15 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobWhen you utter the word "Christian" what comes to mind? Is it Mosaic law or the man who spared the woman caught in adultery and bypassed the Moscaic law?
[b]This is an aspect that Christians simply cannot relate to.
Then i suggest you go and read up on your Mosaic Law.[/b]
Again, Christians simply cannot relate to Mohammad who was stuck in the Old Testament. As for Christians, thank God we have Christ. For us, our faith revolves around him and his new covenant. Mohammad was aware of his teachings but obviously disliked them.
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyThis is what you typed -
When you utter the word "Christian" what comes to mind? Is it Mosaic law or the man who spared the woman caught in adultery and bypassed the Moscaic law?
Again, Christians simply cannot relate to Mohammad who was stuck in the Old Testament. As for Christians, thank God we have Christ. For us, our faith revolves around him and his new covenant. Mohammad was aware of his teachings but obviously disliked them.
Of course, it does not help matters when Mohammad gives his followers liscence to kill in the name of God for various reasons.
I thought it was a trifle ironic that you should type this knowing the OT is full of such commands. You're cherry picking, taking what you want and conveniently forgetting the rest.
Again, Christians simply cannot relate to Mohammad who was stuck in the Old Testament.
Rubbish. The Christian Ugandan government tried recently to pass a law that would allow them to put homosexuals to death. It was reported this policy decision came about after a meeting with some evangelical American Christians. It seems some of your bretheren would like to hark bark to the good ol' days. What you should have said is -
Again, most Christians simply cannot relate to Mohammad who was stuck in the Old Testament.
15 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobOf course, I can't speak for all Christians. In fact, some remain extremly legalistic. Paul even encountered this as Jews insisted on old traditions such as circumcision, however, he rebuked them and told them that the only circumcision needed was of the heart.
This is what you typed -
Of course, it does not help matters when Mohammad gives his followers liscence to kill in the name of God for various reasons.
I thought it was a trifle ironic that you should type this knowing the OT is full of such commands. You're cherry picking, taking what you want and conveniently forgetting the rest.
[b]A b]most Christians simply cannot relate to Mohammad who was stuck in the Old Testament.[/i][/b]
To be fair, however, Christians for the most part follow the teachings of Jesus and Muslims follow the teachings of Mohammad. If you put them side by side you will find the two incapatable. That is why Mohammad had to write a new Bible.
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyLol, incompatible dear Whodey, incompatible! You Americans, i dunno, spend zillions on education and well. . . . you know
Of course, I can't speak for all Christians. In fact, some remain extremly legalistic. Paul even encountered this as Jews insisted on old traditions such as circumcision, however, he rebuked them and told them that the only circumcision needed was of the heart.
To be fair, however, Christians for the most part follow the teachings of Jesus and Muslims fo ...[text shortened]... side by side you will find the two incapatable. That is why Mohammad had to write a new Bible.
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyI am finding it hard to follow you here. Are you saying you do not believe that God commanded people to kill other people? Is the Old Testament incorrect?
To be fair, however, Christians for the most part follow the teachings of Jesus and Muslims follow the teachings of Mohammad. If you put them side by side you will find the two incapatable. That is why Mohammad had to write a new Bible.
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by whodeyI am not convinced. The vast majority of religious Christians also live in poor parts of the world. Here in South Africa, the Muslims are not the poorest (or least educated) of the population. Where are these 'largely uneducated' masses? Are we talking about Saudi Arabia? Indonesia? Please explain where you get your statistics from.
Looking at the world today it would appear that the tables have turned. The Islam world is largely ignorant and uneducated thus making easy prey for the "religious leaders" to tell them to go blow themselves up for Allah.
15 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by vishvahetuI think we should take up our discussion of the vedas elsewhere. This thread is for Islam.
Yes you are corect in saying that, and the Vedas have many branch,s....to name a few:
* Aryur veda......medicine
* Gandava veda.........music
* Dhanur veda ......martial science
* Sthapatya veda....architecture
* Jytisa veda ......astromony & astology
* Canda veda poetry
* Kalpa veda ...rituals
* Nirukta veda....etymology & lexicology
* kalas v ...[text shortened]... spiritual life and go back home to Godhead, forever, and not return to this world of suffering.
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadfirstly i am a Christian for I follow the teaching of the Christ, secondly the post is specifically made with regard tio Islam, and whether or not its a force for peace. If you wish to discuss Christianity then start another thread. I propose that regardless of what other religious movements are doing, regardless of what individual Muslims may appear to be and regardless of political rhetoric, it can be proven that Islam is a force not for peace but of war and suppression. The example was given to illustrate that a judiciary and a government agency, under the influence of Islamists may indeed, perpetrate atrocities against innocents on the flimsiest basis while maintaining that it is proper and correct to do so. Such an environment of fear ensuing from a lack of transparency (you cannot speak against the religion) cannot be a force for peace, either on a national level or on an individual basis, for peace cannot exist where abject fear is a dominant factor!
I did not realize that you were not Christian. I always thought that Jehovahs Witnesses were a denomination, it is news to me that you are an independent religion. I suggest you go and update the Wikipedia page on your religion as it clearly incorrectly calls you a Christian denomination in the very first line.
I also withdraw my (regarding violence ...[text shortened]... ample doesn't prove a generality.
So explain how your example is useful to the discussion.
15 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knobactually my dear friend its really a post about Islam, we can consider the atrocities of nominal Christianity on another occasion perhaps, I do not say this to dismiss your point, for it is very valid, but that it adds an extra dimension before we tackle the initial idea. you know how i feel about homosexuality, people are free moral agents, i just don't like the idea of having it paraded up and down the streets, all painted in gold with angel wings on huge floats as if it was some kind of virtue. I should not be forced nor manipulated by media to accept another's morality, for i myself am a free moral agent also. 🙂
Christian Uganda wanted to impose a law that meant homosexuals could be executed. Does that mean Christainity is full of hate mongering, homophobes?
Erm.................no need to reply, i know the answer to that already. 😉
15 Nov 10
Originally posted by divegeesterSeems like people are pointing out the hypocrisy of singling out "Islam" and your "concern about the impact on the non-Islamic cultures and religions" especially in light of "Christianity" - even NOW.
I don't think the point is whether or not religion x was good bad or ugly at point y in time, the point in question is, is Islam a religion of peace [b]now?[/b]