Good1,
I have spent a bit of time going over Sampson.
As you used to be into "Christianity" ( I am not going to put in doubt the quality
of the "christienhood" you went into), may I just ask regarding Sampson and Dalila:
Did your pastor (?) priest(?) explained things such as :
- Sampson is one the only two ( with Saul) of the old testament to be consecrated BEFORE their own birth. That is : an Angel was sent to announce his birth BEFORE
his conception, and the mother was given instruction BEFORE she was pregnant.
In the case of Sampson these were : no drinking, etc.
- Sampson was consecrated BEFORE birth as a NazIrite ( different to Nazareite) :
that means Sampson was forbidden to touch any corpse ( even family member when dead), any intoxicating drink ( wine, alcohol, etc), and cut his hair.
Being consacrated BEFORE birth, Sampson was given ( blessed) with a unique
strength. His strength did not come from his muscles, but by the anointment
he had.
- Now, God - even if he has a destiny for his "chosen for a task", still leaves the person
with FREEWILL.
- Sampson :
1) did touch a dead corpse ( an animal's one)
2) lied to his own parents when a kid
3) became a drinker
4) went into all types of "sinful behaviors".
5) used his "God blessing" only for himself
- Now, check how Dalila died
- Now check when Did Sampson came back to God fully :
when he was blind!
I don't know if your priest/pastor did explain to your congregation,
that whenever someone is consecrated to God, S %* A ^¨ T $£ AN will
work very hard to mislead this person from as Young as possible. Sampson
fell.
Sampson : more to learn than what most assume.
* * *
Now you left "Christienhood" and feel that you have your hands clean.
May I just point out that Bouddhism has been studying the human mind for 5,000 years non-stop; Christianity has been recording human mind for more than 2,000 years;
Judaism ( Torah here exclusively, not talking about the Talmud), has been recording
human mind for more than 2,000 years.
Why not use what these people know ( obviously, one has to be able to discern
"knowledgable" priests/pastors), and use your critical mind to check/select what is good and drop the rest ?
Now, Islam is a bit singular :
1) Some Catholics ( from some Jesuits saying) have been more or less
involved in early Islam - childhood/teenage education of Muhammad(???)
2) Some Jewish have been more of less involved in early Islam
3) Muhammad being said to have been a victim of S;o/r!c%ery ( w ; i / t! c % h % c % raft):
some ask questions about the effects of such things on the person.
However, Islam has extremely good scolars who can, for instance, highlight:
1) how/why people "sin"
2) what lead people to "sin" ( for the cynics, those could learn how to corrupt
people)
3) also, how "Christiens" do not practice their religion well
4) these scolars - strangely- used to be into some sort of ascetism,
and their ramadan was zero food ( only pure water) for a whole month, and not what we see of people eating copiously every night.
Basically, each of the religions coming from the Old Testament, have really "Saint"
people. But these people are "Saint" for a reason : they can read people very well,
and they are very instructed in understanding the Bible - as it is said
"some will hear, but not listen; some will read, but not understand". Religion is in fact
something very esoteric - aka a form of really hidden knowledge.
****
Now, you talk about allegiances to Muslims, why not ask them to first show
real allegiance to their own religion.
- have they even studied their own religion? most have not, but claim loudly "A l l ... Ak...AR"
- have they even done a real Ramadan ( aka just water for a whole month, and zero food
for a whole month): most have not. But those who have, strangely are not really into
decapitating other Muslims as it is taking place in the Middle East.
Any more remarks?
