 |
| Click for Artist's Description - Free Access on Saturdays! |
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Progressive Revelation and the Fire of Faith." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 11 May 2019. Pen & ink w/Adobe Photoshop color.
Anonymous - Do you think Muhammad should have appointed a successor?
Muhammad Rasheed - Well, the prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah (peace be upon him!) didn't appoint a successor when he had ample time to do so were he so inclined, so it's clear he expected the Muslim community to use the Word of Allah to guide themselves in right conduct and develop Qur'an-influenced best practices from it like they were adults. From that standpoint, I agree that the prophet shouldn't have appointed a successor because the people needed to walk on their own, with that clearly being their first big test as Muslims after the formal end of the Prophetic Age.
But now that we see how the whole thing went down, with the embarrassing/disgraceful bickering, in-fighting, allowing enemy infiltrators in to split the faith and invent hadith, etc., I actually wish the prophet would have asked Allah for formal guidance and chiseled the divinely-revealed standard operating procedure into the Qur'an's pages for posterity.
Matthew James - Do you believe in progressive revelation? I’m famialir with a few people who say the successor or reformation movement sent to Islam just like Jesus was sent to reform Judaism were the Sufis.
Muhammad Rasheed - I’m suspicious of the term “progressive revelation” since it implies that humans would be changing/altering the Word of God in some way. The revelation is what it is, sent to guide humankind in what is right and forbid what is wrong; it’s not our job to change it.
Our job is to do our very best to understand it, to extract the best meaning out of it and ensure we have the proper instruction to move smartly towards passing Judgment on the Last Day. To me that means we use the revealed scripture as the base level OSHA requirement standard, and make sure all of our actions are Above & Beyond what the bare minimum requirement says so that we may successfully ‘idiot-proof’ our righteousness walk. It’s not the scripture that needs the ‘progress,’ but WE do. It is we who need to progress beyond our animal lusts into the supernatural discipline needed for true spiritual growth as commanded by Allah.
Jesus wasn’t sent to reform Judaism, but to return the people to the religion of God from which they had strayed. Muhammad was anointed to return the Arab to the pure religion of Abraham that they knew long ago when their patriarch Ishmael first trained them in it, only for them to forget it later. It didn’t take long after the prophet was gone for the Muslims to taint their religion with pre-Islamic traditionalism, paganism and some of the wrong practices from the influential People of the Book that was condemned in the Qur’an, which all combined forms the root cause of the Muslim world’s ills. It isn’t reformation that their communities require, but a vicious deep cleaning.
Our job is to do our very best to understand it, to extract the best meaning out of it and ensure we have the proper instruction to move smartly towards passing Judgment on the Last Day. To me that means we use the revealed scripture as the base level OSHA requirement standard, and make sure all of our actions are Above & Beyond what the bare minimum requirement says so that we may successfully ‘idiot-proof’ our righteousness walk. It’s not the scripture that needs the ‘progress,’ but WE do. It is we who need to progress beyond our animal lusts into the supernatural discipline needed for true spiritual growth as commanded by Allah.
Jesus wasn’t sent to reform Judaism, but to return the people to the religion of God from which they had strayed. Muhammad was anointed to return the Arab to the pure religion of Abraham that they knew long ago when their patriarch Ishmael first trained them in it, only for them to forget it later. It didn’t take long after the prophet was gone for the Muslims to taint their religion with pre-Islamic traditionalism, paganism and some of the wrong practices from the influential People of the Book that was condemned in the Qur’an, which all combined forms the root cause of the Muslim world’s ills. It isn’t reformation that their communities require, but a vicious deep cleaning.
Matthew James - Progressive revalation is a spiritual concept many believe like the Sufis that God is all wise, and he has not revealed all the spiritual knowledge to mankind, but does so progressively as they’re able to for lack of better words handle it.
For example, Christians believe that the Bible contains all spiritual knowledge and basically all secrets of the universe are contained in it or explanations— “nothing else needed.”
However, John 21:25 There are MANY more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.
Also, Jesus says: John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
So it’s the idea that, there’s a lot more still yet to be revealed or taught by God and his Spiritual teachers, and the reformation movement or the effort to reform that which had either been corrupted or misunderstood was Sufism for Islam, likewise, Jesus came to deliver the Word, and reform what had become of Judaism.
'My house will be called a house of prayer.' But you are making it 'a den of robbers.'"
Just like in all religions, after the spiritual teacher that was sent dies and man takes over, corruption of the message usually follows, and added to that, it’s the idea that as the people come up in consciousness and can receive more, more then is given but all too often the people slip into fundamentalism, and feel that their teacher was the last one, which is never the case.
Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Matthew wrote: "...many believe like the Sufis that God is all wise..."
Of course. That’s why in revealing the message to us, He proclaimed that now our religion was perfected and the canon of scripture was complete. We have everything we need to progress to the next level to receive the more advanced spiritual knowledge you describe, it just won’t be here while we tarry in these decaying fleshy vessels.
2.) Matthew wrote: "...the reformation movement or the effort to reform that which had either been corrupted or misunderstood was Sufism for Islam..."
I think the primary flaw in the concept is based on post-Abrahamic humankind rarely fully embracing the Word of God as revealed, which means that if they can’t get the basics right before the messengers’ bodies were even cold in the ground, how am I reasonably expected to trust them to reform the strayed faith back to where they lacked the discipline to get it in the first place?
3.) Matthew wrote: “Christians believe that the Bible contains all spiritual knowledge […] ‘nothing else needed.’”
They only started doing that after their epic debates with the Muslims and are merely mimicking some of our language regarding the nature of our scripture, a conspicuous deception considering they were eagerly awaiting the arrival of “that prophet” — who would bring his own scripture! — from the Deut. 18:18 prophecy only to change their minds once they actually met him. It’s not real anyway since the New Testament isn’t their version of the Qur’an (the revealed message from God as preached by the Christ Jesus) but is only a version of the hadith (after-the-fact narrative tales from later generations that claim what the messenger said and did within a woefully diverse spectrum of truth & accuracy).
4.) Jesus’ mission ceased while he was still a young man. As a rejected prophet, he wasn’t able to gather his followers to form a community the way Muhammad was later able to. At the community-level stage the message was fuller, and began to take on a less individual responsibility and more legalized-rules-to-guide-believing-groups-in-community-structure direction, which the Christ’s stubborn people denied themselves by their treachery.
5.) The revealed message designed to guide humans to paradise by instructing in right conduct is complete; the canon of sacred scripture is now closed. We hold the formal guidelines for what we need to do to successfully navigate the material realm and emerge triumphant from the terror-inducing scrutiny of Judgment Day. No doubt there is indeed much more for us to learn about our existence within the greater creation, including secrets of the unseen that the prophet-messengers may have had glimpses into that the spiritually kindergarten-level followers were by no means ready to hear while on earth. Over-eager to get MORE and DEEPER (usually with hallucinogens) they often skip over the mandatory, deceptively simple basics described in the Word without achieving the mastery of faith needed for true success.
For example, Christians believe that the Bible contains all spiritual knowledge and basically all secrets of the universe are contained in it or explanations— “nothing else needed.”
However, John 21:25 There are MANY more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.
Also, Jesus says: John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
So it’s the idea that, there’s a lot more still yet to be revealed or taught by God and his Spiritual teachers, and the reformation movement or the effort to reform that which had either been corrupted or misunderstood was Sufism for Islam, likewise, Jesus came to deliver the Word, and reform what had become of Judaism.
'My house will be called a house of prayer.' But you are making it 'a den of robbers.'"
Just like in all religions, after the spiritual teacher that was sent dies and man takes over, corruption of the message usually follows, and added to that, it’s the idea that as the people come up in consciousness and can receive more, more then is given but all too often the people slip into fundamentalism, and feel that their teacher was the last one, which is never the case.
Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Matthew wrote: "...many believe like the Sufis that God is all wise..."
Of course. That’s why in revealing the message to us, He proclaimed that now our religion was perfected and the canon of scripture was complete. We have everything we need to progress to the next level to receive the more advanced spiritual knowledge you describe, it just won’t be here while we tarry in these decaying fleshy vessels.
2.) Matthew wrote: "...the reformation movement or the effort to reform that which had either been corrupted or misunderstood was Sufism for Islam..."
I think the primary flaw in the concept is based on post-Abrahamic humankind rarely fully embracing the Word of God as revealed, which means that if they can’t get the basics right before the messengers’ bodies were even cold in the ground, how am I reasonably expected to trust them to reform the strayed faith back to where they lacked the discipline to get it in the first place?
3.) Matthew wrote: “Christians believe that the Bible contains all spiritual knowledge […] ‘nothing else needed.’”
They only started doing that after their epic debates with the Muslims and are merely mimicking some of our language regarding the nature of our scripture, a conspicuous deception considering they were eagerly awaiting the arrival of “that prophet” — who would bring his own scripture! — from the Deut. 18:18 prophecy only to change their minds once they actually met him. It’s not real anyway since the New Testament isn’t their version of the Qur’an (the revealed message from God as preached by the Christ Jesus) but is only a version of the hadith (after-the-fact narrative tales from later generations that claim what the messenger said and did within a woefully diverse spectrum of truth & accuracy).
4.) Jesus’ mission ceased while he was still a young man. As a rejected prophet, he wasn’t able to gather his followers to form a community the way Muhammad was later able to. At the community-level stage the message was fuller, and began to take on a less individual responsibility and more legalized-rules-to-guide-believing-groups-in-community-structure direction, which the Christ’s stubborn people denied themselves by their treachery.
5.) The revealed message designed to guide humans to paradise by instructing in right conduct is complete; the canon of sacred scripture is now closed. We hold the formal guidelines for what we need to do to successfully navigate the material realm and emerge triumphant from the terror-inducing scrutiny of Judgment Day. No doubt there is indeed much more for us to learn about our existence within the greater creation, including secrets of the unseen that the prophet-messengers may have had glimpses into that the spiritually kindergarten-level followers were by no means ready to hear while on earth. Over-eager to get MORE and DEEPER (usually with hallucinogens) they often skip over the mandatory, deceptively simple basics described in the Word without achieving the mastery of faith needed for true success.
Matthew James - Ah then group I couldn’t think of their name.. just remembered… The Bahá'í Faith.
They believe in progressive revelation.
Muhammad Rasheed - The Bahá'í founders had a lot in common with the founders of Sikhism, who also desired to create a "Greatest Hits Album" of world religion traits they hoped would go viral and change the world. The central point pushed by Bahá'í faith adherents, of the intrinsic worth of all religion, is one already expressed in the Qur'an of Al-Islam; a whole new faith was not required.
Their concept of "Manifestations of God" that considers the prophet-messengers to be "not seen as ordinary mortals" is a major problem however, which will lead inevitably to paganism in future generations. They absolutely WERE ordinary mortals who decided to believe in their Guardian Lord and do what they were commanded to do, and by their example in the second half of their core role, showed humankind how to be saved from hell. The lesson was that if they could do it, as mere ordinary mortals, then we ALL can do it. None of them at any point would have EVER claimed to be anything other than ordinary mortals, so the Bahá'í adherents sow the seeds of ultimate mischief—tempting the unforgivable sin—and reveal themselves performing anything but "progressing revelation."
lol All we have to do is obey as the One God commands from the divine instructions revealed for that purpose. Perhaps it's a little TOO simple for us, where we keep insisting we need to add all this extra faux-deep stuff to the message. Meanwhile, all we're doing is continuing the ages old trend of ensuring the later generations stray from the core message. We should keep it simple, believe, do righteous deeds, avoid evil, say not about God and His prophets what we have no authority to claim and stay in God's favor that we may prosper.
Matthew James - Well, I think whole point of progressive revelation is that one would proclaim there to be value and validity in all religions as the Bahais do, as opposed to clinging to just one religion and thinking as though no more teachers are necessary. All too often, if not every time a spiritual teacher has died, and the religion men setup around him gets settled fundamentalism takes over the religion and the people come to believe they don’t need anymore teachers or teachings.They believe in progressive revelation.
Muhammad Rasheed - The Bahá'í founders had a lot in common with the founders of Sikhism, who also desired to create a "Greatest Hits Album" of world religion traits they hoped would go viral and change the world. The central point pushed by Bahá'í faith adherents, of the intrinsic worth of all religion, is one already expressed in the Qur'an of Al-Islam; a whole new faith was not required.
Their concept of "Manifestations of God" that considers the prophet-messengers to be "not seen as ordinary mortals" is a major problem however, which will lead inevitably to paganism in future generations. They absolutely WERE ordinary mortals who decided to believe in their Guardian Lord and do what they were commanded to do, and by their example in the second half of their core role, showed humankind how to be saved from hell. The lesson was that if they could do it, as mere ordinary mortals, then we ALL can do it. None of them at any point would have EVER claimed to be anything other than ordinary mortals, so the Bahá'í adherents sow the seeds of ultimate mischief—tempting the unforgivable sin—and reveal themselves performing anything but "progressing revelation."
lol All we have to do is obey as the One God commands from the divine instructions revealed for that purpose. Perhaps it's a little TOO simple for us, where we keep insisting we need to add all this extra faux-deep stuff to the message. Meanwhile, all we're doing is continuing the ages old trend of ensuring the later generations stray from the core message. We should keep it simple, believe, do righteous deeds, avoid evil, say not about God and His prophets what we have no authority to claim and stay in God's favor that we may prosper.
My Exhibit A. would be just look at our world and how much evil and corruption is in it. The problem with rejecting progressive revelation, and rejecting the idea that God could still send His spiritual teachers to address problems in a society, or individuals on an individual basis vis a vis a having an inner personal relationship with God without intermediaries via prayer, meditation, or the as the early Follwer’s of the Way called it “Gnosis” is that a society or person might have a horrific problem; slavery, selling women, selling children, marrying children etc and the people cut themselves off from God by adhering only to past written scripture which wasn’t the fullness of Gods infinite wisdom to begin with anyway and in so doing God is unable to reach them and the things that might seem right unto a man keep being perpetuated.
Proverbs 16:25 There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.
Jesus talked about the pitfall of having a fundamentalist mindset when it comes to religion here:
Luke 11:52 Woe to you experts in the law! For you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering."
So, ultimately they aren’t trying to assemble a greatest hits album as you called it, but they teach mutual interfaith respect, try to learn from each, and open themselves to the Living Masters via an inner process, as opposed to closing the door to them only adhering to one written scripture written for long gone societies over 1,000 years ago.
If you recall earlier I mentioned where Jesus said I have YET many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
Based on that statement that Jesus had more things to teach, if they be Muslim or Pentecostal should be believing in such a statement and would that teaching come through a new messenger or via personal communication with Jesus directly? If of course one believes Jesus when he said I will always be with you.
So then ultimately Jesus said there’s more he had to teach and he’d always be among us still to deliver it. I’m not saying Jesus is the only Master Teacher, but it’s an example of Jesus mentioning what I’m saying and I’m inclined to agree with Jesus on the idea he has many more things to teach people, as opposed to the idea that religion ia infallible and complete.
Muhammad Rasheed - I know my tone can come across as kind of harsh during these discussions, but it’s coming from my dedication to not compromising on what God said in scripture. I’m not going to accept what humans invented over what God said, since I consider myself protective over my place in paradise. If my posts come across as mean-spirited or disrespectful it wasn’t my intent.
Matthew wrote: "Well, I think whole point of progressive revelation is that one would proclaim there to be value and validity in all religions as the Bahais do, as opposed to clinging to just one religion…”
In the Qur’an, Allah proclaims that there is value in all religion as long as they instruct their adherents to believe in their Guardian Lord who created them and bade them to do good deeds while avoiding evil works. The One God also said that Al-Islam is the religion perfected for us, so I personally cling to it for that reason. “Perfected by God” would of course make it the best choice. I have no problem respecting the world religions outside of my own, and certainly those that call themselves compiling ‘The Best of’ all the best traits from the lot (it’s better than atheism, surely), but naturally I expect the very man-made effort to also include previous man-made items that merely sounded good that we would have been better off leaving on the cutting floor. I’m capable, Matthew, of recognizing the value of a religion in general, while also critiquing the problems within it. Do you believe you hold a monopoly over this skill? :)
Matthew wrote: "…and thinking as though no more teachers are necessary.”
“Teachers” is one thing, while new prophet-messengers of the One God is quite another. God said that the canon of sacred scripture is now complete; Muhammad ibn Abdullah (peace be upon him!) was the seal of the prophethood and there will be no more of those. Of course there are naturally talented individuals who are gifted at teaching from the Word of God among us and expert at making it plain, and from those I too would eagerly learn from with no issue. But I would never go so far as to proclaim them new prophets of Allah, or continue to listen to them should they themselves, from a corrupt ego, dare to contradict the Word of their Lord.
Matthew wrote: "All too often, if not every time a spiritual teacher has died, and the religion men setup around him gets settled fundamentalism takes over the religion and the people come to believe they don’t need anymore teachers or teachings.”
That phenomenon happens after the people have taken the religion FAR off the Path established by the prophets, and those among the people who realize something is not quite right freak out instinctively. Returning to the original pure message of the prophets is generally not possible since by that point the literal original revelation revealed to that people is often long gone and lost under the weight of the ages. Therefore the concept of “fundamentalism” becomes a sad and amusing joke in context.
Matthew wrote: "My Exhibit A. would be just look at our world and how much evil and corruption is in it.”
Indeed. This would be my own ‘Exhibit A” for my own point. The people never mastered the basics of the prophets’ message, being over-eager to break away from their instructions to invent their own ‘deep’ understandings and establish bureaucratic institutions wrapped around it to control the people for the usual suspects hoarding wealth & power from the many. A community-wide commitment to keeping to the basics of what Allah revealed would prevent this.
Matthew wrote: "The problem with rejecting […] the idea that God could still send His spiritual teachers to address problems in a society […] is that a society or person might have a horrific problem […] and the people cut themselves off from God by adhering only to past written scripture which wasn’t the fullness of Gods infinite wisdom to begin with…”
That’s not a real problem, Matthew. For one, God revealed the scripture to humankind specifically to guide us aright; that’s what it’s for. Everything we know about the One God came from the anointing of the prophets to tell us about God and our role in the creation. God told us this through them and some actually had the brilliant idea to write the information down for posterity. The very concept of “Well, God didn’t actually want that for us!” doesn’t even remotely make sense on any level. ‘God revealed scripture to us to guide us to spiritual prosperity, but He didn’t want to use the scripture to guide us to posterity’ represents a level of confusion that, as a committed truth seeker, I’ve developed the discernment to recognize as a falsehood of immense proportion. In His infinite Mercy, God revealed the message so we wouldn’t have to reinvent the wheel; we know what He requires of us that we may be saved. It’s not even hard, but our treacherous, lowly flesh makes it hard.
Matthew wrote: "…or individuals on an individual basis vis a vis a having an inner personal relationship with God without intermediaries via prayer, meditation…”
Our “inner personal relationship with God” is developed by doing what He commanded and staying on the Path. The purpose of an active and consistent prayer life is to keep us focused on the Path to aid in keeping us out of mischief.
Matthew wrote: "…or the as the early Follwer’s of the Way called it ‘Gnosis’”
I am aware of the doctrine of gnosticism and its record in history. Know you that there were even earlier believers in the One God who thrived for ages around the world, each with a prophet-messenger to instruct that which their Guardian Lord revealed to save them from hell. The first century ‘soup of ideas’ that bubbled up around the mystery of the Christ’s destiny wasn’t exactly a high point in the development of spiritual philosophy in my opinion.
Matthew wrote: "… a society or person might have a horrific problem; slavery, selling women, selling children, marrying children etc”
All of these items and many more would be wiped out if people just mastered the basics. Pride, stubbornness and raw greed keep these problems among us since they’ve proven to be more important to us than just obeying the Lord thy God.
Matthew quoted: "Proverbs 16:25 There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.”
Irrelevant, since it is the adherence to Word of the One God that I’m advocating for. Desiring anything other than that, such as lusting for a mystical “inner personal relationship with God” severed from the formal revealed guidance provided by that same God, is the way of death described.
Matthew wrote: "Jesus talked about the pitfall of having a fundamentalist mindset when it comes to religion here: ‘Luke 11:52 Woe to you experts in the law! For you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.’"
lol He’s literally talking about a specific group of people with a history of rejecting/twisting the message of God, persecuting and killing God’s messengers when they came with a message they were too hard-hearted to hear, and who actually rejected he himself in his role as messenger of the Lord thy God and attempted to crucify him. These people literally made a mockery of the very scripture they were supposed to be guarding, and transformed it into a self-serving doctrine they used to justify their insatiable lust. The LAST thing they demonstrated was a ‘fundamentalist” mindset. Were that the case they would have instead fell on their faces and accepted the Christ Jesus at his word and followed him.
Matthew wrote: "So, ultimately they aren’t trying to assemble a greatest hits album as you called it…”
Meanwhile, they literally plucked the best stuff out of different world religions, proclaimed themselves as new prophet figures without the authority to do so, and formed new religions as a metaphorical direct slap in the face of the message of God.
Matthew wrote: "…but they teach mutual interfaith respect, try to learn from each, and open themselves to the Living Masters via an inner process, as opposed to closing the door to them only adhering to one written scripture written for long gone societies over 1,000 years ago.”
God said one thing, and these people said another thing. Admiring the “mutual interfaith respect” they preach can only go so far, as it stops dead in its tracks when I find it directly contradicting the Word of the One God, Lord of the worlds and master of the Day of Judgment. Who will save me from God’s Wrath should I so boldly reject His guidance in favor of the prideful foolishness of mere men who somehow think they know better than the Supreme Creator? Have a care, please.
Matthew wrote: "If you recall earlier I mentioned where Jesus said I have YET many things to say to you […] Based on that statement that Jesus had more things to teach […] would that teaching come through a new messenger or via personal communication with Jesus directly? If of course one believes Jesus when he said I will always be with you.”
My response to this post lay here within these Quora answers:
https://qr.ae/TUt31p
https://qr.ae/TUGJap
https://qr.ae/TUt31s
Matthew wrote: "So then ultimately Jesus said there’s more he had to teach and he’d always be among us still to deliver it. I’m not saying Jesus is the only Master Teacher, but it’s an example of Jesus mentioning what I’m saying and I’m inclined to agree with Jesus on the idea he has many more things to teach people, as opposed to the idea that religion ia infallible and complete.”
lol I’m inclined to agree with him, too. He was the prophet-messenger of the One God, who performed in the role he was anointed to perform in. As such, he did have more to teach to his people, but didn’t within his lifetime because he was a rejected prophet. I agree he would “always be among us” as he embodied the Word of God in his anointed function; the Word of God is among us today, so he did not lie. Know ye that the Qur’an summarizes exactly what the Christ was instructed to preach to his hard-hearted people. The many more things the Christ had to teach were revealed in the message of the prophet-messenger who came after him, a prophet who came to be accepted by his people that the message would come into its fullness of community-wide instruction. The religion of God is now perfected for us, the canon of scripture is closed. All we have to do is do as God commanded and we will be saved. I do not need any Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrís or Guru Nanaks to revise, reimagine, improve upon, reveal “new” scripture or do any other thing outside of human authority to the religion of God for me. They can read God’s Word and provide insights through the lens of their own human experience, but that’s all. What they’ve provided thus far is not “progress” but a treacherous nonessential to my salvation.
Matthew James - Ok, well, im happy we could disagree respectfully on this one. On paper what you say makes sense, but the problem with, “The Quran” the Bible” already teaches this is that for example in Islam and within Christianity, very few if any “orthodox” believers actually follow the idea that there are other sheep not of this fold, they believe that Islam is evil, and or that Christianity has flaws and only their prophet was the last true one. Few if any believe that God could continue teaching people through whomever he decided to send. Such people coming out of each faith are usually mocked, stoned, burned at the stake, and or just simply ignored because of the fundamentalist mindset that builds up around the religion.
The people themselves cut themselves off from God.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Ok, well, im happy we could disagree respectfully on this one.”
Since I have been told how I can come across online, I put the disclaimer at the beginning of the last post because I didn’t want to chase you away. I never stopped respecting you, Matthew, even if I disagree with the package of doctrines you may hold dear.
Matthew wrote: "Few if any believe that God could continue teaching people through whomever he decided to send.”
There are many people who willingly sit up under people they believe hold special favor with God and hang upon their every word, so I don’t recognize that as true. The challenge isn’t to get people to be willing to follow around any propped-up ole yahoo as he parades around his pet wind of doctrine, but to get the people to study to show themselves approved. We are saved or doomed by our own actions in this world and on the Day of Judgment each of us will be held accountable as to how we made sure we would be saved as God provided our Free Will, intellect and His revealed Word to guide us onto the Right Way. The history of the Levite tribe revealed to us how worthless a priest class is; if we don’t take the initiative to learn & master what our Lord requires of us then we are doomed. People rejected the prophet’s message even during their lifetimes while the scripture was verbally echoing off the walls of their towns! Whether it’s from the mouth of the messenger or from the hoary pages of the Book, either way it’s the people’s job to take the time to get it in them. It’s not the religion’s fault if they refuse, or decide to take the adversary as their friend and reject the message of God altogether. It’s not the religion that will be tossed into hell but their own lazy, stubborn, sorry souls.
Matthew wrote: "The people themselves cut themselves off from God.”
That they do so despite God’s clear guidance on earth is no one’s fault but their own.
Matthew James - I respect you either way Muhammad. I realize people won’t always agree on religion. :) for me, I’m perfectly fine with having an incomplete believe system in that I consider Gods wisdom to be infinite and his deliverance of his wisdom was not complete and could never be so.
Muhammad Rasheed - I recognize the stark discrepancy between what you consider versus what the Omniscient Supreme Creator of reality said, and since I don’t consider myself a wingnut, choose to remain protective of my place in paradise. lol
God’s wisdom IS infinite, but what does that have to do with you as a fleshy morsel of human? You are certainly not capable of absorbing God’s infinite Wisdom, and the finite earth is certainly not the place for it were He so inclined to provide a measure that you could absorb but that your material body, nor the earth could not receive.
Master the basics as defined in scripture and successfully get to the afterlife that you may receive the rest of the teachings you seek. Earth is not the place.
Peace.
Matthew James - I totally disagree as did Christ Jesus in that he said, those who believe in him would do the same things and greater works than he did.
I don’t believe one has to die to obtain a greater spiritual attainment and I do believe God has sent additional messengers since the biblical age.
Muhammad Rasheed - The great works the Christ performed involved submitting his whole will to that of his Guardian Lord and obeying His commands. He did nothing outside of that and it’s why Jesus receives the Favor of his Lord and enjoys the Fruits of Heaven.
If you’re referring to the miracles he was given permission to produce, designed to strengthen the faith of the sad handful of folk who decided to not reject him, what does that have to do with “greater spiritual attainment?” The greater teachings you long for belong to the unseen, and they await us on the other side of the material realm, Matthew. This world is but a test. Please pass it.
Matthew James - I totally disagree with you on that one needs to die to obtain greater spiritual wisdom or perform the same works as Jesus as someone who’s been open to divine progressive revelation. Moreover, there were people in Jesus’ time who exhibited what some would call miraculous abilities after studying under him. There have been people who have done the same and even greater works as recently as this 20th century, and for that matter even in the 21st century. In any event, I’ve learned who has been the appointed and anointed messengers since the biblical era and have studied their work.
I made the decision first to be open to the idea that the spiritual hierarchy, Saints, Prophets whatever you want to call them did indeed have more to teach humanity, as we’ve agreed Jesus did say there was more to teach the people, but where we differ is I don’t believe the revelation from God all stopped in biblical times over 1,000 years ago, but continued and will always continue.
With all power granted to him in Heaven and earth what would limit Jesus to be able to communicate through messengers he would anoint? Nothing. You by default reject anyone. I by default am open to the idea Jesus and other “saints” have always used mouthpiece annointed messengers since the resurrection, before Jesus’ time like Moses delivering the word, and after Jesus’ time.
I understand we’d never agree on this since for you the door is closed on any and all revalation.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "...I don’t believe the revelation from God all stopped in biblical times..."
On what do you base this belief, please? Tell me. What metric are you using to determine whether something (like the Word of the One God) is true or not true?
Matthew wrote: "I totally disagree with you on that one needs to die to obtain greater spiritual wisdom or perform the same works as Jesus as someone who’s been open to divine progressive revelation.”
One certainly needs to die in order to receive the fullness that the human consciousness is capable of receiving, since such info would by necessity encompass far more than both the human vessel and the human lifetime can sustain. Preternatural spiritual abilities—even such as what the prophets were allowed to perform—are still but a glimpse into what our true selves will be able to accomplish. Personally, I would rather pass this test and get to go full-on Super Saiyan in the next life than settle for pulling doves out of a Nazarene hat or whatever other very limited abilities even the most spiritually powerful fleshy humans are able to perform.
Matthew wrote: "Moreover, there were people in Jesus’ time who exhibited what some would call miraculous abilities…”
I believe you. You know I’m a student of the antediluvian ‘third eye’ lore, but I’m also fascinated by the biographies of the legendary ‘Mystic Rebels’ of history. A notable contemporary of the Christ was a certain Apollonius of Tyana who, other than his unfortunate lowly commitment to the paganism of his day, was a great man indeed of impressive psychic prowess. None of that means anything if we aren’t submitted to the Will of God, as it is He who will gift us with the Ultimate Reward in which we will each have all that our hearts desire. The greater spiritual wisdom in its TOTALITY awaits you in your paradise mansion if you are wise. Will ye not heed the promises of your Guardian Lord who does not lie?
Matthew wrote: "In any event, I’ve learned who has been the appointed and anointed messengers since the biblical era and have studied their work.”
God said that every people throughout the ages since Adam the Patriarch received an anointed messenger to guide them aright; some He revealed to us their names in scripture, but most He did not. What they had in common was the message of God: They believed in their Lord who created them, bade the people to perform righteous deeds, avoid the temptations of evil, repent when they messed up and be not obstinate in doing wrong.
Matthew wrote: "With all power granted to him in Heaven and earth what would limit Jesus to be able to communicate through messengers he would anoint?”
Jesus was limited in his role to what the All-Powerful Supreme Creator gave him permission to do. The Christ’s job was to preach to his people during his earthly lifetime, and to return on the Day of Judgment to bear witness that they received or rejected the message.
Matthew wrote: "Nothing. You by default reject anyone.”
lol Not so. This is what I usually have to deal with when having a discussion with those who reject the revealed Word of God. The One God described the function of His anointed prophet-messengers, and listed several times exactly what He instructed them to teach to the people. This is the metric I use. Outside of God definitively proclaiming who the last of the messengers were, I have over the years recognized people within my studies who did display the signs of belonging to that exclusive holy group though they may not have been accepted as such by the thought police gate keepers of mainstream institutions.
Matthew wrote: "I by default am open to the idea Jesus and other “saints” have always used mouthpiece annointed messengers since the resurrection, before Jesus’ time like Moses delivering the word, and after Jesus’ time.”
It’s difficult to decipher this part since it seems like there are a few converging doctrines. Are you perhaps equating Paul with Moses? Do you consider the founders of the Bahá'í and Sikhism to be these same figures?
Matthew wrote: "I understand we’d never agree on this since for you the door is closed on any and all revalation.”
Well, that’s one way to put it. A better and more accurate way is to say that God closed the door on any subsequent revelation, and I merely accept God’s Word.
Matthew James - There are many false prophets, but there are also many real ones and instructions were given.
1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God. For many false prophets have gone out into the world.
Muhammad Rasheed - 1 John 4:2-3 - "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."
____________________
Earlier in our discussion, did I not confess that the Christ Jesus was an ordinary human and thus, had indeed come in the flesh?
So relax. :)
Matthew James - Jesus Christ is apart of a heiracy, as during the reserection he was seen with Moses etc. He isn’t the only Master, right.
Muhammad Rasheed - Seen by whom?
Matthew James - Right.. over 500 people saw him..
1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, He appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.
So basically “the prophets” are all alive and well. As Jesus said, and I think we agreed he said he had more to teach. I don’t close the door to them by default, rejecting all teachings they might have released (through their messengers) for the last 1700 years— but some do.
Again, with all power in heaven and earth granted to Jesus, he has no limitations on continuing to teach people on an individual basis, or through new organizations he might sponsor with a messenger.
Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Right.. over 500 people saw him.."
In Islam, the body of work called “hadith” is not holy scripture; they were not revealed to us by God. Instead, they represent the traditions of what people claimed to have remembered what the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him!) said or did and passed along through the generations as folk sayings. To give strength to the force of the sayings, people would list a chain of personages through whom the quotes were supposed to have come down from: “It was narrated by John, who heard it from Joseph, who heard Abram say that he heard the honorable Mary proclaim that…” is the way they go.
A couple of centuries or so after the prophet left us, when the scholars decided to formally collect all of these folk sayings and make them available in a library collection, they were sadly too lazy to do any serious vetting to determine whether what they quoted were real or not. All that they used was how impressed they personally were by the string of celebrity names claimed by the interviewees – which was exactly what the common people used to determine whether they should be impressed or not.
Naturally this is an embarrassment to even the very concept of “scholarship,” and one of the many reasons why the hadith can never be held up to the same holy standard of the Holy Qur’an, the revealed message of the One God of Abraham as preached by His prophet-messenger.
The Qur’an is in God’s Voice, as He talks directly to the prophet (instructing Muhammad in what the Lord wants us to know), directly to the People of the Book, to the disbelievers/pagans, and directly to us as the reader/listener to the revealed message. Conspicuously, Christian literature lacks an equivalent work… there is no “Qur’an from God as preached by Jesus” in existence. The early followers of the Christ either failed to write down such a work as the messenger recited it to them, leaving the Injeel of the Christ as a solely oral work, or a scant few rare copies of the precious work were lost to us under the weight of time.
What the Christians DO have in the four canonical gospels are collections of the traditions of what some people claimed to have remembered what the Christ Jesus (peace be upon him!) said or did. In other words, they hold the Christian version of the hadith.
Unlike the Muslim’s body of hadith, the Christian’s version has been seriously vetted for authenticity by legions of true believer scholars of the faith’s literature throughout the Age of Pisces into the modern era. From Christian writers such as David L. Turner (Matthew), Donald Senior (What are they saying about Matthew?), Richard C. Beaton (How Matthew Writes) and Leon Morris (New Testament Theology) we discover that “The majority of modern scholars believe that Mark was the first gospel to be composed and that Matthew (who includes some 600 of Mark's 661 verses) and Luke both drew upon it as a major source for their works” and that "[The Gospel of] Matthew is a creative reinterpretation of Mark, stressing Jesus' teachings as much as his acts, and making subtle changes in order to stress his divine nature."
It is clear that the Christian’s version of hadith can no more pretend to be holy scripture revealed from the One God than the Muslim’s version can as they are both folk “creative interpretations” by mere men about the messengers and their deeds and sayings. So in your posts here, you are basically asking me to accept these ‘creative interpretations’ by these people OVER the revealed message of the Supreme Creator of the universe. God revealed the Qur’an’s message to set the record straight on the matters that the People of the Book disagreed upon and you want me to ignore that and instead believe portions and creative reinterpretations of those same arguments as greater than the truth that the One God revealed.
To set the record straight, when God Himself definitively said that the Christ was not crucified by the enemies of God and the messenger, you want me to dismiss this truth as casually as you have in favor of the creative reinterpreted work of your hadith that claimed that “over 500 people saw him” rise from the death that God assured us did not claim Jesus after-all.
So here we find ourselves at the end of our discussion at a necessary impasse, because I do not recognize what you hold as scripture since there is nothing present to convince me it is from the Lord thy God. That is in fact what the Qur’an is for and why it is among us by God’s Mercy.
Matthew James - Assuming that were the case and Jesus was not crucified, which I do believe he was, progressive revalation from God through his messengers, the ones who have lifetimes among the people and then who communicate with the people through a messenger in embodiment has never stopped.
Sometimes it isn’t an organization, but it’s through an author or teacher, or scientist etc. But you think God isn’t capable of, doesn’t desire to, and or hasn’t been inspiring and teaching people anything in the last 1700 years?? :)
Did you ever wonder why some societies advance much faster than others while others are poor, stay poor, and the oppressed stay oppressed?
With the 500, I was simply giving you an example of “prophets not being dead, and having all the power and authority they need to directly communicate with individual people and organizations they sponsor if they choose to.
But I’ll end by saying, deciding that God doesn’t want to reform any religions and assuming ones religion is perfect and holds all truth, (Fundamentalism) allows negative things in society to perpetuate. I’ll be the first want to say I believe in and follow Jesus Christ, but I’ll also be the first one to condemn hypocritical white Christians for allowing slavery in America.
Likewise, I respect Islam, and many of its teachings and teachers, but many things I totally disapprove of in it like people marrying children, having sex with children, marrying multiple wives etc.
For me, religions aren’t perfect and the societies aren’t perfect. Perhaps— if people had not closed the door to reform and more revalation the bad things in each society wouldn’t have continued for as long as they did. For that matter if I’m being fair and consistent, there’s still a lot of slavery in parts of the Islamic world to this day, and many are black people (same as how you and me got to America I’m assuming—I know Arab slave traders had alot to do with it for my family at least ) but slavery is still allowed in many Islamic societies just like marrying and having sex with children.
That’s God’s intention? You don’t think that needs reform and God would never say anything about it or try to change it?
It’s this refusal to change is why the negative things perpetuate, and the closing the door on further revelation.
As Jesus said in his time about Israel, they basically kept murdered all their prophets instead of listening to them, those ones who were sent to keep teaching the people. They kept closing the door just like not all— but most people still do today.
Luke 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling.
That’s why so many people are quite comfortable believing in things that were practiced 1500 years ago.. many of which should never been accepted at all anyway.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Assuming that were the case and Jesus was not crucified…”
There’s no need for assumptions. The One God point blank informed us that his servant was not crucified as his enemies boasted.
Matthew wrote: "…which I do believe he was…”
As you are pitting your finite, human-level understanding against the proclaimed truth of the Omniscient Lord of All the Worlds, I’m curious as to what you are basing this belief upon.
Matthew wrote: "…progressive revalation from God through his messengers…”
The canon of revelation that was formally closed with the Qur’an that you dismiss.
Matthew wrote: "…the ones who have lifetimes among the people and then who communicate with the people through a messenger in embodiment has never stopped.”
The prophet-messengers were human beings whose interaction with material humanity ceased when they left this world. There’s no reason for each messenger to have his/her own personal ‘sub-messenger’ since they all were anointed by the Divine Source.
Matthew wrote: "Sometimes it isn’t an organization…”
It’s never through an organization. Humans are the conduit of the message.
Matthew wrote: "…but it’s through an author or teacher, or scientist etc. But you think God isn’t capable of…”
The Supreme Creator of reality is Omnipotent in the truest sense of the term. You may strike that item from your list moving forward for future discourse as I am not of those who doubt.
Matthew wrote: "…doesn’t desire to, and or hasn’t been inspiring and teaching people anything in the last 1700 years??”
God says He does inspire and speak to us from “behind the veil” listed as separate from His formal revelation revealed through His anointed prophets. But those are two completely separate groups of people that God takes pains in the Book to draw the line between them that there be no confusion. Our point of contention here seems to be your insisting that they are all one group despite the truth God revealed about the matter.
Matthew wrote: "Did you ever wonder why some societies advance much faster than others while others are poor, stay poor, and the oppressed stay oppressed?”
There was never a need for me to wonder since God was kind enough to reveal the answer in the Book: This world is but a test — humanity is tested with both prosperity and adversity to determine their strength of character and the mettle of their faith.
Matthew wrote: "With the 500, I was simply giving you an example of prophets not being dead, and having all the power and authority they need to directly communicate with individual people and organizations they sponsor if they choose to.”
And you demonstrated that with “Matthew’s” invented creative reinterpretation that directly contradicts the truth of the One God of Abraham. Curious.
Matthew wrote: "But I’ll end by saying, deciding that God doesn’t want to reform any religions…”
It wouldn’t be God’s job to do so in any event. He gave us the message, provided the messenger to show us how to walk it out, and now it’s our job to follow it so we may prosper. I’m rightfully 100% unimpressed with any such ‘reformation’ efforts thus far, since humans have proven themselves full of crap and clearly wouldn’t even know where to even begin to reform a faith. Did humankind require supernatural intervention to even know how to act correctly in the first place?
Matthew wrote: "…and assuming ones religion is perfect…”
There’s no need for assumptions. The One God proclaimed His religion to now be perfected for us in the form of Al-Islam.
Matthew wrote: "…and holds all truth…”
“All truth” resides with Allah. Sacred scripture contains enough truth to enable the believers to successfully navigate the material realm phase so we can level up and experience a higher stage of truth.
Matthew wrote: "(Fundamentalism) allows negative things in society to perpetuate.”
Rejecting the Word of God in preference to following our own lusts is how human-created negatives perpetuate.
Matthew wrote: "I’ll be the first want to say I believe in and follow Jesus Christ, but I’ll also be the first one to condemn hypocritical white Christians for allowing slavery in America.”
That means nothing to me. You’ll be Judged on the Last Day according to your own beliefs and actions and no one else’s.
Matthew wrote: "Likewise, I respect Islam, and many of its teachings and teachers, but many things I totally disapprove of in it like people marrying children, having sex with children…”
I agree with you since these are not “Islamic” at all, but were traditional practices of the two Semite nations that were unfortunately continued under their status as People of the Book.
Matthew wrote: "…marrying multiple wives etc.”
God allows the marrying of up to four wives under very specific circumstances (none of which involve lust quenching). Allah emphasizes that one wife is best for those who believe. The message is clear to me and as a fundamentalist I have zero desire for multiple spouses.
Matthew wrote: "For me, religions aren’t perfect…”
One of them is perfect per God’s proclamation on the issue. #YourMove
Matthew wrote: "…and the societies aren’t perfect. Perhaps— if people had not closed the door to reform and more revalation the bad things in each society wouldn’t have continued for as long as they did.”
Again, the people failed to get the basics mastered when the revelation came to them the first time, got further and further and further away from what the basics told them to do, but you want me to believe these so-called reformers are going to be the ones to fix it when in one of your examples their cobbled together faith actually shows them doing the same wrong that caused the people to stray in the first place. Humanity isn’t the place where my faith needs to go since they are consistent in messing up big time.
Matthew wrote: "For that matter if I’m being fair and consistent, there’s still a lot of slavery in parts of the Islamic world to this day…”
I fail to see how you bringing up that point is supposed to demonstrate fairness and consistency. The One God lists “freeing the slave” as one of the major Good Deeds the believer can do in a religion that emphasizes the need to perform Good deeds in order to achieve the Ultimate Reward of eternal paradise. This fact is responsible for nearly completely wiping chattel slavery out in the Muslim World pretty early in its history, only for it to be brought back during the era of lustful imperialism, as the sultans, lesser caliphs and other monarchs strayed further and further and further from the Path of Allah. It’s impossible – especially for the disbelieving outsider – to express “fairness” when attempting to critic Al-Islam without them actually knowing about the religion and its history, or they will just give the same impression that you did here. Was the slavery thing supposed to be your trump card?
Matthew wrote: "That’s God’s intention? You don’t think that needs reform and God would never say anything about it or try to change it?”
lol God provided His definitive piece about the issue in the Book revealed for that very purpose. All we have to do is read the thing and (for once) actually do what God said for us to be saved. lol
Matthew wrote: "It’s this refusal to change is why the negative things perpetuate, and the closing the door on further revelation.”
lol Reevaluate this comment through the lens of my last comment, please.
Matthew wrote: "As Jesus said in his time about Israel, they basically kept murdered all their prophets instead of listening to them, those ones who were sent to keep teaching the people.”
God mentioned it to them in the Qur’an, too. As you can image they don’t look favorably upon the Qur’an and dismiss it with a casualness that doubles your own. :)
Matthew wrote: "They kept closing the door just like not all— but most people still do today.”
As a Muslim, I do hold the revealed scripture of the One God to guide me, so anyone attempting to teach me anything had better come with a message that aligns to what is actually true. I don’t have a whole lot of patience for however enthusiastically spewed foolishness in the guise of “progress.”
Matthew wrote: "That’s why so many people are quite comfortable believing in things that were practiced 1500 years ago.. many of which should never been accepted at all anyway.”
It depends on what things were specifically practiced and by whom that you are referring to, of course.
Matthew James - You also questioned what I’m basing my belief on. Aside from all of the scripture I’ve cited on everything I’ve written about revelation, mainly on Jesus saying there would be more to come, as I’ve also stated numerous times at this point, God has prophets. The level of consciousness on this planet is higher than it was 2000 years ago, but it’s still low.
People still kill each other.
People still ruin the environment.
People still enslave each other.
People still do a lot of horrible things they shouldn’t do..
The point I’ve been trying to make is that it’s not a mistake that the people have come up higher in consciousness since the times of Noah and it’s been through progressive revalation; through inspiration on better forms of governance, technology, law, science, in almost any area you can think of God and his angels (I think we both believe in angels and prophets) have the mission of teaching humanity. The spiritual teachers don’t stop teaching.
Jesus said I have yet, (STILL) many (multiple) things to teach you but you cannot bear it now.
So even Jesus says it that there’s a lot more he can teach. So basically, the teaching, the revalation never stops until our wisdom is equal to theirs, and then higher and higher as it’s their desire for humanity to eventually to be in the same Ascended state as they are with an equal level of consciousness.
What’s this all mean— you said you’re curious. There have been many many many orgianziations the Masters have worked through and given new teachings through, made clarifications on certain things that people might have misundertsood, given higher teachings on certain concepts and fixed areas where corrupt Mullahs, Preists etc corrupted and or totally perverted a teaching to the point where it’s nothing what was actually revealed.
You believe in the perfection of scripture, and man made religions, total infallibility. I do not. Again, there have been many many movements, societies, groups, and various sponsored organizations the Masters have worked through. As I mentioned, I’ve been a student of these movements and the teachings that have been revealed within them.
Shall I list them?
Why if you’ve already closed the door to them. I’d just be givinng you more to disagree with wouldn’t I?
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "I think in terms of belief, we’d never agree for instance with the crucifiction and resurrection.”
Yes. For the record, the One God of Abraham mentions it in the Qur’an several times specifically to set the matter straight in which the People of the Book differed. So I have to believe God over your Christian hadith’s tale as part of my salvation as a believer.
Matthew wrote: "…or for that matter even when Jesus himself mentions that he…”
When the creative reinterpretations of someone else’s creative interpretation of what these after-the-fact folk claimed Jesus said. It’s very difficult for me to accept the narrative tales of what people were claiming Jesus said as testimony from “Jesus himself” when those same narratives are presented to me conspicuously in the man-made story-tale format of the time period.
Matthew wrote: "… which I get— you’re not a believer.”
I bear witness that there is no God but the One God of Abraham. I believe in His message, His prophets, the unseen spirit and the inevitability of the Day of Judgment and I willingly submit my will to His as a believer.
Matthew wrote: "It’s my view that God and his prophets of old can communicate with humanity and have been for eons…”
In the Qur’an, God confirmed that He does inspire us through the veil, so that’s not a contention point. The prophets aren’t communicating with us. That part of your belief system doesn’t even make sense to me (why would they?), and since the revelation is complete there’s no need for any others to arise. I recognize that individuals can be inspired and talented teachers/coaches in the spiritual sciences, sure. They just will never be of the company of the prophets of olde.
Matthew wrote: "…even before Jesus’ time when angelic interaction with people was almost commonplace. “
It’s still common place. The angels are always among us to complete the tasks God commands them to complete, but we realize it not.
Matthew wrote: "As for slavery and marriages of children and sex with children in the Islamic world, walk into many courtrooms or legislatures in the Islamic world and you’ll find it deemed perfectly legal and in accoranace with the Quran.”
Will you bluff me with my own faith’s Book? They do these things only in accordance with the body of hadith and their own cultural traditions. Nothing in the Holy Qur’an justifies their mess.
Matthew wrote: "That should have been reformed out of islamic society…”
This is not likely since the people are in the habit of upholding their lust for cultural tradition over the discipline of faith their Guardian Lord demands of them.
Matthew wrote: "Anyone who dares propose God wants the people to come up higher is labeled a liar or con artist because of the fundamentalist mindset.”
Ha! No, they perform such labeling because they reject mastery of the precepts of God’s revealed guidance and prefer their own lusts.
Matthew wrote: “You also questioned what I’m basing my belief on. […] Shall I list them? Why if you’ve already closed the door to them.”
lol I just wanted you to state it plain for the record so I could formally cite it in the future when making a point. I know you were using the New Testament hadith writings as the basis of your belief.
Matthew wrote: “You believe in the perfection of scripture, and man made religions, total infallibility. I do not.”
There’s only one revealed scriptural message of God on earth and it’s the one I hold as a Muslim (it’s actually the reason I decided to formally accept Al-Islam; no other religion can beat that). Like you, I also have a hadith, that necessarily takes a backseat to what the all-powerful Lord thy God proclaimed for our guidance. I wisely do not mix the two. Within the Holy Revealed Message, God said that HIS religion has now been perfected by HIM, so I dismiss your comment as a gross untruth, and ask you to repent for the sake of your soul.
Matthew James - Actually I’m not using any of that as the basis of my beliefs. While I did cite supporting scripture from 2000 year and ago, the reason I suggest what I believe is true is because of information that has been revealed/ given through messengers that goes back 200, 150, in some instead no more than 4–5 years ago.
John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
Despite Jesus saying that he had more to teach and people weren’t ready for it yet back then, you think it’s 1000%, no chance, entirely impossible.
I think he is all powerful in heaven and on earth and I don’t doubt Jesus meaning what he said and I have studied the work of people who he and the other Masters have worked with during the last 2000 years.
Interestingly enough, you never addressed the bad things in Islamic societies that I mentioned.
Is there a reason for the avoidance?
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Actually I’m not using any of that as the basis of my beliefs.”
Then how else would you know about the Christ at all? Outside of the Qur’an, that is the source text of our knowledge of the final Hebrew prophet, son of Mary. Explain, please.
Matthew wrote: "… information that has been revealed/ given through messengers that goes back 200, 150, in some instead no more than 4–5 years ago.”
What metric do you use to determine whether the info is accurate/true?
Matthew wrote: "Despite Jesus saying that he had more to teach and people weren’t ready for it yet back then, you think it’s 1000%, no chance, entirely impossible.”
No. I said that what he had to teach was revealed through the next prophet-messenger in the line, and given to accepting followers who WERE ready.
Matthew wrote: "I think he is all powerful in heaven and on earth…”
Only the One God is all-powerful. That’s why God gets to be God.
Matthew wrote: "…and I don’t doubt Jesus meaning what he said…”
I don’t doubt it either (see: Belief in the Prophets).
Matthew wrote: "…and I have studied the work of people who he and the other Masters have worked with during the last 2000 years.”
What do you use as the metric for vetting the material and claims for accuracy?
Matthew wrote: "Interestingly enough, you never addressed the bad things in Islamic societies that I mentioned.”
I did. I pointed out the difference between cultural traditions that carried over from the pagan-disbeliever era into the Islamic era versus the message of revealed scripture they claim to follow. Any ‘reformation’ efforts need to involve the habits of the people based on comfortable tradition and not to the religion they only pretend to follow as instructed by the guidelines of their Guardian Lord. You didn’t see those posts?
Matthew wrote: "Is there a reason for the avoidance?”
I’ll wait for you to read the post and provide your feedback. Unless this is your way of expressing that because I didn’t respond the way you wanted me to that it means I avoided it altogether. If that’s the case, then we’ve arrived at another impasse.
Matthew James - Ok, then I think we agree Angels are among us as you’ve said, and I previously noted. Moreover, as I’ve said, it’s my understanding that they are more than capable of using messengers, prophets whatever you want to call them to teach people.
It’s always always always been a matter of whether or not the people will listen:
I think you’ve also said now where I agree since that’s all I’ve been saying is that God does teach people, humanity as a whole and uses his various messengers to do it.
Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Perhaps this is another point of scripture you disagree with where even God (himself) is quoted as saying he appoints prophets.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Moreover, as I’ve said, it’s my understanding that they are more than capable of using messengers, prophets whatever you want to call them to teach people.”
Teach people what exactly, since we have the Book among us to teach us? That’s what it’s for.
Matthew wrote: "It’s always always always been a matter of whether or not the people will listen:”
The Book was revealed through the prophets as guidance sure to those who believe. It is possible to have shamanistic experiences and learn new info directly from unseen spirit beings, but whatever they teach had better align to the Truth of God’s message. But how would we know whether we are being led astray or not if we reject the guiding message?
Matthew wrote: "I think you’ve also said now where I agree since that’s all I’ve been saying is that God does teach people, humanity as a whole and uses his various messengers to do it.”
God said that the message is complete in canon, and the line of messengers has now closed, this being the point where our personal philosophies diverge. God teaches those who approach Him through His Word and as you say, are willing to ‘listen.’
Matthew wrote: "Perhaps this is another point of scripture you disagree with where even God (himself) is quoted as saying he appoints prophets.”
Who else would’ve anointed the prophets of God for their holy mission?
Matthew James - M. Rasheed wrote: "Teach people what exactly, since we have the Book among us to teach us? That’s what it’s for."
One glance at all the evil in all levels of society should inform us that humanity still needs to be taught, and could certainly come up higher in consciousness, but although I entirely disagree with your view that humanity doesn’t need anything else from God, I respect your right to have that view.
M. Rasheed wrote: "The Book was revealed through the prophets as guidance sure to those who believe. It is possible to have shamanistic experiences and learn new info directly from unseen spirit beings, but whatever they teach had better align to the Truth of God’s message. But how would we know whether we are being led astray or not if we reject the guiding message?"
All new revelations entirely align, and sadly, it doesn’t matter that it aligns because most fundamentalists refuse to open the door anyway to graduate from the old, move from 1st to 2nd grade, 3rd grade then eventually high school etc…., so their religious “foundation,” their base knowledge to something higher, their stepping stone then becomes a ball and chain to their spiritual growth essentially since fundamentalists believe. “God aint got nothing new to say.”
I refuse to think this way, but you’re entitled to it.
M. Rasheed wrote: "God said that the message is complete in canon, and the line of messengers has now closed, this being the point where our personal philosophies diverge. God teaches those who approach Him through His Word and as you say, are willing to ‘listen.’"
I sincerely understand wanting to believe that there will be no more communication, after all its written and it says that, right? But that means that you’re allowing that article of faith (and those who wrote it) to block all further communication and knowledge that might be there.
Yes, the difference philosophically is that I’m a spiritual seeker; wanting to raise my level of consciousness, or as Paul said, I die every day, always seeking to come up higher. I know I don't have the spiritual attainment as Christ Jesus yet he said.
John 14:12 Truly, truly, I tell you, whoever believes in Me will also do the works that I am doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.
I’m capable of this same level of attainment, this Christ Consciousness.
Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus:
I don’t want to stay in the human level of consciousness “needing religions and Priesthoods, and written doctrines. Your communication with God can be direct, but you might not believe that since God doesn’t have anything to say to people…
M. Rasheed wrote: "Who else would’ve anointed the prophets of God for their holy mission?"
Jeremiah 1:5 …. before you were born I set you apart and Appointed you a WHAT… a Prophet..wait what.. A Prophet .. a shaman? It doesn’t say a shaman.
I was making the point that you keep saying you don’t believe that God through messengers or Angels or through YOU for that matter, COULD reveal new spiritual information.
“I set you apart and Appointed you a Prophet.” (again not me saying it, God, … and YOU saying you don't believe it and calling it shamanism.
Well that's why God couldn’t work with you as a messenger since you don’t believe God can or wants to, and there isn’t anything new that God would want to teach since you believe you already have a perfect, infallible religion.
I was making the point that despite that being your said firm belief, the bible does say, God would even make you a Prophet if you’d allow. But that's impossible if you;
Already think your belief system is perfect.
If you don’t believe God has anything new to teach the people.
But as to our discourse, again, you don’t believe in prophets, not even yourself being capable of being raised up and becoming one (not reciting anything old, but you being the open door to reveal information that would bring people up higher)… and I'm not mad at you, I love your work on Quora. We just disagree on this and that's ok :)
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "One glance at all the evil in all levels of society should inform us that humanity still needs to be taught…”
They were taught. They just have to practically apply the knowledge to benefit from it, but they prefer their lusts to the Truth of God.
Matthew wrote: "…but although I entirely disagree with your view that humanity doesn’t need anything else from God…”
Not as long as they are on earth and clothed in flesh they don’t. They don’t need to be taught superpowers, Matthew. The signs are just minor gifts to reward the believers who diligently stay on the Path.
Matthew wrote: "All new revelations entirely align…”
What are you basing that on? What is your metric of discernment, please. Don’t make me track you down, wrench it from you and post it on Twitter. I’ll do it. >:(
Matthew wrote: "…and sadly, it doesn’t matter that it aligns because most fundamentalists […] ‘God aint got nothing new to say.’”
You think the ‘higher learning’ you lust after is the being taught gimmicky superpowers and parlor tricks. How is that supposed to profit you again?
Matthew wrote: "I refuse to think this way, but you’re entitled to it.”
No thanks. I’m allergic to strawman effigies. :P
Matthew wrote: "I sincerely understand wanting to believe that…”
I cannot lose if I believe God. You may continue to put all of your faith into that group of story-tellers using your namesake as a pseudonym.
Matthew wrote: "there will be no more communication, after all its written and it says that, right?”
Earlier I mentioned that God said that the scriptural revelation sent down to all of humankind is now closed in canon, God did confirm He speaks through the veil through inspiration, and so I don’t know where you’re getting this “right?” from. Is this supposed to be a demonstration of your level of information retention and analysis powers? Lame.
Matthew wrote: "But that means that you’re allowing that article of faith (and those who wrote it) to block all further communication and knowledge that might be there.”
Oh no! I decided to take the Omniscient Word of the Omnipotent One God as Truth!!! ARRRGGGHH…!!!! Oh, wait… that’s actually a 100% good thing. *whew!*
And what did you say you were putting YOUR faith into again?
Matthew wrote: "Yes, the difference philosophically is that I’m a spiritual seeker; wanting to raise my level of consciousness…”
…one who rejects the revealed scripture of the One God in favor of stories from backwards-down-the-chain of “progressive scripture” you’re supposed to believe in or whatever.
Matthew wrote: "I’m capable of this same level of attainment, this Christ Consciousness.”
We’re all capable of standing firmly at the highest levels of the Straight Way of God; we all hold the potential. That’s why those who willfully stray far off the mark earn God’s Wrath because who else knows the depths of our potential better than the One who made us?
Matthew wrote: "I don’t want to stay in the human level of consciousness needing religions and Priesthoods, and written doctrines.”
We don’t need priesthood at all. God freed us from prieftcraft after the tribe of Levi’s abysmal failure. But you need the religion to guide your earthly walk and you definitely need the revealed Word of God for instruction. If you wish to graduate beyond them, then you will have to leave your flesh behind. And who knows? Perhaps there will be more advanced versions of the same in the other realms.
Matthew wrote: "Your communication with God can be direct…”
Negative. God Himself said otherwise. It is not appropriate for God to talk directly to fleshy humans, and it is certainly not appropriate to say of God that which isn’t true. I suggest you repent.
Matthew wrote: "…but you might not believe that since God doesn’t have anything to say to people…”
I don’t believe that because it is patently false and directly contradicts what God actually revealed to us. Is this another demonstration of your supernatural powers and insight? I think you may have accidentally skipped one of the basic-level modules in the course.
Matthew wrote: "I was making the point that you keep saying you don’t believe that God through messengers or Angels or through YOU for that matter, COULD reveal new spiritual information.”
If God said that the scriptural canon is closed, who then can open it against His Will?
Matthew wrote: “’[Jeremiah 1:5]I set you apart and Appointed you a Prophet.’ (again not me saying it, God, … and YOU saying you don't believe it and calling it shamanism.”
That was God talking to the prophet Jeremiah (peace be upon him!), so I’m unclear as to what point you’re trying to make here. “Shamanism” is the art/gift/science of entering altered conscious-state trances to learn information from the unseen. It’s not a negative term for those who claim to believe, nor should it be.
Matthew wrote: "Well that's why God couldn’t work with you as a messenger since you don’t believe God can or wants to, and there isn’t anything new that God would want to teach since you believe you already have a perfect, infallible religion.”
I literally have no reason to ever believe a human’s opinions over God’s Truth. The suggestion is offensive.
Matthew wrote: "I was making the point that despite that being your said firm belief…”
I care very much for protecting my state of salvation. :)
Matthew wrote: "…the bible does say, God would even make you a Prophet if you’d allow.”
Yet another demonstration from the guy who self-professes belief in “progressive scripture” actually attempting to entice me with previous versions that God sent new revelation to correct. Really, this is Islam 101 stuff here, Matthew. You are not at all helping your credibility as a “spiritual seeker.”
Matthew wrote: "But that's impossible if you; 1.Already think your belief system is perfect.”
What reason would I have to doubt God’s Truth?
Matthew wrote: "2.If you don’t believe God has anything new to teach the people.”
You want me to reject what God said already to receive God’s teachings? lol
Matthew wrote: "But as to our discourse, again, you don’t believe in prophets…”
Meanwhile, I believe in all God’s prophets from Adam to Muhammad (peace be upon them!). “Belief in the Prophets,” remember? Truly I would not be Muslim if I didn’t believe in them. Please note that’s the literal opposite of what you said, Mr. Spiritual Seeker.
Matthew wrote: "…not even yourself being capable of being raised up and becoming one…”
That’s not a temptation for me. I do not long after hellfire. I am not a fool.
Matthew wrote: "(not reciting anything old…”
Oh, hey, remember that time when Jesus recited “old scripture” as his sole weapon in chasing off the temptations of the evil one? #GoodTimes
Matthew wrote: "…but you being the open door to reveal information that would bring people up higher)…”
lol They could bring their own selves higher just by doing what God instructed as written in the old scripture that the devil – and coincidentally you – scorns.
Matthew wrote: "…and I'm not mad at you…”
*shrug* Only my Lord’s Wrath matters.
Matthew wrote: "I love your work on Quora.”
Thank you.
Matthew wrote: "We just disagree on this and that's ok :) “
Well, it’s okay for ME. You’re the one courting hellfire. I suggest you repent. O_O
Matthew James - I think in terms of belief, we’d never agree for instance with the crucifiction and resurrection. While I do believe that after the crucifiction Jesus came back and went to India (again) I do believe he was crucified, and you think everything that is mentioned in the Bible about his crucifiction is a “lie of his enemies,” or for that matter even when Jesus himself mentions that he knows he’s going to be crucified, that’s all a made up lie as well— which I get— you’re not a believer.
Jesus predicts his death - Wikipedia
As for revalation, revealing knowledge to people in a progressive way when they’re ready to learn more, we come from different faith backgrounds and beliefs on this as well. It’s my view that God and his prophets of old can communicate with humanity and have been for eons even before Jesus’ time when angelic interaction with people was almost commonplace.
As for slavery and marriages of children and sex with children in the Islamic world, walk into many courtrooms or legislatures in the Islamic world and you’ll find it deemed perfectly legal and in accoranace with the Quran.
That should have been reformed out of islamic society where in some Islamic countries its quite prevalent. But since all efforts at reform have been rejected we see it still practiced today.
Anyone who dares propose that God wants the people to come up higher is labeled a liar or con artist because of the fundamentalist mindset be they a prophet, messenger, or anyone.. one would think there should be a problem with that, but most of the people are quiet comfortable making no changes whatsoever.
If I recall correctly over 500 people witnessed him in what would would be described as a “Light Body.” Present, but clearly not 100% physically dense. Some today might call a ghost, but for all of the people who saw him and knew him in life, they agreed it was Jesus after his death.
Matthew 17:3 Suddenly Moses and Elijah appeared before them, talking with Jesus.
Matthew James - M. Rasheed wrote: "Then how else would you know about the Christ at all? Outside of the Qur’an, that is the source text of our knowledge of the final Hebrew prophet, son of Mary."
As I said already, if we’re talking about the same Christ, and same bible and we agreed, Jesus said he still had many more things to teach us but we were not at that junction in time, in that level of consciousness ready to receive any higher teachings when he was on earth 2000 years ago.
John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
Since you do not believe in progressive revelation—well actually you do if you believe in the prophets of the Old Testament and then new ones through the new testament, but you think all revelation has now stopped since your religion told you to believe that God had stopped teaching. You’ve stated also that one would only learn the new higher teachings Jesus talked about ONLY after death.
As I’ve already said, in closing the door, you’re refusing to believe in progressive revelation, the idea that God through prophets and Messengers would or has been teaching humanity anything in the last 2000 years.
I don’t take a fundamentalist mindset to religion. There is in my many errors in man-made human organizations. The religions men erected after the prophets die are imperfect, they’re not infallible, and the scriptures they gave us are imperfect also—- that's the whole reason why:
1. they would keep teaching us,
2. To fix misconceptions.
3. To teach us more in general.
You believe your religion is totally infallible, and that's fine. I just do not trust man-made religions absolutely as you do.
Moreover, if we look at religious violence in the last 2,000 years, crusades and such, not only will we find that rejecting progressive revelation and taking a hyper-fundamentalist mindset to religion keeps people and whole societies “paused in time almost” in terms of consciousness, but fundamentalism also leads to extremism. For example, people really believing things like, “ Your words, your actions, your cartoon would offend my prophet, so I’m justified in burning shit in public and destroying your property!”
Explain, please.
M. Rasheed wrote: "What metric do you use to determine whether the info is accurate/true?"
I was illustrating the point that God has been using messengers and has worked through multiple sponsored organizations in the last 2,000 years, new ones I’m familiar with in the last 5 years. But, if you don’t believe in progressive revelation, why mention them, the messengers, or when they were active or if they’re still active at all since you reject them?
M. Rasheed wrote: "No. I said that what he had to teach was revealed through the next prophet-messenger in the line, and given to accepting followers who WERE ready."
Right, so as I said, you think everything stopped after Raphael gave the Prophet the Quran and you also said one would ONLY learn more when they die.
I don’t think progressive revelation will ever stop.
M. Rasheed wrote: "Only the One God is all-powerful. That’s why God gets to be God."
Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All ..did he say HALF? or 1/3? … ALL authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
So with this power, absolutely nothing is stopping Jesus, or any other prophet or Angelic force just like Raphael or Michael from continuing to work with the people to bring their levels of consciousness and societies up higher, and higher...
“So cartoons can’t offend grown men so much they destroy property and even kill people.”
You don’t think they would do this at all and never have in the last 1500 years. I disagree but respect your view.
M. Rasheed wrote: "I don’t doubt it either (see: Belief in the Prophets)"
But if you do believe he said he had many more things to teach us, you think it was the Quran and that's it. There’s higher level consciousness teachings that have been revealed and given to the people since that time period, but, we disagree on that, and that's fine.
M. Rasheed wrote: "What do you use as the metric for vetting the material and claims for accuracy?"
As I already mentioned, one must do as Jesus said:
1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God. For many false prophets have gone out into the world.
Plus, there is a tradition, a foundation, and the newer works always build upon the older revelation.
M. Rasheed wrote: "I did. I pointed out the difference between cultural traditions that carried over from the pagan-disbeliever era into the Islamic era versus the message of revealed scripture they claim to follow. Any ‘reformation’ efforts need to involve the habits of the people based on comfortable tradition and not to the religion they only pretend to follow as instructed by the guidelines of their Guardian Lord. You didn’t see those posts?"
No, I specifically asked you why do you think it is that today, still, there are things like child marriages and sex with these children that are considered perfectly acceptable in not all, but in many Islamic societies?
I certainly do, and I do think you would as well see something wrong with these pictures.
But you don't think these people need to be told by God directly if necessary that something is wrong with what they’re doing?
Over half of Yemeni girls are married before 18, some by the age eight. Yemen government's Sharia Legislative Committee has blocked attempts to raise marriage age to either 15 or 18, on grounds that any law setting a minimum age for girls is un-Islamic.
Really?
In Saudi Arabia and Sudan, the legal age of marriage is 10 years.
You never addressed why it is in not all, but some Islamic societies their practices are considered legal in Sharia Law.
Really?
In Saudi Arabia and Sudan, the legal age of marriage is 10 years.
You never addressed why it is in not all, but some Islamic societies their practices are considered legal in Sharia Law.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "As I said already, if we’re talking about the same Christ…”
Yes, but what does that have to do with the question of whether you use the NT as the basis of your belief system? Even in this thread, you are quoting it as definitive proof to back your opinion of the subject at hand.
Matthew wrote: "Since you do not believe in progressive revelation—well actually you do if you believe in the prophets of the Old Testament and then new ones through the new testament…”
When you first mentioned the term, it was in the context of an alternate point of view from the revealed scripture of the One God passed down through the ages from Adam the patriarch to the illiterate Arab Muhammad (peace be upon the prophets!).
Matthew wrote: "…but you think all revelation has now stopped since your religion told you to believe that God had stopped teaching.”
The One God point blank stated it in the Book. You’re asking me to accept the narrative of the NT writers over that of the Supreme Creator of the universe.
Matthew wrote: "You’ve stated also that one would only learn the new higher teachings Jesus talked about ONLY after death.”
There are varying stages of higher teachings. The levels taught by the prophets involved individual salvation, and how believers should live in community among each other and in dealings with disbelievers. Following their instructions would enable the adept to successfully navigate material realm hurdles and earn access to the next levels of teaching in the afterlife journey[s].
Matthew wrote: "… you’re refusing to believe in progressive revelation, the idea that God through prophets and Messengers would or has been teaching humanity anything in the last 2000 years.”
Not so, since the Holy Qur’an was revealed inside of that time frame through the prophet Muhammad and I believe that the missions of both Mary, mother of Jesus and John the Baptist (pbut) overlapped it as well.
Matthew wrote: "There is in my many errors in man-made human organizations.”
Agreed. That’s why it is so important for the people to re-align themselves to the Word since their man-made institutional bureaucracies often stray from the righteous path. They lack strong quality assurance procedures, which they should have established FIRST before laying the first brick.
Matthew wrote: "The religions men erected after the prophets die are imperfect, they’re not infallible…”
There’s a difference between the religious institutions men create versus the tenets and guidance of the religion God perfected and His prophets demonstrated to us how to walk out. I discern between the two within the Muslim world with no issue or confusion. I care about what my Lord commands with the benefit of having no familial cultural connections to either of the Semite Nations and/or their affiliates to pull me away from Allah’s guidance.
Matthew wrote: "…and the scriptures they gave us are imperfect also—"
The Qur’an is not imperfect. Lol
Matthew wrote: "that's the whole reason why: 1. they would keep teaching us…”
Who is “teaching” you? Note that you’ve dismissed the only revealed scripture on earth as “imperfect” while at the exact same time repeatedly quoting the stories of the NT at me as if they are perfect? Please explain the discrepancy.
Matthew wrote: "2. To fix misconceptions.”
The Qur’an provided this for those very same NT concepts you continue to quote.
Matthew wrote: "3. To teach us more in general.”
About what?
Matthew wrote: "You believe your religion is totally infallible, and that's fine. I just do not trust man-made religions absolutely as you do.”
Then why do you keep quoting doctrinal Pauline Western Christian concepts at me as if they are real?
Matthew wrote: "Moreover, if we look at religious violence in the last 2,000 years, crusades and such…”
I’m curious about the “and such” since the crusades were by no means representative of “religious violence,” but they were a secular land grab of regular old European-style looting & pillaging with a religious-themed sound track playing over it. Actual religious violence happened during the prophet Muhammad’s lifetime, when the pagan Meccans sought to slaughter the early Muslim community to the last man because they feared the popular new monotheistic cult would threaten their pilgrimage trade revenue streams. The Muslims fought to protect their right to worship Allah as they pleased without persecution, and the violence that ensued was righteous.
Matthew wrote: "…not only will we find that rejecting progressive revelation and taking a hyper-fundamentalist mindset to religion keeps people and whole societies ‘paused in time almost’ in terms of consciousness…”
The people were ‘paused in time’ because greedy tyrannical leadership were jealous of freedoms that would potentially cause changes that would threaten their power monopolies.
Matthew wrote: "…but fundamentalism also leads to extremism. For example, people really believing things like, “ Your words, your actions, your cartoon would offend my prophet, so I’m justified in burning shit in public and destroying your property!”
You sound like everything you think you know about Islam came directly from FoxNews talking heads. Is that why you’re reluctant to reveal to me your preferred metric for discerning truth? If so, you were correct in hiding it.
Matthew wrote: "I was illustrating the point that God has been using messengers and has worked through multiple sponsored organizations in the last 2,000 years, new ones I’m familiar with in the last 5 years.”
God revealed His message to guide humankind to salvation, instructing them in exactly what they need to do in order to prosper both in this world and in the next. God explained who the prophets were, what their mission was, what He bade them to instruct their peoples, and how the Age of the Prophets was formally closed. You do not have the authority to proclaim things about the One God that are not so.
Matthew wrote: "But, if you don’t believe in progressive revelation, why mention them, the messengers, or when they were active or if they’re still active at all since you reject them?”
Please note that despite the fact that you reject the Holy Qur’an—revealed scripture of the Most High—I do tell you about it anyway with assurance and boldness because it is TRUE. And who am I to withhold the Truth from any of God’s servants who inquire? By stark contrast, you hide the information that you hold and consider as superior to the Word of Allah as if you fear that it will be consumed by the Force of my Rod, as I compare these mysterious teachings you hoard against the majesty of The Glorious Qur’an.
If you truly have faith in what you claim to believe, then Throw Down Your Rod, O Matthew, with courage and zeal! Test the mettle of your beliefs! If they be truthful, then of what do you have to hide? Let’s see it.
Matthew wrote: "Right, so as I said, you think everything stopped after Raphael…”
Gabriel.
Matthew wrote: "…gave the Prophet the Quran and you also said one would ONLY learn more when they die.”
The entire point of our lives on earth is to learn and perform as we need to in order to pass the scrutiny of Judgment Day. Everything you need as a fleshy human is within the Qur’an for you to study as a Mercy from your Creator. Anything more awaits you on the other side of the death event.
Matthew wrote: "I don’t think progressive revelation will ever stop.”
Well, it stopped here on earth. The rest is unseen spirit.
Matthew wrote: "All ..did he say HALF? or 1/3? ALL authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.”
You want me to believe this “Matthew” over the All-Powerful, All-Knowing Supreme Creator of all reality. Again. The progressed scripture AFTER “The Book of Matthew” proclaimed that Jesus had no such authority. Do you believe in progressive scripture or not? Only when it affirms your confirmation bias logical fallacy? How enlightened.
Matthew quoted: “‘So cartoons can’t offend grown men so much they destroy property and even kill people.’”
Where did this quote come from?
Matthew wrote: "You don’t think they would do this at all and never have in the last 1500 years. I disagree but respect your view.”
Considering there were many previous eras in Islamic history where many cultures didn’t mind paintings of the prophet and the sahabah, this is clearly not a “religious” item you are blowing up out of proportion, but a crazy item that people only think (or pretend) is a religious thing.
Matthew wrote: "But if you do believe he said he had many more things to teach us, you think it was the Quran and that's it.”
Because that is what is true.
Matthew wrote: "There’s higher level consciousness teachings that have been revealed and given to the people since that time period, but, we disagree on that, and that's fine.”
The things you reject and accept as displayed in this thread cast severe doubt over your claims to have access to preternatural insight and knowledge, Matthew. The fact that you hide the info you claim to have from the light of scrutiny casts yet another layer of doubt upon it.
Matthew wrote: "As I already mentioned, one must do as Jesus said: ‘…but test the spirits to see whether they are from God.’”
And yet you reject the prophethood commission and scripture carried by Muhammad ibn Abdullah, yes? Is your discernment metric broken?
Matthew wrote: "No, I specifically asked you why do you think it is that today, still, there are things like child marriages and sex with these children that are considered perfectly acceptable in not all, but in many Islamic societies?”
And I explained that they were doing these things in the pre-Islamic era, and carried them over because they were more important to them than their faith, as they are today. That’s why your “fundamentalist” comments are so far off the mark and lack all insight from both an academic scholarship position and an esoteric clairvoyant one. Get a better metric, please.
Matthew wrote: "I certainly do…”
Do you though?
Matthew wrote: "But you don't think these people need to be told by God directly…”
They have. It is in the Book they proudly hold in their midst. As you’ve pointed out yourself, they just have to listen. For once.
Matthew wrote: "…if necessary that something is wrong with what they’re doing?”
Their cultural traditions are more important to humans than their faith in the unseen.
Matthew wrote: "Yemen government's Sharia Legislative Committee has blocked attempts to raise marriage age to either 15 or 18, on grounds that any law setting a minimum age for girls is un-Islamic.”
They are wrong, since these rulings cannot be substantiated in the Qur’an, but only through fraudulent hadith tales. I already explained this.
Matthew wrote: "In Saudi Arabia and Sudan, the legal age of marriage is 10 years.”
That means the Semite nations’ leadership are filthy and need to study their scriptures with more focus and a correct mindset.
Matthew wrote: "You never addressed why it is in not all, but some Islamic societies their practices are considered legal in Sharia Law.”
Because sharia is a cobbled together body of legal rulings based more on cultural traditions and centuries old habits that they found their fathers doing than on the Qur’an and authentic hadith they are officially supposed to follow. Such are the ways of men.
Matthew James - You want to know which people or organizations have brought forth new revelations, which I mentioned a few already, but only so that you can try to discredit them since you don’t believe it’s even possible.
I don’t have to watch FoxNews to know about many Muslims being offended by cartoons and turning to violence, which totaaaaaaally shows their level of consciousness— (which you’ve stated is just fine where it is… ) and you still didn’t answer that question about Islam condoning marrying children.
That made you mad so you talked about FoxNews (a propaganda media outlet I despise) rather than answer the question I asked you, again?
You aren’t a spiritual seeker. You believe in the infallibility of your religion.
As I said, progressive revelation never stops, and has been continuous since biblical times for those who have ears to hear what’s being said.
Like I said before, why even mention the ones I’m familiar with if all I’ll be doing is giving you more to disagree with? You’re entirely free to do a Google search and go critique and criticize anyone or any organizations you disagree with-which would be any and all of them :)
You’re already talking about “superhuman powers and parlor tricks and shaman” to quote you… .. none of which is the case, whatsoever —you just would not understand or agree with anything regarding spirituality or revalation —and that’s perfectly fine.
But, if you care to answer I’ll ask again, why does Islamic Law allow for marrying children, and sex with them which is being practiced in not all but in so many Islamic countries?
I mentioned the reform movements (Prohets sent for Islam) and you immediately rejected them.. like I said, why even mention the idea of reform or new revelations since you already disagree with the idea that it would even be needed.
So.. again, and it’s entirly central to this discussion of reform and revelation, God sending Prophets and messengers to help raise the consciousness of his people in various societies, why do you feel the long accepted practice of child sex and child marriage in Islam doesn’t need any reform? You can blame yahoo or bing, or google.. or the United Nations Human Rights Wachdogs— doesn’t have to be FoxNews lol. But seriously I understand your a devout Muslim, and I’m just wondering why you think that practice is perfectly legal within so many Islamic societies and doesn’t need any reform?
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "You want to know which people or organizations have brought forth new revelations, which I mentioned a few already, but only so that you can try to discredit them since you don’t believe it’s even possible.”
It’s not to discredit them, per se; I just want to compare what they said to what the One God said. Don’t you compare new information to whatever metric of truth that you use? It’s a normal and reasonable activity for a scholar when presented with information. If they say things worth keeping then I will keep them. If they say things that conflict with Truth then I will discard them.
Matthew wrote: "I don’t have to watch FoxNews to know about many Muslims being offended by cartoons and turning to violence…”
That’s the same mindset you need to believe that is the majority Muslim opinion of the matter, and that it is somehow an Islamic opinion, despite the behavior not aligning to the Truth of the source text.
Matthew wrote: "…which totaaaaaaally shows their level of consciousness…”
Both Muslims and disbeliever outsiders who shallowly believe the behavior is Islamic are in the wrong and demonstrate both lazy FoxNews levels of research ability as well as low levels of consciousness.
Matthew wrote: "(which you’ve stated is just fine where it is… )”
Humans need to master the human-levels of Truth in order to advance to higher, spiritual truths. One cannot ignore and disdain the basics and simultaneously hold hope of attaining the advanced spiritual mastery of the higher unseen mind. It doesn’t work that way.
Matthew wrote: "…and you still didn’t answer that question about Islam condoning marrying children.”
I actually answered it a few times, but you’re apparently expecting me to read off a script with a canned response that you have a ready answer to? That’s the impression you’re giving by ignoring my responses. The Islamic national cultures marry children because it was what they were doing in the pre-Islamic era and carried the practice over into the post-Islamic era because indulging in their filthy lusts was more important to them than their faith. They encoded the behavior into the body of hadith to legitimize it, but it was not a practice of the prophet, nor can it be found in the Qur’an. Marrying children is not of Islam and is wrong.
Matthew wrote: "That made you mad so you talked about FoxNews (a propaganda media outlet I despise) rather than answer the question I asked you, again?”
It’s only your practice of pretending I haven’t already addressed the question a few times already that annoyed me. It’s starting to feel like some kind of manipulative agenda, one I’m used to from the white racist crowd. I was surprised to encounter it here.
Matthew wrote: "You aren’t a spiritual seeker. You believe in the infallibility of your religion.”
So you believe that a “spiritual seeker” is one who rejects the revealed Word of God by default? I counter with the fact that you cannot be a spiritual seeker of any worth by rejecting God’s Word. It would be a shallow and meaningless title for the one so self-labeled.
Matthew wrote: "As I said, progressive revelation never stops, and has been continuous since biblical times…”
You expect me to accept your comment as infallible truth while rejecting the Word of the One God.
Matthew wrote: "Like I said before, why even mention the ones I’m familiar with if all I’ll be doing is giving you more to disagree with?”
Well, you’re the one who came to comment under my Quora answer and share this info with me. I presume now that you’ve changed your mind?
Matthew wrote: "You’re entirely free to do a Google search and go critique and criticize anyone or any organizations you disagree with-which would be any and all of them”
I was already familiar with the Bahá'í since I am a “spiritual seeker” who has done extensive comparative religion over the last few decades. The general topic has always been of great interest to me and I enjoy the discussions that come from active engagement with game thinkers.
Matthew wrote: "You’re already talking about ‘superhuman powers and parlor tricks and shaman’ to quote you… .. none of which is the case, whatsoever”
Well, that was how I interpreted what you DID say. If it was inaccurate then I was waiting on you to correct me, and even tried to help move the conversation forward by asking you direct questions which you ducked. I can only do so much, Matthew. What I will NOT do is reject the Supreme Creator which appears to be what you really want.
Matthew wrote: "—you just would not understand or agree with anything regarding spirituality or revalation—“
lol How about give me a chance to see what I would understand or not? :)
Matthew wrote: "But, if you care to answer I’ll ask again, why does Islamic Law allow for marrying children, and sex with them which is being practiced in not all but in so many Islamic countries?”
The term “Islamic Law” is where the discrepancy lay. The shariah laws are supposed to be based on the expert analysis by the formal scholars of the Qur’an and example of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), but instead they are based on cultural traditions that often predate Al-Islam’s influence. The leaders of the Muslim countries that practice this child-marrying horror allow the practice because of tradition, not because it is blessed by the faith they are supposed to follow.
That has to be at least the sixth time I’ve addressed that item in this thread.
Matthew wrote: "I mentioned the reform movements (Prohets sent for Islam) and you immediately rejected them.”
Because your idea for why Islam would need reforming actually had nothing to do with the religion. Their customs certainly need to be reformed, but it would require them deep-diving into the religion they’ve only pretended to adhere to.
Matthew wrote: "So.. again, and it’s entirly central to this discussion of reform and revelation, God sending Prophets and messengers to help raise the consciousness of his people in various societies, why do you feel the long accepted practice of child sex and child marriage in Islam doesn’t need any reform?”
lol Again? Because the “long accepted practice” isn’t “in Islam” as those who have done zero research into the topic and lack any and all insight enjoy saying, and the reform would have to be in the cultures of the offending ethnic groups, not the religion.
Matthew wrote: "But seriously I understand your a devout Muslim, and I’m just wondering why you think that practice is perfectly legal within so many Islamic societies and doesn’t need any reform?”
I am a devout Muslim, as a Black American with no cultural ties to the ethnic groups who live under sharia and the ages old cultural traditions that rule over their lives. Note that I have a single wife who has been with me for these 15 yrs and who matched my age of 32 at the time of our engagement. Marrying a child is not part of my religion, nor has it ever been. I am not of the cultures that have practiced such things for thousands of years and lust for it even now while they are supposed to be following Islam. I’m wondering why you, as a self-confessed “spiritual seeker,” aren’t aware of the difference between religion versus cultural tradition, and why you haven’t done any research – earthly or spiritual – to enable you to discern the truth of the matter?
Matthew James - We’ll never totally agree on scripture (which is totally fine) or on the concept of progressive revelation (which is totally fine also.) Plus, as I noted you’re a religious fundamentalist and the problem with religious fundamentalism, be it a Muslim or Christian (thinking your religion is 100% perfect) is that it leads to extremism. You are the perfect example actually. Vis a vis your belief in the infallibility of your religion, you already decided that you had the same power and authority as God and you condemned me to hell more than once in our discourse (something I’m used to from christian fundamentalists actually). Something if you note as other will see I never did to you.
I’m happy to be persecuted by you.
Matthew 10:22 You will be hated by everyone on account of My name, but the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.
I noted multiple times how scripture says Jesus said he yet (STILL) had more to teach.
John 16:12 I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it.
What might he be teaching? Plenty since he’s the spiritual master even the Quran says Muslims are to follow and revere along with Miriam his mother.
John 21:25 There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written. That’s a lot of information he said he YET/STILL had to teach people if all the books in the world wouldn’t have ample space. Those who have ears to hear have been listening for the last 2000 years.
With progressive revelation, you cannot bear it now,” as Jesus said, its the idea is that it happens in stages, once your consciousness is raised to a certain level, more can be tought. So, yes there’s more to teach as Jesus said, (which you did agree with that scripture I think once but then once called it Shamanism, but also part of revelation or the communication that occurs involves correcting errors found in religion.
Apparently you think the human beings who eventually wrote down the Bible and Quran were perfect and the world was perfect. I think they were all flawed human beings with self serving agendas.
….and how scripture (God) multiple times also says he would make new people prophets, (mouthpieces for God essentially).
Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you… I set you apart and appointed you a (a Shaman as you labeled it?) prophet to the nations."
Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise up for them a (Shaman?) prophet like you from among their brothers. I will put My words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.
….but you immediately rejected both holy scriptures (what even most Muslims consider authentic and holy) and you labeled both scriptures and anyone who might be a new prophet as, “shamanism.”
That’s fundamentalism.
Who’s rejecting the Word? I think you Sir.
In any case, to be quite honest, I haven’t noticed any real response to my question.. just you somehow blaming FoxNews for the widespread practice in many parts of the Muslim world.
I asked if the practices of marrying little children and sex with what most consider in 2019 (or for that matter (1950) underage girls in the Islamic world needs reform. I think at best said it’s not really that widespread and not really a problem. But maybe I misunderstood you.
For me, if this is and it is.. being done in the name of Allah, or people believe God blesses these child marriages and sex with kids, even it’s 1 it’s a problem and shouldn’t be condoned or ignored, but it’s thousands and thousands every year.
Pictures don’t lie and the UNICEF isn’t Fox News which you somehow want to keep bringing up in your dodging a rather simple but direct question which says a lot about you. Child marriage - UNICEF DATA
8-year-old Yemeni child dies at hands of 40-year-old husband on wedding night
So along with FoxNews, you seemsed to be blaming Pagans? From 1000 years ago not the people doing it. Also, don’t you find it odd it’s the Muslim men (by the way I’m not saying all) claiming religious rights to marry little girls and it’s not the grown Muslim women marrying little boys?
I’m talking about today, right now, and how that’s always been an issue in the Islamic world that needs reform.
Again, that’s what the revelation over time is for, so people like you or whomever else who practices the religion doesn’t continue thinking for eternity that’s its perfectly blessed and ok to do something God I’m reality doesn’t bless.
You’ve kept saying your belief system, Islam is absolutely perfect. I don’t see anything perfect if your religion says you can marry little girls and have sex with them. A loving God naturally would want to reform that.
You reject all revelelation, all reform, and all new Prophets God might raise. I forgot, the world is perfect just like Islam is perfect.
But I’ll provide another chance. Does the practice of child marriages in Islamic societies (codified in their state laws across the “Muslim world” need reform since its religiously based? —or should it continue to be considered perfectly legal under Sharia Law?
Why bother.. you can keep ignoring the question and in so doing defending the practice.
I’ll stand up for the victims and come what may.
More Denial on your part.
As for Muslims becoming violently angry and destroying other people’s property because of cartoons, it’s well documented and you’re entitled to ignore that as well and say those people who became violently angry weren’t angry and the property these angry Muslims destroyed wasn’t destroyed, and you’re free to say that the Muslims who said the were angry because something offended a dead prophet really didn’t really say it.
Such cartoons don’t offend me. They simply show where someone else’s consciousness might be, or quite simply it’s their attempt to provoke me, but as for me I’m above being angered by sillyass cartoons.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "We’ll never totally agree on scripture (which is totally fine) or on the concept of progressive revelation (which is totally fine also.)”
To be honest, it seems like your explanation and understanding of both of them use a lot of Moving the Goal Post logical fallacies, which only adds to the confusion you conjure.
Matthew wrote: "Plus, as I noted you’re a religious fundamentalist and the problem with religious fundamentalism, be it a Muslim or Christian (thinking your religion is 100% perfect) is that it leads to extremism.”
The technical definition of ‘fundamentalism’ is a strict adherence to the basics of the faith (which is totally fine). This isn’t the definition of the term used by you and your FoxNews pundit buddies though, since none of you know enough about the basics of Al-Islam to make such a pronouncement. The basics of the religion encompass only what Allah revealed in the Qur’an and how the prophet demonstrated walking out the Qur’an’s precepts. Only a believer who strictly adhered to these two items alone would earn the title of “fundamentalist.” These child-marrying creatures you are right to be disgusted by cannot claim to be fundamentalists since there is nothing in the Qur’an that condones the practice.
Matthew wrote: "You are the perfect example actually. Vis a vis your belief in the infallibility of your religion…”
The Holy Qur'an 5:4 (excerpt)
“This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”
I believe it because God said it. Should I believe YOU instead? By what grounds? How many universes did you create?
Matthew wrote: "…you already decided that you had the same power and authority as God and you condemned me to hell more than once in our discourse (something I’m used to from christian fundamentalists actually). Something if you note as other will see I never did to you.”
You have zero grounds to condemn me to hell since I have done nothing or said anything to draw that curse upon me. You on the other hand repeatedly reject the Word of God, and even hint that you yourself are some kind of Prophet (or quasi-divine being) of equal rank to the holy messengers of olde. All of this is the behavior of the unrepentant hellbound as described in scripture. Should I not warn you of the spiritually destructive nature of your argument, or stand back and watch you epicly crash & burn on the Last Day?
Matthew wrote: "I’m happy to be persecuted by you.”
lol Do you believe ye persecuted by me, O Matthew, while ye voluntarily comment under my own Quora answer? Did I show up with a platoon of first century Roman soldiers to drag you over to your keyboard by the scruff of the neck and force you to type your trademarked confusing, Moving the Goal Post fallacies at me?
Because I kind of missed that part.
Mathew quoted: Matthew 10:22, John 16:12, John 21:25, Jeremiah 1:5
These are all quotes from people pretending to be the book authors writing OVER what the original revealed scripture said, but you want me to take it more seriously than the actual revealed scripture of the Qur’an. You think this is reasonable? Why?
Matthew wrote: "Plenty since he’s the spiritual master even the Quran says Muslims are to follow and revere along with Miriam his mother.”
I do follow the Christ Jesus by strictly adhering to what his Guardian Lord revealed in the Qur’an. It contains the (“and STILL”) further advanced material he wanted to recite to his own people but was rejected before he had the chance to.
Matthew quoted: "Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise up for them a (Shaman?) prophet like you from among their brothers. I will put My words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.”
This is the prophecy of the anointing of Muhammad from among the children of Israel’s Arab brethren nation.
Matthew wrote: "….but you immediately rejected both holy scriptures…”
I reject the claims that they are “revealed scripture” because they cannot realistically make such a claim. Revealed scripture is only the Word as recited by the prophets themselves, while these writings – both Old and New – are but tales of ‘hadith’ as described at length in an earlier post. I’m forced to pick through them, as I have to do with my own faith’s hadith, in order to find the portions that authentically align to the true revealed scripture from the Lord thy God.
Matthew wrote: "(what even most Muslims consider authentic and holy)”
Logical Fallacy violation: "Argumentum Ad Populum" (Appeal to the People”)
Matthew wrote: "…and you labeled both scriptures and anyone who might be a new prophet as, ‘shamanism.’”
My description and reference to shamanism was actually a positive one. I hold a great deal of respect for the concept and have even incorporated it into my magnum opus graphic novel series. I see my bringing it up seems to have only gone over your head and made you vilify the term which 100% wasn’t my intention (back when I still thought you were cool. Booooo.). It actually means when a spiritual adept has an altered consciousness experience, learns new information directly from the unseen spirit realms, and brings it back to teach to the people. It’s really amazing. If this isn’t what you meant by “higher consciousness,” plus you’ve continuously rejected the advanced revelation taught us by the One God in the Qur’an, then exactly what ARE you talking about when you mention “higher consciousness teachings?”
Matthew wrote: "That’s fundamentalism.”
I reject your definition of the term, as it is contradictory and doesn’t make any sense.
Matthew wrote: "Who’s rejecting the Word? I think you Sir.”
lol According to the definition of the term ‘fundamentalism’ (“strict adherence to the basic principles of any subject or discipline” | Bing search) I’m the only one between the two of us who is NOT rejecting the Word of God. According to your own documented explanations of “progressive revelation,” I am actually correct in upholding the Qur’an OVER your beloved abrogated Pauline writings. SIR.
Matthew wrote: "In any case, to be quite honest, I haven’t noticed any real response to my question..”
That’s because you have taken on a position of disingenuousness that does you little credit.
Matthew wrote: "…just you somehow blaming FoxNews for the widespread practice in many parts of the Muslim world.”
That’s a strawman effigy fallacy. I use the FoxNews reference to label a particular mindset, i.e., one that knows nothing about a topic except the poorly researched, embarrassingly shallow, partisan propaganda against a topic pretending to be truth. This is the unfortunate position that you – a so-called “spiritual seeker” as you’ve oddly self-labeled yourself – have taken regarding this child marriage business.
Matthew wrote: "I asked if the practices of marrying little children and sex with what most consider in 2019 (or for that matter (1950) underage girls in the Islamic world needs reform.”
Allow me to refresh your memory. You actually uncritically claimed that the religion of Al-Islam itself required the reform because of the practice of child marriage. I pointed out the inaccuracy in blaming the religion for an ages old cultural practice that actually existed among those same people before Islam’s influence. It should be obvious to even basic-level critical thinkers who haven’t yet attained the quasi-holy “spiritual seeker” stage that this would mean the reform isn’t needed within the religion itself, but in the cultural traditions.
Try to stay on track, please, Mr. Wannabe Guru.
Matthew wrote: "I think at best [you] said it’s not really that widespread and not really a problem. But maybe I misunderstood you.”
You understood me, since that was merely your demonstrated disingenuousness at work, tainting your witness something awful. At no point did I ever downplay the wrong of child marriage among those cultures. I even called the practice names such as “filth” to highlight my personal condemnation. My only argument is to rightfully re-direct your reformation crusade away from the religion and towards the entrenched cultural traditions and state laws where it actually belongs. That’s all. Somehow your magical spiritual seeker guru powers transformed my argument into “M. Rasheed sure luvs dem child brides! Guffaw!!” which means you may formally ‘close your door’ since you have nothing of value to teach me. To put it mildly.
Matthew wrote: "So along with FoxNews, you seemsed to be blaming Pagans?”
I’m not “blaming the pagans,” but pointing out that the practice didn’t originate in the Qur’an and was instead carried over from the days of pre-Islamic seventh century pagan Arabia. My point is that vilifying Islam for the practice shows a remarkable lack of insight and a demonstration of poor scholarship. The fact that you believe some random asshat can proclaim “In the Name of God!” over a foul stench and it automatically blesses it to flowery purity by the actual religion itself, means you are no spiritual seeker at any stage and you may leave that illegally-gained chevron at the door of this thread as you leave.
Matthew wrote: "Also, don’t you find it odd it’s the Muslim men (by the way I’m not saying all) claiming religious rights to marry little girls and it’s not the grown Muslim women marrying little boys?”
From within a toxic patriarchy culture? No, why would that be “odd.” That’s the barbaric crap men do when they hold such power.
Matthew wrote: "I’m talking about today, right now, and how that’s always been an issue in the Islamic world that needs reform.”
Yes, it 100% needs to be reformed. Since it isn’t a religious item – and the people obviously don’t care what their religion says about it – they don’t need a dubiously credentialed “new prophet” to do the reforming. They need a strong government that actually works in the people’s favor.
Matthew wrote: "Again, that’s what the revelation over time is for…”
Please stop talking about that. Your own practice in this thread proves that YOU don’t even practice it nor even believe in it. If the people were ACTUAL ‘fundamentalists’ over their own religion’s source text, then they wouldn’t be treating the children in this way. Period.
Matthew wrote: "I don’t see anything perfect if your religion says you can marry little girls and have sex with them.”
I agree with you. Fortunately Al-Islam doesn’t tell the people to do any such a thing, hence why you have to look before the influence of the religion to find the root cause of the practice.
Matthew wrote: "You reject all revelelation…”
Meanwhile, I actually completely accept the final revelation of the One God while you viciously reject it from behind a confused cloud of pseudo-spiritual, judaeo-christo, theoso-fishy speak.
Matthew wrote: "…all reform…”
Meanwhile, I’m 100% for reformation of those toxic cultural traditions that abuse those children. I wish them luck.
Matthew wrote: "…and all new Prophets God might raise.”
I absolutely reject all post-Muhammad claims of formal Prophethood by those crackpots. Yup. Sure do. Tell me why I shouldn’t, please. And try to actually make sense when you do it as a favor to me, since I know you can’t stand that.
Matthew wrote: "I forgot, the world is perfect…”
The world is perfectly made by its Supreme Creator and functions according to His Will precisely how it was designed to function. Perhaps you mean something else?
Matthew wrote: "…just like Islam is perfect.”
The Holy Qur'an 5:4 (excerpt)
“This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.”
*shrug*
Matthew wrote: "Does the practice of child marriages in Islamic societies (codified in their state laws across the “Muslim world” need reform since its religiously based? —or should it continue to be considered perfectly legal under Sharia Law?”
Your understanding of the concept is fundamentally flawed. “Religiously based” doesn’t mean anything since there are portions of those laws (like child marriages) that do NOT align to the revealed message source text of God. There are portions of those laws that do indeed align to the Qur’an in either verse and/or spirit, and there are those that do not. All the ones that do not (like child marriage) need to be immediately removed and made illegal.
Matthew wrote: "Why bother.. you can keep ignoring the question and in so doing defending the practice.”
Meanwhile, not once have I ignored the question. The problem is that you don’t know enough about the topic, and don’t know what you are talking about. That makes for poor discussion.
Matthew wrote: "More Denial on your part.”
You don’t know what “denial” means apparently. You asked me a question, I addressed it, you got mad because I didn’t answer it the way the “spiritual seeker” voices in your head told you I would or whatever, then you claimed I “denied” the question. The problem isn’t with me, dude.
Matthew wrote: "As for Muslims becoming violently angry and destroying other people’s property because of cartoons, it’s well documented and you’re entitled to ignore that as well and say those people who became violently angry weren’t angry and the property these angry Muslims destroyed wasn’t destroyed, and you’re free to say that the Muslims who said the were angry because something offended a dead prophet really didn’t really say it.”
I see your long string of ridiculous strawman effigies that I hope at least somehow managed to make sense within your own brain, and I ask you this: What do those over-emotionally triggered wingnuts who can’t control themselves when they see a cartoon have to do with the Muslim world as a whole? Obviously it’s not the entire 1 billion strong global population of Muslims behaving this way, so what are you even talking about here? lol Perhaps you think I know these folk and you expect me to call them up and lecture them about it? I literally have zero idea why you’re even bringing this up. I happen to be a cartoonist, you know? I know for a fact how powerful the medium is and how triggered the weak-minded can get when their buttons get pushed, but that triggered trait isn’t a “Muslim” one or we ALLLLLL would be acting that way. Be thankful that whatever your point is supposed to be, that it isn’t true.
Matthew wrote: "Such cartoons don’t offend me.”
Me either. Should they? Am I some triggered 17 yr old kid living in a cave somewhere with nothing better to do but clean my AK-47 and get triggered over stuff? Let me assure you, I am not.
Matthew wrote: "They simply show where someone else’s consciousness might be, or quite simply it’s their attempt to provoke me, but as for me I’m above being angered by sillyass cartoons.”
Okay? Well, thanks for that. I guess.
Why were you bringing that up again?
Matthew James - I should also note, like Christ Jesus I'm ready to die for the truth of what I'm saying. My scathing critique of the parts of Islam I don’t agree, and do need reform, still, are being said and recorded here from one of the most Islamic countries on earth.
Matthew 16:25 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
If I have to give up the ghost and lose my life Jesus said I’ll gain it. I’m not afraid to speak the truth.
My door is open. I’m a not a high guru, but a spiritual teacher as well. I can serve as His mouthpiece, like anyone else.
What all too often happens to others in the past who served as messengers (because their door was open)?
Burned at the stake, called a witch, hung, crucified, tortured.. People usually fall into fundamentalism and then refuse to continue to be taught.
This was and still is a problem in Israel as Jesus noted:
Luke 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling.
Once one develops some degree of Christ Consciousness like I said you don’t need a priesthood and books and churches and mosques. You can come to know truth on your own without any intermediaries.
In any event, everything I’ve been saying has been for other people to understand as well. There’s a reason why I am come, here of all places.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "I should also note, like Christ Jesus I'm ready to die for the truth of what I'm saying.”
That seems pretty risky considering your penchant for rejecting the Word of God and your demonstrated FoxNews levels of research ability. :P
Matthew wrote: "My scathing critique of the parts of Islam…”
I look forward to you revealing this since thus far it is absent in our discourse.
Matthew wrote: "If I have to give up the ghost and lose my life Jesus said I’ll gain it. I’m not afraid to speak the truth.”
So far you’ve demonstrated you lack the ability to discern between ancient cultural tradition versus religious tenets, as well as your practice of expecting me to accept NT verses while rejecting the next progressive scripture in the line despite you leading this discussion with your proclamation of belief in progressive scripture. Your grasp on “truth” is dubious at best.
Matthew wrote: "My door is open.”
lol Let’s resolve these items first.
Matthew wrote: "I’m a not a high guru, but a spiritual teacher as well. I can serve as His mouthpiece, like anyone else.”
No one can serve as the mouthpiece of God while simultaneously rejecting His message, Matthew.
Matthew wrote: "People usually fall into fundamentalism and then refuse to continue to be taught.”
So far you’ve demonstrated that you lack the ability to discern between old cultural tradition from religious tenet, to the point that it caused you to dismiss the One God’s revealed message.
Matthew wrote: "Once one develops some degree of Christ Consciousness like I said you don’t need a priesthood and books and churches and mosques.”
Like I said, there is no priestcraft in Al-Islam. The One God banished the priesthood sometime when the prophet Malachi was on earth (pbuh) after the tribe of Levi’s colossal failure. The churches and masjids (mosques) are just places for the believers to gather to pray in congregation in support of one another. There’s literally zero reason to vilify the concept on any level.
Matthew wrote: "You can come to know truth on your own without any intermediaries.”
Allah said that in the Qur’an that you reject. I literally didn’t need that from you. Why is your “door open” again?
Matthew wrote: "In any event, everything I’ve been saying has been for other people to understand as well.”
Yeah?
Matthew wrote: "There’s a reason why I am come, here of all places.”
God has a reason for all of our presence here, Matthew.
Matthew James - God Bless Muhammad. You seem to want to revisit arguing with me over your beliefs every other week.
I’m no longer interested as I’ll never agree with your personal interpretations of scripture and your rejections of anything not found in Islam.
Take care.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote:"You seem to want to revisit arguing with me over your beliefs every other week."
I had to break away from what I considered our ongoing dialog because I was juggling several anti-racism arguments (that fuel my daily editorial cartoon output). As soon as I closed a few of them out, I returned to where we left off.
Matthew wrote: "I’m no longer interested as I’ll never agree with your personal interpretations of scripture and your rejections of anything not found in Islam."
I was actually looking to solve the contradictions/paradoxes within your stated belief system so I could understand your position better. As it is you left a lot of confusion in your wake. God is not the Author of confusion, Matt.
Matthew James - Just like I said, “crackpots and shaman.”
I’m not a fundamentalist so I have no desire to prove that my belief system is right. You are a fundamentalist and your ego has a burning desire to try to make me agree with you and that’s why you ignore the scripture Ive repeatedly cited and called prophets God said he would appoint “crackpots and shaman” before even learning who they might be and what they might be saying.
I already knew you had no sincere desire to learn. You in fact told me so. Why give you more to disagree with? :)
You’re the one being disingenuous. It’s called projection and you’re exhibiting a lot of it, and if anyone is angry it’s you. You won’t stop messaging me trying to prove you have a perfect infallible religion.
I do not believe Islam is perfect and infallible. I don’t believe any religion is.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: "Just like I said, 'crackpots and shaman.'”
You shouldn’t mix the two. The shaman isn’t a crackpot.
Matthew wrote: "I’m not a fundamentalist…”
That does explain why you are so contradictory and wishy-washy even in the stuff you claim to believe in.
Matthew wrote: "…so I have no desire to prove that my belief system is right.”
That’s what everyone says when they know their belief system isn’t right. :P
Matthew wrote: "You are a fundamentalist and your ego has a burning desire to try to make me agree with you…”
My intellect and spirit of debate just wanted you to try to make at least a little sense at some point during this discussion. That’s all. That’s more “closure driven” than “ego driven” I think. lol
Matthew wrote: "…and that’s why you ignore the scripture Ive repeatedly cited…”
I didn’t ignore them, they just take a necessary backseat to the next progressive revelation in the line, especially relevant since what you cited were only men’s slipshod recollections, interpretations and even agendum fabrications of the original revealed message preached by the Christ. That left you on a shaky foundation indeed and it’s really sad your “spiritual seeker” skills aren’t revealing that to you.
Matthew wrote: "…and called prophets God said he would appoint ‘crackpots and shaman’ before even learning who they might be and what they might be saying.”
lol You said you didn’t want to tell me anyway even after I point blank asked, so you can’t blame your stuff on me.
Matthew wrote: "I already knew you had no sincere desire to learn.”
I always have a sincere desire to learn. I’m amused that you think you would be the one to teach me. I told you to Throw Down Your Rod! and you refused. That means you hold no rod worth mentioning. #Elementary
Matthew wrote: "You’re the one being disingenuous.”
TRANSLATION: “I know you are, but what am I?!”
Really, Matt? Is THIS your rod? Figures.
Matthew wrote: "It’s called projection and you’re exhibiting a lot of it, and if anyone is angry it’s you.”
And what would I have to be angry of? Are you not the very same “spiritual seeker” who refuses to reveal his lore in fear that I will critique it and hurt his feelings? Are you not that “spiritual seeker” who lacks basic research ability to discern between cultural tradition versus religious tenet? :D
Matthew wrote: "You won’t stop messaging me…”
I’m actually walking this discussion down to its logical conclusion, then I will create a cartoon cover for it and mount it on my trophy wall. That’s what I do. ;)
Matthew wrote: "…trying to prove you have a perfect infallible religion.”
I certainly am not trying to ‘prove’ that which the All-Powerful Supreme Creator of reality proclaimed as Truth. Stop. I was actually just having a conversation with you and somewhere along the way you decided to get butthurt, perhaps when you realized you weren’t what you believed you were. Now you’re lashing out at me.
I forgive you though.
Matthew wrote: "I do not believe Islam is perfect and infallible.”
This will be your undoing.
Matthew wrote: "I don’t believe any religion is.”
It doesn’t matter what you think, Matt. What matters is that which God revealed in His Mercy. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you may actually be on this ‘spiritual seeker’ path you currently lust after and maybe even manage to save your soul from the fire. I hope you make it.
Peace.
Matthew James - Ok, I hope your ego feels better writing the monologue I didn’t read. I have no desire to give you more to disagree with. Your ego feels threatened and cannot fathom alternative viewpoints possibly being true, and you’re in attack mode of any scripture I cited, or interpretation of it as I haven’t even cited any sources other than the Bible for my viewpoint.
Plus— you condemned me to hell again lol.. That’s religious funadementalism.
I’ve askef now nicely a second time. Please stop messaging me regarding this. I’ve allowed you to have the last word.
Peace.
Muhammad Rasheed - Matthew wrote: “Ok, I hope your ego feels better writing the monologue I didn’t read.”
You actually gave the impression that you barely read ANY of my posts. That’s at least half of why you seemed like you were ducking questions.
Matthew wrote: “Your ego feels threatened and cannot fathom alternative viewpoints possibly being true…”
And which alternative viewpoints would my ego be threatened by, Matt? Since you pointedly refuse to disclose that viewpoint in fear that my Rod would devour it.
Matthew wrote: “…and you’re in attack mode of any scripture I cited…”
Did I really “attack” it? Or did I actually use the same criterion of “progressive revelation” that you introduced into this thread in the beginning?
Matthew wrote: “…or interpretation of it as I haven’t even cited any sources other than the Bible for my viewpoint.”
Remember when you said the NT isn’t the source of your knowledge about Jesus, and when I asked how could this be when the NT is the definitive source of the world’s knowledge of the Christ, plus you flat out reject the Qur’an’s numerous mentions of him because of your proudly narrow-minded position, and you refused to tell me where else you got knowledge of him from because you were afraid of my Rod’s critique? #GoodTimes
Matthew wrote: “Plus— you condemned me to hell again lol”
Also Matt wrote: “…the monologue I didn’t read.”
Me: *sips tea*
Matthew wrote: “Please stop messaging me…”
lol Stop commenting under MY Quora answer. I deliberately set these up for dialogue. If you don’t want to play then don’t play. Get your game up.
Matthew James - But why would I waste the time since what was an intellectual discourse discwnded into you condemning me to hell for my viewpoints you didn’t agree with them— something I never did to you. Not only is that very impolite, but it shows a great deal of religious intolerance on your part.
Here’s the thing. I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I don’t think you understand that whatsoever. I gave supporting scripture to my view, but again, I’m not trying to convince you as I alresdy understood that with your being a religious fundamentalist, everyone else must be wrong because you’re certain that you are right in the literal approach to Islamic scripture you take. My view is more so for others to ponder since I already knew beforehand you don’t have ears to hear. As you said all revelation stopped with Islam and anyone else partaking in communion and or servicing as a messmager of God to quote you is “ a crackpot and shaman.”
To reiderate, what you’ve done is suggest.
All people need to be Muslims
Islam is perfect and needs no reform even with hold marriages— it did take you weeks to condemn what should be easy and instant:
Condemned me to hell on multiple occasions
What I’ll do, again, is say that you’re entitled to interpret scripture however you want to. I’m not the fundamentalist and I won’t condemn you to hell although I was taught by a “pretty good source” what happens in the afterlife to people who condemn others to hell, but you’re free to condemn me and everyone else you want to. Again, as you said with you’re supporting scripture, I MUST conform to your view of Islam and your interpretation and for not doing so you’ve condemned me to hell at least 3 times now :)
Muhammad Rasheed - Are you messaging me again after asking me not to message you? Curious. You may as well just pull up a chair and keep trading with me since you obviously enjoy online argument as much as I. We can do this like civil adults without deliberately getting under each other’s skin. I would rather just talk about the ideas and concepts on the table with you, and probe your alternate view point of the same, since I don’t consider you an enemy. I’m under no obligation to convert to Matthew-ism as you are under no obligation to take on my beliefs just because we’re talking about them. That seems to be a big part of your attitude that I didn’t immediately submit to you as the guru figure I always wanted or something similar. You must be used to that from people. I’m not looking for any gurus or mentors, doc, I just want to have the discussions. I’m not your enemy just because your beliefs don’t appeal to me the way they appeal to you. I hold on to my own hopes & dreams for my soul; there are other items that fill me with awe and have my attention along the line of my own research threads into spiritual esoteric lore. I ask you to share your interests with me so I can evaluate them from my own metrics, both from the Word of God and from the place of my own research library sticky notes. Just chill, please.
Matthew wrote: "But why would I waste the time since what was an intellectual discourse discwnded into you condemning me to hell for my viewpoints you didn’t agree with them— something I never did to you.”
It didn’t dissolve into anything; those are actual relevant points of my belief system. You must realize that you actively decided to engage in a religious-themed philosophical discussion with a real life Muslim? In case you were in doubt, please know that I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, the One God of Abraham, and I bear witness that the unlettered Arab Muhammad ibn Abdullah is His anointed prophet-messenger (peace be upon the prophet!). I believe Allah’s message as revealed in the Qur’an, I believe in the prophets, in the Books they recited during their earthly lifetimes, I believe in the unseen spirit and in the certainty of the coming Day of Judgment. That means that if anyone rejects the message of God and rules for humankind established by God in His Word, they will go to hell. This is a basic, “Islam 101” precept of my sacred belief system, and telling you about it doesn’t mean that I am personally condemning you to hellfire. I have no hellfire, nor do I have the authority to banish you to it for a personal offense even if I wanted to. No. This is GOD’S PRINCIPLE and the promise the All-Powerful Master of Judgment Day revealed to us all as a warning. When I – a human speaking to a fellow human – tell you about this principle, it is no different than telling you about any other principle the Creator God established in the universe He wrought (gravity, nuclear fusion, pi, etc.). In other words, I’m merely passing along the message to someone who didn’t get the memo. That’s all.
Matthew wrote: "Not only is that very impolite, but it shows a great deal of religious intolerance on your part.”
I disagree. You were asking me to disregard the all-important source text of my sacred belief system to instead take on your own faith tenets that if I did so, would doom me to hell according to my faith. I asked you on numerous occasions to tell me what you held that would assure me that your way trumped the way I had chosen. You refused to answer and even got offended when I explained that according to my belief system, what you were proposing would send us BOTH to hell instead of just you (from my faith’s perspective). These are my BELIEFS, not a trolling attack against you. When you ask me to step over a line that I take seriously, I tell you about that line because it’s important to me, not to attack you, not even when I use it in a joking tone.
Matthew wrote: "Here’s the thing. I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I don’t think you understand that whatsoever.”
You always gave the impression that your irritation came primarily from your inability to convince me to set down what I hold in exchange for yours. You continue to give that impression even now, and I can’t help but think that’s why you all of a saddened turned salty during along the way. Like it wasn’t enough for us just to have the discussion. If this ISN’T true, then what was the point of withholding information because you were afraid I would critique it? There’s nothing wrong with just discussing it and allowing me to examine it just as an intellectual discourse exercise. I understand that this is material that is important to you (within the wishy-washy limits of commitment possible for a self-confessed non-fundamentalist), but you’ll need a thicker skin if you want to go around presenting it to folk not already in your stiff-necked tribe.
Matthew wrote: "I gave supporting scripture to my view…”
Scripture that was abrogated by the progressed revelation that I hold. Even if through some miracle you really did support your view with the conspicuously extinct ‘Gospel of Jesus’ pure revelation of the final Hebrew messenger himself, the Qur’an would STILL trump it by virtue of the nature of “progressive revelation.”
Matthew wrote: "…with your being a religious fundamentalist, everyone else must be wrong because you’re certain that you are right in the literal approach to Islamic scripture you take.”
In addition to the ‘progressive revelation’ concept at play here, there is also the matter of the Authority that backs my point-of-view, which is no less than the Word of the One God revealed in the Holy Qur’an. In all seriousness, why would I ignore a verse from God Himself to instead believe the re-interpretation of an NT writer who wasn’t even the direct recipient of the revealed message? I really don’t understand you on this item, especially since it directly contradicts the very ‘progressive revelation’ concept you yourself introduced in this thread. I hope my question make sense as I hope for a serious and straight forward answer from you.
Matthew wrote: "My view is more so for others to ponder since I already knew beforehand you don’t have ears to hear.”
I always have ears to hear, but it is clear now that ‘hearing’ wasn’t all you wanted from me. You really did expect me to convert and you seemed to be confident that the ‘child marriage’ item would be the Draw Four card to shake me.
Matthew wrote: "As you said all revelation stopped with Islam…”
God said it. I merely passed along the memo. Please tell me why you believe I should ignore God’s message and accept yours in its place?
Matthew wrote: "…and anyone else partaking in communion and or servicing as a messmager of God to quote you is 'a crackpot and shaman.'”
Anyone else claiming to be a messenger of God is absolutely a crackpot not worth listening to. That’s definitely my position and my view is backed by the Authority of God’s Word. You aren’t quoting me at all since I never vilified shamanism. In bringing the concept up, I unfortunately cast a pearl where I had no business tossing it.
Matthew wrote: "To reiderate, what you’ve done is suggest. 1.All people need to be Muslims”
Not so. Allah said all humans have to do is believe in Him, do good deeds, reject evil and repent when we mess up and we will win through to paradise. It’s possible to do so and not be a formal Muslim, but it will be more difficult because of the compromised nature of the previous abrogated scriptures (that’s why we have “progressed revelation,” you see).
Matthew wrote: "2.Islam is perfect and needs no reform even with hold marriages—“
Islam IS perfect, as it was fashioned by God and gifted to us per His Word I quoted earlier. It does NOT need reform but for the believers to simply adhere to its precepts. If they did so then they would not be marrying children since that abhorrent practice isn’t at all part of the faith Allah perfected for us, but from old cultural traditions the people have made into local law as they don’t wish to leave them behind them.
Matthew wrote: "…it did take you weeks to condemn what should be easy and instant:”
I condemned it from the beginning. You are being disingenuous once again.
Matthew wrote: "3.Condemned me to hell on multiple occasions”
No, you condemned yourself to hell by rejecting the Word of God and implying you were a messenger of that same God. I suggest you repent.
Matthew wrote: "What I’ll do, again, is say that you’re entitled to interpret scripture however you want to.”
It turns out that I already knew that.
Matthew wrote: "I’m not the fundamentalist…”
That explains why you lack a firmness in your own stated beliefs and have a wishy-washy handhold upon them. It’s clear that I believe in ‘progressive revelation’ way more than you do. Do you even know what you believe? Honestly.
Matthew wrote: "…and I won’t condemn you to hell…”
You not only lack the authority to do so, but your attitude on this items means you don’t know the criteria that will send someone to hell. You treat it like someone is insultingly spewing harsh profanity at you instead of actually citing scripture as a warning. This is not the stance of a “spiritual seeker,” Matthew, since the term implies deep knowledge of sacred scripture as a basic foundation.
Matthew wrote: "…although I was taught by a ‘pretty good source’ what happens in the afterlife to people who condemn others to hell, but you’re free to condemn me and everyone else you want to.”
I am not a judge and lack the authority of condemnation. I am a believer in the Lord Most High and merely passed along the memo of scripture to you since you’ve proven woefully unfamiliar with the content. If you really think that means I “condemned you to hell,” then I remain in skepticism over the quality of this ‘spiritual seeking’ you’re supposed to be engaged in.
Matthew wrote: “I MUST conform to your view of Islam and your interpretation…”
You’re having this discussion with ME, not with any other Muslim. As I pointed out earlier, I didn’t marry a child bride and I don’t rage out over those ‘Mohemet Toons.’ I am my own person with my own mind, and I use my own God-given intellect to analyze the materials I subscribe to. Perhaps part of your attitude comes from frustration because I wasn’t reading off of a hive-mind watchtower-like script you’ve seen other Muslims recite from before? Well, I am not that guy. I am me. I haven’t studied under any mentors, gurus, ‘Islamic Mullahs,” etc. You’re discussing these concepts with M. Rasheed, not a well-trained representative of a formal institution’s school of thought.
Capisce?
________________________________
MEDIUM: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.
No comments:
Post a Comment