Religious folk, do you literally interpret the Bible, Quran, Torah?

[ExodusNirvana]

 

[jsmiller]

Doctrine of Original Sin, literal?

Yes. Original Sin, literal

 

[Imyremeshaw]

I grew Muslim, although at this point in my life I'm more culturally Islamic more so than practicing muslim, so I'm partial to the Islam.

I've read the Quran, Bible( Old Testament and New Testament), Baha'i writings, and various Hindu and Buddhist texts. I'm of the belief that most religions come from God, it's man understanding and interpretation through various cultural beliefs and other factor corrupt these texts.

My belief for this is the following, "And for every nation is a messenger. So when their Messenger comes, it will be judged between them in justice, and they will not be wronged." [Quran 10:47] And: "And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, [saying]: 'Worship Allaah and avoid Taaghoot [i.e., false deities]'. And among them were those upon whom error was [deservedly] decreed. So proceed [i.e., travel] through the earth and observe how was the end of the deniers." [Quran 16:36]

As a cultural muslim I believe one way we can really understand the Quran is threw the understanding in beliefs of Judaism, and to a lesser extent of Christianity. I believe there is continuanity through these 3 religions, and that Islam was for everybody, while Judaism was for the Hebrews(Jews are from Judah) and Gods promise to them. Christianity was offshoot and basterized version of Judaism to bring Gentiles into the fold of Judaism and was eventually turned into a basterized version of Judaism.

 

[intilectual recipricol]

Yes. Original Sin, literal

Very interesting. Can you expand on why you think that story is literal?

 

[intilectual recipricol]

I grew Muslim, although at this point in my life I'm more culturally Islamic more so than practicing muslim, so I'm partial to the Islam.

I've read the Quran, Bible( Old Testament and New Testament), Baha'i writings, and various Hindu and Buddhist texts. I'm of the belief that most religions come from God, it's man understanding and interpretation through various cultural beliefs and other factor corrupt these texts.

My belief for this is the following, "And for every nation is a messenger. So when their Messenger comes, it will be judged between them in justice, and they will not be wronged." [Quran 10:47] And: "And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, [saying]: 'Worship Allaah and avoid Taaghoot [i.e., false deities]'. And among them were those upon whom error was [deservedly] decreed. So proceed [i.e., travel] through the earth and observe how was the end of the deniers." [Quran 16:36]

As a cultural muslim I believe one way we can really understand the Quran is threw the understanding in beliefs of Judaism, and to a lesser extent of Christianity. I believe there is continuanity through these 3 religions, and that Islam was for everybody, while Judaism was for the Hebrews(Jews are from Judah) and Gods promise to them. Christianity was offshoot and basterized version of Judaism to bring Gentiles into the fold of Judaism and was eventually turned into a basterized version of Judaism.

So if you think those three religions came from god, but mans understanding corrupted the texts, does it not directly lead to the conclusion that Yahweh is either a poor communicator, OR he is a poor creator?

 

[jsmiller]

Very interesting. Can you expand on why you think that story is literal?

Sure

The term "Original Sin" isn't in the Bible but the idea of it is throughout. We read in Romans that "sin entered the world through one man" Romans 5:12 and "one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people" Romans 5:18. And there are many other passages that point to Original Sin.

As I mentioned in my previous posts, the Bible is written in different styles and genres so one could say that this is allegorical but I would refute that because in its context it is always being presented as historical, AND Jesus affirms the existence of a literal Adam when he says, "at beginning they were made male and female" Matthew 19:4 and he uses Abel (the son of Adam) by name Luke 11:50.

That is why I know the story is literal

 

[Imyremeshaw]

So if you think those three religions came from god, but mans understanding corrupted the texts, does it not directly lead to the conclusion that Yahweh is either a poor communicator, OR he is a poor creator?

Yes and No..
-I believe in Allah revelation to the hebrews, and promise and bond would never be broken for that group
-Isa(Jesus) was a religious reformer, not the military leader that Hebrews hoped for. Isa if he returns would practice Judaism, not Christianity which I think alot modern Christians overlook.
-Islam was the revelation to bring gentiles into the fold of what Hebrews( modern day jews) believe in monotheism. But Islam was pure form of Judaism, we have eventually found a way to basterize that by coming up with Sunni, Shia, school of thoughts, Hanafi, Maliki,etc.. to fit our societies and cultural beliefs, instead of following the Quran and his Sunnah( Muhammed Way, not Sahil Bukhari, Sunnah was originally how to pray, other things to do with rituals, not how Muhammed dealt with fly with his drink or used the restroom, smh).

Having said that, God is all of Human race and the creator, we are made in his image, God is life, we can't comprehend God. God is nature and life, his message is unadulterated , humans inclination is shortsighted and limited based on our understanding of life and the things around us. He is greatest for the simple fact that humans are HERE.

 

[intilectual recipricol]

Sure

The term "Original Sin" isn't in the Bible but the idea of it is throughout. We read in Romans that "sin entered the world through one man" Romans 5:12 and "one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people" Romans 5:18. And there are many other passages that point to Original Sin.

As I mentioned in my previous posts, the Bible is written in different styles and genres so one could say that this is allegorical but I would refute that because in its context it is always being presented as historical, AND Jesus affirms the existence of a literal Adam when he says, "at beginning they were made male and female" Matthew 19:4 and he uses Abel (the son of Adam) by name Luke 11:50.

That is why I know the story is literal

Okay. You actually touched on other important shyt too. Namely Adam and creation. So, you reject the fact of evolution in order to keep the DOS literal. Also, this means that you accept the creation story and subsequent story of eating fruit being the original sin. Very interesting.

Why do you reject evolution? And then we can get into the actual meat, the story of this alleged first sin.

 

[intilectual recipricol]

Yes and No..
-I believe in Allah revelation to the hebrews, and promise and bond would never be broken for that group
-Isa(Jesus) was a religious reformer, not the military leader that Hebrews hoped for. Isa if he returns would practice Judaism, not Christianity which I think alot modern Christians overlook.
-Islam was the revelation to bring gentiles into the fold of what Hebrews( modern day jews) believe in monotheism. But Islam was pure form of Judaism, we have eventually found a way to basterize that by coming up with Sunni, Shia, school of thoughts, Hanafi, Maliki,etc.. to fit our societies and cultural beliefs, instead of following the Quran and his Sunnah( Muhammed Way, not Sahil Bukhari, Sunnah was originally how to pray, other things to do with rituals, not how Muhammed dealt with fly with his drink or used the restroom, smh).

Having said that, God is all of Human race and the creator, we are made in his image, God is life, we can't comprehend God. God is nature and life, his message is unadulterated , humans inclination is shortsighted and limited based on our understanding of life and the things around us. He is greatest for the simple fact that humans are HERE.

I am sorry, but I want to be extremely clear in this discussion. I do not know how this post is relevant to the questions of whether god is a poor communicator OR poor creator. You said, yes & no, so I guess I would ask that you expand on what the yes and no refer to.

But I would like to address one portion of this post. You state that "we cant comprehend God" but you spend the rest of the post talking about (comprehending) this "God;" how is that possible?

 

[Imyremeshaw]

I always say this to my family, friends, and my kids which is why I have great appreciation for Isa's(jesus) words and somewhat Christianity.
Jesus most important commandments:
-Love Allah with all your heart( That means have respect for all Allah created, nature, animals, life, etc..)
-Love your brother as thy would love themselves( imagine if treated the next men whoever it be as you would want to be respected or treated, and dealt with)

If everybody followed those 2 things to a T, life would have alot less issues than there are today(imho)......

 

[Imyremeshaw]

I am sorry, but I want to be extremely clear in this discussion. I do not know how this post is relevant to the questions of whether god is a poor communicator OR poor creator. You said, yes & no, so I guess I would ask that you expand on what the yes and no refer to.

But I would like to address one portion of this post. You state that "we cant comprehend God" but you spend the rest of the post talking about (comprehending) this "God;" how is that possible?

When I said yes or no.Yes, in that God is has let his presence known to us in nature and in life, No in that mans limited understanding will to be always to doubt and seek to strive improvement and perfection.
When I say we can't comprehend God, we can't understand his reasoning, or intentions. Our minds our way to limited to understand all aspects of the societies we live in, let alone the world and different cultures.

 

[intilectual recipricol]

When I said yes or no.Yes, in that God is has let his presence known to us in nature and in life, No in that mans limited understanding will to be always to doubt and seek to strive improvement and perfection.
When I say we can't comprehend God, we can't understand his reasoning, or intentions. Our minds our way to limited to understand all aspects of the societies we live in, let alone the world and different cultures.

Based upon this post, it makes no sense to be a Muslim, or any other religion for that matter. You have disregarded holy books which claim explicitly to understand this "God's" reasoning and intentions. How can you claim that this "God" has let his presence known in nature and life then claim that the human mind is too limited to understand our own societies? You do see the problem, no?

 

[jsmiller]

Okay. You actually touched on other important shyt too. Namely Adam and creation. So, you reject the fact of evolution in order to keep the DOS literal. Also, this means that you accept the creation story and subsequent story of eating fruit being the original sin. Very interesting.

Why do you reject evolution? And then we can get into the actual meat, the story of this alleged first sin.

I'm sorry, I don't know what DOS stands for.

I reject evolution for 4 primary reasons.

First, I think the fossil record is an embarrassment to evolutionists. With all of the millions of fossils found, there is not one single fossil that shows a verifiable transition from one species to another. Alot of Darwin's theory posits the supposed evolution of fish becoming reptiles, then becoming birds, and apes becoming humans. And I think we can agree that in this age of scientific enlightenment it is common knowledge that these transitions do not exist.

Second, I don't buy into the idea that chance accounts for the organization of complex organisms, especially when things containing less complex organization (houses, chairs, microphones) could never happen by chance. Biochemists look at living cells as machines with billions of interactive parts which I do not believe, nor does the science show, could ever happen by chance. I read a study by Dr. James Coppedge, an expert of stat probability who said that the chance of forming even a single protein molecule from random processes, in even 100 million years, is a 1 in 10 to the 161th power probability. I just can't buy into that. I think that stretches credulity.

Third, the whole ape-men idea I find to be a fraud. Evolutionary theory, when drawn to its conclusion, would result in scientists finding significant fossils that link "ape like humans" to modern man. But there haven't been many significant examples of that and most have been found to be frauds. (Nebraska Man- determined to be a Pig's tooth, Java Man- determined to be a pre-human by scientists, Piltdown Man- determined to be a deliberate fraud, Peking Man- determined to be a monkey, Lucy- determined to be an ape.)

Lastly, I think empirical science and reason undergirds the creation model for origins, and undermine evolution. The law of entropy (second law of thermodynamics) says that everything generally runs from order to disorder and from complexity to decay, which evolution violates. Not to mention the evolutionary form is at its core a theory of spontaneous generation which claims that living matter comes from non-organic matter, which I think science disproves. Also, leading evolutions concede that species appear in the fossil record suddenly and are not gradually led up. This is exactly what creation posits.

So for those reasons I reject evolution. I have done extensive study on the subject but if you feel that I missed something or misrepresented the evolutionary model in any way, I am open to discussion.

 

[Imyremeshaw]

Based upon this post, it makes no sense to be a Muslim, or any other religion for that matter. You have disregarded holy books which claim explicitly to understand this "God's" reasoning and intentions. How can you claim that this "God" has let his presence known in nature and life then claim that the human mind is too limited to understand our own societies? You do see the problem, no?

I understand what your saying which is why I'm more cultural muslim rather than all out practicing muslim, i struggle with some of the same things. Having said that, if you don't think humans are too limited to understand our own societies I don't what to tell you. Race, class, most humans only understand things from our limited perspective and experiences.

 

[Schmoove]

Bible believing Christian here.

I take the Bible literally- as in I take it as literature. All literature has a genre and style, and the Bible is no exception. In order to interpret the Bible, one must be able to consider the kind of literature being put forth. The genres of the Bible include historical narratives, poetry, proverbs, didactic letters, apocalyptic prophecy, etc.. Unless you know the genre and form, you're missing the big picture. When I read Shakespeare, if I don't understand Macbeth to be a Tragedy or wrongly assume that Midsummer's Night Dream is a History instead of a Comedy, I'm missing the author's intent.

I think this is the biggest problem for skeptics and believers alike. Many skeptics have the false assumption that the Bible is a book of dos and don'ts conjured up in the minds of a few men. Most don't realize that it is 66 books written over the course of 1,500 years by a plethora of authors. Those authors used different styles, figures of speech, and genres. Without this proper understanding, skeptics mock the Bible as espousing a talking snake, and believers think heaven has literal streets of gold.