User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: Sharia

  1. #31
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,486

    Default

    I think the real difference here is that originally Christianity was a minority, repressed and esentially temporary religion. I'm talking about Christianity here, not Judaism. All talk in it about conquering was meant in a spiritual sense, but obviously was reinterpreted with the needs of the states and powers that adopted the religion. There's no real directive for physical kingdom making in it.

    I haven't studied Islam, but I'm guessing it doesn't have the same deal going on here.

  2. #32
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    I would expect so! Very well analyzed. Perhaps you could post a link to the essay for the curious to read?
    Will do. I just need time to dig it up off my external drive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    I *do* disagree on there "always being terrorism" though. There are methods of pacification that are quite effective. If you make the consequences dire enough and actively erode their culture and religion, I believe you could pacify a country in a generation or two. Think of Mao's re-education camps in Communist China. Except Athiesm doesn't lead to a malleable populace, so I would advocate something else. If you replace their religion with one that is more likely to lead to a peaceful population - Buddhism or Confucionism spring to mind, or Christianity - you can successfully pacify a populace.
    A country has to have the will to do so, however.
    Muhahahaaa. "Pacification" through forcing the will of a conquered or occupied people is EXACTLY what breeds the resentment that is the fuel of terrorism.
    Such PACIFICATION does not typically occur by non-violent methods.
    There's usually a couple of shots fired, buildings destroyed, shock & awe, you know, typical "warfare stuff" to "convince" a given people that it is in their best interest to be "pacified."
    The British learned early on that forcing their subjects in conquered lands to learn the English language was a huge step forward in making people submit to British rule.
    They made a killing doing so in their efforts with the "East India Tea Company" right?

    I hear you though, it is *POSSIBLE* to change the views of a given people *IF* the right techniques are used, I just don't know if such techniques can be 100% non-violent because the nature of all people is to resist change, and I know if any bunch of foreign fucks tried to convince me to think other than I already do, I'd put up one hell of a nasty fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    If pacification isn't an option, the Romans had it right - If none will submit, leave none alive. See The Sack of Carthage and the Destruction of Jerusalem.
    Yep. If a military is allowed to do their job, such options are very effective, although not very humanitarian.
    The purpose of a military is to conquer, to defend, to destroy, to kill at the will of the State it serves, *NOT* to be ambassadors of goodwill and all the other stupid shit our Congress seems to think a modern Army should be. Let the killers kill, and then afterward decide what the tactic is going to be. I am still trying to figure out what the benefit of performing such massive humanitarian efforts as the "Marshall Plan" are.
    We kicked Germany's ass, we spent a ton of money rebuilding their economy and their land, we protected them from Russian takeover, and then many years later they turned their backs on us and now despise us once more. I'm half German, and was born there, and I just don't fucking get it.
    It's be nice to see our military go kick some ass in a foreign land and then leave, and be done with it. Something to the tune of:

    "There you go, you all fucked with the USA, and you've just been bombed into the stoneage. All of your ports, bridges, power plants, water treatment facilities, airports, capitol buildings and highways are now in ruins, and we didn't send in a single man on the ground. Enjoy rebuilding yourselves for the next 50 years, and if you can manage to behave like civilized people later in history, we encourage you to do so, but you'd better fucking behave, because if you don't we'll be back, and it won't be as pretty as this time."

    Cheers,

    -Alex
    --------------------
    Type Stats:
    MBTI -> (E) 77.14% | (i) 22.86% ; (S) 60% | (n) 40% ; (T) 72.22% | (f) 27.78% ; (P) 51.43% | (j) 48.57%
    BIG 5 -> Extroversion 77% ; Accommodation 60% ; Orderliness 62% ; Emotional Stability 64% ; Open Mindedness 74%

    Quotes:
    "If somebody asks your MBTI type on a first date, run". -Donna Cecilia
    "Enneagram is psychological underpinnings. Cognitive Functions are mental reasoning and perceptional processes. -Sanjuro

  3. #33
    Per Ardua Metamorphosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halla74 View Post
    Socioeconomic status has very little to do with who chooses to be a suicide bomber.
    I took two classes on terrorism in the past year and wrote a paper on suicide bombers.
    If you look at the demographic statistics of people who chose to be suicide bombers, they are UNREMARKABLE as compared to others in their same region.
    They do not have a criminal record.
    They are not ignorant street peasants.
    Many are educated, working, middle class people. Most are men, but women are increasingly joining the ranks.

    The thing that most SUICIDE ATTACKERS have in common in regions where terrorism runs rampant is the presence of a long term foreign military that is occupying the country in question.
    ----------------------------------------------
    - Occupation breeds resentment.
    - Those who resent the presence of an occupying superpower will eventually fight back, whether to avenge their relatives who were injured, mamed, or killed in the conflict, or simply to protest the foreign military occupation.
    - Some just wish to leave this life with some meaning instead of living as a pawn in a skirmish they have no control over.
    - There is no magic formula that can predict who will become a suicide attacker and who will not.

    Also, suicide attacks are very well organized.
    The attack is typically highly compartmentalized.
    It is necessary to have the skill of a bomb maker.
    The aid of people to perform surveillance is also needed.
    Of course it is necesasary to have a recruiter to find volunteer suicide attackers.
    The suicide attackers are kept away from the other individuals planning the attack.
    Each person only knows their respective part of the work, which limits the damage any one person or team can cause if apprehended and interrogated.

    Terrorists use ASYMMETRIC WARFARE to fight forces who are superior in numbers, firepower, and materiel.

    IED's (Improvised Explosive Devices) are one example of a weapon favored by terrorists. They are inexpensive to make, can be planted in a myriad of different locations frequented by enemy troops, and can kill or mame without the presence of the maker of the device.

    CAR BOMBS are another example of a terrorist weapon. Fill a car up with ANFO (Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil) Explosives and you have a lethal, moving explosive device. All it took to make it was high nitrogen fertilizer, diesel fuel, and an explosive primer charge.

    SUICIDE VESTS/JACKETS were the weapon of choice for the early Palestinian suicide bombers.

    The now extinct LTTE (Liberatian Tigers of Tamil Eelam) developed a SUICIDE BELT (a nylon belt filled with plastic explosive and large metal balls/shrapnel/etc.) that was very difficult to detect, and to make it worse, they recruited women to wear them, as women were not thought to be terrorist operatives in the early stages of their conflict. So, a woman could get closer to the LTTE's target than a man could, and that is exactly what they did.

    Suicide attacks are constantly evolving. Use of motorcycles and even bicycles loaded with explosives (in the hollow space of the frame's metal tubing) have been reported. At some point children and animals will also likely be used as living weapons.

    So long as there is political tension and hatred, there will be terrorism.

    If you want I can post the salient points of my final paper, with the works cited of course.

    I got an "A" in the class.



    -Alex
    Very true. I wasn't really talking about just suicide bombers, though. I was more referring to the spread of Ismalist extremism/conservatism in general. Feel free to send me your paper, though.
    "You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit."

    Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office
    than to serve and obey them. - David Hume

  4. #34
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    All of those things are very recent developments, historically speaking.
    Yes, in the sweep of history the civilizing of Christianity is a recent development.

    It was only during the Rennaisance that Christianity discovered Humanism. And it was only during the Enlightenment that Christianity discovered Science. And it is only fair to say that it is only after WW II that Christianity accepted Liberal Democracy.

    And it is only fair to say that Islam has yet to discover Humanism, Science and Liberal Democracy.

    And only very, very recently Liberal Democracy has defeated the totalitarian beliefs of Fascism and Communism, and today we are confronted with the totalitarian beliefs of Islam.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Critical Hit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    well;
    Regarding Government, Paul says in the New Testament that we are to be subject to the Government, and obey its laws so far as they do not contradict God's. Equality before the law isn't recent and as far as the Bible is concerned we're all a bunch of hell bound sinners in need of salvation, so.. xD

    I don't think we're saying they're all mindless violent savages. Just that Islam is oppressive to the rights of the individual, and is highly violent in nature.
    If you're looking at things in historical context, the bible was revolutionary. Yes, women are considered "the weaker vessel" - no offence ladies, but I've played coed sports teams, and there ARE physical differences in strength, at least - but spiritually and as persons they were viewed as having the same worth as men. And for a middle eastern culture, they actually had a LOT of rights. A woman's personal rights were never considered any less than a man's.
    I swear to God. The only people who defend the Bible are the people who havent read it.

    Genesis 3:16
    Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

    Isaiah 3:12
    As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them.

    1 Corinthians 11:3
    But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

    1 Corinthians 14:34-36
    Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    Ephesians 5:22-24
    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

    Colossians 3:18
    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

    1 Timothy 2:11-15
    Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.

    Titus 2:4-5
    Teach the young women to be ... obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

    1 Peter 3:1
    Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.

    You could take what is said, culturally, in the bible concerning women's dress codes, but again, that is considered subjective - don't wear a specific type of jewelry (because those who do are whores) sort of edicts are culturally specific.

    Regarding violence; yes, there was MASSIVE amounts of violence in the Old Testament, not all of it was "approved by God" though some of it WAS at his direct command. Some of it was just historical fact. HOWEVER. None of those commands to commit violence were permanent.
    Except the parts about stoning people to death and "not suffering" witches to live. What exactly is the difference between God approving violence and commanding it? Does God do things that God doesnt approve of?


    They were situational; e.g. "Kill all the Hittites in Canaan, because they worship Baal and sacrifice babies to him and that really pisses me off." Situational, and once all Hittites in Canaan are dead, the command is "spent" as it were.
    Thats what I meant by "given in a time of war" in my earlier post. Most Muslim apologetics use the exact same line to explain the violent verses in the Koran. Im not well studied in the Koran so that could be bullshit.

    The directives a Christian is to live by are the ones that don't have an expiration date. The ten commandments (on which most of our legal code is based, like it or not) and the most recent ones from Christ himself; Love your neighbor as yourself. etc. Yes, Christianity has been used as an excuse for violent, bloody war since roughly 500 years after the time of Christ. It was used as an excuse, however, with no actual basis in Christian teachings. It was not a violent religion at it's conception, being instead pacifistic a degree I find dumbfounding - read some historical accounts of the Martyr's. I couldn't believe some of what I read.
    1. You shall have no other gods before me.

    1st Amendment.

    2. You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments
    .

    1st Amendment

    3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.


    1st Amendment

    4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.


    There are only a few states with laws like this. Most of them are very mild. Ill give you .5 points.

    5. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.


    This is more of a social convention than an actual law.

    6. You shall not murder.

    1 point.

    7. You shall not commit adultery.

    Not illegal. Grounds for divorce though.


    8. You shall not steal.

    1 point.

    9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

    1st Amendment. Although a total of 17/50 states have libel laws. .5 points.

    10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

    NOPE.

    So you have a total of 3 points. And the only laws that got full points were "Dont Murder" and "Dont Steal". Somehow I think we would have figured those ones out without the Bible.


    Islam on the other hand. Well. This site puts it far better.
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Qu...3-violence.htm

    The problem is, that according to Islam, those who "ignore the parts they don't like" are bad Muslims who at best are merely earning the disfavor of allah and [according to the most violent demagogues] at worst they should be exterminated along with the infidel if they don't get their act together.
    Do you know what the bible says about Lukewarm Christians? You know what you said about violent demagogues? Look up Gary North. Gary North is a man who thinks that public stoning could be a "family activity". Violent Demagogues are not in short supply in Christianity its just that most Christians dont listen to them. Youve yet to give a reason why Islamic people cant do the same. There are almost no Christians that genuinely believe in the Bible. There are a lot that believe in the IDEA of the Bible. And there are a few that even have some cursory knowledge of it and just look the other way at the bad parts.

    Why cant Muslims do the same thing in time?

    I have nothing against alternative religions to those found in the west. Buddhism did great things in India under Kanishka, before it was stamped out by Hinduism. Confucianism made for a great Chinese society.

    I am however a student of History, and I've read enough to know that there's something seriously wrong with the idea of "Islam" as portrayed by the media and Muslims in America. So I call it like I see it. An ideology that is Super Double Plus Ungood and fit only for the dustbin of history.
    +10% Crit Chance

  6. #36
    Senior Member Wanderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    I swear to God. The only people who defend the Bible are the people who havent read it.
    I swear to God, demagogues like you inflame arguments the second you weigh in.

    I generally don't respond in kind, this is more of an attempt to point out what I consider poor form. However; kindly take a moment and consider, perhaps, that you are not gracing us all with infinite wisdom. That perhaps you are not, in fact Solomon reincarnate; and maybe, just maybe you should consider your words a tad more carefully to avoid ending what had been (from most points of view here, I think) thus far a relatively civilized discussion where adults were sharing points of view and debating them.


    If you are incapable of discussing a subject civilly your words will never accomplish anything. Minds are not changed with insults, and argumentum ad hominem is a childish way to begin any debate.

    Firstly, this is sort of thread-jacking, but if the mods feel a need to move it they will do so, or so I assume.

    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Genesis 3:16
    Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
    You conveniently leave out the part where God chews Adam out and gives him the following punishment.
    3:17 .. “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food util you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.”


    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Isaiah 3:12
    As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them.

    1 Corinthians 11:3
    But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

    Ephesians 5:22-24
    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

    1 Peter 3:1
    Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.

    Colossians 3:18
    Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
    *lumps like verses together*

    This is what is referred to as a hierarchy. Yes, according to Abrahamic Tradition women are not supposed to hold positions of power. In any partnership, one party must hold the final word - biblically speaking, that's the role of the man. I'll point out this current example. In Chinese society, Men are still expected to run things outside of the home - however the person with the real power within the family unit is the mother; similarly, if you believe women had no power because they were at home, you're wrong.
    ..And again, you conveniently forget verses that don't reinforce your point.

    Ephesians 5:25-31
    "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy [...] 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”"

    1 Corinthians 14:34-36
    Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    1 Timothy 2:11-15
    Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.

    Titus 2:4-5
    Teach the young women to be ... obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
    This strikes me as more cultural than anything, I wonder about paul's cannonical status myself at times. Even then, NOWHERE in the bible do you find verses of this ilk.

    Qur'an (4:34) Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them.

    Note; that's if you FEAR rebellion. If you THINK she might be defiant, give her a good beating to remind her of her place.


    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Except the parts about stoning people to death and "not suffering" witches to live. What exactly is the difference between God approving violence and commanding it? Does God do things that God doesnt approve of?
    The laws you are speaking of are the Old Testament Levitical Code that God laid out for the Israelites proper. We do not live in tents anymore, so I don't follow the "walk X number of steps outside of your dwelling to answer nature's call" law either.

    More to the point, Christ came "not to abolish the law, but fulfill it" - since no one is capable of living the law perfectly, "fulfilling the law" established a new covenant of Grace. This covenant replaced the Old Testament covenant, and those who accept Grace and believe in Christ go to heaven, the rest go to hell. The levitical law serves as a reminder of what displeases God, but we're supposed to look more and more like Christ; ergo, less time worrying about what NOT to do, and more time worrying about what *to* do.


    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Thats what I meant by "given in a time of war" in my earlier post. Most Muslim apologetics use the exact same line to explain the violent verses in the Koran. Im not well studied in the Koran so that could be bullshit.
    Many of the edicts given in the Qur'an are specific in how they apply at ALL times, to ALL infidels.

    ..Perhaps you could take a few moments time off of studying Christianity for it's flaws and look into that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    1. You shall have no other gods before me.
    1st Amendment.

    2. You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments
    .
    1st Amendment
    3. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.

    1st Amendment

    4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

    There are only a few states with laws like this. Most of them are very mild. Ill give you .5 points.

    5. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

    This is more of a social convention than an actual law.
    6. You shall not murder.
    1 point.
    7. You shall not commit adultery.
    Not illegal. Grounds for divorce though.
    8. You shall not steal.
    1 point.
    9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
    1st Amendment. Although a total of 17/50 states have libel laws. .5 points.
    10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

    NOPE.

    So you have a total of 3 points. And the only laws that got full points were "Dont Murder" and "Dont Steal". Somehow I think we would have figured those ones out without the Bible.
    For a moment there, I was almost impressed!
    However. Seeing as you stole this from a blog on the internet, my enthusiasm was short lived.
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...-for-our-laws/

    I would discuss this; but it's even further derailing this thread, and honestly a subject like that deserves it's own thread. Kindly give credit to that blog when you start the thread. I take a dim view of plagiarism.


    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    Do you know what the bible says about Lukewarm Christians? You know what you said about violent demagogues? Look up Gary North. Gary North is a man who thinks that public stoning could be a "family activity". Violent Demagogues are not in short supply in Christianity its just that most Christians dont listen to them. You've yet to give a reason why Islamic people cant do the same. There are almost no Christians that genuinely believe in the Bible. There are a lot that believe in the IDEA of the Bible. And there are a few that even have some cursory knowledge of it and just look the other way at the bad parts.

    Why cant Muslims do the same thing in time?
    Yes, actually, I do know what the Bible says about lukewarm Christians.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...46&version=NIV

    Or here:
    Matthew 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot."

    Clear, final, heavenly judgement and denial of Paradise for the lukewarm Christians. I fail to see your point.


    Regarding why Muslims cannot do the same; I think I've outlined WHY the Old Testament Levitical law no longer applies; I don't have to look the other way for those laws anymore than you do for laws against fornication; when a law is repealed, or replaced, it is no longer something by which you live. Again! The commands GIVEN in the Qu'uran were NOT culturally specific and had no expiration date! The last command Christians were given was to "Go out into the world preaching the gospel and making disciples of all nations" - a clear decree with no expiration date. Islam has plenty of decrees exactly like that - Again; I will link you, since you obviously did NOT read this link last time I put it up.
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Qu...3-violence.htm

    I've done my best to explain; but there are none so blind as those who will not see, and I have better things to do with my time.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Critical Hit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
    I swear to God, demagogues like you inflame arguments the second you weigh in.

    I generally don't respond in kind, this is more of an attempt to point out what I consider poor form. However; kindly take a moment and consider, perhaps, that you are not gracing us all with infinite wisdom. That perhaps you are not, in fact Solomon reincarnate; and maybe, just maybe you should consider your words a tad more carefully to avoid ending what had been (from most points of view here, I think) thus far a relatively civilized discussion where adults were sharing points of view and debating them.


    If you are incapable of discussing a subject civilly your words will never accomplish anything. Minds are not changed with insults, and argumentum ad hominem is a childish way to begin any debate.

    Firstly, this is sort of thread-jacking, but if the mods feel a need to move it they will do so, or so I assume.



    You conveniently leave out the part where God chews Adam out and gives him the following punishment.
    3:17 .. “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food util you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.”
    Ahuh, this changes?

    *lumps like verses together*

    This is what is referred to as a hierarchy. Yes, according to Abrahamic Tradition women are not supposed to hold positions of power. In any partnership, one party must hold the final word - biblically speaking, that's the role of the man. I'll point out this current example. In Chinese society, Men are still expected to run things outside of the home - however the person with the real power within the family unit is the mother; similarly, if you believe women had no power because they were at home, you're wrong.
    I dont think they didnt have power because they stayed at home. I think they had no power because they forbidden to have power.

    1 TIMOTHY 2:11-15

    11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

    ..And again, you conveniently forget verses that don't reinforce your point.

    Ephesians 5:25-31
    "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy [...] 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”"
    This has no effect at all on the previous verses or my point.

    This strikes me as more cultural than anything, I wonder about paul's cannonical status myself at times. Even then, NOWHERE in the bible do you find verses of this ilk.

    Qur'an (4:34) Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them.

    Note; that's if you FEAR rebellion. If you THINK she might be defiant, give her a good beating to remind her of her place.

    The laws you are speaking of are the Old Testament Levitical Code that God laid out for the Israelites proper. We do not live in tents anymore, so I don't follow the "walk X number of steps outside of your dwelling to answer nature's call" law either.

    More to the point, Christ came "not to abolish the law, but fulfill it" - since no one is capable of living the law perfectly, "fulfilling the law" established a new covenant of Grace. This covenant replaced the Old Testament covenant, and those who accept Grace and believe in Christ go to heaven, the rest go to hell. The levitical law serves as a reminder of what displeases God, but we're supposed to look more and more like Christ; ergo, less time worrying about what NOT to do, and more time worrying about what *to* do.
    Do you have any biblical basis for this? I know of a verse that states that we dont have to follow ceremonial or dietary laws anymore, but was burning witches a ceremonial law? Was stoning women a dietary law? Can you give me any reason why these verse are null and void other than the fact that they are silly and you dont like them?

    Many of the edicts given in the Qur'an are specific in how they apply at ALL times, to ALL infidels.

    ..Perhaps you could take a few moments time off of studying Christianity for it's flaws and look into that.
    Define "infidel".

    "Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve"

    Koran 2:62

    For a moment there, I was almost impressed!
    However. Seeing as you stole this from a blog on the internet, my enthusiasm was short lived.
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...-for-our-laws/
    Hey dumbass try reading your own fucking source. That person used points to illustrate a similar point but they did so in a much different way. And I doubt he came up with that argument either, its an old argument Ive heard a million times.

    And even if I just copied and pasted that from a blog(which I didnt) it doesnt change my point at all.

    I would discuss this; but it's even further derailing this thread, and honestly a subject like that deserves it's own thread. Kindly give credit to that blog when you start the thread. I take a dim view of plagiarism.
    Once again. Fuck off. If you were wrong either admitt it or dont say anything. Dont deflect it with accusations of plagiarism.

    Yes, actually, I do know what the Bible says about lukewarm Christians.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...46&version=NIV

    Or here:
    Matthew 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot."

    Clear, final, heavenly judgement and denial of Paradise for the lukewarm Christians. I fail to see your point.
    You said that

    "The problem is, that according to Islam, those who "ignore the parts they don't like" are bad Muslims who at best are merely earning the disfavor of allah and [according to the most violent demagogues] at worst they should be exterminated along with the infidel if they don't get their act together. "

    Christians are obviously under a similar standard. Lukewarm Christians get sent to a big ol lake of fire. Yet that doesnt stop 99% of modern Christians from being lukewarm. So what is stopping Muslims from becoming Lukewarm as well?

    Regarding why Muslims cannot do the same; I think I've outlined WHY the Old Testament Levitical law no longer applies;
    No you havent really. And If you have you might want to call up the entire Christian Dominionist movement, because they didnt get the memo.

    I don't have to look the other way for those laws anymore than you do for laws against fornication; when a law is repealed, or replaced, it is no longer something by which you live. Again! The commands GIVEN in the Qu'uran were NOT culturally specific and had no expiration date! The last command Christians were given was to "Go out into the world preaching the gospel and making disciples of all nations" - a clear decree with no expiration date. Islam has plenty of decrees exactly like that - Again; I will link you, since you obviously did NOT read this link last time I put it up.
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Qu...3-violence.htm

    I've done my best to explain; but there are none so blind as those who will not see, and I have better things to do with my time.
    As do I.
    +10% Crit Chance

  8. #38
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post


    For a moment there, I was almost impressed!
    However. Seeing as you stole this from a blog on the internet, my enthusiasm was short lived.
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...-for-our-laws/

    I would discuss this; but it's even further derailing this thread, and honestly a subject like that deserves it's own thread. Kindly give credit to that blog when you start the thread. I take a dim view of plagiarism.
    To be fair, I reached the exact same conclusion long before web 2.0 came along. Am I too a plagiarist?

    These laws (Sharia, 10 commandments, etc) are shit and the world would be a terrible place if we obeyed the edicts laid down by the God of Abraham, whether they be from the Torah, the Bible, or the Quran

    It would be better to edit the Bible and remove all the nonsense, or better yet, start from scratch or from a semi-modern viewpoint that takes human rights into consideration

  9. #39
    Senior Member BAJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post


    For a moment there, I was almost impressed!
    However. Seeing as you stole this from a blog on the internet, my enthusiasm was short lived.
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...-for-our-laws/

    I would discuss this; but it's even further derailing this thread, and honestly a subject like that deserves it's own thread. Kindly give credit to that blog when you start the thread. I take a dim view of plagiarism.





    Yeah, but aren't you quoting a source to justify your opinions?

    He's not turning in a paper as an original work, claiming that he wrote it.

    Instead of saying, "Gee, I was wrong about that", or "I learned something new", or "Your right, it's not really the basis of our law", you attacked his source.

    It doesn't matter, apparently, that the content of his source completely debunks your opinion.

    America is a very covetous nation. We are full of conspicuous consumption and "keeping up with the neighbors". It is probably our main cultural value. We consume things we don't need in order to impress others or distinguish ourselves.

    Our wars are about power and wealth and breeding rights. The same is true of Sharia law.

  10. #40
    Artisan Conquerer Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    7w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Critical Hit View Post
    I swear to God. The only people who defend the Bible are the people who havent read it........
    --------------------
    Type Stats:
    MBTI -> (E) 77.14% | (i) 22.86% ; (S) 60% | (n) 40% ; (T) 72.22% | (f) 27.78% ; (P) 51.43% | (j) 48.57%
    BIG 5 -> Extroversion 77% ; Accommodation 60% ; Orderliness 62% ; Emotional Stability 64% ; Open Mindedness 74%

    Quotes:
    "If somebody asks your MBTI type on a first date, run". -Donna Cecilia
    "Enneagram is psychological underpinnings. Cognitive Functions are mental reasoning and perceptional processes. -Sanjuro

Similar Threads

  1. Sharia law and Islam
    By Poki in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-23-2016, 09:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO