Islam, is it a religion of peace or war?

[rjd970]

So, as Christians, you have removed the OT from your Bible?

But what I am having a hard time with is that you claim God is immutable. Therefore, since God says in the OT that it is okay to beat your slaves... why is it still not okay?

We should be celebrating that Christianity has the NT and at least someway to offset the barbarism in the OT. Islam needs some sort of new age thinking as well to be compatible. The meglamaniacal, genocidal, and infincidal God of the OT has been marginalized by Christian beliefs, as he should be.

Otherwise it isn't out of the realm of possibility we could have fundamentalists today sacrificing animals, beating slaves, stoning non-virgins on their wedding night, and executing gays, heretics, and blasphemers.

 

[lawgator1]

As long as government stays out of religion, and religion stays out of government, I say live and let live.

Same here. A rare point of agreement for us.

 

[lawgator1]

So, as Christians, you have removed the OT from your Bible?

But what I am having a hard time with is that you claim God is immutable. Therefore, since God says in the OT that it is okay to beat your slaves... why is it still not okay?

As Steven Wright says, "You know, the new testament is also really pretty old. They ought to call it the old testament and the most recent testament."

 

[Roustabout]

Why is it wrong?

If you want to resurrect a thread or start a new one be my guest. I’ve discussed this in depth on this forum.

 

[Roustabout]

So, as Christians, you have removed the OT from your Bible?

But what I am having a hard time with is that you claim God is immutable. Therefore, since God says in the OT that it is okay to beat your slaves... why is it still not okay?

That’s. It how immutability works. A drill sergeant can be a hard ass and a kind loving father. Same person on the same day. He doesn’t change, but how he is related to others does. I suggest you study up on your theology before you start trying to pontificate.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

If you want to resurrect a thread or start a new one be my guest. I’ve discussed this in depth on this forum.

I have never seen you take a concrete position on the topic. You enjoy poking holes in positions others take.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

That’s. It how immutability works. A drill sergeant can be a hard ass and a kind loving father. Same person on the same day. He doesn’t change, but how he is related to others does. I suggest you study up on your theology before you start trying to pontificate.

Simple question... yes or no. Is it ok to beat your slaves?

 

[Roustabout]

I have never seen you take a concrete position on the topic. You enjoy poking holes in positions others take.

I absolutely have and for you to imply otherwise is absolute horseshat. It’s not the subject of this thread and my invitation stands.

 

[Roustabout]

Simple question... yes or no. Is it ok to beat your slaves?

No, you cannot beat my slaves.

I don’t answer loaded questions.

 

[rjd970]

That’s. It how immutability works. A drill sergeant can be a hard ass and a kind loving father. Same person on the same day. He doesn’t change, but how he is related to others does. I suggest you study up on your theology before you start trying to pontificate.

But that's not what is meant with the new covenant, right? It's not that he is a drill sergeant and loving father on the same day...its the drill seargeant no longer exists or applies. It's all loving father now.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

No, you cannot beat my slaves.

I don’t answer loaded questions.

Just because it leads to a place that you don't like doesn't make it a loaded question.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Roust - Does God condone owning slaves?

 

[Roustabout]

Roust - Does God condone owning slaves?

In a certain context it is permissible. No where in the Bible does command command Israel to take slaves or say it is a good thing.
Hell, I’d condone it and today in certain contexts.

 

[Roustabout]

Just because it leads to a place that you don't like doesn't make it a loaded question.

Well, you’re full of sh!t. It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking “do you still beat your wife?”
If you want to have an honest discussion that is up to you.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

In a certain context it is permissible. No where in the Bible does command command Israel to take slaves or say it is a good thing.
Hell, I’d condone it and today in certain contexts.

What context is it permissible?

 

[Roustabout]

What context is it permissible?

This is way outside the context of the thread.
Through our 21st century eyes we hear "slavery" and we immediately think Chattel slavery of the Antebellum Era. Slavery still exists and has existed in the world since before recorded history. So, we'd have to know how one is using the term "slavery". The Ancient Near East was a different world than today. There were no government systems of welfare or charity to care for the homeless, downtrodden or helpless. There was no foreign aid for drought or famine. Overall, it was a much harsher world than today. Forms of slavery were used to deal with displaced populations that otherwise would starve and die. Other forms of slavery were used to deal with captives of war, or survivors. It was far less cruel than slaughtering them.

In the context of the other ANE cultures, the OT is revolutionary in how it dealt with slaves. Again, the Bible never condones or endorses slavery. It permits it and provides some ground rules about it. My guess is you have an agenda and don't have a sincere bone in your body about these questions.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

This is way outside the context of the thread.
Through our 21st century eyes we hear "slavery" and we immediately think Chattel slavery of the Antebellum Era. Slavery still exists and has existed in the world since before recorded history. So, we'd have to know how one is using the term "slavery". The Ancient Near East was a different world than today. There were no government systems of welfare or charity to care for the homeless, downtrodden or helpless. There was no foreign aid for drought or famine. Overall, it was a much harsher world than today. Forms of slavery were used to deal with displaced populations that otherwise would starve and die. Other forms of slavery were used to deal with captives of war, or survivors. It was far less cruel than slaughtering them.

In the context of the other ANE cultures, the OT is revolutionary in how it dealt with slaves. Again, the Bible never condones or endorses slavery. It permits it and provides some ground rules about it. My guess is you have an agenda and don't have a sincere bone in your body about these questions.

I've read what the OT has to say about slavery and I wouldn't call it revolutionary. The passages don't all seem to refer to "slavery aid" you speak of. So I suspect that all slaves were not living under these conditions, yet the Bible makes no distinction. By not condemning slavery in any form, God seems to support it.

Slavery v. Slaughter? Why wouldn't God demand that the the less fortunate be given the opportunity to work for an honest days wage?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Actually, we believe we all deserve Hell.

Not a very loving God.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

It is irrational to blame an entire religion for terrorism by people who have bastardized the religion. Don't you think that Muslims in the mid east believe fervently that it is part of the Jewish religion to kill all Muslims? That protestants at different times have believed that Catholocism required its members to kill protestants?

Too easy to blame the religion itself in order to stoke fear and loyalty on the other side.

But it's alright to brand every white Southerner (like myself) who owns a Confederate flag a white supremacist and/or KKK member after some nutjob shoots up a church and they find an old picture of the guy with a rebel flag or blame all NRA members (like myself) for what someone does illegally with a gun and brand them terrorists despite not one NRA member ever being accused.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

What context is it permissible?

Anyone who beats Alabama in football should be able to enslave the entire state. Same with UK in basketball.

 

[MercyPercy]

They want to claim "it was a different time" any time they have to address something problematic in the bible, then at the same time ask others to take biblical teachings as 100% relevant in the modern day. Not to mention perfect and immutable.

It's a fun routine to follow if you've got your dancing shoes on.

 

[Roustabout]

I've read what the OT has to say about slavery and I wouldn't call it revolutionary. The passages don't all seem to refer to "slavery aid" you speak of. So I suspect that all slaves were not living under these conditions, yet the Bible makes no distinction. By not condemning slavery in any form, God seems to support it.

Slavery v. Slaughter? Why wouldn't God demand that the the less fortunate be given the opportunity to work for an honest days wage?

It doesn't matter what you say. The bible deals with issues from 3k to 5k years ago. The fact that you have made up your mind and can't set aside your agenda shows your lack of sincerity. It's even worse when someone takes the time to point out those issues and you basically say, "I don't care." It lets me know not to waste my time answering you in the future. I'll answer for the others reading here. The Bible does condemn slavery in certain forms.

Exodus 21:16
“Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.

Leviticus 19:33-34
“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

There were no wages. Most of these cultures were agrarian. Clearwater's comments shows he is ignorant of the ANE and has no desire to understand.
He refuses to understand the times and that many who were slaves, voluntarily placed themselves into servitude. For examples slave trading was fairly common in that day. A person who could not provide might sell themselves into servitude where they would work and in turn be provide food and housing. The person in servitude could be sold or traded to another. Considering the practice of the time, it is amazing that the OT actually provides ANY rights or directions on how to deal with servitude and slavery. Servitude, in its proper form is not wrong. In fact, it's a better way to deal with displaced populations than much of what we do today.

 

[Roustabout]

They want to claim "it was a different time" any time they have to address something problematic in the bible, then at the same time ask others to take biblical teachings as 100% relevant in the modern day. Not to mention perfect and immutable.

It's a fun routine to follow if you've got your dancing shoes on.

Because it's legitimate. It's a pretty ****** tactic to ignore the culture and common practice of the times.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

It doesn't matter what you say. The bible deals with issues from 3k to 5k years ago. The fact that you have made up your mind and can't set aside your agenda shows your lack of sincerity. It's even worse when someone takes the time to point out those issues and you basically say, "I don't care." It lets me know not to waste my time answering you in the future. I'll answer for the others reading here. The Bible does condemn slavery in certain forms.

Exodus 21:16
“Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.

Leviticus 19:33-34
“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

There were no wages. Most of these cultures were agrarian. Clearwater's comments shows he is ignorant of the ANE and has no desire to understand.
He refuses to understand the times and that many who were slaves, voluntarily placed themselves into servitude. For examples slave trading was fairly common in that day. A person who could not provide might sell themselves into servitude where they would work and in turn be provide food and housing. The person in servitude could be sold or traded to another. Considering the practice of the time, it is amazing that the OT actually provides ANY rights or directions on how to deal with servitude and slavery. Servitude, in its proper form is not wrong. In fact, it's a better way to deal with displaced populations than much of what we do today.

I like the way you resort to personal insults when you get angry. Either your God condones slavery or he does not. Which is it?

 

[MercyPercy]

Because it's legitimate. It's a pretty ****** tactic to ignore the culture and common practice of the times.

I certainly don't ignore the time and culture in which the bible was written. In fact, I wish more people would take that into consideration when deciding whether they should take it literally or not.