Proof of god is a moral question. Do you see the morals shown for god as good or evil?

Thanks, DL - Good post.

You perceive 'God' as all 'Good' - And 'Demiurge' as all 'Evil'?

I perceive 'Ego' God as all good and all evil.
The true God/Source aligns when 'Ego' 'Good and bad' leaves the building.
Gnossos helped me arrive at that 'perception'.

Ego has a duality - God/source does not.

namaste (Not a Jewish saying)

I said this before that everything such as Hell and Heaven can be proved. Without the existence of hell or heaven we can't define what is good and what is bad. I have posted in some other thread to giving a simple example (link below) and I want to see how you prove that wrong.

https://able2know.org/topic/515579-3#post-6860009

I also gave some scenarios in reply to your this thread and questioned how you can give justice to acts of Hitler who killed millions in this world?

Look forward to your intellectual reasoning.

Nobody is arguing - We are sharing insights via the art of conversation.

Any more 'indoctrinated' (Programmed), generic cliques to add...?

That last was god's ego having some pay back. Kidding good buddy.

Few admit to having gained gnosis.

Can I ask you how you read this following?

1. And he said, "Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death."

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

I felt the disturbance and the marvel.

What do you read in 2. will rein over all and in 1. will never taste death?
Regards
DL

Would you feel secure if you lived where anyone could steal from anyone?

Would you like to live in a world of free people without laws?

That is why we choose to live under laws.

As to heaven and hell, they are worthless concepts unless you are speaking spiritually.

I understand that Islam respects Jesus, even as Muslims certainly do not live by his moral tenets, but let me quote him to you anyway.

John 6 ; 63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

It is impossible to have as above, so below or on earth as it is in heaven.

You are mixing the spiritual with the profane and it is impossible for them to mix as the laws in heaven cannot be the same or lead the laws on earth and in a sense, that is why a heavenly god is wasted here on earth. His laws cannot work here.

Regards
DL

How do laws get improved if you do not argue the defects out of them?

How do good laws get written if one does not look at the arguments from both sides?

Need I say more?

Regards
DL

Your first response - Perfect.

2nd - My fault - Meant 'EGO-GOD' Not 'middling' God. Missed the hyphen.
To whit, your response - Perfect.

Having read the rest of your post - Perfect.

'Gnosis', I Had 'Knossos' (GK) intermingled.
"Gnossos" is a nice looking word, though.

I'm still (Even though it matches 'my' spec, currently) scrutinising Gnosticism for imperfections.

Regards
Mark

I chose Gnostic Christianity because of it's overall ideology as the best I could find but will be pleased to have a look at anything you see as imperfections. As an esoteric ecumenist, self-criticism of my religion is a must.

The nice thing is that we can accept any worthy correction and apply it to our system of beliefs. The goal is to perfect it and as perpetual seekers of the best rules and laws to live by, we eagerly want to perfect it..

Regards
DL

Since civil laws are man-made and human has tendency to become corrupt given enough power, a lot of civil laws are unjust. I can point out many characteristics of unjust laws, such as heavy punishment for trivial activities that cause no visible life or property damage, oppressing common and poor people and favoring those rich and powerful, the use of vague language so that the law can be open to any interpretation as long as the person can hire cunning lawyers (In other words, the correct interpretation is interpretation of people with most money or power). Might is always right and I don’t think I need to give you any examples to prove my point.
Man-made law seen in its best light is with some sincerity trying to do justice. The laws are pragmatic and encourage positive action. But at the end of the day it is always trying to catch up with a society that is always fast moving. The law then becomes in some senses experimental. You hear the government announcing that it is ‘tough on crime’ when in actual fact it is not.
Divine law on the other hand comes from the One Being – Allah – that created man and his environment. Allah knows everything – including all about mankind. In this respect divine law has got things right first time. Divine laws are bound to be the best there are because they come from the Source of all creation. When you buy a product you will find with it an instruction manual which will tell you how to use it. It will tell you to do certain things and tell you to avoid certain things. You accept the advice of the manual in case you get hurt. Similarly with divine law, you accept it because it is the best law, because its source is from the best. This is a very simple analogy, which I think explains the point I am trying to make.




You probably did not read my post I used as reference and invited you to refute my evidence with logic. If you can't,the evidence is good enough to prove hell and heaven.

https://able2know.org/topic/515579-3#post-6860009

You also did not explain how you can provide justice to Hitler in this world for the crimes he committed.



It is interesting that you are using something as a source you don't even believe in. Muslims do believe in Jesus as a prophet and as Messiah but that's is something to discuss later sometime.

Quran provides a very details Divine law normally known as Shariah. I know many Americans get scared or angry when Muslims use the word "Shariah." It is just because most people in the west have zero understanding of what Shariah is. They read and listen parts of what from media and they think it is good enough for them to know what Islam and Muslims are all about. Anyways, I can talk about this in great depth but will only give few examples to make point. Please take your time to read and digest these before you reply.

Criminal law is a big contentious issue because Islam is often labelled as barbaric. Murder is referred to as a common law offence in England, but what is forgotten is that the punishment for murder has been changed by statute from the life for a life principle to one of imprisonment. The Shariah is not as barbaric as people make it out to be because it gives an alternative to taking the criminal’s life. Blood money can be accepted by the victims’ relatives in lieu of that person’s life. Moreover the Shariah encourages the possibility of pardoning that person completely. There are many options available in regard to murder. The Shariah is flexible and fair, not rigid. The Shariah is applied with the concept of mercy at its heart. The same cannot be said of the man- made legal systems. Mercy and compassion are absent from a system which is moving closer to trial by computer, as it is deemed that computers can make better judgements than man. What is happening in effect is the dehumanizing of society and justice.
On the face of it, the losing of a hand for committing theft is a terrible thing to happen to someone, but a closer examination of the fiqh (understanding of Islamic law) shows that it can only take place after firm circumstantial evidence emerges. The stolen property first of all has to be of a certain value to constitute a theft. The theft also has to be premeditated. It cannot be something that was done on the spur of the moment. The hand is not amputated if the theft took place out of genuine need. Such an example is when a famine occurs. Indeed we find in Islamic history an occurrence when Caliph Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered for the hand not to be amputated when a person was caught stealing in a time of famine. If the Zakat (Obligatory charity) is not being collected and distributed to the poor, how can they be punished for resorting to theft? Such a view of theft acts as a successful deterrent.
In many Muslim countries, like in Morocco, when the call for prayer is made, the shopping malls empty as people go to the mosques to pray. The people return to find that nothing at all has been stolen. This is a clear sign of a stable society. Compare this to USA where we have a proliferation of CCTV cameras located on every street. Persistent offenders go in and out of jail frequently causing only more and more problems for society. If the Islamic law were applied then persistent offending would end – as after two offences they could no longer commit the crime! Non-Muslim countries face a growing problem of ever increasing incarceration. You will find in Muslim lands very few people indeed who have only one hand.
Tax is another illness in modern society for which Henry VIII is responsible. He was the monarch who legalized usury in England. Up until the time of the Reformation, Christians supposedly followed the teachings of Moses and Jesus (PBUTA) which made usury illegal. Making money out of interest, getting something out of nothing. It is all based on exploitation. I know it may sound very strange since you are brought up with such mentality but let me explain further.
One of the aspects of the Reformation which very few people talk about is the fact that it was then that the Christians agreed that a reasonable amount of usury was acceptable. What the Jews had done to get round the teachings of Moses (PBUH) was to say that they wouldn’t charge interest among themselves but instead would levy it on the non-Jews. In short, “We will take them for all they’re worth.” What the Christians originally did was that they allowed the Jews to do their lending for them because, “We can’t do it ourselves.” And then with the Reformation, they said, “We will now charge interest, but only a reasonable amount.” But this opened a door to a whole host of injustices that most people today find themselves burdened with. So for example in the last hundred years or so, every country in the world has had a national debt created for it that has mushroomed and shows no immediate sign of receding. William of Orange was responsible for starting England’s national debt. The debt is structured in such a way that it is impossible to pay it off. So at the moment the UK national debt is around £1.8 trillion and continually growing. The debt of USA is close $22 trillion. This debt cannot be paid off and as a result, taxes have to be increased. That is why most election campaigns are fought on the argument over which party can tax less when the reality is that they have to increase it. Such a tactic is fighting a losing battle because the debt can only grow. This is why most people do not bother to vote – the result is the same whoever ‘wins’ the election. And the only way to deal with the problem is to follow the advice of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) who said in his final sermon on the Hajj for all usurious debts to be written off. The only thing you have to pay back is the capital. When the Muslims do this they will be strong and they will be following the law of Allah. Usury and tax is an example of where man-made law has introduced something that on the face of it seems harmless but in fact has terrible consequences. A look at the great tragedies and disasters in today’s world reveals that they are the result of institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as well as other massive national banks. These institutions are basically robbing countries that are rich in the real sense of their natural resources in the alleged ‘poor South’, which are then taken to the apparently rich ‘hi-tech North’. The entire world is involved in this great injustice “modern way of slavery.”

You are all over the map.

You see Allah's laws as moral.

I see him as a slave wanting tyrant and Islam was/is so void of moral tenets to convert with that they has to keep using jihads and murder.

My religion has tied equality to righteousness.

If Allah can't make souls all have the same value then he is not a worthy god.

Regards
DL

When discussing issues that are emotional and close to one’s heart, it is often difficult to accept what other people are saying without becoming overly emotional, upset, or angry.  Sign of a sincere person is that he/she reads/listens to the views of the opponent with respect and reply to all the points the opponent has made with logic instead of just denying them flat out.

Look at my posts and how detailed my answers are to yours questions and in reply you read the cover page and assumed you know what is inside the book? Pre-perceived notions are often wrong my friend. It is easy to deny anything but it would be nice to have some facts and logical reasoning behind your statements.




This is debatable but only if you have time to read with sincerity. Jihad which you are referring to is allowed only when people are oppressed or in self defense. Muslims ruled for centuries in the middle East and still we have millions of Coptic Christians, no one forced them to convert. Muslims have been the biggest supporters of Jews during Holocaust. Even today Islam is the fastest growing religion in West and this is without any war. Something to think about.



I already answered this before that in the sight of Allah all are equal and the best is the one who is more God conscious. If this answer is not enough, I can post more detailed one to explain my point.

I Agree.
And perfectly put.

Ok - You and I are on the same frequency - I don't agree with you calling out other (routes to Source) vile, or heretic - But otherwise, 'Diamond cuts Diamond' (metaphorically).

And - I see that, had you not directed my attention, with your 'vile' comment - This 'current' version of 'me' (Old Ident) - Would neither Exist or be inclined to respond to you, as I now do.

EVERYTHING is Awesome! Cheers, DL.

Are you well acquainted with 'Anu, Enki, Enlil (Sumer) texts and scriptures?
They are deritives of Source (physical).

So - Question: Is 'Mathew' a blatant copy of 'Mark' with added narrative that fits the OT's 'messiah' requirements?

If you've Never put two NT's side by side and read the 'equated' chapters, I understand.

Regards
Mark

Your self serving details are just that, but go ahead with these as your reference of Allah and making women equal to men.

Quran (5:6) - "And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it" Men are to rub dirt on their hands, if there is no water to purify them, following casual contact with a woman (such as shaking hands).

Quran (24:31) - Women are to lower their gaze around men, so they do not look them in the eye. (To be fair, men are told to do the same thing in the prior verse).

Quran (2:223) - "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will..." A man has dominion over his wives' bodies as he does his land. This verse is overtly sexual. There is some dispute as to whether it is referring to the practice of anal intercourse. If this is what Muhammad meant, then it would appear to contradict what he said in Muslim (8:3365).

Quran (4:3) - (Wife-to-husband ratio) "Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four" Inequality by numbers.

Quran (53:27) - "Those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names." Angels are sublime beings, and would therefore be male.

Quran (4:24) and Quran (33:50) - A man is permitted to take women as sex slaves outside of marriage. Note that the verse distinguishes wives from captives (those whom they right hand possesses).


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pa...orth-less.aspx

Sahih Bukhari (62:81) - "The Prophet said: "'The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the (women's) private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract).'" In other words, the most important thing a woman brings to marriage is between her legs.

Sahih Muslim (4:1039) - "A'isha said [to Muhammad]: 'You have made us equal to the dogs and the asses'"These are the words of Muhammad's favorite wife, complaining of the role assigned to women under Islam.Ishaq 593 - "As for Ali, he said, 'Women are plentiful, and you can easily change one for another.'"Ali was raised as a son by Muhammad. He was also the 4th caliph. This comment was made in Muhammad's presence without a word of rebuke from him.

Ishaq 593 - "From the captives of Hunayn, Allah's Messenger gave [his son-in-law] Ali a slave girl called Baytab and he gave [future Caliph] Uthman a slave girl called Zaynab and [future Caliph] Umar another." - Even in this world, Muhammad treated women like party favors, handing out enslaved women to his cronies for sex.Tabari VIII:117 - The fate of more captured farm wives, whom the Muslims distributed amongst themselves as sex slaves: "Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself... the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims."

Quran (2:228) - "and the men are a degree above them [women]"

Quran (4:11) - (Inheritance) "The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females" (see also verse 4:176). In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.
Quran (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man's testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman's, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they make more reliable witnesses.

Quran (2:228) - "and the men are a degree above them [women]"

P.S. Keep your lies as brief as possible.

Regards
DL

I have read the Sumerian and Egyptian myths that formed the basis of the Jewish Torah, yes.

I have also read the bible and more commentaries than I can shake a stick at. Prof Bart Ehrman has pretty well destroyed all notions of literal reading and he sees plagiarism and forgery in all the gospels.

I got a good laugh when I read that the powers that be decided on only 4 gospels because there are only 4 cardinal points.

So yes, I think that the writers copied and enhanced from many sources, including Chrestianity.

Regards
DL

Perfect Response!

Of All the folk I've encountered, online, You get my final post on a2k.
NEVER CEASE being YOU.

You're the best version of 'DL' (Greatest I AM) I've ever witnessed - See you in the 'Next' Life... Indeed.

432, 4+3+2=9

3x2=6

root of 9=3
3,6,9.

Tesla, epicurus, da vinci, orsini, pink floyd...
999, 666, 333.

Think!