Blasphemy Punishments in the Bible
- Thread starter Ansar Al-'Adl
- Start date
- Replies 85
- Views 16K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
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
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
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
I'm afraid you haven't answered any of my arguments, Nimrod.
If you wish to use the 'new covenant' argument, then you cannot object to the punishments in principle or say that they are bad/unfair punishments - you can only say that you believe they are not applicable today. If you say they are bad or barbaric punishments then you are saying that a perfect compassionate and allwise God prescribed bad barbaric punishments.
The argument "well, it's only for insulting God" misses the mark as well.
1. The Bible prescribes execution for insulting human beings (parents) as well, and the status of the Prophets is the highest for human beings.
2. You eliminate all your objections against punishments for reviling God in Islam.
3. The "slippery slope" of what constitutes an insult to God makes it entirely plausible that an insult to God's Messengers and God's religion merits some form of punishment as well, even if less than the punishment for insulting God directly.
4. The Bible prescribes stoning to death while the maximum Islamic punishment for the one who violates their covenant with the state (by reviling God, the religion or the Prophets) is simply execution. Why is any punishment whatsoever for insulting God's Messengers labelled by Christians as 'extreme vanity' and stoning to death for blaspheming God is considered the best and most appropriate, just not for our times?
2. You eliminate all your objections against punishments for reviling God in Islam.
3. The "slippery slope" of what constitutes an insult to God makes it entirely plausible that an insult to God's Messengers and God's religion merits some form of punishment as well, even if less than the punishment for insulting God directly.
4. The Bible prescribes stoning to death while the maximum Islamic punishment for the one who violates their covenant with the state (by reviling God, the religion or the Prophets) is simply execution. Why is any punishment whatsoever for insulting God's Messengers labelled by Christians as 'extreme vanity' and stoning to death for blaspheming God is considered the best and most appropriate, just not for our times?
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Peace.
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
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
Woodrow
May Allah have mercy on him رحمة الله عليه
- Messages
- 17,217
- Reaction score
- 4,224
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Perhaps the last sentence needs to be rephrased to "Most mainstream Christains do not believe that." Keep in mind that the typical Christian we come into contact with, is almost always from a Funamentalistic Bible
Denomination.
Ansar Al-'Adl
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
So you have no concrete objections to Islamic punishments so long as they were implemented before the New Covenant? How exactly does "Old Testament times" differ from modern times? Are you not projecting your Christian beliefs onto Islam when you object that it has prescribed punishments that Christians feel are no longer applicable since the New Covenant? This is an objection based on your religious beliefs, not on reason or evidence.
Then is it not better for you and Christians like you to spend time first trying to understand your own Holy Scripture before making accusations about another religion? This is exactly the hypocrisy I was talking about. Christians point at Islam though their criteria prove even more destructive when applied to their own scriptures.
It doesn't matter if you preface the exception with 'minor' or not. I can say that Islam never instructs a man to kill another man for insulting another man with the minor exception of God's Messengers, who are far superior in status to any parents. Cursing one's parents is a sin; cursing God's Messenger is blatant disbelief.
Muslims don't believe in this 'new covenant'! This is why it is fallacious for Christians to object to Islamic punishments because in reality they don't have an argument.
I'll answer your questions about Islamic law in the appropriate threads, inshaa'Allah.
I don't have a problem with what you posted, I just can't understand why you've bothered to post at all in this thread if not to answer my specific questions and challenges to those Christians who object to the Islamic punishments, specifically for blasphemy.
And lastly, for joe's sake, please answer this with a simple yes or no that Joe will be able to understand (he is still under the impression that you reject the OT as barbaric):
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Peace.
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Some laws in the Bible are barbaric because it was written in ancient times.
But those barbaric laws have been changed.
Some of Sharia law is barbaric because it was written in ancient times.
These barbaric laws have not been changed.
The critisizims against Islam is that barbaric laws have not been changed.
Last edited:
Ansar Al-'Adl
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Joe,
Are you familiar with the fallacy known as argumentum ad nauseum? The Christians on this forum do not believe the OT is barbaric. If you can find me a Christian on the forum who believes the Bible is barbaric, then he/she is exempt from my challenge. My argument is against those Christians who do not believe the Biblical punishments to be barbaric.
Are you familiar with the fallacy known as argumentum ad nauseum? The Christians on this forum do not believe the OT is barbaric. If you can find me a Christian on the forum who believes the Bible is barbaric, then he/she is exempt from my challenge. My argument is against those Christians who do not believe the Biblical punishments to be barbaric.
Tania
IB Expert
- Messages
- 2,555
- Reaction score
- 310
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
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.
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.
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
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
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
Tania
IB Expert
- Messages
- 2,555
- Reaction score
- 310
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
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
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
Tania
IB Expert
- Messages
- 2,555
- Reaction score
- 310
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
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.
Ansar Al-'Adl
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Hello Nimrod,
http://www.islamicboard.com/176386-post34.html
Jesus is known to the west - insulting him will not threaten the inter-faith bridges by breeding misconceptions and incting hatred towards a minority. I'll be happy to discuss this further in the above thread.
The fact that Jesus commanded people to be stoned to death for insulting him has been established. Thank you, you've shown what I wanted you to show.
Regards
Then why don't you go around saying that Jesus advocated the murder of those who insult him (which you've agreed is true)? If you find the issues comparable why do you misquote and protray Islam in a negative light but attempt to offer an in-depth explanation when it comes to Christianity? Why the bias?
I don't believe that God nor Prophet Jesus would ever enjoin the smashing of innocent babies against rocks, so I reject the account of the Old Testament.
Does it matter if they are dead or alive? The Bible goes much further than the level of Prophets - it says kill the one who insults his parents.
There is no stoning for insults in Islam so that's a strawman fallacy.
I did explain this in much detail in a thread while the cartoons were going on:
http://www.islamicboard.com/176386-post34.html
Jesus is known to the west - insulting him will not threaten the inter-faith bridges by breeding misconceptions and incting hatred towards a minority. I'll be happy to discuss this further in the above thread.
But it did instruct them to be stoned to death for insulting Jesus, according to Christian understanding. And it does command execution for insulting one's parents. Both of these are clearly more extreme in my view, than any Islamic punishment.
The fact that Jesus commanded people to be stoned to death for insulting him has been established. Thank you, you've shown what I wanted you to show.
Regards
duskiness
Elite Member
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 55
Hi Ansar,
Ansar you are a clever man, so tell why, when you see "beat your wife" in Quran you turn to scholars, Sunna and Islamic law, but when you see something "bad" in Bible you don't look up any commentary?
Ps: i'm going on my "hajj"
tomorrow to Santiago (500 km in 20 day by foot - so scared!!!) so i won't be able to answer you till mid August
take care, Ansar
n.
where?
as you know it, there is no stoning in Christianity also
wher?
Ansar you are a clever man, so tell why, when you see "beat your wife" in Quran you turn to scholars, Sunna and Islamic law, but when you see something "bad" in Bible you don't look up any commentary?
- "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.". That's what i know about stoning...
Ps: i'm going on my "hajj"
tomorrow to Santiago (500 km in 20 day by foot - so scared!!!) so i won't be able to answer you till mid Augusttake care, Ansar
n.
Ansar Al-'Adl
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Hi duskiness,
You may want to read the thread from the start - this thread was created in response to some of the criticism of Christians towards Islamic punishments.
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.
Regards
You may want to read the thread from the start - this thread was created in response to some of the criticism of Christians towards Islamic punishments.
Exodus 21:17 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.
This is the stoning in question:
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.
As above.
First off, 'beat your wife' does not occur in the Qur'an, but I suppose you knew that already and were just offering an example of the need research into texts as opposed to misquoting them, offering a superficial presentation of the issue in question, and in the process maligning an entire religion. I agree with you completely. You may not realize that this thread was created in response to the efforts of some Christians spreading negative and shallow presentations on some Islamic laws. I understand that Christians have their way of looking at the Old Testament and examining/explaining the texts. But I can't understand why some of them do not give the same respect to Muslims and they misquote Islamic laws. The sheer hypocrisy in their actions should be evident from this thread.
Have a safe trip! :thankyou:Ps: i'm going on my "hajj"
Regards
Peace be upon those who follow guidance.
Just wondering Dusk you wrote
I think if you read from the start you will see the quotes, if not then ask again and I will post it.
Again I think if you read into the thread you will see the point being made by Ansar.
Just out of curiosity, this is a question for Ansar, but I would be interested if you could provide me with the Sunnah of Jesus please.
Now again if you read into the thread, the point being made is not debating whether Christianity now allows stoning under the new covenant.
But since you have brought this up, just wondering why you quote something which Bibles like the NIV have commented saying
Online Source
And I hope you have a nice time and learn something from your trip.
E'esa
Just wondering Dusk you wrote
I think if you read from the start you will see the quotes, if not then ask again and I will post it.
Again I think if you read into the thread you will see the point being made by Ansar.
Just out of curiosity, this is a question for Ansar, but I would be interested if you could provide me with the Sunnah of Jesus please.
Now again if you read into the thread, the point being made is not debating whether Christianity now allows stoning under the new covenant.
But since you have brought this up, just wondering why you quote something which Bibles like the NIV have commented saying
Online Source
And I hope you have a nice time and learn something from your trip.
E'esa