or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Migrants, Immigrants, Refugees, and Aliens in Euro-Zone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Migrants, Immigrants, Refugees, and Aliens in Euro-Zone - Page 137

post #2041 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Well, ask yourself why Xtians don't have to slaughter goats anymore if you don't think the New Covenant changes things. wink.gif

I figured it was for the same reasons we're not allowed to eat goose liver or whale meat.
post #2042 of 2656
Lawyerdad, youre right. We werent taught that the old testament doesnt count either. But if you put a priest or christian in a corner about something, he can always say jesus corrected it or showed the right way.

Islam is specific in the sense that islam is said to be "din wa dawle", which means religion and state. Its not only spiritual belief but an organized system for society to govern itself and for personal life, with rules to follow. Its often said that the motivation behind some parts of islam was that christianity simply didnt stick to the tribes back then and they were stuck in their old ways so islam took from it and adapted it and worded it in a way to make them follow it

For its time and place centuries ago, islam was a huge improvement and step forward.

For this reason, its a bit harder for a muslim to stray from his religion than a christian.

However youre right in that eventually, any decent modern religious man is being a hypocrite about the exact letter of the religion he believes in.

I believe muslims can adap it too and many around here do so, majority even. It all depends on media and education. For example all my muslim friends here party and drink but in ramadan they dont drink alcohol, and thats their version of being religious. All my christians friends do every sin imaginable and in the fast they dont eat meat or sweets or whatever, and in their mind that makes them religious too.

If al jazeera and the likes and the sheikhs paid by the islamic states simply change their tone, islamic radicalism can become a fringe isolated movement within a couple of generations at most
post #2043 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan View Post

Lawyerdad, youre right. We werent taught that the old testament doesnt count either. But if you put a priest or christian in a corner about something, he can always say jesus corrected it or showed the right way.

Islam is specific in the sense that islam is said to be "din wa dawle", which means religion and state. Its not only spiritual belief but an organized system for society to govern itself and for personal life, with rules to follow. Its often said that the motivation behind some parts of islam was that christianity simply didnt stick to the tribes back then and they were stuck in their old ways so islam took from it and adapted it and worded it in a way to make them follow it

For its time and place centuries ago, islam was a huge improvement and step forward.

For this reason, its a bit harder for a muslim to stray from his religion than a christian.

However youre right in that eventually, any decent modern religious man is being a hypocrite about the exact letter of the religion he believes in.

I believe muslims can adap it too and many around here do so, majority even. It all depends on media and education.

Thanks for the explanation.

I'm grateful to be able to say that I never ended up in any corners with any priests during my youthful churching days.
post #2044 of 2656

The violence which appears in the Bible is talking mainly about past history. The Old Testament only preaches a little violence, and of course Christ never supported violence. The Quran, on the other hand, is full of violent directives which are intended to apply for the rest of time.

 

Most importantly of all, unlike Christ who was undoubtedly a pacifist, Mohammed was a murderer, torturer and child rapist who kept slaves, and must be about the worst role model imaginable. You simply can not revere Mohammed and be a decent human being.

post #2045 of 2656
The question of what portions of the OT law were and were not applicable to christians goes back to the beginning. Paul addresses it in several of his epistles. The church has made a distinction between the "ceremonial law" and the "moral law" for long enough that you could essentially say it's always been a part of christianity. I'm not a theologian so I'm not going to try to explain it in detail but suffice it to say it's pretty well settled.

FWIW, Islam has gone through "moderate" periods, and moderate islam is still dominant in a lot of places now (central Asia and Southeast Europe for example). Radical Islam has a lot of rhetorical strength in places like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for reasons that are not entirely because of the Koran.
post #2046 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

[How is that any different? Is there something that makes picking and choosing the bits you like a legitimate way to be Christian but not a legitimate way to be Moslem?

Catholics don't treat OT seriously, in fact 90% of them are largely ignorant of it. The parts we hear in church are usually Genesis, parts of Exodus, Eliah, Isiah but really mostly really nice stories not this genocidal shit. Sometimes Hiob and Abraham story. Samson story. That's laregly it. Catholics really really focus on Jesus and are sort of blind to inconsitencies within old testament because their assume God is God and loving. As an ex-catholic I remember having problem explaining some of OT to atheists, usually it went with something like interpretation or that was God's will at the time but Christ gave us new standard to follow etc. Tbh it doesn't hold up very well, OT is bogus. Christ was a great person but OT is filled with murder, genocide etc or stuff not meant to be used anymore like old the jewish customs described there like using clothes made from one type of thread only. I've never met a catholic trying to justify his violent actions by saying God did so in the Old Testament- Catholics don't do that and focus on Christ and live in the doublethink where they Cherry pick stuff they like. It's widely understood catholicsm should be practised this way, nasty bits are ignored and you won't hear them in church, when you press a believer about it he will usually try to rationalize it in some way.

Muslims I guess are different, becasue nasty bits are after good bits so it makes it more problematic(Mecca/Medina periods). And as you see some Muslim practise their religion violently. But frankly if you read the bits it's not like making shit up it's in the book. I'd assume most Muslims like most Christians are largely ignorant of their religion.
post #2047 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

The question of what portions of the OT law were and were not applicable to christians goes back to the beginning. Paul addresses it in several of his epistles. The church has made a distinction between the "ceremonial law" and the "moral law" for long enough that you could essentially say it's always been a part of christianity. I'm not a theologian so I'm not going to try to explain it in detail but suffice it to say it's pretty well settled.

FWIW, Islam has gone through "moderate" periods, and moderate islam is still dominant in a lot of places now (central Asia and Southeast Europe for example). Radical Islam has a lot of rhetorical strength in places like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for reasons that are not entirely because of the Koran.

I'm really conflicted about Paul. I realize he played a crucial role in organizing the church and giving it structure, but a lot of his teachings are, if not in conflict, then certainly in a different tone than the Gospels. I don't think Christ would've supported a lot of his assertions.
post #2048 of 2656
Paul was an asshole before he joined Christianity and remained an asshole after, just switched sides.
post #2049 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan View Post

Islam is a bit worse than christianity because its specific and because in Christianity you can basically bury your head in the sand and pretend that the Old Testament doesnt exist.

But theres plenty of wiggle room there to be muslim and a decent person as many are.

If the billions that Saudi Arabia and Qatar have spent financing radical sheikhs and mosques around the arab world had been spent on the opposite, you would have a very different islamic world. SOciety here was actually better in the earlier part of last century, before the gulf monarchies found oil under their asses.

Alan and many others I don't want to insult your ignorance, but please take time and at least flip through Old Testament just to get yourself familiar with what that is instead of repeating what you have heard from others.
I am not a religious person, but I took time to read Bible out of curiosity. Old Testament has nothing to do with religious prescriptions for gentiles, nothing! Old Testament is not a religious instruction it is historical, ethnographic collection of stories, fairytales, erotic poetry and Jewish laws.
90% of Old Testament is a history of Jewish kingdoms and events that took place real or imaginary. Bringing that book up as a proof that Bible instructs violence is beyond ignorant.
post #2050 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Sorry, I genuinely don't understand what you mean by "more specific". Could you explain?

And where's the rule that says "in Christianity you can . . . pretend the Old Testament doesn't exist?" I'm not religious, so I'm not upset by people being Cafeteria Catholics or the equivalent. But if you're pretending that half of your religion's holy book doesn't exist because it says things that are inconsistent with how you prefer to live your corporeal life, I'd say while you may be socially and culturally a _______, you're not really a _________ in the religious sense.
Why wouldn't exactly the same logic apply with Islam? I'm sure lots of folks who identify as Moslems bury their heads in the sand (and there's sure a lot of that where they live, haaaaayyyyy-o!) and pretend inconvenient parts of the Koran don't exist. How is that any different? Is there something that makes picking and choosing the bits you like a legitimate way to be Christian but not a legitimate way to be Moslem?

deadhorse-a.gif
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Paul talks about this a lot in the NT and so do a few of the other writers.

For example Paul and Peter had a fight about whether or not gentile Christians should undergo circumcision or not eat meat offered to idols like the OT says. Paul and others argue that Christians don't have to because there's a new covenant that is superior where Christ fulfills all the requirements of the law. One of the early heresies was actually about people taking it this to the extreme and doing whatever they wanted to. So Paul had to point out that while everything is permitted not everything is helpful.

Also yeah there is a tendency to ignore the OT especially by Catholics but Christ also pointed how not one iota (smallest Greek mark?) will pass from what they called the Law back then

I'm always surprised at the number of Christians who also think it's cherry picking to follow any part of the OT but not all of it. It's talked about so often in the NT. Practically every other epistle

Christ also broke OT laws like ceremonial cleansing and keeping the sabbath which was a big point of contention between him and the Pharisees (Christ pointed out David also technically broke the Sabbath while on the run). Not sure how accurate these points are in the eyes of Judaism tho

Edited by indesertum - 3/11/16 at 12:32am
post #2051 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post



I'm really conflicted about Paul. I realize he played a crucial role in organizing the church and giving it structure, but a lot of his teachings are, if not in conflict, then certainly in a different tone than the Gospels. I don't think Christ would've supported a lot of his assertions.

I've heard that argument before and it's certainly not baseless, but it's immaterial now. Paul's teachings have been part of Christianity since before it was even called Christianity
post #2052 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medwed View Post

Alan and many others I don't want to insult your ignorance, but please take time and at least flip through Old Testament just to get yourself familiar with what that is instead of repeating what you have heard from others.
I am not a religious person, but I took time to read Bible out of curiosity. Old Testament has nothing to do with religious prescriptions for gentiles, nothing! Old Testament is not a religious instruction it is historical, ethnographic collection of stories, fairytales, erotic poetry and Jewish laws.
90% of Old Testament is a history of Jewish kingdoms and events that took place real or imaginary. Bringing that book up as a proof that Bible instructs violence is beyond ignorant.
The bible as far as we were taught is new + old testament. I get what youre saying that the old testament is a bunch of stories but Actually techniclaly the new testament is a bunch of stories as well written by the disciples who relay what they say is the word of Jesus, just like the old testament often relays what God and other prophets instructions are.
post #2053 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medwed View Post

Alan and many others I don't want to insult your ignorance, but please take time and at least flip through Old Testament just to get yourself familiar with what that is instead of repeating what you have heard from others.
I am not a religious person, but I took time to read Bible out of curiosity. Old Testament has nothing to do with religious prescriptions for gentiles, nothing! Old Testament is not a religious instruction it is historical, ethnographic collection of stories, fairytales, erotic poetry and Jewish laws.
90% of Old Testament is a history of Jewish kingdoms and events that took place real or imaginary. Bringing that book up as a proof that Bible instructs violence is beyond ignorant.

What about book of Leviticus? It's not a historical account it is a set of laws.

"If a man commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, both the man and the woman who have committed adultery must be put to death."

"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

‘Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.”
Edited by wojt - 3/11/16 at 6:12am
post #2054 of 2656
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

What about book of Leviticus? It's not a historical account it is a set of laws.

"If a man commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, both the man and the woman who have committed adultery must be put to death."

"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

It is not set of Christian laws, just like all other laws and ceremonies described in minutia detail in Old Testament are not intended for anyone but Hebrews and subsequently are not followed by Christians or even the most orthodox Jews themselves. For the purpose of my point about religious texts that instruct believers today I was comparing New Testament that clearly instructs vs. Koran that also clearly instructs.
post #2055 of 2656
So we don't have to follow 10 commandments anymore then smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Migrants, Immigrants, Refugees, and Aliens in Euro-Zone