Oh God. Don't ask him that.
Sharia is the solution.....how could I have missed it?
- Thread starter XJEEPER
- Start date
Gee, I wonder if your "muslim protester" would handle himself the same way this Christian missionary did...
I've observed Christian missionaries being treated with far better respect at large stadium festival seating rock concerts,
where they were shouting and waiving signs about sin, hell, repentance, & salvation at the thousands of kids as they entered in.
Sure, some derrogatory comments were made, but nobody touched or crowded them, and nobody stole or destroyed their stuff.
Event security never forced them to leave, either.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
Don't bend my words to support your opinion.
All 3 cases noted are great examples of what can happen when individuals in positions of power, become corrupted by power and greed and hijack their religion to act out their personal agendas and stray from the true doctrine of Christ. These are actions of morally corrupt individuals who exploited their ecclesiastical positions. History is loaded with examples of those who have chosen this path.
Interesting parallel: The original pilgrims that came to America did so to escape the Act of Uniformity; the rule of law that all British citizens must follow the doctrine and traditions of the Church of England.
What do I believe?
I believe that all mankind is born with the Light of Christ; the ability to know good from evil, so they can choose right from wrong. ( some call this their conscience)
I believe that all mankind will be judged for their individual actions and be held to personal accountability for their actions and deeds, both good and evil.
I believe this earthly life is a test and that it should be our goal to strive to do good and to better ourselves each day, looking for opportunities to help others who are less fortunate; to emulate Christ's examples.
Only one person born on Earth was perfect in every way. I believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
I apologize if you felt my last post was bending your words, that was not my intent.
When you posted "opinion" I guessed you had disagreed with my post, yet you seem to acknowledge that people of any religion can "hjijack" it for their own purposes. May I ask what exactly you disagreed with of that post? Or if you disagreed at all?
- Location
- Wasatch Range
I disagree with your statement in that Christians would have acted the same.
Further thoughts regarding your historical comparisons of the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition and witch trials, I would say that many valuable lessons were learned from these, so much that the Founding Fathers were inspired to put into place laws that clearly separate church and state, which will prevent the US from perpetrating any such action, unlike other countries who are still engaged in aggressive wars in the name of religion.
When Muslim leaders call for caliphate and world domination (one must understand that under Islam, there is no separation of government and religion), the destruction of the Jews and any others who stand with them, they are acting as they have done since 630 A.D.
Here's a great read, for perspective.
Though European Crusaders may have been sincere, they wandered off from the origins of Christianity when they slashed and burned and forced conversions. Jesus never used violence; neither did he call his disciples to use it. Given this historical fact, it is only natural that the New Testament would never endorse violence to spread the word of the true God. Textual reality matches historical reality.
In contrast, Muslims who slashed and burned and forced conversions did not wander off from the origins of Islam, but followed it closely. It is a plain and unpleasant historical fact that in the ten years that Muhammad lived in Medina (622-632), he either sent out or went out on seventy-four raids, expeditions, or full-scale wars, which range from small assassination hit squads to the Tabuk Crusade, described above (see 630). Sometimes the expeditions did not result in violence, but a Muslim army always lurked in the background. Later on, Muhammad could exact a terrible vengeance on an individual or tribe that double-crossed him. These ten years did not know long stretches of peace.
Therefore, it is only natural that the Quran would be filled with references to jihad and qital, the latter word meaning only fighting, killing, warring, and slaughtering. Textual reality matches historical reality.
But this means that the Church had to fight back or be swallowed up by an aggressive religion over the centuries. Thus, the Church did not go out and conquer in a mindless, bloodthirsty, and irrational way—though the Christian Crusades were far from perfect.
Islam was the aggressor in its own Crusades, long before the Europeans responded with their own.
Full article with detailed timelines here:
http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/crusades_timeline.htm
- Location
- Wasatch Range
Hehehe, you just triggered my Trolldar.........
See Mark 11:15
"Then they came to Jerusalem. And He entered the temple and began to drive out those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves"
While this is mostly true, the keyword here is "New Testament". God endorses all sorts of violence in the Old Testament. Which I feel it is a bit much to write off, that being half of our Holy Book. Lets have a look at Isiah 15:13
"For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children."
Yeah man, hes talking about killing babies right there....
This is also true, however my counter argument stems from the OT, so if you feel that part doesnt matter ( I am not implying this, so dont say i am bending words now) then disregard this.
If we examine Deuteronomy 20:1-20, we find that it explicitly list rules for Holy Wars! Yep, its OK as long as you follow the rules. To briefly go over them;
First you offer the city you are going to be besieging a peace offer. If the accept, they become your slaves for life.
If they don't accept, then you kill ALL the men and
"but the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves"
and
"do not leave alive anything that breathes"
Yikes.
True, but the Bible has its own share.
Actually the Koran specifically forbids this;
Chapter 2, Verse 190: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors."
I had to do a bit of research for that one, here is my source:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html
My point here is that people will do what ever they please and often sadly use religion to justify death and destruction. I proudly call myself a Christian, however I don't plan on raping and pillaging any villages in the near future.
- Cher"Time for bed"bear
- Location
- Wasatch Range
Perspective?
Christ had the power to turn those desecrating the sacredness of the temple with the sale of livestock into sand, if he chose to, yet he simply overturned their tables and scattered their money and commanded them to leave.
I think you meant to say Isaiah 13:15.
Perspective on Deuteronomy 20, who is God talking to? Go back and read the whole book of Deuteronomy, then lets readdress this in context.
I'll be off-grid for a few day, let's continue this later in the week.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
The leader of Jamaat-e-Islami of Pakistan, the country’s largest and most powerful pro-Sharia party, recently affirmed that a woman should not report being raped unless she has four male Muslim witnesses who saw the act.
He bases his claim on Qur’anic ground: “Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they produce no witnesses, they verily are liars in the sight of Allah” (Qur’an 24:13).
The Malaysian Islamic reformist group Sisters in Islam quickly pointed out the injustice in Hasan’s claim:
“In Pakistan, it is reported that three out of four women in prison under its Hudud laws [these are the laws of what it forbidden and permitted by Allah himself], are rape victims. Because rape is equated with zina [unlawful sexual intercourse] under Hudud law, rape victims are required to produce four pious male witnesses. It is of course nearly impossible for the rape victims to produce the four male witnesses required to prove their allegation. Therefore their police report of rape was taken as a confession of illicit sex on their part and they were duly found guilty.”
He bases his claim on Qur’anic ground: “Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they produce no witnesses, they verily are liars in the sight of Allah” (Qur’an 24:13).
The Malaysian Islamic reformist group Sisters in Islam quickly pointed out the injustice in Hasan’s claim:
“In Pakistan, it is reported that three out of four women in prison under its Hudud laws [these are the laws of what it forbidden and permitted by Allah himself], are rape victims. Because rape is equated with zina [unlawful sexual intercourse] under Hudud law, rape victims are required to produce four pious male witnesses. It is of course nearly impossible for the rape victims to produce the four male witnesses required to prove their allegation. Therefore their police report of rape was taken as a confession of illicit sex on their part and they were duly found guilty.”
It's kinda' hard to produce four pious witnesses when they're busy fightin' over who's got next......
:firedevil
420BlackXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
MT Mike
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Helena, MT
uke::doh:
I truly feel sorry for you. It must be extremely depressing to have nothing to look forward to. No wonder you do illicit drugs. I'll be sure to say a prayer for you.
420BlackXJ
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
I have life to look forward to.
You have fairy tales.
Who is more grounded in reality? Yes me, the "druggie" . What a laugher.
I also find it interesting, that if it weren't for the "bible vote", republicans would never win an election.
Last edited:
MT Mike
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Helena, MT
I have the Truth.
You have nothing.
I sincerely hope that some day you'll see the Light.
You have nothing.
I sincerely hope that some day you'll see the Light.
And he also had the power to ask them nicely. Just sayin.
Yes.
Well I will be honest and say I do not have the time to reread the entire book of Deuteronomy in a timely fashion. I am fairly certain it was written to the Israelites, as a series of speeches by Moses. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I am still unsure of what point you are trying to make. I fail to see how telling a group of people one thing is ok, but it is wrong if you tell it to others? It seems that baby killing should be sort of universally bad. :wierd:
- Location
- Wasatch Range
Point: Without reading the entire passage to gain context, one is left to base their opinion on assumption of the true message of one verse.
I'd love to discussing this further, but it appears that you're less than willing to put forth the effort to truely understand. http://www.htmlbible.com/kjv30/B05C001.htm
Can you just tell me what you are trying to get me to find? The last two of your posts have pretty much been telling me that I was wrong without you offering an alternative view.
I am no bible expert by any means, so if you could at least offer some hint as to what you want me to find in this particular book, then perhaps we could end up on the same page yes?
Regardless, we seem to have strayed far off topic from my original point which could be summarized by saying that sometimes people use religion to justify horrible things, regardless of what particular religion they ascribe to.
:cheers:
friendly atheists FTW.