Print Page | Close Window

Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...

Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Politics
Forum Name: Current Events
Forum Discription: Current Events
URL: http://www.IslamiCity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14882
Printed Date: 21 November 2017 at 11:05pm


Topic: Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...
Posted By: Pati
Subject: Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...
Date Posted: 18 June 2009 at 1:46pm
 
http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/community/heritage/s/1120922_christian_killed_for_drinking_tea_from_muslim_stall_ - Link
 

Christian killed for drinking tea from Muslim stall


June 16, 2009

A Christian man was stoned to death in Pakistan for drinking tea from a roadside stall designated for Muslims.

According to International Christian Concern (ICC) the man, Ishtiaq Masih, had ordered tea at a stall in Machharkay village, Punjab, Pakistan, after his bus stopped to allow passengers to relieve themselves.

When Ishtiaq went to pay for his tea, the owner noticed that he was wearing a necklace with a cross and grabbed him, calling for his employees to bring anything available to beat him for violating a sign posted on the stall warning non-Muslims to declare their religion before being served.

Ishtiaq had not noticed the warning sign before ordering his tea, as he ordered with a group of his fellow passengers.

Witnesses claim the owner and 14 of his employees beat Ishtiaq with stones, iron rods and clubs, and stabbed him multiple times with kitchen knives as Ishtiaq pleaded for mercy.

The other bus passengers intervened and took Ishtiaq to the Rural Health Center in the village. Ishtiaq died as a result of spinal, head, and chest injuries. The doctor who took Ishtiaq's case told ICC that Ishtiaq had excessive internal and external bleeding, a fractured skull, and brain injuries.

A correspondent from the ICC confirmed that he saw a warning posted outside the tea stall, which read: "All non-Muslims should introduce their faith prior to ordering tea. This tea stall serves Muslims only."

I don't understand anything. What is the problem of drinking tea from the same cup? Which kind of insane fanatics are killing someone because he drank a tea?
 
Really, I feel so bad with this kind of stories...
 
God bless Ishtaiaq and receive him with opened arms. Amen


-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.



Replies:
Posted By: Saladin
Date Posted: 20 June 2009 at 6:52pm
I don't understand anything. What is the problem of drinking tea from the same cup?

I got no idea :-S


-------------
'Trust everyone but not the devil in them'


Posted By: Pati
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 1:59am
Originally posted by Saladin

I don't understand anything. What is the problem of drinking tea from the same cup?

I got no idea :-S
 
A christian man went into a coffee shop in Pakistan, and he didn't see a message where they were advising that before asking for something, the clients should declare their religion.
 
After he drunk the tea, the owner saw a necklace with a cross, and called all his workers to kill him.
 
I just want to know the opinion of you as muslim, because what I know about Islam (I have to say that not much), is that the life is the most valuable thing (in the same way it is for us as Christians). So... what do you think about a muslim who kills a Christian because he was drinking tea in a "muslim" cup? What do you think about this kind of happenings?
 
In my opinion, things like this are not common, I'm sure, people who instead of doing good things are just st**id and hurting other people "in the name of Allah" (sorry for this). But the answer of the reasonable muslim community most of the time is the silence.
 
It's the same with the Catholic pastors: a big group of them have been abusing, sure, but what about the others? The pastors who reject a confortable life here in Spain or other countries, and give their life to the poor people? We have the best example in Vicente Ferrer (Rest in Peace and God take care of him): he was a religious man, and his Congregation sent him to India, just to learn more about religion. After two years, they called him back, and he rejected to do. He stayed there until last thursday, when he dead, more than 40 years!! And he gave his life to the poor Indian people, helping them in everything.
 
I think that the muslim community should give answer to this kind of st**idities coming from radicals who didn't understand the Message from the Prophet. Those radicals are the face that most of the people are having from Islam, and it's not good for anyone.
 
Or maybe I am wrong and there is something really bad in drinking tea in the same cup... I don't know.
 
 


-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


Posted By: martha
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 2:36am
As far as I know there is no prob with non-muslim drinking from a tea cup that will be used again by a muslim. Can kind of understand why some muslims dont like to serve non-muslims,especially in Pakistan.
 
But I think just some weirdo cafe owner who doesnt understand Islam very well.
 
Hope he hangs


-------------
some of us are a lot like cement:- all mixed up and permanently set


Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 3:33am
Oh boy oh boy. . .
 
So, what is this topic insinuating?
 
Anyway, here is the run-of-the-mill reponse:
 
The actions of this particular individual are not based on Islam. Personal bias perhaps. Just like 'christian' suppression of muslims in the USA or elsewhere are not 'sanctioned-by-religion' incidents.
 
When muslims can eat the meat slaughtered by non-muslims, food prepared by non-muslims, marry certain non-muslims - drinking tea at the same stall is thus also perfectly normal/allowed. Prophet Muhammad would accept dinner/lunch invitations by Jews and Christians. They would also eat food prepared by non-muslims.
  http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1141277546833 - http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1141277546833
 
"The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), as well as his companions, used to drink water and eat foods prepared by their relatives and fellow countrymen who were mostly pagans in the early times. They only abstained from foods that were considered as unlawful such as carrion, foods immolated to idols, intoxicants, et cetera. When the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ventured out of Arabia, they never refrained from eating foods prepared by the locals."
 

"Made lawful for you this day are At-Tayyibat (all kinds of lawful foods, which Allah has made lawful. The food (slaughter cattle etc.) of the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful to you and yours is lawful to them. (Lawful to you in marriage) are chaste women from the believers and chaste women from those who were given the scripture (Jews & Christians) before your time."  5:5 - Qur'an

 
 
So thats the bit about Islam.
 
Regarding Pakistan . . . I have never seen signs posted on resturaunts asking people to declare thier religion - even in villages. Our house-help in Pakistan was a Christian lady, and she cooked for us. We also had Christian students and teachers at our school who ate at the same cafeteria.
 
You cannot even stop non-muslims from entering your Mosques etc. This is just a chai-stall. . . hope that helps.
 
 


-------------
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."


Posted By: abuayisha
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 7:04am

Fair and unbiased reporting from “International Christian Concern (ICC)”


June 16, 2009

A Christian man was stoned to death in Pakistan for drinking tea from a roadside stall designated for Muslims.

According to International Christian Concern (ICC) the man, …….

 

A correspondent from the ICC confirmed that he saw a warning posted outside the tea stall, which read: "All non-Muslims should introduce their faith prior to ordering tea. This tea stall serves Muslims only."……..



Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 12:38pm
I think that the muslim community should give answer to this kind of st**idities coming from radicals who didn't understand the Message from the Prophet. Those radicals are the face that most of the people are having from Islam, and it's not good for anyone.

Well 1st not sure anyone cna answer for another person's actions.. like in any crime.. heck, can tell you stories as a woman that makes one's hair stand up on end.. I don't think men need to answer for that.

having been to Pakistan.. its one nutty person in a sea of millions...

i would also say things are more tense there. .then they used to be. The US govt foreign policy, Christian missionaries and other agenda people are making people suspicious of motives. The first two times I was there no one asked me my religion per say. The last time "are you  a Christian missionary came out."

Ehen there are outside forces destabilizing your country, well people are less trustworthy . Many Pakistanis have seen what happened to the Afghanis and Iraqis.. and they are npt st**id.

IF the man did have the sign.. its rather humerous as there are so few nonMuslims its quite a bit of a joke. 

Funnily the first time I went I was not a Muslim.. and it was around Christmas and people offered to get me a Christmas cake.. .lol (Not that I wanted it, nut they offered.)


And its like Women in the US who are spit on, harassed, assaulted for wearing hijab. The idiots who do this do not represent all nonMuslims.

Type-casting groups is fairly useless


-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 12:51pm
Originally posted by Hayfa



Funnily the first time I went I was not a Muslim.. and it was around Christmas and people offered to get me a Christmas cake.. .lol (Not that I wanted it, nut they offered.)

 
Hehehe. Thats funny Big%20smile
 
 


-------------
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."


Posted By: believer
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 1:30pm
This makes me think that the number of Muslims in the world is not as large as was thought.
 
There are way too many not practising!!


-------------
John 3
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


Posted By: Saladin
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 1:50pm
I tend to think so too. Btw what about the christian count?


-------------
'Trust everyone but not the devil in them'


Posted By: Pati
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 1:59pm
Originally posted by abuayisha

A correspondent from the ICC confirmed that he saw a warning posted outside the tea stall, which read: "All non-Muslims should introduce their faith prior to ordering tea. This tea stall serves Muslims only."……..

 
Ohh!! So, if he saw the warning, is it his fault? Is it a reason to kill someone?
 
And I repeat again, where is the problem of drinking tea in the same cup? I cannot understand it!!


-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 2:12pm
Originally posted by Saladin

I tend to think so too. Btw what about the christian count?
 
Come on Bro Saladin!!! Why do you talk of Christians? dont you know things like that only apply to us Muslims?
 
Wink


-------------
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."


Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 2:15pm
Originally posted by Pati

 
And I repeat again, where is the problem of drinking tea in the same cup? I cannot understand it!!
 
Already explained earlier.
 
'I cannot understand it'
 
Niether does anybody here. Perhaps one should ask the perpetrator, obviously ppl here dont feel the same way, so cannot help you understand a feeling they are not aware of - or condone.


-------------
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."


Posted By: Pati
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 3:44pm
Originally posted by Chrysalis

Originally posted by Saladin

I tend to think so too. Btw what about the christian count?

 
Come on Bro Saladin!!! Why do you talk of Christians? dont you know things like that only apply to us Muslims?
 
Wink
 
 
If you want to talk about any Christian who killed a muslim for drinking tea in a Christian cup, I have no problem to conden it, be sure.
 
In the same way, as Catholic, I denounce the abuses to the children from some pastors, as well as other acts which are quite away from the real meaning of my religion as Jesus explained to us.
 
I just brought here this case because I was really shocked when I read it, but in any place I said that this is my idea of Islam, opposite.
 


-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 5:21pm
Pati,
 
This is not a part of Islam. To ask us to explain why a person would bahave in such a way is like asking you to explain why the KKK lynched people or why so many people go on murderous shooting sprees.
 
Since it is not a part of our religion nor a part of our mentality regarding non-Muslims we can't possibly speak to his motives or reasoning.
 
Maybe it had nothing to do with drinking from the same cup. Who knows?
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 7:30pm
This type of behavior is more reminiscent of the Jahiliyah times, the times of ignorance before Islam.  Those people should be arrested and punished.


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 21 June 2009 at 10:35pm
Pati:
Others have touched on some aspects of this incident and I concur with islamispeace...Based on the details in the news which are not much all I can assume and say hapless fella may have belonged to the untouchable dark caste... All I can tell you is that there are millions of these poor stuck in low end of work spectrum i.e., menial and dirty particularly where there no indoor plumbing like the rural areas ...This may not be the case in urban locales...  No one other than their own can eat and drink together...It is just sad but true reality of the third world a former British colony and currently American neo colony that has great disparity in the rights of haves and haves not in economics, living standards and educational oppotunities...
To make their life more difficult the churches with colonial support converted some of them to Christianity...with current American onslaught of the AfPak area who BTW represent Xtian crusade put them in a double jeopardy...Poor guy may be forgot that what the country is going through at the moment! American drones are firing missiles and the puppet government is bombing the Islamist's in the most important areas of the country indiscriminately; turning millions into refugees... it was bound to create some resentment against the dark Xtians!  Remember Americans' reaction after 911...a Sikh got killed cuz he was wearing a turbin...
I don't want to post any link to "You Tube" video cuz some of them are so disgusting that will ruin appetite for the day...You can punch untouchables in there find some yourself...unless you insist!


-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: ops155
Date Posted: 22 June 2009 at 10:45am
Patty, please answer for why these guys are doing this, you expect someone to explain someone else's actions so you should do the same. Please give details, thanks!!!
 
 
http://www.alternet.org/rights/76686/ - http://www.alternet.org/rights/76686/
 


Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 22 June 2009 at 3:37pm
Pati,
its a sad incident if it really had happened. Sign Reader's explaination of the complexity of the issue seems fair and correct. If this story is correct, it may not be taken in religious terms. Here is how:
Think of it as 50's southern United States where a black goes in a restaurant only to serve whites, people get angry and take on the guy. Its not justified at all under any circumstances but that's what probably happened. This guy was propbably from the group that cleans pick up poop from people's toilets, ones without sewer system, they are seen as touching filth and a lot of people don't want to be near them or share their food or cups. Unfortunetly, he happened to be a Christian (if the story is true).
I can tell you that I use to share my food and eat with my friend and a neighbor family, both Christians without any bad feeling. And I personally never witnessed anything of this nature against Christians or Hindus where I lived decades ago.
And such actions are condemned in Islam. And those who did such act (if its true) were not acting according to their belief rather their arrogance and hate, both forbidden in Islam.
 
Hasan 


-------------
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"


Posted By: Pati
Date Posted: 23 June 2009 at 12:16pm
Hi,
 
Thanks you all for your explanations: Chrysalis, Shasta'sAunt, islamispeace (I like your nickname Wink), Sign*Reader and Honeto.
 
I understand that this man doesn't represent Islam, sure, but also I don't represent the rest of the people, and most of other people (you know it better than me) are still looking at muslims in  distrustfully way. They say that the value of the bad news is hundred times the value of a good one, and in the current times, the bad news are more followed than the goods.
 
Really, I don't want you to think that I brought this story here to hurt you as muslims, just to show you a fact: I received this by mail, from 3 different people who don't know each other (even, everyone is from different region of Spain!!)...
 
I am sorry, and I know that it's not fair for a whole community to be shown only after a bad action of one of them... but unfortunately, that happens. I know lot of muslims, I went on holidays to a muslim country and it was great, I am studying arabic free in a Mosque (at the same time I am learning a little bit of Islam)... I know the good part of Islam and of muslims, but you have to get relation with other people, and if someone is rejecting you, just smile because most probably he is a short minded person!!
 
 
 
Originally posted by ops155

Patty, please answer for why these guys are doing this, you expect someone to explain someone else's actions so you should do the same. Please give details, thanks!!!
 
 
http://www.alternet.org/rights/76686/ - http://www.alternet.org/rights/76686/
 
 
Hi ops155,
 
The answer is so simple: they are not true christians, if their aim is to kill someone. And if they just think about it, they will receive the repulse from the Church in first place, including the Christians, in the same way that the christians are repulsing every kind of abuses or killing.
 
But be sure, if this association is just hurting any muslim, our voice against them will be very clear. Actually, if they didn't do it before, I'm sure it's because no one knows them (sorry if I am wrong, but I have no idea about who they are).
 
A true christian is against every kind of violence, and if the only reason which generates this violence is a different religion, we will shout loudly against them.
 
Do you think it's enough explanation? If you need more details, just ask me!!


-------------
No God wants the killing, but the peace.
The weapons are carried by people, not by religions.


Posted By: Angel
Date Posted: 23 June 2009 at 8:08pm

To those who think muslims can explain this incident: It is silly to expect muslims to explain this, obviously this is one man, one out of billion plus, this is not a reflection of the muslim population world wide or Pakistan (not that I have been to pakistan). If the customer saw the sign perhaps he should have obeyed it or just asked why? NOT that I am saying it is his fault for dying but if someone has a sign about something then maybe do what it says. Man I know quite well when people don't read or just ignore signs, I get this at work, i think its just human nature but if there is a sign obviously there is a reason. If this shop owner doesn't want non muslims I think it is his choice (even if it is discrimination from others perspective).

Of course I don't agree with the killing!!! maybe the ower should have charged for the tea double or triple.


-------------
~ Our feet are earthbound, but our hearts and our minds have wings ~


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 25 June 2009 at 4:24am
This atrocity is sadly so typical of the "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan, a country, incidentally, where all signs are of very limited value, as so few people can read..... 
 
http://www.aina.org/news/20090612162300.htm - http://www.aina.org/news/20090612162300.htm
 
The above link claims that the perpetrator of this evil, Ali the tea-shop owner, had not even been arrested, but that Muhammad Iftikhar Bajwa, police chief at Pindi Bhatian Saddar police station, stated that he could not take the sign down........
 
Go here, to the Asian News, to see what witnesses claimed happened, and for the extent of our dear brother Ishtiaq's injuries which lead to his death -
http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/community/heritage/s/1120922_christian_killed_for_drinking_tea_from_muslim_stall - http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/community/heritage/s/1120922_christian_killed_for_drinking_tea_from_muslim_stall _ 
 
 
If anyone has information as to how "investigations" into this evil are progressing, please convey them to us.  (Who knows, perhaps they are claiming there is a shortage of witnesses, or some other pathetic excuse Confused)  It is only to be hoped and prayed that believing Christian people will not respond in kind to the vile attitudes and actions of these evil people


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 25 June 2009 at 2:46pm
"This atrocity is sadly so typical of the "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan, a country, incidentally, where all signs are of very limited value, as so few people can read....." 
 
I know, we have this same problem in the United States. Signs everywhere, but no-one reads them. Like when people ignore the "No Weapons" signs and go into public places, schools, or churches heavily armed and massacre anyone unfortunate enough to be within gunshot range.
 
You know, like the recent shooting at the Holocaust Museum. Or the shooting of Dr. George Tiller in church by that anti-abortion Christian man who claims more killings will occur.
 
Here good Christians protest on behalf of the shooter at the doctor's funeral.  Nice pic, too bad it wouldn't copy over.
 
  http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//090620/480/bb83834fbd66461cbc32468b7ecc28c4/ - http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//090620/480/bb83834fbd66461cbc32468b7ecc28c4/
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/brand/photos//SIG=10qgqrhua;_ylt=Ar_IcEt0WvbHvDjqP_hZNF9saMYA/*http://www.apimages.com/">AP
Fri Jun 19, 11:24 PM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Abortion-doctor-shot-death-Jennifer-DSouza-left-and-Haylee-Burke-second-left-both-Whichita/ss/events/us/053109georgetiller/im:/090620/480/ef0fbc10940b432488a2eb76f2e492ea/;_ylt=AhcNQq3lEAtfd4yUGO3TuYFsaMYA - Previous 9 of 119 http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Abortion-doctor-shot-death-Sedgwick-County-Jail/ss/events/us/053109georgetiller/im:/090616/480/5f636399dd2440fbb8521ba00db2452a/;_ylt=ApeHQKROwXPBYQ3tXEfL8F5saMYA - Next

FILE - In this Saturday June 6, 2009 file photo, Protesters from Rev. Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church demonstrate during funeral services for Dr. George Tiller at College Hill United Methodist Church in Wichita, Kan. Tiller, 67, a late-term abortion provider, was shot in the head Sunday as he handed out programs while ushering at Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita. Scott Roeder, a 51-year-old abortion opponent, was arrested a few hours later just outside Kansas City. Abortion providers say that threats of more slayings from the man accused Tiller's shooting, proves the existence of a 'violent, terrorist movement' coalescing around the issue.



-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 26 June 2009 at 2:16am
ooops, you missed the whole point again, Auntie
 
Do you have signs in the US saying you have to declare your religion in a tea shop, so they can give you a seperate cup, because you are somehow unclean? 
 
Even if you did, would the penalty imposed by the owner on the person ignoring/not seeing the sign be death? 
 
Would the family of the dead man then have to go and register a case with the police?  Or would the police be on the scene almost instantly?
 
Would the authorities say they were not able to remove the evil sign?
 
Would the perpetrators still be at large, if the police knew where they were?


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 26 June 2009 at 9:19am
Oh, I get the point. I'm a Muslim, I've been told "we don't want you here, go back where you came from" which in my case happens to be Kentucky.
 
The United States, setting the moral standard? Showing those inferior "evil" people how it should be done?
 
Signs in the United States....
 
"Baptist preacher defends church's anti-Islam sign


By JEFF BRUMLEY
The Times-Union,


The sign may be controversial, but the Rev. Gene A. Youngblood said it is researched and speaks the truth.

"Islam is evil and believes in murder," reads the sign at the entrance of First Conservative Baptist Church and the Conservative Theological Seminary on St. Augustine Road in Jacksonville. "Jesus teaches peace."

Church's Sign Against Islam Sparks Controversy

Good%20News%20Independent%20Baptist%20Church%20sign%202

Posted: May 11, 2007

Spring Hope, N.C. — Words like "bomb" and "die" draw attention to the small sign in front of Good News Independent Baptist Church.

Rev. Gary Murrell put up the sign, which on one side claims the message of Islam is "submit, convert or die."

The other side reads: "When is the last time you heard of a Jew or Christian with a bomb strapped to their body?"

Pastor defends anti-Islam message on church sign

http://www.churchcentral.com/contact_us.php - by:

AVON, Ind. — The Rev. Marc Monte defended his decision to place his Sept. 7 sermon topic, "Islam: America’s Number One Enemy," on his church sign, saying he meant to provide needed information, not a message of hate.The Indianapolis Star reported that Monte, pastor of Faith Baptist Church, said the message contained information the public does not get from the media and many religious leaders.

"I want to stir up interest, not alarm, but Islam is a false religion, dangerous and hate-promoting," said Monte.

"If I were a pastor who read KKK literature or Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf,’ I would hope the members of my church would head to other churches. It is awful stuff. I repudiate it, and I put Islam in the same camp."

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/11266/church-sign-sparks-debate - Church sign sparks debate
 
FOREST CITY — A sign in front of a Baptist church on one of the most traveled highways in the county stirred controversy over http://www.apologeticsindex.org/r04.html - religious tolerance and first-amendment rights this weekend.

A sign in front of Danieltown Baptist Church, located at 2361 U.S. 221 south reads “The Koran needs to be flushed,” and the Rev. Creighton Lovelace, pastor of the church, is not apologizing for the display.

“I believe that it is a statement supporting the word of God and that it (the Bible) is above all and that any other religious book that does not teach Christ as savior and lord as the 66 books of the Bible teaches it, is wrong,” said Lovelace. “I knew that whenever we decided to put that sign up that there would be people who wouldn’t agree with it, and there would be some that would, and so we just have to stand up for what’s right.”

Church sign about Islam offends Muslims

By Michelle Malkin  •  May 12, 2007 11:20 AM

Several North Carolina readers send word of http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1407899/ - this WRAL report about a church in Spring Hope that is rankling local Muslims. The church’s sign is causing controversy:

church002.jpg

Well, as Robert Spencer http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014860.php - has noted , Muhammad did in fact command Muslims to subjugate, convert, or kill non-Muslims (see, e.g., http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4294 - Sahih Muslim 4294 ). And salvation in Jesus Christ is certainly not the message of Islam."

Mandarin church sign upsets Muslims


By Steve Patterson
Times-Union staff writer,


A Mandarin church has alarmed Muslims by posting a roadside message that said Islam's founder endorsed murder in the Quran.

The Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations yesterday asked members of the clergy to speak against the message at the First Conservative Baptist Church, 12021 St. Augustine Road.

A sign there reads: "Jesus Forbade Murder Matthew 26-52 Muhammad Approved Murder Surah 8-65." A surah is a chapter in the Quran, Islam's scripture, which Muslims believe to be God's word in Arabic.

Is the Maranatha Chapel of Harlan, IN violating the tax code because they are certainly liars

By http://freethoughtfortwayne.org/author/skeptigator/ - Skeptigator October 28, 2008  
http://freethoughtfortwayne.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/6a00d834516dc069e2010535c410ac970c1.jpg">
 
 
 
So many "evil" signs put up by so many good Christians accross the good old United States.....

There are still high schools in this country that have separate proms, one for the white kids and one for the black kids. A throw back to 30 years ago and the "Whites Only" signs.
 
"About now, high-school seniors everywhere slip into a glorious sort of limbo. Waiting out the final weeks of the school year, they begin rightfully to revel in the shared thrill of moving on. It is no different in south-central Georgia’s Montgomery County, made up of a few small towns set between fields of wire grass and sweet onion. The music is turned up. Homework languishes. The future looms large. But for the 54 students in the class of 2009 at Montgomery County High School, so, too, does the past. On May 1 — a balmy Friday evening — the white students held their senior prom. And the following night — a balmy Saturday — the black students had theirs.
 
Racially segregated proms have been held in Montgomery County — where about two-thirds of the population is white — almost every year since its schools were integrated in 1971. Such proms are, by many accounts, longstanding traditions in towns across the rural South, though in recent years a number of communities have successfully pushed for change. When the actor http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/f/morgan_freeman/index.html?inline=nyt-per - Morgan Freeman offered to pay for last year’s first-of-its-kind integrated prom at Charleston High School in Mississippi, his home state, the idea was quickly embraced by students — and rejected by a group of white parents, who held a competing “private” prom. (The effort is the subject of a documentary, “Prom Night in Mississippi,” which will be shown on HBO in July.) The senior proms held by Montgomery County High School students — referred to by many students as “the black-folks prom” and “the white-folks prom” — are organized outside school through student committees with the help of parents. All students are welcome at the black prom, though generally few if any white students show up. The white prom, students say, remains governed by a largely unspoken set of rules about who may come. Black members of the student council say they have asked school administrators about holding a single school-sponsored prom, but that, along with efforts to collaborate with white prom planners, has failed. According to Timothy Wiggs, the outgoing student council president and one of 21 black students graduating this year, “We just never get anywhere with it.” Principal Luke Smith says the school has no plans to sponsor a prom, noting that when it did so in 1995, attendance was poor.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/magazine/24prom-t.html?_r=1 - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/magazine/24prom-t.html?_r=1
 
As for disparity in the way criminal cases are handled, let's see. Have you ever heard of Shantay Latrice Wheeler? Nikki McPhatter? Ali Gilmore?
 
Ali Gilmore: pregnant, missing since Febuary 3, 2006, African American
 
Shantay Latrice Wheeler: pregnant, missing April 2001, found 5 months later murdered, African American
 
Nikki McPhatter: missing May 4, 2009, found shot, stuffed into a car trunk and set on fire by her boyfriend in June, African American
 
No? But I'm sure you know who Laci Peterson and Natalee Holloway are.
 
Does the U.S. let perpetrators of crimes remain at large if they know where they are? Sure, it happens all of the time. Especially if you happen to be white and rich. In fact, my tax dollars are bailing out a bunch of criminal companies as I write this. Our ex-president and ex-vice-president are both guilty of war crimes and not only are they roaming about freely, they are being guarded on my dollar.
 
AS for the police responding to a crime scene instantly, well, that depends on where you live and who you are. Ask anyone who lives in a poor, racially mixed neighborhood.  An example: Dallas, TX:
 
"The murder rate in southern Dallas is twice as high as in the rest of the city. Assaults are nearly twice as likely in the south as in the north. Business or home burglaries are one and a half times higher in the south than in the north.

Police response times are slow citywide by national standards – and they're worst in the highest-crime areas. And the officers patrolling those neighborhoods are the department's least-experienced, The News' analysis found.

One harsh judgment: "We've abandoned the people and the neighborhoods."

http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/spe/2004/dallas/crime2.html - http://www.dallasnews.com/s/dws/spe/2004/dallas/crime2.html
 
Apparently we haven't come too far in our enlightenment as a people or a country. Perhaps we should work on changing ourselves before passing moral judgement on everyone else.
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 26 June 2009 at 4:39pm
But the "reverends" Youngblood, Murrell, Monte and Lovelace have a perfect right to give voice to their opposition to Islam.  Did their signs display a "death's head" directed at muslims?  Was any threat aimed at muslims?  In fact, one of the signs makes clear that "Jesus preaches peace".  Which does not, of course, mean that you can't say your piece.  Interesting that the "Council on American-Islamic Relations" is flexing its muscles on the issue, daring to tell christian preachers what to preach.  Perhaps they think that "peace" means you can't say your piece.  Especially if it's against Islam.
 
As for the sign at Maranatha chapel of Harlan, it does not say Obama is a muslim, but even if that is what they mean, there are plenty of muslims who think the same.  Let's say a presidential candidate actually was a muslim.  There would be nothing wrong, indeed everything right in my view, about opposing that person, given the political/legal ideology which Islam is, quite irrespective of which political party he belonged to.  I would not vote for him/her, but would oppose him/her, as it is my perfect right to do.  But once again, there was nothing threatening in the sign, even if it was wrong.
 
As for the situation in South Dallas, sadly it may be the same in all poor urban areas, racially mixed or not.
 
As for the "prom" situation, I'm really not sure what you expect the police to do about that....


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 26 June 2009 at 8:44pm
I would assume that a merchant in Pakistan has just as much right to put up a sign of a religiously intolerant nature as the good Christians in this country do.
 
I see you totally ignored the signs that the good Christians rallying behind the murderer of Dr. Tiller were carrying. "God sent the killer".  A sort of "hitman" for Jesus, so to speak.
 
You know, you've got a lot of nerve condemning any other religion when members of your religion are some of the biggest hypocrites on the face of the earth.
"Do as I preach, not as I do" is the mantra of Christianity at this time.  Jesus is peace but let's kill, murder and start wars.
Love your neighbor, unless they are black, poor or non-Christian. I guess the Christian concept of love and peace only go so far.
Abortion is murder but murdering abortion doctors or sending 18 year olds of to die for a lie is not.
Homosexuality is destroying the moral fiber of this country but I'll have homosexual sex on the side. And speaking of sex on the side, yet another conservative, right wing, Christian admits to an affair this week. Not only an affair, but using tax dollars to conduct the affair.  So, not only is he a liar and an adulterer, he's a thief stealing hard earned money from hard working Americans. Will he be prosecuted, I'm sure the authorities know his whereabouts. And just a week after another religious conservative right-winger admitted to an affair: John Ensign. I suppose apologising to "people of faith" as Sanford has done makes it okey dokey. Never mind that he voted to impeach Bill Clinton for his "affair". And here are Ensign's own words:

"The Nevada Republican once called on President Bill Clinton to resign, declaring "the truth must come out." In October 2007, he was sharply critical of former Sen. Larry Craig, of Idaho, calling the Republican's arrest in an airport bathroom sex sting "embarrassing for the Senate."

 Does the word HYPOCRITE mean anything?
 
BTW: I don't expect the police to do anything about the prom. I would expect all of the Jesus loving white folks to do something about it. After all, they are the ones who insist that their children are too good to attend prom with children of color. I'm sure they feel quite comforted as they gaze into the blue-eyed, blond-haired pictures of Jesus that adorn their walls that they "doing unto others" like a good Christian should.
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 1:58am
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

I would assume that a merchant in Pakistan has just as much right to put up a sign of a religiously intolerant nature as the good Christians in this country do.
 
I see you totally ignored the signs that the good Christians rallying behind the murderer of Dr. Tiller were carrying. "God sent the killer".  A sort of "hitman" for Jesus, so to speak.
 
You know, you've got a lot of nerve condemning any other religion when members of your religion are some of the biggest hypocrites on the face of the earth.
"Do as I preach, not as I do" is the mantra of Christianity at this time.  Jesus is peace but let's kill, murder and start wars.
Love your neighbor, unless they are black, poor or non-Christian. I guess the Christian concept of love and peace only go so far.
Abortion is murder but murdering abortion doctors or sending 18 year olds of to die for a lie is not.
Homosexuality is destroying the moral fiber of this country but I'll have homosexual sex on the side. And speaking of sex on the side, yet another conservative, right wing, Christian admits to an affair this week. Not only an affair, but using tax dollars to conduct the affair.  So, not only is he a liar and an adulterer, he's a thief stealing hard earned money from hard working Americans. Will he be prosecuted, I'm sure the authorities know his whereabouts. And just a week after another religious conservative right-winger admitted to an affair: John Ensign. I suppose apologising to "people of faith" as Sanford has done makes it okey dokey. Never mind that he voted to impeach Bill Clinton for his "affair". And here are Ensign's own words:

"The Nevada Republican once called on President Bill Clinton to resign, declaring "the truth must come out." In October 2007, he was sharply critical of former Sen. Larry Craig, of Idaho, calling the Republican's arrest in an airport bathroom sex sting "embarrassing for the Senate."

 Does the word HYPOCRITE mean anything?
 
BTW: I don't expect the police to do anything about the prom. I would expect all of the Jesus loving white folks to do something about it. After all, they are the ones who insist that their children are too good to attend prom with children of color. I'm sure they feel quite comforted as they gaze into the blue-eyed, blond-haired pictures of Jesus that adorn their walls that they "doing unto others" like a good Christian should.
 
 
Once again, you've completely missed the point.  I have not, so far, been "condemning any other religion", as you claim, in this thread.  Did I say Islam was to blame for the tea-shop atrocity?  Why do you think I put speech marks round the word Islamic when referring to Pakistan?  Believe me, if I find any scrap of evidence in Islam which supports the actions of these murderers, I will let you know about it.
 
Lashing out at christian hypocrites is very good, that's what should happen to them, but I did not see any church signs advocating "killing, murdering and starting wars", whereas the death's head on the tea-shop sign was clear, and they carried out their threat.
 
I am not supporting the murder of this murderer Tiller.  Unlike muslims, christians have no licence to kill for any reason


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: believer
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 6:02am
Of course the sign is tasteless, but it is a freedom of speech issue.
 
Is this preacher telling people to go out and kill others that do not believe that jesus die for them?  If he did he would be removed from his position.
 
Your quran, islam and clerics condone and preach killing of non-muslims.
 
Jesus does not.  The Gospel does not.
 
That is the separation of the 2 religions. 
 
How can anyone follow a religion that condones judging and killing someone when you yourself are as sinful as the next?


-------------
John 3
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


Posted By: believer
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 6:05am
Islam offends me!!  Denying the gift/sacrifice of GOD.
 
 


-------------
John 3
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 10:38am
"Your quran, islam and clerics condone and preach killing of non-muslims."

Believer,

Some clerics don't represent Islam and Qur'an. You must stop blaming Islam and Qur'an for the unislamic behaviour of some people. Please do remember that you have been warned before for spreading lies here.

Everyone,

Please comply with the guidelines.

Peace



-------------
Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?
Qur'an 55:13


Posted By: Saladin
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 12:32pm
[QUOTE=believer] Islam offends me!!                                                                

Not surprising the good offends you belier.

-------------
'Trust everyone but not the devil in them'


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 27 June 2009 at 4:33pm
"Once again, you've completely missed the point.  I have not, so far, been "condemning any other religion", as you claim, in this thread.  Did I say Islam was to blame for the tea-shop atrocity?  Why do you think I put speech marks round the word Islamic when referring to Pakistan?  Believe me, if I find any scrap of evidence in Islam which supports the actions of these murderers, I will let you know about it."
 
"This atrocity is sadly so typical of the "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan, a country, incidentally, where all signs are of very limited value, as so few people can read....."
 
Actually Doo-bop, if you were not wanting to infer that Islam was somehow involved in this matter you would not have inserted "Islamic" in quotation marks or otherwise.
 
Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
The United States is blood guilty for those who have died in Iraq.
 
The "Christian" United States is blood guilty for those who have died in Iraq.
 
Many bigoted Americans don't want same sex marriage legalised.
 
Many bigoted "Christian" Americans don't want same sex mariage legalised.
 
See the difference?
 
I don't think I missed the point at all, and neither has anyone else reading this thread.
 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 28 June 2009 at 2:02am
Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the Christian Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
See the difference?Ermm


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: ZEA J
Date Posted: 28 June 2009 at 2:33am
Originally posted by believer

Of course the sign is tasteless, but it is a freedom of speech issue.
 
Is this preacher telling people to go out and kill others that do not believe that jesus die for them?  If he did he would be removed from his position.
 
Your quran, islam and clerics condone and preach killing of non-muslims.
 
Jesus does not.  The Gospel does not.
 
That is the separation of the 2 religions. 
 
How can anyone follow a religion that condones judging and killing someone when you yourself are as sinful as the next?
I think the big question here is how can anyone worship a god who killed his only son to 'save' mankind?


-------------
"You will never attain piety and righteousness,(and eventually paradise)until you
spend of that which you love."(Al-Imran:92)


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 28 June 2009 at 12:30pm
Once again, Believer interjects himself with two absurd statements and then disappears!  Get a life. 

How can anyone follow a religion that condones judging and killing someone when you yourself are as sinful as the next?

Perhaps because they know that your caricature is incorrect and based on your own flawed and biased Christian opinion.  Better questions to ask are:

How can anyone believe that Jesus loves everyone, when it was he who ordered Moses, Joshua and Saul to utterly annihilate several nations, not sparing any living thing? 

How can anyone believe that Jesus loves everyone when on the Day of Judgment, he will throw all who rejected him into Hell?  What happened to the love? 




-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 28 June 2009 at 6:05pm
Originally posted by Doo-bop

Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the Christian Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
See the difference?Ermm
 
 
Yes I believe I do. In the first statement the question of religion does not occur at all. By inserting a religious affiliation, in quotation marks or not, you are inferring that the religion mentioned is somehow associated with the actions of the perpetrators.
 
"Christian" Republican: you may be inferring doubt as to their religious affiliation, but you have still brought up their religion, therefore inferring guilt by association.
 
 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Chrysalis
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 2:14am
Originally posted by believer

Islam offends me!!  Denying the gift/sacrifice of GOD.


You should be offended by Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism etc etc BEFORE you even think of being offended by Islam. Because the above mentioned religions don't even believe in Jesus period. They don't even consider him a Prophet - let alone 'God's son' nauzubillah. Judaism throws Mary and Jesus in a bad light!

If anything, you should be appreciative of Islam, for being the ONLY religion outside of Christianity who actually BELIEVE in Jesus Christ, as a Prophet of God, and that Muslims are religiously bound to respect, love and honour him. . . Unfortunately, many Christians seem to forget this fact now and then. We just dont take it to a cult/fanatic status by calling him Divine or God's offspring worthy of worship. Too bad if that 'offends' you . . . .







-------------
"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 4:55am
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Doo-bop

Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the Christian Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
See the difference?Ermm
 
 
Yes I believe I do. In the first statement the question of religion does not occur at all. By inserting a religious affiliation, in quotation marks or not, you are inferring that the religion mentioned is somehow associated with the actions of the perpetrators.
 
"Christian" Republican: you may be inferring doubt as to their religious affiliation, but you have still brought up their religion, therefore inferring guilt by association.
 
 
 
 
 
No, you are doing the inferring.  The name of the country is The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and the fact that, according to reports at least, that noone has even been arrested for this atrocity, that the sign is still in place, would indicate that the speech marks I inserted were most appropriate.
 
Unless of course we can establish a direct link between Islam and the evil committed


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Gibbs
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 2:43pm
Originally posted by believer

"Islam offends me!!  Denying the gift/sacrifice of GOD."
 
I believe Chrysalis put this lightly. For me, as an observer its interesting that you having been here longer than I is offended by Islam, yet you continue to be here. Why? Why stay at a website continually being offended yet stay here? To me in your many posts you are devoid of logic and reasoning and I believe you are here to argue not continue the message of Christianity.


Posted By: Angel
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 8:34pm
Originally posted by believer

Islam offends me!!  Denying the gift/sacrifice of GOD.
 
 
 
 
 
If that is the case, then leave the boards! Tongue
 
 


-------------
~ Our feet are earthbound, but our hearts and our minds have wings ~


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 8:57pm
Originally posted by believer

Islam offends me!!  Denying the gift/sacrifice of GOD.
 
 
3:69 (Y. Ali) It is the wish of a section of the People of the Book to lead you astray. But they shall lead astray (Not you), but themselves, and they do not perceive!

-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 29 June 2009 at 9:37pm
Originally posted by Doo-bop

 
I am not supporting the murder of this murderer Tiller.  Unlike muslims, christians have no licence to kill for any reason!

Unless it is on the scales of genocide or Inquisition or Crusade based on lies and deceptions e.g., WMDs or colonial land grabs cuz these are great and noble causes blessed with holy water made by child molesting priesthoodLOL 
Btw may be the murders committed in the http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Christian dominated lands that lead the world are for practice and fun only... you might like to knowWink
So much debate for uno death while the US Christians operated drones are killing Pakiland families for fun of it on daily basis and no mention is being made anywhere about it cuz the Christian Zionist control over media can cover it up...


-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 4:30am
Originally posted by Sign*Reader

Originally posted by Doo-bop

 
I am not supporting the murder of this murderer Tiller.  Unlike muslims, christians have no licence to kill for any reason!

Unless it is on the scales of genocide or Inquisition or Crusade based on lies and deceptions e.g., WMDs or colonial land grabs cuz these are great and noble causes blessed with holy water made by child molesting priesthoodLOL 
Btw may be the murders committed in the http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Christian dominated lands that lead the world are for practice and fun only... you might like to knowWink
So much debate for uno death while the US Christians operated drones are killing Pakiland families for fun of it on daily basis and no mention is being made anywhere about it cuz the Christian Zionist control over media can cover it up...
 
Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Sign*Reader
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 10:14am
Originally posted by Doo-bop

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

Originally posted by Doo-bop

 
I am not supporting the murder of this murderer Tiller.  Unlike muslims, christians have no licence to kill for any reason!

Unless it is on the scales of genocide or Inquisition or Crusade based on lies and deceptions e.g., WMDs or colonial land grabs cuz these are great and noble causes blessed with holy water made by child molesting priesthoodLOL 
Btw may be the murders committed in the http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Christian dominated lands that lead the world are for practice and fun only... you might like to knowWink
So much debate for uno death while the US Christians operated drones are killing Pakiland families for fun of it on daily basis and no mention is being made anywhere about it cuz the Christian Zionist control over media can cover it up...
 
Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill

A tree is known by it's fruit!
The time to fool is gone...
Under what logic can you even talk about the command when you know your religion is a lawless religion... commands are part of a faith that has rules and commandments! Christianity is a man(Paul) made religion against the world of rules! When you and Jews will find agreement about what you then we will consider discussing this issue further...
2:113 (Y. Ali) The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon." Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but Allah will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.

Finally the Jews got the control of Christian world after suffering all the atrocities at the Christians hands through their financial strategy...Now suddenly the Ten Commandments are legal at city halls when they were challenges by the atheists...What gives? And don't tell me that the so Christians can really hold them sacred much less the Jews!
 


-------------
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 8:57pm
Originally posted by Doo-bop

Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Doo-bop

Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the Christian Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
See the difference?Ermm
 
 
Yes I believe I do. In the first statement the question of religion does not occur at all. By inserting a religious affiliation, in quotation marks or not, you are inferring that the religion mentioned is somehow associated with the actions of the perpetrators.
 
"Christian" Republican: you may be inferring doubt as to their religious affiliation, but you have still brought up their religion, therefore inferring guilt by association.
 
 
 
 
 
No, you are doing the inferring.  The name of the country is The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and the fact that, according to reports at least, that noone has even been arrested for this atrocity, that the sign is still in place, would indicate that the speech marks I inserted were most appropriate.
 
Unless of course we can establish a direct link between Islam and the evil committed
 
You are correct. I am inferring that since you went to the trouble of posting "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan, something that the original article did not do, that you purposely brought "Islamic" into the discussion. As for your reasoning, I can only conclude based your posting history, that you want to associate Islam with this act.
 
A direct link is not possible since Islam does not condone such behavior. But why would a direct link be necessary when inferrence, false association, and misinformation will do the trick?
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 9:04pm
"Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill"
 
Show me the command for Christians not to kill.


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 01 July 2009 at 4:26am
Show me the command for Christians not to kill.

And after you show us, Please, please show and teach the other Christians not to kill.. you get on us for 'not being responsible' for our fellow Muslims.. why don't you help educate your own.

I once saw a poll of Christians in the US and they believe 'thou shalt not kill' is really important, except in matters of self-defense.. and they see the war in Iraq as self-defense (talk about believing false propaganda).




-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 8:28am
Originally posted by Sign*Reader

Originally posted by Doo-bop

Originally posted by Sign*Reader

Originally posted by Doo-bop

 
I am not supporting the murder of this murderer Tiller.  Unlike muslims, christians have no licence to kill for any reason!

Unless it is on the scales of genocide or Inquisition or Crusade based on lies and deceptions e.g., WMDs or colonial land grabs cuz these are great and noble causes blessed with holy water made by child molesting priesthoodLOL 
Btw may be the murders committed in the http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita - Christian dominated lands that lead the world are for practice and fun only... you might like to knowWink
So much debate for uno death while the US Christians operated drones are killing Pakiland families for fun of it on daily basis and no mention is being made anywhere about it cuz the Christian Zionist control over media can cover it up...
 
Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill

A tree is known by it's fruit!
The time to fool is gone...
Under what logic can you even talk about the command when you know your religion is a lawless religion... commands are part of a faith that has rules and commandments! Christianity is a man(Paul) made religion against the world of rules! When you and Jews will find agreement about what you then we will consider discussing this issue further...
2:113 (Y. Ali) The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon." Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but Allah will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.

Finally the Jews got the control of Christian world after suffering all the atrocities at the Christians hands through their financial strategy...Now suddenly the Ten Commandments are legal at city halls when they were challenges by the atheists...What gives? And don't tell me that the so Christians can really hold them sacred much less the Jews!
 
 
What foolishness!  The commandments of Christianity are clear - they are found throughout the New Testament, many of them in Paul's epistles.  And yes, God commands everybody to obey them.  But.......the difference between this and your own system is that it is not a code of criminal or civil law, in other words, we do not presume to make people adhere to things they do not believe in, indeed, we cannot, since there is no, nor can there be, any christian state.
 
By the way, perhaps you can help me out.  Can you give me the name of one Jew who believes that the Mosaic covenant was for anyone other that the nation of Israel?  Maybe you can find one.  But I have not found one.
 
"Finally the Jews got the control of Christian world after suffering all the atrocities at the Christians hands through their financial strategy...Now suddenly the Ten Commandments are legal at city halls when they were challenges by the atheists...What gives? And don't tell me that the so Christians can really hold them sacred much less the Jews!"
 
What is this?  Are you trying to make out there is a command to kill in the Ten Commandments?


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 8:55am
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

"Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill"
 
Show me the command for Christians not to kill.
 
1 Peter 4:15 - Let none of you suffer as a murderer....
 
1 John 3:15 - no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him....
 
Romans 12:14 - bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not
 
Romans 12:17 - recompense no man evil for evil
 
Romans 12:19 - dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves........vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord
 
Consider also the Holy Teaching of our Glorious Lord personally delivered when he was on earth -------
 
Matthew 5:44 - but I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you
 
John 18:36 - Jesus answered, my kingdom is not of this world:  if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews:  but now is my kingdom not from hence


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 9:16am
They are not saying do not kill... murder and killing are not exclusive in of the other. You can kill someone and NOT be a murderer.

It is saying things about
murder, vengence, enemies, do not hate those that persecute.

Nowhere does it say you should not kill in self-defense..

And most reasonable people believe in the right to kill in certain instances. 



-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 9:53am
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Doo-bop

Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Doo-bop

Most of the Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the "Christian" Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
Most of the Christian Republican politicians in the United States are hypocrites.
 
See the difference?Ermm
 
 
Yes I believe I do. In the first statement the question of religion does not occur at all. By inserting a religious affiliation, in quotation marks or not, you are inferring that the religion mentioned is somehow associated with the actions of the perpetrators.
 
"Christian" Republican: you may be inferring doubt as to their religious affiliation, but you have still brought up their religion, therefore inferring guilt by association.
 
 
 
 
 
No, you are doing the inferring.  The name of the country is The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and the fact that, according to reports at least, that noone has even been arrested for this atrocity, that the sign is still in place, would indicate that the speech marks I inserted were most appropriate.
 
Unless of course we can establish a direct link between Islam and the evil committed
 
You are correct. I am inferring that since you went to the trouble of posting "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan, something that the original article did not do, that you purposely brought "Islamic" into the discussion. As for your reasoning, I can only conclude based your posting history, that you want to associate Islam with this act.
 
A direct link is not possible since Islam does not condone such behavior. But why would a direct link be necessary when inferrence, false association, and misinformation will do the trick?
 
 
 
Sorry, but I will not remove the speech marks unless you can provide a direct link between Islam and the evil perpetrated


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Doo-bop
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 10:04am
"Nowhere does it say you should not kill in self-defense.."
 
Yes it does.  The context of John 18:36 is self-defence.
 
"And most reasonable people believe in the right to kill in certain instances." 
Well, we are not interested in being reasonable.  We are interested in obeying God.  That is our reason.  If you don't like it, tough.  Btw, could you outline to me all the instances where it is "right to kill" in Islam (with full references to Islamic core texts, of course)


-------------
"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" - John the Baptizer (John 1:29)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 02 July 2009 at 3:30pm
Originally posted by Doo-bop

Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

"Not good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill"
 
Show me the command for Christians not to kill.
 
1 Peter 4:15 - Let none of you suffer as a murderer....
 
1 John 3:15 - no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him....
 
Romans 12:14 - bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not
 
Romans 12:17 - recompense no man evil for evil
 
Romans 12:19 - dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves........vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord
 
Consider also the Holy Teaching of our Glorious Lord personally delivered when he was on earth -------
 
Matthew 5:44 - but I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you
 
John 18:36 - Jesus answered, my kingdom is not of this world:  if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews:  but now is my kingdom not from hence
 
Even if any of these directly stated 'do not kill' I don't see where any of it has to do with Christianity.  Jesus and his disciples were preaching/teaching to the Jews.
 
Jesus did say to follow the old laws, the Mosaic laws, and to do as Moses. Jewish laws for Jewish followers.
 
The only one who might be giving Christians commands would be Paul. The Prophet Paul?
 
Where does God or Jesus command Christians not to kill?
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: ZEA J
Date Posted: 06 July 2009 at 9:12pm
[QUOTENot good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill[/QUOTE]
 
"Deuteronomy 17
17:2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die."
 
Hi, I found the above from a website. I don't know if it's an actual qoute from the bible or not.

 

 




-------------
"You will never attain piety and righteousness,(and eventually paradise)until you
spend of that which you love."(Al-Imran:92)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 07 July 2009 at 4:35am
[QUOTE=ZEA J][QUOTENot good enough.  Show me the command for christians to kill[/QUOTE]
 
"Deuteronomy 17
17:2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die."
 
Hi, I found the above from a website. I don't know if it's an actual qoute from the bible or not.

 [/QUOTE]

That's from the Old Testament, where there are more commands to kill than you can imagine, but the Christians will say that the Old Testament doesn't count anymore. They will say that Jesus brougyt a new covenant, even though Jesus himself said the opposite, and the old Mosaic Laws are no longer valid, even though Jesus himself followed them and commanded his followers to do the same.
 
When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 07 July 2009 at 9:36am
When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.

And yet its in all the copies of the Bible... you get both.. the Mosaic Laws and the 'new' Testament. Why bother with the old, if you should not follow it?


-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 07 July 2009 at 10:07am
Originally posted by Hayfa

When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.

And yet its in all the copies of the Bible... you get both.. the Mosaic Laws and the 'new' Testament. Why bother with the old, if you should not follow it?
 
Otherwise how would they know what laws not to follow? It's a complicated system...


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Natassia
Date Posted: 03 August 2009 at 11:06am
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Hayfa

When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.

And yet its in all the copies of the Bible... you get both.. the Mosaic Laws and the 'new' Testament. Why bother with the old, if you should not follow it?
 
Otherwise how would they know what laws not to follow? It's a complicated system...
 
Summation of the Law and Prophets:
 
In all things, do unto others as you would have them do to you.
 
You follow that law, you follow them all.


-------------
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:39-40)


Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 4:48pm
Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Hayfa

When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.

And yet its in all the copies of the Bible... you get both.. the Mosaic Laws and the 'new' Testament. Why bother with the old, if you should not follow it?
 
Otherwise how would they know what laws not to follow? It's a complicated system...
 
 
 
...right, it gets further tangled when you see quotes like " I came to fulfill the law" attached to Jesus in the same book.
Hasan


-------------
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 04 August 2009 at 8:44pm
Originally posted by honeto

Originally posted by Shasta'sAunt

Originally posted by Hayfa

When Christians say the Bible what they REALLY mean is the New Testament.

And yet its in all the copies of the Bible... you get both.. the Mosaic Laws and the 'new' Testament. Why bother with the old, if you should not follow it?
 
Otherwise how would they know what laws not to follow? It's a complicated system...
 
 
 
...right, it gets further tangled when you see quotes like " I came to fulfill the law" attached to Jesus in the same book.
Hasan
 
Jesus never said otherwise. Jesus was a Jew, preached to the Jews, and followed the Mosaic Laws, period. Anyone who states differently should have some sort of scriptural proof positive to back it up.


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 5:15am
Yes, like is there ANY proof that did not follow the dietary laws? Any?? 

-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 05 August 2009 at 12:40pm
Originally posted by Hayfa

Yes, like is there ANY proof that did not follow the dietary laws? Any?? 
 
Nope. Jesus kept all of the Mosaic Laws. Here is why the dietary Laws were discarded:
 
Acts 10:9On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

 10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,

 11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

 12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

 14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

 15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

 16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

 
Acts 15:19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

 20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

 21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

 22Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:

 23And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.

 24Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

 
 25It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,

 26Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 27We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.

 28For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

 29That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

It was Peter and Paul. Peter because he went to sleep hungry and dreamed he could eat anything and Paul and certain elders because they didn't want to burden or trouble the gentiles... How easily they dismissed the Word of God. Notice how when speaking of circumcision they declare that "we  gave no such command". Wasn't the command from God? An everlasting covenant?
 
Genesis 17:7And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
 
10This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.

 11And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

 12And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.

 13He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

 14And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.  



-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Natassia
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 5:04am
@ Shasta's Aunt
 
I suppose these scriptures are worthless then...
 
Matthew 15

 10Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

 12Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"

 13He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."

 15Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."

 16"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17"Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

Mark 7

 14Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. 15Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.' "

 17After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? 19For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")

 20He went on: "What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' 21For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

Silly Christians for believing in their scriptures.


-------------
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:39-40)


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 8:01am

17After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18"Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? 19For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")"

Yet Jesus, his family, and his direct disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. So, Jesus never broke the dietary laws but a gospel written 70 years after his death, after Paul's epistles regarding gentiles and his views of the dietary laws had been written,  has a parable that some have concluded means all food is allowed and the swine eating frenzy begins. Never mind what Jesus actually did...
 
Here is the Matthew version of the same story, different ending:
 
Matthew15:15Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.

 16And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

 17Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

 18But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.

 19For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

 20These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.

A bit of a difference between making unclean food lawful and making unclean hands lawful.
 
I wonder why Christians aren't as keen about other passages in Mark. Like the ones where Jesus forbid divorce, but wait, the Pauline Privilege changed that too......
 
 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Akhe Abdullah
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 8:03am
Question: are these verses repeats Matthew 15,1-12and Mark 7,1-7 ?


Posted By: Natassia
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:20am
Originally posted by Akhe Abdullah

Question: are these verses repeats Matthew 15,1-12and Mark 7,1-7 ?
 
Same story recorded by two different people who may or may not have been relying on a shared primary source.


-------------
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:39-40)


Posted By: Natassia
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:28am
@ Shasta's Aunt
 
You wrote: Yet Jesus, his family, and his direct disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. So, Jesus never broke the dietary laws but a gospel written 70 years after his death, after Paul's epistles regarding gentiles and his views of the dietary laws had been written, has a parable that some have concluded means all food is allowed and the swine eating frenzy begins. Never mind what Jesus actually did...

((sigh)) Pigs are no dirtier than chickens. You are more likely to get a disease nowadays from poultry than you would from pork, especially if the pork is cooked thoroughly. Christians have some pretty solid theology to explain the spiritual meanings behind the food laws found in the Torah. I do wonder what the Islamic theology is that explains their dietary restrictions. So far I've heard some unscientific answers such as "pigs are dirty animals and you can get really bad diseases from them" (as if you can't get mad cow disease from beef or salmonella from poultry or mercury poisoning from fish) and some vague responses like, "it's a test." It's not a test for a vegetarian.

Also, you do not know that his family and disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. Obviously the Jewish religious leaders felt they did and took exception to it. Jesus came to fulfill the law. He satisfied it completely by adhering to all of the commands, and then he offered his perfect life as a sacrificial Lamb in atonement for our sins. You are picking and plucking at dietary laws when you don't even know why they were in place or why Jesus would have followed them in the first place.

And what Jesus was telling people about 'unclean' and 'clean' was not a parable. He was speaking directly and clearly on the matter. That's why the writer of the gospel of Mark interpretated his meaning to be that all food was declared clean. That's why another writer, the author of the Acts of the Apostles, also concluded such a thing when he recorded Peter's vision. And Paul, the writer of our earliest Christian scriptures, also verified this belief in his epistles. The earliest Christians who wrote the scriptures agreed that Jesus had fulfilled the dietary laws when he ended the separation between Gentiles and Jews and Man's separation from God.

The gospel of Matthew was written by a different author from both Mark and Acts. However, this gospel confirms the teaching that it isn't what you ingest that makes you 'unclean' but rather what comes out of your heart. You are missing the meat of the message (pun intended) in favor of promoting your belief that eating swine does in fact make you unclean. (By the way, according to the Torah, Israelites weren't supposed to eat camels either.)

And where did Paul permit divorce?

I Corinthians 7
 
 10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
 
 12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
 
27Are you married? Do not seek a divorce...


-------------
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:39-40)


Posted By: peacemaker
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:32am
Everyone,
 
Please stick to the topic and comply with the section and the forum guidelines.
 
Peace


-------------
Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?
Qur'an 55:13


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 9:36pm
Natassia, there you go leaving out pertinent verses again.
 
Corinthians 7:15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
 

Pauline privilege

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Christianity - Christianity portal

The Pauline Privilege (Privilegium Paulinum) is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity - Christian concept drawn from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus - apostle Paul 's instructions in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Corinthians - First Epistle to the Corinthians .

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pauline_privilege&action=edit&section=1 - edit ] Origin

In Paul's epistle it states:

To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband ... and that the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say, not the Lord, ... But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace. (1 Corinthians 7:10-15, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Standard_Version - RSV )

The first section, "not I but the Lord", matches http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus - Jesus ' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expounding_of_the_Law#Divorce - teaching on divorce , found in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expounding_of_the_Law - Expounding of the Law , http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Matthew&verse=19:9&src=! - Matthew 19:9 , http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Luke&verse=16:18&src=! - Luke 16:18 , and http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Mark&verse=10:11&src=! - Mark 10:11 . The second section, "I say, not the Lord", gives Paul's own teaching on divorce.

Pauline Privilege

Scriptural Authority

St. Paul wrote, 1 Cor 7:12To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy. But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace.”

 

Conditions

The Catholic Church can dissolve a marriage bond, allowing the Catholic party to re-marry, if:

Both persons were not baptized at the time of their wedding. Marriage originally not sacramental.

One party has been baptized, but the other remains unbaptized. Marriage remains not sacramental.

The unbaptized person departs physically by divorce or desertion, or morally by making married life unbearable for the baptized person. Just cause for the dissolution.

The unbaptized person refuses to be baptized or to live peacefully with the baptized person. Unbaptized person is asked.

Civil divorce has been granted by the state. Church cannot be responsible for the separation.

 Some Observations

The Pauline Privilege applies only when both parties were unbaptized at the time of the marriage. It is not the same as an annulment. The Pauline Privilege dissolves a real but natural marriage. An annulment is a declaration that no valid marriage ever existed.

If one party was baptized and the other unbaptized at the time of the marriage, the marriage is still natural but can be dissolved only by the Pope personally, exercising his authority as the Vicar of Christ and executive agent of divine law. This is called the Petrine Privilege because it is reserved to the Chair of Peter, and very rare.

If both parties were baptized at the time of the marriage it is a sacramental and supernatural marriage, and is indissoluble, even if one party abandons his Christian faith. 1 Cor 7:10 “To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband.”

There is Biblical precedent for dissolving a marriage between a faithful person and an unbeliever, when the Jews put away their pagan wives. Ezra 10:1 “While Ezra prayed and made confession, weeping and casting himself down before the house of God, a very great assembly of men, women, and children, gathered to him out of Israel; for the people wept bitterly. And Shecani’ah the son of Jehi’el, of the sons of Elam, addressed Ezra: ’We have broken faith with our God and have married foreign women from the peoples of the land, but even now there is hope for Israel in spite of this. Therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all these wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law. Arise, for it is your task, and we are with you; be strong and do it.’ Then Ezra arose and made the leading priests and Levites and all Israel take oath that they would do as had been said. So they took the oath.”

http://www.secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/paulineprivilege.htm - http://www.secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/paulineprivilege.htm



-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:09pm

"((sigh)) Pigs are no dirtier than chickens."

What does this have to do with God's command to not eat pork? Is this a feeble attempt at justification?
 
"Also, you do not know that his family and disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. Obviously the Jewish religious leaders felt they did and took exception to it. Jesus came to fulfill the law. He satisfied it completely by adhering to all of the commands, and then he offered his perfect life as a sacrificial Lamb in atonement for our sins. You are picking and plucking at dietary laws when you don't even know why they were in place or why Jesus would have followed them in the first place."
 
The Jewish leaders felt Jesus broke the dietary laws? Once again, show me the passages for that.
 
How do we know that Jesus never broke the Mosaic Laws, because according to the Bible he was perfect in the Law, therefore he couldn't have broken ANY of the Mosaic Laws. Period.  You yourself stated basically the same above, I highlighted it in red. Please feel free to dispute this if you like. Of course, you would have to prove that the Bible is incorrect, Jesus was not perfect in the Law, and therefore was not the perfect sacrificial lamb. But it might be fun to watch you argue against yourself.
 
I assume Jesus followed the Laws because God commanded them.
 
Leviticus 11:1And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them,

 2Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.

 3Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat.

 4Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 5And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 6And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.

 7And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.

 8Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

 etc......
 
Frankly I'm a little surprised that you are questioning God's commands or suggesting that Jesus would do so to the point of not following them. 
 
How do we know that his followers did not break the dietary laws? Because after Jesus' death his family, disciples, and followers became known as Nazarenes. Even Paul was accused of being a leader of the Nazarenes in Acts, though he rightfully denied it because he had already begun to abolish the Mosaic Laws.
 
However, history has recorded the practices of the Nazarenes and that's how we know.
 
Views and practices of the Nazarenes

Did not call themselves Christians

But these sectarians whom I am now sketching disregarded the name of Jesus, and did not call themselves Jesseans, keep the name of the Jews, or term themselves Christians – but “Nazoraeans,” from the place-name, “Nazareth,” if you please!

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.1

Believed Jesus is the Messiah

The Nazarenes... accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law.

Jerome, On. Is. 8:14

Were Torah Observant

They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Christ; but since they are still fettered by the Law – circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest – they are not in accord with the Christians.

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.4

Used both the Old Testament and the New Testament

They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do.

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.2

Used Hebrew and Aramaic NT source texts

They have the Gospel according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.9.4

And he [Heggesippus the Nazarene] quotes some passages from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_according_to_the_Hebrews - Gospel according to the Hebrews and from the Syriac [the Aramaic], and some particulars from the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition of the Jews.

Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.22

Believed Jesus is the Son of God

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Cæsarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist “Out of Egypt have I called my son,” and “for he shall be called a Nazarene.”

Jerome, Lives of Illustrius Men Ch.3

They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion – except for their belief in Christ, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that God is one, and that his Son is Jesus Christ.

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.2

 
 
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:13pm
Originally posted by peacemaker

Everyone,
 
Please stick to the topic and comply with the section and the forum guidelines.
 
Peace
 
Sorry, but I felt compelled to respond to a couple of posts.


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Natassia
Date Posted: 22 August 2009 at 11:22pm
@ Shasta's Aunt
 
But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

What, a Christian husband is supposed to hold his pagan wife hostage if she wants to leave him because of his new-found faith? Obviously this verse says that a Christian should allow their unbelieving spouse to leave if they want. If that spouse wants to drink "un-Christian tea" then the Christian is supposed to allow them. (Just keeping things on topic.)

What the Catholic Church does has no bearing on Christianity since the Church is supposed to revolve around Christ and the scriptures...not the other way around. And the epistles of Paul were written to Christians not non-believers. Therefore, to try and say that Paul was writing rules for non-believers to follow is absolutely ridiculous. He was simply giving guidance to Christians who had non-Christian spouses. He was telling them to remain married to their non-believing spouse unless he or she (the non-believer) desired to leave.

That's it.

So...let 'em "drink the tea freely" if that's what they want.

(And remember, Christians are not chained to the Law of Moses or Ezra or whoever else in the Tanakh.)

***

First of all, I said you do not know that his family and disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. Obviously the Jewish religious leaders felt they did and took exception to it.

The Pharisees did not accuse Jesus of breaking the laws. (Read the story again.)

Secondly, you have failed to explain the purposes of those dietary laws. Are you saying that God gave us laws for no real reason except to give us laws? Jesus fulfilled the reason for those laws.  And he fulfilled the laws themselves.

Thirdly, Jesus' followers became known as Christians (Acts 11:26). Jesus was known as the Nazarene (Mark 16:6), and Paul was charged with being the ringleader of the Nazarene sect (Acts 24:5).



-------------
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:39-40)


Posted By: Nazarene
Date Posted: 23 August 2009 at 10:08am
salaams
 
    if true they need to overcome this. i took the U.S.A almost 200 yrs. to let a black person drink from a "WHITES ONLY FOUNTAIN" and blacks were hung here for doing just that. where were ALL THE CHRSITAIN OUTRAGE AT THIS!!! the persecution of and enslavement of the blacks was spearheaded by christians. and than there was the INDIANS. it was GOD'S DIVINE WILL they be wiped out ridding us the pagan heathens and making the west SAFE for settlement.
    i get tiered of all the POOR HELPLESS CHRISTIAN CRAP!!!
CHRISTANITY was/is the bloodiest religon ever invented!!
leland


-------------
love for all conquers all


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 24 August 2009 at 11:47pm

"Thirdly, Jesus' followers became known as Christians (Acts 11:26). Jesus was known as the Nazarene (Mark 16:6), and Paul was charged with being the ringleader of the Nazarene sect (Acts 24:5)."

The followers of Paul in Antioch were called Christians. Not the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem.  Why would the Jewish followers of Jesus have used the Latin term Christo to describe the Messiah?
Who were the Nazarenes that Paul was accused of leading? Who did he go to Jerusalem to meet? James, Peter, the followers of  Jesus in Jerusalem, the Nazarenes.  Acts shows clearly that these followers of Jesus adhered to the Mosaic laws:
 
Acts 21:17And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.

 18And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

 19And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.

 20And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Clearly James, the brother of Jesus and leader of the Jerusalem church, never gave up the Mosaic Laws. Why would he continue to follow the Mosaic Laws if  Jesus had commanded his followers to do differently?
 
Who made the charge against Paul? Ananias, the Jewish high priest.  Why would the Jewish high priest of Jerusalem accuse a follower of Jesus of being a Nazarene if they were known as Christians?  Because the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem were known as Nazarenes, not Christians.
 
"First of all, I said you do not know that his family and disciples never broke the Jewish dietary laws. Obviously the Jewish religious leaders felt they did and took exception to it."
 
You are correct, I do not know. I am going by the Biblical scriptures in my assertation that they never broke the Law. Since I believe that the Bible has been corrupted, these scriptures might not be correct. However, for the sake of argument, if YOU believe the scriptures to be correct, then YOU would have to believe that Jesus' direct followers never broke any of the Maosaic Laws. That would include the dietary laws.
 
I have posted historical accounts outside of the Biblical scriptures, which you appear to be questioning, that show that they did not break the Mosaic Laws. But I can post another Biblical scripture which would prove so.
 
The story of Peter:
 
Acts 10:9On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

 10And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,

 11And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

 12Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

 13And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

 14But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

 15And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

 16This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

 17Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate,

This occured after the death of Jesus. After Jesus supposedly abrogated the dietary laws. If Jesus had abrogated the dietary laws, why was it necessary for Peter to have a vision from God allowing him to eat that which was "unclean". If the followers of Jesus had already broken the dietary laws, why would Peter have stated that he had never eaten anything "unclean"?
 
Then in Acts 11:1And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.

 2And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,

 3Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

If Jesus had abrogated the Laws and they no longer mattered, why were his apostles, the men who actually knew him and followed him personally, confronting Peter about breaking the Laws? If Jesus did not follow the Laws, why did his apostles, disciples, family, and followers do so. Wouldn't they have done what Jesus did? If the followers did not continue to follow the Mosaic Laws after Jesus died, why does the Bible say that they did?
 
But, if you have scriptural proof that the disciples and family of Jesus did break the Laws, please post them. 
 
"Secondly, you have failed to explain the purposes of those dietary laws. Are you saying that God gave us laws for no real reason except to give us laws? Jesus fulfilled the reason for those laws.  And he fulfilled the laws themselves."
 
You have yet to prove that Jesus fulfilled anything. However, I don't have to explain the purpose of the laws. I posted the scriptures according to the Bible where God ordered man not to eat certain foods because they are unclean. That should be enough of a reason, don't you think?
 


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 25 August 2009 at 12:01am
"What the Catholic Church does has no bearing on Christianity since the Church is supposed to revolve around Christ and the scriptures...not the other way around. And the epistles of Paul were written to Christians not non-believers. Therefore, to try and say that Paul was writing rules for non-believers to follow is absolutely ridiculous. He was simply giving guidance to Christians who had non-Christian spouses. He was telling them to remain married to their non-believing spouse unless he or she (the non-believer) desired to leave."
 
Where did I say that Paul was writing rules for non-believers? I never said any such thing. I did write:
 
"The only one who might be giving Christians commands would be Paul."
 
Are you trying to redirect the conversation by throwing out false accusations.   tsk, tsk, Natassia. Let's just stick to what has REALLY been posted, shall we?
 
You are absolutely right, Paul was giving guidance by telling the people that if their non-believing spouses wanted to leave, they could divorce them. What guidance did Jesus give regarding Christians married to non-Christian spouses?
 
Matthew 5:31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

 32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

What's that? No distinction. Looks like Jesus didn't say whosoever puts away his wife except Christians married to non-believers... Apparently Jesus' guidance regarding divorce was that you couldn't save for cases of fornication.
 
You are the one who said that Paul's doctrines do not differ from Jesus' doctrines. I think you have yet to prove that they are even compatible.


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Shasta'sAunt
Date Posted: 25 August 2009 at 12:20am
"(And remember, Christians are not chained to the Law of Moses or Ezra or whoever else in the Tanakh.)"
 
According to whom?


-------------
“No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
Eleanor Roosevelt


Posted By: Hayfa
Date Posted: 26 August 2009 at 6:35am
So really Natassia you area follower of Paul, not Jesus, correct? Jesus followed the Mosaic laws.. why would you NOT want to follow them? Why don't you strive for a higher level? Seems to make sense to me... that you would WANT to more "Jesus-like."   Interesting

-------------
When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi



Print Page | Close Window