Re: the difference between islam and christianity .... (OP)
format_quote Originally Posted by nimrod
Ansar Al-‘Adl, Jesus refused to stone the adulteress, what do you make of that?
And yet, if Jesus is God he also ordained many punishments in the Old Testament for blasphemy and the like. Christians believe these punishments to be divinely ordained, they just don't believe they are applicable anymore.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
But it does expose an element of hypocrisy on the part of those Christians who criticise Islamic laws against blasphemy.
It’s not the laws that are criticized it’s the punishments.
1,000 years ago the West decided that stoning people to death is barbaric and therefore the Bible is ignored on such matters. And on anything else barbaric.
To Muslims, the Koran is considered perfect and Sharia law is considered perfect. Where a punishment is barbaric Muslims refuse the change the Koran or Sharia.
There is nothing hypocritical about criticizing a barbaric punishment.
When you say The West, and quote Ansar saying Christians you have to see that there is a difference.
You see the hippocracy comes from some Christians, let me xplain it.
Some Christians state that stoning is cruel and barbaric. But at the same time those same Christians claim that the Bible is something to live by, every piece of it.
See, now you come and say the West decided stoning is barbaric so that part of the Bible is ignored. Theres a difference between those peopel in the west that say that, and some Christians who still insist that the bible is perfect in every way.
If it is perfect then stoning is a perfect method ordained by G-d according to those Christians, who in hand are hippocritically stating that Islam is cruel and barbaric for using that same method.
Ansar Al-‘Adl, I have reviewed the threads and I never found an answer to this
“Ansar Al-‘Adl, what man in the Old Testament was the word “blaspheme” associated with? Where is the word “Blaspheme” used in regard to man insulting man?”
Perhaps it was there and I just missed it.
It is rather important to the point you are trying to make.
I believe that was the point of Nicola’s post.
As to your reply to Panatella “I'm well aware of the new covenant - old covenant distinction in Christianity. But it doesn't negate the fact that Christians believe that these punishments were ordained for God and considered the law for centuries. If Christians wish to argue that Jesus ignorantly prescribed what they consider 'vanity', that is entirely up to them. But it does expose an element of hypocrisy on the part of those Christians who criticize Islamic laws against blasphemy”.
It isn’t a matter of ignoring scripture, but rather a case of studying it.
Ansar Al-‘Adl, sorry for taking a while to get back to this, I am remodeling the kitchen here at the house.
You are correct when you say the punishments listed under the Old Covenant were directly handed down to man from God.
(I know people are, to a degree, a product of the times and communities that they live in. But I have often wondered if I could have carried out the punishments called for in the Old Testament. It would be a very hard thing for me to throw rocks at someone till I killed them.
I imagine it was am extremely painful way to die. I can however understand that if you were trying to teach people the seriousness of breaking the law, then having them carry out the punishment themselves would make certain they understood it first hand.)
Ansar Al-‘Adl, It appears that you are covering more than one topic with this thread. I am not sure if you are going towards any one of the themes in particular. I will try to mildly address your different points in this post, if you would like to revisit any of them I will do my best to focus on which ever part you wish.
From post #1. Yes you are correct to say Jesus (In Old Testament times) ordered the punishments that are found in the Old Testament. Stoning was the prescribed punishment for adultery as well as blaspheme and such things as cursing your parents.
When you study the Old Testament scripture you will see that, at one point, the Hebrew were told, by God, to quit bringing sacrifices and burning offerings to God. Now if this were taken out of context it would seem to be a contradiction to what Moses had commanded the Hebrew to do.
However taken in context what we see is that there had been a long repeated pattern of God severely punishing the Hebrew till they repented and walked the straight and narrow for a short time and time they fell back into rebellion. The rebellion became worse and worse, for a time, some of the Hebrew even adopted the practice of burning some of their children to the pagan god Molech.
The worship of the pagan god Baal and goddess Asheria was very common for a very long period of time.
This cycle of severe punishment and temporary reform was resulting in a large amount of Hebrew suffering, yet it was bringing the desired results God said he wished for the Hebrew nation.
God said he wanted the Hebrew to be a pure nation of priests to bring his fame and blessings to the rest of the world. God did not allow the Hebrew to fulfill their role (imo) because the Hebrew never quit giving credit, for what God did, to idols.
God say’s that he gets no pleasure from the failure and suffering and death of a man. God prefers that all repent and save themselves from the coming punishment.
At one point God sent one of his prophets to the King of the Hebrew and told the King “Ask for any sign you wish, no matter how large the sign”. The King replied that “Scripture tells us not to “test” God”.
God’s reply is that he will provide a sign himself and that the sign will be a virgin birth.
What that scripture is addressing when taking in context is this:
God had made the kings of Israel a powerful “almighty” ruler to their people as to be able to rule like gods. The kings answered to no man except to the spokesmen (Prophets) of God.
God was saying to that king (My reading between the lines of that scripture and history of what was going on.) “I have repeatedly offered signs and rewards and punishment to your people, yet they keep rebelling and the result is just more and more suffering for the Hebrew people”.
“Now king of the Hebrew, you pick a sign that you think will finally get my message across to your people”
The king replied “It is said not to “test” God”.
(Now I am not sure if #1. the king didn’t fully understand what the meaning was of what prophet had said, or, if #2. the king did understand it completely and was simply refusing to believe that God would provide what ever sign the king might ask for, or, #3. that the king didn’t want to take responsibility setting something in motion that the Hebrew would almost certainly fail at (The recognition that God is the only God and they would have a change of ways that would finally result in the Hebrew fulfilling God’s purpose for them). Judging from the prophet’s reaction to the king’s reply, I suspect the answer is #2 or #3.)
Therefore God choose to make a New Covenant with mankind, Jesus taught and explained the terms of the New Covenant just as he did with the Old Testament.
If a person would expect a new contract to be exactly like the contract it was replacing then they would have to first answer this question:
If you think they should be the same, then why even introduce a second contract?
You introduce a second contract because of changes one party or the other are making to the contract. It is very clear that man doesn’t dictate terms to God, so the changes must have came from God’s part of the contract.
Hi Nimrod,
I've read your post, but I'm afraid it doesn't provide any answers to my question. You've said that the Jews were very rebellious as if to say, "They deserved it!" when it comes to these harsher punishments. And then you've again said that you're under the New Covenant so these punishments no longer apply.
The verses I am speaking about right now are:
Leviticus 24:13-16. Then the LORD said to Moses: "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; anyone who BLASPHEMES the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.
Deuteronomy 13:7-12. If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst.
1. These verses clearly prescribe EXECUTION by STONING TO DEATH for proselytising and blasphemy.
2. Christians believe that these punishments were prescribed by God to be implemented.
3. Yet, some Christians will criticise Muslim punishments which are not nearly as harsh for such offences, and call them 'extreme vanity'! This is clearly hypocrisy.
The New Covenant issue is a red-herring since you still believe that for centuries these punishments were implemented as instructed by God. And the issue about the rebellion of the Jews also doesn't fit because in the first passage it says Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death. And at any rate, the continual rebellion of the Jews wouldn't be a sufficient excuse to apply unjust, barbaric punishments, if that's how christians percieve them. I think Christian evangelicals who object to Islamic punishments should reflect on what should be familiar advice:
Matthew 7:3-5. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
These verses clearly prescribe EXECUTION by STONING TO DEATH for proselytising and blasphemy.
Christians believe that these punishments were prescribed by God to be implemented.
In the modern world, Christians do not believe in stoning
In the modern world, nobody in the West believes in stoning.
What people believed 1,000 years ago has no relevance to the people of today.
We believe stoning is barbaric.
The Koran was written more than 1,000 years ago. Muslims believe the Koran is perfect and that any punishments prescribed 1,000 years ago apply to the people of today.
In the modern world, Christians do not believe in stoning
Christians TODAY believe that these punishments were revealed by a perfect God, and that is what matters here. Whether they have abandoned it today for the new covenant is irrelevant to my argument, so long as they still view it to be revealed by God.
The Koran was written more than 1,000 years ago. Muslims believe the Koran is perfect and that any punishments prescribed 1,000 years ago apply to the people of today.
Absolutely. Justice is neither relative nor bound by time and culture.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Did you ever answer this “ “Ansar Al-‘Adl, what man in the Old Testament was the word “blaspheme” associated with? Where is the word “Blaspheme” used in regard to man insulting man?” “.
As far as this, Ansar Al-'Adl “I've read your post, but I'm afraid it doesn't provide any answers to my question. You've said that the Jews were very rebellious as if to say, "They deserved it!" when it comes to these harsher punishments.”
That wasn’t my message at all.
People are people; the Jews have the same faults as you and I. What I showed is the different approaches God used at different times for dealing with those faults.
Your answering the question I posed is important to any discourse concerning the differences between Islamic teachings and Christian teachings.
If that is the direction you wanted to take your topic in, then it will have to be addressed.
If your aim was a simple discussion, of Christian teachings concerning man’s punishment of man for blaspheme under the New Testament verses the Old Testament, then let me know and I will proceed.
Hi Joe98,
Do Christian today believe the Old Testament is from God? Yes, they do. And yes Christians TODAY believe that these 'barbaric' punishments were revealed by God. Simply denying it isn't going to get you anywhere.
Hello Nimrod,
I haven't made the claim that the word blasphemy is associated with man in the Bible. But that's not to say that verbal offences amongst human beings were not punishable with death in the Bible:
Exodus 21:17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Ansar Al-‘Adl “I haven't made the claim that the word blasphemy is associated with man in the Bible”.
Then you are comparing apples to oranges in-order to make your argument concerning Islam’s punishment for insulting Muhammad, which IS where your argument started from.
Ansar Al-‘Adl “But that's not to say that verbal offences amongst human beings were not punishable with death in the Bible”. Once again you are comparing apples to oranges.
The scripture you quoted in-order to try and prove your case does not address the issue at hand.
Ansar Al-‘Adl “Exodus 21:17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.”
That scripture is addressing the principal of not cursing your Father in Heaven, along with the issue of discord that results when children don’t show respect toward parents or other sources of authority.
Since you brought that scripture into this discussion, I have a question I would like to ask you about it.
Is that the only scripture in the Bible commanding the death penalty for a man insulting another man?
Find me scripture concerning the demands of the death penalty for insulting other prophets, other than Muhammad, and then we can compare apples to apples.
That was the point Nicola was making in her post, that you cited.
Ansar Al-‘Adl “I haven't made the claim that the word blasphemy is associated with man in the Bible”. This part has left me confused.
If this thread isn’t concerning the thread, I started and you moved, that Nicola committed on, then why have you quoted her on this thread?
If you are quoting her because she committed on a thread about people being punished, for simply insulting Muhammad, with the same death penalty as required for Blaspheming God then, yes, you did link blaspheming God to being equal to insulting Muhammad (In a backdoor fashion).
Joe “You are all ignoring the third way. Modern man uses common sense together with a body of laws that have been built up over the last 250 years”.
I understand the point you are making, and it is a good one.
If I am reading your posts correctly the point you are making is that:
No ONE today lives up to the standards of the perfect man according to religious teachings.
So there is no point in punishing people for failing to maintain a perfect record. We all fall short.
I agree that the modern man, that is Christian, has advanced to the point that there is separation between church and state. (Considering man’s short comings, that is a very good thing)
As an aside Joe what, if any, teachings of Jesus would you not desire you neighbor to practice?
No, todays peole believe that ancient people believed it was the word of God.
Okay, let's see about this. Why don't we ask Nimrod for his view,
Nimrod - do you believe the OT verses I cited were revealed by God or do you reject them as Joe98 has suggested? Please answer this.
format_quote Originally Posted by nimrod
Ansar Al-‘Adl “I haven't made the claim that the word blasphemy is associated with man in the Bible”.
Then you are comparing apples to oranges in-order to make your argument concerning Islam’s punishment for insulting Muhammad, which IS where your argument started from.
Insulting anything in the religion is prohibited in Islam because blaspheming against God's religion is blaspheming against God. No it is not comparing apples to oranges, because the Christian objections are not on the basis of who the target of the blasphemy is, but the objection was What extreme vanity! Haven't these guys ever heard - sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" Are we to assume that words can not hurt human beings but they CAN hurt God and therefore this is not 'extreme vanity' ??
Never mind the 'slippery slope' as to what constitutes an insult to God, but are you trying to say that stoning someone to death for insulting God is perfectly acceptable and a punishment that is maximum execution for insulting the Prophet pbuh is barbaric?? What is the status of Messengers of God in the Bible?
Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, "See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Why is it that blaspheming against God merits stoning to death while blaspheming against God's religion or messengers merits no punishment whatsoever?
And does this mean you have no objections to any Islamic punishment for insulting and blaspheming against God?
The scripture you quoted in-order to try and prove your case does not address the issue at hand.
Ansar Al-‘Adl “Exodus 21:17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.”
That scripture is addressing the principal of not cursing your Father in Heaven, along with the issue of discord that results when children don’t show respect toward parents or other sources of authority.
The issue is not speaking about god, in black and white the verse states to slay those who curse their parents. Why don't you address this verse and tell me, since you believe that execution is only non-barbaric when applied to thsoe who insult God, why is it prescribed for INSULTING HUMAN BEINGS (not even Prophets!) in this verse?? Please answer this.
Is that the only scripture in the Bible commanding the death penalty for a man insulting another man?
Are you trying to say that if there is only one scripture it is not evidence? Why are you asking me to search for more verses? Let's deal with this one right now:
Exodus 21:17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.
In black and white, death has been prescribed in the OT for insulting human beings who do not even reach the status of the Prophets.
Find me scripture concerning the demands of the death penalty for insulting other prophets, other than Muhammad, and then we can compare apples to apples.
Why does it have to be Prophets? You are using whatever excuse you can find to narrow the scope down. What's next? Finding a scripture that demands death penalty for insulting an arab prophet?? Your initial objection was to punishments for insults or blasphemy. Now you have objected to punishments for insults or blasphemy against human beings. And yet the OT unequivocally prescribes a punishment for insulting ordinary human beings.
And with regards to proselytising in another religion, Islam prohibits and places restrictions on it, but the OT explcitly prescribes stoning to death.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
Joe
As an aside Joe what, if any, teachings of Jesus would you notdesire you neighbor to practice?
I live by the teachings of my parents and by the norms of my local society.
I want my neighbors to do so too.
As it turns out most of that started as the 10 commandments, then the teachings of Jesus were added and then over the last 2,000 years it has evolved into what we have today.
I am sure our Muslim friends can find something barbaric he said but otherwise if Jesus lived next door to me he would be a good neighbor.
But I would not allow his many visitors to park in front of my house.
I live by the teachings of my parents and by the norms of my local society.
I want my neighbors to do so too.
As it turns out most of that started as the 10 commandments, then the teachings of Jesus were added and then over the last 2,000 years it has evolved into what we have today.
I am sure our Muslim friends can find something barbaric he said but otherwise if Jesus lived next door to me he would be a good neighbor.
-
you being an atheist somehow I doubt that very much,
It is Allah, except Whom there is no God; the King, the Pure, the Giver of Peace, the Bestower of Safety, the Protector, the Most Honourable, the Compeller, the Proud; Purity is to Allah from all what they ascribe as partners (to Him)! Al-Quran 59:23
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks