This Holy Quran Prank Is So Devious It's Brilliant.

Why don't you all who want to compare what the Qu'ran says to the Bible actually read a good version of the Qur'an versus talking out your posteriors?

You all are proving the exact ignorance in the video, you have assumptions of what the Qur'an states without having read it.

Everyday I see people post what is supposedly in the Qur'an but isn't. Those verses from the Old Testament in the video are way worse than whatever is in the Qur'an.

WHAT IS NOT IN THE QU'RAN:

Stoning for Adultery ... (!!!!!)
Honor Killings or killing children .. (WTF!?!?!? How could you assume something so horrible is in there? The Qur'an was actually against female infantacide which was practiced before it preached.. Also, honor killings are a cultural issue, not Qur'anic. Hindus, Yazidis, and even Arab CHRISTIANS practice honor killings, so it is a cultural problem and not one of religion.)
A Caliphate
Any clear system of government or laws beyond rudiments and principles.
Any command to subjugate Christians and Jews
Any command to turn the other cheek and not fight back if your under attack.

The last point is a main difference between Islam and Christianity. I see this as realistic as most Christians act as if their religion condones the rightful practice to defend one's land and family like Judiasim and Islam does, but Christianity actually states the exact opposite. It asks it's adherents to be peaceful martyrs.

Anyone interested what the Qur'an really says should buy the Study Qur'an by Seeyid Nasr.. It has brilliant commentary:

a reply to: boymonkey74

Our money says 'In God We Trust'. What does our government spend the biggest portion of that money on? Bombs, bullets, instruments of destruction. Bible followers are the blood-thirstiest religion of all. We just don't call it terrorism but it's exactly the same thing on a larger, more organized scale.

Well,there is the whole Christian belief that Jesus changed it all... For those that don't know, the Christian Bible has the Old Testament which is basically the Jewish Torah, and then Jesus told his dad that that stuff is way to harsh for a normal human. Then his dad being the brute that he is says "OK well, then if you die a horrible painful death I will forgive all of them and let them come to heaven." That is what the New Testament is about. While modern churches still use the old stories as that, stories. They usually take from the New Testament for their sermons so many parts of the Old are left out of the common studies presented to the average Christian on Sunday. While you will find many Baptist and Pentecostal Sects screaming hellfire and brimstone to justify how the feel about the gays or blacks or whatever they are scared of. Jesus changed all of that.

If we still had to follow the old testament we would all need to buy a second house to send our wives and daughters to the week before and the week after they have their monthlys, and burn our favorite chair if she sits on it while bleeding. No not only if it gets a stain. It really says a man can no longer sit-in a chair that a woman has sat in while on her period, so it is commanded burned. Crazy right?!

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
The age of the internet and YouTube has bred a generation (or 2) that accepts what their church, mosque, synagogue tells them and Facebook posting and the X-factor inhibits their ability to discern things, research things, READ things for themselves.

"being fooled does not make you a fool, you only become a fool when you continuously fall for the same Sh!t"

Exactly. That's why I have a link to the entire Qur'an in my signature (Pickthall translation). I don't care if people accept it or reject it because Islam isn't for everyone. But reading it in its entirety is the only way to have a truly informed opinion of it. Otherwise, it's no different than taking a few "anti-Muggle" passages from a Harry Potter book, then claiming they prove the author advocates genocides on humans lol.

As for the OP: Yeah, I saw this on another forum. I love it because it highlights the double standards. It's like the people who say Muslims are violent, then turn around and advocate wars against us lol! As if wars aren't violent and military campaigns don't kill innocent people. Or the ones who talk crap about specific Quranic passages about war & self defense, yet they actually chose to go to war and have killed people. They've followed those war & self defense passages closer than most Muslims have!

Them: Rawr! The Qur'an says that anyone who attacks their main place of worship should be killed! Monsters!

Me: Don't you guys push for guns in churches? Don't large churches have security guards? And don't Catholics have armed forces to protect the Vatican? What's the difference?

a reply to: AudioOne

I agree. It's the same with FGM (female genital mutilation). It's not in the Qur'an either. In fact, FGM is the idiotic practice of "circumcising" women; which is ironic because circumcision isn't in the Qur'an either! FGM is an Eastern African tradition that is used by Muslims, Christians, and other groups in the region who (ironically) say that both men & women should practice circumcision equally. In other words, they're pushing for gender equality in one of the worse possible ways (though some also do it to control women, like foot binding in China).

Just as there's nothing in the Qur'an stopping women from driving or controlling their own transportation. In fact, my Muslim mom's the one who taught me how to drive lol.

originally posted by: pheonix358

originally posted by: Indigent
At least one religion moved away from its source material and is not longer stoning people to death

Well .... no!

The people made it illegal.

If it were still up to the church, I don't know! Just look what they still do today and try and get away with.

P

Gentile Christians do not live under Mosaic or Talmudic Law. Never have.

Justinian Law is the basis of Western Law today. Justinian (Christian Emperor of Byzantium) created a set of laws called the Justinian Code. The Justinian Code was law throughout the empire.


I know of no Christians who want to institute Mosaic or Talmudic Law and live under it.... Do You?

New Testament:

Because we know that a man is not justified by works of The Written Law, but by the faith of Yeshua The Messiah, we also believe in Yeshua The Messiah, that we should be made right by the faith of The Messiah, and not by the works of The Written Law, because no one is made right by the works of The Written Law.

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them." 11 Now it is evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for "He who through faith is righteous shall live"; 12 but the law does not rest on faith, for "He who does them shall live by them." 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree." 14 that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Now it is evident that no man is justified before God by the law; for "He who through faith is righteous shall live."

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree."

that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM." 11Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." 12However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM."…

a reply to: boymonkey74

Yeah, I knew it was going to twist that way. Just a bunch of PC kids whom are obfuscating the fact that there isn't one single Christian nation that actually practices these 2000 year old barbaric bible rituals in the 21st century.

Stop trying to compare 2015 with BCE already. It's not even in the same context anymore

I liked the part were they proved jesus raped a nine year old girl as one of his many wives.

And jesus claimed god told him it was perfectly fine torape non-believers wives and take them as slaves.

And how jesus called black people,raisin heads and considered the black race imferior and more suited for slavery.

And how jesus said thieves should get their hands cut off, and women who are raped should be stoned and apostates beheaded.

They proved Jesus was just like the "prophet" of islam...oh wait that never happened.

I guess there are some key differences between muhammadens and christians after all.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yeah, I saw this on another forum. I love it because it highlights the double standards.

Now I know you've got confirmation bias. There are no double standards because Christians don't follow the old testament anymore. It's been 'reformed" unlike Islam. You know this...but decide to ignore this fundamental fact. If you were at least honest with yourself or had a single ounce of integrity like the good Muslim you proclaim to be, you would not have "loved" it. You've clearly demonstrated you will use straw mans to validate your own point of view.

FGM is the idiotic practice of "circumcising" women; which is ironic because circumcision isn't in the Qur'an either!

And neither is stoning. But Islam has adopted that into their laws as well. What's your explanation for that? 15 countries that do it.

"The New Testament, in which God is in a much better mood." --seminary saying

a reply to: ghostrager

So it's not Jesus that's the problem, it's his ancestors?! Good point, but then you'd be called racist against Jews.

a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

His ancestors were not Jewish...

originally posted by: sweftl337
The word “Jew” never existed in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic and Jesus spoke mostly Greek and Aramaic. First of all, if we go back some 2000 years, there were no Jews. There was a land known as “Judea” and in that land lived many different peoples. The people of Moses were the Hebrew Israelite's – there was no Jew.

originally posted by: Nichiren
Jesus was a 'Judean', not a Jew. During His lifetime, no persons were described as "Jews" anywhere. That fact is supported by theology, history and science. In none of the manuscripts of the original Old or New Testament was Jesus described or referred to as a "Jew". The term originated in the late eighteenth century as an abbreviation of the term Judean and refers to a resident of Judea without regard to race or religion, just as the term "Texan" signifies a person living in Texas.

In spite of the powerful propaganda effort of the so-called "Jews", they have been unable to prove in recorded history that there is one record, prior to that period, of a race religion or nationality, referred to as "Jew". The religious sect in Judea, in the time of Jesus, to which self-styled "Jews" today refer to as "Jews", were known as "Pharisees". "Judaism" today and "Pharisaism" in the time of Jesus are the same. Jesus abhorred and denounced "Pharisaism"; hence the words, "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers".

“Judaism as we know it today did not exist before Christ. Before Christ, there was only the faith of the Israelites, until by a gradual process, the pure faith of the Israelites was subverted by corrupt teachings. These corrupt teachings were transmitted orally by the Pharisees. Christ condemned these teachings when calling them the ‘traditions of the elders.’”

Judaism Discovered

When the word "Jew" was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was "Judean." However during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the English speaking peoples of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew." It is a misrepresentation. . .

There is not a person in the whole English-speaking world today who regards a "Jew" as a "Judean" in the literal sense of the Word. That was the correct and only meaning of the word in the 18th century . . . (Facts Are Facts, by Benjamin H. Freedman, p. 15-21). The meaning of the word "Jew" in our Bible is not the same as the colloquial idiom.

Jesus Christ was not a Jew. Had Jesus been a Judean it is very likely He would have been an Edomite, not a kinsman to Adam, and thereby disqualified from being the Holy One of Israel, the last Adam, who was born to redeem the first (Leviticus 25; Ruth). Were Jesus a so-called Jew He would not have been Messiah whom the Lord prophesied would dwell in Galilee of the Gentiles (Isaiah 9:1-7). Jesus did not live in Judea and dared not walk in Jewry (i.e. Judea), "for fear of the Jews" who sought to kill Him.

History of God's Holy Bible and the so-called Jews

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Religion is not for me, I can't reconcile it to my life in this age.

That said, I have read the Quran in translation (from a historical and geo political interest) and the Surah i remember in these trying times of people killing each other over their doctrine is this one:

I worship not that which ye worship;
Nor worship ye that which I worship.
And I shall not worship that which ye worship.
Nor will ye worship that which I worship
Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion

Ironic huh?
People are the same the word over they interpret religious doctrine for their own ends.

The Qu''an is a more graceful read than the KJ bible.

originally posted by: Murgatroid

His ancestors were not Jewish...

History of God's Holy Bible and the so-called Jews

Anti Semetic nonsense from your link .

Jesus was Jewish. Sorry to the haters, but they worship a Jew.

(John 4:22).

Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.

The first book of the NT pertains specifically to his Jewish genealogy, validating him as the Messiah
(Matthew 1:1).
“The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham”

Luke Chapter 3 specifies his mother was a descendent of King David.

Hebrews 7:14, “For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah,”

Was he observant, yes:
(Luke 2:39). “done everything required by the Law of the Lord”

Jesus also displayed the outward signs of being an observant Jew. He wore tzitzit (tassles) on His clothing (Luke 8:43; Matthew 14:36) to serve as a reminder of the commandments (Numbers 15:37-39). He observed Passover (John 2:13) and went up to Jerusalem (Deuteronomy 16:16) on this very important Jewish pilgrimage feast day. He observed Succoth, or the feast of tabernacles (John 7:2, 10) and went up to Jerusalem (John 7:14) as required in the Torah. He also observed Hanukah, the festival of lights (John 10:22) and probably Rosh Hashanah, the feast of trumpets (John 5:1), going up to Jerusalem on both those occasions as well, even though it isn't commanded in the Torah. Clearly, Jesus identified Himself as a Jew (John 4:22) and as King of the Jews (Mark 15:2). From His birth to His last Passover Seder (Luke 22:14-15), Jesus lived as an observant Jew.

www.gotquestions.org...

He attended Synagogue (Luke 4:16) and even preached in Jerusalem in the temple, and had he not been an observant Jew he would not have been allowed pass the threshold. .....

I think the Ironic part is that both Islam, and Christianity took what they wanted from Zoroastrianism.

Zoroastrianism or Mazdaism[n 1] is one of the world's oldest religions, "combining a cosmogonic dualism and eschatological monotheism in a manner unique... among the major religions of the world."[1] Ascribed to the teachings of the prophet Zoroaster, its Supreme Being is Ahura Mazda. Leading characteristics, such as messianism, the Golden Rule, heaven and hell, and free will influenced other religious systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Christianity, and Islam.

en.wikipedia.org...

Doesn't matter in the slightest. Either by polytheism or monotheism.

Mankind has ALWAYS been effed up.

I don't understand all this one-upmanship over which religion is more or less violent in which circumstances and times.

Islam is crap.
Christianity is crap.
Judaism is crap.
They're all crap.

They all have adherents who will resort to violence. They all have stupid, nonsensical beliefs. They all believe in fantasies. They all exclude each other, whether it's to call them gentiles, pagans, infidels, or whatever. And they all have created significant conflict in the world both on the present and in the past.

A pox on all their houses.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I wish everybody could stop talking about other people religion and talk about their own one. Playing jokes with what is considered sacred books for other people is not respectful.

I'm Christian and believe many parts of the Bible are "past due", that's why Jesus came with an "update". Amazingly, there is still a lot of people stuck in an old concept of Christianity that results easy to use for jokes and downplaying.

a reply to: neo96

Zoroastrism is interesting. The parallels between and Christianity are there, but the only problem being our only source the Avesta dates from the 13th century AD. It is hard to determine if the 13th century Avesta borrowed from Christianity / Judaism or if it in fact a genuine recording of oral tradition from the 6th century BC.

It likely does predate Christianity as their are influences from it found in ancient Aryan religions. (down into India)

the Avesta does not claim that Zoroaster himself was resurrected from the dead. So much for the parallel between Jesus and Zoroaster and for the idea that the church got the idea of the resurrection from the Avesta. Other parallels have been claimed by Jesus-Mythers. They claim that Zoroaster was baptized in a river. There is no mention of this in any Zoroastrian scripture. They claim that his was a virgin birth. The Avesta refers to a “kingly glory” that was inherited by Zoroaster through is mother, but it is hard to see this as equivalent to a virgin birth. Another claim is that Zoroaster, like Jesus, was tempted by Satan in the wilderness. There is perhaps some parallel here, as Zoroaster was tempted for ten years (rather than forty days) by a sub-demon named J. Buiti, not by the Zoroastrian equivalent of Satan (who, by the way is not equivalent to Satan, but who is equal to Ahura Mazda in power).

evidenceforchristianity.org... the-religion-believable/

On the other hand scholars have argued for a while whether Judaism borrowed from Zoroastrism, or was it the other way round?
During the time of Isaiah there is Persian/Babylonian overlordship of the Israelites, so the influence was there, but Moses etc was considered before before Zorastrism.
Anyway the point is no one can settle on when the religion was formed so its hard to define if it had influence on others.
To add to the debate, they just found the seal of King Hezekiah, and it has the symbol of the sun disk.

An interesting read from a non Judeo-Christian perspective:

The myths and religious ideas of Genesis are nothing but borrowings from Zoroastrianism according to Dr. Friedrich Spiegal in Avesta die Heiligen Schriften der Persens (Wien 1853). Persian influence on post-exilic history was extreme. The post-exilic prophets acted as spokesmen for the Persian kings. Ezra and the others not only dated events by Persian reigns, but recorded the kings' edicts. In the Exilic books the name of Cyrus occurs 14 times, Darius 13 times, Xerxes 7 times and Artaxerxes about the same. There is no other religious book in the world that so honored foreign princes.

- See more at: www.iranchamber.com...

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: muSSang

Why is it BS? are you saying the passages are not in the book?.

The old testament, has some really "gruesome" chapters ... but they are NOT part of the Christian bible. The Christian bible, is ONLY the new testament.

The bible is split into two parts, the OLD testament, and the NEW testament.

The old testament is NOT a part of the bible ... it's a REFERENCE to the Tanakh. But I wouldn't take that "quote" too seriously, as I DOUBT it's accurate.

a reply to: Trueman

I wish everybody could stop talking about other people religion and talk about their own one.

I wish they would stop talking and be the person that claim they are. They say they love God, yet they spend their life reading books written by man and following a messenger, instead of living their lives in a Godly manner.

If they spent half the amount of time thinking of God, and trying to please him with their mouth, their their heart and their deeds, we would not have any problems.

They are victims of poor teachings, lies and manipulation. Until they let go of the all of these man made tools, they will remain blind and caged. Anybody that claims to love God has to know that in religion God is reduced to an old incompetent fool, that has to use men to do his job for him. Their claim of the inspired word of God, means that someone believes God spoke to them, and they then felt compelled to share what he supposedly told them. We have thousands of those on the internet on any given day, and we have a lot of gullible people following them too. I just hope they don't start commanding their followers to kill all that don't believe.

If they truly believe in an Omnipotent God, I would think they should see that he is very pissed off right now, and I don't blame him. I would be pissed off too if my people were following the pied piper right off the cliff and ignoring me.