless, the taking on of the sin of all of humanity is a real sacrifice.

And I am afraid you missed this query of mine:

Don't be so sure.

But Amigo definitely claimed that scriptures are not important and immaterial, do you think this opinion is the view of majority of christians?

I think that is your erroneous interpretation of what he said.

Remember that Amigo is a catholic and catholics are majority christians. So if you disagree with amigo, doesnt this make your brand of christianity indeed heretical?

A Catholic might consider some of my views in error, but since I've never been Catholic, a Catholic would not consider me a heretic regardless what my views are.

 

[Ramadhan]

You will find Christians of different opions as to whether or not Jesus knew that he would also be resurrected.

Do you base your faith on what other christians say or think? Shouldn't you base your faith on what your scripture says? Or in any case, shouldn't you base your faith and belief on evidence instead of what other people say/act?

In the supposed death and resurrection of jesus (as), there's only two scenarios here:
1. jesus (as) knew he was going to die to pay the inherited sins of the christians (well, christians believe that if you are not christian then your sin is not paid)
2. jesus (as) didn't know he was going to die to pay the inherited sins of the christians.

I hope you are not going to tell me Jesus (as) knew and didn't know at the same time, because that is truly messed up, as if 3=1 is not messed up enough.
Now, if Jesus knew he was going to have an extra 2 nights of sleep (he knew it wasnt going to be a real death, because he is god after all), then that is not a real sacrifice (let's for the time being not discussing about the ridiculousness of the idea that God who created this vast universe of at least 14 billions light years in radius and everything else, needed to come down as a baby human to be able to forgive the sins of mere humans).
And if jesus (as) didn't know he was going to die, that means he is not god after all.
So, can you please tell us what is the evidence in the canonical gospels regarding this scenario?

But, regardless, the taking on of the sin of all of humanity is a real sacrifice.

So you believe in a god who requires to sacrifice himself to pay the sins of all humanity, knowing that he himself created the concept of sins.
We can infer from this opinion that you believe in a god who is not all powerful, all able.
Another thing, you are saying god sacrificed himself to take on the sin of all humanity. We know that is not accurate, do we? Because christians believe that those who don't believe jesus is god didn't get their sins paid off.

Don't be so sure.

I think I can understand your reluctance to answer my question:

Was there any live witness to the death and resurrection of Jesus (pbuh) that you consider it as absolute truth? You can use the source from your own bible, I would even accept that.

Many people are reluctant to face questions which would destroy their belief based on blind faith

I think that is your erroneous interpretation of what he said.

It is either you never read any of amigo's posts (which would be pretty unbelievable), or your capacity of honesty is not as what I would normally expect from a methodist pastor. Here's a tiny sample of what Amigo wrote regarding his own scripture aka bible:

Truth does not need any support. Documented sources need the support and back up of truth not vice-versa.

The reason Christianity is not founded on scripture is simple.

We can do without any scipture.

All that we need is the Holy Spirit of God.

It is very clear that he does not regard bible as important at all, and in fact it is clear that he regards what "the fathers" and current writings are more important. The proof is in his posts. He never provided any biblical verses to back up his belief/faith, and many people have asked about his biblical sources and he never answered a single one of them. I am not the only one who think this way about Amigo, here's a tiny sample of what others have said about Amigo and bible:

Most of what you said were just empty words... Half of it didn't make sense... And plus, if you have no evidence for what you say how can we be expected to take any of it? At least most Christians will use the Bible as their source of information... Most Muslims will use their scholars, Quran, and Hadith... If these sources are used, then we can have a discussion. You however don't seem to have any basis for anything... You're just throwing out your own personal ideas. (seems like that anyway)

Brother Ramadhan, from what I can tell, the Bible is mostly irrelevant to Amigo and what is important to him is the Catholic Church, including their sacraments as Amigo so indicated, "For this reason, in Christianity the pillar of Truth is not the Bible/scriptures, it is the Church.

You keep talking about disregarding your sciptures then how would you know what to believe and what not to believe? How would you distinguish the truth from falsehood?

I find the type of answers such as that from Amigo fairly typical of Christianity----it seems to be a "Chrsitian thing" to so inundate a person with nonsensical terms that one hopefuly forgets the question in their attempts to figure out the answer-----which is an impossibility because the answer itself makes no sense anyway....and persisting on getting an answer that does make sense ends up with the typical "its a mystery" bit.......

The best that I can tell you are making up what you write as you go. Your words are illogical and they are not backed up by any scripture. As far as I am concerned your words are merely hearsay.

So Pastor GS, you see that I was not making up things, I believe that we should be able to provide evidence of what we say and believe within the context.

A Catholic might consider some of my views in error, but since I've never been Catholic, a Catholic would not consider me a heretic regardless what my views are.

That's what you believe, but not based on fact and evidence. You are good with words, as I can expect from a christian pastor. You may not think you are a heretic, however, fact is, catholics who are majority christians believe you are either a heretical christian or even not christian at all.

 

[Grace Seeker]

You are good with words, as I can expect from a christian pastor. You may not think you are a heretic, however, fact is, catholics who are majority christians believe you are either a heretical christian or even not christian at all.

</p>
Do you know why I am good with words? (Rhetorical question, I know you don't know the answer.) It's because I know the meaning of them. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word "heretic" as used within the Catholic church. From a Catholic perspective, a heretic is one who having once been a part of the faith left it. So, Martin Luther who was a Catholic priest and rebelled was a heretic. John Calvin who never was a Catholic is not. This is so even though Luther and Calvin had very similar beliefs. Similarly, MustafaMc and Woodrow today have very similar views. As I understand their background, Woodrow was once Catholic, but MustafaMc never was. In the eyes of the Catholic church both are equally wrong, but only Woodrow is the heretic.

I'm not even saying that I agree with the Catholic church's manner of using the term that way, for I think that modern society has adopted the meaning you gave to it. But it is their term; they invented it. So, if Catholic should choose to continue to use it with its original meaning, I guess that is their choice. But in the end, that is why I continue to assert that you often don't even understand your own questions. Let me refresh your memory on what you actually asked:

Remember that Amigo is a catholic and catholics are majority christians. So if you disagree with amigo, doesnt this make your brand of christianity indeed heretical?

Answer, NO. If Catholics are majority Christians, and the majority defines a heretic as one who was once a part of the Catholic faith and then leaves it, since I have never been a Catholic it is therefore impossible for me to be a heretic. Once you understand the real meaning of the words you have chosen and the facts associated with them, rather than just the meaning and facts you want to there to be, the answer is clear.

You have similar problems of miscommunication by taking accepting incorrect understanding of basic concepts with most of your other points of contention. And since rather than seeking to actually understand you appear (at least from my vantage point) merely to desire to be in continuous contention, I've lost interest in discussing these things with you.

BTW, it has nothing to do with the question. I've address every question that you've asked above (other than the definition of heretic) at one time or another on this forum, many of them repeatedly, but the people asking them where polite, not contentious. I'm here to learn about Islam and will take time to also help people who misunderstand Christianity. But your misunderstandings regarding Christianity appear to be entirely the result of a contentious attitude, for you give little to no evidence of a desire to learn from previous correction. So, I see little value for either of us in sharing anything with you, you tend to ignore it. You basically told me that you don't even bother to read PMs from certian people, implying that I was one of those you don't listen to. This leads me to believe the only reason that you would bother to read this post or any other is to continue to argue. Do that on your own time. I'm done wasting mine on you.

As for learning about Islam. These are some of the things that I have learned:When the Prophet (pbuh) was asked, "Which Muslim has the perfect faith?" He answered, "One who possess the best moral character." I'm told that the focus of the life of a genuine Muslim "is on developing noble qualities in the soul, such as patience, kindness, and modesty and breaking the bad habits of the soul, such as lying, harshness, and ingratitude." (Sohaib N. Sultan in The Quran and Sayings of he Prophet Muhammad: Selections Annotated and Explained) And plainly, Ramadhan, I don't see this sort of character in your postings.

So, I don't think I can help you understand Christianity better, as you won't listen. And I don't think you can help me understand Islam better, because you don't reflect what I am told is genuine Islam. I don't say that to cut you down. I might be completely wrong about you. Maybe it is only in this context that you behave this way, and in person are as genuine of a Muslim as I would ever care to meet. But in this context you are not. May Allah give you guidance. All the best. Good bye.

 

[Ramadhan]

Do you know why I am good with words? (Rhetorical question, I know you don't know the answer.) It's because I know the meaning of them

Isn't it funny, normally a person who truly know the meaning of words are able to explain their ideas in simple words/sentences and manners.
Actually, I think you are better with words because you are conditioned to. You can never explain core beliefs of christianity in simple sentences and words that are understood by everyone, so you are forced to create long winded convoluted flowery words and sentences to confuse people when you are asked about the core of your belief.

But your misunderstandings regarding Christianity appear to be entirely the result of a contentious attitude, for you give little to no evidence of a desire to learn from previous correction. So, I see little value for either of us in sharing anything with you, you tend to ignore it.

You have never given the answer to my previous questions either. Everyone can just do a search on my interaction posts between you and me and can see for themselves that you tend to obfuscate the matter to avoid giving clear answers.

So, I don't think I can help you understand Christianity better, as you won't listen. And I don't think you can help me understand Islam better, because you don't reflect what I am told is genuine Islam. I don't say that to cut you down. I might be completely wrong about you. Maybe it is only in this context that you behave this way, and in person are as genuine of a Muslim as I would ever care to meet. But in this context you are not. May Allah give you guidance. All the best. Good bye.

I understand christianity enough to know that the true message from Jesus (pbuh) has been mangled and changed beyond recognition, and if you think I cannot help to understand Islam better, too bad then. I see that you have been member of this forum more than 4 years and have been involved in numerous discussions threads. If I didn't help you have better understanding of Islam, surely those thousands others have. So no big deal for you, right?

Although funny thing is, you claimed in the your reporting post of mine that one of the reasons you are not accepting Islam is because of me. I didn't know I was that important to you.
So basically, you judge the truth based on your perception of one single individual? If there is an advice I can give you, I am telling you that that is not the wisest and smartest thing to do.
Although it seems quite contradictory, because in the same reported post, you claimed that Allah made you a christian and not a muslim.
It seems you are blaming everyone, from God down to me, for your decision of not accepting Islam.

You basically told me that you don't even bother to read PMs from certian people, implying that I was one of those you don't listen to. This leads me to believe the only reason that you would bother to read this post or any other is to continue to argue. Do that on your own time. I'm done wasting mine on you.

I am afraid you need to improve your reading comprehension and deductive power. Not reading or responding PMs from certain people do not mean I don't want to engage them in the forums. After all, this is a public discussion forum and not a social networking site, and so I am still eager to engage discussions with you in the comparative religion, so you and other readers are able to see the truth about bible, jesus (as), saul of tarsus, christianity, etc. I hope you are as excited as I am.

 

[Woodrow]

At the moment I am only going to address this part.

</p>
Do you know why I am good with words? (Rhetorical question, I know you don't know the answer.) It's because I know the meaning of them. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word "heretic" as used within the Catholic church. From a Catholic perspective, a heretic is one who having once been a part of the faith left it. So, Martin Luther who was a Catholic priest and rebelled was a heretic. John Calvin who never was a Catholic is not. This is so even though Luther and Calvin had very similar beliefs. Similarly, MustafaMc and Woodrow today have very similar views. As I understand their background, Woodrow was once Catholic, but MustafaMc never was. In the eyes of the Catholic church both are equally wrong, but only Woodrow is the heretic.

Catholicism is quite exact over what it defines as a heretic. You are correct, in accordance with the Catholic Church I am considered a heretic as I was once Catholic and my Brother MustafaMc is not because he never was a Catholic. This is even while both he and I have very similar histories.

In the Catholic dictionary a heretic is defined as:

her·e·tic (hr-tk)
n.
A person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church.
adj.
Heretical.
[Middle English heretik, from Old French heretique, from Late Latin haereticus, from Greek hairetikos, able to choose, factious, from hairetos, chosen, from haireisthai, to choose; see heresy.

To meet that definition a person has to first be Catholic.

Of course this leads to confusion as to if a denomination can be heresy and the follower not, because they never where Catholic. A good example would be Lutherans. Martin Luther was called a heretic and his church a heresy. But today most Lutherans were born as such so the members are heretics. As an added twist over the years the Catholic Church accepted some of Luthers reforms and the Lutheran Church lost it's label of being a heresy.

Oddly there probably are still some denominations the Catholic church considers heretical, yet by their own definition the members are not heretics.

 

[Amigo]

To meet that definition a person has to first be Catholic. Of course this leads to confusion as to if a denomination can be heresy and the follower not, because they never where Catholic.

There is a difference between following an error without realising at all that it is an error, and actually lying about the truth you know and leading others into error or following error in prideful negligeance not because truth is lacking to you. The Catholic Church acknowledges that not all who follow errors do it intentionally.

And other example is the case of a Muslim who have never meet a Christian and only know Christianity through what he read in the muslim Book(s). If this Muslim believes that Christians worship three G/gods, he is a not heretic.
On the other hand, an ex-Christian, who know very well that Christians don't believe in three G/gods but turn around and start saying that Christians confess that they worship three G/gods, this person is a heretic.

 

[Who Am I?]

The concept of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus used to bother me even when I was a Christian, so maybe I was always a heretic.

 

[Amigo]

The concept of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus used to bother me even when I was a Christian, so maybe I was always a heretic.

If you were not a real Catholic, you are not a real heretic.

 

[Who Am I?]

If you were not a real Catholic, you are not a real heretic.

Nope, I was never a Catholic. Strictly Protestant, though I thought about becoming Catholic for a while.

 

[IAmZamzam]

I think you are better with words because you are conditioned to. You can never explain core beliefs of christianity in simple sentences and words that are understood by everyone, so you are forced to create long winded convoluted flowery words and sentences to confuse people when you are asked about the core of your belief.

Mister, I do believe you just more or less boiled down the entire world of Christian apologetics to a single sentence. Impressive.

 

[Who Am I?]

Mister, I do believe you just more or less boiled down the entire world of Christian apologetics to a single sentence. Impressive.

OK, was I the only one who read this in a Darth Vader voice?

"Impressive.. most impressive, young Skywalker."

Er... what? Why are you all looking at me like that?

 

[Riana17]

Mister, I do believe you just more or less boiled down the entire world of Christian apologetics to a single sentence. Impressive.

Salam
Masha Allah
Islam is really the simplest yet the most amazing thing ever happend to me, who likes complication anyway? I dont like to be lost, not at all inshallah

I never really had wish list for myself, however since I become Muslim, I had one "to die Real Muslim Inshallah" Oh this makes me cry... what else we need??? really praying 5times/day, waking up 3am to pray, fasting, worshipping ONE TRUE GOD is more than worth it. Life becomes so easy so peaceful so beautiful because of Islam,,, alhamdollelah,