What should we do now: for Liberals

[deaddude]

So the allowance of slavery is a very Christian one?

If you are saying that Jihad is a very Muslim practice based on the Quaran then I can say that slavery is very Christian practice based on the Bible.

 

[José]

Marbles,

I'm gonna use your own words to reiterate my main point, hoping that this time you'll get it:

CAUSE:

"A state born out of terrorism stamping on the rights of Arabs."

EFFECT:

"A people using an outlawed form of warfare to secure their own country."

Eliminate the cause (Israel) and you'll get rid of the effect (palestinian terrorism).

 

[MrMarbles]

Marbles,

I'm gonna use your own words to reiterate my main point, hoping that this time you'll get it:

CAUSE:

"A state born out of terrorism stamping on the rights of Arabs."

EFFECT:

"A people using an outlawed form of warfare to secure their own country."

Eliminate the cause (Israel) and you'll get rid of the effect (palestinian terrorism).

So you want to eliminate Israel?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

If you are saying that Jihad is a very Muslim practice based on the Quaran then I can say that slavery is very Christian practice based on the Bible.

Yes. but one statement is the truth and one is a lie. Care to guess which is which?

 

[deaddude]

How? Refute whichever one you think is a lie; don’t just say that it is untrue.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

How? Refute whichever one you think is a lie; don’t just say that it is untrue.

Jihad is in their holy writings. Slavery is not endorsed by the bible. Christians were the first abolitionists you know.

 

[deaddude]

Jihad is in their holy writings. Slavery is not endorsed by the bible. Christians were the first abolitionists you know.

Slavery is not endorsed by the bible.

Sure it is, check the Old Testament.

Christians were the first abolitionists you know.

Bullshit, the first abolitionists were Voodoun Haitian slaves.

October 23

Toussaint
L'Ouverture
*On this date in 1790, the first slave revolt in Haiti took place. France named its newly colonized island Saint Domingue in the early 1700.

French colonists brought in African slaves and developed big coffee and spice plantations. By 1788, there were eight times as many slaves (almost 500,000) as colonists. During the French Revolution, the slaves in Saint Domingue rebelled against their French masters. The slaves destroyed plantations and towns. Toussaint L'Ouverture, a former slave, took control of the government and restored some order to the country.

However, after Napoleon I came to power in France in 1799, he sent an army to restore colonial rule. The army sent by Napoleon captured and L'Ouverture and imprisoned him in France. However, many of the French soldiers caught yellow fever and died, and the rebels defeated the weakened French army in 1803. On Jan. 1, 1804, General Jean-Jacques Dessalines, the leader of the rebels, proclaimed the colony an independent country named Haiti.

http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/1235/First_Haitian_slave_revolt

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Of course slaves are abolitionists. I mean , non slave abolitionists in our country. And the ones who began the movement which eventually succeeded. You're silly.

The old testament deals with rules on existing slaves. It does not promote active ongoing enslavement. Jihad is a directive to kill in the name of islam, lie in the name of islam, whatever it takes.

 

[deaddude]

Did you not read my quote, the Haitian Slave revolt was successful they kicked the french out of Haiti. After they were given independence and freedom they were still as abolishonist as ever. Non-slave abolitionists.

Question, do the Old Testament rules regarding slaves say that slavery is an abomination and all existing slaves should be free?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Did you not read my quote, the Haitian Slave revolt was successful they kicked the french out of Haiti. After they were given independence and freedom they were still as abolishonist as ever. Non-slave abolitionists.

Question, do the Old Testament rules regarding slaves say that slavery is an abomination and all existing slaves should be free?

It does haven't to do that to be superior to muslim insanity. It doesn't actively promote ongoing atrocity as islam does. You lose. Get bent.

 

[deaddude]

Oh so you are saying that a religion can progress form an antiquated idea in its holy book. Funny, there are still some Christians who believe that slavery is acceptable. Perhaps then there are Muslims that do not believe in jihad.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Oh so you are saying that a religion can progress form an antiquated idea in its holy book. Funny, there are still some Christians who believe that slavery is acceptable. Perhaps then there are Muslims that do not believe in jihad.

You're so completely off base. The idea was never there that "slavery should be spread and is something good" it was just part of the society at the time. Jihad is an active teaching of current islam. Can you get this through through the tiny ganglion of nerve cells rustling around in your cranium?

 

[deaddude]

I never said it did, what I said was that it meant "God says it’s alright if you do X" which is an endorsement of slavery. So your logic follows the Koran endorses Jihad so all Muslims endorse Jihad, then the Bible endorses slavery so all Christians endorse slavery.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I never said it did, what I said was that it meant "God says it’s alright if you do X" which is an endorsement of slavery. So your logic follows the Koran endorses Jihad so all Muslims endorse Jihad, then the Bible endorses slavery so all Christians endorse slavery.

Construing that as an endorsement of slavery in the modern world is idiotic. Sorry it is. It was a reflection of the time.
Jihad is an active endorsement of barbarity for all time going forward, to spread islam by force.
Your mind is a cesspool of ineffective rationalization.

 

[nakedemperor]

Construing that as an endorsement of slavery in the modern world is idiotic.

Does this imply that God's meaning can change over time? Re: interpretation, that is?

 

[deaddude]

You say that the rules for slavery were a reflection of the time? And that only radical Christians seeking to return to those times use this passage to support their own bigotry and hate. I am willing to accept that this is true. I would then ask you to prove to me that the concept of Jihad is not a reflection of the times, and that it is not just radical Muslims wishing to return to those times that use the presence of Jihad in the Koran to support their own bigotry and hate.

 

[Said1]

Oh so you are saying that a religion can progress form an antiquated idea in its holy book. Funny, there are still some Christians who believe that slavery is acceptable. Perhaps then there are Muslims that do not believe in jihad.

Some Christians may believe slavery is acceptable, but there are no one practicing it, there is only one interpretation, and it's illegal. On the other hand,
Jihad is STILL the sixth pillar of Islam, and it still means defense of Islam against attackers or struggle against evil. In order to wage Jihad, they must feel threatened or attacked FIRST.

 

[deaddude]

Some Christians may believe slavery is acceptable, but there are no one practicing it, there is only one interpretation, and it's illegal. On the other hand,
Jihad is STILL the sixth pillar of Islam, and it still means defense of Islam against attackers or struggle against evil. In order to wage Jihad, they must feel threatened or attacked FIRST.

Therefore the actions of the 9/11 terrorists is not Jihad since they were the aggressors? They (the terrorists) are just perverting an idea in Koran about self defense?

 

[nakedemperor]

Some Christians may believe slavery is acceptable, but there are no one practicing it, there is only one interpretation, and it's illegal.

I'm the worst theologian ever, but, if God says slavery is acceptable, how can some Christians believe slavery is unacceptable?

 

[Said1]

Therefore the actions of the 9/11 terrorists is not Jihad since they were the aggressors? They (the terrorists) are just perverting an idea in Koran about self defense?

I agree, I didn't say it made sense.