CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Islam...

[Kutnupe14]

Joshua, along with other books in the bible, do have killing in them, but the difference is God was working with His people physically at that time and he was telling them what to do, and He had a purpose, but God didn't instruct us now to kill any nationalities. There was also a few people who died in the flood, but that doesn't mean that God wants us to drown people. Christ said for us to do as He did, and this was important enough for God to come in the flesh and show us personally.

Ok, I guess I'm going to have to quote scripture:

Luke chapter 19 verse 27, Jesus says, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

 

[PaulF]

Some of this I can accept. Let's not forget that, while we discuss these things, the idea of a Christian is to follow Christ's example. The idea of a Muslim to follow Muhammad's example. For each group it is necessary to have a means of determining that example so one can more accurately follow it.

Let's take a look at what you speak of in Joshua. Do you want me to use the entire book of Joshua as a reference, or do you have a few select verses that you'd like to point out? I'll happily do either for you.

I think my point is getting lost here...I not saying that the violent texts in the Bible ought to inspire violence in followers, my point is that someone looking to justify their violent urges can do so with passages from either holy book...it's all in there.

Christians and Jews have done a pretty good job of getting their followers to ignore the more violent and bigoted parts of their religious texts as those behaviors fell out of grace in modern, secular societies. Islam desperately needs to separate itself from the more "backwards" elements of its beliefs. Islam is very much a reflection of life as it was on the Arabian peninsula in the seventh century. Their culture was largely based on a tribal authoritarian foundation. Islam serves well to maintain that view of the world among its followers...much to the detriment of its own people in this ever more modern and secular world.

 

[T.Lex]

In an effort to bring some specificity, can we at least try to paint with a finer brush?

Sunni appear to have overall figured out how to integrate and participate in western secular societies.

The Salafist portion of Sunni clearly have not.

The Shia mostly have.

If we cannot speak with some specificity, then there will continue to be the opportunity to speak past each other, with countervailing examples aplenty.

 

[Benp]

Ok, I guess I'm going to have to quote scripture:

Luke chapter 19 verse 27, Jesus says, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

This is part of a parable that Jesus was telling. You cannot just take a scripture out of context and say what you want it to mean. Here is the full context:
Luke 19:11-28 New Living Translation


The crowd was listening to everything Jesus said. And because he was nearing Jerusalem, he told them a story to correct the impression that the Kingdom of God would begin right away.
He said, "A nobleman was called away to a distant empire to be crowned king and then return.
Before he left, he called together ten of his servants and divided among them ten pounds of silver, saying, 'Invest this for me while I am gone.'
But his people hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, 'We do not want him to be our king.'
"After he was crowned king, he returned and called in the servants to whom he had given the money. He wanted to find out what their profits were.
The first came before him, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.’
"'Well done!' the king exclaimed. 'You are a good servant. You have been faithful with the little I entrusted to you, so you will be governor of ten cities as your reward.'
"The next servant reported, 'Master, I invested your money and made five times the original amount.'
"'Well done!' the king said. 'You will be governor over five cities.'
"But the third servant brought back only the original amount of money and said, 'Master, I hid your money and kept it safe.
I was afraid because you are a hard man to deal with, taking what isn't yours and harvesting crops you didn't plant.'
"'You wicked servant!' the king roared. 'Your own words condemn you. If you knew that I'm a hard man who takes what isn't mine and harvests crops I didn't plant,
why didn't you deposit my money in the bank? At least I could have gotten some interest on it.'
"Then, turning to the others standing nearby, the king ordered, 'Take the money from this servant, and give it to the one who has ten pounds.'
"'But, master,' they said, 'he already has ten pounds!'
"'Yes,' the king replied, 'and to those who use well what they are given, even more will be given. But from those who do nothing, even what little they have will be taken away.
And as for these enemies of mine who didn't want me to be their king--bring them in and execute them right here in front of me.'"
After telling this story, Jesus went on toward Jerusalem, walking ahead of his disciples.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Christians and Jews have done a pretty good job of getting their followers to ignore the more violent and bigoted parts of their religious texts as those behaviors fell out of grace in modern, secular societies.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This is part of a parable that Jesus was telling. You cannot just take a scripture out of context and say what you want it to mean. Here is the full context:
Luke 19:11-28 New Living Translation

I think you're missing the point.... unless you hold that this specific scripture can't be misinterpreted and used to justify killing non-Christians.

 

[JettaKnight]

Ok, I guess I'm going to have to quote scripture:

Luke chapter 19 verse 27, Jesus says, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Whoa, whoa, whoa!

Jesus did not say that as a commandment. In that passage Jesus is telling a parable about resources given to workers by a nobleman and what they did with it. It's the nobleman who makes that statement, not Jesus.

I think you're missing the point.... unless you hold that this specific scripture can't be misinterpreted and used to justify killing non-Christians.

Wait, so you twist scripture and say, "See! The Bible says kill non-Christians!" Then you get called out for a clear misreading, and you response, "Yeah, I'm twisting, but, see! The Bible says kill non-Christians if you twist it!"

 

[Kutnupe14]

Whoa, whoa, whoa!

Jesus did not say that as a commandment. In that passage Jesus is telling a parable about resources given to workers by a nobleman and what they did with it. It's the nobleman who makes that statement, not Jesus.

Yes, Jesus said it as a parable, but the parable relates to the judgement of God. It is clear there is an equivalency between the nobleman and God.

 

[JettaKnight]

IKR?

I can understand the issue with Judaism - there's no teaching of Christ that explain the law & it's reasoning and how he fulfills it to change the dynamic. What I've never come to grasp is how Jews can take the law, which should still be in force for them, and choose to ignore parts or all of it.

 

[hog slayer]

Yes, Jesus said it as a parable, but the parable relates to the judgement of God. It is clear there is an equivalency between the nobleman and God.

Remember, we are to follow the leader. If you can find where Christ would justify this sort of behavior from His followers, maybe we should do more with it. Otherwise, it nearly takes an intentional misinterpretation to make this a passage instructing Christians to be violent.

Maybe a different angle.

Verse 27. - But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. An obvious reference to the Lord's dealings with the chosen people, and an unmistakable reference to the awful ruin and disaster which was so soon to overwhelm the city and temple and the whole nationality. But behind this temporal reference there looms in the background the vast shadow of a terrible eternal doom reserved for the enemies of the Redeemer.

 

[jamil]

No, it's not possible. Just as it's impossible to mount a defense of the mayhem inflicted on millions of people by Christianity in the past 14 cen... wait, I don't need that much time... past 5 centuries?

People sucked more then. It is from natural causes. Some have progressed morally. Some haven't. Some try to prevent that progression. Some try to lead it.

The deceived inflict mayhem. Defense mounted. Not impossible.

Ultimately, inside, they are fulfilling their basic nature. That's not a defense of their behavior, btw. Behavior which commits violence on innocent people cannot be defended.

 

[Benp]

I think you're missing the point.... unless you hold that this specific scripture can't be misinterpreted and used to justify killing non-Christians.

If your point is that the bible can be misinterpreted I will agree to that. I do not believe that was your original intention with the quote, but whatever. The Koran is NOT misinterpreted when it commands that nonbelievers must die.

 

[PaulF]

I said "mostly"...while Judaism still clings to ritual genital mutilation, at least Christians haven't burned a "witch" alive in almost two years!

 

[JettaKnight]

Yes, Jesus said it as a parable, but the parable relates to the judgement of God. It is clear there is an equivalency between the nobleman and God.

True, but it's a parable. I don't receive exactly ten minas, lust like I don't actually throw seeds on to soil to spread Christianity.

What can be derived from this ending to parable is that there are grave consequences to Christians (or Jews of the time) that flounder the talents and resources given unto them.


Here's the litmus test: Show me a single commentary on this passage making your claim that it explicitly or implicitly advocates the slaying of non-Christians.

In other words, "put up or shut up" (with all due respect)

 

[hog slayer]

Interesting that the topic of Jews comes up during the same time as this parable. I've been taught a bit about this parable and how it relates to the Jews. I didn't bring that up in detail here for fear of further confusing the issue.

Frankly, I'm happy Kut (anyone, for that matter) posted scripture. It's the only way to reduce any unneeded confusion I'll gladly walk through any area of the bible.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem the same can be said for any of our Muslim friends. And, as I've said already, I've never come across anyone who could do a decent job at Islam Apologetics.

IKR?

I can understand the issue with Judaism - there's no teaching of Christ that explain the law & it's reasoning and how he fulfills it to change the dynamic. What I've never come to grasp is how Jews can take the law, which should still be in force for them, and choose to ignore parts or all of it.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If your point is that the bible can be misinterpreted I will agree to that. I do not believe that was your original intention with the quote, but whatever. The Koran is NOT misinterpreted when it commands that nonbelievers must die.

I'm not versed in the Koran, and you may be right. It might not be misinterpreted... however, I believe that it contradicts itself or doesn't make things explicitly clear when compared to other passages. In such cases, it would depend on the person to decide which path they'd take.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

If your point is that the bible can be misinterpreted I will agree to that. I do not believe that was your original intention with the quote, but whatever. The Koran is NOT misinterpreted when it commands that nonbelievers must die.

This.

 

[Kutnupe14]

True, but it's a parable. I don't receive exactly ten minas, lust like I don't actually throw seeds on to soil to spread Christianity.

What can be derived from this ending to parable is that there are grave consequences to Christians (or Jews of the time) that flounder the talents and resources given unto them.


Here's the litmus test: Show me a single commentary on this passage making your claim that it explicitly or implicitly advocates the slaying of non-Christians.

In other words, "put up or shut up" (with all due respect)

Lol, you know I won't let that one go.

 

[hog slayer]

I'm not versed in the Koran, and you may be right. It might not be misinterpreted... however, I believe that [Quran] contradicts itself or doesn't make things explicitly clear when compared to other passages. In such cases, it would depend on the person to decide which path they'd take.

This is very much a reality. This is why it is so hard for an Islam Apologetics to remain cordial and reasonable. You've really pointed to the heart of the matter. The Quran isn't such a pristine book. It has many cases of contradiction and insufficient information. I will say, though, that it isn't lacking in violent instruction. In all reality, If one really objectively scrutinizes the text, it'll be tough to find it reasonable. Sure, you can buy it through faith. But you've got to turn a blind eye to certain areas of confusion and instruction.

 

[JettaKnight]

I said "mostly"...while Judaism still clings to ritual genital mutilation, at least Christians haven't burned a "witch" alive in almost two years!

Yeah... we're slacking off. There's a few on my short list.