Contradictions in the Quran?

Originally posted by ahosyney
Do you belive in Devil?

If so, what is the main goal of the Devil if you do?

If there is no devil, do you think there will be sin?

Of coarse I believe in the devil. However, I believe God created Lucifer and not Satan. In other words, God created Lucifer and he later sinned and fell and became Satan just as man fell in the garden. Arguing that God created an evil being instead of a sinless being who later fell would be like arguing that God created a sinful being or, in effect, it would be like arguing that God created sin. Could a holy God create sin? No, it makes no sense to argue this.

Sin, however, was never created because it does not exist. Sin is merely the absence of God's love in ones heart via our free will to choose to reject his love that does exist.

Originally posted by ahosyney
When you talk about the Bible, do you talk about the whole Bible, the NT, or the OT?

I think you agree with me that the OT contains a lot of violence ordered by GOD aganist the enemies of GOD, that include killing every living.....

I will offer an argument, and I hope you answer me:

If Jesus is GOD, or part of the trinity, then he must be the same e source of information about Quran. Can you tell me your sources, and why do you trust them?

You are correct that the Bible discusses violence, hovever, there are different types of violence. There is physical violence, emotional violence as well as spiritual violence, At times, however, the various types of violence may overlap. For example, as Christ was chasing the money changers out of the temple, he did so based on the spritual concept that the will of the Father was being violated. However, he then picked up a whip and chased them out of the temple. As we can see in this example, we see both spiritual and physical violence combined but only for the sole purpose of a spriitual concept. So as we see with Christ, physical violence has not been banned just as it was not banned in the Old Testament. However, just because Christ chased them out of the temple with a whip does not mean he did not love them just like a parent who whips their child does not mean they hate them as well. Also, had you ever considered the violence done to Christ? God's only begotten Son was torchered and killed on a cross for days upon days. In fact, the Bible says that Christ laid down his life because it was the will of the Father to slay him. Is this a taste of Old Testament violence you were referring to? You see his crucifixion was physical violence in the harshest of forms, yet it was all done for a spiritual purpose just as Chrsit was chasing out the money changers. You see the Fathers will is focused on the greater good of humanity becoming redeemed unto himself. This is and was the fight of Chrsit as well as for the Christian. The danger, however, is focusing on human will and initiating violence for human desires/needs and then saying that God is behind such activities. If you notice in the Old Testament, Sodom and Ghommora and the people in Noah's flood were all slain by the hand of God himself. This was done to stop the death and destruction initiated by the sin of the people. THerefore, it was done to help preserve the human race as a whole that had become gangranous with sin. God did not use the people to initiate physical violence except for the Israelite conquest of the Holy Land. However, they were led by day by a pillar of smoke and a pillar of fire by night and had many evidences that God was directing them. I say if you are led by a pillar of smoke by day and a pillar of fire by night and see the Red Sea part before you with manna falling from heaven, God is probably behind what he is telling you even if it means to take up the sword. In my opinion, the conquest of the Holy land was once again spiritual in nature. It was to help bring about the promises made to Abraham and his descendants and ultimately to bring the Messiah into the world to help save the world. The conquest of the Holy Land can also be seen as having been justified via the Mosaic law of the eye for a eye concept. There is evidence that the descendants of the Israelite people known as Shemites were invaded and conquered by the Canaanite people long before the Israelites reconquered the land. So according to Mosaic law, you could say it was an eye for an eye so to speak.

This brings us to the Mosaic law such as an eye for an eye. Did Christ do away with the Mosaic law? If you recall, Christ was asked if a woman caught in adultry should be stoned. According to Mosaic law she should have been, however, Chrsit told them that whoever was without sin should cast the first stone. Notice Christ did not deny them their right to stone her so as to stop her from further spreading her sinful ways of adultry to others, rather, he stopped her sinful ways by showing her mercy and having the power to break the sin in her life without destroying her. I say that both the Mosaic law and the teachings of Christ were given to us to combat sin. I say both are effective, however, which is more effective? Which is better? This is why Christ is said to be the fulfillment of the law and perfection of the law and why it says he did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law.

As far as physical violence initiated by God during and after the time after Chrsit, there does seem to be a lull in the frey. It is known as the period of grace. It is a period of time before Christ comes again. If you read Revelation you will see that the judgements in Revelation are very "Old Testament" like. When Christ returns the lull in the frey ends and then it will be judgement day!!!

As far as my sources for the Quran I get them of various web sites. However, it is difficult for me to trust any web site, even one that I may agree with, and that is part of why I bring them to your attention to see how you refute them.

Originally posted by Varqa
So what if we are not perfect. Only God is perfect. We are not God. We are not perfect that is why we will always need Him to guide us, ever striving for perfection and never reaching it.

So God made us with flaws? Does this not mean he would be imperfect?

Originally posted by whodey
So God made us with flaws? Does this not mean he would be imperfect?

I don't see our imperfections as flaws. I rather look at them as immaturities. Every father has to instruct his children and help them grow. In a way I guess we are all capable of being perfect. All we have o do is to follow the path that the messengrs of God have prescribed for us.

Originally posted by Varqa
I don't see our imperfections as flaws. I rather look at them as immaturities. Every father has to instruct his children and help them grow. In a way I guess we are all capable of being perfect. All we have o do is to follow the path that the messengrs of God have prescribed for us.

How then would you classify sin? Would it be an imperfection, a flaw, or an immaturity?

Originally posted by whodey
How then would you classify sin? Would it be an imperfection, a flaw, or an immaturity?

Sin is the result of the attachment of the soul to the physical world.

Originally posted by Varqa
Sin is the result of the attachment of the soul to the physical world.

So what was Adams "soulish"attachment to the physical world that caused him to sin?

Also, could you give a more percise definition of what sin is? You definition sounds rather ambiguous.

Originally posted by whodey
So what was Adams "soulish"attachment to the physical world that caused him to sin?

Also, could you give a more percise definition of what sin is? You definition sounds rather ambiguous.

Adam is the cause of man's physical life; but the Reality of Christ -- that is to say, the Word of God -- is the cause of   spiritual life. It is "a quickening spirit," meaning that all the imperfections which come from the requirements of the physical life of man are transformed into human perfections by the teachings and education of Jesus. Therefore, Christ was a quickening spirit, and the cause of life in all mankind.

Adam was the cause of physical life, and as the physical world of man is the world of imperfections, and imperfections are the equivalent of death, Paul compared the physical imperfections to death.

But the mass of the Christians believe that, as Adam ate of the forbidden tree, He sinned in that He disobeyed, and that the disastrous consequences of this disobedience have been transmitted as a heritage and have remained among His descendants. Hence Adam became the cause of the death of humanity. This explanation is unreasonable and evidently wrong, for it means that all men, even the Prophets and the Messengers of God, without committing any sin or fault, but simply because they are the posterity of Adam, have become without reason guilty sinners, and until the day of the sacrifice of Christ were held captive in hell in painful torment. This is far from the justice of God. If Adam was a sinner, what is the sin of Abraham? What is the fault of Isaac, or of Joseph? Of what is Moses guilty?

(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 119)

Originally posted by Varqa
Adam is the cause of man's physical life; but the Reality of Christ -- that is to say, the Word of God -- is the cause of   spiritual life. It is "a quickening spirit," meaning that all the imperfections which come from the requirements of the physical life of man are transformed into human perfections by the teachings and education of Jesus. Therefore, Christ ...[text shortened]... c, or of Joseph? Of what is Moses guilty?

(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 119)

It may not make sense to you but it is Biblical. 1 Corinthians 15:22 says, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Do you think it fair that Christ suffered and died because of sin? After all, he was born without sin and blameless and remained so until his death. You see, sin is a very destructive force that effects or infects those that come into contact with it in this sinful world. It has little to do with being "fair".

Originally posted by whodey
It may not make sense to you but it is Biblical. 1 Corinthians 15:22 says, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Do you think it fair that Christ suffered and died because of sin? After all, he was born without sin and blameless and remained so until his death. You see, sin is a very destructive force that effects or infec ...[text shortened]... that come into contact with it in this sinful world. It has little to do with being "fair".

Of course it is Biblical. And I believe God is fair and He is just. I can't see Him condemning everyone because of what one person has done.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

(King James Bible, Jeremiah)

Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?

(King James Bible, Job)

Originally posted by Varqa
Of course it is Biblical. And I believe God is fair and He is just. I can't see Him condemning everyone because of what one person has done.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

(King James Bible, Jeremiah)

Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?

(King James Bible, Job)

IF you look at Adam in and his actions occuring in a vaccum then it would be possible for us to be born free of sin. However, if you look at his actions in terms us being a part of Adam, ie one of our forefathers, then we are apart of who and what he was. We see this in terms of genetics, why not sin nature? Is genetics fair? Is it fair for me to be born with a predisposition for heart disease and/or cancer and die prematurely as a result of it being passed down to me? Is God perverting justice by allowing this?

As far as fairness, would you say it fair that according to the Bible there was only one sinless man in history and that sinless man paid the price of all who sinned? I say its not fair. You see it has less to do with fairness and more to do with God's love for us.

Originally posted by whodey
As far as fairness, would you say it fair that according to the Bible there was only one sinless man in history and that sinless man paid the price of all who sinned? I say its not fair. You see it has less to do with fairness and more to do with God's love for us.

Actually, Job appears to have been perfect according to the Bible.

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

(King James Bible, Job)

Originally posted by Varqa
Actually, Job appears to have been perfect according to the Bible.

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

(King James Bible, Job)

Not only Job, but also Zacharias

Luke 1:5,6
5 THERE was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

And also Noah:

Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Besides I talked with Whodey before about that Jesus was blaspheming peopl, and if he consider this a sin or not. But he didn't answer me.

By saying that I don't attack jesus, If I belive in Quran I should belive that Jesus was righteous and perfect, but he is not the only one. All the prophets are righteous and perfect.

Originally posted by Varqa
Actually, Job appears to have been perfect according to the Bible.

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

(King James Bible, Job)

Notice you said "appears" to have been sinless. I will say that Job was perfect and upright in that he feared God and served God and not that he was sinless. After all, Job died as we all do. Dp you really think men die without having sinned? If so, what right did sin have over them in order to take their lives? Adam was told that the penalty for sin is death. So if Adam had not sinned, Adam would have never died or am I missing something here?

Originally posted by ahosyney
Not only Job, but also Zacharias

[b]Luke 1:5,6
5 THERE was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

righteous and perfect, but he is not the only one. All the prophets are righteous and perfect.[/b]

I am glad you brought up Noah. Here we have a case where Noah had sinned Biblically when he became drunk even though it states that he was a just man and perfect in generations. I am sure that you would counter, however, by saying that the scriptures have been "corrupted" and that Noah never became drunk because he was a man of God. I would argue, however, that this description of Noah does not imply that he was sinless, rather, only that he was a man of God. After all, if we serve God we ask God for forgiveness for our sins when we sin. Therefore, in God's sight we are just because he forgives us, no?

As far as Jesus blaspheming I would say that he was not. However, had he not been the Son of God he would have been blaspheming. He was merely accused of blaspheming because they did not believe that he was the Son of God.