News & Politics

Rant

Muslim Brotherhood Wins Big in Egypt Election

Posted 5 months ago|124 comments|712 views
Written by
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

This is the motto of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928, and by 1940 had over two million members. The organization has been banned, or at least repressed, in many Middle Eastern countries for most of its existence. They claim to be against violence, but have been accused of violence, and even assassination. The Brotherhood's charter is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ...ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state".

The Brotherhood has also claimed to be apolitical, and claims to support pluralism and Democracy, and claimed that they wanted no part in the government of Egypt, other than to be able to vote with the rest of the democratic nation.

Two questions arise.

1) If they wanted no political presence in post-revolution Egypt, how did they win 37% of the first round of Parliamentary elections?

2) If the Qur'an is their Constitution, (Law), how can they objectively and impartially administer a Democratic Constitution?

Essam el-Erian, the deputy head of the new Freedom and Justice Party, stated that the group is not interested in imposing Islamic values on Egypt, a country which consists of a significant Christian minority among others who object to being forced to live by Islamic guidelines.

"We represent a moderate and fair party," el-Erian said. "We want to apply the basics of Shariah law in a fair way that respects human rights and personal rights."

Human and personal rights, as defined by Islamic, or Sharia, Law would be a case of circular logic, because Sharia is the final word, and Sharia respects only its own judgements.

True, either way it went in the election process, some form of Islamic government would no doubt have been instated. Sharia was a given from the very beginning of the revolution. But how many foreigners cheered them on, knowing that many Egyptians would soon find out the real meaning of the word "persecution".

I think Iran should take notice. They aren't the only repressive, aggressive kids on the block any more. More importantly, people who cheered this "grass-roots" revolution as a step forward in democracy and liberation should take notice. Change, without a clear goal and direction, is more often bad than good.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "Egypt, a country which consists of a significant Christian minority among others who object to being forced to live by Islamic guidelines."

~~"America, a country which consists of significant Non-Christian minorities who object to being forced to live by Christian guidelines"...do you have an equally deep rooted problem with this?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Which "Christian guidelines" do you object to?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Or refer to?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I object to the fact that the Tea Party and the Republican Party claim to be all about following the Constitution to the "t". In the same breath they claim that Gay Marriage needs to be illegal, that Abortion needs to be illegal. They balk at the idea of an Atheist group putting up a display in the town square but then lash out at that same group about "fairness" when they petition to have the nativity scene and Christmas tree taken down. The claim that schools need to adopt abstinence only policies for teaching...all of these are based on the oppressive religious dogma that they have been indoctrinated with since they were children.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: It seems that you have been indoctrinated with the assumption that only Christians oppose gay marriage, abortion, and teen sex.

What about polygamy or adult incest? Selling homemade alcohol? Not wearing your seatbelt?
5 months ago: PH,

Sorry Bub... there is nothing "christian" about the way America is "forced" to live... it is all-out moral anarchy and depravity taught in schools and subsidized by the Govnt. Seriously? What could be further from Christianity... no prayer... no ref to God... not an inkling of faith... just a repressive darwinistic hedonistic masochistic abortionistic christophobic pseudologistic and just plain sick peer dependent mind controlling political coercion. It would be a play straight out of Anton LaVey's Satanic bible ...if we didn't "know" any better!
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "no prayer... no ref to God... not an inkling of faith'"

Read the Constitution...this is what we are supposed to have. If you want to practice Christianity, Scientology, Flying Spaghetti Monsterology, Satanism, Paganism, Pantheism, Agnosticism, Druidism, Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, I-worship-soapism then do it on your own time. It has no place, I repeat NO place in public law/mandates/governance/schools.
5 months ago: PH,

Exactly! So why are you saying that you are forced to live under Christian dictates?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Don't put words in my mouth. I made a statement based on something that the post had in it and asked a question about that statement. I made no assertion to whether or not that statement was true.

Further, there is indeed a nativity scene and christmas tree in my town's square...but the local atheist group was told that their display was not welcome. Also, Gay Marriage is not legal everywhere yet and people are still championing hatred in an attempt to stop it from becoming legal.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

So, therefore, any Federal law that restricts or prohibits the free and open worship, by anyone, anywhere, is unconstitutional. States, on the other hand, have the power to make and enforce such laws, provided there is no discrimination involved.
Any Federal law that prohibits God or Allah or even Lucifer in any place is unconstitutional.

How's that?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: quick definition

"respecting" = concerning or considering

"no" = zero, none, zilch, nada, big fat goose egg

5 months ago: Right on.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: A few things:

1. When a town puts up a nativity scene on public property...how is that not an endorsement of a particular religion? ESPECIALLY when that same town will not let any other religious group put up any display??? The point of the Constitution in regards to religion is that the government will not tell you what to worship, nor will it tell you that you are not allowed to worship in private. If you want to praise Jesus, fine, do it in your home or church, but not in my face or on public property that I own.

2. You are aware that God=Allah=God right? Allah is the Arabic translation of the word "God", and that the Muslim God and the Christian God are the same God right? The deity is one in the same between the two religions...
5 months ago: Allah of the Quran and Jehovah of the OT are not the same being at all. That is a common misconception. A historical and detailed character analysis of the two will prove that out.

However, worshippers of both are brother and sisters in humanity if not in the spirit. That is an important fact to understand in any debate regarding the two unique characters of their respective sacred texts.

Regardless of view there should be mutual respect for the other belief even in the face of disagreement as long as there is no violence involved. Then respect goes out the window.

Also, how do you explain this:

http://spofga.org/ten_commandments/2005/...

There is a big difference between the separation of church and state and the separation of government from God.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I am not going to debate the existence and definition of deity with you, it is an argument that you and I cannot resolve civilly.

As for the Supreme Court building:
1: it is very old
2: The 10 commandments are not present, the numbers 1 thru 10 in roman numeral are. do you have any proof that those numbers represent the commandments? Because according to the building designer...those number represent the first 10 amendments to the Constitution...better known as the Bill of Rights...
3: The area near the justices are, according to the building designer, depictions of the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, the 10 sculptures flanking them represent Wisdom and Justice
4: When asked about the presence of the numbers 1-10 in Roman Numeral around the building he consistently pointed out that each one of them represents the Bill of Rights.
5 months ago: Nice rationalization.
5 months ago: Also, if there were going to be a lack of civility in a theological debate, it would not come from me. That's counterproductive.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Its the truth...how on earth can you be so blinded by faith that you would honestly think that the 10 commandments would be more important on the Supreme Court than the Bill of Rights? Especially when there is documented proof that the designer himself indicated that they are representative of the Bill of Rights???
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Not so much in terms of argument, I just meant that you and I will never agree on the existence of a deity.
5 months ago: PH,

You say... "God=Allah=God right?" ...please watch the following, it may help put together an historical understanding for what many assume today....

Walid Shoebat - Who Is Allah & Is He The God Of The Bible?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cIGsrif1...
5 months ago: Sorry, but as important as they are, Moses is not holding up the Bill of Rights on that building.

Seems your lack of understanding (faith?) has blinded you so that you cannot admit the obvious becuase you know it destroys your argument.
Content Removed by Huey Newton
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: So the designer lied about it?

Moses is included several times, as is Mohhamed, Charlemagne, Octavian, Confucious and many others. They were represented as the "great lawgivers" of society. The intention of the sculptures was to represent the Bill of Rights...
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I can have a calm conversation about this:

"The question is not necessarily one of existence, but one of identity. But we can give this a pass for now if you like. "

Which deity would you like to discuss the identity of?
5 months ago: "So the designer lied about it? "

No. You are misinformed.
5 months ago: "Which deity would you like to discuss the identity of? "

You have stated that Allah and Jehovah are the same being. That is a common misconception. Their very own scriptures show that they are not. They differ most dramatically in how one is to receive forgiveness and how they are to be approached by sinful humans.

The God that Jesus Christ reveals is nothing like Allah in regard to love, grace kindness, and acceptance of individuals. Also, Allah is not Jesus' Father.

Do you have any references to site in their respective sacred texts to prove otherwise?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I'm misinformed? By direct quotes from the designer and from a multitude of historians?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: It is not a misconception. Allah and "God" are both the God of Abraham. It is a different interpretation between that of Mohammad and Jesus. They are the same God. Ask any Theologist, Philosopher, Professor of Religious Studies. It is the same God.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Arab Christians refer to "God" as Allah.

In Aramaic the word for "God" is Ĕlāhā. Through translation it became what it is today.

Allah is just a word. God is just a word. Both Words along with countless others all describe the same Deity.
5 months ago: Give me some scripture verses proving they are the same. Okay?

Opinions not based on the texts of either camp have no relevance in a discussion like this.

Jehovah is not just a word. Allah is not just a word either. They are specific names of specific, individual deities. They are specific names of specific, individual deities. They are not the same.

For Christians and Muslims it's not a matter of whether they are the same or not. Only the most liberal go there, for it really does not ultimately matter to them in their theology. The matter of conflict is Who is the true God?

If orthodox Muslims believed that Jews and Christian worshipped the same God as they, why is it that they persecute, hound and kill the non-Muslims and reference Allah's words to do it?

Because they are not the same, that's why.
They are not the same.

For Christians and Muslims it's not a matter of whether they are the same or not. Only the most liberal go there, for it really does not ultimately matter to them in their theology. The matter of conflict is Who is the true God?

If orthodox Muslims believed that Jews and Christian worshipped the same God as they, why is it that they persecute, hound and kill the non-Muslims and then reference Allah's words to do it?

Because they are not the same, that's why.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: OK, now I'm confused.

You're telling me that Abraham made up an imaginary being, that we'll call God, (even though his real name is YHWH, Adonai, El Roi, et al.).

Then you are telling me that 3000 to 5000 years later, Mohammed delivered his own imaginary God, with 99 divine names, none of which are the same name as the imaginary God that Abraham invented, and with a strikingly different personality from the God of Abraham.

If they are strictly figments of the imagination, how can two persons' imaginary deities be in fact the same God? You speak of them as though they are real.
5 months ago: Direct quotes? Please supply them.

http://www.christianheritagemins.org/art...

In the meantime, please check the information in the link above.

BTW - if you look, the two tablets also appear in Hebrew and not just Roman numerals.

Just by the way the 10 are displayed as tablets should be enough for a rational thinker understand what's going on, whether they like it or not. Agree or not.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: They are the same. If you refuse to do research about what you believe in and would rather be blindly leaded along that is a choice you have made.


As for the names...they are just words. Are you honestly telling me that different languages don't have different names for things? How do you say "train" in English? How about French? German? Arabic????
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Train in French still means train. God means god, no matter what language you translate the word "god" into. However, no god's name is God, that I know of. Man has had many gods. Is Thor the same being as Abraham's God? Zeus? Mithra? Men have called all of them God, Lord, Master, Etc.

God YHWH has distinct names, that those who know him call him by.

Ishmael, the patriarch of Islam, was the firstborn son of Abraham, the offspring of a slave, and was cast out for mocking Isaac. YHWH saved him from death in the desert, promising to make him a great nation. For what purpose was this great nation, whose purpose in life now is eradicating the Jews?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "Allah is no mere linguistic designation for God, as Dios in Spanish or Dieu in French. Allah is the name of the god of Islam.

In fact, Allah was the name of the chief god among the numerous idols in the Kaaba in Mecca, which represented the deities of travelers passing through in the caravans. Allah was the god of the local Quraish, Muhammad's tribe, before Islam was invented.

Muhammad smashed the idols but kept the black stone which is still kissed today by Muslims. He kept, too, the name Allah for the god of Islam (its sign was the crescent moon) in order to appeal to his own tribe.

Allah has definite characteristics: he is not a father, has no son, is not a triune being but a single entity who destroys rather than saves sinners, has compassion on only the righteous, does not deal in grace but only rewards good deeds, has no way to redeem the lost sinners, etc. "


http://www.menorah.org/allahtrc.html
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Arab Christians refer to "God" as Allah
5 months ago: Okay. Let's break this down.

You tell me to do research, yet you have not provided one scripture to prove or support anything you have stated. You talk about blindness, yet just based on your superficial handling of the subject you show your own blindness and outright ignorance of the.

Many different religions use the word "God" but they are not referring to the same being.

The God of the Quran is not the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. He has no son. As matter of fact, it is BLASPHEMY to say he does.

Sura 19:20,34, Jesus praised his birth and then said, "I am the servant of Allah." And Allah teaches, "It is not for God to take a son unto Him."

Allah loves Muslims only (Sura 2:195; 2:190; 2:276; 3:32). The Father of Jesus, the God of the OT and NT loves all (john 3:16).

Allah of the Quran lies. He lies when it suits his purposes (Sura 3:54; 8:30). Jehovah stands by His words and by His promises. (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29).
The God of the Bible is called "The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob "Israel" . He is the father of the Jews.

Like I stated earlier (which you very conveniently ignored and refused to address) - For Christians and Muslims it's not a matter of whether they are the same or not. The orthodox on all sides know that they are not the same. NEVER have been.

If orthodox Muslims believed that Jews and Christian worshipped the same God as they, why is it that they persecute, hound and kill the non-Muslims and reference Allah's words to do it? If you would study, you would know why.

Allah commands Muslims, "Take not the Jews and Christians as friends ( Surah 5:51, A1 Hi1-a1i, v. 54, Jusuf a1i). Check it out. They do not take them as friends because they are unclean and worship another God. A God other than the God of Quran.

You are the one who really needs to do some research and stop swallowing, hook line and sinker what you get off the internet.

When you study the texts, then we will have a basis for debate. Until that time, you have not footing. I've proven my case and until you hit the books, discussion on this particular subject is over. I'm not going to waste time arguing the subject with someone who has obviously read or fully researched either the Quaran or Bible.

Jehovah of the Bible and Allah of the Quran are two different beings.

Your wanting to make them the same changes nothing and until you have some scriptures to back up your claim, your argument is LOST.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow"

Qu'ran Sura 29:46

Muslims and Christians both worship the God of Abraham. Muslims and Christians argue because both believe that the other has twisted the message of God. Muslims feel that Christians have committed a blasphemous act with their interpretation of the word of God. The largest point of dispute is that of Jesus and his role (Son of God vs. Messenger of God).

As for violent conflict between the two. There are extremist sects of every belief system. Extremist Muslims become what we in America have branded "Terrorists". Extremist Christians are also "Terrorists" by this definition. There are also Extremist Jews, Atheists, Hindus etc etc.

The problem with religion is that is entirely based on interpretation. If you believe in something so deeply based on personal (or indoctrinated) interpretation, it will become increasingly difficult to be open and rational with people who are not. This argument is a perfect example. No matter what you want to say, Muslims and Christians both worship the God of Abraham. Each faith has interpreted the fairy tale differently...it doesn't make your version correct and their version wrong...
Content Removed by Huey Newton
5 months ago: "The problem with religion is that is entirely based on interpretation"

That's not a problem. Any time anyone wants to solve a case, they must first have evidence and then interpret that evidence.

It's only a problem to a person who refuses to examine the evidence and make a real decision based upon evidence and fact rather than simply attempt to disparage the beliefs of others and interpret things based on how they feel rather than based on what the sacred texts plainly say.

Again, if you study the texts it is OBVIOUS that they are not the same. You refuse to look at that and therefore you have made up in your mind that they are the same. Not based on evidence, but based on how you feel. You have yet to produce anything of substance in regard to substantive scriptural evidence of their sameness

In any interpretation it is a matter of studying the scriptures in context and then comparing the books against each other. You have not done this. I have for years.

I know I could show you scripture after scripture from the Quaran, Hadith, Old and New Testaments in context and it would not change your mind. It would not change, not because of lack of exegetical evidence, but because your mind is already made up and what the books say makes no difference at all to you. The only thing that matters is how you feel about the identity, not what is what has been written.

So this is pointless. This is not a theological debate from your side, but an emotional one.

I have not read all of the Hadith (it's voluminous to say the least), however I continue to study the Christian Greek scriptures and the Hebrew Old Testament. I have read and studied the Quran and still continue to read parts of it from time to time to stay fresh in my understanding.

As far as Jesus Christ that is a HUGE problem for the Muslims. He made claims and made statements that fly in the face of the God of the Quran. That's a fact whether you admit it or not. It's very clear. Allah is not Jesus' Father. Ergo he is not Jehovah and He is not the God of the Bible (OT/NT).

There are lots of folks who erroneously believe it your way, however the majority of experts, those who would be called orthodox and not liberal, would disagree with your position based upon the mountains of scriptures that conflict with the claim of Allah being the true God of Abraham or being the I AM of Exodus.

Quoting one scripture means nothing. You have to compare character, nature, personality, actions responses. It takes work that you have not done to find these things out. Oobviously have done none of it.

Simple questions:
How can Allah be a liar and Jehovah a keeper of His word and be the same being? They cannot be.

How can Allah love only Muslims, while Jehovah loves everyone and they be the same? They cannot.

How can Jehovah forgive sins on the basis of blood and Allah accept only perfection in the flesh in order to credit righteousness and they be the same god? They cannot.

Since you perceive both to be fairy tales and have studied neither out thoroughly, all of your comments are specious at best due to lack of sound information and therefore really don't hold much water in the larger scheme of things.

The biggest cop out there is to say that it's subject to interpretation. Well, you have provided no information to interpret.

Some things are just obvious. But they can never be obvious to someone who has taken neither the time nor effort to research the scriptures in an attempt to interpret them in the first place. Until you do that you need to leave the subject alone. Every post just shows how little actual research you have done in this area and how extremely limited your understanding of Christian, Jewish and Muslim theology is.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I provided you with a direct quote from the Qu'ran. Muslims feel that God never had a son, and that Christians have twisted and mutated the gospel. The God of Abraham is the deity of worship for both Muslims and Christians. The argument stems from the fact that Christians believe Jesus was the son of god and Muslims believe he was the messenger of God. What makes you right and them wrong? The fact that you believe what you believe and therefore only you can be right? There are other religions FAR older than Christianity, all of which are far more compelling than any message offered by Christianity.

In a larger point, I do not care as I think it is all nonsense. The "Divine Texts" were written by man, then re-written, and re-written and re-written and re-written again and again and again. I have examined evidence. There is absolutely zero proof that any deity exists, especially not a singular all knowing one. It is obvious that no evidence exists, nor can any evidence every exist. Organized religion, particularly Catholicism and Christianity are created stories. They were created by monarchs and other powerful people as a tool to keep the underclasses of society in check ("Pay your taxes or you will go to hell", "Do what the King says or you will go to hell", "Accept that this ordinary man was divinely chosen to rule you with an iron fist or you will be smited"). There is no proof that the ancient Greeks had it wrong. Prove that Zeus is less real than God. Religion has always been a crutch of humans to stand on because of their inability to accept the fact that life is fleeting and will end. That is why there is manufactured "morality" in these religions, so that people will feel at ease dying because they will get to go to some various world of happy fun land, or better yet, come back to life as something better (but only if you are good).
5 months ago: "The "Divine Texts" were written by man, then re-written, and re-written and re-written and re-written again and again and again."

Wrong.

True. There is no original New Testament. However this is not an issue that's unique to the Bible; it's a question that can be asked of other documents that have come down to us from antiquity. But what he New Testament has in its favor, especially compared with other ancient writings, is the unprecedented multiplicity of copies that have survived.

Check and cross check. They all say the same thing. But you have not done your homework.

"I have examined evidence." You are playing one note on a violin with broken strings. One scripture does not build a case.

You did it again. You proved that you don't know what you are talking about.

You are right in one aspect however. You don't care. You don't care and it shows in your sloppy responses. You have presented zilch with regard to material to prove your case.

You have not studied; you just know what you believe. Shows over.
5 months ago: Also, anyone who looks at this universe and discounts even the possibility of it being intelligently created is not a rational person. They have chosen to lobotomize themselves.

There is far more evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ than there ever will be for abiogeneis, so you can believe whatever fairy tale you like or walk with whatever crutch you choose.

I was going to leave this alone, but you dug it up. The next time you want to have a theological debate, do yourself a favor and at least study the theology first.

Like I said - shows over.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I have studied religions for years. You have studied a religion for years. You have been indoctrinated to believe what your particular brand says to be true.

I suppose it would be fair to say that the current Christian interpretation (outside of Westboro) of God is different than that of Allah. Old Testament God and Allah are much more similar. You however, refuse to recognize the fact that according to BOTH religions, their Deity of worship is the God of Abraham. They have interpreted the story differently from that point. Christians believe that Jesus was the son of God, Muslims believe that he was a messenger. They are different stories about the same person.

I ask you again, offer some proof of Jesus's Resurrection (the Bible isn't proof). Also, while you are at it if you could prove to me that the God of Abraham is more real than Zeus that would help.

The entire Qu'ran is a holy book dedicated to the worship of the God of Abraham, so is the Old Testament and the New Testament. Different interpretations of the same story, nothing in the world makes yours factually more correct than anyone else's (although in your head it is more true since it is your perception of reality, and perception is ALWAYS more persuasive than fact).

I have asked you several questions, to which you cannot answer so you take the time to rather issue statements like "shows over" and "your responses are sloppy". When you have legitimate, scholarly, hard evidence of the existence of God, proof that he is more real than Zeus and that Jesus (who was a man) was resurrected after his death then we can talk about my "sloppy responses".

My tale of choice/crutch of choice is that I don't have one. We are mammals, we developed over millions of years of evolution (accepted scientific fact). We are Carbon Based Lifeforms, we are fragile, we will die, we will decompose...the end.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Ishmaelites worshiped the God of Abraham for many centuries after Ishmael's foundation of the the eastern Arabs. Ishmaelites saved Jacob from slavery in Egypt. Job was an Arab descendant of Ishmael. The Three Wise Men were from the Arab, or Ishmaelite, territories.

Isaiah 60:6 & 7, RSV. "A multitude of camels shall cover you, the young camels of Midian and Ephah; all those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praise of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on my altar, and I will glorify my glorious house."

These are all sons of Abraham, children of the East, Arabs, forefathers of the Muslim people.

The Qur'an was not written by Mohammed, due to the simple fact that could neither read nor write. The word Qur'an means "recitation". Mohammed was "given" the text orally over a period of 23 years, similar to the Joseph Smith/Mormon story, and other people wrote down what he taught them by memorization.

Islam religion at one time respected monotheistic Jews and true Christians. Only the ones that had become corrupt with polytheism and idolatry were at risk. They even considered themselves to be the "fifth plague" of Revelation.

"Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given power like the power of scorpions of the earth; ...They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any green growth or any tree, but only those of mankind who have not the seal of God upon their foreheads"


Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: (continued)

But the teachings of Mohammed do not coincide with the teachings of the Bible or the Torah.
5 months ago: This has gone from inane to stupid.

"I have studied religions for years. You have studied a religion for years."

I've studied dozens of different, religions, philosophies and world views. You have no idea what I have or have not studied.

"My tale of choice/crutch of choice is ...... We are mammals (higher monkeys/primates evolved from a single cell organism run amok that created itself), we developed over millions of years of evolution (unproven scientific theory). We are Carbon Based Lifeforms, we are fragile, we will die, we will decompose...the end (you hope)."

More accurate statement.

Dude, I'm done with this.

You may have studied some religion, but you have no real in depth understanding of the Quran, Old or New Testaments. If you did you could cite chapters and verses to back up your understanding.

You have no basis other than your own feelingm the Quaran and that's not good enough to win a theological debate.

When you can produce and cross more than one scripture to prove your point, well have something. In the meantime I am wasting my time here. Chiao.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: If one does not believe in God, then he cannot believe in prophets of God. If he cannot believe in a prophet, then he would have no knowledge of a false prophet. 600 years after Jesus' birth, a man claiming to be a direct descendant of the cast out tribe of Ishmael taught that he was given 600 visions from Gabriel, the angel of the Lord.

Thanks to Mohammed, the Christian nations endured hundreds of years of war brought on by Muslims. The Holy Wars were a response to this jihad aggression as taught by Mohammed.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Evolution is widely accepted scientific fact.

Again, I ask, empirical evidence of God's existence? Why is he more real than Zeus?

Do you honestly dispute that both Christians and Muslims worship the God of Abraham?

When I have more time (over the weekend I will cite all the evidence you want), in the mean time...I have asked one simple question 3 or 4 times now. Please prove with empirical hard scholarly evidence that God exists, and/or that your god is more real than Zeus.
5 months ago:
When I last checked we were not debating the fact of God's existing. What we were debating is whether the God of Quran is the same God as the Father of Jesus Christ who is the promised seed of Abraham.

Do Christian and Muslims worship the same God? I re-iterate, they do not.

The Allah of the Quran is not the God of Abraham though their book claims he is. The check would be to simply anayze the character of Allah and compare those charactersistics to the Father of Jesus Christ.

The proof of sameness would be the consistency of character between the God of the Bible and the God of the Quran. If they were in fact the same, the scriptural evidence should be very easy to compile. As it turns out, he exact opposite is the case. Verse after verse can be referenced to show the differences. I have listed specific examples throughout this discourse.

It does not matter that one verse produced from the Quran claims the God of it to be the God of Abraham. The preponderance of evidence to the contrary is staggering. That is what makes the case for them being different persons not anyone's opinion.

An honest look at the books shows without a doubt that Allah of the Quran and Jehovah of the Bible are two are very different personalities to say the least. The main differences being in nature, in attitude toward humanity and in action with regard to love of their creation and deliverance of humankind from damnation. The lines of distinctions are pronounced pretty much night and day.

Proves without a doubt that they are not the same. The weekend has passed. This particular debate is over.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Forgive my absence, I was very ill with pneumonia over the past 4 days.

After reading this post I have a fairly simple statement and question:

You seem to have acknowledged that according to the Quran, the deity presented in that text is the God of Abraham. I will concede that the deity presented in the Bible is also purported to be the God of Abraham.

You have stated that despite the fact that the Quran claims that it presents the tale/story/word of the God of Abraham it in fact is not the God of Abraham but some other deity. What precisely makes the fairy tales of the Bible more accurate/truthful than those of the Quran? Is it not possible that the Quran presents the true God of Abraham while the Bible presents a twisted/manipulated version of that deity, or perhaps a different deity all together? Do you honestly believe that, because you are a Christian, that your version of "God" is more accurate than the version of God presented in the Quran? Maybe the Bible is wrong and the Quran is right????
5 months ago: It all goes back to Jesus Christ and his resurrection. That is no fairy tale.

There is a book by a man named Josh McDowell, "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" that you should read. It will do a better job at explaining the overall position than I can do in a few posts here.

Hope you feel better soon.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "That is no fairy tale."

Prove it without the Bible then...

Otherwise you are literally saying "I'm a Christian and therefore my Christian beliefs are absolute truth and the fact that the Quran says it is the true story of the God of Abraham is totally irrelevent because the Bible says so..."
That is an irrational stance, you cannot prove beyond your personal belief that the Muslim God of Abraham is in fact not the God of Abraham...I ask again, what, other than your personal beliefs, makes the Bible right and Quran wrong????
5 months ago: Who in their right mind totally discounts the testimony of eyewitnesses?

The disciples saw Jesus alive. They touched Him. They spoke with Him. He fulfilled His promise to them. No money to be made, no status or nobility to be found. Persecution, hardship, torture and death was what they received. Who would die for that kind of lie?

They wrote about it and they testified to the death in the time of Jesus' contemporaries. They were changed people who embraced what they had once run from.

You can remain skeptical and I respect that. I'm a believer and it would be nice if you respect that.

I love my Muslim brothers and sisters, but I don't see it the way they do nor they I. That's okay. I still respect. It's great when that respect is mutual.

Mutual respect and understanding go a long way when folks are not hostile toward each other and are secure in what they believe even when they disagree. A person who knows who they are need not run roughshod over the faith of others.

In the end we all answer for ourselves only. I pray my Muslim brothers and sisters be blessed and come to a deeper understanding of who Jesus really is.

They have their walk and I have mine. Peace and love is the best way to go.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Well, its possible that people lied. It's also possible that it makes a good story.

I do respect your right to believe whatever you want. I will certainly never agree with it, but that is a different story.

Likewise, when you say that your version of the story of the God of Abraham (the Bible) is correct because you believe it and therefore the Quran and it's story of the God of Abraham is wrong you are completely and utterly disrespecting every Muslim in the world. The most important point is the fact that neither faith can PROVE anything. They can only accept what they believe, but that acceptance in no way offers evidence that one is right and one is wrong. People of various faiths should think about that when they say things like "I pray that someday they will see the truth" or things of that nature...because what if...no matter how much you believe it is not, the Quran is in fact the real representation of God...????
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: When discussing the God of Abraham, I would probably believe Abraham. If someone came along 4000 years after Abraham and paint an entirely different picture of who God is, I would still go with the Abraham version.

If I wrote a biography about Bill Clinton filled with falsehoods and misrepresentations, would that make Bill Clinton into the person I claimed? Only to those who believed it.
5 months ago: People don't die for good stories.

Also, most Muslims have a thicker skin and a greater depth of faith and character than you give them credit for.

Just because Muslims and Christians see things differently that does not make them enemies or necessarily hostile to each other. You evidently missed the point of my last post.

It's hyper attitudes like that on all sides as to why we don't have more peace between professing Muslins, Christians, atheists, agnostics, dialectical materialists (pick 'em).

As far as Muslims go, they have their reasons for their faith and I have my reasons for mine. That does not mean we have to lack respect for each other or be offended that we both believe we have it right.

They believe I am wrong. That Christianity is wrong. Should I then see that as them completely and utterly disrespecting the Christian world? Absolutely not. That is how small minded people think.

Should atheists and agnostics be hostile and condescending to the beliefs of others even when their position is unproven or ambiguous? Absolutely not. That is counterproductive to peaceful co-existence.

One does not have to prove anything to the limits to believe it. Some things are simply beyond proving in this life.

Some believe this universe came from nothing. Some believe it has come direct from the hands of a loving Creator. Both positions ultimately require faith.

That being said, we all need to establish some convictions regarding the important things of life. In the midst of our existence we need to be able to live peacefully with our brothers and sisters. We should strive to not take offense at differences.

We should not feel the need or have the obligation to embrace or endorse everything under the sun. However, we are all unique creations of God and we should strive to live in peace and harmony with each other in our differences and despite of our differences.
5 months ago: It's not hate to think that it is abnormal for men to want to mary men any more than it is hate to think it's wierd for a brother to want to marry his sister.

Reardless of the legality of either, both mindsets are wacked.

Many small minded and intolerant people are still afraid of and offended at baby Jesus regardless of where they see him. Tells a story in itself.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "It's not hate to think that it is abnormal for men to want to mary men"

~True, but it is hate when you take your own personal feelings and try to make them the LAW. Those feelings for you are based on your moral code right? Which is based on Christianity right? Because, I really don't have a single little problem with it. I don't think its abnormal for 2 people who are in love to want to get married and spend their life together.
5 months ago: News Flash - all laws are made from a moral code. A consensus of personal opinions, if you will. That is where they come from.

That being said, the laws of a particular realm do not always coincide with absolute truth. That is where we can have a divergence of opinion. What is truth of the matter?

Again, when it comes to right and wrong, the law of the land may be correct or it may be incorrect. The law may be right or it may be wrong. But it is still the law and it has been put in place by folks with an ethical code.

So, l am not looking to legislate anything. I'm just calling a spade a spade. Abnormality is in the eye of the beholder, even if you discount providence.

I would just as soon endorse the marriage of siblings as the marriage of same sex individuals. There is no real difference. Both pairings are abnormal. Hate has nothing to do with that opinion either.

Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Right and Wrong is subjective. You think it is wrong for gay couples to marry. I don't.

Abnormality is subjective. You think it is abnormal for two people who are not related but are the same gender to love each other and want to marry each other. I do not find homosexuality abnormal, it has existed in nature for 60 million years.

We both think it is wrong (and probably abnormal) for people who are related to one another directly (brother/sister) to want to marry.

The point is that in a vacuum you can justify any action. However, in a society where liberty is supposed to be paramount, stripping that away from people because they are different than you is wrong and hateful (I too am calling a spade a spade). Marriage is the union of two people's lives who are in love. It does not matter if you don't like the kind of love, it is not your right to chose. If you don't like it don't marry a gay. Further, if you don't like it find a church that won't marry them. But from a governance stand point, if a church is willing to marry same sex couples (and there are plenty that will) then the you, me, the government nor anyone else has the right to tell them not to.

5 months ago: The point is, I really don't care.

Even if laws were passed to allow siblings who fall in love to marry and have children that would still be abnormal. Same issue with same sex couples. Still a perversion.

Your code of morality has no bearing on my outlook, just as mine apparently has no bearing on yours. If the laws were changed one way or another regarding the legal issues tomorrow, I am sure that it would not change your outlook one iota. Mine neither.

Both unions are still counted as sick, but others can believe what they like. That's their prerogative.

I would not fight to keep siblings from marrying either. They can do what they want. But I won't roll over on the issue either.

I would simply hope the female has her tubes tied or the man gets a vasectomy because I would not want the kids to pay the price for their moral depravity.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Right, except that I'm not telling you that you are wrong to have those opinions, I'm telling you that you don't have the right to create a law based on them.

Just because you THINK it's abnormal does not make it factually abnormal for gay people to love each other.
5 months ago: PH,

If you look at the landscape of the World, mostly "Christian" nations allow gay marriage or union... you will see most atheistic countries either don't recognize, disallow or penalize those homosexual relationships...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_s...

...you actually find "Christian" nations more tolerant.
5 months ago: "you don't have the right to create a law based on them. " Who does?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: You are making an assessment based on the fact that the vast majority of the Western Developed world recognizes and allows same sex marriage. You also ignore that these countries are typically extremely secular. The fact that the majority of the populations of the developed world are Christian is not related to the fact that they are also secular and more accepting of gay couples/have a better understanding of the definition of liberty.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Why would you want someone opposed to gay marriage to be forced to endure seeing gays openly expressing their love in public, yet you do not feel that someone expressing their love for God has the same right.

Would that be a double standard?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: I was still waiting for a response here too. It looks like there should be liberty for all. except Christians.

PH "....If you want to praise Jesus, fine, do it in your home or church, but not in my face..."

PH "...in a society where liberty is supposed to be paramount, stripping that away from people because they are different than you is wrong and hateful..."
5 months ago: That's a great point.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Ok, I think we have sort of gone past each other here.

I think that people should have the right to celebrate/worship whatever/whoever they want no matter what their religion is. This celebration should be held in private life, i.e. The Federal and State (See the 14th Amendment) are barred from endorsing/prohibiting the exercise of a religion. Therefore, when people (whether they be Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim or whatever else) propose laws to prevent people from getting married based on a sexual orientation that they feel is immoral due to their religious beliefs, those laws are un-Constitutional.

On a personal level, I have no issue with people celebrating their religion, I don't like people on the train trying to tell me that they are right and I am wrong and that if I don't start agreeing with them I am going to hell...
5 months ago: PH,

You say... "I think that people should have the right to celebrate/worship whatever/whoever they want no matter what their religion is. This celebration should be held in private life" ...does that include "PRIDE" parades?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Is the Pride Parade a government endorsement of religion???
5 months ago: PH,

The same Constitution protects religion to orientation... and when your Comander in Chief endorses and forces Homosexuality on the public with Taxpayer's money, giving them preferential treatment... what do you think???
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: The Constitution does not protect nor extend the right to discriminate to a religious group in terms of Governance (i.e. Laws cannot discriminate because of religious preference, however your Church certainly could).

I'm not sure that extending liberty to all human's who are citizens of the United States (and therefore protected by the Constitution) is the same as an endorsement. Are you arguing that by allowing gay people to get married that somehow taxpayers are paying for the wedding??? What is preferential about giving gay people the same liberty that non gay people have? Why should I get special treatment for not being gay while my gay friends are stripped of their liberty because of religious zealotry?
5 months ago: PH,

When a nation has to indoctrinate a generation to accept something that is not natural, that falls under the "faith" category. I like you, don't mind or care what an individual believes in private as long as the rest of the populous isn't forced to go along with it.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: It's not unnatural. In fact homosexual relationships have been observed in nature forever. It is not unnatural for a human to love another. It is a basic human right, the Constitution of the United States ensures that all men (people) were created equal. Your vendetta against homosexuality is based on a fairy tale that you chose to live your life by. It is not the feeling of the larger populous. It is not your right to govern based on that religion. There are many religious people and even organizations and churches that embrace and fight for gay rights to marry and enjoy their lives together. There are a few people who are blinded by hatred that champion the idea that the government should tell people who they may love and who they may marry. Those people are especially offensive, and often attempt to mutate the Constitution to meet their sick and hateful ideals.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "homosexual relationships have been observed in nature forever. "

...and so have polygamous, incestuous, and or pedophile relationships occurred in nature forever. Are you ready to pull the trigger on legalizing these normal, natural relationships too?

My question: Why is it ok for you to proselytize to me about gay rights, and it's not ok for me to tell you about Jesus?

Why is ok for gays people to prance half naked, performing debaucheries on a PUBLICLY OWNED street, (or even just holding hands and kissing) to the dismay of those that think it is wrong, but a quiet, respectful Nativity Scene in front of a church is objected to?


Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: You can tell me about jesus all you want...you CANNOT make laws based on those beliefs. Gay people are human beings, if they are citizens of the United States then they are protected by the Constitution (i.e. Protected from your oppressive religious views).

As for the holding hands and kissing/parading thing...you can turn around/not watch it...if a law is passed based on your oppressive religious zealotry they cannot get away from that. That is why the Constitution prevents the Federal and State governments from endorsing a specific religion (again..see the 14th amendment).

I do not care 1 little bit if there is a nativity scene in front of a Church...I care A LOT if it's in my state capitol building.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: What's the difference between state funded road and a state funded building? The anti- discrimination law pretty much expands separation of Church and State to Race, gender, creed and national origin as well.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: As far as the Nativity, can't you just look away as well? Or does it offend you so deeply that you cannot bear just knowing that it is there?
5 months ago: What beliefs do you base laws on?

How's this - "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed.."

Or -

"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions."

Maybe the Supreme Judge of the World has a say in government you suppose?

I'm pretty sure that's why there are representative STONE TABLETS adorning the walls and doors of the Supreme Court numbered 1-10.

It's really not hard to connect the dots. Some just don't like the picture it makes.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: This is beyond the point of looking away. If the nativity scene is put up by an independent group in the state capitol building, and other groups (Jews, Atheists, FlyingSpaghetti Monsterists, Hindus etc, etc) are allowed to also post displays, and the displays are funded privately then sure they can go up in the state capitol building. BUT if they are funded by the government then we have crossed into UnConstitutional areas.

If a state or the federal government were to pay to put up a nativity scene and barred other groups from displaying things as well...then yes...I would be very offended.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "I'm pretty sure that's why there are representative STONE TABLETS adorning the walls and doors of the Supreme Court numbered 1-10.
It's really not hard to connect the dots. Some just don't like the picture it makes."

~That would be you sir...The 1-10 represents the Bill of Rights (The First 10 amendments to the Constitution). Ask any historian, ask the builder, ask the designer, ask the Supreme Court Justices...no matter what you want to believe...that is what they are.
5 months ago: So the Bill of Rights are what should bee seen as being represented on the Stone Tablets????

http://www.christianindex.org/569.tenmos...

So Moses is holding up the Bill of Rights as well? Suuuurrrreeeee...

Also, The Declaration of Independence speake to the Supreme Judge. Is that Judge who gave us the Bill of Rights?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: "So the Bill of Rights are what should bee seen as being represented on the Stone Tablets????"

~YES! They are the foundation of our Country....are you kidding me???

The Declaration of Independence, since when was that a Governing Document...Oh wait...IT'S NOT! The Constitution is the governing document of the United States of America. I bet you 1 millions dollars that you cannot find the words Christian or Jesus in the Constitution.

Moses is included as a historical lawgiver, not as a religious figure. Mohammad is also up there...are we a Muslim nation too??
5 months ago: Moses is depicted in the center. He is is also depicted at various locations throughout the Supreme Court building unlike the others.

"We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

James Madison - the Father of our Constitution.

Fact is, the government of the United States of America has always had the utmost and highest respect for the 10 Commandments. Only a fool would be blind not to see the value in them. They are the basis for any sane and livable civilization.

The government of that day never tried to keep them hidden. They were seen as critical. Direct from the Supreme Judge. I don't see why some folks are so threatened by them unless they simply relish in breaking them.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Mohammad and many other figures are seen throughout the Supreme Court. They were included as the great lawgivers of history.

Several of the "10 Commandments" are part of our society in terms of laws: Murder, Theft, Purjury. These are not inherently religious.

Again, I will give you 1 million dollars if you find the words "Christian" or "Jesus" in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Only a full is blinded by religion so much that they cannot recognize FACT. The numerals in and on the Supreme Court are representations of the Bill of Rights...Period...it is a FACT.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
~Thomas Jefferson

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
~Treaty of Tripoli

"Strongly guarded is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States."
~Madison

"...Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it."
~Thomas Jefferson

Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Fool*

My autocorrect is stupid sometimes
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "...If the nativity scene is put up by an independent group in the state capitol building...and the displays are funded privately then sure they can go up in the state capitol building...."

Well good on you. That's very tolerant. The Freedom From Religion Foundation, however, sees things differently, as do many other atheists. http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/local/wabas...

They say that having a religious themed display as the center and focal point of any public property, regardless of who paid for it, is endorsing a particular religion.

The first Amendment does not put religion on any different footing than that of any of the other inalienable rights. If having a religious display on public property is taboo because it indicates the government is choosing a side, then having a pro choice rally on the courthouse steps will be unconstitutional. And who would be silly enough to say that if the KKK holds a rally on the public square, it means the government is endorsing the KKK? Or homosexuality?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Right, But I'm not part of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. I have always stated that I attempt to take pragmatic stances on issues.

If the state isn't funding the display, and if they are fair to all groups who wish to have a display (by fair I mean that the requirements to be allowed to have a display are the same to all groups) then there is no way it could be construed as an unConstitutional endorsement of religion.
5 months ago: Adolph Weinman, is the designer. I challenge you to find anything unquestioningly written or quoted directly by him that states that those tablets represent the Bill of Rights. Prove it.

Throughout history the 10 Commandments have always been symbolically displayed on two stone tablets. This is the obvious representation to anyone other than one with an anti-religious bias or those who are adept at revisionist history.

So let's see it. Direct quote, authentic letter or any specific proof directly from Mr. Weinman.

The Supreme Court is just one example and you and some other folks can't even get over that.

All you really need to do is take a visit to the nation's capital. That should put this issue to rest. Religious symbolism and quotes are all over the place. There are some knuckleheads tryinmg to get them removed, but that will never change that fact that they exist.

For example, a large statue of Moses holding the Ten Commandments, alongside a statue of the Apostle Paul, has overlooked the rotunda of the Library of Congress' Jefferson Building since 1897. And the Jefferson Building's Great Reading Room contains a sculpture of a woman beside the Ten Commandments with a quote above her from the Old Testament (Micah 6:8). A medallion with two tablets depicting the Ten Commandments decorates the floor of the National Archives. Inside the Department of Justice, a statue entitled "The Spirit of Law" has two tablets representing the Ten Commandments lying at its feet. In front of the Ronald Reagan Building is another sculpture that includes a depiction of the Ten Commandments. So too a 24-foot-tall sculpture, depicting, among other things, the Ten Commandments and a cross, stands outside the federal courthouse that houses both the Court of Appeals and the District Court for the District of Columbia. Moses is also prominently featured in the Chamber of the United States House of Representatives. Also, as far as I know, Congress still opens in prayer. These are just some examples. How about that?

There is a big difference between the separation of church and state versus the separation of government from God. Divine providence was always understood by this nation's founders. They acknowledged the Supreme Judge. They even understood the FACT that any rights we do have are provided by our Creator. Thank you.

5 months ago: Also, I never stated or even implied that the United States was founded on the Christian religion. That's a rock that is stuck in your craw not mine.

What I have stated and proven is that the US government has ALWAYS acknowledged God. Period.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Here ya go man:

A letter written BY WEINMAN, it is in the archives of the Supreme Court of the United States, I found a several links to the letter, below is the copy:

http://tinyurl.com/cekdmjc

I am writing the archives for confirmation today.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/east&westwalls.pdf
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: There you have a letter by Weinman and documentation from the supreme courts own records and website.

I'm sure you will find some fault in this, but I have proven beyond any doubt and thought to the contrary that those tablets CLEARLY represent the Bill of Rights...PERIOD.
5 months ago: I will check it out. What about the rest of my post?
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Moses is present in several spots, I will concede this point.

I will argue as I have all along, that according to many fine historians and government documentation that he is present as a lawgiver not a religious figure.

Once again: the National Archives lists the numbers 1-10...no text of the commandments, again, ask any historian...the numbers in the Archives represent the Bill of Rights.

Please bear in mind: Weinman was the sculptor of many of these pieces...and stated several times that the numbers represent the Bill of Rights (the foundation of our nation). Perhaps it is not me who is trying to ignore religious symbolism, but you trying to find it where it simply does not exist. By your logic the first 10 pages of most of my older books and prologues of most of my newer ones would also be representative of the 10 commandments.

The government is run by people. Most of those people are Christian. Most of the right wingers are evangelical Christians. Clearly you cannot take the god out of them.

As for Prayers in Congress, you are correct. I will reply with a quote by James Madison who felt that the practice was horribly wrong:

"Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In the strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation?"
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: On the south wall, Moses is holding the Ten Commandments. They represent the Ten Commandments. King Solomon of the Old Testament joins him.

On the north wall Mohammed is holding a copy of the Qu'ran.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/north&...
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I already stated that those people were depicted in the other sculptures in a post at somepoint in this chain. They are there as lawgivers, not religious figures. That is why all of them are present.

Also, as I said the large tablets that are present represent the Bill of Rights.
Content Removed by Huey Newton
5 months ago: Moses holds the laws given to him by God.

He is representative of the greatest lawgiver humankind has ever known as witnessed to by the government of the United States of America. That is why he has a position of such monumental prominence in the houses of the US Government and in the nation's capital.

It is a shame that there are those who would deny that heritage and attempt to destroy it rather than simply embrace it and accept the fact.

I know some don't like it, but that's too bad. It is the way this nation was founded and it's the way that it still is. America has NEVER been a secular nation. That's a fact. Some like to pretend that it is, but it is not.

To try and separate Moses from religion or Moses from God's Law is like trying to get water without the wet. I cannot be done.

I re-iterate:

There is a big difference between the separation of church and state versus the separation of government from God. Divine providence was always understood by this nation's founders. They acknowledged the Supreme Judge. They even understood the FACT that any rights we do have are provided by our Creator.

Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Again, I am aware of Moses' position. I would say that the Muslims would argue with you that their interpretation of the God of Abraham is accurate and that he is therefore the greatest lawgiver in history. Mohammad is present in the sculptures, are we a Muslim nation? Perhaps the Muslim interpretation of God is the one who's laws we should follow?

America is a secular nation, your assertion to the contrary is completely unfounded. Secular, in terms of political philosophy is the removal of religion from law making. We have that here. Our founding fathers strongly desired for religion to not be part of governance. Think honestly for a second. This country was founded/framed by a group largely composed of Deists, who fled their homes in Europe to escape religious oppression, the separation of the church from the state was paramount to their goals.

I have already agreed with you that individuals who make up government are largely Christian (not entirely though). The right wing especially struggles to contain their faith, they often try to govern based on the "morality" instilled in them by their pastors/preachers/priests. For those who are "men of God" you clearly cannot remove that from an individual. The Constitution simply mandates that we remove it from lawmaking.

Do you yet concede that the larger tablets (not the smaller ones in the wall sculptures) but the ones on the doors and floor are in fact Representative of the Bill of Rights???
5 months ago: Nope. Still need to check it out. Please send me another link. The tinyurl one is not loading for me. Thx.

Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: The supreme court link provides the same information. It is clearly written in that information packet that they represent the Bill of Rights.

Here is the link to the letter again as well.

http://tinyurl.com/cekdmjc
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: This is purported to be from the 1975 US Supreme Court Handbook.

http://www.christianheritagemins.org/art...

In the highlighted areas, it says the "Tableaus" are representative of the Ten Commandments, situated strategically between the "Majesty of Law" and the "Power of Government".
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I've conceded that the smaller sculptures featuring the "great lawgivers" feature the 10 commandments. Moses was a great lawgiver...his laws were given by the 10 commandments, of course in that sculpture they are present. Much like in the same type of sculpture is Mohammad holding the Quran.

I have clearly demonstrated with a letter from the designer and sculptor and in the official information packet of the Supreme Court that the numerals present outside of these small sculptures are meant to represent the Bill of Rights, the foundation of our country (which happen to be the first 10 amendments).
Content Removed by Huey Newton
5 months ago: That url is not working for me. Is the letter an original and is it signed by him? You said you had several links anyway, so please provide another.

Also, the Supreme Court website can clearly have modified the intent of what the tablets truly represent to suite their current position or stance, so scratch that.

In the long run however, there is still a bigger picture to consider.

There are religious symbols, scriptures, artwork all over the Government properties of DC. That's a fact.

Bottom line is why is it unconstitutional to have the 10 Commandments prominently displayed in or on the property of any courthouse or government property other than that of the Supreme Court? That's just a ludicrous position to take.

http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/fede...

The whole controversy is a crock that is being pushed by folks who are still trying to separate the water from the wet. Fortunately, not everyone is that gullible.

God has always been involved in the minds of the founders of this country. That needs to be understood. Where they did not want the federal government to mandate a national religion, they certainly did not want the people to see the country as anything other than ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

That's why we have reference to God in the Washington Monument, the Capitol, and the Lincoln Memorial, God's name mentioned at the National Archives, Senate and House Office Buildings, the U.S. Supreme Court, the Jefferson Memorial, and the Library of Congress.

Just take the Lincoln Memorial for example, words like "Nation Under God", "Bible" and "Pray" inscribed everywhere in the building stones.

Take a walk through the Rotunda of the capital and there are four paintings hanging on the wall. In those four paintings, you have two prayer meetings, a Bible study, and a baptism.

If you try to get any of those things done on government property today and you will end up in a fire fight or in litigation up to your eyeballs. Obviously, that's not the way it was nor is it the way it was ever intended to be.

Fuss about the details but the founders never sought to kick God out of the government, nor did they intend for this nation to deny the place of Divine Providence in its continuance.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: As I said. Your ability to be rational is destroyed by your desire to have "god" involved in everything.

The Supreme Court has clearly stated in its documents that the tablets (other than the one present in the "lawgivers" sculpture represent the Bill of Rights. How is this so hard for you to comprehend? Why in the world would the Bill of Rights not be represented in the Supreme Court...it is the foundation for the laws and the basis of this nation. Your are grasping at straws.

Obviously Moses is holding the 10 commandments in the sculpture of the "lawgivers" as they were key to his lawgiving...Mohammad is holding the Quran...are we a Muslim nation too then? Perhaps "under god" means the Muslim interpretation of the God of Abraham???? Seriously...use a little rationality.

I have already CONCEDED the point that since the majority of the human beings involved in government believe in God that you certainly cannot take it "out of them". That is not the same as endorsing a religion.

FURTHER: As for the references to god around various buildings in D.C. Let me point out to you that those buildings were built, mostly, before supreme court precedence ruled that capitol buildings are not to specifically endorse any religion. These buildings in DC are also protected as national landmarks. They are not going to tear down every building in DC to fix this issue. It is a grandfathered issue for these buildings.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: You're*
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: The 1975 Supreme Court Handbook that I cited said something entirely different from the one you are quoting.

I am loathe to use a reference with the word Christian in the title, because I know it will be instantly discounted by some. But here is an article dealing with "The rewriting of America's History", from which I got the image of the Supreme Court handbook that states that the stone tablets are indeed representations of the Ten Commandments.

It says the Ten Commandments are symbolically placed between the figure representing Law and the and the figure representing Government.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "....those buildings were built, mostly, before supreme court precedence ruled that capitol buildings are not to specifically endorse any religion...."

This is a "Gotcha" moment.

So, the Founding Fathers approved the construction of buildings which have been recently ruled unacceptable. And the Supreme Court is judicially deciding the Founders were wrong.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: I forgot to put the link to the article.

http://www.christianheritagemins.org/art...
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Funny thing about the depiction of Moses on the Supreme Court building. Although the text on the tablet is written in Hebrew, his beard obscures most of the text, so it appears, instead of saying "Thou shalt not kill", it just shows "kill". It also would appear, to anyone who can read Hebrew and isn't familiar with the commandments, that it commands you to steal and commit adultery as well.

Concerning the depiction of Mohammed, it was requested by the Muslim world to have that removed, as it is a disrespect to portray him. When declined, it sparked protests worldwide.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: The first Seal of the United States, designed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson by a Resolution of Congress, shows Moses, stretching his hand over the Red Sea, causing it to overwhelm Pharaoh. Above is the pillar of fire and the cloud, expressive of Divine presence and command.


First US Motto: Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

http://www.christianheritagemins.org/art...

That sounds like a country that was founded on religious principals. Or....does it sound like a country that used religion to galvanize the ignorant superstitious morons they wished to use to their own purposes?
5 months ago: "As I said. Your ability to be rational is destroyed by your desire to have "god" involved in everything."

Dudage, I don't look for God where He is not, but I do embrace Him where He is.

You should try it sometime.

This Nation's founders obviously did.
5 months ago: Good stuff OOTB.

I re-iterate - This whole controversy is a crock. A crock promulgated by liars and historical revisionists who want to re-brand America.

There was NEVER intended to be a separation of this government from God in this nation. NEVER. This FACT is attested to by the archives, the symbols and the architecture that cover this nation's capital and as well as other government buildings.

The buildings and the archives would literally have to be destroyed to get the acknowledgement of God out of this government. And unfortunately, I'm sure there are plenty of folks out there that would like to do just that. Fortunatley there are plenty of other folks who will NEVER allow that to happen.

There is an evil agenda that is being pushed by folks who are still trying to separate the water from the wet. It's an all out war in an attempt to deny the principals that this government was built on and subvert and pervert it to their own "politically correct" ideas and ends. Not on my watch.

Thank God, not everyone is gullible enough to fall for that crap.

This has NEVER been a secular nation. By secular, I mean a nation that would disregard or marginalize the importance of acknowledging the providential role of the Almighty in the nation's founding and continuance.

Religion and religious freedom has ALWAYS played an important role in government here. Always.

I know that there are some that can't stand that FACT and are fighting tooth and nail to revise history, but that is not going to work. There are too many people who are not going to let that heritage go down the tubes. Nor should they.

The fact that there is a fight in the first place tells any rational and thinking person that something has gone wrong and that there are forces at work here that are not supportive of the founders original intent and are unashamedly looking destroy what the founders have so magnificently built rather than perpetuate it its original purpose.

God has ALWAYS been involved in the minds of the founders and builders of this nation. That needs to be understood. Where they DID NOT want the federal government to mandate a specific national religion, they certainly DID NOT want the people to see this country as anything other than ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

End of story.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: You are no longer arguing a point. I have already agreed with you that it was not an intention to remove god from people (or government (which is run by people)). The point is that the United States is not a Christian nation by law. The majority of the founders were Deists anyways. More importantly they had just left a country that was ruled by the church. Their intention was to remove organized religion from government.

Your statement about the conditions of the United States as a Secular nation is just flat out wrong. The word Secular has a very clear definition. It is a condition where religion is removed from governance. The United States has been/always will be a Secular nation. We are not ruled religiously, we have the rule of law. The Constitution very clearly outlines, and the founders in their own writings were very clear about the fact that the United States are to be Secular. This is one of the pesky FACTS that you don't like.

Again, I'm not arguing with you that God was/is to be removed from people or government, it cannot be, the government is run by people, most of those people believe in god. Religion is, however, Constitutionally removed from Government. End of Story
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: This is good. In my opinion, we are all basically arguing in favor of the same points. I've learned some things, and I'm sure the rest of us have also. This is why I do RantRave instead of CoD or WoW. O_o
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: Hey now, I play WoW...
5 months ago: This has been fun.
5 months ago: WoW - Have never played...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqJE5TH5j...

Love this commercial though.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: That one is good, have you seen the William Shatner one? Chuck Norris is pretty good one too.

It is a very fun game if you are into that sort of story line.
5 months ago: Yes. I've seen the Norris one recently. It's way cool. Seems like that guy won't age. Looks good in CGI form.

You are fun to debate with. Neither one of us blew a gasket either.

Hope that bug that was attacking over the weekend has gone away.
Perfect Horizon
Perfect Horizon
Chicago, IL
5 months ago: I thought this was a very nice debate/discussion. I also feel that we at the very least reached some common ground over the course of it.

I am feeling much better, thank you.
5 months ago: You guys ROCK... (with real rocks!)
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: "...1. When a town puts up a nativity scene on public property...how is that not an endorsement of a particular religion? ..."

Towns and States have every right to endorse any religion they choose. The Constitution expressly forbids the Federal Government from becoming involved.

"...The point of the Constitution in regards to religion is that the government will not tell you what to worship, nor will it tell you that you are not allowed to worship in private. "

You left out one word. Your sentence should have read..."in regards to religion is that the FEDERAL government will not...."

There's your local democracy for you. The will of the many being forced on the few.

"...If you want to praise Jesus, fine, do it in your home or church, but not in my face or on public property that I own...."

Now, how would you like it if you were told "If you want to NOT worship God, fine, do it in private, but as long as you are on public property, you dang sure better act like you are worshiping! Or Else!!!!"

That's what the people of Egypt are facing. Thanks be to God that here in this country, so far, the Federal Government is not allowed to tell you where and when you can worship. Is prayer in public schools illegal? Not no, but emphatically no! My child's public Local/ State/and Federally funded school regularly and publicly prays together. To God!! There is absolutely nothing the Federal Government can do about it.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
Content Removed by RantRave
5 months ago: Perfect Horizon,

I have to say you are doing a great job of debating this issue, no body is loosing their cool and a lot of information is reaching the reader... it's too bad that other writers who in the past who share your "take" aren't here to stand with you.... not like you need their help !:]

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.