The Koran - Whos Read It?

Not true.

Christianity has no problem with pork, enjoy the bacon goodness!

meh its says it in the bible not to eat it.

book of Leviticus, chapter 11, v. 7:

http://www.biblewiki.be/wiki/Leviticus_Chapter_11,_Verse_7

7: And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.

7: And the swine, which, though it divideth the hoof, cheweth not the cud.

7: And the swine, because this [animal] divides the hoof, and makes claws of the hoof, and it does not chew the cud, is unclean to you.

book of Leviticus, chapter 11, v. 8

http://www.biblewiki.be/wiki/Leviticus_Chapter_11,_Verse_8

8: Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

8: The flesh of these you shall not eat, nor shall you touch their carcasses, because they are unclean to you.

8: Ye shall not eat of their flesh, and ye shall not touch their carcases; these are unclean to you

Deuteronomy 14:7-8

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+14:7-8&version=NIV

7 However, of those that chew the cud or that have a divided hoof you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the hyrax. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a divided hoof; they are ceremonially unclean for you. 8 The pig is also unclean; although it has a divided hoof, it does not chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses.

Isaiah 65:2-4

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+65:2-4&version=NIV

2 All day long I have held out my hands
to an obstinate people,
who walk in ways not good,
pursuing their own imaginations—
3 a people who continually provoke me
to my very face,
offering sacrifices in gardens
and burning incense on altars of brick;
4 who sit among the graves
and spend their nights keeping secret vigil;
who eat the flesh of pigs,
and whose pots hold broth of impure meat;

Isaiah 66:17

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah 66:17&version=NIV

17 “Those who consecrate and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one who is among those who eat the flesh of pigs, rats and other unclean things—they will meet their end together with the one they follow,” declares the LORD.

Also http://www.usislam.org/christianity/biblepork.htm
 
And you totally miss out Peter's vision in Acts 10. Christ's death and resurrection has made all things clean.
All the portions of the Old Testament you have quoted were for the Jewish people, I know that they are there and what they say but Jesus has made all things new.

Jesus fulfilled the Law in its entirety and established a new covenant of reconciliation, that we might know God, his heart and his will.

The law condemns us because no-one can keep it, but Jesus brings life and wholeness, no longer do we stand condemned by the law.
 
Last edited:


Old Testament is the Covenant given to Moses for the Israelites, the New Testament is the New Covenant given by Christ to his apostles and like Squark states Acts 10.9-16 make this clear:

NRSV said:
9 About noon the next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10He became hungry and wanted something to eat; and while it was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11He saw the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down, being lowered to the ground by its four corners. 12In it were all kinds of four-footed creatures and reptiles and birds of the air. 13Then he heard a voice saying, ‘Get up, Peter; kill and eat.’ 14But Peter said, ‘By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.’ 15The voice said to him again, a second time, ‘What God has made clean, you must not call profane.’ 16This happened three times, and the thing was suddenly taken up to heaven.

So eating pork etc is permitted to Christians.
 
Also Jesus himself states that all food has been made 'clean' in Mark 7 14-23 and Luke 11 v39-41 all because of the cross of Christ.

Jesus says that what enters a man by the mouth does not 'defile' him, because it also leaves the body, but what comes from the heart, through the mouth, that defiles him and makes him unclean.
 
Last edited:
What on earth are you trying to say?

God's law is perfect, our failure to be able to keep it and therefore be justified shows us our desperate need for a saviour. There is absolutely no way I can justify myself before God, no amount of 'good works' will save me.
Jesus is that saviour, though.

I am not saying anything complicated. I can quote from the Bible if you wish, but I have a feeling you will say that doesn't apply for one reason or another?

Gods law is indeed perfect, Gods judgement is perfect, God Almighty is far above all things. Love for God comes from striving to follow a righteous way of life as ordained by Him, not by you, me, or anyone else. Atheists do not believe in God, therefore they are honest in rejecting certain things because they do not believe it was from God in the first place. Those who ascribe to a religion, who claim to believe it is from God, who claim to believe in God, would/should attempt to follow the way of life commanded as best they can. Yes we are not perfect and we sin, for that we must repent and ask for Gods forgiveness. But to say you believe in God, yet you feel it is ok to do what you want, completely go against His laws because you know better, and you're saved anyway because you believe in Jesus Christ PBUH is nothing but delusional.

Out of God's love for us, he kept God's commands and then took all sin upon himself as a sacrifice so that I can be forgiven and am now able to stand before God just as if I'd never sinned, that's not to say that I don't still make mistakes, but my soul is righteous before God.

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. (Ezekiel 18:20)

Do you understand what the above means? Each person will be accountable for themself, the son for himself and the father for himself. No one else will be held accountable for what you do, you must account for it.

That is the gracious gift of God, he knows that we were unable to save ourselves but he doesn't want anyone to perish because he love us so extraordinarily so in Jesus he gave us a way back to him.

Our response, as Christians, to God's great love is to seek to and keep God's law and live a life of gracious compassion just like Jesus.

So you actually agree that you have to make your utmost effort to 'seek and keep Gods law'. Where do you get this law from? Do you make it up from the top of your head, or do you get it from the Bible, or elsewhere? I am honestly very curious to know.

e36Adz you talk about God's law because that is all you have, I talk about God's grace because it is everything that we need.

Following Gods law and His commandments, is all that we as human beings can attempt to do while hoping and praying that He forgives us for our sins. Making up our own laws to replace His divine laws, and saying that Gods laws are outdated and need updating is making a mockery out of your religion and your beliefs.

Judgement lies with God alone.
 
To be fair you are calling people delusional because they believe something different from you.

The same kind of criticism aimed at you by Atheists I might add and equally unfair.

Where did I call someone delusional before his post?
 
Castiel, and you know perfectly well that I would not call someone 'delusional' for simply believing something different to me. I would however call it someone who claims to be a christian yet doesn't believe in the Bible, or claims to be a muslim but doesn't believe in the Quran etc. They are just re-defining the words to suit themselves and it seems to be a common trend these days. They are 'deluding' themselves in that sense, at least atheists are honest with their beliefs and not hypocritical. Interpreting the Bible in a different way is not the same as completely going against what it says.
 
Castiel, and you know perfectly well that I would not call someone 'delusional' for simply believing something different to me. I would however call it someone who claims to be a christian yet doesn't believe in the Bible, or claims to be a muslim but doesn't believe in the Quran etc. They are just re-defining the words to suit themselves and it seems to be a common trend these days. They are 'deluding' themselves in that sense, at least atheists are honest with their beliefs and not hypocritical. Interpreting the Bible in a different way is not the same as completely going against what it says.

I am a Christian, and i don't believe the bible to be the living breathing infallible breath of God. I am honoured that you consider my rather sane view point 'delusional'
 
Castiel, and you know perfectly well that I would not call someone 'delusional' for simply believing something different to me. I would however call it someone who claims to be a christian yet doesn't believe in the Bible, or claims to be a muslim but doesn't believe in the Quran etc. They are just re-defining the words to suit themselves and it seems to be a common trend these days. They are 'deluding' themselves in that sense, at least atheists are honest with their beliefs and not hypocritical. Interpreting the Bible in a different way is not the same as completely going against what it says.

Neither of those illustrations necessarily make them delusional, it simply means that they interpret their faith in a different way to you or the mainstream.

Christians as a rule do not hold the same literal belief of Gods Word in the Bible as Muslims do the Qur'an. Many see it as a guide to their faith rather than the unadulterated word of God.

You can argue that they are wrong given the content of their justification but you did call Squark delusional because he believes that Jesus Christ offers him salvation regardless of his previous actions, he like many evangelical Christians believe that salvation is only found through Christ and that even if he led a blameless life, without accepting Christ as his saviour he cannot justify his place in heaven.

That is his belief and is no more delusional than your own.

I am quite surprised that you said it, as you are normally not so dismissive.
 
Last edited:
I am a Christian, and i don't believe the bible to be the living breathing infallible breath of God. I am honoured that you consider my rather sane view point 'delusional'

The words 'living breathing infallible' were not uttered by me. I would be interested if you could answer a few questions just so I can understand your point of view. :)

1) What makes you personally Christian?

2) Jesus Christ PBUH lived approx 2000 years ago. What scripture do you use to learn about what he PBUH taught/preached?

3) Which laws do you try to live your life by?
 
Neither of those illustrations necessarily make them delusional, it simply means that they interpret their faith in a different way to you or the mainstream.

Wrong. Interpreting religious scripture differently is COMPLETELY different to going against what it says.

You can argue that they are wrong given the content of their justification but you did call Squark delusional because he believes that Jesus Christ offers him salvation regardless of his previous actions, he like many evangelical Christians believe that salvation is only found through Christ and that even if he led a blameless life, without accepting Christ as his saviour he cannot justify his place in heaven.

I called him delusional after RDMs post.

Anyway, what you have said above and what Squark said is not the same. He implied that because human beings are not perfect, and Gods law IS perfect, we do not need to make any attempt to follow Gods law. Is this what modern day Christians are preaching?

I am quite surprised that you said it, as you are normally not so dismissive.

It is the hypocritical aspect of some so-called religious people that gets to me, as I simply cannot understand why they would even choose to belong to that faith if they do not believe a single thing that the religion actually teaches. That does not mean interpreting it in a different way, it means going directly against everything it stands for. It makes no sense at all and I think even you would struggle to explain it, but by all means feel free to do so. :)
 
Wrong. Interpreting religious scripture differently is COMPLETELY different to going against what it says.

That would depend entirely on how you interpret that scripture to begin with.



Anyway, what you have said above and what Squark said is not the same. He implied that because human beings are not perfect, and Gods law IS perfect, we do not need to make any attempt to follow Gods law. Is this what modern day Christians are preaching?

I don't think he was implying that at all, I think he was implying what I said. I'm sure he will clarify anon...



It is the hypocritical aspect of some so-called religious people that gets to me, as I simply cannot understand why they would even choose to belong to that faith if they do not believe a single thing that the religion actually teaches. That does not mean interpreting it in a different way, it means going directly against everything it stands for. It makes no sense at all and I think even you would struggle to explain it, but by all means feel free to do so. :)

I don't think that applies to Squark however. I think you are misunderstanding him, or he is not explaining himself very clearly. Probably a little of both.

Squark said this:


Our response, as Christians, to God's great love is to seek to and keep God's law and live a life of gracious compassion just like Jesus.

Which encapsulates his belief and is generally in keeping with New Testament teaching and as such is no more delusional or intrinsically wrong than any other.
 
Last edited:
Haven't read the full thread yet.

I'm a Christian and have a Qu'ran (well the english translation side of the page). Probably read about 2/3 to 3/4 ish of it. Unsure if I'll ever bother to finish it.

As for the Bible - read the full thing twice systematically cover to cover. Probably a good few more times in bits.
 
Back
Top Bottom