Personal blog that will cover my personal interests. I write about Christian Theology and Apologetics, politics, culture, science, and literature.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Answering Muslims: Pregnant Woman Whipped 200 Times, then Shot to Death, in the Name of Islam
I agree that the Bible and the Qur'an both decries fornication and adultery and I agree it's wrong and God does not like it. It is however is against scriptures to punish only the woman especially in such an extreme way - 200 lashes and being shot 3 times!??? It's not justice or mercy. I cannot think of anyway to make what was done right. I disagree that such behavior should be ignored or condoned but I see no way to punish it with violence especially with innocent unborn children involved! Even if you wanna follow the Old Testament laws, these people did not follow them. According to the laws of Moses, both the man and woman are guilt. Both were supposed to be executed not just the woman.
The Daily Mail is reporting that elders in the village of Quds contacted Taliban commanders after the woman's pregnancy became known. A local official said: 'She had an illegal relationship with a man who was not her husband,' adding, 'Her husband died many years before. Then she became pregnant so, according to Islam, we gave her a very strong punishment. It was more than 200 lashes. Then we shot her.'
Um no. I never said that they weren't "true" Muslims. You did. I'll accept responsibility for the Crusades, Inquisition, but not the Holocaust (because Hitler was not a Christian), if you accept responsibility for Stalin and Mau and the Columbine shootings - because the perpetrators were Atheists.
Oh, well good for you. Of course you should already be aware that I acknowledge Stalin and Mao (and Pol Pot) were atheists. But I think you are doing a diservice to their victims by not blaming the real culprit, communism. Unfortunatly for you, at the time of the Crusades, etc... Christianity was the state as well as the religion, so there's no getting around that one for you.
However, High School kids are generally stupid and have no idea who they are, so we'll chalk that one up to sheer stupidity and upbringing.
They did what they did because in their relativistic moral worldview they thought they were right. By definition to be a communist is to be an atheist while not all atheists are communists.
I doubt they thougt about it. But if I recall, one of them was brought up as an evangelical. Either way, you are reaching. They were simply dumb, horrible kids.
The columbine shooters purposely target Christians remember? Being brought up evangelical means nothing if you turn against it as they did. I'm not reaching...you are. and dodging.
This is probably illustrative of how christianity (or any religion) got started. You hear a rumor that either makes you feel good or supports your position, and you keep it and make it "properly basic" and if new evidence comes out later, you can ignore it.
Also, it's important to note that from the journals it can be determined that Harris at least believed in some sort of version of god, which would make him not an atheist. Not that it really matters.
I think you may need to do more research about what happened during the Columbine shooting. Won't matter however...you'll be too chicken to admit that atheism played a role.
I have no delusion that atheists don't kill people. You're the one with the belief system that lets you think that no true christian can do wrong. So I guess you'll be too chicken to rethink your beliefs concerning Klebold and Harris based on new evidence (well, new last year).
Let me leave you with a quote "That story about a student being shot in the head after she said she believed in God? Never happened, the FBI says now."
I assume you are too chicken to admit that your statement that they specifically targeted Christians was in error? What else are you wrong about Marcus?
First, I never have said that a true christian can do no wrong. All I've said that Christianity is not responsible for the things you want to make it responsible for like the holocaust. True Christians become Christians for the reason that they recognize their own unworthyness and want to turn their lives over to God. If you can really think that God would sign off on evils like the Holocaust, then you are more deluded than I though. And I will not admit that my statement that Christians were specifically targeted during the Columbine shootings was wrong because there are conflicting reports and why would you not be skeptical about FBI reports? I mean they always tell the truth and don't make mistakes right? I gave you evidence that says that Christians were targeted.
I have never claimed personal infallibility. The Bible is true and infallible...not me.
And I will not admit that my statement that Christians were specifically targeted during the Columbine shootings was wrong because there are conflicting reports...
Right, so in the face of conflicting evidence*, you choose to believe what you want to believe.
*maybe you can site some of this conflicting evidence?
Well, I don't know what actually happened in Canaan several thousand years ago, but the Hebrew record mentions killing EVERYTHING including babies. So yes. It's at least comparable.
OK, I'll peruse your link, but...
I did site some contrary evidence regarding what happened at Columbine.
Where??? I just reread all the posts. You didn't site anything here. You are a liar and I don't think you even know it. Even though you'll pay lip service to your "infallibilty", you cannot let yourself ever to be shown to be in the wrong. Pride's a sin in your religion, no?
Where??? I just reread all the posts. You didn't site anything here. You are a liar and I don't think you even know it. Even though you'll pay lip service to your "infallibility", you cannot let yourself ever to be shown to be in the wrong. Pride's a sin in your religion, no?
Look at my comment at 11:25 am today and then click on "Read this". That is the link. You owe me an apology. I've admitted when I'm wrong a lot of times. Being a christian means admitting I'm wrong and God is right! By definition. You never admitted God is right and your being wrong. There are no take-backs.
Next you are a moral relativist, how do you call it sad?
further, the citation I sent explains that there is controversy over if anyone was shot because they believed in God, not that specific people were not targeted because they were Christians. My point was that they were and some witnesses who were there and their families said that they were targeted.
You are the one who is choosing top believe what he wants despite evidence.
As for Amalekites and the holocaust you are going to have to try to work harder to link them. Children died when America drooped atomic bombs on Japan..is that the same thing as the holocaust?
Ha! Sorry about that. I really wish links were't the same color as the headers and footers.
Next you are a moral relativist, how do you call it sad?
Um, it makes me sad. People had their lives taken. You realize recognizing that morality is relative doesn't mean I think no morality exists, I thought we'd been over that?
My point was that they were and some witnesses who were there and their families said that they were targeted.
That might have been your point, but you said...
The columbine shooters purposely target Christians remember?
Doesn't seem like they did, now does it?
As for Heroshima and Nagasaki, I don't think it technically qualifies as genocide as we would have had to have also nuked Kyoto and Tokyo and then went forward with the invasion and proceeded to kill all the men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys for it to compare. Either way it was terrible.
You realize recognizing that morality is relative doesn't mean I think no morality exists, I thought we'd been over that?
I agree and never have argued that could not recognize what is moral or not. My point is that the columbine shooters did not think it was a bad thing. They felt justified. Why was they wrong? If they weren't wrong then why feel sad?
My saying that the shooters targeted their Christian classmates is not wrong if you believe the evidence that they did. If you reject that...that is your right. No one is going to hell because they disagree with me about the shooters' motivations.
You know Marcus, no one is going to Hell, or Candyland either.
I read both articles. I didn't see ANY evidence that they specifically targeted Christians. In fact, one of them apparently walked away from a wounded girl who professed a belief in god.
As for why it was wrong, western culture generally* dictates that taking innocent life is wrong. One person can't say, "hey, I think this x would be morally right, I'll do x." If x is not considered morally right by the society at large.
*too many qualifiers to mention, that's why it's called moral realativism...
As for genocide, it's when a specific group is targeted for extinction (be it through murder, breeding, displacement, etc...). I think technically it applies only to an ethnicity, but I figure it could apply to a nationality, religious group or ideological group as well.
Heroshima and Nagasaki don't fit those descriptions. Not any better than Dresden or Stalingrad would qualify. Both equally awful though.
What makes society right? One time it was okay to have slaves.
Nothing makes society right, but society makes us think it's "right". Follow?
At one time it was ok to keep slaves in the Bible too.
Also, I agree about motivation/intent being a factor in classifying something as genocide or not. Although that raises an interesting question about slavery in the new world. Personally, I think it counts. But I don't think the intent was the extermination of the African. Fuzzy area. Those do exist, you know?
But those aren't "True Muslims".
ReplyDeleteWhat makes you say that? I don't have a historical definition of what a Muslim is that they do not fit. Do you? What is it?
ReplyDeleteOf course you do Marcus, granted most Muslims historically did this, but none of them were "true muslims" either.
ReplyDeleteIsn't this how you dodge responsibility for the Crusades, the Inquisition, Salem and the Holocaust?
Um no. I never said that they weren't "true" Muslims. You did. I'll accept responsibility for the Crusades, Inquisition, but not the Holocaust (because Hitler was not a Christian), if you accept responsibility for Stalin and Mau and the Columbine shootings - because the perpetrators were Atheists.
ReplyDeleteOh, well good for you. Of course you should already be aware that I acknowledge Stalin and Mao (and Pol Pot) were atheists. But I think you are doing a diservice to their victims by not blaming the real culprit, communism. Unfortunatly for you, at the time of the Crusades, etc... Christianity was the state as well as the religion, so there's no getting around that one for you.
ReplyDeleteHowever, High School kids are generally stupid and have no idea who they are, so we'll chalk that one up to sheer stupidity and upbringing.
Chicken
ReplyDeleteThey did what they did because in their relativistic moral worldview they thought they were right. By definition to be a communist is to be an atheist while not all atheists are communists.
ReplyDeleteRight back at you Col. Sanders.
ReplyDeleteI doubt they thougt about it. But if I recall, one of them was brought up as an evangelical. Either way, you are reaching. They were simply dumb, horrible kids.
The columbine shooters purposely target Christians remember? Being brought up evangelical means nothing if you turn against it as they did. I'm not reaching...you are. and dodging.
ReplyDeleteThe columbine shooters purposely target Christians remember?
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure that was determined to be a myth.
I'll have to see if I can confirm that.
I thought so.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably illustrative of how christianity (or any religion) got started. You hear a rumor that either makes you feel good or supports your position, and you keep it and make it "properly basic" and if new evidence comes out later, you can ignore it.
Also, it's important to note that from the journals it can be determined that Harris at least believed in some sort of version of god, which would make him not an atheist. Not that it really matters.
I think you may need to do more research about what happened during the Columbine shooting. Won't matter however...you'll be too chicken to admit that atheism played a role.
ReplyDeleteRead this
I have no delusion that atheists don't kill people. You're the one with the belief system that lets you think that no true christian can do wrong. So I guess you'll be too chicken to rethink your beliefs concerning Klebold and Harris based on new evidence (well, new last year).
ReplyDeleteLet me leave you with a quote "That story about a student being shot in the head after she said she believed in God? Never happened, the FBI says now."
I assume you are too chicken to admit that your statement that they specifically targeted Christians was in error? What else are you wrong about Marcus?
First, I never have said that a true christian can do no wrong. All I've said that Christianity is not responsible for the things you want to make it responsible for like the holocaust. True Christians become Christians for the reason that they recognize their own unworthyness and want to turn their lives over to God. If you can really think that God would sign off on evils like the Holocaust, then you are more deluded than I though. And I will not admit that my statement that Christians were specifically targeted during the Columbine shootings was wrong because there are conflicting reports and why would you not be skeptical about FBI reports? I mean they always tell the truth and don't make mistakes right? I gave you evidence that says that Christians were targeted.
ReplyDeleteI have never claimed personal infallibility. The Bible is true and infallible...not me.
The one who is chicken is you.
If you can really think that God would sign off on evils like the Holocaust
ReplyDeleteEver heard of the Amalekites???????
And I will not admit that my statement that Christians were specifically targeted during the Columbine shootings was wrong because there are conflicting reports...
ReplyDeleteRight, so in the face of conflicting evidence*, you choose to believe what you want to believe.
*maybe you can site some of this conflicting evidence?
Ryan... are u seriously wanting to equate the conquest of Canaan with the Holocaust? You should have been a comedian.
ReplyDeleteI did site some contrary evidence regarding what happened at Columbine.
Let me try to make it even clearer
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/cassie.htm
Well, I don't know what actually happened in Canaan several thousand years ago, but the Hebrew record mentions killing EVERYTHING including babies. So yes. It's at least comparable.
ReplyDeleteOK, I'll peruse your link, but...
I did site some contrary evidence regarding what happened at Columbine.
Where??? I just reread all the posts. You didn't site anything here. You are a liar and I don't think you even know it. Even though you'll pay lip service to your "infallibilty", you cannot let yourself ever to be shown to be in the wrong. Pride's a sin in your religion, no?
If it wasn't a sad subject, this would actually be funny. You didn't actually read the article at that link, did you?
ReplyDeleteReread it Marcus (or just actually read it) and tell me exactly what part of your statement it supports?
@Ryan
ReplyDeleteYou said:
Where??? I just reread all the posts. You didn't site anything here. You are a liar and I don't think you even know it. Even though you'll pay lip service to your "infallibility", you cannot let yourself ever to be shown to be in the wrong. Pride's a sin in your religion, no?
Look at my comment at 11:25 am today and then click on "Read this". That is the link. You owe me an apology. I've admitted when I'm wrong a lot of times. Being a christian means admitting I'm wrong and God is right! By definition. You never admitted God is right and your being wrong. There are no take-backs.
Next you are a moral relativist, how do you call it sad?
further, the citation I sent explains that there is controversy over if anyone was shot because they believed in God, not that specific people were not targeted because they were Christians. My point was that they were and some witnesses who were there and their families said that they were targeted.
You are the one who is choosing top believe what he wants despite evidence.
As for Amalekites and the holocaust you are going to have to try to work harder to link them. Children died when America drooped atomic bombs on Japan..is that the same thing as the holocaust?
Ha! Sorry about that. I really wish links were't the same color as the headers and footers.
ReplyDeleteNext you are a moral relativist, how do you call it sad?
Um, it makes me sad. People had their lives taken. You realize recognizing that morality is relative doesn't mean I think no morality exists, I thought we'd been over that?
My point was that they were and some witnesses who were there and their families said that they were targeted.
That might have been your point, but you said...
The columbine shooters purposely target Christians remember?
Doesn't seem like they did, now does it?
As for Heroshima and Nagasaki, I don't think it technically qualifies as genocide as we would have had to have also nuked Kyoto and Tokyo and then went forward with the invasion and proceeded to kill all the men, women, children, babies, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys for it to compare. Either way it was terrible.
@Ryan
ReplyDeleteApology accepted
You realize recognizing that morality is relative doesn't mean I think no morality exists, I thought we'd been over that?
I agree and never have argued that could not recognize what is moral or not. My point is that the columbine shooters did not think it was a bad thing. They felt justified. Why was they wrong? If they weren't wrong then why feel sad?
My saying that the shooters targeted their Christian classmates is not wrong if you believe the evidence that they did. If you reject that...that is your right. No one is going to hell because they disagree with me about the shooters' motivations.
What is your definition of genocide?
You know Marcus, no one is going to Hell, or Candyland either.
ReplyDeleteI read both articles. I didn't see ANY evidence that they specifically targeted Christians. In fact, one of them apparently walked away from a wounded girl who professed a belief in god.
As for why it was wrong, western culture generally* dictates that taking innocent life is wrong. One person can't say, "hey, I think this x would be morally right, I'll do x." If x is not considered morally right by the society at large.
*too many qualifiers to mention, that's why it's called moral realativism...
As for genocide, it's when a specific group is targeted for extinction (be it through murder, breeding, displacement, etc...). I think technically it applies only to an ethnicity, but I figure it could apply to a nationality, religious group or ideological group as well.
Heroshima and Nagasaki don't fit those descriptions. Not any better than Dresden or Stalingrad would qualify. Both equally awful though.
Neither does the Old Testament of the Bible.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes society right? One time it was okay to have slaves. Why? Because the majority thought so? No. I don't think so.
As for Columbine. there were and are other accounts that say different then what you have chosen to believe.
As for genocide. Doesn't "genocide" also have something to do with motivation. What is the motivation of genocide?
Neither does the Old Testament of the Bible.
ReplyDeleteWhat's this in reference to?
What makes society right? One time it was okay to have slaves.
Nothing makes society right, but society makes us think it's "right". Follow?
At one time it was ok to keep slaves in the Bible too.
Also, I agree about motivation/intent being a factor in classifying something as genocide or not. Although that raises an interesting question about slavery in the new world. Personally, I think it counts. But I don't think the intent was the extermination of the African. Fuzzy area. Those do exist, you know?