Blasphemy Punishments in the Bible

Ansar Al-‘Adl I have reread the thread to see if perhaps I had misunderstood your postings.

Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the crux of what you have posted:

Jesus prescribed certain punishments in the Old Testament for various offences.
Among those are the calls to stone people for Cursing God or their parents or anyone attempting to lead the Hebrew into false god worship.

You have made the point that if anyone finds the punishments found in Islam to be cruel, then all they need to do is to look back at the Old Testament and find the same punishments called for doing the same offences. Therefore those punishments should be carried out today.

That is where I disagree with you.

You state that you understand the differences between the times we are living in (The period of Grace) compared to Old Testament times (The period of the Law). (Never mind that some of Islam's punishments are harsher than even those prescribed in the Old Testament)

What I feel you are overlooking is the point I tried to make to you about God choosing different approaches to dealing with mans short comings at different times.

Not all Laws were written for all men and all times.

I will give you an example of what I am referring to;

In the Old Testament we find that God forbade the intermarriage with certain groups.

White Supremacist, have perverted the meaning of that scripture to mean that there is to be no mixing of the races. All the while they are ignoring scripture just a few verses away that shows that Moses had a black wife.

Anti-death penalty people love to quote the commandment “Thou shall not kill” at an execution, all the while ignoring scripture just a few verses away that call for the death penalty for certain offences.

In post #24, I said it looked to me like you were trying to cover more than one topic with this thread and you are.

I will state this one more time.

Blaspheme does NOT apply to man insulting man. Not even for insulting Islam or Muhammad. (If that isn't the counter-point to your thread then, perhaps you should retitle it.)
When Islam instituted that law and its prescribed punishment, it went beyond any teachings found in the bible.

You seem to be trying to compare biblical teachings to Islamic teachings and make them say the same thing, but they don’t say the same things.

You have cited the scripture that tells the Hebrews to stone people for proselytizing and compared that to Islam’s teachings and implied that both are the same.

Find me scripture in the bible that says that if a Jew or Christian quits believing in God, they are to be stoned.

What are Islam’s teachings concerning an Atheist (Who was once a Muslim.) who repeatedly says in public that there is no God, and that since there is no God then Muhammad was not a prophet but was simply a liar and those who said he split the moon in two were liars.

Jesus’ teaching was that if they refuse to accept the Christian message then I am to simply shake their dust off the bottom of my feet and out of my clothes and move on, even if they are saying those things in my neighborhood.

Your argument equates insulting Muhammad with insulting God.

Jesus said that insulting the man that was Jesus (The Christ) would be forgiven, but insulting the Holy Spirit (That is Jesus God) would not be forgiven.

Jesus never taught what Islam teaches, that insulting a man is equal to insulting God.

Jesus taught to stone a person for:

Say to the Israelites: 'Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech must be put to death. The people of the community are to stone him' (Leviticus 20:2).

A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads (Leviticus 20:27).

But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death (Deuteronomy 18:20).

Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him (Leviticus 24:16).

Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people (Exodus 31:14).

Anyone who attacks his father or his mother must be put to death. Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death (Exodus 21:15,17).

If anyone takes the life of a human being, he must be put to death (Leviticus 24:17).

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife - with the wife of his neighbor - both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death (Leviticus 20:10).

If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads (Leviticus 20:13).

If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal (Leviticus 20:15).

All of those things were commanded to teach the Hebrew what was right and what was wrong.

The Hebrew failed to carry out those commandments, just the same as you or I would have failed to do so.
The result was God’s continual punishment of the Hebrew, all the while the blessings of God were not being allowed to be spread to the rest of mankind.

God chose to take a different approach to dealing with Mankind. God did that through Jesus the Christ.

That is the meaning of this scripture; 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 Law didn’t save. The commandment to love your fellow man was lost in all the pious attempts by the Israelites to follow the rest of the Law.

That is why Jesus said “'You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, `Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, `Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, `You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell' (Matthew 5:21,22)”.

We are living under a different Covenant today. You may think it is a Red Herring, but that Red Herring is crucial to understand if a person is to understand what Jesus the Christ did.

That is why Jesus said “you don’t pour new wine into old wine skins or they will burst and both the wine and the wine skins will be ruined” and that “no one sews a patch of new clothe on to an old garment because the new clothe will shrink and pull away and both the patch and the garment will suffer”.

Islam’s teachings that try to lead us back into the time of the Law results in exactly the same thing as the arguments between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, one group wanted to claim to more pious than the other. All the while they were ignoring the commandment to love your fellow man as you love yourself.


That is why I started the thread “Your desires or your actions” because it seems to me that carrying around a sign calling for the death of someone, who insults Muhammad, is in direct opposition to what Jesus taught:

Jesus said “'You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, `Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, `Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, `You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell' (Matthew 5:21,22)”.

Yes there are things in the Old Testament that I find very hard to accept.

I have never understood what the babies, that God ordered the killing of, were guilty of.

But to say that what Islam teaches should/could not be looked at as cruel or harsh simply because some of those punishments are found in the Old Testament is wrong imo.

The Hebrew failed at fulfilling the intent of the Law just the same as you are I would have.

You have admitted a number of times that Muslims have failed at fulfilling Islamic teachings, is there any reason to believe that they wouldn’t have failed to fulfill the Old Testament Laws?

I am not trying to get into an argument saying that Christians are any better at fulfilling Jesus the Christ’s teachings. All I am saying is that we have all fallen short and if you want to start stoning people for insulting Muhammad and Islam then:

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”.

Because you surely missed the meaning of:


“'You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, `Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, `Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, `You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell' (Matthew 5:21,22)”.

Ansar Al-‘Adl, if there is something you feel I haven’t addressed then let me know.

Thanks
Nimrod

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I am sorry you feel as though I have not answered any of your questions/arguments.

It is not a matter of me “wishing” to use the “New Covenant” argument. I have simply tried to show you the differences that exist between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

A person would not be prudent in ignoring those differences.

You seem to laboring under the false pretense, that I am of the persuasion, that none of the Old Testament decrees were harsh. That would be a false assumption.

I have stated so in my previous post.

Your argument is only valid if you have a time-machine so that you can transport all of us back to Old Testament times to live out our lives in.

Jesus said and did things during his time on Earth. Your argument comes across as though he brought no teachings at all.

If you wish to dispute my understanding of those teachings then all the better.

Let me be plain spoken.

There are things in the Old Testament I have a hard time understanding.

I don’t understand what the babies were guilty of that God ordered their killing.
That being said, it is there, regardless if I understand it all or not.

However I can make sense of some of what is in the Old Testament.

Why have the whole community take part in punishing offenders?

It is a very good way of making sure that everyone understands the seriousness of calling for the Death penalty, it also teaches every citizen the seriousness of their children breaking the Law.

The Old Testament never instructs a man to kill another man for insulting another man, with the minor exception of a man cursing his mom or dad.

That instruction was given in the generic sense, it makes no distinction for insulting a prophet.

Islam goes beyond biblical teachings in that regard, as well as in the punishment for a thief.


As I have stated, if you expect a new Covenant to be a carbon copy of the old Covenant, then why even have a new Covenant?

If you don’t understand the slippery slope of what could be understood to be insulting toward Muhammad or Islam, answer me this:

What EXACTLY could any teaching that disagrees with what Muhammad said be considered?

Your post has left me rather confused, I am assuming you were short of time.

What Exactly, of what I have posted, do you have a problem with?

Thanks
Nimrod

The islamic countries are based on the shariah laws. I heard even that is not applied 100% (we can't find a pure islamic country)-may be its false.
The other countries are based on constitution and laws made by humans. I think the Church lost his power to influence the politics in this world. Still in the rural areas and even towns the priest have their influence. But they can't apply the Biblical laws because they would be in the end judge by the human laws.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl

My argument is against those Christians who do not believe the Biblical punishments to be barbaric.

You didn't state that at the beginning.

And you will not find any such Christains.

Everyone has the view that it was not considered barbaric at theat time but is barbaric today.

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I have done my very best to provide you answers.

The subject that you are trying to address is much deeper than your simply replies imply.

The short answer (In contrast to the long in-depth answers I have been providing you with) is:

Yes all the Old Testament scripture was handed down by Jesus.
Yes I do have concrete objections to some Islamic punishments.
Yes I do believe some of the things in the Old Testament are extremely harsh and just short of sounding like I am trying to be God’s judge, yes they do (To me) sound cruel.

If you understand all that is in the Old Testament then, by all means, enlighten me as to what the babies that God ordered killed were guilty of.

If it God instructed people to be killed for insulting a dead prophet, then show me where.

And IF that is the correct understanding of Islam, then cite for me examples of people being stoned for insulting all the rest of the prophets.

Explain to me why Islam wasn’t rioting in the street when Jesus was insulted much worse by artist than any of the cartoons of recent history concerning Islam.

Perhaps when you attempt to answer that you will begin to understand Nicola’s post that you cited.

My objections to your thread have been posted by me more than once:

The Bible does NOT instruct people to the stoned or killed in any other manner, for insulting a dead prophet.

The Bible never equates the insulting a man to insulting God. (And there is an understanding as to why).

Thanks
Nimrod

Mara, this may sound strange but I feel that except for direct instruction from God concerning current events (Current events, meaning the current events of what ever time span.), that the church should NOT be in charge of political events, faulty men control the churches.

When the church is in charge, you wind up with things like the Christian crusades, or, Saudi Arabia’s style of Islam.

The church controlling the Kings is not the example we find in the Old Testament.

Sorry if this post is off topic a bit.

Thanks
Nimrod

format_quote Originally Posted by nimrod

Mara, this may sound strange but I feel that except for direct instruction from God concerning current events (Current events, meaning the current events of what ever time span.), that the church should NOT be in charge of political events, faulty men control the churches.

When the church is in charge, you wind up with things like the Christian crusades, or, Saudi Arabia’s style of Islam.

The church controlling the Kings is not the example we find in the Old Testament.

Sorry if this post is off topic a bit.

Thanks
Nimrod

Is not off topic. . Its quite on topic because thats why we can't see the biblical punishment today. What was quoted:
Exodus 21:17 "Whoever curses his father or mother shall be put to death. "
If the church would have ruled in our countries- in particular setting up the laws-, i think the biblical punishments would have been applied.
We can't say the Bible its old or its not anymore actual or we are able to comment the Holly Book-thats not good or its good.

Mara, you have stated a very important point I have been trying to make to Ansar.

God has taken different approaches to dealing with men at different times.

Adam and Eve were subject to only one rule; don’t eat the fruit of one certain tree.

The folks that lived during Noah’s time didn’t have a written law from God that we know of.

Men of different ages are different from men of other ages.

Not all Law, was written, for all men.

God has shown that he adjusts his approach to different times and men of different times.

An important thing to understand is this:

God became more and more harsh and implemented very cruel punishments on the Hebrew as time went on, in order to teach them to quit worshipping false gods.

Once the Hebrew quit that practice, just before Jesus the Christ’s time, God brought the next step into play.

The time of the Law had been fulfilled, and then was the time to show God’s mercy, the time of Grace.

I can understand Islam’s thinking though:

On one hand seemingly, the most perfect thing that could have happened, is for God to have handed one single set of rules to stand for all time.

I am of the opinion that God knew that the modern man would be more advanced in his thinking in all areas, not only his understanding of science but also his understanding of God’s nature.

Just the same as God acted differently toward the Hebrews at different times (depending on if the Hebrews were doing right), God also acts differently toward men and the times they live in.

Now days most folks, that have been raised in a society that doesn’t believe in multiple gods, finds the idea of multiple gods a little nuts.

The need for God to be so harsh toward man kind, in-order to teach mankind that God is One, has mostly passed.

God does not treat all men exactly the same. God knows who he is dealing with and adjusts his approach to fit what needs to be addressed.

The time of the Law has been fulfilled.
If anyone tries to lead you back into the Law, then a person would be well advised as to question why.

Something to ponder, Joseph Smith also used the claim that he was restoring the miss-guided population/church to what God originally intended, the restoration of the Law.

You may find a study of the LDS/ Mormon interesting.

Thanks
Nimrod

format_quote Originally Posted by nimrod

The time of the Law has been fulfilled.
If anyone tries to lead you back into the Law, then a person would be well advised as to question why.

Something to ponder, Joseph Smith also used the claim that he was restoring the miss-guided population/church to what God originally intended, the restoration of the Law.

You may find a study of the LDS/ Mormon interesting.

Thanks
Nimrod

I am still not able to talk about Mormons, i never read about them before, but even if they tried, they will fall under the country law, civil or penal law.
I agree with you the humankind its to "modern" in this days. Even the penal laws are changing often in order to can keep the step with this modernisation.
For example, 2 years ago the adultery was punished with jail, in order to protect the family life, off course. Now, this law was replaced with only pecuniary damages, so fall under the civil law. See from criminal law to civil law. Why? Because even the family life begin not look like with was supposed to be.
The same modernisation i have noticed in islamic countries too, when they allowed the myshar marriages - which after me are other sample of modern life with very little connections of the family life.