Anti-Semitism in Religions

[godelian]

I have analyzed the Quran into >1400 themes, what I asserted is based on the specific themes which I can extract the related verses.
It is just that I am lazy in this case but very confident.

That is still not a quote.

Is it Islam and you are an official believer of Islam [a Muslim] and you want to rely on Jewish and Christian scholars which may be bias views for whatever reasons?

If the scholar's conclusion necessarily follows from his premises, then why would it matter what his background may be?
It doesn't matter who exactly says it. The only thing that matters, is how it is justified.
In fact, if it matters who says it, than what he says cannot possibly matter.
That is actually epistemology 101.

The proper authority for Islam must be from the expert Islamic scholars and historians.

It is the justification that matters, not the person producing it.
Your views are contrary to standard epistemology.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I have analyzed the Quran into >1400 themes, what I asserted is based on the specific themes which I can extract the related verses.
It is just that I am lazy in this case but very confident.

That is still not a quote.

I have not quoted.

Is it Islam and you are an official believer of Islam [a Muslim] and you want to rely on Jewish and Christian scholars which may be bias views for whatever reasons?

If the scholar's conclusion necessarily follows from his premises, then why would it matter what his background may be?
It doesn't matter who exactly says it. The only thing that matters, is how it is justified.
In fact, if it matters who says it, than what he says cannot possibly matter.
That is actually epistemology 101.

Its history 101 ["written by winners"] which is very subjective, more so, if they are from non-Muslims authors trying to convince Muslims.
There is no room for proper epistemology with theology which is grounded on faith.

The proper authority for Islam must be from the expert Islamic scholars and historians.

It is the justification that matters, not the person producing it.
Your views are contrary to standard epistemology.

I agree empirical justification is critical, e.g. as in science or even history to some extent.
But not in this case regarding the Islam as evolving from the Ebionite Gospels.

[godelian]

Its history 101 ["written by winners"] which is very subjective, more so, if they are from non-Muslims authors trying to convince Muslims.
There is no room for proper epistemology with theology which is grounded on faith.

That is sheer nonsense. Theology is justified from scripture. History is justified from corroborating witness depositions. Therefore, the JTB account of knowledge is perfectly applicable. A knowledge item -- as always -- is a two-tuple (claim, justification) where (justification ⊢ claim).

Theology is staunchly foundationalist. Therefore, the faith is exclusively concentrated in the scripture -- not in the conclusions that one draws from them. History is empirical. Every claim requires witness depositions.

I agree empirical justification is critical, e.g. as in science or even history to some extent.
But not in this case regarding the Islam as evolving from the Ebionite Gospels.

So, instead you prefer to rely on prefabricated conclusions?

I have pointed out the existence of extensive scholarship on the matter.

The following is from a blog post from someone who seems to believe pretty much the same as I do:

http://arabianprophets.com/?page_id=2834

Muslims believe in the gospel of the followers of James the Just, the brother of Jesus and leader of the Jesus movement in Jerusalem. This gospel is revealed in the Quran. Christians believe in the biblical gospels which are reflective of the Greco-Roman philosophy and mythology that pervaded 1st Century Roman occupied Palestine. According to Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 67, the Palestinian Jews, who opposed the hellenization of their scriptures, accused the hellenized authors of the gospels of modeling the birth story of Jesus on that of Perseus. According to Greek mythology, Perseus was born of the virgin, Danae, upon who Zeus sired Perseus. The Palestinian Jews who opposed this story are currently known as Ebionites, or the Poor ones. The Ebionite gospel was destroyed by the trinitarian Christians who viewed this gospel as heretical. Fragments of this gospel survive in the writings of Epiphanius of Salamis, a Greek bishop.

The Ebionites were Jewish Christians who followed the law of Moses and believed Jesus to be a prophet who was the fully human son of Mary, a Levite, and Joseph, a Judean from the tribe of Judah. The Gospel that the Ebionites followed is a revelation found in the Quran. In order to understand this particular revelation, one must understand the history of the Ebionites in the Arabian Peninsula.

The Ebionites were forced to flee Palestine after the Roman Jewish wars and after the failure of the Bar Kochba revolt. The Romans did not distinguish between the hellenized Jews and the conservative Jews. Both were forced to flee Jerusalem, the temple was burned to the ground, the Bar Kokhba revolt failed, the Romans banned all Jews from Jerusalem and renamed the city Aelia Capitolina. A portion of the exiled Jews fled to Mesopotamia and another faction fled into the Arabian Peninsula. It appears that Muhammad was descended from the Ebionites who settled in Arabia.

Muhammad’s great grandmother, Salma bint Amr, was from the Jewish clan of Banu Najjar meaning ‘the clan of the Carpenter.’ This clan was located in Medina and is listed under the Jewish clan of Banu Awf in the Constitution of Medina. She married Muhammad’s great grandfather, Amr Al Ula who changed his name to Hashim after he married Salma bint Amr. He is reported to have changed his name because Hashem was the Jewish name for God.

Hashim was a Hanif. He and Salma were the parents Abd Al Muttalib whose birth name was Shayba al Hamd (the white streak of Praise) who, as the grandfather of Muhammd, named his grandson Muhammad meaning the ‘the Praised One’. Both Shayba and Muhammad were raised in Mecca. Muhammad was also a Hanif (monotheist). It might be that that Salma bint Amr was a descendant of the Ebionites who fled the Roman Jewish wars and settled in the Arabian Peninsula. Her clan’s association with the Ebionites is retained in the name Najjar, the Carpenter, after Jesus association with that profession (Mark 6:3). This would certainly explain the Ebionite view of Jesus in the Quran. According to Wiki: “The 12th century Muslim historian Muhammad al-Shahrastani mentions Jews living in nearby Medina and Hejaz who accepted Jesus as a prophetic figure and followed traditional Judaism, rejecting mainstream Christian views. Some scholars argue that they contributed to the development of the Islamic view of Jesus due to exchanges of Ebionite remnants with the first Muslims.”

What the Quran calls the "hanif" (monotheists) are pretty much surely Ebionites.

[attofishpi]

History is empirical. Every claim requires witness depositions.

The only history you should contemplate is as I state within the Divine nature of the English language.

HIS_STORY: Christ.

..and NO, it's not empirical - "witnesses" can make up whatever bullshit they want, idiot.

[godelian]

..and NO, it's not empirical - "witnesses" can make up whatever bullshit they want, idiot.

You are quick to call other people idiots, especially when it is you who are in fact the idiot:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method

Historical method

Eyewitnesses are, in general, to be preferred especially in circumstances where the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically, when they deal with facts known by most contemporaries.
...
An eyewitness is more reliable than testimony at second hand, which is more reliable than hearsay at further remove, and so on.
...
If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias then the credibility of the message is increased.
...
Eyewitness evidence

R. J. Shafer (1974) offers this checklist for evaluating eyewitness testimony:[12]

[Sculptor]

See this:
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Quran-antisemitic

Why there is anti-semitism in religions?

The aim of messianc religions is to win over the others. The single minded, single god, single messiah begs that their verision of reality be the true one.
Jews reject Jesus and Mohammed as the true saviour.
Christians think Jesus is the One, but utterly reject Mohammed as a false profit.
Islam considers itself the 3rd stage of religion, whilst they accept Moses ,and Jesus as prophets they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth.

Of the 3 Jews alone restrict membership into their "tribe" as they think themselves the special nd chose people.
Well no one likes a smart ass. And whilst Christians have spent a thousand years hating Ilsam and Islam hates CHristians back, they both agree that Jews are the worst.
The VAST majority of all 3 religions just want to live their lives in peace and get on with growing their family and wealth.
But when the shit hits the fan and there is a recession or depression people look around for someone to blame.

And it comes back to the bigotry of the Old Testament, which all three religions use as a source, for an excuse to SMITE the other. Being at the bottom of the stack Jews get the worst of it.

There is a solution to all this. Stop being a religious nut job.

[godelian]

Islam considers itself the 3rd stage of religion, whilst they accept Moses ,and Jesus as prophets they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth.

The late Muhammad, may he rest in peace, was also no more than a prophet.

[Sculptor]

Islam considers itself the 3rd stage of religion, whilst they accept Moses ,and Jesus as prophets they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth.

The late Muhammad, may he rest in peace, was also no more than a prophet.

What's your point?
There are Christians who think Jesus was mortal too.

[godelian]

Islam considers itself the 3rd stage of religion, whilst they accept Moses ,and Jesus as prophets they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth.

The late Muhammad, may he rest in peace, was also no more than a prophet.

What's your point?
There are Christians who think Jesus was mortal too.

It is standard doctrine in Islam that Muhammad is not divine. Nor is Jesus. There are no divine humans in Islam

[Sculptor]

The late Muhammad, may he rest in peace, was also no more than a prophet.

What's your point?
There are Christians who think Jesus was mortal too.

It is standard doctrine in Islam that Muhammad is not divine. Nor is Jesus. There are no divine humans in Islam

Yes, so what is your point?

[godelian]

Yes, so what is your point?

Concerning what you wrote, "they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth", this is not true because it is against fundamental Islamic doctrine to see any human as a god. That would lead to having two gods, which is exactly what Islam does not want.

[Sculptor]

Yes, so what is your point?

Concerning what you wrote, "they see Mohammed as the one true god on earth", this is not true because it is against fundamental Islamic doctrine to see any human as a god. That would lead to having two gods, which is exactly what Islam does not want.

The thread is asking about why religions are antisemitic

[Veritas Aequitas]

And it comes back to the bigotry of the Old Testament, which all three religions use as a source, for an excuse to SMITE the other. Being at the bottom of the stack Jews get the worst of it.

Each of the three Abrahamic religion has their own specific Constitution, i.e. Contract [covenant] and terms of contract therein as stipulated by God.

As such, each of the believers must comply with their terms of contract and no where else.

The Jews with their elitist 'God chosen people' and ego naturally invited 'hate' from others, it is the primal us vs them impulse.

Meanwhile, it is stipulated in the Muslim's contract with Allah, the terms of contract dictate he must hate the Jews or kill them upon the slightest threats [even drawing of cartoons and being a disbeliever] from them.
As such, Muslims can hate and kill Jews [& infidels] in the name of God and the religion.
The critical reason why Islam hate the Jews is because they mocked and rejected M as the new prophet.

The terms of the Christian contract with Jesus/God has an overriding pacifist term, i.e. love all - even enemies, give the other cheek.
As such a Christian cannot hate Jews and every one.
If any Christians were to hate Jews because they rejected Jesus, it is on their own personal act and has nothing to do with Christianity-proper. They cannot hate Jews in the name of Jesus or Christianity.
The terms of contract for a Christian are only in the Gospels i.e. direct from Jesus from God. The OT, Acts, Espistles are not part of the terms of the contract, they merely act as a guide.

[Sculptor]

And it comes back to the bigotry of the Old Testament, which all three religions use as a source, for an excuse to SMITE the other. Being at the bottom of the stack Jews get the worst of it.

Each of the three Abrahamic religion has their own specific Constitution, i.e. Contract [covenant] and terms of contract therein as stipulated by God.

Nah. Were only if it were that clear.
At least one reason why there are a number of different factions and cults associated with all three, is that there is no clear message of that sort, in the numerous and contradictory scriptures.
Christians cannot even agree if there is a concept of the "trinity", nor that Jesus was mortal or divine.

As such, each of the believers must comply with their terms of contract and no where else.

The Jews with their elitist 'God chosen people' and ego naturally invited 'hate' from others, it is the primal us vs them impulse.

I'm pretty sure they all do that in their own ways.

Meanwhile, it is stipulated in the Muslim's contract with Allah, the terms of contract dictate he must hate the Jews or kill them upon the slightest threats [even drawing of cartoons and being a disbeliever] from them.

Nope. You have expressed a minority view. Some think that a snowman is an affront to god, but not many.
Some think that drawing a picture of a flower is against god's law. But like everything, there are exrtemes, and not so extreme.
It is Christian "law" that adulterers ought to be smited.

As such, Muslims can hate and kill Jews [& infidels] in the name of God and the religion.
The critical reason why Islam hate the Jews is because they mocked and rejected M as the new prophet.

The terms of the Christian contract with Jesus/God has an overriding pacifist term, i.e. love all - even enemies, give the other cheek.

Tell that to GW Bush and his crusades against Islam in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As such a Christian cannot hate Jews and every one.

Yet Christians have been punishing Jews for killing Christ - and just being more clever and capable then them for 2000 years, whilst Jews have lived in peace in Islam far more during that time.

If any Christians were to hate Jews because they rejected Jesus, it is on their own personal act and has nothing to do with Christianity-proper.

Fuck off with your childish "No True Scotsman" Bollocks.
Judge by deeds.

They cannot hate Jews in the name of Jesus or Christianity.
The terms of contract for a Christian are only in the Gospels i.e. direct from Jesus from God. The OT, Acts, Espistles are not part of the terms of the contract, they merely act as a guide.

As usual you reference some idiot ideal in your head whilst ignoring the fact of reality.
This is your whole problem and why no one agrees with anything you say on the Forum.

[FlashDangerpants]

They cannot hate Jews in the name of Jesus or Christianity.
The terms of contract for a Christian are only in the Gospels i.e. direct from Jesus from God. The OT, Acts, Espistles are not part of the terms of the contract, they merely act as a guide.

As usual you reference some idiot ideal in your head whilst ignoring the fact of reality.
This is your whole problem and why no one agrees with anything you say on the Forum.

I was lead to believe that in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says specifically that the he isn't there to change one word of the law (Old Testament), so this whole "fresh start" thing is a bit fucked anyway?