Um, those are old testaments. Bible is only complete when read with old and new testament as a whole.
You don't see any of that crazy crap in New, which takes place after/during the coming of Christ.
Um, those are old testaments. Bible is only complete when read with old and new testament as a whole.
You don't see any of that crazy crap in New, which takes place after/during the coming of Christ.
As always, the same way any religion deals with parts of their "holy book" that recommends doing stuff that today would be morally horrible. They ignore it. Pick and choosing parts of the bible, qu'ran, or other religious text to read, and parts to ignore is an integral law of religion 
whew, thats good. now all i have to do is make sure i dont run into new-testament-god when i die.
And you don't have to worry about following those "crazy crap" Ten Commandments either. That's Old Testament. And I guess walking on water and flying into space after you die is not crazy crap.
Hopefully it tells them avoid people who are ignorant, aka you. Could you explain to me how drinking, pre-martial sex and not believing in a certain thing is an example of critical thinking? Let us see if you can do it. I don't believe in the divinity of Mohamed but it does not mean I think all Muslims are fools for following the teachings the way they are meant too. I certainly do not think that they lack the ability to critically think and analyze situations due to the fact they follow a specific guideline in there life. So if you would be so kind as to tell me how they do or how his examples of things he doesn't do shows the people involved in those activities can critically think I would love to hear it.
Or we can safely assume your an ignorant troll who gets his jollies off insulting other religions. Your call.
...you completely took that verse out of context...
It is Zechariah's prophecy of the future millenial kingdom...after
the return of Christ (12: 10) and when He will rule on earth
for 1000 years (theocratic rule).
And how does reading a verse in many versions make it
that you aren't taking it out of "context".
It would help with wrong translations but certainly not taking it out of context.
NO true Christians would advocate following Zech 13: 3 today. It would be like
reading prophecies of Revelation and going to Israel today to talk to the two witnesses.
Originally posted by: thecrecarc
As always, the same way any religion deals with parts of their "holy book" that recommends doing stuff that today would be morally horrible. They ignore it. Pick and choosing parts of the bible, qu'ran, or other religious text to read, and parts to ignore is an integral law of religion
It's not that hard to figure out it states clearly in the OLD TESTAMENT that those rules were really only for the Jews, the covenant in the Old Testament was really between them and God not the world and God. It serves as an example, platform for the new testiment.
It?s imprinted in our minds that nothing is FREE. So it seems crazy that it could be that simple. For those of us that are religious that is.
While other like to brand us raving lunatics.
I get the feeling you misunderstand me--to clarify, I'm not prodigialrebel, though I responded to your response to him. I am not Muslim. I am actually African Methodist Episcopal, so I do believe in the 2nd Testament etc. Like I said in an earlier post (and earlier threads), I've never read the Qu'ran either, like you.
My only assertion is that *all* people have a tendency to allow for more leeway with their native interpretations than they do with those of others. Extremist/fundamentalist zealots exist within all belief systems, but a given society-at-large more or less makes of the respective texts what they need to in order to rationalize their own positions/goals. Because at the end of the day, both Christians and Muslims believe that their own believers alone will ascend to "heaven" (however the concept is conveyed); we see non-Christians as "infidels", and they see non-Muslims as the same... so the question becomes, who's bluffing?
I basically try not to read too much into either since there will never be a cut-and-dry answer. The definition of faith pretty much guarantees that.Originally posted by: AStar617
I get the feeling you misunderstand me--to clarify, I'm not prodigialrebel, though I responded to your response to him. I am not Muslim. I am actually African Methodist Episcopal, so I do believe in the 2nd Testament etc. Like I said in an earlier post (and earlier threads), I've never read the Qu'ran either, like you.
My only assertion is that *all* people have a tendency to allow for more leeway with their native interpretations than they do with those of others. Extremist/fundamentalist zealots exist within all belief systems, but a given society-at-large more or less makes of the respective texts what they need to in order to rationalize their own positions/goals. Because at the end of the day, both Christians and Muslims believe that their own believers alone will ascend to "heaven" (however the concept is conveyed); we see non-Christians as "infidels", and they see non-Muslims as the same... so the question becomes, who's bluffing?
Ooops I thought you were prodigialrebel. Sorry, you posed a good question though one that many people ask.
Sorry, "out of context" was poor word choice. I meant "translated wrong".
The text I've bolded is the most important part, upon which we both agree to some extent. IMHO, the fact that *all* religious texts have parts which need to be left up to mortal interpretation / application makes it sorta unfair for us to say "your text condones killing people" and vice versa. That's all I'm saying.
Mmmm, but every Muslim that I have asked and pressed enough for a answer says that they are called to kill the non-believers if they will not convert. (If you do convert you get to be a second-class citizen, YAY) They usually follow with they do not follow that part; otherwise I might not be here. So I wonder how someone decides to not follow that and what it does to their, getting into paradise plan, when the way to get into their paradise is based on the works system.
I also wonder what it means to Catholics when they don't go to a day of obligation?
OK, a lot of replies in the time I was gone but I will try and address this with the best of my knowledge:
Every time someone posts a verse from the Quran that seems to encourage killing 'infidels', I look it up and what I normally see is a passage taken out of context. The Prophet Muhammad was driven out of Mecca after facing great persecution and having his life endangered. Most of the passages that I have seen involve statements made in the context of war, when the Muslim Army of Medina were going to face the Non-Muslims in battle. Every time you see the Prophet claiming, "Kill the infidels", it is a passage that describes the build-up to a battle.
War is never encouraged in the Quran - when the Quran talks about infidels, it talks about the oppressive forces of that time that whose sole intention was ostracizing people and forcing them to 'convert by the sword.' Infidel, in the Quran's context, refers to an invading force that is trying to steal away the right of a Muslim to freely practice their religion.
For instance, the United States gives its Muslim citizens the right to practice their religion, build mosques, preach, hold seminars and freely distribute their literature. If the United States were attacked by a Muslim nation, the Quran requires US Muslims to pledge allegiance with their motherland - even if it isn't an Islamic State. This is maybe a too simple example but that is what I learned all my life.
I am an Indian (a secular but predominantly Hindu nation) and we have an iffy relationship with Pakistan (a Muslim nation). But if I truly believed in the Quran, my loyalty would have to be with India and not Pakistan. So the question of all Muslims being required to slay infidels (as some people think) doesn't really rise.
I will re-read the thread and try to address some of the questions.
Did you get to the part about the stars in the sky are really missiles to kill Satan. And that mountains were put on earth to stabilize and prevent earth quakes. The Quran is amazing.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
tell me how stoning people to death is critical thinking? how about death for apostasy? the faiths foundations are so shaky it has to resort to such oppressive mind control. nothing about atheism/rationalism/humanism says you must go drinking and have premarital sex, there are good rational reasons to not do things. that you have to set up such a pathetic straw man is telling. nothing about not believing in god alone means you are rational, you could believe in homeopathy or pagan spirits or other nonsense as well. its all part of the same irrational thinking, some is worse than others of course. very few people kill over their horoscopes for instance. however, religious texts are full of irrational things, and frankly if you have to pick and choose for the few semi correct verses, the whole is proved worthless, that or you are simply being unfaithful and making a sham of the religion. never mind religion being a sham itself anyways. ignorance is one thing, but the religious take it a step further with willful ignorance, shoving their heads right into those holes so they can believe in their malignant fairy stories.
the bible is one of the worst systems for morality out there.
i don't need to get jollies off anything. religion is an insult to humanity. religion gets too much of a pass in society. if someone tells you they believe in magic and a mystical wizard named gandalf who rules from the heavens you'd call them an idiot and they'd deserve it. never mind the rest of the trash in the scripture. respect has to be earned, and religion has earned nothing, it has spread through fear ignorance and oppression, all forces that are harmful and that is nothing to be respected. if the ability to spread grounds for respect we'd have to worship aids.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
Apostasy and civil rights. Islam is incompatible with universal human rights.
http://www.iheu.org/node/1541
and its true. its the worst of the lot. the koran is direct from god as it gets. no real interpretation is possible. at least the bible is second hand scribblings of human disciples. you have a little leeway there, its made up of many authors, some sections by other authors were culled by the church and other nonsense so the authority is really easily questionable. the koran is claimed to be perfect direct from god as it gets and unchanged throughout time, and frankly that means a single flaw in the koran invalidates it as it would mean that god himself is a total moron. and well.. its chock full of them.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/
http://www.iheu.org/node/1541
and its true. its the worst of the lot. the koran is direct from god as it gets. no real interpretation is possible. at least the bible is second hand scribblings of human disciples. you have a little leeway there, its made up of many authors, some sections by other authors were culled by the church and other nonsense so the authority is really easily questionable. the koran is claimed to be perfect direct from god as it gets and unchanged throughout time, and frankly that means a single flaw in the koran invalidates it as it would mean that god himself is a total moron. and well.. its chock full of them.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/
Atif
Platinum Member
- Oct 10, 2001
- 2,423
- 11
- 81
Yes, I've read the Qur'an. Didn't hear about it. Wasn't told about it. I read it.
Muslims are not commanded to kill non-believers if they will not convert.
"There is no compulsion in religion" - the Holy Qur'an, Chapter 2, Verse 256
Simply stated: A Muslim (adherent of Islam), as part of his/her declaration of Faith, declares that "There is none worthy of worship except the One God." By pledging this allegiance, it guarantees that a Muslim accepts the commandments of God.
Muslims believe the Qur'an is the direct word of the One God. Thus, when God says not to kill, as Cain did Abel, Muslims accept this rule of God. The same holds true for everything else in the Qur'an - it is divine guidance for mankind, and as such, it is to be accepted by every Muslim ENTIRELY.
What needs to be understood before examining Islam is that it is NOT merely a system of beliefs, morals, and rites like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. Rather, Islam is a comprehensive social system built upon the existence of God and His divine guidance. Therefore, Islam addresses high-level issues including governance, politics, penal code, warfare, and family law as well as everyday issues like education, diet, belief, manners, morality, and, of course, worship. In this sense, Islam can be compared to other comprehensive systems such as communism, capitalism, socialism, democracy, et al. This comprehensiveness is a salient feature of Islam missing from all other religions.
The sad reality is that all religion in the Western world is evaluated in the shade of Christianity. Therefore, the inadequacies (real or perceived) inherent in Christianity are unnecessarily associated with all religions, and in particular Islam.
Having established that the Qur'an is seen as the word of God, and that it thus, contains divine guidance, it follows that Muslims believe the perfect system of governance for mankind is that system which is revealed by God in the Qur'an.
Since Muslims believe the way of life revealed in the Qur'an is from the One God, to whom submission is due, it is expected that others acknowledge that God's commandments should serve as the foundation of life. Let's draw an analogy here: you are a full-time student, and you get called in for jury duty during the schoolyear. Though you don't particularly agree with the court's assertion that full-time student status is NOT an excuse for skipping jury duty, you still serve because you accept the state's authority to summon you.
Similarly, all individuals (Muslim or otherwise) are expected to accept God's guidance. The ultimate show of acceptance is acceptance of Islam as one's faith. However, God reveals in the Qur'an that not all will come to accept Islam. For these individuals, an acceptance of God's rule is necessary. By this it means, one must accept that the One God, as the creator, has ultimate authority and right to rule. So long as the individual accepts this, (in an Islamic state this is demonstrated by the payment of the Jizya) the individual is free to practice his/her religion without conversion to Islam.
There are many instances in history of non-Muslims agreeing to God's rule without accepting Islam itself. The Jews of Al-Andalus and the Christians of Ethiopia immediately come to mind. This harmony has existed for the very reason that Muslims do not forcibly convert others to the religion. Rather, as I have explained, God's right to rule is to be accepted by all, whether through complete submission to God (acceptance of Islam) or payment of the Jizya.
I would like to briefly address the issue of conflict before closing; individuals have fought for ideas and ideologies for quite some time. Not more than three hundred years ago, Patrick Henry shed blood to achieve liberty from the persecution of England. Today, President George W. Bush deploys soldiers to various parts of the world to erect democratic governments in lands where such a government previously has not existed. In these cases and many others, it is widely accepted that, so long as the war is "just," the use of force is necessary to bring about a greater good. In light of the understanding of Islam as a comprehensive system of life, why then are we unduly critical of Muslim states that fought battles to extend the Domain of God's Rule on Earth once diplomatic measures were vehemently rejected?
Peace
Muslims are not commanded to kill non-believers if they will not convert.
"There is no compulsion in religion" - the Holy Qur'an, Chapter 2, Verse 256
Simply stated: A Muslim (adherent of Islam), as part of his/her declaration of Faith, declares that "There is none worthy of worship except the One God." By pledging this allegiance, it guarantees that a Muslim accepts the commandments of God.
Muslims believe the Qur'an is the direct word of the One God. Thus, when God says not to kill, as Cain did Abel, Muslims accept this rule of God. The same holds true for everything else in the Qur'an - it is divine guidance for mankind, and as such, it is to be accepted by every Muslim ENTIRELY.
What needs to be understood before examining Islam is that it is NOT merely a system of beliefs, morals, and rites like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. Rather, Islam is a comprehensive social system built upon the existence of God and His divine guidance. Therefore, Islam addresses high-level issues including governance, politics, penal code, warfare, and family law as well as everyday issues like education, diet, belief, manners, morality, and, of course, worship. In this sense, Islam can be compared to other comprehensive systems such as communism, capitalism, socialism, democracy, et al. This comprehensiveness is a salient feature of Islam missing from all other religions.
The sad reality is that all religion in the Western world is evaluated in the shade of Christianity. Therefore, the inadequacies (real or perceived) inherent in Christianity are unnecessarily associated with all religions, and in particular Islam.
Having established that the Qur'an is seen as the word of God, and that it thus, contains divine guidance, it follows that Muslims believe the perfect system of governance for mankind is that system which is revealed by God in the Qur'an.
Since Muslims believe the way of life revealed in the Qur'an is from the One God, to whom submission is due, it is expected that others acknowledge that God's commandments should serve as the foundation of life. Let's draw an analogy here: you are a full-time student, and you get called in for jury duty during the schoolyear. Though you don't particularly agree with the court's assertion that full-time student status is NOT an excuse for skipping jury duty, you still serve because you accept the state's authority to summon you.
Similarly, all individuals (Muslim or otherwise) are expected to accept God's guidance. The ultimate show of acceptance is acceptance of Islam as one's faith. However, God reveals in the Qur'an that not all will come to accept Islam. For these individuals, an acceptance of God's rule is necessary. By this it means, one must accept that the One God, as the creator, has ultimate authority and right to rule. So long as the individual accepts this, (in an Islamic state this is demonstrated by the payment of the Jizya) the individual is free to practice his/her religion without conversion to Islam.
There are many instances in history of non-Muslims agreeing to God's rule without accepting Islam itself. The Jews of Al-Andalus and the Christians of Ethiopia immediately come to mind. This harmony has existed for the very reason that Muslims do not forcibly convert others to the religion. Rather, as I have explained, God's right to rule is to be accepted by all, whether through complete submission to God (acceptance of Islam) or payment of the Jizya.
I would like to briefly address the issue of conflict before closing; individuals have fought for ideas and ideologies for quite some time. Not more than three hundred years ago, Patrick Henry shed blood to achieve liberty from the persecution of England. Today, President George W. Bush deploys soldiers to various parts of the world to erect democratic governments in lands where such a government previously has not existed. In these cases and many others, it is widely accepted that, so long as the war is "just," the use of force is necessary to bring about a greater good. In light of the understanding of Islam as a comprehensive system of life, why then are we unduly critical of Muslim states that fought battles to extend the Domain of God's Rule on Earth once diplomatic measures were vehemently rejected?
Peace
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
theres plenty of compulsion. the concept of apostasy just nullifies any claim of no compulsion.
just because you claim you are fighting for the greater good doesn't mean much. the germans in ww2 probably thought they were fighting for the greater good after all. the problem is the muslims base their reasoning on a faulty fairy tale which they take too seriously. the seed of their reason is corrupt to begin with, nothing good can come from it.
just because you claim you are fighting for the greater good doesn't mean much. the germans in ww2 probably thought they were fighting for the greater good after all. the problem is the muslims base their reasoning on a faulty fairy tale which they take too seriously. the seed of their reason is corrupt to begin with, nothing good can come from it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter