IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Politics > Current Events
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 10>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Hayfa View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Female
Joined: 07 June 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2368 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hayfa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Killing in Pakistan for drinking tea...
    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
Back to Top
Shasta'sAunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Female
Joined: 29 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1930 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shasta'sAunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Shasta'sAunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Female
Joined: 29 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1930 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shasta'sAunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Shasta'sAunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Female
Joined: 29 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1930 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shasta'sAunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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?
 


Edited by Shasta'sAunt - 25 August 2009 at 12:16am
�No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.�
Eleanor Roosevelt
Back to Top
Nazarene View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 05 September 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 298 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Nazarene Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Natassia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 16 July 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 177 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Natassia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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)
Back to Top
Shasta'sAunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Female
Joined: 29 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1930 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shasta'sAunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 August 2009 at 10:13pm
Originally posted by peacemaker peacemaker wrote:

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
Back to Top
Shasta'sAunt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Female
Joined: 29 March 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1930 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shasta'sAunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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 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 C�sarea 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

 
 
 


Edited by Shasta'sAunt - 21 August 2009 at 10:28pm
�No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.�
Eleanor Roosevelt
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 10>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.