Roman Catholic Seminarian turned Muslim...My experiences.

You're all idiots if you think engaging with a Muslim will get you actual truthful answers.

Islam allows their minions to lie about anything;
to object and or deny any actions of their fellow terrorist, so long as they hold their "true intentions" in their heart.

"I am not here to apostlytize."
Lie #1.

Carry on sheep.

...
Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct except for ''XYZ'' and ''xyz'' interpretations are wrong....it actually went down like this....

a long intro I know ...again I make no apology. I am merely sharing why I am muslim.

...
The most demented person of all was Muhammad (MHBEIHF) who taught his thieving murdering band to slit the throats of any PEOPLE they wanted to rape and pillage in their efforts to "enjoy" life. So Muhammad took his band of thieves to the Jewish town of Medina, killed all of the men of one Jewish tribe, raped their women and sold their children into slavery. AND TO THINK HE BOASTED OF IT, AND IT IS WRITTEN DOWN IN THE ISLAMIC HOLY HADITHS.

I spent 6 years studying in college to become a Roman Catholic priest....History Archeaology Philosophy etc...I am a convert to Islam.

I make no apology. I am not here to apostlytize.

I am going to show how I came to this ...and allow others to see some of my thoughts in this regard as requested by others here on GLP.

++++I reserve the right to ignore people on this thread due to the personal nature of it.+++++

I am posting my thoughts for GLP to share and discuss not for me to Lead this thread.

first the basics....

Why believe in a god in the first place?
cosmological teleological ontological proofs notwithstanding....Mathematics in Rene descartes 7 days meditations takes geometry from ''origin'' (0,0,0) in an effort to deduce from God a world.....Geometry works today. aether Physics quantum mechanics too many others to list...

Well whats God like then if he exists?
Omnibenevolent Omniscient Omnipotent etc...these are Necessary Qualities to ascribe to a God by DEFINITION.....ie it is a tautology to define God as anything else.

Well then I started to discern the various religions based upon my understandings of the above....
example:
Norse have Thor and Odin amongst other Gods....the essence being a split of power = not Omnipotent....thus fail.

worship of the Sun
sun = urning plasma etc...=not Omniscient= fail

and proceeded with more and more mythos and religions until to my satisfaction had the three Abrahamic ones.

I Judaism
II Christianity
III Islam

First to christianity....
For 1500 years there was no differentiation (only after Martin Luther wrote his theses) in OFFICIAL church doctorine.

After the council of Nicea (and consequently the edict of milan that made christianity the official religion of rome) was there a consensus in belief....these occured around the year 300

During the deliberations the apocrypha were denoted and summarily exiled from the bible(yes parts of the bible were debated and removed).

this lead to differing interpretations of theology which persist to today. ....ie 2nd maccabbees...purgatory issue.''holy thought to pray for the dead''...etc.

in essence a disagreement over what should be in the bible and thus belief

Judaism follows the Torah
Which is itself written in various form EJP (elohist yawhist priestly) versions...during the abylonian captivity.
Essentially the jews copied Sumerian stories and attributed the stories to ''judaic'' essences..

example
Noahs flood account= Epic story of Gilgamesh which is much older and was in the area written on the ziggurat that the jews were captured in....
Moses=Sargon1st parallels possibly etc.
even the story of david slaying goliath goliath= Elhanan, the son of Jaareoregim slew goliath...David served the phillistines against the israelites.
the point is the stories have been manipulated to serve theological ends....

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct except for ''XYZ'' and ''xyz'' interpretations are wrong....it actually went down like this....

a long intro I know ...again I make no apology. I am merely sharing why I am muslim. Judging from the fact that thousands of peoeople have read my threads I guess there is at least one ''good muslim''....I wish GLP would end its tirade of hate against Islam. I wish you all well.God bless us all.

ED, and what of the Cathars?

ED, and what of the Cathars?

what of them?....?

ED, and what of the Cathars?

what of them?....?


What is your opinion on the Cathars and the divine feminine?

ED, and what of the Cathars?

what of them?....?


What is your opinion on the Cathars and the divine feminine?

More specifically on the Divine Feminine, Magna Mater of the Near East and Greco-Roman worlds. You know the entities known as Isis, Nut, and Maat in Egypt; Ishtar, Astarte, and Lilith in the Fertile Crescent; Demeter, Kore, and Hera in Greece; and Atargatis, Ceres, and Cybele in Rome.

ED, and what of the Cathars?

what of them?....?


What is your opinion on the Cathars and the divine feminine?

More specifically on the Divine Feminine, Magna Mater of the Near East and Greco-Roman worlds. You know the entities known as Isis, Nut, and Maat in Egypt; Ishtar, Astarte, and Lilith in the Fertile Crescent; Demeter, Kore, and Hera in Greece; and Atargatis, Ceres, and Cybele in Rome.

I believe the feminine has been subjugated in to the masculine in theology for millenia. I think that God is not an anthropomorphic ideaological sentiment and cannot be expressed in terms of masculine and feminine but is rather beyond both. As to the specifics well the ones you listed in my opinion only could be manifestations of nephilim or demons or angels ...In reality I do not have an answer...yet. I am still learning.

ED, and what of the Cathars?

what of them?....?


What is your opinion on the Cathars and the divine feminine?

More specifically on the Divine Feminine, Magna Mater of the Near East and Greco-Roman worlds. You know the entities known as Isis, Nut, and Maat in Egypt; Ishtar, Astarte, and Lilith in the Fertile Crescent; Demeter, Kore, and Hera in Greece; and Atargatis, Ceres, and Cybele in Rome.

I believe the feminine has been subjugated in to the masculine in theology for millenia. I think that God is not an anthropomorphic ideaological sentiment and cannot be expressed in terms of masculine and feminine but is rather beyond both. As to the specifics well the ones you listed in my opinion only could be manifestations of nephilim or demons or angels ...In reality I do not have an answer...yet. I am still learning.


So telling your first sentence. Explain how you think it is your statement and Sharia law coincide? Obviously your statement has conflicting thoughts and beliefs with your newfound religion, yes?

<snip>

sharia law=interpretation of the Quran. which is debatable..

<snip>

sharia law=interpretation of the Quran. which is debatable..

It is interesting that you already had a superstitious predisposition, as manifested by you being a seminarian. I assume that this was as a result of inherited attitudes from your parents. It is fairly natural when becoming dissatisfied with one system of superstition to substitute another, rather than question the need for communal superstition at all. At this particular time when Roman Catholicism is dying as a result of public knowledge of its sexual dysfunction, you have jumped ship to a cult system that allows you to express your youthful sexuality in a somewhat more healthy way. You will undoubtedly be happier about that.

You noted something interesting in your comment above, about Sharia Law. You say this is interpretation, and is debatable. If this is so then the guidelines cannot be called "law". To be "Law" the guidelines must be codified so that all reasonable people reading them will tend to understand the same thing. Islam in general falls down when compared to other legal and social systems because of a lack of codification. As a person experience in western thinking, do you have any plans to rectify this it by contributing to a less debatable system of codified law that most people can agree on?

please copy a link to the hadith that states what you say.

joe neubarth thankyou for one starring and writing ''dantes is isane'' on multiple of my threads...as you can see from the reaction of the readers I do not think it has had your desired outcome.

please copy a link to the hadith that states what you say.

Dawud
Book 1, Number 0313:

Narrated Woman of Banu Ghifar:

Umayyah, daughter of AbusSalt, quoted a certain woman of Banu Ghifar, whose name was mentioned to me, as saying: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) made me ride behind him on the rear of the camel saddle. By Allah, the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) got down in the morning. He made his camel kneel down and I came down from the back of his saddle. There was a mark of blood on it (saddle) and that was the first menstruation that I had. I stuck to the camel and felt ashamed.

When the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) saw what had happened to me and saw the blood, he said: Perhaps you are menstruating.

I said: Yes. He then said: Set yourself right (i.e. tie some cloth to prevent bleeding), then take a vessel of water and put some salt in it, and then wash the blood from the back of the saddle, and then return to your mount. When the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) conquered Khaybar, he gave us a portion of the booty. Whenever the woman became purified from her menses, she would put salt in water. And when she died, she left a will to put salt in the water for washing her (after death).

<snip>


You noted something interesting in your comment above, about Sharia Law. You say this is interpretation, and is debatable. If this is so then the guidelines cannot be called "law". To be "Law" the guidelines must be codified so that all reasonable people reading them will tend to understand the same thing. Islam in general falls down when compared to other legal and social systems because of a lack of codification. As a person experience in western thinking, do you have any plans to rectify this it by contributing to a less debatable system of codified law that most people can agree on?
------------------
the problem with your predicated axiom is that I am ABLE to help codify the law...I am not. I work as a EMT...who would listen to me? I am not Imam. There are societal Necessary qualities in order to be taken seriously. My vocation in life is different. I am not the only western Muslim.

<snip>


You noted something interesting in your comment above, about Sharia Law. You say this is interpretation, and is debatable. If this is so then the guidelines cannot be called "law". To be "Law" the guidelines must be codified so that all reasonable people reading them will tend to understand the same thing. Islam in general falls down when compared to other legal and social systems because of a lack of codification. As a person experience in western thinking, do you have any plans to rectify this it by contributing to a less debatable system of codified law that most people can agree on?
------------------
the problem with your predicated axiom is that I am ABLE to help codify the law...I am not. I work as a EMT...who would listen to me? I am not Imam. There are societal Necessary qualities in order to be taken seriously. My vocation in life is different. I am not the only western Muslim.

You appear to have misread. I did not question whether you were capable, I observed that the problem was lack of codification and asked if you intended to assist in rectifying this problem. Saying that you are not an Imam, is passing the buck. In your work, you observe real life. You have accepted a system with legal implications in that real life. You are clearly intelligent and thoughtful. Intelligent and thoughtful people do not accept systems voluntarily, unless they agree with them. You are uniquely well positioned to contribute to the idea of codification. This is something you can do by writing out codification, then discussing the validity of points with people such as your Imam and other members of your community.

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct .

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct .


...which leads you back to the Bible, where you began.

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct .


...which leads you back to the Bible, where you began.

....correct with a different understanding and interpretation and extrapolation.

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct .


...which leads you back to the Bible, where you began.

....correct with a different understanding and interpretation and extrapolation.


so in effect you are a musloistian.

Which leads to Islam which says in Essence The bible is correct .


...which leads you back to the Bible, where you began.

....correct with a different understanding and interpretation and extrapolation.


so in effect you are a musloistian.

Muslims believe in the prophets that came before. Hence an understanding of the bible is a good thing. I am not a musloistian I am a Muslim. I believe in the God of Abraham. I do not believe christ was God.