Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?
- Thread starter Greatest I am
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
79Replies
-
2KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Greatest I am
Active Member
Last chance my friend.
What does the first commandment mean to you?
To follow some entity called God or to follow his laws orsomething else?
Regards
DL
It doesnt matter what it means to me...you are the one claiming people are not obeying the first commandment by following the law of the land.
So again show me how Christians are breaking the first commandment by following laws set by the govt.
In order for you to do this you need to show me the first commandment....then show what laws people follow that are having them violate the first commandment..............Pretty simple request...if what you say is true you can provide documentation to support such............until then you are just bashing religion as usual.
So which is it?
Can you support your claim...or are you just an intolerant religion basher.
Here we are 3 pages deep and you have provided fucking nothing....you remind of a punk on the playground....Not trying to sound harsh here,but there really is no other way to put it.
Back up your bashing or shut the fuck up.
Greatest I am
Active Member
I wanted your version and asked the question you refuse to answer to avoid B S discussions of the nomenclature, but I am pleased to offer this as you refuse to work from the high ground I offered. You may begin at the bottom of the page if you are pressed for time.
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Torah/Ten_Cmds/ten_cmds.html
Christians do not follow Adonai. Regards
DL
Last edited by a moderator:
You link essentially agrees with my post number 25...of which you did not dispute.
So fucking again show me how obeying the law is violating the first commandment....be a fucking man and show what laws people obey are making them violate the first commandment.
It is your fucking claim that people are violating the first commandment
Thus for you to make this claim..you must know the first commandment....fucking post it.
You claim that obeying the laws of the land is violating the first commandment...thus you must have some laws that people obey that have them in violation of the first commandment.....Fucking post em......Is that simple enough for you?
Three fucking pages and you keep dodging this issue.
THIS IS NOT A BLOG....IT IS A DEBATE FORUM.
You are claiming this as christian law?
Show me some documentation where Christians are pushing for this.
Thats sharia law..{Islam}
There are no Christian nations that stone women....additionally you have stated there are no nations of Christian laws.
What laws...name some statues that have people disobeying the first commandment !!!!!!!!!!!!!
What laws have Christians replaced?
You have already stated we do not have religious laws and know of no Christian nations that have ever pushed for such !!
Dude you are all over the place here...How do you intend to debate if you dont have at least an honest position?
Here you have a double standard...As you post but fail to offer proof for your wild claims !!!!
Greatest I am
Active Member
They are not. That is the claim of the O P. Learn how to communicate or you are back on ignore. RegardsDL
For your fallacious argument to even have a leg you would have to show that
Is christian law....show me where this is christian law anywhere.
Show me a group of Christians who are claiming above is "Christian law"...but lets not stop there lets go back to the beginning of the thread so you can respond to what is Christian law...as I stated there is no such thing...you keep dodging the issue however.
Last edited by a moderator:
All religions promote themselves.
That essentially constitutes a religious theocracy.
Indeed. But it's not so much a phenomena as it is more of a dictatorship controlled by religious leaders that do not allow challenge of their authority in governing matters.
I don't either, currently. But the Pope of Rome was once the leader of the Papal States.
Personally, I don't think theocracies make a good governing body. Too much of a tendency of religious leaders to become draconian as evidenced in the Medieval Inquisition ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition ) and the Spanish Inquisition ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition ) while not technically a theocracy( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Monarchs ) whose monarchs were under the control of the Catholic Pope......as that last link explains.
Neither.
It's rather obvious the Protestant Reformation initiated a schism between the governing of State and organized religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation
Kings and kingdoms of Western Europe began rejecting the authority of the Pope.
Western Civilization, mostly Christian at that period of time, was turning away from religious domination.
This was a good thing, imo.
I do realize you hate it, but the freedom to choose what to believe eventually became a right in most of Western Civilization.
BTW, the nation with the largest Muslim population does not adhere to Islamic law. It adheres to civil law and it's Muslim content is about 86%.
That nation is Indonesia.
WTF!......
After all the shit you posted, you now admit that your argument is based on an insignificant quantity?
Seriously....you've never wondered why I don't respect the logic you use?
All religions promote themselves.
That essentially constitutes a religious theocracy.
Indeed. But it's not so much a phenomena as it is more of a dictatorship controlled by religious leaders that do not allow challenge of their authority in governing matters.
I don't either, currently. But the Pope of Rome was once the leader of the Papal States.
Personally, I don't think theocracies make a good governing body. Too much of a tendency of religious leaders to become draconian as evidenced in the Medieval Inquisition ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition ) and the Spanish Inquisition ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition ) while not technically a theocracy( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Monarchs ) whose monarchs were under the control of the Catholic Pope......as that last link explains.
Neither.
It's rather obvious the Protestant Reformation initiated a schism between the governing of State and organized religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation
Kings and kingdoms of Western Europe began rejecting the authority of the Pope.
Western Civilization, mostly Christian at that period of time, was turning away from religious domination.
This was a good thing, imo.
I do realize you hate it, but the freedom to choose what to believe eventually became a right in most of Western Civilization.
BTW, the nation with the largest Muslim population does not adhere to Islamic law. It adheres to civil law and it's Muslim content is about 86%.
That nation is Indonesia.
WTF!......
After all the shit you posted, you now admit that your argument is based on an insignificant quantity?
Seriously....you've never wondered why I don't respect the logic you use?
There are many nations with a higher percentage of Islam....and yes amputations and such are still practiced in some.
If you visit them...I suggest obeying the law or suffer some serious consequences.
Morocco 32,381,000 99.9 2.0 99%[53]
Tunisia 10,349,000 99.8 0.6
Iran 74,819,000 99.6 4.6
Western Sahara 528,000 99.6 < 0.1
Mauritania 3,338,000 99.2 0.2
Yemen 24,023,000 99.0 1.5
Tajikistan 7,006,000 99.0 0.4Iraq 31,108,000 98.9 1.9
Jordan 6,397,000 98.8 0.4
Mayotte 197,000 98.8 < 0.1
Turkey 74,660,000 98.6 4.6
Somalia 9,231,000 98.6 0.6 99.9%[60][61][62][63][64]
Azerbaijan 8,795,000 98.4 0.5
Maldives 309,000 98.4 < 0.1
Niger 15,627,000 98.3 1.0
Comoros 679,000 98.3 < 0.1
Algeria 34,780,000 98.2 2.1
Palestinian territories 4,298,000 97.5 0.3 3,500,000 99.3% (Gaza Strip),[57] 75% (West Bank)[58]
Saudi Arabia 25,493,000 97.1 1.6
Djibouti 853,000 97.0 0.1
Libya 6,325,000 96.6 0.4
Uzbekistan 26,833,000 96.5 1.7
Pakistan 178,097,000 96.4 11.0
Senegal 12,333,000 95.9 0.8
Gambia 1,669,000 95.3 0.1
Egypt 80,024,000 94.7 4.9 91%[37]
Turkmenistan 4,830,000 93.3 0.3
Syria 20,895,000 92.8 1.3
Mali 12,316,000 92.4 0.8
There are many nations with a higher percentage of Islam....and yes amputations and such are still practiced in some.
If you visit them...I suggest obeying the law or suffer some serious consequences.
Morocco 32,381,000 99.9 2.0 99%[53]
Afghanistan 29,047,000 99.8 1.8
Tunisia 10,349,000 99.8 0.6
Iran 74,819,000 99.6 4.6
Western Sahara 528,000 99.6 < 0.1
Mauritania 3,338,000 99.2 0.2
Yemen 24,023,000 99.0 1.5
Tajikistan 7,006,000 99.0 0.4
Iraq 31,108,000 98.9 1.9
Jordan 6,397,000 98.8 0.4
Mayotte 197,000 98.8 < 0.1
Turkey 74,660,000 98.6 4.6
Somalia 9,231,000 98.6 0.6 99.9%[60][61][62][63][64]
Azerbaijan 8,795,000 98.4 0.5
Maldives 309,000 98.4 < 0.1
Niger 15,627,000 98.3 1.0
Comoros 679,000 98.3 < 0.1
Algeria 34,780,000 98.2 2.1
Palestinian territories 4,298,000 97.5 0.3 3,500,000 99.3% (Gaza Strip),[57] 75% (West Bank)[58]
Saudi Arabia 25,493,000 97.1 1.6
Djibouti 853,000 97.0 0.1
Libya 6,325,000 96.6 0.4
Uzbekistan 26,833,000 96.5 1.7
Pakistan 178,097,000 96.4 11.0
Senegal 12,333,000 95.9 0.8
Gambia 1,669,000 95.3 0.1
Egypt 80,024,000 94.7 4.9 91%[37]
Turkmenistan 4,830,000 93.3 0.3
Syria 20,895,000 92.8 1.3
Mali 12,316,000 92.4 0.8
Lot of linkage there, Man.
Many are not theocracies and some links that I followed derived their own legal systems.
As a group, I do see an element of violence to their societies.
How do they ( as a group ) relate to Islamic theocracies that use Sharia as their legal systems?
What's your point and how does it relate to this thread about Christianity versus Islam?
Greatest I am
Active Member
WTF!......
After all the shit you posted, you now admit that your argument is based on an insignificant quantity?
Seriously....you've never wondered why I don't respect the logic you use?
And you were doing so well. Too bad you let your personality out.
Regards
DL
I was pointing out that many Islamic nations do use sharia law.
GIA thesis is since we are not following the old testament and stoning that we are not actually Christians as we are not promoting it.
It has been explained to him we follow the new testament. ..but he conveniently ignores that fact.
Why he would want to bring back stoning is beyond me however.
You are the OP.
Did you forget that you are the one that started this thread???
You can not hide that fact....if you wanting to change your position then do so....rather than try to divert attention to the OP as if it is someone else lol.
Man.....you're only allowing the snake dude to play you by accepting certain arguments.
Christ didn't teach any of the obscenities he posted. They came from the Old Testament which was written before Christ was born.
Christ taught love and forgiveness.
The Old Testament didn't.
Christians, logically, should be following the teachings of Christ, not the contrary elements of the Old Testament, imo.
What snake dude has done is taken elements of the Old Testament that are contrary to the the teaching of Christ and presented them as such.
Snake dude could argue that Christian fundamentalists ( those that worship the Old Testament literally ) and make a debatable argument, but he has chosen to represent all those that believe in Christ and his lessons, as of one belief.
It just isn't so.
This is what makes many of his threads rampant lies.
As you pointed out, he's blogging the internet, one web site after another.
And he does get clobbered at many of them, worse than here.
Remember valis?
He was of the gnostic persuasion.
Very civil, civilized and logical.
This guy's obviously a troll.
Not the way you state it.
I take it you are referring to:
Initially, it was Christ's response to Caesar's taxes and whether Jews were obligated to pay.
This link explains the context quite well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Render_unto_Caesar
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members