Fundamental Fundamentalism: part 2

How to win a revolution, at a very high toll

From Ryszard Kapuscinski, Shah of Shahs:

The method of jihad might depend on the occasion.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"After all, how many times does the Bible say to kill someone that, in the US, we just won't let happen?"

Zero.

Any time a death sentence is offerered it's to be done or overseen by an authority. Stoning an adulterer is done by the people involved but not without the priests permission. The death penalty is done by the authority. However, it's quite clear that the punishments offerered in the OT for breaking laws no longer apply. It's still wrong to commit adulterly and murder but we have other ways of punishing it now if at all. Who decides the punishments is the authority figure which in the US is the US government. The only time we are allowed to go against the US Government is when the government forces us to sin against God.

The Koran has no such concepts within it's pages. If I persecute MarkX he has the authority to kill me according to his religion. If he persecutes me I turn the other cheek and let God take care of it in his time. The Bible is very clear on the concept of authority where the Koran doesn't appear to have any notion of authority.

I covered this in the first part of my paper. It's no wonder there's so much war in the middle east. The Koran is way to obscure to be of any use in guiding people. But then what would one expect from a book forged out of war?

Ben

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Zero? My eye.

I must disagree with you. Your reasoning does not hold up. After all, thou shall not suffer a witch to live; people commit wrong sexual acts and still live; of course, now we look back to what problems I have with Christianity: I believe we're all better off if you're shirking your duties to God because your religion cannot take precedent over any other. In the end, though, Christians do, in fact, persecute. They just submit to a temporal authority that tells them they cannot kill people. And yes, we are happy at this particular progress. Now, if the Christians could figure out the rest.

To take an issue from the homosexual debate: is that not the basis of, say, the OCA or other persecutors of gays? That the United States and other governments are forcing them to violate their Christian consciences by forcing them to not ostracize, persecute, or kill homosexuals? After all, I did stumble across an article where a Christian author called for the death penalty for homosexuals (what's even more macabre is that in drawing comparisons of liberalism to the Nazi party, he criticized the use of propaganda to reduce the value of human life; a lovely hypocrisy--as soon as I have all the issues involved in that conundrum settled, I'll post a topic on it because, frankly, it is amazing). But one article on the web is hardly the limit to it. Freddie Phelps brought his "God Hates Fags" ministry to Seattle a couple years ago and ... well, let's hear it for the opposition. Nonetheless, its amazing how many issues you can take up where the government is forcing you to go against your Christian conscience: public money for abortion; public money for homosexuals; for art that a person disagrees with (Serrano's 1986 photo Piss Christ was still receiving abuse in year 2000 Native American diabetes research legislation, incidentally ... let's hear it for the Philistine) ....

Yes, and if I practice witchcraft, or sodomy, I am to be executed? It is, after all, Biblical. To the other, I always thought the Koran was clear: God is the authority.

It's a cute observation, and one that is not entirely without merit. What of Judaism? Does history not show the Jews getting the crap kicked out of them for millennia? What of this tradition born of persecution? And the poor, Christian martyrs? The problemis that "forged out of war" is not entirely exclusive to the Islamic portion of the Abramic troika.

And it might be possible, might it not, that strife in that region has something to do with economy? After all, there's been fighting going on there since ... well, the Greeks, at least. Transitional economy equals transitional social structure equals social strife. Try breaking Iranians of tyranny, for instance: the people have known tyranny for 2,500 years--freedom might actually frighten them. That trend predates Islam by a good ... 1,100 years at least?

Christianity has squared off against Islam pretty much from day one. It's a lot of wasted conflict, as far as I can tell.

What amuses me is that you sound like any of a number of infidels examining the Bible; for instance, I find the Bible far too full of crap to be of use to anybody: starting with the fall and that man is born into sin, the Bible describes, as near as I can tell, a massive swindle by a small-time deity; kind of the Microsoft of spirituality. It's intensely misogynistic, blaming women for all that is wrong in life. Sure, it's popular, but it doesn't mean it works. It teaches people to look forward to the end of the world; it seems far too fucked up a book to be of any use to anyone, and look at the amount of warfare and strife it has brought. It's like Bush and bin Laden arguing over whose side God is on: God doesn't give a rat's butt--it's all stupid. Of course, if I look at The Cow 2.190, I do see an immediate parallel 'twixt Christianity and Islam: the destruction of idolatry.

Again, though, I find myself thinking about the exhortations in the Bible to put someone to death; yes, the Muslims do take God a little more seriously than Christians: give them time; they'll figure out how to f--k it up just the same.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well you asked for it...........

I really would like to keep it only to Quran and would love to answer your so called claims and your strange chrsitian mentality. Nothing new thou, it has been like this since Islam came to exsistance.
I will still get back to you on your very first post. But for right now for your eyes only. It really seems that you are not very litrate when it comes to even bible and yet you try to explain every one Quran. Which you do not have the slightes knowledge.


***Instant Death to Apostates (those who desert their religion) in the Bible in both the Old Testament and the New Testament:****

Please note that I just would like to prove to that the Bible gives absolutely no religious freedom what so ever. Most of the Christians in the United States and the West think that the freedom of choice and speech that they have comes originally from the Bible. I am trying to disprove this belief and not give the Bible something that it does not deserve.

Let us look at Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."

Also let us look at Deuteronomy 17:3-5 "And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, .....and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die."

2 Chronicles 15:13 "All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman."

Man or women??? Aren't we geting some ideas to kill non-christian. Oh I am sorry Bible didn't teach that.

Also let us look at Romans 1:20-32

(from the New Testament) "20. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23. and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
29. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30. slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31. they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."


WOW and BIBLE said NO KILLINGS?? And have Perfect Authority????? KALVINB, I guess you wasted lots of time during your missionary years.


We also read about Jesus ordering the killing of apostates (those who desert him) "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away an withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. (John 15:5-6)" Apostates are to be burned alive according to the new testament. Of course as a Muslim I don't believe that Jesus ever said that. The Bible is full of corruptions that give wrong the picture about Jesus.

Even Psychics must be put to death:

Let us look at Leviticus 20:27 "And as for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail. They should pelt them to death with stones. Their own blood is upon them."

The above verses clearly show that once a person becomes a Christian, then he is pretty much stuck with it and can't leave it. The above laws order mothers to kill their sons or daughters, brothers to kill their own brothers or sisters, fathers to kill their own sons or daughters, or friends to kill their own friends if they decide to follow another religion. There must be no mercy given to the person nor a chance for him or her to repent. Kill him/her immediately !!!. Stone him/her to death immediately !!!.

Jesus did honor the Old Testament's laws and ordered his followers (the Christians as we call them today) to follow the Old Testament until the day of Judgment:

Jesus said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

Christians always say as an excuse "Oh this law doesn't exist in the New Testament, it is only the Old Testament." Well, according to Matthew 5:17-18 above, we clearly see that Jesus honored the Old Testament, and forces Christians to follow the unmodified laws of it that have not been replaced by newer ones in the New Testament. The Old Testament as we clearly see above orders the immediate killing of apostates/renegades. The New Testament as we also clearly see above, orders the death of the apostates/renegades. And according to Matthew 5:17-18 above, apostates/renegades in Christianity must be put to death simultaneously.

It is quite unfortunate that in the middle centuries when the Church used to rule over everything, the minority Christians and the Christian Scientists were slaughtered and put to death by the majority Christians just because the Priests and Ministers of the High Church decided to call those minority Christians and the Christian Scientists Apostates or Renegades (those who leave their religion).

The Bible does give authority to the Priests and Ministers to call someone an apostate. Let us look at 1Corinthians 2:15 "The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment." The Bible does indeed rely heavily on people to judge other people regardless of the amount of evidence that can be provided. This philosophy in the Bible does promote corruption and confusion among people. It also promotes divisions and sects in the religion.

Clearly, the tragedies that history had witnessed in the middle centuries of Christians slaughtering other Christians and non Christians, and the formation of Catholics and Protestants in Europe, and the brutal slavery in the United States that was approved by the Church (to enslave Africans and to bring them to the U.S.) indicates that the Bible is a corrupted book, and is the main cause for all the killings and massacres that took place in history. Why do you think that most of the killings and massacres that happened throughout history, happened mostly from Christians? All it takes to create a massacre is to have the Priest or Minister of the Majority Christians declare the other group of minority Christians as "NON-BELIEVERS" and say that they are no longer Christians, and since they are no longer Christians in the eyes of the stronger church, then killing them would be absolutely lawful according to the Bible. In fact, killing them not only becomes lawful, but it also becomes mandatory according to Deuteronomy 13:6-9, Deuteronomy 17:3-5 and Romans 1:20-32 above.

The religion of Islam on the other hand gives absolute freedom of religion. Allah Almighty (GOD) prohibits Muslims to force anyone to Islam. Muslims are not supposed to make people resent Islam by their acts. Islam teaches us that a person can only believe in God by peace.



Conclusion:

The Bible in both the Old Testament and the New Testament doesn't tolerate apostates, and orders for them to be killed. The Bible does order men and women (spiritual leaders and religious people) to be judgmental, and to kill those who don't agree with them in the most painful death, by stoning them to death! There is no room for being creative and free in the real Christian society. You must obey the rules, or else you shall lose your life!.

The Bible in my opinion contradicts itself by presenting itself as a "Book of Love" and yet it is at the same time the worst judgmental book ever! Not just worst but it goes beyond in some cases.


KALVINB, I really didn't want to do this. But you just pushed me.

And no According to Quran I don't have right to kill you. You can think whatever you like but Only time I can wage a war against you if you will start it or only time I will try to kill you if you try to kill me. It is very clear through out Quran.

I am not sure where do you get your ideas from but when I used to go to church, they try to tell us that Islam is a cult and their holy book contains SUN GOD and pagan rituals. Now I wonder why they don't wanted us to read Quran. What they were afraid of?. Truth maybe??

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Your ignorance is showing.

Being deserving of death and actually putting someone to death are two completely different things. The wicked deserve death but no where are we ordered to carry out the sentence.

Trying to convince you to worship false gods and just minding my own business are two different things.

"Aren't we geting some ideas to kill non-christian."

Oh look there's the prophet again. Failed to quote that part. Not only are you ignorant but you keep proving my points in the process of trying to disprove them. The Koran has no concept of authority. In the Bible only prophets are allowed to lead a holy war.

You really have no clue what's going on do you? Not surprising since authority is no where to be found.

Tiassa:

That's all fine and dandy that God is the authority but he's passed that authority indesciminatly to all Muslims so they can crucify whomever persecutes them. The Muslims basically have the same authority as God when it comes to the wicked. That's clearly not the case in Christianity.

"Yes, and if I practice witchcraft, or sodomy, I am to be executed?"

Try to keep two things in mind. I already addressed this.

You would have been yes. Joe Blow Jew couldn't carry out the punishment though. The priest would have done it. According to the Koran any Muslim who caught you doing witchcraft would have the authority to kill you on the spot.

You can point to stories of ignorant Christiantians but that doesn't change what Christianity really is.

I can look in the Koran and see why Muslim countries are a mess of endless wars. You slap a Christian and the Christian walks away. You slap a Muslim and they'll slap you back and the violence continues endlessly as it has for how many years now? You fight until THEY call for peace. Allah forbid a Muslim should take the first step for peace.

Ben

 

lol........You are funny

LOL... Now who is playing a word game?? See that's what I like about christian spirit. Say one thing and then try to make a total different meaning out of it. Just like you did with Bible. Read 'YES' and prove it 'NO'.
Now where are your prophets?? Now where are the prophets when ministers and Chruches ordered to kill witches what happened in early America in the name of witch craft and religion, Offcourse you like to look away from that, since it won't justify your purpose. Typical hypocrite approach.

""You would have been yes. Joe Blow Jew couldn't carry out the punishment though. The priest would have done it. According to the Koran any Muslim who caught you doing witchcraft would have the authority to kill you on the spot.""

Please show me the verse and then I would talk about it.


"" You can point to stories of ignorant Christiantians but that doesn't change what Christianity really is.""

You can point to stories of Ignorant Muslims but that doesn't change what Islam really is. lol

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Dude, make up your mind about what do you want to talk about. lol.

"" I can look in the Koran and see why Muslim countries are a mess of endless wars. You slap a Christian and the Christian walks away. You slap a Muslim and they'll slap you back and the violence continues endlessly as it has for how many years now? You fight until THEY call for peace. Allah forbid a Muslim should take the first step for peace """


I can look in the BIBLE and see why majority of christians are sex addicts, alcocholics and comit adultry. Since bible give no directons for people. But infact it tries to justify all the filth in humans by holy means.
And you maybe correct about if you slap a muslim he will slap you right back but when you slap a chrstian, he will stab you in the back and keep that in his heart. Don't even try to defend this you know it better. On the face you will smile and in your heart you will be planing how to stab him. Nothing new.


**Let us look at Leviticus 20:27 "And as for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail. They should pelt them to death with stones. Their own blood is upon them." ***
Oh so now your prohpets will come and justify the killings?? I mean on who's authority? So all those thousands of women killed during witch hunt, they were killed on the authority of prophets? Or does prophets gave rights to priests? Huh....very interesting.


And the Native americans were wiped out by mistake, rriigghhtt. I think those americans were not chrisitans they were muslim american right?. Hitler was muslim, Ariel Sharon is muslims when he killed 2000 women and children in early 84. Ireland is all muslims , Protestant and catholic muslims??...lol.
You see Kalvin, you keep repeating same thing Quran is evil and Bible is good. What you fail and will always fail to understand since you are full of prejedice that it has always been the people who pervert religions, traditions and illtrate cultures cause that problem. Then they hide behind relgion. Bible, Quran or Torah. You can read each one of them understand according to your understanding or things you like or wish and then justify them according to your religion. But the reality would never change it is you who is perverting it not that your religion is bad or muslims or jews.
Very big Example is Bible it self. How many reformations did it go thorugh how many times we get new versions with some more or less words and meanings. It is humans who like to make it all fancy and easy and destroy the whole meaning. Your thinking will never change and I don't blame you. .


Oh for what you said about Quran said kill if some one caught doing witchcraft...


Here is little note from Human rights watch.



Based on this division, the charges against al-Naqshabandi -- "the practice of works of magic and spells and possession of a collection of polytheistic and superstitious books"17 -- would appear to fall into the category of reform crimes described above, where the Quran and the Sunna do not specify a punishment for witchcraft. Indeed, a statement by the Ministry of Interior makes clear that in this case "it was decided he be sentenced to the discretionary punishment of death (qatlihi ta`ziran).18



http://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/saudi/Saudi-03.htm


Peace.

 

Ducks, horses, and hoots

KalvinB

You seem to be missing a fundamental point:

In either case, it is a religious standard which is carrying out my execution. I don't care if it's Osama bin Laden or The Pope passing such judgement. That one person's religion should allow for the procedural destruction of a human being is the issue. Don't try to wash your hands of it, Pilate; you don't get to on this one. It is, in fact, a coward's excuse, and being that we all try not to think such things about one another, I would hope you could provide another avenue to make your point. However, that you're trying to separate religiously-endorsed murder sounds more than a little like, uh ... calling a duck a horse, as the saying has it.

To the other, a Sufi master was once arrested for saying that God was beneath the soles of his feet. Taken before the tribunal, he pointed to the fact that the locals worshipped Mammon; this acknowledged, the Sufi revealed that he partook in the local custom of keeping coins in his shoes for luck; thus a symbol of God, being wholly of God itself, was beneath the soles of his feet. On the logical grounds, he was acquitted.

Within Islam there runs a current of justice which, in the modern day, we find extreme. Any Muslim wishing to kill me for witchcraft would be unable to do so without first defining witchcraft. I'm quite sure that, when you add up all the rules about killing in the Koran, you'll find it's not nearly so compulsive as you would like to imagine it.

Tell me about my American Muslim neighbors, please. Have they forsaken God because they apply the Supreme Law of the Land in the United States and attempt to respect my rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? I assert that they are empowered to participate in our society, and have no instructions to go about slaying us whatsoever. In fact, I would suggest that you go downto the local mosque and ask a Muslim why he's not out in the street slaying the idolaters. I think you'll get a better answer than I can possibly offer.

Again, you seem to be missing a fundamental point. When you stop attacking Muslims they are supposed to put down their arms. What, are you going to slap the Muslim again because he slapped you back? God forbid you should ever take a step toward peace, like respecting it in the first place. Why slap anyone is the big point. Unfortunately, Christians are told by their holy books to go around slapping people; don't tell me you don't have evangelical obligations or I'll be forced to laugh.

Ducks and horses, sir. I thought it was a pretty silly term, but it works well enough.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

MarkX, you're completely lost on this issue. Just stop trying.

"Since bible give no directons for people. But infact it tries to justify all the filth in humans by holy means."

You're either an blatent liar or have never actually read the Bible.

Considering the above the rest of your post is a waste of time.

Tiassa:

"Unfortunately, Christians are told by their holy books to go around slapping people"

No they aren't. They're supposed to go around preaching the truth. Only God does the slapping or the established authority. He doesn't have any Joe Blow do the slapping for him like Islam's God.

"In either case, it is a religious standard which is carrying out my execution"

No, it's a legal standard. And Joe Blow Jew wasn't allowed to execute judgement. Just like today you aren't allowed to take the law into your own hands. You have to take it to a judge. Islam doesn't have such divisions of authority. The only thing that's changed thoughout the OT to NT was the ruling authority. First it was just God and now it's governments under God. The law hasn't changed. It's still a religious crime to practice witchcraft but no one is going to do anything about it since the ruling authority doesn't care and Christians, unlike Muslims, can't take the law into our own hands. We just tell you you're wrong in your beliefs like we're supposed to. God will send you to hell for it if that's his will. It's not our job to punish you.

"In fact, I would suggest that you go downto the local mosque and ask a Muslim why he's not out in the street slaying the idolaters. I think you'll get a better answer than I can possibly offer."

According to his religion he has every right to slay unbelievers if they attack him. It really doesn't matter what he says. What matters is what his religion says. US law doesn't see it his religion's way but that doesn't change what his religion is.

The problem with Islam is it's lack of authority. You slap a Muslim they'll kill you. You slap a Christian they'll turn the other cheek. Pointing out abuses of authority in Christianity has no bearing on the fact that what we would call an abuse of authority in Christianity is actually fundamental to the Muslim beliefs.

Ben

 

Irony ... try not to let it sweep you away

What legal standard? That is, according to what law should one be put to death? In the case of murder, it is a law of society. But in the case of witchcraft, it is a law of religion. Attempting to separate the who of the punishing authority is just a stupid word game, KalvinB. My religion does not call for your death, for instance. In fact, my religion demands that I help preserve a society in which people are allowed to believe silly things like a duck and a horse being the same thing. And, yes, I'm going to throw your terms back at you until you realize that who isn't as important as the principle itself.

Both religions contain condemnations against the life of those who practice witchcraft? Fine. You do not get to wash your hands of this one. What would be the difference between, as your example has it, Markx killing you, and my subjective accusation of witchcraft killing you via the civil authority, such as has been seen on the American continent during the colonial period (Salem) and in a political form in the 20th century (remember that Reagan lied to Congress and named names during the McCarthy Red Hunt). This process has historical precedent among Christians, too; the Bishopric of Trier, Germany, actually saw two villages reduced to a single childbearing female apiece according to the method of your "horse". Or "duck". Or whatever. In this case, it's pucky.

I like how it's okay to murder witches as long as "someone else" is doing the murdering for you, KalvinB. Ducks? Horses? What the hell, they're all dead meat in the end, anyway, right?

Oh, yeah, right. Oh, that's right, we're talking about in theory.

Quite simply: By what authority is witchcraft illegal?

KalvinB, it's sounding more and more like jealousy. So what if you picked the wrong team to be on for how you really feel in the world? Who says you can't find a religion that better suits your needs? It's not like that's not what everyone does anyway.

What abuse of authority? The empowerment to do what anyone else does anyway, regardless of what their religion says?

I mean, this is part of what I see: We've had our differences, but part of that extends from my perception of your utterly un-Christian behavior toward some of our posters in the past; now here we see you basically undertaking the same processes you decry in atheistic examinations of Christianity as you approach Islamic ideas; and at the core of it is the very thing that we had sharp words about before: turning the other cheek. What? Witchcraft empowers me to do whatever the hell I have to in order to preserve my life; I do, in fact, have the option of putting people in the ground if they take a poke at me. I choose not to because it's a better way. Does it annoy me, then, that other people have the "liberty" to be violent? It can be annoying. But short of trying to kill me, they're not going to move me to violence. It seems that what you're aiming toward here is the right to overreact the way everybody does anyway. I fail to understand why you're so hung up on this idea that you're talking about abuse of authority on one hand and lack of authority (presumably to abuse) on the other. The problem with Islam is unstable economy and lack of eduacation among the present generations. In order for Western (Judeo-Christian) culture to attain the certain degree of peaceability it has, Chrisitans have had to abandon a lot of their faith mandates in accommodation of the new political and economic climate. As we see from our Muslim-American neighbors, they, too, can learn this accommodationism. Like I said, go down to the local mosque and ask a Muslim why.

Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity: hmmm ... Christianity in the 15th century .... Yeah, peaceful and tolerant and most definitely not slapping anyone in the face. Can you understand that point, KalvinB? The one that's right in front of you if you look to the Muslims in your own community? Like the cabbie who, for some inexplicable reason, chose to drive me to my destination instead of slay me for my idolater's ways?

I'm finding some irony in the current state of the topic; look ... try looking at it without playing favorites. If you're capable of doing that, you're halfway there, and it only gets easier.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Christianity hasn't abandoned anything. There is no reason to try to squish freedom of religion according to the Bible. Never has been. In the OT, you weren't put to death for being a heathen. You were put to death for messing with God. Lying in the name of God (false prophets) is a sure way to get yourself dead. Messing with the real prophets got you dead. Not because the real prophet took out his sword but because God sent some plagues, bears, fire, ect ect to take you out.

Witchcraft is a religious crime on the same scale as devil worship. Back in the OT it was serious enough for death since it does work and it's very difficult to outrun a lie (devil induced miracles) where there are no phones and letters and anything else. This is why false prophets were put to death back then. Just nip it in the bud. When you've got a God tossing down fire from heaven and leveling cities, it's pretty hard to claim the followers are acting of their own religious ferver. Messing with God gets you dead.

If God doesn't make you dead, it's not our place, never has been, to make you dead for doing something we don't like. Back in the OT, religious and civial law were one and the same. Since God took care of the religious law through Christ, all that's left to worry about in the civil law and that's what God setup governments for. Back in the day prophets (who actually established their authority through miracles and prophecy) took care of the civil law as well. Since they were of God, they were trusted to be as humanly fair as possible.

Abuse of religious authority (actually more like self proclaimed authority) gets you in hell. I mention that in the first paper. You complain about what Christians have done so wrong yet their God isn't telling them they'll go to heaven for it. In fact, they're probably burning in hell. (or, if Tony's listening) They will be burning in hell for it.

We are not ordered to draw our sword to defend God. If God needed defending he'd send his angels.

I don't think there's any real argument against what my paper contains so I'll stick with it. MarkX has only managed to agree with me in his attempt to disagree so unless he has something new to add...

I may possibly add some definitives instead of "could be this or that. "

The 3rd paper will be 8-10 pages and summarize the first 2 papers and then form a conclusion on whether or not what's going on in the Middle East is a result of a book that was forged from war.

The basic new question is "what does the Koran say concerning peace and love?"

If it doesn't offer guidlines for that then how can we possibly expect there to ever be peace until the Koran is tossed out?

Ben

 

No it's not. Either spelling is using English characters to represent phonetically the sounds of another language. So either spelling is as valid as any other that sounds vaguely similar. There is no point or petty victory to be proven or gained from such silly semantics.

Tiassa, you mentioned Falwell. We don't see much of him in Australia, but on an American news show once I did see an interview with him. He was talking about Marylin Manson. The TV show guy asked him why he objects to such entertainment when the USA's constitution protects the right of people like Manson to create such entertainment, and Falwell actually said something like "Yeah, but the constitution should only protect the right people". That dude is very nuts.

Oops, just got down to Tiassa explaining what I just did, that the spelling of Koran doesn't matter.

All right, the second page of this thread seems to have degenerated into people calling each other ignorant simply because they have different views and interpretations. Typical of any thread which starts off about religion.

Notice how it is all now discussions about how and when it is okay to go around killing people, and when it's okay to stone someone for rape, and crap like that? You're discussing the correct circumstances for when individuals or peoples are allowed to do something which should be completely unacceptable.

So what if the Koran of the christian bible say you can stone people or have a holy friggin war. Ignore both the dumb-arse pieces of misused toilet paper and go read something productive, something that doesn't describe when and how you can go kick someone's arse.

This is the big problem with religion.

 

By the way, KalvinB< it was quite an interesting little essay you began the thread with. But it does seem somewhat one-sided. I would suggest balancing it out with some Koran quotes about why and when it is not okay to kick arse. I'm sure I read a passage from the Koran once that said something like "The least harm you do to any man, you do to all of humanity, so you shouldn't ever harm anyone", or something like that.

 

Adam,
You do have some valid points. But yes religius posts do get little personal some times. But you have to understand that I came to Islam from Christianity. Now according to bible KalivnB or his so called priest can Kill me. Anyways you pointed out well that there is favouritism in Kalvin's paper but then again he is using missionary tactics, I used to meet people like that back in early 90s and late 80s. Nothing new. I don't know what do you know about religions but it get's really interesting when some one talk about something they don't know at all.

KavinB,
I think you started a good debate but you lost it. Then you avoided the whole topic, and try not to read posts and saing it is waste of time. Offcourse it is when you can't defend yourself. And kalvin I think I read bible in depth then you ever did. I read bible not just in chruch but Farmer's Branch Bible College,TX. In the end I realize I spend 5 years of my life just understanding a book which really has 15% turth and rest all fiction. I never took their words (priests of elders). Since for all questions they have the same answer. Believe in christ, believe in salvation and you are ok. Forget the rest. Then it took me 4 years to read Quran and I am still in process. Well anyways it good to see and debate with people like you. I am not here to propogate my ideas but just an advice for you, go interact with outside world. Come out of your naive thinking and try to understand the history and current affairs. Because when you talk about middle east you don't have a slight clue what are you refering to.

Tiassa,
Nice reply, like always you brings good more sense to this post.

 

Well, I was raised entirely without religion. There are no religious people in my family except for one Buddhist aunt we rarely see. Our family tends to put more emphasis on learning rather than accepting as children are raised. Thus I was always able to read of religions without bias or emotional attachment as I grew. I think the perspective of an impartial outsider will always be the clearest in any debate/situation, simply due to that lack of emotional involvement.

As for what I know of religion... The human race is divided, and these divisions sometimes cause wars and such. Hell, they sometimes cause the absolute destruction of entire cultures, and the wiping of millions of lives from whole continents. We face such divisions as religion, national and geographical boundaries, gender, and so on. Now Gender I don't mind, it kinda rocks. But imagine if we wiped out religion entirely? One less division, and a big division at that. Far fewer wars and such.

You might say "Well, people would just find something else to fight about". And maybe they would. Nice pessimistic outlook there. But any way you look at it, one less division would mean more people alive and freee and happy.

 

Ben,

There's something you said that I just couldn't let go. Here it is:

By your argument, then, U.S. should immediately retract all of its "anti-terror" warfighters and in general annihilate its entire army. Just consider 9/11 a slap on the cheek, and walk away.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Isn't it something that one of the most Christian countries in the world is also the one with the largest army? That the very same people who are fanatically Christian also tend to be fanatically militaristic (i.e. so-called "conservatives")? What an interesting paradox, wouldn't you agree?

 

The little differences

So what's the difference between then and now, KalvinB? There is no reason to try to squish freedom of religion ...? The idea hadn't been realized yet, so of course the Bible isn't going to address it by name. But the bit about suffering a witch to live, which I see you mention. On that point, what is the difference between then and now? If it's messing with God, then it seems that it's God's issue to deal with. As you point out:

The way I see it, you're telling me on the one hand that one is to report witchcraft to the religious authority because witchcraft equals screwing with God (e.g. the critical difference you've noted), while on the other hand, you're telling me that God doesn't need to be represented by men in any such way (e.g. defended).

Maybe there's something I'm missing, so allow me to put two points in front of you:

* There is a apparently difference between reporting witchcraft to a religious authority and passing sentence oneself when putting the witch/idolater to death. I object to this because in both cases it is a religious standard (e.g. God's Law according to the Bible or Qu'ran), and not a conventional law agreed upon by men (e.g. the rightfully entrusted government of the United States via the Constitution and its Amendments).

* While God does not need defending in the case of the Islamic party entrusted to do God's justice (as per your objection above), God does need defending in the proper course of reporting witchcraft to the religious authority (as per your comparison above). This, obviously, does not make sense.

Which part? Your conclusion that:

* anyone can lead a war
* it's just a matter of finding support
* Muhammed had no problems doing so

leaves a vital question unaddressed. I can only wonder why you have chosen to ignore, then, the reasons Muhammed felt compelled to fight. I'm quite sure that you, in diligent research, at least have some notes on that.

Or is it your point that the differences in how words are interpreted are mere "games"? Or is it your collective data about who and when to fight that ignores the admonitions toward when to stop fighting? Which of your ill-examined points do you find so solid as to refuse to reconsider?

I'm looking back to your first Fundamentalism thread to see if any of your points are worth standing on. That post is more inquisitive than declaratory, but I noticed the part where you're talking about holy wars and mention the battle at Jericho (Joshua 6) while forgetting the tale of Amalek:

For this episode holds a vital lesson:

And what happens when the people do not carry out their holy war to the fullest extent ordered by God? For even the eventual execution of Agag does not appease the Lord:

But your omission of the tale of Agag of the Amelekites is obvious, since it blows the first paragraph of your original Fundamentalism topic out of the water:

The Old Testament itself shows that God, by this standard, was, indeed, kidding the house down with the Thou shall not kill routine.

But you have, in that statement, made a transition from the Old Testament to the New, and this raises interesting issues; you are, after all, citing Romans, and not Jesus, who came not to destroy but to fulfill the law and prophets. Is it a difference 'twixt covenants? I would be interested, then, to read your paper on the Jews. (

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

... really ...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

In your opinion, then, did Christ change the nature of the holy war? I will not undertake the issue of why the next prophet shouldn't change the nature of the holy war, though, as I think holy wars are absolutely bonkers. The only acceptable revision of holy wars should be the abolition of them, yet even Christians sing, "Onward Christian soldiers ...."

Could it be that Markx, having studied the Qu'ran more closely, understands what he's talking about, and therefore has no reason to disagree with the quandary of holy wars, but merely the paucity of your inquiry?

Wow ... fourteen-hundred years of socio-economic theory as well as a five-hundred year (at least) back-story in eight to ten pages. I wish you luck with that endeavor.

We will undertake the issues of peace and love after you get the warfare worked out of your blood ...

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Bambie...

You're not paying attention. "authority" The US Government has the authority to strike back. YOU do not. The GOVERNMENT does. This isn't that hard.

Tiassa:

Nobody cares why you object. So if someone doesn't agree to murder being a crime, they should be allowed to do it?

"God does need defending in the proper course of reporting witchcraft to the religious authority (as per your comparison above). This, obviously, does not make sense."

You make no sense. Reporting a witch isn't defending God. It's reporting a witch.

"The Old Testament itself shows that God, by this standard, was, indeed, kidding the house down with the Thou shall not kill routine."

You're NOT PAYING ATTENTION at ALL. How hard is this?

The only time it's okay to "utterly destroy" someone is when GOD who is the AUTHORITY tells a PROPHET to lead the war. Since Christ came, God doesn't use prophets anymore. Do I need to draw you pictures or what? This whole concept of authority is apparently too much for you people. Now I suppose the whole concept of PROVING authority will just blow your mind.

Like I said, my papers are fine. There's no objections to them that are even remotly valid.

You can babble on as you have been but I'm done. I've got a few revisions to do.

You people don't belong in a philisophical forum. This is absolutly pathetic.

Ben

 

Argument of the year!

Wow, KalvinB, why did you even post your topics if you didn't want to hear from anybody? Or was it that you wanted us all to come and kiss your rosy Christian ass? At any rate, get off the fucking cross; you're not Jesus, right?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The argument of the year! And you only had to speak for every poster and visitor to Sciforums in order to have a point. What did you want, KalvinB, for everyone to share your hatred of Islam?

What are you reporting a witch for, and to whom, and what is supposed to be the result of that? You're desperately trying to escape the fact that your religion prescribes murder for religion, and is thus equal to the religion that you hate in that regard. Sorry, KalvinB, you cannot wash your hands of that one. Nor can you escape the fact that what blessed event has made the Judeo-Christian (Wetern) experience peaceable is a lack of devotion to Biblical instructions.

I'm paying attention: Christianity has some pretty stupid standards for murdering people.

That you do not understand what is wrong with that idiocy is a full measure of, well, Christianity.

And that ....

Why don't you do that? Right now you're being such a closed-minded, bigoted prick I find it hilarious. You're such a testament to the quality of human being that Chrisitanity produces that, quite honestly, the lot of you should just shoot yourselves. Quite simply, KalvinB, the commandment does not read, Thou shall not kill unless thou thinkest the Lord telleth you to, does it? Please show me the Bible verse which tells us that. That you are seeking justifications for warfare within a ministry of reconciliation and fulfillment is an indicator of how badly you fail to understand the faith you have adopted. You made a mistake when you compared the Qu'ran to the Bible because you undermined your own objections to the Qu'ran. Like you said, there's no objections that you find valid because you're afraid to find them valid. Come, now ... what was the point of even mentioning Jericho? Surely, you're capable of answering a simple question like that, eh? Of course, in considering holy wars, and when God who is the authority calls people to war, why did you not comment on Agag of the Amalekites? If there are not objections, it's because you're trying as hard as you can to avoid them.

The second best argument of the year. Tell us, KalvinB can you support that assertion?

Didn't think so.

You're a riot man. Tell me, are all "real" Christians as angry as you? I mean, I can only assume that the Christians who try to be nice, who happen to believe different things about the Bible, aren't actually Christians, then, right? Tell you what, KalvinB, why don't you spare us your immature tantrums. You sound like my retarded cousin who walks around calling everyone "Dummy!" and tells them to "Pay attention!" and so forth.

Why do you strive so hard to augment the hatred in the world? Why lend your voice to jealousy and discord? Why not undertake an idea for the sake of learning, and not for trying to be right compared to somebody else's wrong? You'll find knowledge and its acquisition to be much more rewarding if you don't set it aflame with spite first.

Have some coffee, smoke a joint ... whatever it takes to get you calm and centered for a few. And then ask yourself: What the hell was the point of that? Why do you bother, KalvinB, if all you're going to do is ignore people's posts and try to be abusive? All you're showing is what faith in Christ is worth and what it gets people.

Good luck with your paper.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You're not listening at all. I've addressed every one of your points.

If you can't listen and apply knowledge without it being put in the form of a legal document you don't belong in a philisophical forum.

Telling the truth doesn't make one a bigot. If you don't like it, take it up with them.

Ben

 

I love the way you wriggle

Really? I must have missed your commentary on Saul's failure to carry out the Lord's holy war against Agag and the Amalekites. I'm still not satisfied with your presumptuous overlooking of the Qu'ran's limitations of warfare. And I think the duck/horse routine you're pulling with the nature of how religions authorize murder is about as disgraceful as we generally hope never to see out of another Christian again, but y'all are consistent on that count, at least. Put your petty jealousies aside and just cope with the fact that you chose Christianity. Stop using that poor choice as a reason to be so hateful.

I thought I was taking it up with a bigot. Oh, wait, you were talking about yourself. Oh, crap. My bad

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

KalvinB, that you have ignored an exemplary post which demonstrates that the nature of jihad is, indeed, subjective (Kapuscinski), and have continued forth with your pseudo-academic condemnation of Islam in a manner that stunningly resembles what you complain about in other people who examine Christianity and draw conclusions other than yours. Furthermore, it has been shown that the basis of your spurious comparison 'twixt "holy wars" of different religious texts amounts to the same "stupid" word games that you decry in the focus of your current blithe ignorance.

That you cannot do better than beat your chest for machismo and call people pathetic and tell them that nobody cares ... come on--is that as intelligent as a Christian gets? Fine with me; it's still bigoted stupidity, and I'll happily continue to point that out. Really, KalvinB, is there a particular reason we should take what you say seriously? It's quite obvious that you don't.

Help me out here ... if I stay with either one of the topic posts ... what, exactly, is your thesis? Any number of irresponsible statements stick out, but maybe it would help if you were to tell us what that is. Oh, that's right, you're sticking with it; it's too late to worry about details.

thanx,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!