Islam - What's your view on it?

[FoRiZon]

This video is pretty much exactly how I see it, alot of people are taking a blind eye to this in order to not offend.

But at some point everyone must stand their ground, and address the issue and conflicts we face today.

Honestly its not the religion itself that need change, but more of the attitude people have on it. I mean Christians has protestants for example. Islam do has some form like Fethullah Gulen movement and sufism, the progressive ones. Sadly not very dominant on people who really adhere it.

Just gotta wait till January.

Give a benefit of doubt. If the next US president really does such things, move.

 

[FoRiZon]

Delete

 

[Carbonox]

Feels good on the top, eh?

That sure is going to raise people's opinion of you.

 

[ToyGTone]

@Smurfybug @ECGadget Any last words? I think everyone hates you at this point.

If anything, i'm probably more hated on GTP and the internet overall than any of you three. Not saying it as a fact but let's see...

Someone who's religion is Islam + someone's of a race that islam started on (Arab) + Lived his life in a different place with a different culture than @ECGadget and @Smurfybug (at least you're somehow more used to the western culture) + Had plenty of arguing around here, whatever it was politics, religion or really anything else. Have you noticed how i used to talk and like far more members out here back then but nowadays almost everyone just ignores me? Even my GTP followers number dropped. Also ether people hates me because some Group known as Da'esh ruined everyone life's or they get jealous because somehow i live in a paradise with everything i can buy from, as if i was the kings child.

It doesn't help that i often use the internet as a way to forget about school or family problems (Youtube is a main example). If i couldn't deal with that amount of bullying, fighting, hate and simply being isolated from everyone else, that's from people who's i can understand and live with easily, then how could i deal with a world called the internet? a place full of people from all around the world? people who i might don't understand their language, their culture, their lifestyle, their religion or their views on others? People who might be trolls, racists, SJW's...etc?

Another thing i would like to mention is that i heard people that said how us arabs or muslims hate pretty much everyone or anti-western but from what i have seen, it's the other way around. Like apart from politics, there's nothing really we hate about other nations. In fact, some older generations of people criticize the Youth people for "adopting traditions from other cultures into their life's". Whatever that's true or not is not what i'm talking about tho. People or shall i say the media makes us look like that we hate EVERYTHING about other peoples life. And guess what the result of that? Returning hate back and then things get worse.

Yes i know there's far more worse things happening to some people but...i just can't help myself but complain. I feel like everyone hates me in some ways or another. I tried to forget it several times but i can't and it hits me. I don't really have friends anymore and i will probably end up staying single for my entire life. I feel like i'm just a waste of space. My parents are old and retired, everything started to go up in price in this country. My place will probably end up in a war soon and i might end up dead.

 

[BobK]

If anything, i'm probably more hated on GTP and the internet overall than any of you three. Not saying it as a fact but let's see...

Someone who's religion is Islam + someone's of a race that islam started on (Arab) + Lived his life in a different place with a different culture than @ECGadget and @Smurfybug (at least you're somehow more used to the western culture) + Had plenty of arguing around here, whatever it was politics, religion or really anything else. Have you noticed how i used to talk and like far more members out here back then but nowadays almost everyone just ignores me? Even my GTP followers number dropped. Also ether people hates me because some Group known as Da'esh ruined everyone life's or they get jealous because somehow i live in a paradise with everything i can buy from, as if i was the kings child.

It doesn't help that i often use the internet as a way to forget about school or family problems (Youtube is a main example). If i couldn't deal with that amount of bullying, fighting, hate and simply being isolated from everyone else, that's from people who's i can understand and live with easily, then how could i deal with a world called the internet? a place full of people from all around the world? people who i might don't understand their language, their culture, their lifestyle, their religion or their views on others? People who might be trolls, racists, SJW's...etc?

Another thing i would like to mention is that i heard people that said how us arabs or muslims hate pretty much everyone or anti-western but from what i have seen, it's the other way around. Like apart from politics, there's nothing really we hate about other nations. In fact, some older generations of people criticize the Youth people for "adopting traditions from other cultures into their life's". Whatever that's true or not is not what i'm talking about tho. People or shall i say the media makes us look like that we hate EVERYTHING about other peoples life. And guess what the result of that? Returning hate back and then things get worse.

Yes i know there's far more worse things happening to some people but...i just can't help myself but complain. I feel like everyone hates me in some ways or another. I tried to forget it several times but i can't and it hits me. I don't really have friends anymore and i will probably end up staying single for my entire life. I feel like i'm just a waste of space. My parents are old and retired, everything started to go up in price in this country. My place will probably end up in a war soon and i might end up dead.

I for one don't hate you. I have no reason to. I can't speak for everyone on GT Planet, nor do I read every forum, but I haven'
t seen anything that would lead me to believe anyone else hates you either.

What you're saying here, to be honest, sounds a lot more like teen angst than anything else.

 

[mister dog]

Huh how did this thread spiral into people feeling hated personally? If anything us GTP 'right wingers' criticize Islam and hate on its bad aspects (just like we would hate the bad aspects of Christianity for that matter), but that has nothing to do with people personally be it if they are Muslim or not. That would be real bigotry and just plain silly.

@ToyGTone everyone has rough stages in his/her life, and like all of us you'll get out of it sooner or later. Just try to not put those negative feelings you have at the moment as your base when going out and mixing with folk, as it just creates a precedent for more negativism or general boredom

 

[Dennisch]

Addicted to likes and he isn't collecting as much as he used to?

I fail to see why someone should hate you, or any of the other Muslims here on GTP. You're all members here, everybody abides to the same AUP, and if things get toasty there's always a member of staff to slap us on the fingers.

 

[Johnnypenso]

If anything, i'm probably more hated on GTP and the internet overall than any of you three. Not saying it as a fact but let's see...

Someone who's religion is Islam + someone's of a race that islam started on (Arab) + Lived his life in a different place with a different culture than @ECGadget and @Smurfybug (at least you're somehow more used to the western culture) + Had plenty of arguing around here, whatever it was politics, religion or really anything else. Have you noticed how i used to talk and like far more members out here back then but nowadays almost everyone just ignores me? Even my GTP followers number dropped. Also ether people hates me because some Group known as Da'esh ruined everyone life's or they get jealous because somehow i live in a paradise with everything i can buy from, as if i was the kings child.

It doesn't help that i often use the internet as a way to forget about school or family problems (Youtube is a main example). If i couldn't deal with that amount of bullying, fighting, hate and simply being isolated from everyone else, that's from people who's i can understand and live with easily, then how could i deal with a world called the internet? a place full of people from all around the world? people who i might don't understand their language, their culture, their lifestyle, their religion or their views on others? People who might be trolls, racists, SJW's...etc?

Another thing i would like to mention is that i heard people that said how us arabs or muslims hate pretty much everyone or anti-western but from what i have seen, it's the other way around. Like apart from politics, there's nothing really we hate about other nations. In fact, some older generations of people criticize the Youth people for "adopting traditions from other cultures into their life's". Whatever that's true or not is not what i'm talking about tho. People or shall i say the media makes us look like that we hate EVERYTHING about other peoples life. And guess what the result of that? Returning hate back and then things get worse.

Yes i know there's far more worse things happening to some people but...i just can't help myself but complain. I feel like everyone hates me in some ways or another. I tried to forget it several times but i can't and it hits me. I don't really have friends anymore and i will probably end up staying single for my entire life. I feel like i'm just a waste of space. My parents are old and retired, everything started to go up in price in this country. My place will probably end up in a war soon and i might end up dead.

Using the internet to escape bullying fighting and hate is a bit of an uphill climb don't you think? GTP is a bit of an oasis in a desert of despair IMO, but places like YT comments, Twitter, any comment section on any news site etc. are simply toxic waste, dominated by a handful of people who represent the worst of the worst in society and should be avoided by anyone wishing to retain their sanity. It'll poison your mind into thinking the world is full of people like that when it really isn't. The media isn't much better. I've never run into anyone in real life that even remotely resembles the type of people who make stupid videos or the brutal comments.

 

[LeMansAid]

...school......muslims.......My parents are old and retired

What? Shouldn't your mother be just in her twenties?

Joking, joking!!

@BobK might be spot on with teen angst, but also maybe not. Minor things that I did over thirty years ago still give me irrational bursts of negative feelings. Some of these things just don't leave us alone, despite us having grown in years and maturity. You could consider posting over here to get some perspective on what might be transient, and what's "baked-in", in your case.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

You do know the difference between the Koran and Hadiths?

However cherry-picking examples can be used to make either look the worse, what you need to do is compare the entire contents of both. Fortunately that has been done, unfortunately for your cherry-picking the Bible takes the prize.

Err ok. Let's have a look see....

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788

Hmmm this is using mostly the OT as source. Actually it's only citing OT verses. And it's called the passages in the quran mostly humane for the time and....oh there's that nugget again - "mostly in self defence". The problem is, the history of Islam doesn't corroborate this. Take the early assaults on caravans:

http://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/chapter-seven-jihad-begins.html

Then there was the Battle of Badr...

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/badr.aspx

Then, as Islam grew, so did the wars

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/self-defense.aspx

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/bible_quran.html

Your quote says when expressed as a percent the quran has over twice as many violent verses. It says that over 1 in 20 verses are violent... Just sayin

Also again, this is taking the Bible as a whole and not looking at the NT. Christians generally follow Christ's teachings.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/someo...o-see-which-was-more-violent-2016-2?r=US&IR=T

This source is a contradiction to your seconds findings so yeah, it's up to you which one you want to use. I mean surely it's better to compare man for man, but I don't think anyone is willing to go there since it's blatantly obvious what the results will be.

I get the feeling that you're trying to change the interpretation of that late biblical addition to say that Jesus cancelled the punishment for adultery when he clearly did not. It's interesting parts of the hadith you used and the bible addition you used are quite likely contemporaneous.

Just so we're absolutely clear. You're saying that Jesus wouldn't have cancelled the punishment if the man was present. You....you think Jesus would have condemned them to death. That's what you're going with?

I mean it's a theory, I'll give you that!

 

[Scaff]

[/Quote]
Then you should know that comparison of Hadiths with the Bible are like using the book of Mormon as a Biblical source.

It's neither canon nor considered the word of God.

Err ok. Let's have a look see....

Hmmm this is using mostly the OT as source. Actually it's only citing OT verses. And it's called the passages in the quran mostly humane for the time and....oh there's that nugget again - "mostly in self defence". The problem is, the history of Islam doesn't corroborate this. Take the early assaults on caravans:

http://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/chapter-seven-jihad-begins.html

Then there was the Battle of Badr...

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/badr.aspx

Then, as Islam grew, so did the wars

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/muhammad/self-defense.aspx

Hate to break it too you but the OT is as much a part of Christianity as the NT is. JC himself stated that he had not come to abolish the old laws, and was himself not above a bit of going on the offensive. You also forget that he promised to come back and punish all nonbelievers, sword in hand.

What's more ironic is that you try and remove the founding book of Christianity (which is what the OT is), but want to include the Hadiths (which are at best an account of what Mo did and what happened after he buggered off, but are not the word of God).

Also again, this is taking the Bible as a whole and not looking at the NT. Christians generally follow Christ's teachings.

Then please explain why do many Christians use it as a source for readings, why the 10 commandments are in every church, why Genesis is used to tell the story of how Christians believe the world came into existence, why JC said it's laws are still valid and why it's used as the basis to stop women in the clergy and target LBGT?

The OT is a fundamental part of Christianity.

This source is a contradiction to your seconds findings so yeah, it's up to you which one you want to use. I mean surely it's better to compare man for man, but I don't think anyone is willing to go there since it's blatantly obvious what the results will be.

Which all three acknowledge is down to the difficulty in classification, odd you missed that, or did you think simply ignoring it would have more impact.

The Koran and Bible are both blood and violence filled works that can be used as justification to target just about anyone it's followers feel like. However to try and pass Christianity off as somehow far more tolerant and nonviolent is to both cherry pick to the extreme and ignore a huge amount of factual data both contemporary and historic.

After all both Bush and Blair said that invading Iraq was gods work, after they had prayed on it.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Then you should know that comparison of Hadiths with the Bible are like using the book of Mormon as a Biblical source.

It's neither canon nor considered the word of God.

Hmm? Oh I wasn't comparing it with the Bible

Here was the original quote:

First is probably one of the more famous of Jesus's teachings: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
What Mohammad taught? "Let's go back OT style and stone adulterers"

I used the Hadith to show what Mohammad did, and therefore taught. It was comparing their actions.

Hate to break it too you but the OT is as much a part of Christianity as the NT is. JC himself stated that he had not come to abolish the old laws, and was himself not above a bit of going on the offensive. You also forget that he promised to come back and punish all nonbelievers, sword in hand.

I only just came back to Christianity - can you point to this verse?

What's more ironic is that you try and remove the founding book of Christianity (which is what the OT is), but want to include the Hadiths (which are at best an account of what Mo did and what happened after he buggered off, but are not the word of God).

I'm not sure why you think I'm removing the OT? And again, the hadiths were used to show what Muhammad did compared to Jesus re stoning.

Then please explain why do many Christians use it as a source for readings, why the 10 commandments are in every church, why Genesis is used to tell the story of how Christians believe the world came into existence, why JC said it's laws are still valid and why it's used as the basis to stop women in the clergy and target LBGT?

The OT is a fundamental part of Christianity.

Oh for sure it's a fundamental part... But the NT changes certain things

Which all three acknowledge is down to the difficulty in classification, odd you missed that, or did you think simply ignoring it would have more impact.

The Koran and Bible are both blood and violence filled works that can be used as justification to target just about anyone it's followers feel like. However to try and pass Christianity off as somehow far more tolerant and nonviolent is to both cherry pick to the extreme and ignore a huge amount of factual data both contemporary and historic.

After all both Bush and Blair said that invading Iraq was gods work, after they had prayed on it.

I do think at the moment Christianity is more tolerant and less violent. I don't think it's the least violent, but I think the teachings are inherently more peaceful just because of the sources. One was a warlord who used religion as a vehicle for arab supremacism - the other a hippy.

 

[Scaff]

Hmm? Oh I wasn't comparing it with the Bible

Here was the original quote:

So you cite the Bible, but your not comparing it with the Bible?

I used the Hadith to show what Mohammad did, and therefore taught. It was comparing their actions.

In which case use the Koran, unless the difference between the two is still an issue.

I only just came back to Christianity - can you point to this verse?

Matthew 15:7.

I'm not sure why you think I'm removing the OT? And again, the hadiths were used to show what Muhammad did compared to Jesus re stoning.

Then why raise issue with the OT being cited?

And given that Jesus and God are one (you know the holy Trinity - separate yet indivisible) you seem to be being very selective about what you think he said in regard to stoning.

Oh for sure it's a fundamental part... But the NT changes certain things

So Jesus was wrong then?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

I do think at the moment Christianity is more tolerant and less violent. I don't think it's the least violent, but I think the teachings are inherently more peaceful just because of the sources. One was a warlord who used religion as a vehicle for arab supremacism - the other a hippy.

Damn you are new back to this Christianity thing arn't you. Forgetting again that God and Jesus are one (along with the Holy Spirit), as such your hippy was a bit of a bloody thirsty lunatic in his younger days. Not that he entirely changed his way in the NT, after all he did throw a bit of a violent hissy fit in the Temple, killed off a load of pigs in an attempt to cure mental illness and cursed a fig tree to try and prove a point. All of which is without the utterly nuts death-fest that is Revelations (and I've not included the books the church 'removed' because they were either totally bonkers or anti-Semitic to the max).

Christianity is only less violent if you remove the entirety of the OT (which you seem to be being quite clear you are not), get very selective with the text and utterly forget the fact that Jesus and God are supposed to be the same.

You can take either of them as a source of good or a source of bad, that is unless you want to cherry pick for ideological reasons.

 

[BobK]

JC himself stated that he had not come to abolish the old laws, and was himself not above a bit of going on the offensive. You also forget that he promised to come back and punish all nonbelievers, sword in hand.

I only just came back to Christianity - can you point to this verse?

Matthew 15:7.

@Scaff, is it possible you cited the wrong passage?

7. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

I'm particularly interested in that "punish all nonbelievers, sword in hand" part.

 

[Scaff]

@Scaff, is it possible you cited the wrong passage?

I'm particularly interested in that "punish all nonbelievers, sword in hand" part.

Typo on my part, that should be 5:17

 

[BobK]

Typo on my part, that should be 5:17

Thank you. Could I trouble to point me toward that "sword in hand" bit?

 

[Scaff]

Thank you. Could I trouble to point me toward that "sword in hand" bit?

That would be Revelations, which (my bad) is actually coming from his mouth. However the entirety of Revelations can be pretty much summed up as 'if you don't believe in me or have sinned then you dead and off to hell with you forever'.

I have also just remembered Acts 3:23, in which Peter says "And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people." Referring to thee prophet from Dt 18:18-19 which is Jesus, so even the NT is not above calling for the death of unbelievers (and Jesus is cited in a number of books of the NT as saying that cities that do not allow him to preach will suffer a worse fate than Sodom and Gomorrah).

 

[DCP]

Typo on my part, that should be 5:17

You continue trying to deceive people through your own deception.
Read the whole of Matthew Chapter 5 to understand what Jesus is saying. You good and cherry picking I see.

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder,a]'>[a] and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a causeb]'>[b] shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. 26 Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.

27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old,c]'>[c] ‘You shall not commit adultery.’d]'>[d] 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immoralitye]'>[e] causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ 34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’f]'>[f] 39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighborg]'>[g] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,h]'>[h] 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethreni]'>[i] only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectorsj]'>[j] do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

https://gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html

I know, it's difficult for a person to understand God, when they refuse to believe in Him.
It's like trying to jump from 30000 feet without a parachute, yet still expect to land unhurt on the hard ground.
Let's hope you've learnt this time.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

So you cite the Bible, but your not comparing it with the Bible?
In which case use the Koran, unless the difference between the two is still an issue.

It's comparing their actions on an identical issue, i.e. stoning.

The hadith have plenty of examples of Muhammad's actions - I don't see why it needs to be Bible vs Koran or nothing at all??

Then why raise issue with the OT being cited?

Since it's less relevant to Christians, and will obviously contain more violence.

And given that Jesus and God are one (you know the holy Trinity - separate yet indivisible) you seem to be being very selective about what you think he said in regard to stoning.

The Father, back in OT times laid that law. The Son came to save sinners - He would do a pretty poor job if he sentenced her to death for her sin!

So Jesus was wrong then?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

I'm not the best at explaining it, but I believe that sins are forgiven through Jesus and His sacrifice. The Law still stands (adultery a no no) but the punishment?
Therefore with the coming of Christ virtually everything has changed:

1. The blood sacrifices ceased because Christ fulfilled all that they were pointing toward. He was the final, unrepeatable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews 9:12: “He entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.”

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-christ-fulfilled-and-ended-the-old-testament-regime

Damn you are new back to this Christianity thing arn't you. Forgetting again that God and Jesus are one (along with the Holy Spirit), as such your hippy was a bit of a bloody thirsty lunatic in his younger days. Not that he entirely changed his way in the NT, after all he did throw a bit of a violent hissy fit in the Temple, killed off a load of pigs in an attempt to cure mental illness and cursed a fig tree to try and prove a point. All of which is without the utterly nuts death-fest that is Revelations (and I've not included the books the church 'removed' because they were either totally bonkers or anti-Semitic to the max).

This is where I'm slightly different (maybe?) to other Christians. I side more with Jehovah's Witnesses in doubting the Trinity, but I get what you're saying about the majority of denominations that teach the Trinity.

Christianity is only less violent if you remove the entirety of the OT (which you seem to be being quite clear you are not), get very selective with the text and utterly forget the fact that Jesus and God are supposed to be the same.

I'm not sure about that...

You can look at the founders, history, and passages to come to a conclusion. I'm guessing you've come to a different one than mine.

You can take either of them as a source of good or a source of bad, that is unless you want to cherry pick for ideological reasons.

Sure, I guess, but I argue it's far easier to take one as a source for bad than the other.

 

[Scaff]

You continue trying to deceive people through your own deception.
Read the whole of Matthew Chapter 5 to understand what Jesus is saying. You good and cherry picking I see.

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder,a]'>[a] and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a causeb]'>[b] shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. 26 Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.

27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old,c]'>[c] ‘You shall not commit adultery.’d]'>[d] 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immoralitye]'>[e] causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ 34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’f]'>[f] 39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. 41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighborg]'>[g] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,h]'>[h] 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet your brethreni]'>[i] only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectorsj]'>[j] do so? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

https://gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html

I know, it's difficult for a person to understand God, when they refuse to believe in Him.
It's like trying to jump from 30000 feet without a parachute, yet still expect to land unhurt on the hard ground.
Let's hope you've learnt this time.

I don't refuse to believe in god, I simply have no belief in any God. Now show me actually evidence to a scientific standard and I will be happy to accept his existence. Odd that you should (again) make this mistake, given the number of times I've said it in reply to you.

Now a number of issues exist with the rest of what you have posted (none of which is either new to me or cherry picking), first it assumes that Jesus lived a perfect life (he didn't based on the evidence in the same book your quoting), nor does support a non-violent approach given that it demands self mutilation of its followers for simply looking at someone else in the wrong way.

You also fail to address the fact that almost every sect of Christianity still use the OT, the Ten Commandments are still taught as a core (which they should not be), nor does it address the other issues of violence against non-believers in the NT (which I have already cited some of).

It's comparing their actions on an identical issue, i.e. stoning.

The hadith have plenty of examples of Muhammad's actions - I don't see why it needs to be Bible vs Koran or nothing at all??

Then you don't understand the difference between them at all. The hadiths are not canon to Muslims, the Koran is. In the same way that the Bible (OT and NT) are Canon to Christianity but the interpretations of David Koresh, Jim Jones and the Westboro Baptists are not.

Since it's less relevant to Christians, and will obviously contain more violence.

So despite the fact that its canon to Christians you want to remove it to shift the numbers in your favour?

That's akin to Muslims saying if we just take out the violent bits then the Koran would be less violent than it is as a whole.

Its supposed to be the word of God, are Christians who believe supposed to pick and chose in this way? Its seems to being very assumptive of what God means?

The Father, back in OT times laid that law. The Son came to save sinners - He would do a pretty poor job if he sentenced her to death for her sin!

According to the canon unless she submits to God then she's going to hell anyway?

However it does raise an interesting question, if God is God (and therefore infallible) how did he get it so wrong in the OT (numerous times) to needs to murder everybody bar one family and then send himself, as his son to die for sins he set us up to have in the first place?

Its almost as if its a system designed to control the behavior of people based around a very inconsistent bunch of stories.

I'm not the best at explaining it, but I believe that sins are forgiven through Jesus and His sacrifice. The Law still stands (adultery a no no) but the punishment?
Therefore with the coming of Christ virtually everything has changed:

1. The blood sacrifices ceased because Christ fulfilled all that they were pointing toward. He was the final, unrepeatable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews 9:12: “He entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.”

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-christ-fulfilled-and-ended-the-old-testament-regime

Yet it doesn't say that in the Bible.

This is where I'm slightly different (maybe?) to other Christians. I side more with Jehovah's Witnesses in doubting the Trinity, but I get what you're saying about the majority of denominations that teach the Trinity.

Exactly, so for the majority of Christianity (and as you have not bother to differentiate between the differing interpretations and teachings of Islam across its many sects) they are one and the same, as such you can't give a free pass.

I'm not sure about that...

You can look at the founders, history, and passages to come to a conclusion. I'm guessing you've come to a different one than mine.

I've read both, I know both well (please don't make the mistake that @DCP does that just because I'm an atheist I'm unaware of the texts), however that's why I posted the links to the studies to show that when looked at objectively the Bible is at least as violent, if not more so. However both did the big one and killed off the whole of humanity bar one family (however they did both nick it from an earlier religion).

Sure, I guess, but I argue it's far easier to take one as a source for bad than the other.

Have you read both the whole of the Bible (OT and NT) and the Koran?

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Sorry wasn't ignoring the Revelations/Acts/Matthew citation, will post an update in a bit

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

nor does support a non-violent approach given that it demands self mutilation of its followers for simply looking at someone else in the wrong way.

Pardon my ignorance - where is this?

Then you don't understand the difference between them at all. The hadiths are not canon to Muslims, the Koran is. In the same way that the Bible (OT and NT) are Canon to Christianity but the interpretations of David Koresh, Jim Jones and the Westboro Baptists are not.

Well there's kind of a difference - we can see what Muhammad's actions were. It being canon is immaterial since Muhammad to Muslims was the "perfect man". If it was one or two instances of stoning then I can understand but in the source I used:

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Stoning

You're looking at over 20 occasions at least where he prescribed stoning to death. Therefore the comparison and my point is valid, that being how in Islam it went from stoning in the OT, forgiveness in the NT, back to stoning.

And to take it a bit further, 1/3 of British Muslims refuse to condemn stoning adulterers and 58% of Indonesian muslims (the largest Muslim community in the world) believe they should be stoned to death.

So despite the fact that its canon to Christians you want to remove it to shift the numbers in your favour?

Not really. The OT is pre-Christ, and Christians use it as a history of life before Christ and as a prophecy of Christ's coming. I'm not saying remove it, I'm saying it should be used in context.

That's akin to Muslims saying if we just take out the violent bits then the Koran would be less violent than it is as a whole.

Again not really. We also need to look at the type of violence we're comparing. With the Koran I'd wager there's more prescriptive verses that are more relevant to Muslims today than the same for modern day Christians.

Its supposed to be the word of God, are Christians who believe supposed to pick and chose in this way? Its seems to being very assumptive of what God means?

Again I think it's context, plus the NT supercedes it.

According to the canon unless she submits to God then she's going to hell anyway?

What do you mean?

However it does raise an interesting question, if God is God (and therefore infallible) how did he get it so wrong in the OT (numerous times) to needs to murder everybody bar one family and then send himself, as his son to die for sins he set us up to have in the first place?

Its almost as if its a system designed to control the behavior of people based around a very inconsistent bunch of stories

That was more our fault than God's. We are all sinners, and if we believe then those sins can be absolved through Christ.

Yet it doesn't say that in the Bible.

Hmmmm but that's an interpretation

Exactly, so for the majority of Christianity (and as you have not bother to differentiate between the differing interpretations and teachings of Islam across its many sects) they are one and the same, as such you can't give a free pass.

I'm not looking for a free pass. We look to the Son more as an example, and follow His teachings. If they are exactly one and the same then you see that God is merciful in the NT, which again is what most Christians look to as the most important part of the Bible.

I've read both, I know both well (please don't make the mistake that @DCP does that just because I'm an atheist I'm unaware of the texts), however that's why I posted the links to the studies to show that when looked at objectively the Bible is at least as violent, if not more so. However both did the big one and killed off the whole of humanity bar one family (however they did both nick it from an earlier religion).

I think again it's looking more at the prescription for violence, and looking at how tolerant each religion is at this stage. For example, certain denominations have LGBT ministers - something that will never happen in Islam as it is haram. Indeed, over half of Muslims polled reckon it should be illegal, and 100% of Brit Muslims think it is immoral (that is all 500 polled):

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/11/europe/britain-muslims-survey/
For violence we see that a sizeable minority (25% for the 7/7) sympathise with terrorists:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

Have you read both the whole of the Bible (OT and NT) and the Koran?

No, just enough to form a conclusion (plus the current climate seems to agree with me). I am reading as we speak though!

That would be Revelations, which (my bad) is actually coming from his mouth. However the entirety of Revelations can be pretty much summed up as 'if you don't believe in me or have sinned then you dead and off to hell with you forever'.

I have also just remembered Acts 3:23, in which Peter says "And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people." Referring to thee prophet from Dt 18:18-19 which is Jesus, so even the NT is not above calling for the death of unbelievers (and Jesus is cited in a number of books of the NT as saying that cities that do not allow him to preach will suffer a worse fate than Sodom and Gomorrah).

I got a different version of your Acts quote so can't really comment on that and as for the sword to unbelievers do you know roughly where in Revelations this is?

-----

It seems we are talking a lot about Christianity, I'll try to bring it back on topic in my next post!

 

[Scaff]

Pardon my ignorance - where is this?

Matthew 5 (again):

28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery within his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

Well there's kind of a difference - we can see what Muhammad's actions were. It being canon is immaterial since Muhammad to Muslims was the "perfect man". If it was one or two instances of stoning then I can understand but in the source I used:

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Stoning

You're looking at over 20 occasions at least where he prescribed stoning to death. Therefore the comparison and my point is valid, that being how in Islam it went from stoning in the OT, forgiveness in the NT, back to stoning.

No your looking at over 20 occasions during which someone said he prescribed it, but its not canon.

In fact it written (in the Haddith) that after Mo died someone remembered they had some stuff on it, but we were busy and a goat ate it!

Now how many times does it actually cover it in the actual canon text of Islam? Not the stuff written by a load of other people after his death, many of whom never met him and is not considered canon.

And to take it a bit further, 1/3 of British Muslims refuse to condemn stoning adulterers and 58% of Indonesian muslims (the largest Muslim community in the world) believe they should be stoned to death.

Source please.

Not really. The OT is pre-Christ, and Christians use it as a history of life before Christ and as a prophecy of Christ's coming. I'm not saying remove it, I'm saying it should be used in context.

I am using it in context, its the word of god. As such its infallible, and is considered canon by Christians.

Again not really. We also need to look at the type of violence we're comparing. With the Koran I'd wager there's more prescriptive verses that are more relevant to Muslims today than the same for modern day Christians.

I've read both, the answer for both is the same (not odd given that they all use the same source material), almost none of its applicable today that doesn't already exists as a produce of the natural evolution of morals in the human race (you are aware that the much touted 'gold rule' of Christianity actually predates it).

Again I think it's context, plus the NT supercedes it.

According to who?

What do you mean?

Don't believe in god and your going to hell, regardless of how good a life you have lived. Not that even believing in god is a free pass, as according to the Bible (NT) only 144,000 places exist anyway (Rev 7 1-8).

That was more our fault than God's. We are all sinners, and if we believe then those sins can be absolved through Christ.

Who made us sinners? Oh and if God is the divine being he's made out to be we don't actually have free will.

Hmmmm but that's an interpretation

Then you will have no problem citing the chapter and verse.

I'm not looking for a free pass. We look to the Son more as an example, and follow His teachings. If they are exactly one and the same then you see that God is merciful in the NT, which again is what most Christians look to as the most important part of the Bible.

So God is wrong in the OT then?

I think again it's looking more at the prescription for violence, and looking at how tolerant each religion is at this stage. For example, certain denominations have LGBT ministers - something that will never happen in Islam as it is haram. Indeed, over half of Muslims polled reckon it should be illegal, and 100% of Brit Muslims think it is immoral (that is all 500 polled):

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/11/europe/britain-muslims-survey/
For violence we see that a sizeable minority (25% for the 7/7) sympathise with terrorists:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

Now aside from the sample size used in these being tiny (and that is problematic) and the recent election showing that poll data can be wrong, a factor that is missing is that of comparison data.

Close to half of Americans polled also believe that homosexuality should be illegal and more think its wrong and should be discouraged (looking at data from the same time period).
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/580346...of-americans-want-homosexuality-to-be-illegal

I also don't see your 25% figure in the articles, rather a far lower figure of 4%.

No, just enough to form a conclusion (plus the current climate seems to agree with me). I am reading as we speak though!

Populist movements and numbers are not a substitute for knowing the facts and reading the source yourself. Millions of Children will tell you Santa is real, doesn't make it either a fact or reality.

I got a different version of your Acts quote so can't really comment on that and as for the sword to unbelievers do you know roughly where in Revelations this is?

Here you go for Acts:
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Acts 3:23

And Rev:
http://biblehub.com/revelation/19-15.htm

It seems we are talking a lot about Christianity, I'll try to bring it back on topic in my next post!

We are, which is why I have been considering just having a single religion thread.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Matthew 5 (again):

28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery within his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

I think this is a good explanation:

http://www.ukapologetics.net/13/cutoff.htm

No your looking at over 20 occasions during which someone said he prescribed it, but its not canon.

In fact it written (in the Haddith) that after Mo died someone remembered they had some stuff on it, but we were busy and a goat ate it!

Now how many times does it actually cover it in the actual canon text of Islam? Not the stuff written by a load of other people after his death, many of whom never met him and is not considered canon.

Hmm you are a tough cookie.. I'm not really sure what else I can add regarding the differing actions to an adulteress so I'll say agree to disagree.

Source please.

2006 poll for the Indonesian:
https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/08/slaughter-silence-open-secret/
(It doesn't get much better if you consider some other countries... For example in pew research polls out of those who want Sharia in Pakistan and Afghanistan which is around the mid/high 80s mark, the same percentage want stoning. Taking Pakistan as an example that is .89 x .89 = .79 so 79%)

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/...ligion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

For the Brit Muslim source:

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7861/british-muslims-survey

I am using it in context, its the word of god. As such its infallible, and is considered canon by Christians.

Ya it's an account of what happened. It's not really prescriptive.

I've read both, the answer for both is the same (not odd given that they all use the same source material), almost none of its applicable today that doesn't already exists as a produce of the natural evolution of morals in the human race (you are aware that the much touted 'gold rule' of Christianity actually predates it).

Which kinda brings me back to my point. The "golden rule" is present in Christianity, but then abrogated by the "final prophet" Muhammad.

According to who?

Christians, I presume.

Don't believe in god and your going to hell, regardless of how good a life you have lived. Not that even believing in god is a free pass, as according to the Bible (NT) only 144,000 places exist anyway (Rev 7 1-8).
Do they all go to hell (the non-144'000)? I didn't know that. Kinda scared now

Who made us sinners? Oh and if God is the divine being he's made out to be we don't actually have free will.

Interesting question! If I have it right we are born with sin and as for free will, can I refer you to @DCP? I have interesting thoughts on free will that probably aren't suited for the Islam thread!

Then you will have no problem citing the chapter and verse.

It's in the quote. And the interpretation too. There are probably others but so far I'm up to the end of Genesis in terms of reading - and Sunday School was too long ago

So God is wrong in the OT then?

God isn't wrong, but the Son came after. It's not a case of better either before that gets brought up, it's just that His sacrifice showed God's merciful side.

Now aside from the sample size used in these being tiny (and that is problematic) and the recent election showing that poll data can be wrong, a factor that is missing is that of comparison data.

Close to half of Americans polled also believe that homosexuality should be illegal and more think its wrong and should be discouraged (looking at data from the same time period).
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/580346...of-americans-want-homosexuality-to-be-illegal[/quote]
That link is saying 28% think it should be illegal.

I also don't see your 25% figure in the articles, rather a far lower figure of 4%.

"Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror."

Here you go for Acts:
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Acts 3:23

Oh I had the NIV version coming up where it says "cut off from the people". I guess that's how the people (or souls) will be split. Getting destroyed sounds pretty nasty, I agree

...But since this is the Islam thread I'm pretty sure there's a few things about unbelievers somewhere in there

One take on what can happen to unbelievers:
http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/islam_unbelievers.html

And Rev:
http://biblehub.com/revelation/19-15.htm

The Rider of the White horse? Is that confirmed to be Jesus?

We are, which is why I have been considering just having a single religion thread.

 

[TenEightyOne]

"Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror."

That's an oft-repeated quote from CBS, if you look at their source then there's actually no such question.

God isn't wrong, but the Son came after. It's not a case of better either before that gets brought up, it's just that His sacrifice showed God's merciful side.

Showed his own merciful side. Jesus and his father were one and the same.

All in all you keep pushing an idea of pre-dark-ages Isla'am as if it's normal practice today while ignoring the fact that Christianity (from the same root!) teaches almost exactly the same ideas and values.

Fundamentalist militant islaamics are no more representative of the masses than Brainden Baptist preachers who still advocate death-by-stoning are.

. Not that even believing in god is a free pass, as according to the Bible (NT) only 144,000 places exist anyway (Rev 7 1-8)

Erm, no. That's not all the places in heaven, those are the sealed ones. Various branches of christing have various theories about the 144,000 (including UFOs, that's a great one) but nowhere does it say that that's the limit to the number of places in heaven.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

That's an oft-repeated quote from CBS, if you look at their source then there's actually no such question.

Your link is for a questionnaire from 2007. The cited one is from 2006. Channel 4 themselves use the 25% figure:

http://www.channel4.com/news/articl...nalysis+of+the+muslim+survey/158240.html#fold

Showed his own merciful side. Jesus and his father were one and the same.

All in all you keep pushing an idea of pre-dark-ages Isla'am as if it's normal practice today while ignoring the fact that Christianity (from the same root!) teaches almost exactly the same ideas and values.

Fundamentalist militant islaamics are no more representative of the masses than Brainden Baptist preachers who still advocate death-by-stoning are.

By that theory, over half the population of Indonesia are fundamentalist and militant??

And almost exactly the same ideas and values?

I'm not so sure....

Erm, no. That's not all the places in heaven, those are the sealed ones. Various branches of christing have various theories about the 144,000 (including UFOs, that's a great one) but nowhere does it say that that's the limit to the number of places in heaven.

Yay!

 

[ToyGTone]

If one thing i learned from my life, from meeting different people, about judging a person. Religion of such people shouldn't be the way to judge whatever he's a good person or not. As a Muslim, not every Muslims are good or bad person. Same goes to every other people. I just had an argument at school with a group who badmouthed me and my family and bullied me before yet i have met non muslims who treated me much better.

 

[Dotini]

Overnight Sunni Muslims detonated a bomb in a Shia mosque in Kabul, according to a BBC radio report. Reportedly, there was loss of life including women and children.

Not to be outdone, in Myanmar, soldiers were said responsible for the burning of over 1000 Rohingya (Sunni?) Muslim homes, again according to BBC.

 

[mustafur]

If one thing i learned from my life, from meeting different people, about judging a person. Religion of such people shouldn't be the way to judge whatever he's a good person or not. As a Muslim, not every Muslims are good or bad person. Same goes to every other people. I just had an argument at school with a group who badmouthed me and my family and bullied me before yet i have met non muslims who treated me much better.

Well yes, Humans have free will and that should never not be factored in. This is why Free speech is Vital.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Not to be outdone, in Myanmar, soldiers were said responsible for the burning of over 1000 Rohingya (Sunni?) Muslim homes, again according to BBC.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...e-on-mynmar-human-rights-abuse-claims/8054976