Some positive news out of the middle east

Scroll to see replies

Dodging as usual.

I don't want you to say anything. I just want you to be consistent in what you say.

For example: in some threads you advocate killing apostates
If I ask you directly: you say "ask the scholars"

In this thread you are quick to pass judgement on people who draw the pictures. You claim it is blasphemous, it is offensive and you blatantly said that you "hated" that Danish cartoonist.

However, I ask you a direct question about what you think the punishment should be and you defer to the "scholars"

It seems you are just all talk until one asks you a direct question about your own beliefs. At that point, when you are cornered, you defer to the scholars.

Is there a point really to you posting all your stuff here if you're just going to defer the answer to scholars?

Also, you pretend to be ultra-knowledgeable on the Quran, posting all your colour coded nonsense. But as soon as the topic shifts to "punishment"...suddenly you aren't so knowledgeable any longer. You are forced to defer to your useless scholars.

As I said...be consistent.

Oh and finally, present proof about your arabic claim or stop bringing it up because you are making yourself look foolish.

Reply 41

Good bloke

Original post by Perseveranze

You mean an offensive picture, and not just a picture? In an Islamic state, it would account to Blasphemy and one can potentially get the death penalty for it. It's actually no different to Christian blasphemy laws or how they did it.

There are, quite rightly, no blasphemy laws in England.

Reply 42

.eXe

Original post by Good bloke

There are, quite rightly, no blasphemy laws in England.

And there are definitely no "Christian blasphemy laws" so I have no clue what that kid is talking about.

Reply 43

Perseveranze

Original post by .eXe

No, you have an issue with comprehending basic sentences. No one ever denied apostasy, I even proved to you it's in Christian/Jewish Theology and Christian history is full of it.

I said it's only applicable in an Islamic state, and the chances of it happening are extremely rare due to the fail safes.

I never once denied or dodged your question.

Original post by .eXe

In this thread you are quick to pass judgement on people who draw the pictures. You claim it is blasphemous, it is offensive and you blatantly said that you "hated" that Danish cartoonist.

However, I ask you a direct question about what you think the punishment should be and you defer to the "scholars"

Ok, calling something "Blasphemous" is one thing, but then saying what a judge would say, taking all the evidences into account etc. is completly different.

You tried to bring up a foolish analogy regarding "people know the law" and I disapproved this analogy, which you've just gone and ignore. That same analogy answers this question as well.

In Shariah, things aren't as simple as "this happens, so this is the definite punishment". No, Islamic courts look at things on a case to case basis.

Original post by .eXe

It seems you are just all talk until one asks you a direct question about your own beliefs. At that point, when you are cornered, you defer to the scholars.

Actually I don't ever talk of my own opinion, I go by the consensus. Which isn't "picking and choosing a scholar", it's what the majority have said over a period of 1400 years. It's like recurring testimony and is one of the things that makes Islamic theology one of the most objective.

Original post by .eXe

Is there a point really to you posting all your stuff here if you're just going to defer the answer to scholars?

So you prefer me to do what you do, and make stuff up, based on whatever interpretations I like or see fit? That's why people consider you a joke. You can't accept something if it goes against your own "liking", so you will simply twist it.

Just like how you claimed homo's don't go hell in Christianity, when there's dozens of commentaries of bibilical verses saying the opposite.

Original post by .eXe

Also, you pretend to be ultra-knowledgeable on the Quran, posting all your colour coded nonsense. But as soon as the topic shifts to "punishment"...suddenly you aren't so knowledgeable any longer. You are forced to defer to your useless scholars.

Because you're asking me stupid questions like what punishment I would give a certain individual, when there's no way to know.

If you had asked me, what happens in Shariah if you steal, I wouldv'e said you get amputated and then told you the conditions for this (2 witnesses etc.)

With blasphemy it's completely different, you can get away with a fine, a jail term or if you went really far, a death sentence. There's no fixed punishment.

And this can be applicable for insulting anyone, be it Christian, Jew or whatever.

ps. These "useless scholars", you can have a billion lifetimes and you wouldn't even achieve a grain sand worth of what they achieved in their short lifetimes.

Original post by .eXe

As I said...be consistent.

That is rich coming from someone who not only lies about knowing arabic, uses the worst kind of sources, but also interprets things randomly to whatever his liking is, and whatever fits his argument.

Original post by .eXe

Oh and finally, present proof about your arabic claim or stop bringing it up because you are making yourself look foolish.

Ask Saintsoldier (who I know for a fact wouldn't lie about it, he has no reason to). Stop trying to be in denial about it.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 44

Perseveranze

Original post by .eXe

And there are definitely no "Christian blasphemy laws" so I have no clue what that kid is talking about.

Don't bother trying to quote me again you liar. You're not worth my time and this is why you cannot debate me or with anyone for that matter. You will always lie and twist things and interpret whatever you can to fit your liking, whether it's on Christianity, Islam or anything.

"One of the worst sins in Christianity" and you didn't know about it. Dear me.

Reply 45

.eXe

Original post by Perseveranze

You said "Christian blasphemy law"

All you linked was a wikipedia page on blasphemy.

Show me the part about a law. Where is the Christian blasphemy law you were talking about?

What have I lied about kid?

Tell me exactly which phrase was a lie.

Speaking against a religion may be a crime but there is no such thing as a Christian blasphemy law you child. If that were the case then everyone who jokes about Jesus would be prosecuted.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 46

Perseveranze

Original post by .eXe

You're not comprehending or reading;

Blasphemy laws in Christian countries did not exist for no reason or justification. Don't bring about your own interpretations please.

Leviticus 24:16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

Matthew 9:3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!"

Matthew 12:31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Matthew 12:32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Luke 12:10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

Absolutely loads more. Should be enough to show that Blasphemy law exists, whether it's against Jesus or not, it's clear you can't insult God or the "holy spirit".

And here's you main church theologians;

•

Thomas Aquinas says that “it is clear that blasphemy, which is a sin committed directly against God, is more grave than murder, which is a sin against one's neighbor. … it is called the most grievous sin, for as much as it makes every sin more grievous.”^[11]

•

The Book of Concord calls blasphemy “the greatest sin that can be outwardly committed”.^[12]

•

The Baptist Confession of Faith says: “Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God…is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. …For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns.”^[13]

•

The Heidelberg Catechism answers question 100 about blasphemy by stating that “no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of His Name”.^[14]

•

The Westminster Larger Catechism explains that “The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane...mentioning...by blasphemy...to profane jests, ...vain janglings, ...to charms or sinful lusts and practices.”^[15]

•

Calvin found it intolerable “when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked.”^[16]

Or are these "useless scholars"?

And what lol? You can speak against Jesus but you can't speak against religion in general? Is that what you just said lol? And you do know a Christian state does not exist, otherwise you probably would get persecuted. You live in a secular country, not a Christian one.

Keep pretending though.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 47

.eXe

Original post by Perseveranze

You're not comprehending or reading;

Blasphemy laws in Christian countries did not exist for no reason or justification. Don't bring about your own interpretations please.

Leviticus 24:16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

This is in Leviticus. What the hell does this verse have to do with Christianity you ignoramus? Just because it's in the Bible doesn't automatically mean it's part of Christianity. The OT is in the Bible to serve as a preface to the New. The Old Law is obsolete, it became obsolete when its final prophesy of the Messiah coming was fulfilled.

Don't quote OT to me again because I have clearly explained why it has nothing to do with Christianity.

Matthew 9:3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!"

Matthew 12:31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

How is this a law? This is Matthew stating what is a the worst sin you can commit in Christianity. So? Where is the law? Do you understand the meaning of a "law"? Define law.

Matthew 12:32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Again, this is the same quote as the one above. If one speaks blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, they cannot be forgiven. You can say whatever you want against the other two parts of the Trinity but one cannot speak against the HS. Now here's the little thing you don't get.

These aren't laws. They are SINS. Get it right son.

Go brush up on your definitions before you revisit this forum.

Luke 12:10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

See above. Go buy a dictionary.

Absolutely loads more. Should be enough to show that Blasphemy law exists, whether it's against Jesus or not, it's clear you can't insult God or the "holy spirit".

What you meant foolish kid was that "sins exist". Speaking blasphemy is a sin not a freaking law. I am surprised that as a theist, you fail to understand the distinction.

Keep pretending though.

Pretending what? I have answered each of your allegations.

All you have managed to do against my questions is "ask the scholars"

Brilliant work there.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 48

Perseveranze

Original post by .eXe

This is in Leviticus. What the hell does this verse have to do with Christianity you ignoramus? Just because it's in the Bible doesn't automatically mean it's part of Christianity. The OT is in the Bible to serve as a preface to the New. The Old Law is obsolete, it became obsolete when its final prophesy of the Messiah coming was fulfilled.

Don't quote OT to me again because I have clearly explained why it has nothing to do with Christianity.

Stop lying, of course the OT does have to do with Christianity. Why do you find Christians always quoting the "lovely parts" of OT?

There's ample evidence that the laws of Church/state were derived from both NT and OT. Also;

Original post by .eXe

How is this a law? This is Matthew stating what is a the worst sin you can commit in Christianity. So? Where is the law? Do you understand the meaning of a "law"? Define law.

You define law through biblical meanings. The meaning here is pretty clear + Leveticus could not be clearer.

Where do you think they got their laws from?

In Britain's last blasphemy execution, 20-year-old Thomas Aikenhead was executed for the crime in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles. - "Thomas Aikenhead". 5.uua.org. Retrieved 10 November 2011.

Original post by .eXe

That's still blasphemy law though lol.

Original post by .eXe

These aren't laws. They are SINS. Get it right son.

So you're saying no sin has a worldly penalty?

Original post by .eXe

Go brush up on your definitions before you revisit this forum.

When you can't even debate your own religion, then desperation surely will kick in.

This is what happens when you spend your whole life trying to interpret things however you see fit, you completely lose all hope of seeing things from a more objective angle.

Original post by .eXe

What you meant foolish kid was that "sins exist". Speaking blasphemy is a sin not a freaking law. I am surprised that as a theist, you fail to understand the distinction.

Then what on earth do you think Christian nations derived Blasphemy or ANY laws from?

Even today, there are Blasphemy laws influenced by Christianity;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

Original post by .eXe

Pretending what? I have answered each of your allegations.

All you have managed to do against my questions is "ask the scholars"

Brilliant work there.

Even though I refuted all your allegations, and destroyed you in your own religious arguements?

You lied saying I dodged apostasy.
You lied saying I "ask the scholars", when I said no such thing. Now you're in denial even though I fully explained to you what the consensus is and why it brings about greater objectivity.

You then asked me a question that has many different answers (What punishment would I give a Blasphemer?). It's me asking you, what punishment would you give, according to Christianity, for someone who steals a bike. Whatever answer you give, 1000 Christians would give a completely different answer.

And the sad thing is, if I asked you the question about Blasphemy and Punishment based on Christianity, despite the history and the clear evidences of the death sentence, you'll just deny it and pretend like it doesn't exist.