Print Page | Close Window

--------------------------------------------------

Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=31396
Printed Date: 09 December 2019 at 8:32am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: --------------------------------------------------
Posted By: Muslim75
Subject: --------------------------------------------------
Date Posted: 10 September 2014 at 6:05am
------------------------------------------



Replies:
Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 12 September 2014 at 5:02pm
'greater Love hath no man than that he lay down his life for another'
- the words of Yshwe

12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

No man took His life, He gave it for our sakes....

'nevertheless Lord, not My will, but Thine be done'

41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,

42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.




-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 13 September 2014 at 3:02am
------------------------------------------


Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 13 September 2014 at 3:07am
------------------------------------------


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 13 September 2014 at 1:01pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

 
"No one believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself."
 
These words have no parallel.

Greetings Muslim75,

It is a good teaching.  You are nearly correct, there is only one parallel, because those words come directly from Yshwe Himself.  They have been stated only slightly differently for muslims.  Smile

12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.  - the words of Yshwe(known as Jesus)


It is from which we derive the 'Golden Rule' which we, among my people, were all taught as children...  'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'.  Smile

asalaam and blessings to you,

CH




-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 13 September 2014 at 1:23pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

This is love:
 
Allah's Apostle said, "Allah said, 'I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine. And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil
(praying or doing extra deeds besides what is obligatory) till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection (Refuge), I will protect him; (i.e. give him My Refuge) and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him."  (Bukhari)

Greetings Muslim75,

I found a couple of things interesting in this....

I wonder who would be defined as 'a pious worshiper'?
What about the Christian that attends church every day, and prays every day, and lives a righteous life? 
What about the Hindu that bows down every day in deference to a higher power than himself, and lives a righteous life?
Are these not all pious in their worship?  And who is to say they do not worship the same higher power?
I think only that higher power Himself can say.

Now the rest of that teaching I like...

that when we love the Creator we see things with His eyes, and hear with His ears, and act with His actions...

it's not about Him loving us though.... (do you know any parent that has conceived a child, that does not then love that child?)....

it is about us choosing to love Him, to show our love for Him with our honor.

and I like the part that teaches that a believer should hate death...
a believer should never desire the death of another, but rather desire to see them have every chance to be saved from eternal separation from the Creator....

but neither do I believe they should fear death... for the death in this world, if we have lived it right, will mean eternal life with the Creator.
The only fear should be for the one who does not love the Creator and live according to His ways.

asalaam and blessings,
CH


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 3:28am
------------------------------------------


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:42am
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Allah's Apostle said, "Allah said, 'I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine.


But Jesus said (in http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:43-48 - Matthew 5:43-48 ):
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

Muslim love extends only to fellow Muslims.  As Jesus points out, there is nothing special about that.  Even the pagans love their own people.

Christian love is unconditional and universal, even for those who show hostility toward you.  Christian love is harder, and better.


-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 12:06pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:


Ultimately, not all religions can be true. Only one religion is true. It is Islam.

Greetings Muslim75,

Putting aside the issue of what religion is true, we must ask the question, and seriously consider the answer...

What then do you suppose leads another person to lead a life just as righteous even though he 'follows another religion'? 

Why is one persons pious worship not as worthy as another's if they look the same in the fruition thereof... in the way that they live their life?  If they are honest, do not steal, do not cheat, do not kill....?   If they attend to their duties and their worship as diligently as anyone else?
Who are we to say that this worship is not the same to the Creator and just as worthy?   Only the Creator Himself can decide.

We all each believe our religion is true, that's why it's called faith.  What matters is that we give our hearts to something higher than our own desires... that we give our hearts to a guidance that is higher than ourselves... that requires of us, to be better than ourselves, to be better than we would be with no guidance.

Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:


Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


it's not about Him loving us though
It is.

I disagree... the Creator most naturally will love His creation... what He Himself created...
it is for us to love Him...
it is we, that are given the choice to love, or not love.

Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:


 It's not comparable in the least. If Jesus said: This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you ; I say that Muhammad (saws) said: No one believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. 
 

I am sorry that you can not see that they are the same.  Muhammad was only repeating what was taught by Yshwe... the Logos... the Wisdom which came before all else.

20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.

This is the definition of 'believer'... Muhammad was teaching what Yshwe had taught, just in different wording.

Peace and blessings to you,
Caringheart



-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 12:14pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Allah's Apostle said, "Allah said, 'I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine.


But Jesus said (in http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:43-48 - Matthew 5:43-48 ):
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

Muslim love extends only to fellow Muslims.  As Jesus points out, there is nothing special about that.  Even the pagans love their own people.

Christian love is unconditional and universal, even for those who show hostility toward you.  Christian love is harder, and better.

Thumbs%20Up

Hi Ron,

I have often had to remind myself of those words of Christ...
'if you love those who love you, of what reward is that...'  ... that is easy.
It is easy to love those that love you... those who are the same.... much harder to extend love to the less lovely, but it is Love that saves.  Smile

I think it has even more impact in the King James translation.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

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;

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

asalaam.




-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 12:44pm

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:


But Jesus said (in http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:43-48 - Matthew 5:43-48 ):
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

 
These are my final responses to your objections, you the Christians.
 
Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith):
 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 
As you can see, there is no comparison.
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:


In Islam, love extends only to fellow Muslims. 
You are wrong. The Hadith we are talking about applies to all mankind.



Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 12:56pm
 
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


I disagree... the Creator most naturally will love His creation... what He Himself created...
it is for us to love Him...
 
The Hadith is not about the love of Allah the Creator for His creation. It is about love. It is about the love between Allah the Creator, and His purified servant.

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.
 
This is about the characteristics of a believer, as mentioned by Jesus according to Christianity.
 
Muhammad (saws) spoke far greater words:
 
By Allah, he does not believe! By Allah, he does not believe! By Allah, he does not believe! It was said, who is that, O Allah's Apostle? He said, that person whose neighbor does not feel safe from his evil.
 
There is no comparison, not in the least.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 2:36pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith)

 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 

It is a shame that Muhammad's message was not a consistent one,
but one changing from day to day.

This was a good message... showing that only the Creator has the ability to judge the heart.
asalaam.


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 3:41pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith)

 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 

It is a shame that Muhammad's message was not a consistent one,
but one changing from day to day.

This was a good message... showing that only the Creator has the ability to judge the heart.
asalaam.


No, no, no.  The shame is in the fact that people like you deceive yourself by living in your denial.  You get cornered by the facts and then resort to the same tired old polemical arguments. 

The message of Islam teaches its followers to be kind and just to all people but it also tells us that we can defend ourselves against those who wish to harm us.  You are confusing the permission to fight against oppressors as somehow "changing" the message to be kind to one's neighbors.  The reality is that both teachings apply. 


-------------
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: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 3:42pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith):
 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 
As you can see, there is no comparison.

I agree, there is no comparison.  A Christian would always want to spare the life of a captured prisoner, regardless of his religion.

Quote
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

In Islam, love extends only to fellow Muslims.

You are wrong. The Hadith we are talking about applies to all mankind.

Yes I know, but Muhammad's "love" applied only to prisoners who (pretended to) convert.  Otherwise, he was fine with murdering them.

By the way, I am not a Christian.  I just happen to agree with the Christians that true love has to be unconditional.  Conditional love is worthless.  It is nothing more than a bargaining ploy.


-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 3:47pm
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith)

 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


It is a shame that Muhammad's message was not a consistent one,
but one changing from day to day.

This was a good message... showing that only the Creator has the ability to judge the heart.
asalaam.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


No, no, no.  The shame is in the fact that people like you deceive yourself by living in your denial.  You get cornered by the facts and then resort to the same tired old polemical arguments. 

The message of Islam teaches its followers to be kind and just to all people but it also tells us that we can defend ourselves against those who wish to harm us.  You are confusing the permission to fight against oppressors as somehow "changing" the message to be kind to one's neighbors.  The reality is that both teachings apply. 

As much as I love to argue/debate with Islamispeace, he is right when he says that Islam teaches kindness to one's neighbour and permission to wage war in self-defence.

As also Ron Webb correctly pointed out, Jesus took this a step further by not only ordering commanding for neighbours, but also enemies. That is a lot harder to do than loving those who love you and fighting those who hate you... even if it is in self-defence and not offense.

This teaching is one a few reasons why, in spite of the many errors and contradictions that remain in the Bible, I am still a Christian.



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 3:49pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Usama was the beloved of Muhammad (saws) and the son of Zaid, the beloved of Muhammad (saws). He fell upon an idolater in battle. Just as he was about to kill him, the unbeliever exclaimed there was only one God, so that he should be spared. But Usama killed him and said to Muhammad (saws) that the unbeliever said it only to be spared. Muhammad (saws) was very angry and told him (famous Hadith):
 
"Did you cleave his heart and see (whether his confession of belief was due to fear of death) ?" And kept repeating it.
 
As you can see, there is no comparison.

I agree, there is no comparison.  A Christian would always want to spare the life of a captured prisoner, regardless of his religion.

Quote
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

In Islam, love extends only to fellow Muslims.

You are wrong. The Hadith we are talking about applies to all mankind.

Yes I know, but Muhammad's "love" applied only to prisoners who (pretended to) convert.  Otherwise, he was fine with murdering them.

By the way, I am not a Christian.  I just happen to agree with the Christians that true love has to be unconditional.  Conditional love is worthless.  It is nothing more than a bargaining ploy.


Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 4:37pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.

Big%20smile Coming from you, that's quite a compliment!

And I was just thinking to myself, TG12345 would make an awesome humanist! Wink


-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 4:39pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.


LOL I think you give Ron too much credit. 

And even if he does "understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians", he certainly does not understand the teachings of Islam, as we see in his latest shenanigans about Muhammad (peace be upon him) allegedly "murdering" prisoners.  The dude is a clown, pure and simple.

And don't worry.  He is not going to convert to Christianity "for some reason", not that you are necessarily urging him to.  After all, you have decided to no longer try to convert people to Christianity.       


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 4:41pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.

Big%20smile Coming from you, that's quite a compliment!

And I was just thinking to myself, TG12345 would make an awesome humanist! Wink


Speaking of "humanists", you still haven't answered my question to you about abortion that I posed on another thread a while back.  I know it is unrelated to this thread, but I just thought I would remind you.  Wink


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 4:45pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As much as I love to argue/debate with Islamispeace, he is right when he says that Islam teaches kindness to one's neighbour and permission to wage war in self-defence.

As also Ron Webb correctly pointed out, Jesus took this a step further by not only ordering commanding for neighbours, but also enemies. That is a lot harder to do than loving those who love you and fighting those who hate you... even if it is in self-defence and not offense.

This teaching is one a few reasons why, in spite of the many errors and contradictions that remain in the Bible, I am still a Christian.



This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that? 


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:26pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


LOL I think you give Ron too much credit. 

Obviously due to Ron's faith status he is not a Christian and I and him probably disagree on very many things. I don't take back though what I said about him understanding some of Jesus' teachings... in the Christian faith, love for all people including enemies is mandatory, not optional. He understands that.  He also understands that unconditional love is far greater than conditional love. Many Christians don't, even if they call themselves Christians.

I believe in giving credit where credit is due. I disagree with you on many things and sometimes you can be very rude when you debate with people whom you disagree with (and before you claim the pot is calling the kettle black I will beat you to it by admitting I have a problem with that too and haven't been too kind to you and Abu Loren when we have clashed)... but you do very good and extensive research, and I commend you for that. That may or  may not be giving you "too much credit", but I couldn't care less.

I will point out the positives I see in people regardless of their faith or whether or not we are on good terms. LOL I think right now I'm on good terms with everyone on the board, we haven't had a good scrap for a while. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


And even if he does "understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians", he certainly does not understand the teachings of Islam, as we see in his latest shenanigans about Muhammad (peace be upon him) allegedly "murdering" prisoners.  The dude is a clown, pure and simple.

Do you mean the mass killings of POWs from the Banu Qurayzah tribe? They were combatants who were taken prisoner after their tribe betrayed the early Muslims and caused a situation that almost caused them to be defeated in battle and possibly massacred or taken into slavery. They weren't "innocent people", but I still have no problem calling their mass execution a form of mass murder of prisoners.

The 250 Syrian soldiers who were marched into the desert by ISIS and executed en-masse, given that they were serving the regime of Bashar Al Assad, were probably not all innocent of war crimes and abuses of civilians. Yet their humiliating march and mass execution by gunfire was a form of murder.

As you are going to say, the prophets in the Bible (assuming they existed and that the Biblical accounts are true... many of them aren't... check out my last comment in our debate on the Pharaoh) not only killed prisoners, but also innocent civilians, including infants. If Muhammad was a murderer for killing his prisoners, they were genocidal maniacs, at least according to the Old Testament accounts, some of which we know are wrong. Unlike in the past, I have no problem anymore with admitting both. Wink


Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

And don't worry.  He is not going to convert to Christianity "for some reason", not that you are necessarily urging him to.  After all, you have decided to no longer try to convert people to Christianity.       

If he converts, that is his choice.

I'm no longer going to try to convert people, but will continue to be a witness to my faith through how I try to live my life, and will discuss it when appropriate. I will continue to pray for people to become Christian, because quite frankly I believe it is a good thing and it is better than other alternatives. However, I will no longer (probably) go out of my way to try to convert others.

Thanks for not trying to convert me to Islam anymore, though if you chose to I can't even say I would mind. When you come to the same conclusion about your religion that I have reached about mine, you may decide to stop trying to convert people to Islam altogether. Wink

We'll talk more later, probably in a few days, inshAllah.


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:32pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that?

It may be the hardest thing anyone could be asked to do, but yes, a true Christian is expected to do exactly that.  And many of them (Christian and otherwise) do.  I have read stories of parents who not only reconciled with the person who killed their child, but have gone on to be friends and have helped the criminal to overcome the sickness that drove him to it.

Thankfully, it is not something I have had to face myself, so it is a bit presumptuous of me to describe the process; but I suppose it starts with recognizing the innate humanity of the killer, understanding his background and the forces that shaped his character and motivated his actions -- in short, putting yourself in his shoes.  There is always an explanation for the crime, however wrongheaded the logic or however narrow the viewpoint or however desperate the circumstances that led to it.  We can feel sorry for a criminal whose worldview has become so distorted that he has (in his mind) no choice but to hurt others.

And yes, we still need courts and jails.  There need to be practical consequences for crimes in order to provide disincentives to potential criminals.  But these consequences should never be outright cruel.  No truly civilized person could support torture or stoning to death, for instance, no matter how repugnant the crime.  Incarceration seems to be as far as progressive societies are willing to go, and it seems to do the job.

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:37pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I'm no longer going to try to convert people, but will continue to be a witness to my faith through how I try to live my life, and will discuss it when appropriate. I will continue to pray for people to become Christian, because quite frankly I believe it is a good thing and it is better than other alternatives. However, I will no longer (probably) go out of my way to try to convert others.


So, in other words, you are a walking contradiction is more ways than one.  You are a skeptic and a believer at the same time. Wink   You also wouldn't "probably" go out your way to convert others to Christianity yet you will "pray" that they do.  This is despite the fact that you have clearly said that you would not covert to Islam because of the alleged "errors" and that it would be "illogical" to convert from Christianity to Islam for that reason.   

I just don't know what to say to such blatant contradictions.  The hypocrisy and arrogance are shocking!  Shocked  Such lack of logic is surreal. 


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:43pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that?

It may be the hardest thing anyone could be asked to do, but yes, a true Christian is expected to do exactly that.  And many of them (Christian and otherwise) do.  I have read stories of parents who not only reconciled with the person who killed their child, but have gone on to be friends and have helped the criminal to overcome the sickness that drove him to it.

Thankfully, it is not something I have had to face myself, so it is a bit presumptuous of me to describe the process; but I suppose it starts with recognizing the innate humanity of the killer, understanding his background and the forces that shaped his character and motivated his actions -- in short, putting yourself in his shoes.  There is always an explanation for the crime, however wrongheaded the logic or however narrow the viewpoint or however desperate the circumstances that led to it.  We can feel sorry for a criminal whose worldview has become so distorted that he has (in his mind) no choice but to hurt others.

And yes, we still need courts and jails.  There need to be practical consequences for crimes in order to provide disincentives to potential criminals.  But these consequences should never be outright cruel.  No truly civilized person could support torture or stoning to death, for instance, no matter how repugnant the crime.  Incarceration seems to be as far as progressive societies are willing to go, and it seems to do the job.


I am sure there are some people that do indeed "forgive" the person, but there are many more who do not.  And that's my point.  Most people would not and do not find this teaching to be wholly practical.  You confirmed my point by acknowledging that courts and jails are a necessity.  Of course they are!  But if the Christian teaching was practical, which it is not, then there would be need for courts and jails. 

As for "explanations" for the crime, I am sure most people could care less.  Try forgiving someone like http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/fish/index.html - Albert Fish or understanding his reason for killing.   


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:45pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.

Big%20smile Coming from you, that's quite a compliment!

And I was just thinking to myself, TG12345 would make an awesome humanist! Wink


Speaking of "humanists", you still haven't answered my question to you about abortion that I posed on another thread a while back.  I know it is unrelated to this thread, but I just thought I would remind you.  Wink


I forgot to also remind you that I asked you about what "humanists" actually "believe" with regard to the standard atheistic view that we are all just chemical accidents living out a meaningless existence.  Wink


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:48pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As much as I love to argue/debate with Islamispeace, he is right when he says that Islam teaches kindness to one's neighbour and permission to wage war in self-defence.

As also Ron Webb correctly pointed out, Jesus took this a step further by not only ordering commanding for neighbours, but also enemies. That is a lot harder to do than loving those who love you and fighting those who hate you... even if it is in self-defence and not offense.

This teaching is one a few reasons why, in spite of the many errors and contradictions that remain in the Bible, I am still a Christian.



This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that? 

I disagree with you on this. If the goal of prison is to degrade and abuse and destroy, you are correct. If the goal is to rehabilitate and teach a lesson, then sending someone there can be an act of love.

Many people have found God in prison, including a student I once taught in an adult education class who used to deal crystal meth and be an "enforcer" for a street gang and beat people up so badly that in comparison, what happened to me in Palestine 4 years ago was a joke.

In jail, he was befriended by some Christians and got involved in Bible studies and chapels. He left the gang, and after being released he worked on his GED (General Education Diploma).

Prisons, at least in Canada, offer inmates the oppurtunity to study and get their high school diplomas, as well as learn work skills, and get counseling. Of course, being locked up sucks and there are many freedoms you lose... but it's for both the good of society and the good of the prisoner if he or she is behind bars for committing acts of violence. There is a lot about the prison system that I think needs to be reformed, but that is a different discussion topic.

Even those who are in prison and will never be let out- nor for the good and the good of society, should they be- can choose to do positive things in jail.

Unlike an execution, a prison sentence does not need to stop a prisoner from living a productive and faithful life. 

Regarding forgiving and even loving someone who has killed your children... such a thing would be extremely hard, but not impossible. Read about Imaculee Ilibagiza and if you have time, her book Left to Tell: Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust. She is a Catholic Rwandan Tutsi woman whose family members were slaughtered in cold blood by Hutu militias. She in spite of her horrific loss, forgave their killers. She managed to track one of them down- when he was in prison- and tell him she forgave him.


Tom Fox was a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams who was murdered in Iraq after being kidnapped and held for several months. His team members chose to forgive the killers of their fellow activist.

Let me tell from you from experience that when you are in a conflict zone like the West Bank (and Tom was not only there, but in Iraq... where the death count surpasses that in the West Bank by only God knows how many tens of thousands of people), you get very close to the people you are with. When I was with ISMers, for the time we were together, we were like blood. When one of us was hurt or arrested, we felt it as a blow against everyone of us. I couldn't even begin to imagine how I would have felt if one of my comrades was killed by the Israeli Army, or even badly hurt. When you are in that kind of situation, the people you are with become sometimes even closer than family. That may feel very weird and hard to understand, but unless you have been in such a situation, I don't think you could understand and it is hard for me to even put into words how close a bond you develop with others on your team.

When Tom Fox was killed, CPTers lost not only a dedicated activist and man of God, but also a brother and comrade.

However, what I will paste below is the statement they wrote.

Forgiveness and love is possible, even for people who have done the most heinous and horrific things to you and those whom you love the most.

It's definitely not easy. But it is possible.



New York, March 10, 2006 --The co-directors of Christian Peacemakers Teams today issued the following statement:

In grief we tremble before God who wraps us with compassion.  The death of our beloved colleague and friend pierces us with pain.  Tom Fox's body was found in Baghdad yesterday.

Christian Peacemaker Teams extends our deep and heartfelt condolences to the family and community of Tom Fox, with whom we have traveled so closely in these days of crisis.

We mourn the loss of Tom Fox who combined a lightness of spirit, a firm opposition to all oppression, and the recognition of God in everyone.

We renew our plea for the safe release of Harmeet Sooden, Jim Loney and Norman Kember.  Each of our teammates has responded to Jesus' prophetic call to live out a nonviolent alternative to the cycle of violence and revenge. 

In response to Tom's passing, we ask that everyone set aside inclinations to vilify or demonize others, no matter what they have done.   In Tom's own words: "We reject violence to punish anyone. We ask that there be no retaliation on relatives or property. We forgive those who consider us their enemies. We hope that in loving both friends and enemies and by intervening nonviolently to aid those who are systematically oppressed, we can contribute in some small way to transforming this volatile situation." 

Even as we grieve the loss of our beloved colleague, we stand in the light of his strong witness to the power of love and the courage of nonviolence.  That light reveals the way out of fear and grief and war.

Through these days of crisis, Christian Peacemaker Teams has been surrounded and upheld by a great outpouring of compassion:  messages of support, acts of mercy, prayers, and public actions offered by the most senior religious councils and by school children, by political leaders and by those organizing for justice and human rights, by friends in distant nations and by strangers near at hand.   These words and actions sustain us.  While one of our teammates is lost to us, the strength of this outpouring is not lost to God's movement for just peace among all peoples. 

At the forefront of that support are strong and courageous actions from Muslim brothers and sisters throughout the world for which we are profoundly grateful.  Their graciousness inspires us to continue working for the day when Christians speak up as boldly for the human rights of thousands Iraqis still detained illegally by the United States and United Kingdom.

Such an outpouring of action for justice and peace would be a fitting memorial for Tom.  Let us all join our voices on behalf of those who continue to suffer under occupation, whose loved ones have been killed or are missing, and in so doing may we hasten the day when both those who are wrongly detained and those who bear arms will return safely to their homes. In such a peace we will find solace for our grief. 

Despite the tragedy of this day, we remain committed to put into practice these words of Jim Loney: "With the waging of war, we will not comply.  With the help of God's grace, we will struggle for justice.  With God's abiding kindness, we will love even our enemies."  We continue in hope for Jim, Harmeet and Norman's safe return home.

DR. DOUG PRITCHARD, CPT CO-DIRECTOR 
and REV. CAROL ROSE, CPT CO-DIRECTOR

Tom Fox's blog is http://bruno.ncccusa.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/ - http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/

See also http://www.cpt.org - http://www.cpt.org http://www.cpt.org -  

Previous stories:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060129CPTrenewedthreats.html -



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:51pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I'm no longer going to try to convert people, but will continue to be a witness to my faith through how I try to live my life, and will discuss it when appropriate. I will continue to pray for people to become Christian, because quite frankly I believe it is a good thing and it is better than other alternatives. However, I will no longer (probably) go out of my way to try to convert others.


So, in other words, you are a walking contradiction is more ways than one.  You are a skeptic and a believer at the same time. Wink   You also wouldn't "probably" go out your way to convert others to Christianity yet you will "pray" that they do.  This is despite the fact that you have clearly said that you would not covert to Islam because of the alleged "errors" and that it would be "illogical" to convert from Christianity to Islam for that reason.   

I just don't know what to say to such blatant contradictions.  The hypocrisy and arrogance are shocking!  Shocked  Such lack of logic is surreal. 

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:57pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As much as I love to argue/debate with Islamispeace, he is right when he says that Islam teaches kindness to one's neighbour and permission to wage war in self-defence.

As also Ron Webb correctly pointed out, Jesus took this a step further by not only ordering commanding for neighbours, but also enemies. That is a lot harder to do than loving those who love you and fighting those who hate you... even if it is in self-defence and not offense.

This teaching is one a few reasons why, in spite of the many errors and contradictions that remain in the Bible, I am still a Christian.



This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that? 

I disagree with you on this. If the goal of prison is to degrade and abuse and destroy, you are correct. If the goal is to rehabilitate and teach a lesson, then sending someone there can be an act of love.

Many people have found God in prison, including a student I once taught in an adult education class who used to deal crystal meth and be an "enforcer" for a street gang and beat people up so badly that in comparison, what happened to me in Palestine 4 years ago was a joke.

In jail, he was befriended by some Christians and got involved in Bible studies and chapels. He left the gang, and after being released he worked on his GED (General Education Diploma).

Prisons, at least in Canada, offer inmates the oppurtunity to study and get their high school diplomas, as well as learn work skills, and get counseling. Of course, being locked up sucks and there are many freedoms you lose... but it's for both the good of society and the good of the prisoner if he or she is behind bars for committing acts of violence. There is a lot about the prison system that I think needs to be reformed, but that is a different discussion topic.

Even those who are in prison and will never be let out- nor for the good and the good of society, should they be- can choose to do positive things in jail.

Unlike an execution, a prison sentence does not need to stop a prisoner from living a productive and faithful life. 

Regarding forgiving and even loving someone who has killed your children... such a thing would be extremely hard, but not impossible. Read about Imaculee Ilibagiza and if you have time, her book Left to Tell: Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust. She is a Catholic Rwandan Tutsi woman whose family members were slaughtered in cold blood by Hutu militias. She in spite of her horrific loss, forgave their killers. She managed to track one of them down- when he was in prison- and tell him she forgave him.


Tom Fox was a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams who was murdered in Iraq after being kidnapped and held for several months. His team members chose to forgive the killers of their fellow activist.

Let me tell from you from experience that when you are in a conflict zone like the West Bank (and Tom was not only there, but in Hebron), you get very close to the people you are with. When I was with ISMers, for the time we were together, we were like blood. When one of us was hurt or arrested, we felt it as a blow against everyone of us. I couldn't even begin to imagine how I would have felt if one of my comrades was killed by the Israeli Army, or even badly hurt. When you are in that kind of situation, the people you are with become sometimes even closer than family. That may feel very weird and hard to understand, but unless you have been in such a situation, I don't think you could understand and it is hard for me to even put into words how close a bond you develop with others on your team.

When Tom Fox was killed, CPTers lost not only a dedicated activist and man of God, but also a brother and comrade.

However, what I will paste below is the statement they wrote.

Forgiveness and love is possible, even for people who have done the most heinous and horrific things to you and those whom you love the most.

It's definitely not easy. But it is possible.



New York, March 10, 2006 --The co-directors of Christian Peacemakers Teams today issued the following statement:

In grief we tremble before God who wraps us with compassion.  The death of our beloved colleague and friend pierces us with pain.  Tom Fox's body was found in Baghdad yesterday.

Christian Peacemaker Teams extends our deep and heartfelt condolences to the family and community of Tom Fox, with whom we have traveled so closely in these days of crisis.

We mourn the loss of Tom Fox who combined a lightness of spirit, a firm opposition to all oppression, and the recognition of God in everyone.

We renew our plea for the safe release of Harmeet Sooden, Jim Loney and Norman Kember.  Each of our teammates has responded to Jesus' prophetic call to live out a nonviolent alternative to the cycle of violence and revenge. 

In response to Tom's passing, we ask that everyone set aside inclinations to vilify or demonize others, no matter what they have done.   In Tom's own words: "We reject violence to punish anyone. We ask that there be no retaliation on relatives or property. We forgive those who consider us their enemies. We hope that in loving both friends and enemies and by intervening nonviolently to aid those who are systematically oppressed, we can contribute in some small way to transforming this volatile situation." 

Even as we grieve the loss of our beloved colleague, we stand in the light of his strong witness to the power of love and the courage of nonviolence.  That light reveals the way out of fear and grief and war.

Through these days of crisis, Christian Peacemaker Teams has been surrounded and upheld by a great outpouring of compassion:  messages of support, acts of mercy, prayers, and public actions offered by the most senior religious councils and by school children, by political leaders and by those organizing for justice and human rights, by friends in distant nations and by strangers near at hand.   These words and actions sustain us.  While one of our teammates is lost to us, the strength of this outpouring is not lost to God's movement for just peace among all peoples. 

At the forefront of that support are strong and courageous actions from Muslim brothers and sisters throughout the world for which we are profoundly grateful.  Their graciousness inspires us to continue working for the day when Christians speak up as boldly for the human rights of thousands Iraqis still detained illegally by the United States and United Kingdom.

Such an outpouring of action for justice and peace would be a fitting memorial for Tom.  Let us all join our voices on behalf of those who continue to suffer under occupation, whose loved ones have been killed or are missing, and in so doing may we hasten the day when both those who are wrongly detained and those who bear arms will return safely to their homes. In such a peace we will find solace for our grief. 

Despite the tragedy of this day, we remain committed to put into practice these words of Jim Loney: "With the waging of war, we will not comply.  With the help of God's grace, we will struggle for justice.  With God's abiding kindness, we will love even our enemies."  We continue in hope for Jim, Harmeet and Norman's safe return home.

DR. DOUG PRITCHARD, CPT CO-DIRECTOR 
and REV. CAROL ROSE, CPT CO-DIRECTOR

Tom Fox's blog is http://bruno.ncccusa.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/ - http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/

See also http://www.cpt.org - http://www.cpt.org http://www.cpt.org -  

Previous stories:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060129CPTrenewedthreats.html -
So again, if the majority of criminals do not "reform" and, given the chance would commit more crimes if they were released, then where is the practicality in this teaching? 

It is precisely due to the impracticality of this teaching that no rational country actually applies it.  To apply it would mean that no person should be punished for his crime, but rather should be forgiven.  Such a system of law would be a criminal's dream.   


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 5:59pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:14pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile


By the way, if you feel that Christianity is a "good thing" and "a better alternative", you might want to consider Jainism:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm%20 - http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm

Just a suggestion. Wink


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:25pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As much as I love to argue/debate with Islamispeace, he is right when he says that Islam teaches kindness to one's neighbour and permission to wage war in self-defence.

As also Ron Webb correctly pointed out, Jesus took this a step further by not only ordering commanding for neighbours, but also enemies. That is a lot harder to do than loving those who love you and fighting those who hate you... even if it is in self-defence and not offense.

This teaching is one a few reasons why, in spite of the many errors and contradictions that remain in the Bible, I am still a Christian.



This teaching might sound nice, but the problem is that it is completely impractical.  If this teaching was actually practical, then we would have no use of criminal courts and jails.  Because if you are supposed to love someone regardless of the harm they cause you, then theoretically, Christians should not believe in courts and jails.  How can you, if you are supposed to love your enemies?  Would you send someone you "love" to prison for committing a crime against you?  What if someone, God forbid, killed your child?  If the teaching is to be taken literally, are we supposed to "love" that person?  What parent could do that? 

I disagree with you on this. If the goal of prison is to degrade and abuse and destroy, you are correct. If the goal is to rehabilitate and teach a lesson, then sending someone there can be an act of love.

Many people have found God in prison, including a student I once taught in an adult education class who used to deal crystal meth and be an "enforcer" for a street gang and beat people up so badly that in comparison, what happened to me in Palestine 4 years ago was a joke.

In jail, he was befriended by some Christians and got involved in Bible studies and chapels. He left the gang, and after being released he worked on his GED (General Education Diploma).

Prisons, at least in Canada, offer inmates the oppurtunity to study and get their high school diplomas, as well as learn work skills, and get counseling. Of course, being locked up sucks and there are many freedoms you lose... but it's for both the good of society and the good of the prisoner if he or she is behind bars for committing acts of violence. There is a lot about the prison system that I think needs to be reformed, but that is a different discussion topic.

Even those who are in prison and will never be let out- nor for the good and the good of society, should they be- can choose to do positive things in jail.

Unlike an execution, a prison sentence does not need to stop a prisoner from living a productive and faithful life. 

Regarding forgiving and even loving someone who has killed your children... such a thing would be extremely hard, but not impossible. Read about Imaculee Ilibagiza and if you have time, her book Left to Tell: Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust. She is a Catholic Rwandan Tutsi woman whose family members were slaughtered in cold blood by Hutu militias. She in spite of her horrific loss, forgave their killers. She managed to track one of them down- when he was in prison- and tell him she forgave him.


Tom Fox was a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams who was murdered in Iraq after being kidnapped and held for several months. His team members chose to forgive the killers of their fellow activist.

Let me tell from you from experience that when you are in a conflict zone like the West Bank (and Tom was not only there, but in Hebron), you get very close to the people you are with. When I was with ISMers, for the time we were together, we were like blood. When one of us was hurt or arrested, we felt it as a blow against everyone of us. I couldn't even begin to imagine how I would have felt if one of my comrades was killed by the Israeli Army, or even badly hurt. When you are in that kind of situation, the people you are with become sometimes even closer than family. That may feel very weird and hard to understand, but unless you have been in such a situation, I don't think you could understand and it is hard for me to even put into words how close a bond you develop with others on your team.

When Tom Fox was killed, CPTers lost not only a dedicated activist and man of God, but also a brother and comrade.

However, what I will paste below is the statement they wrote.

Forgiveness and love is possible, even for people who have done the most heinous and horrific things to you and those whom you love the most.

It's definitely not easy. But it is possible.



New York, March 10, 2006 --The co-directors of Christian Peacemakers Teams today issued the following statement:

In grief we tremble before God who wraps us with compassion.  The death of our beloved colleague and friend pierces us with pain.  Tom Fox's body was found in Baghdad yesterday.

Christian Peacemaker Teams extends our deep and heartfelt condolences to the family and community of Tom Fox, with whom we have traveled so closely in these days of crisis.

We mourn the loss of Tom Fox who combined a lightness of spirit, a firm opposition to all oppression, and the recognition of God in everyone.

We renew our plea for the safe release of Harmeet Sooden, Jim Loney and Norman Kember.  Each of our teammates has responded to Jesus' prophetic call to live out a nonviolent alternative to the cycle of violence and revenge. 

In response to Tom's passing, we ask that everyone set aside inclinations to vilify or demonize others, no matter what they have done.   In Tom's own words: "We reject violence to punish anyone. We ask that there be no retaliation on relatives or property. We forgive those who consider us their enemies. We hope that in loving both friends and enemies and by intervening nonviolently to aid those who are systematically oppressed, we can contribute in some small way to transforming this volatile situation." 

Even as we grieve the loss of our beloved colleague, we stand in the light of his strong witness to the power of love and the courage of nonviolence.  That light reveals the way out of fear and grief and war.

Through these days of crisis, Christian Peacemaker Teams has been surrounded and upheld by a great outpouring of compassion:  messages of support, acts of mercy, prayers, and public actions offered by the most senior religious councils and by school children, by political leaders and by those organizing for justice and human rights, by friends in distant nations and by strangers near at hand.   These words and actions sustain us.  While one of our teammates is lost to us, the strength of this outpouring is not lost to God's movement for just peace among all peoples. 

At the forefront of that support are strong and courageous actions from Muslim brothers and sisters throughout the world for which we are profoundly grateful.  Their graciousness inspires us to continue working for the day when Christians speak up as boldly for the human rights of thousands Iraqis still detained illegally by the United States and United Kingdom.

Such an outpouring of action for justice and peace would be a fitting memorial for Tom.  Let us all join our voices on behalf of those who continue to suffer under occupation, whose loved ones have been killed or are missing, and in so doing may we hasten the day when both those who are wrongly detained and those who bear arms will return safely to their homes. In such a peace we will find solace for our grief. 

Despite the tragedy of this day, we remain committed to put into practice these words of Jim Loney: "With the waging of war, we will not comply.  With the help of God's grace, we will struggle for justice.  With God's abiding kindness, we will love even our enemies."  We continue in hope for Jim, Harmeet and Norman's safe return home.

DR. DOUG PRITCHARD, CPT CO-DIRECTOR 
and REV. CAROL ROSE, CPT CO-DIRECTOR

Tom Fox's blog is http://bruno.ncccusa.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/ - http://waitinginthelight.blogspot.com/

See also http://www.cpt.org - http://www.cpt.org http://www.cpt.org -  

Previous stories:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051206peacemakers.html

http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html - http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060119appeals.html
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/060129CPTrenewedthreats.html -
So again, if the majority of criminals do not "reform" and, given the chance would commit more crimes if they were released, then where is the practicality in this teaching? 

It is precisely due to the impracticality of this teaching that no rational country actually applies it.  To apply it would mean that no person should be punished for his crime, but rather should be forgiven.  Such a system of law would be a criminal's dream.   


LOL I'm done my Palestine presentation work for the day, so we can debate some more.

Being raped should not be a part of anyone's life. These things happen though both inside and outside prisons. Many prisons however do need to change to be more vigilant in stopping this kind of thing.

You loving someone does not guarantee they will not do bad things. You can't guarantee that even if you beat them or cut off their hands.

Providing a prison experience where the person can be helped if he or she chooses to take advantage of the offer can be an act of love. Whether the person uses this offer however is up to them.

We both believe God because of His mercy and love provides humanity a way to come to Him, even if we disagree what that way is. That there are those who reject it does not make Him any less merciful or loving.

You can punish someone and love them at the same time, if the goal of the punishment is to push that person in the right direction. You can't do that however when you kill them.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:31pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile

Phew! I'm so glad to hear that! LOL

If you want to go even further, also feel free to label me a "terror lover" and "naive and irresponsible, looking to get your head kicked in". The first compliment was handed to me by some conservatives after I got back from Palestine, and the second by some people in my family when they learned I was going to return to Palestine.

Try this out:

"Arrogant walking contradictory naive terror loving irresponsible hypocrite looking for a head bashing."

Feel free to also call me an "Arab lover", all of us ISMers got called that a lot by Israeli soldiers. We wore that label with pride.




Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:32pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile


By the way, if you feel that Christianity is a "good thing" and "a better alternative", you might want to consider Jainism:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm%20 - http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm

Just a suggestion. Wink

Thanks but no thanks. When you admit the Quran and hadiths have the errors in them that we both know they do, perhaps you can check Jainism out. I don't think they eat pork either. Big%20smile


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:42pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Dude, I just wanted to tell you that if one day for some reason you decided to convert, you'd make an awesome Christian. You understand some of Jesus' teachings better than many Christians do. Thanks.

Big%20smile Coming from you, that's quite a compliment!

And I was just thinking to myself, TG12345 would make an awesome humanist! Wink

Oh dear, I guess I deserved that one. Tongue

How do you define humanism?


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:53pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL I'm done my Palestine presentation work for the day, so we can debate some more.

Being raped should not be a part of anyone's life. These things happen though both inside and outside prisons. Many prisons however do need to change to be more vigilant in stopping this kind of thing.

You loving someone does not guarantee they will not do bad things. You can't guarantee that even if you beat them or cut off their hands.

Providing a prison experience where the person can be helped if he or she chooses to take advantage of the offer can be an act of love. Whether the person uses this offer however is up to them.

We both believe God because of His mercy and love provides humanity a way to come to Him, even if we disagree what that way is. That there are those who reject it does not make Him any less merciful or loving.

You can punish someone and love them at the same time, if the goal of the punishment is to push that person in the right direction. You can't do that however when you kill them.


This is ludicrous.  You can try to sugar-coat sending someone to prison as "loving" them, but the fact is that to most people, prison is a nightmare which no one would want someone they love to experience.  Your freedom of movement is taken away from you.  You are locked up with violent criminals and rapists.  That's not love. 

For you to suggest that you can love someone and punish them at the same time is also logically absurd.  That's like saying that since someone loves you and fears for your afterlife, then they should force you to convert to their religion.  Because after all, it is for your own good.  Even if you don't agree that their religion is the truth, from their point of view, it is.  Hence, to forcefully convert you in order to save you from Hell would be an act of love. 

Another way to put it is regarding God and the eternal punishment of sinners in Hell.  How can God love them when He will punish them for eternity? 


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 6:57pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile


By the way, if you feel that Christianity is a "good thing" and "a better alternative", you might want to consider Jainism:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm%20 - http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm

Just a suggestion. Wink

Thanks but no thanks. When you admit the Quran and hadiths have the errors in them that we both know they do, perhaps you can check Jainism out. I don't think they eat pork either. Big%20smile


Really?  I'm surprised.  I thought you would find Jainism to be right up your alley given the Jains' emphasis on non-violence.  In a way, the Jain view on non-violence is actually more complete than the Christian view.  Jain non-violence is completely unconditional, and applies to all living things.  Of course, I don't think that it would be practical either.

I am not going to admit your poorly researched arguments against Islam.  As we have already seen, you have insisted on "errors" in the past, only to find out that you were mistaken.  LOL  It is always enjoyable to see some so sure of himself only to admit later that he was wrong.  Let' do it again real soon! 


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:02pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile

Phew! I'm so glad to hear that! LOL

If you want to go even further, also feel free to label me a "terror lover" and "naive and irresponsible, looking to get your head kicked in". The first compliment was handed to me by some conservatives after I got back from Palestine, and the second by some people in my family when they learned I was going to return to Palestine.

Try this out:

"Arrogant walking contradictory naive terror loving irresponsible hypocrite looking for a head bashing."

Feel free to also call me an "Arab lover", all of us ISMers got called that a lot by Israeli soldiers. We wore that label with pride.




LOL Not sure what one has to do with the other.  You apply one set of standards to yourself yet apply a different set to others.  I am sorry that you are willing to wear this "label with pride", if that is what you are saying.  I would think that most people, especially God-fearing people, would not want to be labelled as arrogant hypocrites.  Shocked


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:05pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL I'm done my Palestine presentation work for the day, so we can debate some more.

Being raped should not be a part of anyone's life. These things happen though both inside and outside prisons. Many prisons however do need to change to be more vigilant in stopping this kind of thing.

You loving someone does not guarantee they will not do bad things. You can't guarantee that even if you beat them or cut off their hands.

Providing a prison experience where the person can be helped if he or she chooses to take advantage of the offer can be an act of love. Whether the person uses this offer however is up to them.

We both believe God because of His mercy and love provides humanity a way to come to Him, even if we disagree what that way is. That there are those who reject it does not make Him any less merciful or loving.

You can punish someone and love them at the same time, if the goal of the punishment is to push that person in the right direction. You can't do that however when you kill them.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


This is ludicrous.  You can try to sugar-coat sending someone to prison as "loving" them, but the fact is that to most people, prison is a nightmare which no one would want someone they love to experience.  Your freedom of movement is taken away from you.  You are locked up with violent criminals and rapists.  That's not love. 

For you to suggest that you can love someone and punish them at the same time is also logically absurd.  That's like saying that since someone loves you and fears for your afterlife, then they should force you to convert to their religion.  Because after all, it is for your own good.  Even if you don't agree that their religion is the truth, from their point of view, it is.  Hence, to forcefully convert you in order to save you from Hell would be an act of love. 

Another way to put it is regarding God and the eternal punishment of sinners in Hell.  How can God love them when He will punish them for eternity? 

It isn't different from the concept of God being most merciful, as Islam teaches He is. One could ask why a merciful God would make an eternal hell.

Islam if I am not mistaken, unlike Christianity, does not teach that God loves sinners. It does teach He is merciful to everyone though, and He is more merciful than anyone else.

Loving others while punishing them is as "logically absurd" as being merciful to them and doing the same thing.

Funny how you bring up forceful conversions and state that doing that to someone to save them from eternity in hell would be an act of love. It would also be an act of mercy, going by your logic. Yet your religion forbids it.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:08pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


This is ludicrous.  You can try to sugar-coat sending someone to prison as "loving" them, but the fact is that to most people, prison is a nightmare which no one would want someone they love to experience.  Your freedom of movement is taken away from you.  You are locked up with violent criminals and rapists.  That's not love. 

For you to suggest that you can love someone and punish them at the same time is also logically absurd.  That's like saying that since someone loves you and fears for your afterlife, then they should force you to convert to their religion.  Because after all, it is for your own good.  Even if you don't agree that their religion is the truth, from their point of view, it is.  Hence, to forcefully convert you in order to save you from Hell would be an act of love. 

Another way to put it is regarding God and the eternal punishment of sinners in Hell.  How can God love them when He will punish them for eternity? 

It is a hard thing for a non-Christian to understand.
but you can ask God into your heart to reveal it.  Smile
You have to understand Yshwe, and receive the Holy Spirit.

I am sure I remember a teaching in the qur'an about allah requiring a thing that you may not like but is good for you.  This is punishment in love.

Just like Proverbs 3:

11 My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction:

12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.


asalaam and blessings.


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:14pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile

Phew! I'm so glad to hear that! LOL

If you want to go even further, also feel free to label me a "terror lover" and "naive and irresponsible, looking to get your head kicked in". The first compliment was handed to me by some conservatives after I got back from Palestine, and the second by some people in my family when they learned I was going to return to Palestine.

Try this out:

"Arrogant walking contradictory naive terror loving irresponsible hypocrite looking for a head bashing."

Feel free to also call me an "Arab lover", all of us ISMers got called that a lot by Israeli soldiers. We wore that label with pride.




LOL Not sure what one has to do with the other.  You apply one set of standards to yourself yet apply a different set to others.  I am sorry that you are willing to wear this "label with pride", if that is what you are saying.  I would think that most people, especially God-fearing people, would not want to be labelled as arrogant hypocrites.  Shocked

I meant the label given to me by the IDF, that of being an "Arab lover". Reading comprehension, Islamispeace.

Being labeled "arrogant" by someone though who uses ad hominems and insults on this forum against other people more than anyone else though isn't that big of a deal for me.

I admit I don't have a lot my theology figured out very well right now and am confused about many things. In spite of that, I still hold to my faith and aren't ashamed of it. Not going out of my way to convert anyone but if they choose to enter it, I think it's great.

Having you though call me "arrogant" and "hypocrite" really isn't that big of an issue. You act more arrogantly towards others on this board than any other member I have seen in a long time, perhaps with the exception of "Power of God", so this is an obvious example of the pot calling the kettle black.


Feel free to call me what you want. If you want ideas for more insults that you want to throw at me, let me know. I do after all have an English major. Wink


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:20pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Thank you, I will! Smile


By the way, if you feel that Christianity is a "good thing" and "a better alternative", you might want to consider Jainism:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm%20 - http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~pluralsm/affiliates/jainism/jainedu/5greatvows.htm

Just a suggestion. Wink

Thanks but no thanks. When you admit the Quran and hadiths have the errors in them that we both know they do, perhaps you can check Jainism out. I don't think they eat pork either. Big%20smile
[/QUOTE]

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Really?  I'm surprised.  I thought you would find Jainism to be right up your alley given the Jains' emphasis on non-violence.  In a way, the Jain view on non-violence is actually more complete than the Christian view.  Jain non-violence is completely unconditional, and applies to all living things.  Of course, I don't think that it would be practical either.

Jainism doesn't teach in the existence of God, and as I already stated, I'm not willing to become an atheist.

You are the first Muslim I have met who encourages non-Muslims to convert to Jainism. That must be a first in the history of Islamicity. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


I am not going to admit your poorly researched arguments against Islam.  As we have already seen, you have insisted on "errors" in the past, only to find out that you were mistaken.  LOL  It is always enjoyable to see some so sure of himself only to admit later that he was wrong.  Let' do it again real soon! 

There are three threads waiting for you, buddy. Reply when you have time, and when I have time I will reply to your response.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:30pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.


Thank you, I will! Smile

Phew! I'm so glad to hear that! LOL

If you want to go even further, also feel free to label me a "terror lover" and "naive and irresponsible, looking to get your head kicked in". The first compliment was handed to me by some conservatives after I got back from Palestine, and the second by some people in my family when they learned I was going to return to Palestine.

Try this out:

"Arrogant walking contradictory naive terror loving irresponsible hypocrite looking for a head bashing."

Feel free to also call me an "Arab lover", all of us ISMers got called that a lot by Israeli soldiers. We wore that label with pride.




LOL Not sure what one has to do with the other.  You apply one set of standards to yourself yet apply a different set to others.  I am sorry that you are willing to wear this "label with pride", if that is what you are saying.  I would think that most people, especially God-fearing people, would not want to be labelled as arrogant hypocrites.  Shocked

I meant the label given to me by the IDF, that of being an "Arab lover". Reading comprehension, Islamispeace.

Being labeled "arrogant" by someone though who uses ad hominems and insults on this forum against other people more than anyone else though isn't that big of a deal for me.

I admit I don't have a lot my theology figured out very well right now and am confused about many things. In spite of that, I still hold to my faith and aren't ashamed of it. Not going out of my way to convert anyone but if they choose to enter it, I think it's great.

Having you though call me "arrogant" and "hypocrite" really isn't that big of an issue. You act more arrogantly towards others on this board than any other member I have seen in a long time, perhaps with the exception of "Power of God", so this is an obvious example of the pot calling the kettle black.


Feel free to call me what you want. If you want ideas for more insults that you want to throw at me, let me know. I do after all have an English major. Wink


That's not what you said.  You said that you would "probably" not go out of your way to convert someone, yet you would "pray" for them to convert.  You also obviously don't feel that it would be "illogical" for someone to convert to Christianity despite its many errors, yet would feel it be "illogical" for yourself to convert to Islam because of the alleged "errors". 

Regarding the labels, I did say "if that's what you are saying".  What was that you said about "reading comprehension"?  Wink

I can see that we are again heading in the direction of tit-for-tat responses where we exchange insults and sarcasm.  I am all for it, if that's what you want! Big%20smile


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:38pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Feel free to see me as a hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction if you must. You are probably right in some ways. Have a nice day. Smile

PS even better, see me as an hypocritical and arrogant walking contradiction who is also illogical. I forgot to consider your last sentence.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Thank you, I will! Smile

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


Phew! I'm so glad to hear that! LOL

If you want to go even further, also feel free to label me a "terror lover" and "naive and irresponsible, looking to get your head kicked in". The first compliment was handed to me by some conservatives after I got back from Palestine, and the second by some people in my family when they learned I was going to return to Palestine.

Try this out:

"Arrogant walking contradictory naive terror loving irresponsible hypocrite looking for a head bashing."

Feel free to also call me an "Arab lover", all of us ISMers got called that a lot by Israeli soldiers. We wore that label with pride.



Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


LOL Not sure what one has to do with the other.  You apply one set of standards to yourself yet apply a different set to others.  I am sorry that you are willing to wear this "label with pride", if that is what you are saying.  I would think that most people, especially God-fearing people, would not want to be labelled as arrogant hypocrites.  Shocked

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


I meant the label given to me by the IDF, that of being an "Arab lover". Reading comprehension, Islamispeace.

Being labeled "arrogant" by someone though who uses ad hominems and insults on this forum against other people more than anyone else though isn't that big of a deal for me.

I admit I don't have a lot my theology figured out very well right now and am confused about many things. In spite of that, I still hold to my faith and aren't ashamed of it. Not going out of my way to convert anyone but if they choose to enter it, I think it's great.

Having you though call me "arrogant" and "hypocrite" really isn't that big of an issue. You act more arrogantly towards others on this board than any other member I have seen in a long time, perhaps with the exception of "Power of God", so this is an obvious example of the pot calling the kettle black.


Feel free to call me what you want. If you want ideas for more insults that you want to throw at me, let me know. I do after all have an English major. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


That's not what you said.  You said that you would "probably" not go out of your way to convert someone, yet you would "pray" for them to convert.  You also obviously don't feel that it would be "illogical" for someone to convert to Christianity despite its many errors, yet would feel it be "illogical" for yourself to convert to Islam because of the alleged "errors". 

I'm not saying anywhere that it would be logical or illogical for someone to convert to Christianity, I'm just saying I think it would be good if they did so, in my view.  Is that what you meant by saying I'm a hypocrite and apply standards to people that I wouldn't apply to myself? Just curious.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Regarding the labels, I did say "if that's what you are saying".  What was that you said about "reading comprehension"?  Wink

You wrote:

I am sorry that you are willing to wear this "label with pride", if that is what you are saying.

The label I said I wore with pride was that of being an "Arab lover". That is definitely what I am saying.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


I can see that we are again heading in the direction of tit-for-tat responses where we exchange insults and sarcasm.  I am all for it, if that's what you want! Big%20smile

LOL let's go. We haven't had a good scrap in a while. LOL




Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:38pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Jainism doesn't teach in the existence of God, and as I already stated, I'm not willing to become an atheist.

You are the first Muslim I have met who encourages non-Muslims to convert to Jainism. That must be a first in the history of Islamicity. Wink


Maybe you should do some research before making false statements about another religion.  Jains are not "atheists".  They are a polytheistic religion.  Read the following for clarifications on some myths about Jainism:

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

Many people mistake Jainism for Hinduism, when they are actually very different.  Jains believe in gods known as "Thirthankars".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

There are three threads waiting for you, buddy. Reply when you have time, and when I have time I will reply to your response.


I assume that one of these is the one about the Exodus and how it allegedly didn't happen, which of course would falsify the Bible? Wink

Patience is a virtue, "buddy".  I will get to them in time.


-------------
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: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:43pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

I am sure there are some people that do indeed "forgive" the person, but there are many more who do not.  And that's my point.  Most people would not and do not find this teaching to be wholly practical.  You confirmed my point by acknowledging that courts and jails are a necessity.  Of course they are!  But if the Christian teaching was practical, which it is not, then there would be need for courts and jails.

Why would there be no need?  First, plenty of people "could care less" (to use your words) about Christian teaching; so for them, courts and jails would still be a necessary deterrent.

Second, even perfect love does not guarantee perfect behaviour.  Sadly, we often hurt those we love.  Again, the threat of a jail sentence might be an additional deterrent when mere love is insufficient.

Thirdly, even if unconditional love for all mankind is an impossible ideal for any of us, IMHO it is still a goal worth striving for.  Tell me, is it possible to be a perfect Muslim?  And if not, is it still a worthwhile goal?

Quote As for "explanations" for the crime, I am sure most people could care less.  Try forgiving someone like Albert Fish or understanding his reason for killing.

Actually, Albert Fish is one of the easier people to forgive.  He was clearly crazy, and it's pretty obvious why.  From his Wikipedia page:
His family had a history of mental illness. His uncle suffered from mania. A brother was confined in a state mental hospital. His sister was diagnosed with a "mental affliction". Three other relatives were diagnosed with mental illnesses and his mother had "aural and/or visual hallucinations". His father was a river boat captain and by 1870, was a fertilizer manufacturer. The elder Fish died in 1875 at the Sixth Street Station of the Pennsylvania Railroad in Washington, D.C. of a myocardial infarction. Fish's mother then put him into Saint John's Orphanage in Washington, where he was frequently treated sadistically. He began to enjoy the physical pain that the beatings brought. Of his time at the orphanage, Fish remarked, "I was there till I was nearly nine, and that's where I got started wrong. We were unmercifully whipped. I saw boys doing many things they should not have done."

And it goes on from there.

If you had been born into circumstances like that, don't you think maybe you would have been pretty messed up too?  I'm not defending his crimes, which were horrific.  But don't you see that he was as much a victim as the people he hurt?

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:43pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

It isn't different from the concept of God being most merciful, as Islam teaches He is. One could ask why a merciful God would make an eternal hell.

Islam if I am not mistaken, unlike Christianity, does not teach that God loves sinners. It does teach He is merciful to everyone though, and He is more merciful than anyone else.

Loving others while punishing them is as "logically absurd" as being merciful to them and doing the same thing.

Funny how you bring up forceful conversions and state that doing that to someone to save them from eternity in hell would be an act of love. It would also be an act of mercy, going by your logic. Yet your religion forbids it.


Islam teaches that God is merciful if we seek forgiveness.  It also teaches that God is just.  Those who reject God have rejected His mercy and have instead earned His justice.

In contrast, Christians want us to believe that God "loves us" yet at the same time, will throw us in Hell for eternity if we don't believe in him.  Pardon me for asking, but where exactly is the "love"?  Confused 

One of these scenarios makes no sense.  I pick door #2.   




-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:54pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Why would there be no need?  First, plenty of people "could care less" (to use your words) about Christian teaching; so for them, courts and jails would still be a necessary deterrent.

Second, even perfect love does not guarantee perfect behaviour.  Sadly, we often hurt those we love.  Again, the threat of a jail sentence might be an additional deterrent when mere love is insufficient.

Thirdly, even if unconditional love for all mankind is an impossible ideal for any of us, IMHO it is still a goal worth striving for.  Tell me, is it possible to be a perfect Muslim?  And if not, is it still a worthwhile goal?


If you are supposed to love and forgive your enemies, then courts and jails would have no function.  A criminal would have to be forgiven, not punished.  The idea of a jail sentence is to punish the person for his crime.  It is a form of vengeance.

Hope and reality are two different things.  You can deceive yourself through false hope, but it won't change anything.  What is the use of a teaching that simply cannot be practically applied?

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Actually, Albert Fish is one of the easier people to forgive.  He was clearly crazy, and it's pretty obvious why.  From his Wikipedia page:
His family had a history of mental illness. His uncle suffered from mania. A brother was confined in a state mental hospital. His sister was diagnosed with a "mental affliction". Three other relatives were diagnosed with mental illnesses and his mother had "aural and/or visual hallucinations". His father was a river boat captain and by 1870, was a fertilizer manufacturer. The elder Fish died in 1875 at the Sixth Street Station of the Pennsylvania Railroad in Washington, D.C. of a myocardial infarction. Fish's mother then put him into Saint John's Orphanage in Washington, where he was frequently treated sadistically. He began to enjoy the physical pain that the beatings brought. Of his time at the orphanage, Fish remarked, "I was there till I was nearly nine, and that's where I got started wrong. We were unmercifully whipped. I saw boys doing many things they should not have done."

And it goes on from there.

If you had been born into circumstances like that, don't you think maybe you would have been pretty messed up too?  I'm not defending his crimes, which were horrific.  But don't you see that he was as much a victim as the people he hurt?


And yet, the jurors found him guilty.  In other words, he was sane (although the Wikipedia article seems to contradict itself - go figure).  He knew what he was doing.  Try forgiving or "loving" such a person. 


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:55pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Jainism doesn't teach in the existence of God, and as I already stated, I'm not willing to become an atheist.

You are the first Muslim I have met who encourages non-Muslims to convert to Jainism. That must be a first in the history of Islamicity. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Maybe you should do some research before making false statements about another religion.  Jains are not "atheists".  They are a polytheistic religion.  Read the following for clarifications on some myths about Jainism:

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

Jainism believes in a "god" who did not create the universe and will not destroy it, and he does not even "operate" it.

The Truth Other philosophies including Hinduism, believe their truth to be absolute. As per Anekantvad in Jainism the truth is relative and multisided. Non-violence in Jainism is ultimate it encompasses even the minutest life forms. On the other hand in Hinduism, it is restricted to vegetarianism (that too under some castes) and cow protection. Concept of God is also different. Unlike Hinduism, Jainism does not believe God to be Creator, Operator and Destructor of Universe. Thus it can be seen that same terms connote different meanings in Hinduism and Jainism.

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

I don't consider such a being to be God. Also didn't say Jains are atheists, but converting to such a religion for me would be like becoming a "deist"... or in other words, an "atheist-lite".

If you consider a being that did not create the world, will not destroy it, does not operate it, does not care about us, will not judge us... and anyone of us can become like such as being "God"... that is your choice, not mine.

Jainism and the divine

Jains do not believe in a God or gods in the way that many other religions do, but they do believe in divine (or at least perfect) beings who are worthy of devotion.

This makes it difficult to give a straight answer to the question "is Jainism http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/ - atheistic ?" The scholar Heinrich Zimmer suggested that a new word was needed: transtheistic, meaning "inaccessible by arguments as to whether or not a God exists".

God and the problem of evil

The Jain view of God enables Jainism to explain the evil and suffering that exists in the world without the intellectual difficulties faced by religions that have an omnipotent, wholly good, creator God at their heart.

Where religions such as http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/ - Christianity find the problem of evil one of their toughest tests, Jains use the existence of evil as a reason for denying the existence of an omnipotent, wholly good, Creator.

Jainism and God - the theistic side

Some writers regard the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/soul.shtml - jinas as 'gods' because the jinas are venerated by Jains in the way that other faiths worship gods or God.

Jains venerate them because they have achieved perfection, and have become liberated from the cycle of birth and death.

The jinas are the ideal state of an individual soul's existence, and are worshipped as a perfect example for Jains to aspire to. So the only 'gods' that exist for Jains are pure souls that are omniscient, perfectly happy and eternal.

All of us could become such a 'god' because every being has the potential to become such a perfect soul.

In many ways the Jain attitude to perfect beings is both intelligible and satisfying, and sufficient to demolish the claim that Jainism is an atheistic religion. If one wants to argue that Jainism is atheistic then one must do so from a specific, limited, idea of what it means to be divine.

Prayers

Jain prayers aren't like the God-focussed prayers found in Christianity. Instead Jain prayers tend to recall the great qualities of the tirthankaras and remind the individual of various teachings.

Jainism and God - the atheistic side

Jains do not believe that the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/universe_1.shtml - universe was created by God or by any other creative spirit. Jain writings are scornful of the very idea:

If God created the world, where was he before creation? If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?

No single being had the skill to make this world -- For how can an immaterial god create that which is material?

If God is ever perfect and complete, how could the will to create have arisen in him? If, on the other hand, he is not perfect, he could no more create the universe than a potter could.

There is no God to maintain the universe

Jains do not believe that any form of god is necessary to keep the universe in existence, or that any form of god has any power over the universe.

There is no God of judgement

Jains do not believe in that sort of judgement. Jains believe that the goodness or quality of a being's life are determined by http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/karma.shtml - karma .

Jains believe that karma is a physical process, and nothing to do with spiritual beings.

There is no God the ruler

Jains do not believe that there is a god who must be obeyed.

There is no God who helps people

Jains do not believe in any god who will respond to prayer or intervene in the world. The beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

The beings that Jains worship are beyond human contact and they cannot intervene in the world.

There is no God who demands worship

The perfect beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

Any being that desired anything would not be perfect and thus not a god.

There is no God compared to whom each of us will always be inferior

Every soul has the potential to become perfect. All perfect souls are equal.

The heavenly beings are not gods

The beings that live in the heavenly kingdoms are not gods since they are still subject to karma and reincarnation. These beings are called devas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/god.shtml




Many people mistake Jainism for Hinduism, when they are actually very different.  Jains believe in gods known as "Thirthankars".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

There are three threads waiting for you, buddy. Reply when you have time, and when I have time I will reply to your response.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


I assume that one of these is the one about the Exodus and how it allegedly didn't happen, which of course would falsify the Bible? Wink

Correction. It would falsify not only the Bible, but the Quran also.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Patience is a virtue, "buddy".  I will get to them in time.

Glad to hear, pal. Take all the time you need.

BTW when I write "buddy" or "pal", I don't mean them in a sarcastic or disrespectful way. Many of us teachers, especially those who work in middle schools, often call both our students and each other "bud". It's just slang, I guess.


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:58pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

For you to suggest that you can love someone and punish them at the same time is also logically absurd.

You don't think that a parent can love their child, and still punish them?

Quote That's like saying that since someone loves you and fears for your afterlife, then they should force you to convert to their religion.  Because after all, it is for your own good.  Even if you don't agree that their religion is the truth, from their point of view, it is.  Hence, to forcefully convert you in order to save you from Hell would be an act of love.

I don't see what this has to do with the previous sentence.  Anyway, it is impossible to force someone to convert.  ("A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.")

Quote Another way to put it is regarding God and the eternal punishment of sinners in Hell.  How can God love them when He will punish them for eternity?

I agree with you on that.  I believe most modern Christian apologists reject the traditional notion of Hell, or regard it merely as the state of being apart from God, not a specific place created by God as a punishment for sin.

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 7:58pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Jainism doesn't teach in the existence of God, and as I already stated, I'm not willing to become an atheist.

You are the first Muslim I have met who encourages non-Muslims to convert to Jainism. That must be a first in the history of Islamicity. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Maybe you should do some research before making false statements about another religion.  Jains are not "atheists".  They are a polytheistic religion.  Read the following for clarifications on some myths about Jainism:

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

Jainism believes in a "god" who did not create the universe and will not destroy it, and he does not even "operate" it.

The Truth Other philosophies including Hinduism, believe their truth to be absolute. As per Anekantvad in Jainism the truth is relative and multisided. Non-violence in Jainism is ultimate it encompasses even the minutest life forms. On the other hand in Hinduism, it is restricted to vegetarianism (that too under some castes) and cow protection. Concept of God is also different. Unlike Hinduism, Jainism does not believe God to be Creator, Operator and Destructor of Universe. Thus it can be seen that same terms connote different meanings in Hinduism and Jainism.

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

I don't consider such a being to be God. Also didn't say Jains are atheists, but converting to such a religion for me would be like becoming a "deist"... or in other words, an "atheist-lite".

If you consider a being that did not create the world, will not destroy it, does not operate it, does not care about us, will not judge us... and anyone of us can become like such as being "God"... that is your choice, not mine.

Jainism and the divine

Jains do not believe in a God or gods in the way that many other religions do, but they do believe in divine (or at least perfect) beings who are worthy of devotion.

This makes it difficult to give a straight answer to the question "is Jainism http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/ - atheistic ?" The scholar Heinrich Zimmer suggested that a new word was needed: transtheistic, meaning "inaccessible by arguments as to whether or not a God exists".

God and the problem of evil

The Jain view of God enables Jainism to explain the evil and suffering that exists in the world without the intellectual difficulties faced by religions that have an omnipotent, wholly good, creator God at their heart.

Where religions such as http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/ - Christianity find the problem of evil one of their toughest tests, Jains use the existence of evil as a reason for denying the existence of an omnipotent, wholly good, Creator.

Jainism and God - the theistic side

Some writers regard the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/soul.shtml - jinas as 'gods' because the jinas are venerated by Jains in the way that other faiths worship gods or God.

Jains venerate them because they have achieved perfection, and have become liberated from the cycle of birth and death.

The jinas are the ideal state of an individual soul's existence, and are worshipped as a perfect example for Jains to aspire to. So the only 'gods' that exist for Jains are pure souls that are omniscient, perfectly happy and eternal.

All of us could become such a 'god' because every being has the potential to become such a perfect soul.

In many ways the Jain attitude to perfect beings is both intelligible and satisfying, and sufficient to demolish the claim that Jainism is an atheistic religion. If one wants to argue that Jainism is atheistic then one must do so from a specific, limited, idea of what it means to be divine.

Prayers

Jain prayers aren't like the God-focussed prayers found in Christianity. Instead Jain prayers tend to recall the great qualities of the tirthankaras and remind the individual of various teachings.

Jainism and God - the atheistic side

Jains do not believe that the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/universe_1.shtml - universe was created by God or by any other creative spirit. Jain writings are scornful of the very idea:

If God created the world, where was he before creation? If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?

No single being had the skill to make this world -- For how can an immaterial god create that which is material?

If God is ever perfect and complete, how could the will to create have arisen in him? If, on the other hand, he is not perfect, he could no more create the universe than a potter could.

There is no God to maintain the universe

Jains do not believe that any form of god is necessary to keep the universe in existence, or that any form of god has any power over the universe.

There is no God of judgement

Jains do not believe in that sort of judgement. Jains believe that the goodness or quality of a being's life are determined by http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/karma.shtml - karma .

Jains believe that karma is a physical process, and nothing to do with spiritual beings.

There is no God the ruler

Jains do not believe that there is a god who must be obeyed.

There is no God who helps people

Jains do not believe in any god who will respond to prayer or intervene in the world. The beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

The beings that Jains worship are beyond human contact and they cannot intervene in the world.

There is no God who demands worship

The perfect beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

Any being that desired anything would not be perfect and thus not a god.

There is no God compared to whom each of us will always be inferior

Every soul has the potential to become perfect. All perfect souls are equal.

The heavenly beings are not gods

The beings that live in the heavenly kingdoms are not gods since they are still subject to karma and reincarnation. These beings are called devas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/god.shtml




Many people mistake Jainism for Hinduism, when they are actually very different.  Jains believe in gods known as "Thirthankars".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

There are three threads waiting for you, buddy. Reply when you have time, and when I have time I will reply to your response.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


I assume that one of these is the one about the Exodus and how it allegedly didn't happen, which of course would falsify the Bible? Wink

Correction. It would falsify not only the Bible, but the Quran also.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Patience is a virtue, "buddy".  I will get to them in time.

Glad to hear, pal. Take all the time you need.

BTW when I write "buddy" or "pal", I don't mean them in a sarcastic or disrespectful way. Many of us teachers, especially those who work in middle schools, often call both our students and each other "bud". It's just slang, I guess.


Irregardless of your personal opinions, the fact is that Jainism does acknowledge the existence of "gods".  And no, Deism is not "atheism-lite".  Deists like Thomas Paine would have been shocked to learn that they were actually "atheist-lite", according to your definition! 


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:04pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

You don't think that a parent can love their child, and still punish them?


LOL We are not talking about parents punishing their children.  If you would care to read my posts, you would see that I am talking about punishing criminals. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

I don't see what this has to do with the previous sentence.  Anyway, it is impossible to force someone to convert.  ("A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.")


That's true, but my point is that this argument could be used.  In fact, Augustine once wrote that it was allowed for the Church to forcefully convert the Donatists to Catholicism because it was for their own good.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

I agree with you on that.  I believe most modern Christian apologists reject the traditional notion of Hell, or regard it merely as the state of being apart from God, not a specific place created by God as a punishment for sin.


I doubt that.  One only has to read the Bible to see that Hell is a pretty horrible place full of torture.  The Book of Revelation refers to it as a "lake of fire".  It seems pretty clear that it is not the "state of being apart from God". 

Even if it was the "state of being apart from God", my point still stands.  How can God "love" us, yet throw us in a place where we are eternally "apart" from him?  Where is 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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:04pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

It isn't different from the concept of God being most merciful, as Islam teaches He is. One could ask why a merciful God would make an eternal hell.

Islam if I am not mistaken, unlike Christianity, does not teach that God loves sinners. It does teach He is merciful to everyone though, and He is more merciful than anyone else.

Loving others while punishing them is as "logically absurd" as being merciful to them and doing the same thing.

Funny how you bring up forceful conversions and state that doing that to someone to save them from eternity in hell would be an act of love. It would also be an act of mercy, going by your logic. Yet your religion forbids it.


Islam teaches that God is merciful if we seek forgiveness.  It also teaches that God is just.  Those who reject God have rejected His mercy and have instead earned His justice.

In contrast, Christians want us to believe that God "loves us" yet at the same time, will throw us in Hell for eternity if we don't believe in him.  Pardon me for asking, but where exactly is the "love"?  Confused 

One of these scenarios makes no sense.  I pick door #2.   


So God is not merciful to the unbelievers? Is that what your faith really teaches?

Isn't provision of the earth an act of mercy?


You can love someone but allow them to make their own choices and suffer the consequence of these choices.

Regarding hell and God's mercy, if God is as you say merciful only to those who seek forgiveness, He is less merciful than many people who show mercy to both the repentant and unrepentant.

You can keep door #2, I'm not following you in. ConfusedConfused


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:13pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Jainism doesn't teach in the existence of God, and as I already stated, I'm not willing to become an atheist.

You are the first Muslim I have met who encourages non-Muslims to convert to Jainism. That must be a first in the history of Islamicity. Wink

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Maybe you should do some research before making false statements about another religion.  Jains are not "atheists".  They are a polytheistic religion.  Read the following for clarifications on some myths about Jainism:

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

Jainism believes in a "god" who did not create the universe and will not destroy it, and he does not even "operate" it.

The Truth Other philosophies including Hinduism, believe their truth to be absolute. As per Anekantvad in Jainism the truth is relative and multisided. Non-violence in Jainism is ultimate it encompasses even the minutest life forms. On the other hand in Hinduism, it is restricted to vegetarianism (that too under some castes) and cow protection. Concept of God is also different. Unlike Hinduism, Jainism does not believe God to be Creator, Operator and Destructor of Universe. Thus it can be seen that same terms connote different meanings in Hinduism and Jainism.

http://www.jaina.org/?Myths

I don't consider such a being to be God. Also didn't say Jains are atheists, but converting to such a religion for me would be like becoming a "deist"... or in other words, an "atheist-lite".

If you consider a being that did not create the world, will not destroy it, does not operate it, does not care about us, will not judge us... and anyone of us can become like such as being "God"... that is your choice, not mine.

Jainism and the divine

Jains do not believe in a God or gods in the way that many other religions do, but they do believe in divine (or at least perfect) beings who are worthy of devotion.

This makes it difficult to give a straight answer to the question "is Jainism http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/ - atheistic ?" The scholar Heinrich Zimmer suggested that a new word was needed: transtheistic, meaning "inaccessible by arguments as to whether or not a God exists".

God and the problem of evil

The Jain view of God enables Jainism to explain the evil and suffering that exists in the world without the intellectual difficulties faced by religions that have an omnipotent, wholly good, creator God at their heart.

Where religions such as http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/ - Christianity find the problem of evil one of their toughest tests, Jains use the existence of evil as a reason for denying the existence of an omnipotent, wholly good, Creator.

Jainism and God - the theistic side

Some writers regard the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/soul.shtml - jinas as 'gods' because the jinas are venerated by Jains in the way that other faiths worship gods or God.

Jains venerate them because they have achieved perfection, and have become liberated from the cycle of birth and death.

The jinas are the ideal state of an individual soul's existence, and are worshipped as a perfect example for Jains to aspire to. So the only 'gods' that exist for Jains are pure souls that are omniscient, perfectly happy and eternal.

All of us could become such a 'god' because every being has the potential to become such a perfect soul.

In many ways the Jain attitude to perfect beings is both intelligible and satisfying, and sufficient to demolish the claim that Jainism is an atheistic religion. If one wants to argue that Jainism is atheistic then one must do so from a specific, limited, idea of what it means to be divine.

Prayers

Jain prayers aren't like the God-focussed prayers found in Christianity. Instead Jain prayers tend to recall the great qualities of the tirthankaras and remind the individual of various teachings.

Jainism and God - the atheistic side

Jains do not believe that the http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/universe_1.shtml - universe was created by God or by any other creative spirit. Jain writings are scornful of the very idea:

If God created the world, where was he before creation? If you say he was transcendent then, and needed no support, where is he now?

No single being had the skill to make this world -- For how can an immaterial god create that which is material?

If God is ever perfect and complete, how could the will to create have arisen in him? If, on the other hand, he is not perfect, he could no more create the universe than a potter could.

There is no God to maintain the universe

Jains do not believe that any form of god is necessary to keep the universe in existence, or that any form of god has any power over the universe.

There is no God of judgement

Jains do not believe in that sort of judgement. Jains believe that the goodness or quality of a being's life are determined by http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/karma.shtml - karma .

Jains believe that karma is a physical process, and nothing to do with spiritual beings.

There is no God the ruler

Jains do not believe that there is a god who must be obeyed.

There is no God who helps people

Jains do not believe in any god who will respond to prayer or intervene in the world. The beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

The beings that Jains worship are beyond human contact and they cannot intervene in the world.

There is no God who demands worship

The perfect beings that Jains worship have no interest in human beings.

Any being that desired anything would not be perfect and thus not a god.

There is no God compared to whom each of us will always be inferior

Every soul has the potential to become perfect. All perfect souls are equal.

The heavenly beings are not gods

The beings that live in the heavenly kingdoms are not gods since they are still subject to karma and reincarnation. These beings are called devas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/beliefs/god.shtml




Many people mistake Jainism for Hinduism, when they are actually very different.  Jains believe in gods known as "Thirthankars".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

There are three threads waiting for you, buddy. Reply when you have time, and when I have time I will reply to your response.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


I assume that one of these is the one about the Exodus and how it allegedly didn't happen, which of course would falsify the Bible? Wink

Correction. It would falsify not only the Bible, but the Quran also.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Patience is a virtue, "buddy".  I will get to them in time.

Glad to hear, pal. Take all the time you need.

BTW when I write "buddy" or "pal", I don't mean them in a sarcastic or disrespectful way. Many of us teachers, especially those who work in middle schools, often call both our students and each other "bud". It's just slang, I guess.


Irregardless of your personal opinions, the fact is that Jainism does acknowledge the existence of "gods".  And no, Deism is not "atheism-lite".  Deists like Thomas Paine would have been shocked to learn that they were actually "atheist-lite", according to your definition! 

I didn't ever say that Jainism is atheist, or negate that it is polytheistic. I said it doesn't teach in the existence of God. It teaches in the existence of different deities who did not create us, will not judge us, and have no control over us. I don't consider such creatures to be "God". For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

Thomas Paine can think what he wants. I think worms ate his brain away a few centuries ago though, so it's not something I'm too worried about.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:20pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Even if it was the "state of being apart from God", my point still stands.  How can God "love" us, yet throw us in a place where we are eternally "apart" from him?  Where is the "love"?

Greetings islamispeace,

Perhaps I can add some clarity....
it is not the Creator that 'throws us into hell'....
it is our own choices that throw us into hell....
if at the end we are not pure to enter into communion with the Creator, where else is there to go, what else is there to do?
We are given free will, and it is our own free will that chooses our destination for us... the scriptures only warn us of the end result of our choices...
we can choose life and eternity in the presence of the Creator...
or eternal separation... which is described as a burning, or a hell... a 'lake of fire' ... I personally believe this is an allusion to becoming part of the fossil fuels, since all life is energy...
we either got to 'shine like stars', or to burn in the lake of fire.


Regarding love and punishment:

I am sure I remember a teaching in the qur'an about allah requiring a thing that you may not like but is good for you.  This is punishment in love.

Just like Proverbs 3:

11 My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction:

12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

asalaam,
CH


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:22pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

So God is not merciful to the unbelievers? Is that what your faith really teaches?

Isn't provision of the earth an act of mercy?


LOL You can try to change the subject all you want.  It doesn't change the fact that you have failed to offer a logical explanation for how you can insist on the one hand that God "loves" us yet also insist on the other hand that He will throw us in Hell for eternity if we don't believe in Him. 

God gives the unbelievers a chance to repent in this life.  They choose not to.  Hence, when they die, the doors of mercy are closed to them.  So yes, after death, they have no chance of attaining God's mercy.  I don't see what is so hard to understand.  It certainly makes more sense than saying that God loves us but will still torture us in horrible ways for eternity. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You can love someone but allow them to make their own choices and suffer the consequence of these choices.

Regarding hell and God's mercy, if God is as you say merciful only to those who seek forgiveness, He is less merciful than many people who show mercy to both the repentant and unrepentant.

You can keep door #2, I'm not following you in. ConfusedConfused
 

I could care less what you follow.  I thought I made that clear.  

If you really "love" someone, you would let them make their own choices and not punish them yourself as a "consequence".  Unbelievers go to Hell because God sends them there.  He could just as easily not send them there.  He could just as easily make them disappear after death.  But no, He has decided to torture them for not believing in Him.

Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...Wink




-------------
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: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:23pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

If you are supposed to love and forgive your enemies, then courts and jails would have no function.  A criminal would have to be forgiven, not punished.

The criminal is (ideally) to be loved by the victims, and punished by the law, so there is no conflict. But anyway, love and punishment are not mutually exclusive.  As I said, can a parent not love their child and still punish them for misbehaviour?

Quote The idea of a jail sentence is to punish the person for his crime.  It is a form of vengeance.

Absolutely not.  Vengeance is the worst possible reason for punishment.  It should play no role in a civilized society.  The purpose of a jail sentence is to deter others from committing crimes, and to protect society from the perpetrator until he is rehabilitated.  (In theory, anyway.  I know we're a long way from that.)

Quote Hope and reality are two different things.  You can deceive yourself through false hope, but it won't change anything.  What is the use of a teaching that simply cannot be practically applied?

It can be practically applied.  Perhaps it can't be perfectly applied, but that's okay.  Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do the best we can.

Quote And yet, the jurors found him guilty.  In other words, he was sane (although the Wikipedia article seems to contradict itself - go figure).  He knew what he was doing.  Try forgiving or "loving" such a person.

The jury was looking for vengeance (the worst possible motivation, as I said).  IMHO he should have been not guilty by reason of insanity.  But sane or not (and frankly I'm not sure even how to define the term for people like Fish), he was obviously a product (and therefore a victim) of his upbringing.  I do feel sorry for people like that.

Of course he knew what he was doing, but was he responsible for the forces that created the twisted, diseased mind that found pleasure in those acts?  What he did was pure evil, but Albert Fish himself was just an extraordinarily flawed human being acting according to his flawed nature.  In that sense he was no more evil than a hurricane.  He deserves our sympathy.  Yes, really.  Would you have wanted to have been him?

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:26pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I didn't ever say that Jainism is atheist, or negate that it is polytheistic. I said it doesn't teach in the existence of God. It teaches in the existence of different deities who did not create us, will not judge us, and have no control over us. I don't consider such creatures to be "God". For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

Thomas Paine can think what he wants. I think worms ate his brain away a few centuries ago though, so it's not something I'm too worried about.


You're missing the point.  You are simply redefining Jainism and Deism according to your opinions, when the reality is that they do not conform to your opinions. 

Jains believe in various deities.  Therefore, being a Jain is not "like becoming an atheist".  Jains have their reasons for not believing in a Creator God.  But they don't deny that there are "gods" that should be "worshiped".

Deists believe in God.  Thomas Paine spelled it out clearly in "The Age of Reason".  They believe that He created the universe.  They simply do not believe that He sent prophets or scripture to mankind.  This is not "atheist-lite".   




-------------
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: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:32pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Speaking of "humanists", you still haven't answered my question to you about abortion that I posed on another thread a while back.  I know it is unrelated to this thread, but I just thought I would remind you.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

I forgot to also remind you that I asked you about what "humanists" actually "believe" with regard to the standard atheistic view that we are all just chemical accidents living out a meaningless existence.

Sorry, I've lost track of both of those discussions.  You'll have to remind me.

Anyway, I gotta get to bed.  See you tomorrow.

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:40pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

The criminal is (ideally) to be loved by the victims, and punished by the law, so there is no conflict. But anyway, love and punishment are not mutually exclusive.  As I said, can a parent not love their child and still punish them for misbehaviour?


But if a "victim" "loves" the criminal, then how can they allow him to be punished (i.e. thrown into prison)?  You cannot allow vengeance against someone you love.

Anyway, you again confirmed my point.  The fact that the law is impartial to the "love" between the victim and the criminal shows that the idea of "loving your enemies" is impractical to the law.  That is why we have courts and jails. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Absolutely not.  Vengeance is the worst possible reason for punishment.  It should play no role in a civilized society.  The purpose of a jail sentence is to deter others from committing crimes, and to protect society from the perpetrator until he is rehabilitated.  (In theory, anyway.  I know we're a long way from that.)
        

Oh please.  If someone commits a crime, they are sent to prison.  There is a causal link.  Prison is vengeance for the crime.  If the idea was to "deter others", then we need a new system because the present one clearly has failed.  The threat of incarceration hardly deters would-be criminals.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

It can be practically applied.  Perhaps it can't be perfectly applied, but that's okay.  Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do the best we can.
 

How?  How can it be "practically applied"? 

"Love your enemies."

"Do good to those who hate you."

"Turn the other cheek."

How exactly can these teachings be "practically applied"?

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

The jury was looking for vengeance (the worst possible motivation, as I said).  IMHO he should have been not guilty by reason of insanity.  But sane or not (and frankly I'm not sure even how to define the term for people like Fish), he was obviously a product (and therefore a victim) of his upbringing.  I do feel sorry for people like that.


He was found sane, regardless of your personal opinions.  He knew what he was doing.  Whatever horrible things happened to him did not force him to kill a little girl and eat her flesh.  He did that himself. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Of course he knew what he was doing, but was he responsible for the forces that created the twisted, diseased mind that found pleasure in those acts?  What he did was pure evil, but Albert Fish himself was just an extraordinarily flawed human being acting according to his flawed nature.  In that sense he was no more evil than a hurricane.  He deserves our sympathy.  Yes, really.  Would you have wanted to have been him?


So if he knew what he was doing, then why does he deserve our sympathy?  The guy butchered a little girl and ate her flesh!  Sure, I sympathize with his experiences as a child, but what he did as an adult is what we are concerned with.  He was an adult when he killed Grace Budd.  He should have known better.  But he didn't.  Who would sympathize with such a person? 




-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:47pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I didn't ever say that Jainism is atheist, or negate that it is polytheistic. I said it doesn't teach in the existence of God. It teaches in the existence of different deities who did not create us, will not judge us, and have no control over us. I don't consider such creatures to be "God". For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

Thomas Paine can think what he wants. I think worms ate his brain away a few centuries ago though, so it's not something I'm too worried about.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


You're missing the point.  You are simply redefining Jainism and Deism according to your opinions, when the reality is that they do not conform to your opinions. 

Jains believe in various deities.  Therefore, being a Jain is not "like becoming an atheist".  Jains have their reasons for not believing in a Creator God.  But they don't deny that there are "gods" that should be "worshiped".


As I wrote,

For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

I do not consider non-involved deities that anyone can eventually become, to be God. Maybe for someone else, they could be God. For me, they aren't.

That is why I wrote that for me, accepting Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.


Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Deists believe in God.  Thomas Paine spelled it out clearly in "The Age of Reason".  They believe that He created the universe.  They simply do not believe that He sent prophets or scripture to mankind.  This is not "atheist-lite".   

I never said deists don't believe in God. I call their beliefs "atheism-lite" because if you believe that God exists but don't believe He sends us prophets and Scripture, then you have no way of knowing His will and therefore you cannot follow or obey any commandments He gives.  Deism teaches that "people should do the right thing because it's the right thing to do" but provides no definition of what the "right thing" is. Seems that is up to the individual to decide.

Basically, the message seems to be to live your life as you see fit but be a good person. God may or may not see you after you die, and He may or may not be involved in how the world operates.

I call this "atheism-lite" because like an atheist humanist, a deist tries to be a nice person and lives his life and makes decisions based on his or her own logic. God is neither worshiped or consulted or even feared. It's almost like atheism, except that a non-involved and mysterious deity exists somewhere in the background of your life.




Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:51pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As I wrote,

For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

I do not consider non-involved deities that anyone can eventually become, to be God. Maybe for someone else, they could be God. For me, they aren't.

That is why I wrote that for me, accepting Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.


Yeah, I know that.  That's why I wrote:

You are simply redefining Jainism and Deism according to your opinions, when the reality is that they do not conform to your opinions.

You are also redefining what it means to be "atheist". 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I never said deists don't believe in God. I call their beliefs "atheism-lite" because if you believe that God exists but don't believe He sends us prophets and Scripture, then you have no way of knowing His will and therefore you cannot follow or obey any commandments He gives.  Deism teaches that "people should do the right thing because it's the right thing to do" but provides no definition of what the "right thing" is. Seems that is up to the individual to decide.

Basically, the message seems to be to live your life as you see fit but be a good person. God may or may not see you after you die, and He may or may not be involved in how the world operates.

I call this "atheism-lite" because like an atheist humanist, a deist tries to be a nice person and lives his life and makes decisions based on his or her own logic. God is neither worshiped or consulted or even feared. It's almost like atheism, except that a non-involved and mysterious deity exists somewhere in the background of your life.


But it isn't atheism.  Deism acknowledges belief in God and also celebrates His greatness.  Read "The Age of Reason" for Paine's view on God.   


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:52pm
OK. I'm done for tonight. We'll argue more in a few days, God willing.

This exchange has been surprisingly civil, after we just about almost agreed to restart our insult war. I'm kind of disappointed.  Maybe next time. Wink



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 14 September 2014 at 8:58pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

OK. I'm done for tonight. We'll argue more in a few days, God willing.

This exchange has been surprisingly civil, after we just about almost agreed to restart our insult war. I'm kind of disappointed.  Maybe next time. Wink



Oh don't worry.  You'll get your war.  LOL

Let me know if you have another "sleepless night".  Wink


-------------
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: Muslim75
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 5:39am
------------------------------------------


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:43am
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

But if a "victim" "loves" the criminal, then how can they allow him to be punished (i.e. thrown into prison)?  You cannot allow vengeance against someone you love.

Why do you see love and punishment as mutually exclusive?  Let me ask again: can a parent not love their child and still punish them for misbehaviour?

And again, it's not about vengeance.  Not in our system anyway.  Maybe it is for you, but that only underscores the difference between Muslim and non-Muslim justice.

Quote Anyway, you again confirmed my point.  The fact that the law is impartial to the "love" between the victim and the criminal shows that the idea of "loving your enemies" is impractical to the law.  That is why we have courts and jails.

You're right -- the law is and ought to be impartial.  Nobody ever said the law was about love.

Quote Oh please.  If someone commits a crime, they are sent to prison.  There is a causal link.  Prison is vengeance for the crime.  If the idea was to "deter others", then we need a new system because the present one clearly has failed.  The threat of incarceration hardly deters would-be criminals.

Well, I think it does; but even if it doesn't, there is still a benefit to society in keeping criminal off the streets.  You may be right that we need a better system, but not one based on vengeance or cruelty.  Violence only begets violence.

Quote How?  How can it be "practically applied"?
"Love your enemies."
"Do good to those who hate you."
"Turn the other cheek."
How exactly can these teachings be "practically applied"?

In all sorts of ways.  On an individual level it would depend on the specific "enemy", but you could try to understand why they hate you or what circumstances made them your enemy.  At a group level you could donate to the John Howard / Elizabeth Fry Society.  Politically, you could push for better rehabilitation services and more funding for legal aid.  At an international level, it would help if certain nations would stop responding to terrorist acts with rocket attacks, and vice versa.  And on this forum, we could all try to treat our opponents with a bit more courtesy.

Quote So if he knew what he was doing, then why does he deserve our sympathy?  The guy butchered a little girl and ate her flesh!  Sure, I sympathize with his experiences as a child, but what he did as an adult is what we are concerned with.  He was an adult when he killed Grace Budd.  He should have known better.  But he didn't.  Who would sympathize with such a person?

I would.  As you say, he should have known better, but he didn't.  And it's not his fault that he didn't.  Indeed, it would have been surprising if he had grown up into a normal, healthy, loving adult, don't you think?

I would have had more trouble if you had picked a serial killer who was born into a typical middle-class family with apparently loving parents and a normal childhood.  Those examples do exist, and it's really hard to feel sorry for people who had all the advantages and still managed to turn into a monster.  But Albert Fish?  He was as much a victim as his victims.

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:49am
Originally posted by Muslim75 Muslim75 wrote:

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

By the way, I am not a Christian.
Did you not understand ? I said only one religion can be true.

No, I don't understand.  Can you explain your opening post to me?  Did Muhammad make a mistake in turning away from the blind man, nor not?

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:57am
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Why do you see love and punishment as mutually exclusive?  Let me ask again: can a parent not love their child and still punish them for misbehaviour?

And again, it's not about vengeance.  Not in our system anyway.  Maybe it is for you, but that only underscores the difference between Muslim and non-Muslim justice.


LOL Your personal opinions don't change anything.  When person commits a crime, they are punished with a jail sentence.  The latter is the result of the former.  There is a causal link.  If the idea was to "deter" would-be criminals, then the whole system has been a dismal failure.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

You're right -- the law is and ought to be impartial.  Nobody ever said the law was about love.


Which is why the Christian teaching is impractical. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Well, I think it does; but even if it doesn't, there is still a benefit to society in keeping criminal off the streets.  You may be right that we need a better system, but not one based on vengeance or cruelty.  Violence only begets violence.


Sure, there is a benefit, but usually, it is a benefit to society only, not to the criminal.  Most criminals are repeat-offenders.  They get caught, get sent to jail, and are then released, only to commit another crime.  Clearly, the threat of jail does not deter them. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

In all sorts of ways.  On an individual level it would depend on the specific "enemy", but you could try to understand why they hate you or what circumstances made them your enemy.  At a group level you could donate to the John Howard / Elizabeth Fry Society.  Politically, you could push for better rehabilitation services and more funding for legal aid.  At an international level, it would help if certain nations would stop responding to terrorist acts with rocket attacks, and vice versa.  And on this forum, we could all try to treat our opponents with a bit more courtesy.


Sleepy I have no idea how any of this explains how to practically apply the Christian teaching.  I agree that in many cases, understanding the motivation for criminal behavior should be considered.  Many people commit crimes out of desperation or poverty.  I am not saying that such people should be automatically punished. 

But there are also many people who commit crimes for mostly selfish reasons.  They don't mind hurting someone else to satisfy their own needs.  Such people would actually take advantage of liberal laws to escape any punishment.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

I would.  As you say, he should have known better, but he didn't.  And it's not his fault that he didn't.  Indeed, it would have been surprising if he had grown up into a normal, healthy, loving adult, don't you think?


What?  It's not his fault that he didn't know better?  Shocked

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

I would have had more trouble if you had picked a serial killer who was born into a typical middle-class family with apparently loving parents and a normal childhood.  Those examples do exist, and it's really hard to feel sorry for people who had all the advantages and still managed to turn into a monster.  But Albert Fish?  He was as much a victim as his victims.


That is ludicrous.  Many people experience severe trauma in their childhoods.  They don't all turn out to be sadistic serial killers who murder little girls and eat their flesh.  Albert Fish was a grown man.  He chose to carry out his sick fantasies.  Such a person deserves no sympathy.  If he was child when he did those things, that would have been different, but he was a grown man. 


-------------
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: Muslim75
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 2:12pm

------------------------------------------



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 7:31pm
OK, taking a break from presentation planning for today, and thought I'd shoot off a quick response.

Salaam Alaikum.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

As I wrote,

For me, to accept Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

I do not consider non-involved deities that anyone can eventually become, to be God. Maybe for someone else, they could be God. For me, they aren't.

That is why I wrote that for me, accepting Jainism would mean becoming like an atheist.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Yeah, I know that.  That's why I wrote:

You are simply redefining Jainism and Deism according to your opinions, when the reality is that they do not conform to your opinions.

You are also redefining what it means to be "atheist". 

An atheist is someone who does not believe in God- at least, that is what I mean when I say "atheism". I understand God as the One who created us and leads us and will judge us.

Jainism believes in deities who do not do any of these things, and have no control over our lives and whom we do not need to answer to.

Deism believes God exists, but that He does not communicate with humanity, and is unclear even whether He will see us after we die.

Deism and Jainism may not be atheist religions so if I said they are, I apologize for a very bad choice of words. What I meant to say is that for me, believing in a "god" who is not our creator and who does not care about what we do and will not judge us and therefore we are not accountable to him... is more or less the same as being an atheist.

In either way, you live your life how you want and do what you want. Of course, you are encouraged to be a "good person", and you may need to worry about karma (if you are a Jain), but there is no One who you need to be accountable to.

Hope that made it more clear.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I never said deists don't believe in God. I call their beliefs "atheism-lite" because if you believe that God exists but don't believe He sends us prophets and Scripture, then you have no way of knowing His will and therefore you cannot follow or obey any commandments He gives.  Deism teaches that "people should do the right thing because it's the right thing to do" but provides no definition of what the "right thing" is. Seems that is up to the individual to decide.

Basically, the message seems to be to live your life as you see fit but be a good person. God may or may not see you after you die, and He may or may not be involved in how the world operates.

I call this "atheism-lite" because like an atheist humanist, a deist tries to be a nice person and lives his life and makes decisions based on his or her own logic. God is neither worshiped or consulted or even feared. It's almost like atheism, except that a non-involved and mysterious deity exists somewhere in the background of your life.


Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


But it isn't atheism.  Deism acknowledges belief in God and also celebrates His greatness.  Read "The Age of Reason" for Paine's view on God.   

Thanks. I began reading it online.

You're right, Deism isn't atheism. That is why I call it "atheism-lite". There is the belief that God exists and that He is good. Also it is considered important to do good works.

There isn't however any notion of needing to be accountable to God, and it is believed He didn't send down any religion.

To me, there is little difference in holding to such a belief and to rejecting His existence altogether. In both cases, God is unknowable to humanity. Aside from "being good", we have no idea what He wants from us. We also don't need to fear His judgement, because there is nothing mentioned about that either in this world or in the afterlife.

Why follow someone who isn't leading you? Why care about how you treat others and how you live your life, if no one will judge you anyways?

Deism isn't atheism. But in my opinion, it's almost the same thing.

That is why I personally would never become either a Deist or Jain.


Why are you trying to get me to consider Deism, btw?


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 7:35pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

OK. I'm done for tonight. We'll argue more in a few days, God willing.

This exchange has been surprisingly civil, after we just about almost agreed to restart our insult war. I'm kind of disappointed.  Maybe next time. Wink


Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Oh don't worry.  You'll get your war.  LOL

I certainly hope so. Starting to almost think you are getting "soft". Big%20smile

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Let me know if you have another "sleepless night".  Wink

LOL no offense to you but considering the fact they are due to our debates, you'd be probably the last person I'd want to get a hold of. LOL


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 7:53pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

An atheist is someone who does not believe in God- at least, that is what I mean when I say "atheism". I understand God as the One who created us and leads us and will judge us.

Jainism believes in deities who do not do any of these things, and have no control over our lives and whom we do not need to answer to.

Deism believes God exists, but that He does not communicate with humanity, and is unclear even whether He will see us after we die.

Deism and Jainism may not be atheist religions so if I said they are, I apologize for a very bad choice of words. What I meant to say is that for me, believing in a "god" who is not our creator and who does not care about what we do and will not judge us and therefore we are not accountable to him... is more or less the same as being an atheist.

In either way, you live your life how you want and do what you want. Of course, you are encouraged to be a "good person", and you may need to worry about karma (if you are a Jain), but there is no One who you need to be accountable to.

Hope that made it more clear.


To not believe in a god who holds us responsible or has any control over our lives is not "more or less the same as being an atheist".  Not believing in any supernatural being, regardless of what role it plays in our lives, is "more or less the same as being an atheist".         

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Thanks. I began reading it online.

You're right, Deism isn't atheism. That is why I call it "atheism-lite". There is the belief that God exists and that He is good. Also it is considered important to do good works.

There isn't however any notion of needing to be accountable to God, and it is believed He didn't send down any religion.

To me, there is little difference in holding to such a belief and to rejecting His existence altogether. In both cases, God is unknowable to humanity. Aside from "being good", we have no idea what He wants from us. We also don't need to fear His judgement, because there is nothing mentioned about that either in this world or in the afterlife.

Why follow someone who isn't leading you? Why care about how you treat others and how you live your life, if no one will judge you anyways?

Deism isn't atheism. But in my opinion, it's almost the same thing.

That is why I personally would never become either a Deist or Jain.


Why are you trying to get me to consider Deism, btw?


I'm not.  I am just giving you some alternatives.  To me, Deism makes far more sense than Christianity and yes, Jainism as well.  Neither one of those religions would ever be on my list if I were ever considering leaving Islam.  There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that it would ever come to that, but you get my drift.  But if I ever considering leaving Islam, I would consider Deism as a definite possibility.

It's not just the errors in Christianity.  It is the fact that its central teaching is completely false.  We are supposed to believe that Jesus came down to die for our sins because Adam and Eve brought original sin into our lives, and because of original sin, death entered the world.  This scenario is preposterous since death has always existed wherever life has.  And the claim that original sin brought about "spiritual death" also fails to rescue the original sin theory.  Hence, with the main reason for God's supposed descent in human form completely debunked, there was no need for God to come down to die for our sins.  We then have a domino effect in which the crucifixion and the resurrection both are completely unnecessary. 

Considering this, Deism makes far more sense, even if you claim that it is "atheism-lite" which is ludicrous. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I certainly hope so. Starting to almost think you are getting "soft". Big%20smile
      

Well, let's hope you are up for it, because you were the one who asked for a "truce" last time.  I actually thought that you didn't have the stomach for it at the time. Wink  Perhaps, your new look on religion has made you a little tougher, even though you are still a Christian.  But obviously, your faith is not as strong as it used to be. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL no offense to you but considering the fact they are due to our debates, you'd be probably the last person I'd want to get a hold of. LOL


Awww, that's hurts my feelings! Cry

But, I can't say I blame you...LOL


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 7:54pm
Just a reminder...

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

If you really "love" someone, you would let them make their own choices and not punish them yourself as a "consequence".  Unbelievers go to Hell because God sends them there.  He could just as easily not send them there.  He could just as easily make them disappear after death.  But no, He has decided to torture them for not believing in Him.

Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...Wink


Wink


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:14pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

An atheist is someone who does not believe in God- at least, that is what I mean when I say "atheism". I understand God as the One who created us and leads us and will judge us.

Jainism believes in deities who do not do any of these things, and have no control over our lives and whom we do not need to answer to.

Deism believes God exists, but that He does not communicate with humanity, and is unclear even whether He will see us after we die.

Deism and Jainism may not be atheist religions so if I said they are, I apologize for a very bad choice of words. What I meant to say is that for me, believing in a "god" who is not our creator and who does not care about what we do and will not judge us and therefore we are not accountable to him... is more or less the same as being an atheist.

In either way, you live your life how you want and do what you want. Of course, you are encouraged to be a "good person", and you may need to worry about karma (if you are a Jain), but there is no One who you need to be accountable to.

Hope that made it more clear.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


To not believe in a god who holds us responsible or has any control over our lives is not "more or less the same as being an atheist".

Of course it is. With such a belief you can live your life like God isn't there.
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


  Not believing in any supernatural being, regardless of what role it plays in our lives, is "more or less the same as being an atheist".         

No, that would mean being an atheist.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Thanks. I began reading it online.

You're right, Deism isn't atheism. That is why I call it "atheism-lite". There is the belief that God exists and that He is good. Also it is considered important to do good works.

There isn't however any notion of needing to be accountable to God, and it is believed He didn't send down any religion.

To me, there is little difference in holding to such a belief and to rejecting His existence altogether. In both cases, God is unknowable to humanity. Aside from "being good", we have no idea what He wants from us. We also don't need to fear His judgement, because there is nothing mentioned about that either in this world or in the afterlife.

Why follow someone who isn't leading you? Why care about how you treat others and how you live your life, if no one will judge you anyways?

Deism isn't atheism. But in my opinion, it's almost the same thing.

That is why I personally would never become either a Deist or Jain.


Why are you trying to get me to consider Deism, btw?

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


I'm not.  I am just giving you some alternatives.

Why? What would it matter to you what I believe or don't believe?
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


 To me, Deism makes far more sense than Christianity and yes, Jainism as well.  Neither one of those religions would ever be on my list if I were ever considering leaving Islam.  There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that it would ever come to that, but you get my drift.  But if I ever considering leaving Islam, I would consider Deism as a definite possibility.

It's not just the errors in Christianity.  It is the fact that its central teaching is completely false.  We are supposed to believe that Jesus came down to die for our sins because Adam and Eve brought original sin into our lives, and because of original sin, death entered the world.  This scenario is preposterous since death has always existed wherever life has.  And the claim that original sin brought about "spiritual death" also fails to rescue the original sin theory.  Hence, with the main reason for God's supposed descent in human form completely debunked, there was no need for God to come down to die for our sins.  We then have a domino effect in which the crucifixion and the resurrection both are completely unnecessary. 

I see what you mean about the problem of original sin. I don't believe though that God needed to come down and die for our sins. It is something He chose to do.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Considering this, Deism makes far more sense, even if you claim that it is "atheism-lite" which is ludicrous. 

I don't know. I would rather follow a religion that tells me it's necessary to love and help other people, and that it's not OK to commit adultery or get drunk or lie... and back that up with consequences. Deism does none of that. You can be a Deist and more or less do whatever you want, knowing that the "God" who exists couldn't care less.

As shocking as this may sound to you, I would consider Islam before becoming a Deist.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I certainly hope so. Starting to almost think you are getting "soft". Big%20smile
      
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Well, let's hope you are up for it, because you were the one who asked for a "truce" last time.  I actually thought that you didn't have the stomach for it at the time. Wink 

Last time it got pretty personal and nasty. It got to the point where we stopped speaking to each other.

If that's what you understand by "war", no, I don't want it that way. I meant using insults and sarcasm, but in good fun, and with the understanding we are friends and having respect for each other.

Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


 Perhaps, your new look on religion has made you a little tougher, even though you are still a Christian.  But obviously, your faith is not as strong as it used to be. 

My faith is bruised, yes. I don't think I'm any more or less "tough" than I was before.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL no offense to you but considering the fact they are due to our debates, you'd be probably the last person I'd want to get a hold of. LOL

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Awww, that's hurts my feelings! Cry

You mean you have them?....Shocked

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


But, I can't say I blame you...LOL

LOL. No, and I don't blame you either. Our debates have messed up my worldview... a lot... but the truth is nothing to run from.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:27pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Just a reminder...

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

If you really "love" someone, you would let them make their own choices and not punish them yourself as a "consequence".  Unbelievers go to Hell because God sends them there.  He could just as easily not send them there.  He could just as easily make them disappear after death.  But no, He has decided to torture them for not believing in Him.

Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...Wink


Wink

If you cut out the first two sentences, you have more or less the same argument against Islam.

One could also question why God, who is just, would punish someone in hell for eternity. How long has the worst sinner ever lived?

That argument could be made against both Christianity and Islam.




Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:32pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...

Islamispeace,

Oh yes, because muslims never 'come up with nonsensical explanations' ?

(where IS that shakes head side to side smiley?)

I think it is unhelpful to harbor disdain for people because of their religion, and to attempt to insult them during what ought to be civil discussions aimed at understanding.

Peace and blessings... please find some peace and blessings... you are not doing justice to the name you have chosen,
Caringheart


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:33pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Of course it is. With such a belief you can live your life like God isn't there.


Not at all.  Deists still believe that one should be good, but not because of the threat of judgment.  Deists believe that you can just be good.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

No, that would mean being an atheist.


Yes, and being a Deist is not the same as "being an atheist".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Why? What would it matter to you what I believe or don't believe?


Mostly because I see no logical reason for anyone to be a Christian, especially after admitting that the Bible is inaccurate in many places. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I see what you mean about the problem of original sin. I don't believe though that God needed to come down and die for our sins. It is something He chose to do.


Alright look, you're making it very hard for me to use insults.  LOL When you talk like this, I can't help but feel a little sympathy for you. 

Anyway, God could just as easily be forgiving and merciful.  By coming down in human form, He would be encouraging idolatry.  Moreover, only pagan religions believe that the gods came down in human form, not necessarily to "die for our sins" of course.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I don't know. I would rather follow a religion that tells me it's necessary to love and help other people, and that it's not OK to commit adultery or get drunk or lie... and back that up with consequences. Deism does none of that. You can be a Deist and more or less do whatever you want, knowing that the "God" who exists couldn't care less.

As shocking as this may sound to you, I would consider Islam before becoming a Deist.


Oh, I would too.  As I said, Deism is distant second possibility.  I never said that I agree with everything it says. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Last time it got pretty personal and nasty. It got to the point where we stopped speaking to each other.

If that's what you understand by "war", no, I don't want it that way. I meant using insults and sarcasm but with the understanding we are friends and having respect for each other.

Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.


Well, after reading your response so far, I feel a little bad for you, so I am going to lay-off the insults...for now. 

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

My faith is bruised, yes. I don't think I'm any more or less "tough" than I was before.


If you say so.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You mean you have them?....Big%20smile


It's hard to believe, I know.  I come off a little macho, but yes, I do have feelings...Embarrassed

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL. No, and I don't blame you either. Our debates have messed up my worldview... a lot... but the truth is nothing to run from.


I agree.


-------------
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: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:34pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

  I would rather follow a religion that tells me it's necessary to love and help other people, and that it's not OK to commit adultery or get drunk or lie... and back that up with consequences. Deism does none of that. You can be a Deist and more or less do whatever you want, knowing that the "God" who exists couldn't care less.

lol - that gave me a chuckle.


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:36pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Just a reminder...

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

If you really "love" someone, you would let them make their own choices and not punish them yourself as a "consequence".  Unbelievers go to Hell because God sends them there.  He could just as easily not send them there.  He could just as easily make them disappear after death.  But no, He has decided to torture them for not believing in Him.

Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...Wink


Wink

If you cut out the first two sentences, you have more or less the same argument against Islam.

One could also question why God, who is just, would punish someone in hell for eternity. How long has the worst sinner ever lived?

That argument could be made against both Christianity and Islam.




Islam, unlike Christianity, does not say that God "loves" us.  Islam states unequivocally and unapologetically that God only loves the believers.

The issue of eternal damnation is not a problem for the belief in a just God, who has given fair warning to all.  It is a problem for the belief that this God "loves" us.  You can't love someone and yet throw them into everlasting fire to be tortured for eternity. 


-------------
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: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:37pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...

Islamispeace,

Oh yes, because muslims never 'come up with nonsensical explanations' ?

(where IS that shakes head side to side smiley?)

I think it is unhelpful to harbor disdain for people because of their religion, and to attempt to insult them during what ought to be civil discussions aimed at understanding.

Peace and blessings... please find some peace and blessings... you are not doing justice to the name you have chosen,
Caringheart


Yak, yak, yak. 

You're breaking my heart!  Cry


-------------
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: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:39pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Islam, unlike Christianity, does not say that God "loves" us.  Islam states unequivocally and unapologetically that God only loves the believers.

That's like saying you only love your child if he or she does everything exactly as you tell him/her to. Confused


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:40pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Leave it to Christians to come up with nonsensical explanations for nonsensical scenarios...

Islamispeace,

Oh yes, because muslims never 'come up with nonsensical explanations' ?

(where IS that shakes head side to side smiley?)

I think it is unhelpful to harbor disdain for people because of their religion, and to attempt to insult them during what ought to be civil discussions aimed at understanding.

Peace and blessings... please find some peace and blessings... you are not doing justice to the name you have chosen,
Caringheart


Yak, yak, yak. 

You're breaking my heart!  Cry

No intention to break your heart, just to open it and allow the poison to drain out, and let the Light shine in.
Smile


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 8:43pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Islam, unlike Christianity, does not say that God "loves" us.  Islam states unequivocally and unapologetically that God only loves the believers.

That's like saying you only love your child if he or she does everything exactly as you tell him/her to. Confused


That's better than saying you love your child, but you will burn them for eternity if they don't accept you. Confused


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:01pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Of course it is. With such a belief you can live your life like God isn't there.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Not at all.  Deists still believe that one should be good, but not because of the threat of judgment.  Deists believe that you can just be good.

Sure. But if you choose to be bad... there is no one to be accountable to in the next life, or this life, if you have enough $$ and influence.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

No, that would mean being an atheist.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Yes, and being a Deist is not the same as "being an atheist".

I wrote

is more or less the same as being an atheist.

Yes, Deism is not perfect atheism. However, considering that God is just an impersonal force who has no control over you, there is little difference in the end result.

Here, let me rephrase again.

In my view, being a Deist is very similar to being an atheist in many respects.

Fair enough?

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Why? What would it matter to you what I believe or don't believe?


Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Mostly because I see no logical reason for anyone to be a Christian, especially after admitting that the Bible is inaccurate in many places. 

And I see no logic in abandoning an imperfect belief system for other imperfect ones.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I see what you mean about the problem of original sin. I don't believe though that God needed to come down and die for our sins. It is something He chose to do.


Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Alright look, you're making it very hard for me to use insults.  LOL When you talk like this, I can't help but feel a little sympathy for you. 

LOL the last thing I'd ever want or need is sympathy from you or anyone else. If you're having "a very hard time" using insults, just turn on your spell-checker. Wink


Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Anyway, God could just as easily be forgiving and merciful.

Of course. He could do it without coming down as Jesus. He could also do it without creating us or sending down prophets or making a heaven or a hell. What's your point?

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


 By coming down in human form, He would be encouraging idolatry. 

How? If He is worshiped while He is in human form, it isn't idolatry. If someone or something else is worshiped instead of God, it would be idolatry.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Moreover, only pagan religions believe that the gods came down in human form, not necessarily to "die for our sins" of course.

Prior to Christianity and Islam, only pagan religions believed in miraculous births also, not necessarily from a virgin.

Also, unlike Judaism, only pagan religions believed in long-lasting torment in hellfire.

We can play the "pagan religions believed in that too" game all we want, but I don't think it helps your argument.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

I don't know. I would rather follow a religion that tells me it's necessary to love and help other people, and that it's not OK to commit adultery or get drunk or lie... and back that up with consequences. Deism does none of that. You can be a Deist and more or less do whatever you want, knowing that the "God" who exists couldn't care less.

As shocking as this may sound to you, I would consider Islam before becoming a Deist.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Oh, I would too.  As I said, Deism is distant second possibility.  I never said that I agree with everything it says. 

Then I still don't understand why you would be trying to present it as an "alternative".

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

Last time it got pretty personal and nasty. It got to the point where we stopped speaking to each other.

If that's what you understand by "war", no, I don't want it that way. I meant using insults and sarcasm but with the understanding we are friends and having respect for each other.

Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


Well, after reading your response so far, I feel a little bad for you, so I am going to lay-off the insults...for now. 

People can still use insults and be civil and friendly.

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

My faith is bruised, yes. I don't think I'm any more or less "tough" than I was before.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


If you say so.

Mmkay...

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

You mean you have them?....Big%20smile

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


It's hard to believe, I know.  I come off a little macho, but yes, I do have feelings...Embarrassed

"macho" definitely wasn't the word I was thinking of to describe you, but OK. Wink

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:

LOL. No, and I don't blame you either. Our debates have messed up my worldview... a lot... but the truth is nothing to run from.

Originally posted by Islamispeace Islamispeace wrote:


I agree.

Hope you keep that in mind as you check out Ancient Egyptian history, and some other things we've been discussing. Smile

Take all the time you need, I am not rushing you. God knows I've been more slow at responding to our debates than you have.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:03pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:


Islam, unlike Christianity, does not say that God "loves" us.  Islam states unequivocally and unapologetically that God only loves the believers.

That's like saying you only love your child if he or she does everything exactly as you tell him/her to. Confused


That's better than saying you love your child, but you will burn them for eternity if they don't accept you. Confused

Greetings islamispeace,

There's a difference here...
You love your child and you will hurt indescribably over their loss and the fact that they chose to walk away from you.

not loving them means you do not even care that they have chosen to burn in hell.

asalaam,
CH


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:10pm
Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


Hope you keep that in mind as you check out Ancient Egyptian history, and some other things we've been discussing. Smile

Ancient Egyptian history can be very revealing. Smile


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:13pm
Alright, going to bed now. Talk more with y'all some other time.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 15 September 2014 at 9:15pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by TG12345 TG12345 wrote:


Hope you keep that in mind as you check out Ancient Egyptian history, and some other things we've been discussing. Smile

Ancient Egyptian history can be very revealing. Smile

It kind of helps to destroy the misconceptions held by many Christians and Muslims alike, that the Bible and Quran, respectively, are inerrant. So do archaeological discoveries in the Holy Land.



Posted By: Muslim75
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 12:38am

------------------------------------------



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 7:06am
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Greetings islamispeace,

There's a difference here...
You love your child and you will hurt indescribably over their loss and the fact that they chose to walk away from you.

not loving them means you do not even care that they have chosen to burn in hell.

asalaam,


Even if the child chose to walk away from you, if you truly loved them, you would let them go and NOT throw them in a prison and cause them immeasurable pain and agony for eternity.  What kind of sick "love" is that? Shocked

I don't know about you, but I certainly would not deliberately cause someone I love to suffer endlessly in horrific pain because they "chose to walk away from me".  If you would deliberately hurt them because of this, then you don't really love them.  To cause immeasurable pain to someone is not indicative of "love".  It is indicative of hate.   

This reminds me a of Simpsons episode, in which Homer was certain that the rapture was coming and so was trying to warn everyone by saying:

"God loves you!  He's going to kill you!"

I love that line...LOL


-------------
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: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 8:17am
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Your personal opinions don't change anything.  When person commits a crime, they are punished with a jail sentence.  The latter is the result of the former.  There is a causal link.  If the idea was to "deter" would-be criminals, then the whole system has been a dismal failure.

Your assertion that "the whole system has been a dismal failure" is just a personal opinion and doesn't change anything. Tongue But do you really think there is just as much crime with our present system as there would be without it?

Quote
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

You're right -- the law is and ought to be impartial.  Nobody ever said the law was about love.
Which is why the Christian teaching is impractical.

Impractical as a basis for law, yes.  I would not support any religious teaching as a basis for law.  Again, another difference between us.

Quote Sure, there is a benefit, but usually, it is a benefit to society only, not to the criminal.  Most criminals are repeat-offenders.  They get caught, get sent to jail, and are then released, only to commit another crime.  Clearly, the threat of jail does not deter them.

Yes, the benefit is to society.  That's the whole idea.  
No, it's obviously not much of a deterrent to those who commit crimes anyway, and if it wasn't a deterrent the first time then it probably won't be the next time either; but how many more people would commit crimes, but never do, precisely because the threat of incarceration is a deterrent for them?

Quote But there are also many people who commit crimes for mostly selfish reasons.  They don't mind hurting someone else to satisfy their own needs.  Such people would actually take advantage of liberal laws to escape any punishment.


Sure, and one of the judge's jobs is to try to identify such people and adjust their sentences accordingly.  It's a tough job and no doubt mistakes are made in both directions; but I would far rather let a few selfish people off with a light sentence than to chop off the hands of a single thief whose kids were starving and he didn't know what else to do.

Quote
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

I would.  As you say, he should have known better, but he didn't.  And it's not his fault that he didn't.  Indeed, it would have been surprising if he had grown up into a normal, healthy, loving adult, don't you think?
What?  It's not his fault that he didn't know better?

No, it's probably not his fault.  If you had been born with his genetic baggage and had grown up as he did, you might not have known better either.

Quote That is ludicrous.  Many people experience severe trauma in their childhoods.  They don't all turn out to be sadistic serial killers who murder little girls and eat their flesh.  Albert Fish was a grown man.  He chose to carry out his sick fantasies.  Such a person deserves no sympathy.  If he was child when he did those things, that would have been different, but he was a grown man.

He was a grown man who heard voices, allegedly from God, telling him to kill children.  He argued (quite reasonably IMHO) that if God truly did not want him to kill them, He would have sent an angel to stop him, just as He stopped Abraham from killing Isaac.

If God told you to kill children, would you?

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 9:07am
Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Your assertion that "the whole system has been a dismal failure" is just a personal opinion and doesn't change anything. Tongue But do you really think there is just as much crime with our present system as there would be without it?


One is the immediate result of the other...causality.  I don't think that's a matter of "opinion"...Wink

Criminal laws serve a dual purpose.  I don't doubt that deterrence is one factor, but it is not the only factor.  The purpose of a jail is to punish criminals and to serve as a deterrent to others.  But with regard to the latter, the whole system has failed because there is no deterrent.  Would there be less crime without it?  Of course not, but that doesn't change the fact that the idea of "deterrence" is just a pipe dream.

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Impractical as a basis for law, yes.  I would not support any religious teaching as a basis for law.  Again, another difference between us.


Well, there you go...LOL

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Yes, the benefit is to society.  That's the whole idea.  
No, it's obviously not much of a deterrent to those who commit crimes anyway, and if it wasn't a deterrent the first time then it probably won't be the next time either; but how many more people would commit crimes, but never do, precisely because the threat of incarceration is a deterrent for them?


Most people would not commit a crime anyway, because it is not in their nature.  They don't need a "deterrent" to tell them its wrong to kill a little girl and eat her flesh, for example. 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Sure, and one of the judge's jobs is to try to identify such people and adjust their sentences accordingly.  It's a tough job and no doubt mistakes are made in both directions; but I would far rather let a few selfish people off with a light sentence than to chop off the hands of a single thief whose kids were starving and he didn't know what else to do.


LOL This just goes to show once again how out of touch you are.  You really should do yourself a favor and not open your mouth when it comes to Islamic law, because you definitely don't know much about it.  You make yourself look even more like the clown you are.

A person who steals because he is trying to feed his children would not be punished by the law.  There is a long precedence in Islamic law with regard to this.  The Caliph Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would not prosecute a thief who stole because he was desperate.  But when you have the Bernie Madoffs of the world stealing from desperate people (and often times getting away with it), I would far rather see them suffer for their crimes, than to let them off with a "light sentence". 

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

No, it's probably not his fault.  If you had been born with his genetic baggage and had grown up as he did, you might not have known better either.


"Genetic baggage"?  What the hell does that have to do with knowing whether it is right or wrong to kill a child and consume her flesh?  Shocked

I guess its safe to say that you are just as crazy as Albert Fish was!

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

He was a grown man who heard voices, allegedly from God, telling him to kill children.  He argued (quite reasonably IMHO) that if God truly did not want him to kill them, He would have sent an angel to stop him, just as He stopped Abraham from killing Isaac.

If God told you to kill children, would you?


LOL Why am I not surprised that this is the best argument you could come up with? 

Abraham (peace be upon him) was disturbed at the idea of having to sacrifice his son.  He didn't enjoy it.  Fish did.  In fact, when he lured Grace Budd to the place of her death, he actually stripped down naked before proceeding to strangle her.  He was getting pleasure from his depravity.
 
Moreover, as you admit, God did not let Abraham go through with the act.  It was all a test and Abraham passed with flying colors.  It was never God's intention to let Abraham kill his son.  So where Fish got the idea that God wanted him to kill children is beyond me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that was just a smokescreen, an excuse he invented to avoid punishment.   
And according to Islamic law, it is forbidden to kill a child, whether it be due to poverty or anything else.  So, if I ever heard a "voice" claiming to be God, telling me to kill children, I would know that it is not actually God but something else. 

By the way, there is plenty of infanticide going around these days, what with "pro-choice" abortion.  You still have not answered my question about how a "humanist" would view such a phenomenon.


-------------
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: Caringheart
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 11:51am
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Greetings islamispeace,

There's a difference here...
You love your child and you will hurt indescribably over their loss and the fact that they chose to walk away from you.

not loving them means you do not even care that they have chosen to burn in hell.

asalaam,


Even if the child chose to walk away from you, if you truly loved them, you would let them go and NOT throw them in a prison and cause them immeasurable pain and agony for eternity.  What kind of sick "love" is that? Shocked

I don't know about you, but I certainly would not deliberately cause someone I love to suffer endlessly in horrific pain because they "chose to walk away from me".  If you would deliberately hurt them because of this, then you don't really love them.  To cause immeasurable pain to someone is not indicative of "love".  It is indicative of hate.   

This reminds me a of Simpsons episode, in which Homer was certain that the rapture was coming and so was trying to warn everyone by saying:

"God loves you!  He's going to kill you!"

I love that line...LOL

Greetings islamispeace,

I think I see the difference here... the problem in understanding.

The quran teaches you that the almighty Creator throws people into hell.

My belief, and my understanding, of my God, is not that He throws us into hell, but that we walk there of our own accord.

You do not seem to know or understand the concept of consequences of our own actions.  The concept that it is up to us to purify ourselves here on this earth if we ever expect to make it into the presence of the Creator.

I agree with your first statement... that is a sick love... but that is your allah...
that is not my God.

I agree with your second statement... a loving Creator would not cause his creation which He loves, to stumble and fall into the pit... i.e., He would not 'place a veil over their eyes'

My God invites us to see... He cures blindness... He offers salvation.  My God offers every chance to turn from the path of destruction and enter the path of life.  If we walk into darkness, we do it of our own accord... of our own free will given to us by the Creator... and I am sure it wounds Him deeply to lose even one of His.

asalaam,
CH


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 12:07pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Greetings islamispeace,

I think I see the difference here... the problem in understanding.

The quran teaches you that the almighty Creator throws people into hell.

My belief, and my understanding, of my God, is not that He throws us into hell, but that we walk there of our own accord.

You do not seem to know or understand the concept of consequences of our own actions.  The concept that it is up to us to purify ourselves here on this earth if we ever expect to make it into the presence of the Creator.

I agree with your first statement... that is a sick love... but that is your allah...
that is not my God.

I agree with your second statement... a loving Creator would not cause his creation which He loves, to stumble and fall into the pit... i.e., He would not 'place a veil over their eyes'

My God invites us to see... He cures blindness... He offers salvation.  My God offers every chance to turn from the path of destruction and enter the path of life.  If we walk into darkness, we do it of our own accord... of our own free will given to us by the Creator... and I am sure it wounds Him deeply to lose even one of His.

asalaam,
CH


LOL Obviously, you don't hold your Bible in very high regard, because it is your Bible which says that God throws people into Hell.  So yes, the Christian concept of "God loves you...but He will throw you into Hell  if you don't believe in Him" is a sick "love".  Christianity is a walking contradiction.   

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Yeah, God sure "loves" us...Ermm

Homer Simpson: God loves you!  He's going to kill you!

Hmm, that might be a good signature! Wink

By the way, you have exhibited an abhorrent lack of understanding of why Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) "places a veil over their eyes".  He does this to those who have repeatedly rejected the truth, despite every warning and every chance to repent and amend their ways.  Such people lose out on His mercy, which is why He "places a veil over their eyes". 



-------------
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: Caringheart
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 12:30pm
You obviously do not understand the concept of free will and consequences. Unhappy

and placing a veil over their eyes, taking away any chance of redemption, is to you better, how?  In this case allah is ensuring that they will walk into hell.. how is that different than what you presume is 'throwing one into hell'?  At least in the one instance those who walk themselves into hell at least do it without having the One who created them blinding their eyes to what they are doing.  In my scriptures it is the ruler of this world that blinds the eyes to the Creator's Truth.  It is the ruler of this world that wants the creation to walk to its destruction.

asalaam.



-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 12:40pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

You obviously do not understand the concept of free will and consequences. Unhappy

and placing a veil over their eyes, taking away any chance of redemption, is to you better, how?  In this case allah is ensuring that they will walk into hell.. how is that different than what you presume is 'throwing one into hell'?  At least in the one instance those who walk themselves into hell at least do it without having the One who created them blinding their eyes to what they are doing.  In my scriptures it is the ruler of this world that blinds the eyes to the Creator's Truth.  It is the ruler of this world that wants the creation to walk to its destruction.

asalaam.



Free will and "consequences" does nothing to explain the contradiction in claiming that God "loves" you but you will burn in agony if you don't believe in Him.  If God "loves" us, then He would have provided a much less severe "consequence" than torturing people for eternity.  He wouldn't say "Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."  I don't want any part of that kind of "love".  Yeeesh!

Now, while Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) closes the "eyes" of some people as punishment for their disbelief and arrogance, He also guides those who submit to His will.  That is divine justice.  We all get what we deserve. 


-------------
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: Caringheart
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 12:58pm
Greetings islamispeace,

So your allah has no love for unbelievers... he can throw them into hell and feel nothing... does this sound like a Creator?  He can throw away His creation and feel nothing?
my God has love for all of His creation... He sees His creation walk themselves into hell and suffers greatly at the loss... He tries time and again to provide them a way of salvation, even up to the final days of the earth
Hmmm

I guess you missed the part where I spoke of all life being energy and when life on this earth ends that energy must go somewhere...
either to 'shine like the stars'... in the heavens
or to the pit... of fossil fuels


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 3:16pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

So your allah has no love for unbelievers... he can throw them into hell and feel nothing... does this sound like a Creator?  He can throw away His creation and feel nothing?
my God has love for all of His creation... He sees His creation walk themselves into hell and suffers greatly at the loss... He tries time and again to provide them a way of salvation, even up to the final days of the earth
Hmmm


LOL Riiiight.  "Your" God says he "loves" us but that if we don't do what He says, He will cause more pain than to us than we can imagine!  That's "your" God. 

My God is just and fair.  He offers us His love and mercy.  It is up to us to earn it.  My God does not make empty statements like "I love you" only to follow it up with eternal torture.  Would you cause horrific pain to someone you love?  That would be lunacy. 

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

I guess you missed the part where I spoke of all life being energy and when life on this earth ends that energy must go somewhere...
either to 'shine like the stars'... in the heavens
or to the pit... of fossil fuels



LOLLOLLOL You must be joking!  This one takes the cake!

So, do you think that "Hell" is actually just a metaphor for when our bodies break down and return to the earth as "fossil fuels".  Are you telling me that the coal and gas we burn are the souls of the damned?  So that means that when I get my car filled tomorrow, I am filling my car with souls? LOL

And as for the souls which "shine like the stars", would it be something like this (sorry, I couldn't find the English version):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1OtqDVvZmQ -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1OtqDVvZmQ

But seriously, the Bible makes it very clear that the souls of sinners literally go to Hell to burn in a lake of fire. 


-------------
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: TG12345
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 5:49pm
A question for Islamispeace.

You gave an example of a parent saying s/he "love" his/her child and then sentencing that child to an eternal punishment, and mocked such an idea (and even brought up my favorite philosopher, Homer Simpson Smile).


Now, some quick questions for you:

What would you say about a judge who sentences a person to a million floggings because he committed one act of fornication? Or hands down a billion life sentences for one act of murder? Or stones an adulteress to the point of being close to death, then has doctors revive her and bring her back to health of some sort, then has her stoned like that again, then revived, then does it again a few dozen more times (or how much it is possible for doctors to do until she can't be revived anymore)?

Would his sentences in your opinion be fair, or grossly disproportionate? Should the judge remain on the bench, or be removed and placed in an institution?


Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 16 September 2014 at 5:52pm
Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Originally posted by Ron Webb Ron Webb wrote:

Your assertion that "the whole system has been a dismal failure" is just a personal opinion and doesn't change anything.  But do you really think there is just as much crime with our present system as there would be without it?

One is the immediate result of the other...causality.  I don't think that's a matter of "opinion"...

But of course it's only your opinion that "one is the immediate result of the other.  Do you have any evidence for it?  Or any evidence that "the whole system has been a dismal failure"?

Quote Criminal laws serve a dual purpose.  I don't doubt that deterrence is one factor, but it is not the only factor.  The purpose of a jail is to punish criminals and to serve as a deterrent to others.  But with regard to the latter, the whole system has failed because there is no deterrent.  Would there be less crime without it?  Of course not, but that doesn't change the fact that the idea of "deterrence" is just a pipe dream.

Surely if there is less crime because of the existing laws, then by definition the existing laws are acting as a deterrent.

Quote Most people would not commit a crime anyway, because it is not in their nature.  They don't need a "deterrent" to tell them its wrong to kill a little girl and eat her flesh, for example.

That's true.  The law exists to deter the ones who do need a deterrent.

Quote This just goes to show once again how out of touch you are.  You really should do yourself a favor and not open your mouth when it comes to Islamic law, because you definitely don't know much about it.  You make yourself look even more like the clown you are.

Remember when I said that as a practical application of Christian love "we could all try to treat our opponents with a bit more courtesy"?  This is what I was talking about.

Quote A person who steals because he is trying to feed his children would not be punished by the law.  There is a long precedence in Islamic law with regard to this.  The Caliph Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would not prosecute a thief who stole because he was desperate.  But when you have the Bernie Madoffs of the world stealing from desperate people (and often times getting away with it), I would far rather see them suffer for their crimes, than to let them off with a "light sentence".

I'm sure Caliph Umar was a wise and gentle man, but if he was in the habit of chopping off people's hands then I have no doubt that he chopped off at least a few who didn't deserve it.  As for Bernie Madoff and his ilk, I don't want them to "suffer" at all.  I do want them to spend some time in prison, even if it means that means that a few innocent people will inevitably end up in prison too.  I can live with that; but I can't live with chopping off their hands.

Quote "Genetic baggage"?  What the hell does that have to do with knowing whether it is right or wrong to kill a child and consume her flesh?

Given his family history, I think it's safe to assume that his mental illness had a genetic component.

Quote Abraham (peace be upon him) was disturbed at the idea of having to sacrifice his son.  He didn't enjoy it.  Fish did.  In fact, when he lured Grace Budd to the place of her death, he actually stripped down naked before proceeding to strangle her.  He was getting pleasure from his depravity.

And what was it that caused him to get pleasure from such an act, instead of the revulsion that most of us would feel?  Was it his fault that his mind worked that way?

Quote Moreover, as you admit, God did not let Abraham go through with the act.  It was all a test and Abraham passed with flying colors.  It was never God's intention to let Abraham kill his son.  So where Fish got the idea that God wanted him to kill children is beyond me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that was just a smokescreen, an excuse he invented to avoid punishment.

Excuse or not, he was right, wasn't he?  If God had wanted Fish to stop, He could have easily stopped him.

Quote And according to Islamic law, it is forbidden to kill a child, whether it be due to poverty or anything else.  So, if I ever heard a "voice" claiming to be God, telling me to kill children, I would know that it is not actually God but something else.

That's what I think too.  So why didn't Abraham know that?  Why would he believe that God could ask him to do something so outrageous?  It's always puzzled me that everyone believes Abraham passed God's test.  IMHO he failed miserably.  (Off-topic, I know.)

Quote By the way, there is plenty of infanticide going around these days, what with "pro-choice" abortion.  You still have not answered my question about how a "humanist" would view such a phenomenon.

Also off-topic, and I know how discussions with you tend to get out of control.  Maybe some other time we'll get into that.

-------------
Addeenul Aql Religion is intellect.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net