|
28613. alistairConnor - 10/29/2006 7:30:05 PM I take it, Con, that you're going to pass on the Old Testament questions? Message # 28603 28614. poipual - 10/29/2006 10:42:51 PM alister
What is the point of quoting Bible verses from the Old Testament. Now if yu could show me a sigificant number od Christians or Jews who follow those verses, they would have meaning. In some Islamic countries, honor killins happen today, even in Jordan. I am swell aware that it predates Islam. You may take lightly what muslims are saying they intend doing, and I wonder why. 28615. alistairConnor - 10/29/2006 11:01:33 PM Al : I'm taking up Concerned's challenge. He said :
I have a better idea. Let's discuss the " verses of Christianity or Judaism" that exhort the believer to lie to, cheat, defraud and murder those of other faiths.
i.e. he seems to be claiming that Christianity is an inherently "better" religion than Christianity or Judaism, independently of whether or not people actually follow the scriptures or not.
So let's not shift the goalposts just yet. Not until Con has answered. 28616. alistairConnor - 10/29/2006 11:08:39 PM But I do agree, Al, with your implicit view that religion should be left out of politics.
However, there most certainly are political forces in Israel today who openly claim that they have a God-given right to make war on other tribes, just like in the Old Testament, to claim any territories they feel Israel should own. (Since you asked. I can dig up the names of the parties and individuals if you wish. And their government often seems to be following the same policy, though it doesn't generally say so.) 28617. poipual - 10/29/2006 11:16:00 PM I am so happy to hear that it is just an academic exercise between you and concerned. Why do I worry so much about what muslims are about. I'll be 75 in Feb., and evren though the Dr. said I had 20 years to go, he may be wrong, don't you know. But I have 11 grandchildren.
I might favor Christianity and Judism because I don't fear them, nor do I fear Budists or Hindos, or atheists or agnostics.
There is a road to peace with Islam. It is submission. Are we ready for that?
I know many liberals seem to fear Christians 28618. poipual - 10/29/2006 11:37:23 PM I am reading Churchill's "Memoirs of the Second World War". These words struck me:
"Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win...you may come to a time when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves."
Is Wisnton right today, or is submission the better choice? 28619. alistairConnor - 10/30/2006 12:07:18 AM If you are asking me whether Christians should make religious war against Moslems, then certainly I think they should not.
As for picking wars we can easily win. Are you proposing Afghanistan, or Iraq, as an example? 28620. jexster - 10/30/2006 12:39:02 AM We're losing..no we've lost both.
Allah! Allah! Save us!
Those unto whom We gave the Scripture recognize (this revelation) as they recognize their sons. But lo! a party of them knowingly conceal the truth. al-Qur'an 2:146 28621. jexster - 10/30/2006 2:01:22 AM Narrated AbuHurayrah:
Strongest among men in enmity to the believers (Muslims) wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, 'We are Christians': because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. (The Noble Quran, 5:82)"
Say: 'O People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians)! Come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.' If then they turn back, say ye: 'Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will).' (The Noble Quran, 3:64)
No wonder Jen et al have to proof text their way ..way..way out views
It is all right wing Jew propaganda
28622. Jenerator - 10/30/2006 3:37:40 AM Jex,
Here's the issue (in a nutshell). Mohammed wrote down the scriptures at different times in his life while dealing with different issues. Even from a cursory reading of the Koran you can see a change in tone. Mohammed goes from one extreme to the next. First he claimed that Jews and Christians were People of the Book. Later he claims that they must convert or be killed.
There is an Islamic principle called nasikh that explains that when a verse is in direct contradiction with another verse, the newer verse is to been viewed as more authoritative because it would have been more recent from the mouth of Mohammed. Abrogation if you will. So, if Mohammed said 'eat apples on the second day of the week' and later said 'cut down an apple tree on the second day of the week', the latter verse is to be viewed as more authoritative.
So, in essence, you view Meccan scriptures in light of Medinan scriptures. 28623. Jenerator - 10/30/2006 3:40:57 AM You would still have Muslims eating apples rather than cutting down the apple trees and both groups would claim to be fully Muslim. 28624. jexster - 10/30/2006 4:41:33 AM No he doesn't Jen...that's a lie.
I am not going to keep posting the same material that proves it
I have done it several times now
The issue (in a nutshell) is that you are regurgitating bottom feeder swill that right wing Jews have passed off as authentic muslim scholarship
You are republishing lies and bigotry 28625. jexster - 10/30/2006 4:43:11 AM And again ..the proof is not only in Muslim scripture but in praxis ...which when contrasted with Christain history of Jewish and Muslim persecutions, admits of no dispute either 28626. jexster - 10/30/2006 4:48:02 AM You want to know why Jen persists in Jew lies the answer is here
Her hate is the inevitable outcome of her perverse Christainity.
I think I've said that before two 28627. jexster - 10/30/2006 4:55:58 AM The Catholic Church of course rejects Jen's perverse understanding of Islam and Christianity, calling for a dialogue of mutual respect and understanding - something which Jen is manifestly incapable.
That's because she's a heretic.
She'd have been burned at the stake 500 years ago. 28628. jexster - 10/30/2006 5:06:14 AM Medina and Mecca: No Compulsion in Religion
Juan Cole has pointed out what countless other scholars have - something Jen can't quite seem to comprehend..
At least she knows the difference between Medina and Mecca:
He notes that the text he discusses, a polemic against Islam by a Byzantine emperor, cites Qur'an 2:256: "There is no compulsion in religion." Benedict maintains that this is an early verse, when Muhammad was without power.
His allegation is incorrect. Surah 2 is a Medinan surah revealed when Muhammad was already established as the leader of the city of Yathrib (later known as Medina or "the city" of the Prophet). The pope imagines that a young Muhammad in Mecca before 622 (lacking power) permitted freedom of conscience, but later in life ordered that his religion be spread by the sword. But since Surah 2 is in fact from the Medina period when Muhammad was in power, that theory does not hold water.
In fact, the Qur'an at no point urges that religious faith be imposed on anyone by force. This is what it says about the religions:
' [2:62] Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians-- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. '
28629. concerned - 10/30/2006 6:19:41 AM Re. 28613 -
No, my intention is not to 'pass', if I can get the Mote to accept my posting. Btw, did you know that you are the first person in the half century of my life to get me to read any but the shortest books in the Bible all the way through in a single sitting? It didn't happen during the five years I went to a private Christian school. It didn't happen in two years I went to a Baptist church. Are you proud of yourself?:) 28630. concerned - 10/30/2006 6:31:06 AM Btw, why should any Muslim, since the Old Testament which is holy to Islam guarantees Palestine to Jews, try to deny Jews Palestine? 28631. concerned - 10/30/2006 6:52:42 AM The Book of Joshua is a narrative of the Jewish conquest of Canaan at around 1400 BC which was purportedly promised to them by their God during the time of Abraham.
I don't see where anything in Joshua incites modern Jews, or particularly Christians against those of other religions in any way whatsoever. Even at the time, Joshua offered the various kingdoms (cities) in Canaan the opportunity to surrender or leave peacefully. Some took him up on his offer and coexisted with the Jews for hundreds of years. 28632. alistairconnor - 10/30/2006 10:34:51 AM Yes Con, I'm truly proud. If your reading enables you go beyond your shallow misconceptions about our judaeo-christian heritage, I will be even prouder.
But very surprised.
|
