Islam Will lose, The West Already Lost
Introduction
The war that has been going on between the West and Islam is obvious to all except those Westerners who live in denial and refuse to believe their eyes. What we actually see is a new kind of war the like of which never been fought before. In fact the word ‘war’ may not be the right expression to describe what has been going on. In wars, the fighting is in both directions but what we see today is that Islam is fighting against the West while the West is fighting alongside Islam!
Islam will lose
Islam has no place in this age of the Internet because its true nature can be easily exposed. It simply has no strength to survive an intellectual challenge. The ideology was not well constructed, and no more than a random collection of myths and ideas that make no sense to any person with common sense.
Islam was destined to die at the stage of its inception in Mecca but the Arabs of Yathrib, the ‘Ansar’ ( supporters) gave it a new breath of life. Mohammed’s claims were examined by the scholars of the time, like Abu Al Hakam Ibn Hisham, and were rejected for being false. If Mohammed failed to defend his ideology, no Muslim scholar can succeed. Apart from the few dozens who joined him in the early years, Mohammed failed to attract any other followers in his own city. His uncles and cousins, even his own daughter, Zainab, didn’t join him because they all believed he was making things up. The Ansar supported Mohammed and his followers of ‘muhajiroon’ (immigrants) purely for political reasons. They paid the ultimate price for their blunder, which resulted in the loss of their power and the fall of their city to Mohammed as they completely vanished from history. The Ansar’s support to Mohammed is reminiscent of the West’s support to his followers fourteen centuries later. Mohammed’s current followers were persecuted in their home countries until they gained the support of the West (again for political reasons). The new ‘muhajiroon’ made the most of the generous Western support that was at their disposal, just as Mohammed did in Yathrib, and they succeeded. The new ‘muhajiroon’ are so powerful in the West that not a word of criticism is allowed to be uttered against them.
It was a pure accident that Islam survived to our time. Accidents do happen in life and often unlikely things can happen. Throughout its history, Islam has been a handy tool used by rulers to subjugate its followers, and it is still so in our time. The enemies of the various Islamic empires never wanted or needed to challenge the Islamic ideology because they were only interested in power and conquests.
The Internet proved to be a different kind of enemy to Islam, and a lethal one indeed. It is not interested in power or conquests, and hits Islam where it hurts, and where it has no defence – the heart of its ideology. But the Internet is not alone; in the last few years an unlikely fierce enemy of Islam emerged, which is Islam itself! The very rise of Islam and the implementation of sharia in various parts of the world proved to have a similar function to the self destruct button. The strict implementation of Islam with its associated horrible practices prompted many young Muslims, especially in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and some North African countries, to question the ideology and discover the big lie.
Apostasy is not new to Islam, it is as old as Islam itself. Even while still in Mecca, some of Mohammed’s companions defected to Christianity in Abyssinia. However, the apostate that humiliated Mohammed most was Abdullah Ibn Abu Al Sarh, who was one of the scribes of the Quran and who discovered that Mohammed was making up the Quran. Throughout the centuries, intellectuals living under the Islamic rule continued to defect from Islam, albeit keep their views privately ( Al Mutanabbi, Al Ma’arri, Al Razi … and many others) for obvious reasons.
The Internet is currently rich with ex-Muslims’ activities that expose Islam, and it is paying off dividends. We will never have an accurate number of those who leave Islam, but a tiny minority they are not anymore. Their number is increasing more and more, especially in North Africa and Saudi Arabia. Understandably, most of those ex Muslims are young, which makes it more promising. It is the young who hold the future.
When I started writing on the Internet, I remember reading an article by Ali Sina in which he predicted that Islam will collapse in his life time. He actually produced a mathematical sequence explaining why he believed so. I admired Ali’s logic and confidence and wished I could share his optimistic views. This was when Islam was actually going from strong to stronger, or so it seemed, with more converts and more increasing demands to introduce Sharia law. That picture started to change recently as some serious cracks started to appear in the Islamic structure and they are beyond repair. Ali’s prediction wasn’t that wrong or far-fetched.
The West already lost
“Civilizations die of suicide, not murder”
Arnold Toynbee
The West has committed suicide. The lethal pill was swallowed by the post war generation of Europeans. The so called called ‘baby boomers’ inherited treasures of wealth, culture, freedom and unsurpassed civilization, earned by their fathers and grandfathers. The rich inheritance didn’t come cheaply, but at the cost of millions of lives that were sacrificed by the previous generations. All the the baby boomers needed to do was to enjoy those treasures and pass them on to the next generations; a task they could have done effortlessly, but they didn’t. The result is what we see today, a Europe with borders open to whoever is interested to cross over, countries with dwindling economies, and nations ashamed of their culture, identity and history. Europe has reached the point of no return and nothing short of a miracle can stop the rolling wheel of demise.
Germany’s position is not easy to comprehend; it was tough with Greece and suddenly became soft towards the influx of millions of immigrants. It does look as if the Germans this time will succeed in bringing down Europe. It has been known for years that the Germans (and most western Europeans) lost interest in raising children. This is not a human instinctive behavior, but an acquired culture that is against human instincts. The politicians and their media were behind this madness, which is why they didn’t do anything about it. Europeans were led to believe it is better for them to enjoy life to the full, without the cost and responsibilities of raising children. Ordinary marriage was frowned upon at and the “ordinary family” was slowly deprived of its privileges through biased legislation. People who often campaigned to save endangered species became endangered themselves and nobody cares to save them.
By opening borders, Germans will have no real control over the number of people who come to the country. Once in Germany, those people can travel freely to the rest of Europe, if they desired. It is estimated that the number of Muslims in Germany will rise to 20 millions in 2020 (after five years) and the number will multiply in the years after. By importing this kind of immigrants on this scale, Germany also imports unemployment of unemployable people and ethnic conflicts on a scale that had never been tried before. It is reality and not racism to note that the migrants who clench to their cultures will do in Germany exactly what they did back in their countries i.e minimal work, which made their countries poor in the first place. Germany has been a world leader in science, technology and manufacturing, which made the German products stand out as icons of excellence. Soon “made in Germany” will no longer mean made by the Germans and that will be the beginning of the end for the economy and the nation.
I am an immigrant myself. I came to the UK because I loved the British way of life and wanted to be part of it, contribute to it and benefit from it, which I did. I could have continued to work in the Middle East just like the rest of my colleagues, who couldn’t bear the thought of living outside their “superior Islamic” culture. Most immigrants are not Syrians and not refugees. Surprisingly, there are very few Christians (the really oppressed group) among the Syrian refugees. Traditionally, immigrants are motivated by a determination to succeed by working hard and making a new start. This is how America was built. The current immigrants, regardless of their origins, have exactly the opposite motivation, which is to do no work and live on state benefits. They have been fed the idea that Europe is obliged to respect their rights (i.e human rights) to practice their religion and have a good life without having to work at all ( which is sadly true in many ways ). Even more shocking, some truly believe they are desperately needed to fertilize the European women because their men are not good enough! Europeans like to think they can afford their blunder, which is doubtful, but even if true it is not sustainable in the long term.
The irony is that European generosity to immigrants is received with suspicion rather than gratitude by many Arabs, including those living in Europe, who adopt the views expressed by clerics back in their countries. Many believe it is a well planned conspiracy to abuse Muslims and let them do the dirty work in order to boost European economies and then convert them to Christianity. Many Arabs are actually more grateful to the Saudis, who refused to take any of the refugees, for offering to build mosques in Germany!
___________________
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Manu X:129. No collection of wealth must be made by a Sudra, even though he be
able (to do it); for a Sudra who has acquired wealth, gives pain to Brahmanas.
* Sudra slaves can’t own property and must remain poor.
Clearly there is no other dictum regarding slavery more inhumane than we find in Hinduism.
===========================================================
Read the verse properly….the verse does NOT mean that a shudra CANNOT legally own properties…
What it says is
“Even though he be able, a shudra shall NOT amass wealth, for having acquired wealth the shudra harasses the brAhmanas”.
This is the correct translation (Author: Ganganatha Jha).
This verse does NOT legally prohibit shudras from owning wealth…
This verse if anything it shows that Shudras can legally own wealth, but that is NOT spiritual merit for them and with that wealth they start harassing brAhmins through charity given for them….one who accepts charity or gifts in Hinduism carries on his head sins of giver of charity or gift thereby causing pain and harassment to brAhmins…..shudras gain spiritual merit by service or helping (for conducting rituals and collecting materials for rituals) to brAhmins only …that is the meaning of this verse…
Same Manu smriti says shudras do own wealth..
Manu smriti 11
34. A Kshatriya shall pass through misfortunes which have befallen him by the strength of his arms, a Vaisya and a Sudra by their wealth, the chief of the twice-born by muttered prayers and burnt-oblations.
42. Those who, obtaining wealth from Sudras, (and using that) offer an Agnihotra, are priests officiating for Sudras, (and hence) censured among those who recite the Veda.
43. Treading with his foot on the heads of those fools who worship a fire (kindled at the expense) of a Sudra, the giver (of the wealth) shall always pass over his miseries (in the next world).
All the above verses CLEARLY SHOW that a shudra can own wealth.
The verses 42 and 43 explain how sins of a shudra gets transferred to brAhmins who accepts charity or gifts from wealthy shudras.
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Laws of Manu 8:413-414. ….
* Servants are not bought and they are not compelled to work.
=============================================================
Read the previous verses…The duties of a King are laid out here….
410. (The king) should order a Vaisya to trade, to lend money, to cultivate the land, or to tend cattle, and a Sudra to serve the twice-born castes….
This verse makes it clear in context. The King shall order or make (compel) the Vaishya do what he needs to do, mainly to do business activities and thereby employ shudras and take care of them. The King shall make the Shudras work for other three castes….This is ensuring each follows one’s own dharma.
After that comes the verses 413 and 414…..…..The compelling here for a vaishya through various means (how is NOT stated here, may be rewards and punishments) obviously does NOT imply slavery. Similarly, compelling a shudra does NOT mean slavery, but through various means from material rewards, punishments and other kinds…..
Besides, the verse 413 clearly mentions bought or unbought. Why? Because it wants to distinguish between a slave and free shudra….This itself means that shudra are NOT slaves by default….
Verse 414 talks about spiritual development and emancipation of shudras is through servitude to brAhmins (spiritual teachers) only just as emacipation of Vaishya is through supporting all people through business, or a brAhmins emancipation is through practicing severe penances, or a warriors (Kshatriyas) emancipation is through act of protecting his citizens in war with his life if necessary. It does NOT speak about slavery through physical force but forced through their karma. They have a choice to earn their livelihood on their own…That is why they can own property….
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Heres a nice bonus verse. Manu explicates what is considered spoils of war. Notice that women are included in the booty. So each time the Vedas mention spoils of war, women are automatically assumed to be among the captured possessions..
ManuVII 96. Chariots and horses, elephants, parasols, money, grain, cattle, WOMEN, all sorts of (marketable) goods and valueless metals belong to him who takes them (singly) conquering (the possessor).
==========================================================
The King does NOT enslave the captured warriors or their wives, sisters or daughters here…A Kshatriya (warriors) or other twice-borns (brAhmins or Vaishyas) or free shudras are never enslaved…What is taken is the properties that belong to conquered warriors…The Hindu ethic here is whatever the enemy owns, it belongs to conqueror. If the conquered owns slaves (women or men) who do manual labor, then they too belong to them…If the village or city belongs to the conquered, the conquerer becomes the ruler of these cities and villages….For example any city will consist of brAhmins, Vaishyas, Kshatriyas and Shudras who are free. These are never to be enslaved.
So the WOMEN mentioned in this verse is slaves who belonged to the conquered warriors. They automatically become slaves of the new master, namely warrior or Kshatriya who is the conqueror.
NOTE here that there is no mention of sexual rights or anything of that sort here. NOTE the masters here are Kshatriyas or warriors. They like brAhmins are required to follow strict codes especially with regard with what kind of women they can associate with. Slaves are usually outside 4 castes and sexual association with them leads to loss of caste..This is part of ritual purity for brAhmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. So no sexual contact is allowed here.
Hence there is no comparison here to the biblical or quran verses which allow believers to kill male members and take women as sex slaves whether they are free or not.
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Manu 8:417. A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for,as that (slave) can have no property, his master may take his possessions.
==============================================================
There are conditions when this can be done from a Shudra…this is clear from following verses…THIS SEIZING IS ALLOWED EVEN FROM OTHER BRAHMINS.
Manu smriti 11
11. If a sacrifice, (offered) by (any twice-born) sacrificer, (and) especially by a Brahmana, must remain incomplete through (the want of) one requisite, while a righteous king rules,
12. That article (required) for the completion of the sacrifice, may be taken (forcibly) from the house of any Vaisya, who possesses a large number of cattle, (but) neither performs the (minor) sacrifices nor drinks the Soma-juice;
13. (Or) the (sacrificer) may take at his pleasure two or three (articles required for a sacrifice) from the house of a Sudra; for a Sudra has no business with sacrifices.
14. If (a man) possessing one hundred cows, kindles not the sacred fire, or one possessing a thousand cows, drinks not the Soma-juice, a (sacrificer) may unhesitatingly take (what he requires) from the houses of those two, even (though they be Brahmanas or Kshatriyas);
15. (Or) he may take (it by force or fraud) from one who always takes and never gives, and who refuses to give it; thus the fame (of the taker) will spread and his merit increase.
16. Likewise he who has not eaten at (the time of) six meals, may take at (the time of) the seventh meal (food) from a man who neglects his sacred duties, without (however) making a provision for the morrow,
17. Either from the threshing-floor, or from a field, or out of the house, or wherever he finds it; but if (the owner) asks him, he must confess to him that (deed and its cause).
Clearly the seizing of goods is allowed for performing religious rituals and brAhmins who preform such religious rituals can seize it NOT ONLY FROM SHUDRAS, BUT ALSO FROM VAISHYAS, KSHATRIYAS and OTHER STINGY BRAHMINS also as per the verses.
So this does NOT prove anything about slavery of Shudras…
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Yes, Hindus can and have emulated their gods. For example, Indra the butcher, who has been deified for his ruthless slaughters of Dasyus. It may be an evil emulation but it’s still practical.
==============================================================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra#In_the_Rigveda
Indra is, with Varuna and Mitra, one of the Ādityas, the chief gods of the Rigveda (besides Agni and others such as the Ashvins).
In the Rigveda, Indra is the god of thunder and rain and a great warrior who battles with the water obstructing serpent Vritra and other enemies frequently referred to as Dasa.
There is no evidence Indra was human and later deified as you claim. Vritra is a powerful aura whom Indra vanquishes in battle. Vrtra is called as a Dasa or Dasyu in RgVeda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasa
The three words Dasa, Dasyu and Asura are used interchangeably in almost identical verses that are repeated in different Vedic texts, such as the Rig veda, the Saunaka recension of Atharva veda, the Paippalada Samhita of the Atharva veda and the Brahmanas text in various Vedas.
The word Asura refers to demonic beings, the opposite of devatas.
No emulation is referred to here when you praise devatas. It is meant for worship of devatas and gaining spiritual/material favors.
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
You’ve missed the point entirley. …. It was a tu quoque response by Jesus, not meant to be taken seriously. Unless of course you can show me an example where Jesus or any of his followers actually killed a child for being disobedient.
=============================================================
It is you who has missed the point completely…..Whether it was tu-quoquo or if there is absence of execution of these commands are irrelevant here…I already dealt with valid argument from silence and non-execution of certain laws does NOT necessarily mean jeebus does not agree with them….Again let me restate….
Matthew 15:3
For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; [a] and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’
Jeebus himself admits that God commanded these laws…..when jeebus states “God commanded them”, was he saying this just to satisfy Jews or did he himself believe in them? Answer honestly…This same jeebus said not on tittle of law will be left unfulfilled….So it is clear that jeebus believed these are commands of god and are ethical and moral….
This is enough to convict him…..as he justifies these laws, just as he felt no need to oppose institution of slavery which is authorized by the same biblical god…we need not go through this again and again….
Ron says:
==============================================================
Jesus was born sinless and he did not commit any sin unlike all other humans ever born on this planet.
==============================================================
Just repeating the same lies again and again does NOT make it true…Answer my question logically..
1. WHOSE SPERM DID UNHOLY GHOST INSERT INTO MARY? ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT OF JOSEPH => ADULTERY
2. WHY DID UNHOLY GHOST NOT INFORM HUSBAND JOSEPH BEFORE CONCEPTION? UNHOLY GHOST LIKE AN ADULTERER IMPREGNATED MARY WITHOUT HUSBAND’S KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMED IN DREAM AFTER THAT….THIS DREAM STORY IS MERELY MADE UP EXCUSE. HENCE NO UNHOLY GHOST IS INVOLVED…
3. WHEN CONCEPTION IS MIRACULOUS, WHY THERE IS NO MIRACLE IN 9 MONTHS GESTATION PERIOD? ONLY ORDINARY HUMAN SPERM INJECTION WILL LEAD TO 9 MONTHS GESTATION PERIOD. CLEARLY SEMEN IS INVOLVED IN MARY’S PREGNANCY…UNHOLY GHOST HAS NO BODY. SO SPERM CANNOT BELONG TO UNHOLY GHOST(S). WHOSE IT IS?
CLEARLY THIS UNHOLY GHOST IS SOME ADULTEROOUS HUMAN BEING….=> JEEBUS WAS BORN THROUGH ADULTERY…
NOW WHY WOULD ANYONE BET THEIR LIFE CALLING SUCH BASTARD AS “son of god” and EVEN PRAY TO SUCH A PERSON?
Ur bible also agrees jeebus is born a sinner….a mamzer is a sinner
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
— Deuteronomy 23:2
Jesus was born sinless and he did not commit any sin unlike all other humans ever born on this planet. He did not shed anyone’s blood but died for our (yours, mine and everyone’s) sin.
Lets look at the lives of these gods or founders
Mohamed killed, raped, robbed, lied, committed pedophilia etc. (documented in Hadith)
Shiva committed acts of murder, rape, adultery, fornication, kidnapping, bestiality, infanticide, larceny, impersonation(identity theft), homosexuality, group sex, gang rape (documented in Puranas, Vedas, Upanishads and other Hindu Scriptures)
Krishna committed acts of murder, lewdness, rape, lust, adultery, fornication, kidnapping, bestiality, robbery, impersonation (identity theft), larceny, homosexuality, incest, group sex, gang rape, genocide, lies, theft and juvenile theft etc. (documented in Puranas, Vedas, Upanishads and other Hindu Scriptures)
Brahma committed acts lewdness, rape, lust, incest, adultery, fornication, kidnapping, bestiality, robbery, homosexuality, group sex, larceny, gang rape, genocide, lies, theft etc. (documented in Puranas, Vedas, Upanishads and other Hindu Scriptures)
Indra committed acts of murder, lewdness, rape, lust, adultery, fornication, kidnapping, bestiality, robbery, impersonation (identity theft), larceny, homosexuality, incest, group sex, gang rape, genocide, lies, theft and juvenile theft etc. (documented in Puranas, Vedas, Upanishads and other Hindu Scriptures)
Buddha abandoned his wife and child and lived semi-naked. (He gets benefit of doubt of felonies but is charged with deserting wife and child)
So Jesus is sinless and holy man. In a court of law in any part of the world there is no sentence for a child even if born out of wedlock. Jesus was born as divine intervention to save mankind. Whether you believe it or not the fact remains that most of educated believes him to be holy or good and a of a high moral character. Even Dawkins, Flew, Nietze may not have accepted Jesus as God but they all said Jesus was good.
There are sociopaths, people brimming with hate and who have been indoctrinated with hate from birth who might believe that Jesus was bad, but these are in the minority.
You don’t have to bet your life time on trying Jesus.
You have to ask Jesus to reveal himself to you for ONE WEEK only with the condition that if He (Jesus) does not reveal himself then you will continue to worship your gods.
You are just challenging Him (Jesus) for ONE WEEK.
Jesus will answer. Try Jesus for ONE WEEK only.
Unless, Phoenix shows that bible allows freedom of religion, there is absolutely no point to quoting any of the quotes from foundng fathers….Its mere rhetoric….Some foundng fathers had negative opinion on christianity some had positive. It means nothing….the 10 commandments and its religious punishments, especially deny all religious freedom….so US constitution is against bible and christianity…
Ron, since you are NOT interested in logical discussions or any of the qoutes I provide refuting all your silly claims from third rate websites, I have only one question…
Why would anybody wants to call a bastard born through a adulterous woman to come in his dreams and visions….
1. WHOSE SPERM DID UNHOLY GHOST INSERT INTO MARY? ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT OF JOSEPH => ADULTERY
2. WHY DID UNHOLY GHOST NOT INFORM HUSBAND JOSEPH BEFORE CONCEPTION? UNHOLY GHOST LIKE AN ADULTERER IMPREGNATED MARY WITHOUT HUSBAND’S KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMED IN DREAM AFTER THAT….THIS DREAM STORY IS MERELY MADE UP EXCUSE. HENCE NO UNHOLY GHOST IS INVOLVED…
3. WHEN CONCEPTION IS MIRACULOUS, WHY THERE IS NO MIRACLE IN 9 MONTHS GESTATION PERIOD? ONLY ORDINARY HUMAN SPERM INJECTION WILL LEAD TO 9 MONTHS GESTATION PERIOD. CLEARLY SEMEN IS INVOLVED IN MARY’S PREGNANCY…UNHOLY GHOST HAS NO BODY. SO SPERM CANNOT BELONG TO UNHOLY GHOST(S). WHOSE IT IS?
CLEARLY THIS UNHOLY GHOST IS SOME ADULTEROOUS HUMAN BEING….=> JEEBUS WAS BORN THROUGH ADULTERY…
NOW WHY WOULD ANYONE BET THEIR LIFE CALLING SUCH BASTARD AS “son of god” and EVEN PRAY TO SUCH A PERSON?
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
This only applies if and only if Jesus was in the company (especially his followers) of slave traders and kept silent on the matter, when questioned. We don’t find any such instance in the bible. This argument from silence does not apply at all. Geez, did you even read the examples in your link? Here’s a much simpler example from another link.
=========================================================
Your argument is silly…..jeebus had no problem to overturn the tables and throw away things in the temple merely by seeing them…When he found some wrong being done, he immediately reacted, even with physical violence…NOTE that nobody questioned him here….Jeebus reacted to mere sight of wrong doing inside the temple….
Jesus Cleanses the Temple
Matthew 21
12Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.
13″It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.'”
Clearly jeebus did NOT want to tolerate wrong doers and wrong actions in his sight…
Now let us go back to slavery…and VALID ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE…..
http://editthis.info/logic/Informal_Fallacies#Argument_from_Silence
To make a valid, or evidential argument from silence, an arguer most demonstrate that the person in question would
1) have had the opportunity to be aware of claim and,
2) knowing of the claim, would have had the opportunity to make mention of it.
When one is able to demonstrate these issues, then one has made a valid Argument from Silence
NOW was JEEBUS aware of slavery AND ITS WOES? We know this is a parable…we are NOT interested in meaning of parable here….what we are interested is whether jeebus was aware of slavery and the punishments/difficulties/lack of rights slaves undergo…
Luke 12:45-48: clearly shows that slaves are beaten by masters if they do not obey them and NOT do what they are asked to do…So point no 1 is satisfied…..
Now coming to point no 2. Did jeebus have the opportunity to make mention of it?
Now does this opportunity come only when some opponent questions jeebus regarding slavery?
Here we are NOT dealing with a DEBATE situation with jeebus. We are dealing with a religious teacher of morality to society here, especially a religious teacher who does NOT tolerate wrong doers and openly attacks them as he did in temple… If this were merely a debate, then one must say that the opponent must have asked this question about morality of slavery…
However, jeebus being a teacher of morality to a primitive society, he is expected to teach moral principles and address important issues….Now the question is did jeebus in anyway have the opportunity to address regarding slavery to his followers, at the least those followers who owned slaves…The answer is YES…
Luke 7
The Centurion’s Great Faith
1When He had completed all His discourse in the hearing of the people, He went to Capernaum.
2And a centurion’s slave, who was highly regarded by him, was sick and about to die.\
3When he heard about Jesus, he sent some Jewish elders asking Him to come and save the life of his slave.
4When they came to Jesus, they earnestly implored Him, saying, “He is worthy for You to grant this to him;
5for he loves our nation and it was he who built us our synagogue.”
Now, where did jeebus address slavery issue here?
Your question is did anybody ask jeebus regarding slavery? Again, Jeebus is NOT debating anybody here…Just as jeebus overturned tables on just seeing money-lenders in temple AS A TEACHER OF SOCIETY, why did jeebus not address the issue of Centurion (described as epitome of faith) owning a slave, if slavery is as wrong as money lenders being inside the temple? This is a valid logical question….look at jeebus’ complete lack of mention of slavery as anything that is to be opposed….
It is also clear that the high priests of jeebus’ time owned slaves…
Mark 14:66 Disciples’ Literal New Testament (DLNT)
Peter Denies Jesus Three Times
66 And Peter being below in the courtyard, one of the servant-girls of the high priest comes.
Jeebus obviously had many opportunities to condemn slavery, whether due to his followers or opponents…yet jeebus did NOT condemn slavery even ONCE, but condemned by physical force money-lenders in synagogue without any direct provocation or anybody questioning him…..
THEREFORE JEEBUS DID NOT FIND ANYTHING WRONG IN SLAVERY…YOU CANNOT ESCAPE THIS ARGUMENT WITHOUT CHICANERY TU-QUOQUO….
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
My point was, you do not have a benchmark to condemn slavery. Your scriptures see no ethical atrocity in owning slaves. As a matter of fact, Hinduism relies on slavery to exist, in its original state, that is. You cannot be against slavery and be pro Hinduism simultaneously.
====================================================
strawman argument…….emotional tu-quoquo responses….My argument is NOT regarding morality or ethical aspects of slavery…My argument is regarding jeebus NOT condemning slavery and therefore jeebus silence implies approval of slavery as perfectly moral….THIS IS A VALID ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE…
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
He is not referring to the present but clearly to the past. Also he makes no mention of capital punishment but leaves matters in God’s hands. The following verses makes that clear
You’re grasping at straws.
=============================================================
Again you missed the entire point and making strawman arguments….Here Paul did NOT find anything immoral or unethical in these punishments…This IS THE POINT OR ARGUMENT HERE…. The argument is NOT that Paul handed punishments here…
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
There is nothing in John19:11 that supports capital punishment. Your desperation is apparent.
==============================================================
Your chicanery is clear by making strawman allegations….
John 19:11
11 Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above.
The argument is that jeebus recognized rulers as god’s instrument and therefore ought to be obeyed…By implication it justifies all the laws and justice system and its associated punishments, just jeebus approved mosaic law…
Matthew 23
2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
Clearly jeebus again approves Mosaic laws…..
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Romans13:4 refers to a spiritual battle with evil. There is nothing in the context of that verse indicating Jesus or anyone else were physically holding swords.
==============================================================
What a numbskull? You did NOT even take the effort to read the original verses…
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013
Romans 13
Submit to Government
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Clearly, this verse talks about rulers or Kings or whatever in this world and NOT about vague spiritual battles here…..This verse talks about government authorities…numbskull…at the least read the verses from the bible and then argue without wasting my time again….
Since the bible says ruling authorities are god’s hand or instrument, then their laws and punishments are also god’s wrath on sinners and therefore all punishments, including capital punishments are approved…
Phoenix Says:
==============================================================
Firstly, there’s a deliberate yet subtle chicanery in your verse, including the omission of the following verses. That word “dies” must be “died” Paul is referring to how transgressors were treated in the past who were under the Mosaic law.
==============================================================
Is it? A thief thinks all others are thief and a deceiving fellow like you thinks the same about others..
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Hebrews%2010%3A28
Hebrews 10:28
DLNT
Anyone having set-aside the Law of Moses dies without compassions upon the testimony of two or three witnesses.
Disciples’ Literal New Testament (DLNT) Disciples’ Literal New Testament: Serving Modern Disciples by More Fully Reflecting the Writing Style of the Ancient Disciples, Copyright © 2011 Michael J. Magill. All Rights Reserved. Published by Reyma Publishing;
YLT
any one who did set at nought a law of Moses, apart from mercies, by two or three witnesses, doth die,
Young’s Literal Translation (YLT) by Public Domain
NKJV
Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
NRSV
Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy “on the testimony of two or three witnesses.”
NRSVA
Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy ‘on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’
NRSVACE
Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy ‘on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’
NRSVCE
Anyone who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy “on the testimony of two or three witnesses.”
test
Brahma is considered to be the greatest spiritual god of the Hindu Trinity and yet if we read Shiv Puran (Ruder Samhita 2 Sati Khand 2) we find him mentioned as a cheat and a sex maniac.
Why Hindus worship Penis and Vagina.
1. Once all the three Gods had a fight on the question : who is the supreme. Their fight bore no result. Ultimately, Bhrigu the Brahman was appointed the Commissioner to decide the case. He first visited the abode of Brahma who did not take care of him. The Brahman was infuriated. He cursed as he did not worship the Brahman, henceforth, nonbody would worship Brahma. Then he went to Shiv. He was engaged in sexual intercourse with his wife. He too did not take notice of the Brahman. So the Brahman commanded that as he is always engaged in sex, he become a penis. So Shiv became penis with vagina around it. Then he went to Vishnu who was sleeping. Bhrigu the Brahman kicked him. He held of brahman’s foot and asked if it has not been hurt. Brahman was pleased with his Brahman-reverence. He was thus declared supreme god
2. It is simply a cock & bull story. If Shiv had turned into ‘Penis’ why the life of Shiv did not come to an end. How could Shiv exist after becoming a penis? In fact, Brahmans made him penis to provide sanction of religion to their own lustful misdeeds. Their another book Ling Puran i.e. History of Penis tells another story. It says once Brahma and Vishnu were fighting over their supremacy. Suddenly a giant penis appeared between them. Both agreed whosoever would find one end of the penis, would be Supreme God. Both travelled thousands of miles but neither could find the end. Ultimately, they worshipped that penis of Shiv and named him Mahadev i.e. Supreme God.
It appears to be a story told by sex-maniac quack who sell medicine to cure all sex-problems. Many hindu sex maniacs believe this story. Some Hindu fanatics will deny it but they never stop worshipping it.
Just think over! Whom do we call a ‘God’! It is universal acceptance that God is Father of all fathers. Then how can a ‘Father’ be a penis! How could daughters and sons worship penis of that Father. It is really a blot in the name of religion. A person who gets his penis worshipped a NEVER be a God.
If such a person is God, then where is a need for Satan? Even Satan does not think of doing so.
Source:
https://hinduismkisachai.wordpress.com/
Jesus is the way, the truth, and life. Jesus is sinless. Jesus did miracles. Jesus gave life to the dead, he cured the sick and gave sight to the blind. Jesus died for all our sins and rose again.
Jesus always answers prayers if you earnestly seek him.
Just say “Lord Jesus reveal yourself to me if you are the true living God and come to me in dreams and visions and if you don’t reveal yourself to me then I will continue to worship what I am worshipping now”. Try this for at least a week. He (Jesus) will answer your prayers even before your week is over”
This guy Why says that t Brahma is creator god
The Puranas and the site by BK Chaturvedi a Hindu, Veda and Sanskrit expert says that
Adharma was son of god Brahma (with whom did he copulate?). In Puranas we know that Brahma had an incestuous relationship (seducing, raping and then marriage) with his own daughter Saraswati. Was Adharma their offspring?
Adharma had a wife Mithya who gave birth to son Dambha and daughter Maya.
Dambha married (incestuous relationship) sister Maya and gave birth to son Krodha and daughter Himsa
This Krodha married (incestuous relationship) sister Himsa and gave birth to son Kali.
So Brahma the Hindu god who committed incest ultimately created demon .
Puranas also tell that Brahma has 4 heads and one of this gods head always tell lies.
Is this guy “Why” telling all lies or is he brainwashed with Hinduism that he can’t figure out the lies and the falsehood in Hinduism
Jesus is the way, the truth, and life.
Jesus is sinless
Jesus did miracles
Jesus gave life to the dead, he cured the sick and gave sight to the blind.
Jesus died for all our sins and rose again.
Jesus always answers prayers if you earnestly seek him.
Just say “Lord Jesus reveal yourself to me if you are the true living God and come to me in dreams and visions and if you don’t reveal yourself to me then I will continue to worship what I am worshipping now”. Try this for at least a week. He (Jesus) will answer your prayers even before your week is over”
Jefferson explained his support for religious freedom in practical terms: “(I)t does me no injury for my neighbor to believe in twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Today’s claims about America’s founding as a Christian nation derive from this 19th-century effort to overcome the skeptical reasoning and secular principles so important in the nation’s founding.
Steven K. Green teaches law and history at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon. He is the author of the recent book, “Inventing a Christian America: The Myth of the Religious Founding.”
If, by the question, one is asking whether the Founding Fathers relied on Protestant Christian principles in drafting the essential documents and in organizing the new governments, then the answer is a resounding “no.”
The writings of the period (1765-1790), including speeches, debates, letters, pamphlets, and even sermons, reflect the overwhelming influence of Enlightenment, Whig, and classical republican theories.
The political events of the period also support the conclusion that the founders intended to institute a secular-based form of governance//
Of course there is some influence of the Enlightenment. After all, few Founding Fathers were deists. But most were devout Christians and because of that, Christianity was the most influential.
===
In a short span of 16 years (1775-1791), the nation was transformed from maintaining religious establishments in nine of 13 colonies to achieving disestablishment at the national level and in 10 new states (or 11, depending on how one views Vermont).
At the same time, the United States became the first nation in history to abolish religious disqualifications from officeholding and civic engagement. The founders purposely created a nation that based its legitimacy on popular will, not on some higher power//
The writer you quote assumes America was intended to be a theocracy. That’s not what’s being claimed. I’m arguing that America is more Christian than any other ideology, be it Deism or Philosophical Materialism.
===
If one refines the question to ask whether the Founding Fathers were motivated to act as they did based on their Christian faith, the answer becomes a little murkier, but the response is still “no.”
Many of the leading founders were theological liberals who approached religion from a rational perspective//
My previous quotes of the Founding Fathers show their motivation was inspired by Christianity. Here’s it again:
Daniel Webster
U. S. SENATOR; SECRETARY OF STATE; “DEFENDER OF THE CONSTITUTION”
[T]he Christian religion – its general principles – must ever be regarded among us as the foundation of civil society.125
Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens.126
====
If Benjamin Franklin, the only self-professed deist among the leading founders, could believe in God’s general providential plan for the United States, then the ubiquitous references to God’s interposing providence tell us little about the influence of distinctive religious thought on the founding generation//
How does Ben franklin’s quote nullify the dozens of other religious founding fathers’ christian beliefs? And how exactly does one deist imply little christian influence when compared to the overwhelming christian majority? This is absurd.
===
Let’s skip to the end. John Adams’ quote is the most misused by anti-christians:
f the founders had not made their stance on this “Christian nation” issue clear enough in the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, they certainly did in the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli.
Begun by George Washington, signed by John Adams and ratified unanimously by a Senate still half-filled with signers of the Constitution, this treaty announced firmly and flatly to the world that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
Despite the founders’ intent, later generations of Americans began to assert that the country they created was indeed Christian//
America regularly attempted to assure the Muslims that as Christians, we had no religious hatred of them – that we had “no enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility” of the Muslims, and that our substantial differences of “religious opinions shall [n]ever produce an interruption of the harmony between the two nations.” Furthermore, we inserted specific clauses into the treaties to ensure that our Christian diplomats in their Muslim nations could practice their Christian faith, just as their Muslim diplomats in America could practice their Muslim faith. 15 Very simply, using multiple clauses, we attempted to reassure them that we were not like the Period II Christian nations that had attacked them simply because they were Muslims; America was not – and never had been – a party to any such religious war.
The 1797 treaty with Tripoli was just one of the many treaties in which each country recognized the religion of the other, and in which America invoked rhetoric designed to prevent a “Holy War” between Christians and Muslims. 16 Article XI of that treaty therefore stated:
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. 17
Critics end the sentence after the words “Christian religion,” thus placing a period in the middle of a sentence where no punctuation currently exists, stopping the sentence in mid-thought. However, when Article XI is read in its entirety and its thought concluded where the punctuation so indicates, then the article simply assures Tripoli that we were not one of the Christian nations with an inherent hostility against Muslims and that we would not allow differences in our “religious opinions” to lead to hostility.
(Significantly, even if Article XI contained nothing more than what the critics cite – i.e., “the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion” – this still would not refute America being a Christian nation since the article only refers to the federal government. Recall that while the Founders themselves openly described America as a Christian nation, they also included a constitutional prohibition against any official federal establishment of religion. Therefore, if Article XI is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States did not establish the Christian religion, such a statement does not repudiate the fact that America was considered a Christian nation. However, the history of the Treaty, of the treaties negotiated before and after it, and the circumstances of the conflict discounts even that reading.)
Even though clauses such as Article XI in the 1797 treaty clearly demonstrate America’s efforts to distinguish itself from the historical European Christian nations that hated Muslims, the diligent diplomatic efforts proved unsuccessful – especially in the case of Tripoli (today’s Muslim Libya); terroristic attacks against American interests continued largely unabated.
The extortion payments became a significant expense for the American government. In fact, in 1795, payments to Algiers, including the ransom payment to free 115 American seamen, totaled nearly one million dollars 18 – a full sixteen percent of the entire federal budget for that year! 19 And Algiers was just one of the five Barbary Powers. Not surprisingly, American presidents and citizens resented remitting such extortion payments simply to enjoy rights already guaranteed them under international law. Preparations were therefore begun for a military remedy, thus embracing President George Washington’s axiom that:
To make a valid, or evidential argument from silence, an arguer must demonstrate that the person in question would 1) have had the opportunity to be aware of claim and, knowing of the claim, would have had the opportunity to make mention of it.
When one is able to demonstrate these issues, then one has made a valid Argument from Silence//
This only applies if and only if Jesus was in the company (especially his followers) of slave traders and kept silent on the matter, when questioned. We don’t find any such instance in the bible. This argument from silence does not apply at all. Geez, did you even read the examples in your link? Here’s a much simpler example from another link.
http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence
Jay: Dude, where are my car keys?
Bob: (says nothing)
Jay: I KNEW you took them!
* Notice in the example the person is actually asked. Jesus was not asked about his position.
===
Luke 12:45-48: “The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.”
You skipped verse 41 where Peter asks Jesus for a parable. Do I need to remind you what a parable is? In actuality, there were no slaves present during this parable and none of the listeners decided to go buy slaves after the parable. Perhaps they actually knew the meaning of a parable.
===
Tu-quoquo…….So you do agree that you do NOT have valid argument against bible NT or OT approving slavery and its abuses//
My point was, you do not have a benchmark to condemn slavery. Your scriptures see no ethical atrocity in owning slaves. As a matter of fact, Hinduism relies on slavery to exist, in its original state, that is. You cannot be against slavery and be pro Hinduism simultaneously.
However, Paul pays the debt owned to Christian philemon to release him. A simple statement that slavery is sinful would have avoided slavery itself. This shows that Paul did NOT find anything wrong in slavery//
How does one free a slave and then still get charged with being pro-slavery? That’s an absurd conclusion.
===
Servants are NOT slaves….Shudras are servants, NOT slaves……Shudras are free to own properties and live their own lives independent of brAhmins…
The verses which talk about shudras being servants of Brahmins, talks about spiritual emancipation of shudras attained through serving Brahmins wh are spiritual teachers…This is the meaning of the verse….It does NOT talk about slavery of shudras//
Here are the verses again:
Laws of Manu 8:413. But a Sudra, whether bought or unbought, he may compel to do servile work; for he was created by the Self-existent (Svayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmana.
414. A Sudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude; since that is innate in him, who can set him free from it?
* Servants are not bought and they are not compelled to work.
Manu 8:417. A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for,as that (slave) can have no property, his master may take his possessions.
Manu X:129. No collection of wealth must be made by a Sudra, even though he be
able (to do it); for a Sudra who has acquired wealth, gives pain to Brahmanas.
* Sudra slaves can’t own property and must remain poor.
Clearly there is no other dictum regarding slavery more inhumane than we find in Hinduism.
Hinduism recognizes 7 types of slaves
Manu 8:415.
1. (viz.) he who is made a captive under a standard,
2. he who serves for his daily food,
3.he who is born in the house,
4. he who is bought
5. and he who is given,
6.he who is inherited from ancestors,
7.and he who is enslaved by way of punishment.
====
No…nowhere Hindus went around enslaving others…especially Brahmins cannot capture prosoners of war….these are slaves of warriors and princes…the verses correspond to them//
I just showed you above. Slaves do not need to be captured in war, although that’s perfectly permissible. They can be bought, enherited, by way of punishment,etc.
Heres a nice bonus verse. Manu explicates what is considered spoils of war. Notice that women are included in the booty. So each time the Vedas mention spoils of war, women are automatically assumed to be among the captured possessions
ManuVII 96. Chariots and horses, elephants, parasols, money, grain, cattle, WOMEN, all sorts of (marketable) goods and valueless metals belong to him who takes them (singly) conquering (the possessor).
Manu VII:97. A text of the Veda (declares) that (the soldiers) shall present a choice portion (of the booty) to the king; what has not been taken singly, must be distributed by the king among all the soldiers.
The purpose of spirituality in Hinduism is to realize one’e own worth (svabhava) depending on the different schools of thought. It is never to emulate any Hindu God in each and every act. ONE CANNOT FOR EXAMPLE EMULATE CREATION OF UNIVERSE BY VEDIC GOD. The ONLY case where it should be emulated is when the teachings itself is meant for the human beings…Rest of your post is laughable BULL crap//
Yes, Hindus can and have emulated their gods. For example, Indra the butcher, who has been deified for his ruthless slaughters of Dasyus. It may be an evil emulation but it’s still practical.
===
your jeebus and first Christians have approved both OT punishments and laws and also capital punishments dished out from ruling authorities. They do NOT oppose any of these capital punishments…..
Matthew 15
3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; [a] and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’[c] Thus you have made the commandment[d] of God of no effect by your tradition.
Clearly here jeebus explicitly says that god’s commandment is death for anybody who curses his father or mother…If it is god’s commandment then jeebus obviously approves this teaching of OT….if jeebus approves death for insulting parents, then surely he approves death punishment for ADULTERY which is god’s commandment as well….He does NOT see any moral or ethical conflict here//
You’ve missed the point entirley. The Pharisees, a literalist sect, accused Jesus of not honoring his tradition. Jesus then turns around and accuses them of not following the Mosaic law literally by not killing their children for being disobedient. It was a tu quoque response by Jesus, not meant to be taken seriously. Unless of course you can show me an example where Jesus or any of his followers actually killed a child for being disobedient.
===
28 Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
Here clearly Paul approves the OT death punishments for rejecting Moses’ law….that it is JUST…Paul compares that to using jeebus sacrifice to sin will result in even more serious punishment..
NOTE: We have seen now that there is no MORAL or ETHICAL impediment to capital punishment awarded in OT for violating Moses’ laws either by first Christians or even jeebus himself…
Now the next step is if there is any objection or do the first Christians or jeebus approve implementation of these capital punishment….If proven, then Christianity has no problem in implementing these laws as well….Do they or do they not?//
Firstly, there’s a deliberate yet subtle chicanery in your verse, including the omission of the following verses. That word “dies” must be “died” Paul is referring to how transgressors were treated in the past who were under the Mosaic law. He is not referring to the present but clearly to the past. Also he makes no mention of capital punishment but leaves matters in God’s hands. The following verses makes that clear
30 For we know him that said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
===
You’re grasping at straws. There is nothing in John19:11 that supports capital punishment. Your desperation is apparent. Romans13:4 refers to a spiritual battle with evil. There is nothing in the context of that verse indicating Jesus or anyone else were physically holding swords.
@Why
In Vedic Sanskrit Brahma means Great, creator. In Vedic literature God is called with many names according to its attributes. In Veda are mantras like “Sah Brahma, Sah Vishnu, Sah Indra, ” ( Sah pointer to God, Brahma means creator, Vishnu means maintainer, omnipresent, Indra mean almighty. But in later post Vedic era poranic Hindu did personification of every name and made idol of them in their ignorance. Brahma, Shiva were Rishis in ancient times but poranic ignorant Hindu declared them Incarnation of God & write false Poranic story on the name of Vyas.
Ron
Read your own wiki link on Kali-(demon) illiterate. It clearly says that there 2 different beings…
Brahma is the creator God in Hinduism and He creates every creature from other Hindu Gods to Hindu demons to Human beings to animals, plants etc. whatever is in existence….Since He created the other creatures, depending on the order of creation and secondary, tertiary creators involved one is called grandson, great-grandson etc. There is NO special meaning to the word son, daughter, grandson etc. in Hinduism like christianity.
Didn’t ur bible demon god create the devil aka satan? This is so similarly.
REST OF YOUR QUOTES ARE AS USUAL BULL SHIT FROM BULL SHIT WEBSITES FROM BULL SHIT PEOPLE WHICH NEEDS NO ANSWER..HINDUISM IS DEFINED BY HINDU SCRIPTURES AND HINDU SCHOOLS, NOT BY THIRD RATE GARBAGE WEBSITES.
UNLIKE YOU I WHEN I EXPOSE JEEBUS AND CHRISTIANITY I USE PROPER PRIMARY SOURCES AND TRUE HISTORY WITH PROPER UNDERSTANDING AND LOGIC.
@Ron
Yes, I agree Hinduism quite new religion. It is came long after Islam. Yes, I agree with you Hinduism does not care human being. It is true because if Hinduism had any sentiments for human beings they would have never allowed Muslims to live in country after partition of country on name of Islam. Hindu helped the breeding of Muslims. Hindu never punished converted Hindu to Muslim in charge of apostasy. Yes, Hinduism adopted many things from Budhism. Budha himself was muslim. Foolish Hindu worship the cow and fight with muslims for protecting the cow. Few days before a Hindu mob killed a Muslim because he ate the beef.
Even if we consider the argument that one Kali is a hindu demon and another Kali is a hindu goddess, how come did the Supreme Hindu god Brahma had a demon grandson?
According to Taslima Nasreen acclaimed and multiple-award winning author
Yes Hindus worship Penis and also Vagina
http://freethoughtblogs.com/taslima/2013/03/10/worshipping-lords-phallus/
even this hindu site agrees with it and they have a pornographic story to it.
http://www.jaisiyaram.com/blog/religion/18894-shiva-lingam-how-the-worship-of-a-penis-started-in-hinduism-17-feb-15.html
Source: http://www.nizgoenkar.org/newsDetails.php?id=10299
Hinduism is not an old Religion, It’s actually quite new.
British combined all the Pagan cults in the Subcontinent and called it Hinduism in 1830 AD
Hinduism doesn’t care about Human beings , all it cares about is Gold temples Stone Gods and Cows
Hindus will create another million Gods and build another million temples.
There is no hope in such society, it will rot and stink which is already happening and will continue to happen
And more over Sanathana Dharma is just old ritualistic Bullshit of Animal worship, Incestuous intercourse and animal sacrifice.
Animal and child sacrifice were integral part of Sanathana Dharma-Mostly its an superstitious cult.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/24/gadhimai-festival-photos_n_369446.html
Human Sacrifice (Purushamedha) to Kali Mata is still common in India
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/maharashtra-clocks-one-human-sacrifice-a-month/article6789643.ece
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/mar/05/india.theobserver
After observing all these Filth in Subcontinent-Persians called The Filthy people as Hindu – Basically it means. A Thief ,Thug, Black, Ugly ,Cunning human
Ugliness, Corrupt, Cunning abilities to cheat others Etc. are Some characteristics that Persians Observed among people in Indian subcontinent.
Hinduism basically adopted Many aspects from Buddhism, meditation ,Perseverance and other teachings of Buddha were copied and packaged as Hindu inventions for Western Audience (this is done to make quick money not spirituality).
Hinduism and Hindu Scriptures basically emphasize more of ritual Sacrifices and Killing of animals, Children, Women as a sacrifice to the Gods- Some Purana’s even portray Incestuous relationship between Gods, Gods molesting their mothers, Female Goddesses fornicating with their sons and Male Gods cursing their wives.
Worse even Hindu gods are meat eaters, Vegetarianism was adopted by upper caste after they observed its significance from Buddhists.
Hindu Cult Basically practiced open air sexual rituals ,Incest, Wife sharing, Phallus worship, Shiva Penis worship, Vagina Worship, and other sexual perversions are very much part of Hindu cults.
Open any Upanishad you will find animal fornication, Goddesses Sucking penis of Horse ,Which you see on walls of Hindu temples.
http://breakawaybackpacker.com/2012/04/the-sex-temples-of-khajuharo-in-photos/
Gods fighting over Women, Gods killing each other, Cursing each other for Sexual relations. money, power Etc.–Most Hindu mythical stories symbolize Human greed, Lust for power, Sexual desires, Hatred. Etc…
Hinduism for most Westerners is some strange weird pagan cult and since most Westerners were once Pagans themselves before Christianity they probably rediscovered their past in the filthy Cults of the Indian Subcontinent.
Hindus are seriously damaged because of Culture, a Ritualistic Brahminic culture that destroyed rationality, created numb rote learning brain, It even destroyed Work Ethic of lower castes.
Hinduism is some Cult which emerged from Ancient Sodom and Gomorrah
Jesus is the way, the truth, and life.
Jesus is sinless
Jesus did miracles
Jesus gave life to the dead, he cured the sick and gave sight to the blind.
Jesus died for all our sins and rose again.
Jesus always answers prayers if you earnestly seek him.
Just say “Lord Jesus reveal yourself to me if you are the true living God and come to me in dreams and visions and if you don’t reveal yourself to me then I will continue to worship what I am worshipping now”. Try this for at least a week. He (Jesus) will answer your prayers even before your week is over”
Almost I forgot….The constitution of US is NOT inspired by bible or christianity…..The secular ideas grew out of opposition to church controlling the governments of europe…
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/02/living/america-christian-nation/
Jefferson explained his support for religious freedom in practical terms: “(I)t does me no injury for my neighbor to believe in twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Today’s claims about America’s founding as a Christian nation derive from this 19th-century effort to overcome the skeptical reasoning and secular principles so important in the nation’s founding.
Steven K. Green teaches law and history at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon. He is the author of the recent book, “Inventing a Christian America: The Myth of the Religious Founding.”
If, by the question, one is asking whether the Founding Fathers relied on Protestant Christian principles in drafting the essential documents and in organizing the new governments, then the answer is a resounding “no.”
The writings of the period (1765-1790), including speeches, debates, letters, pamphlets, and even sermons, reflect the overwhelming influence of Enlightenment, Whig, and classical republican theories.
The political events of the period also support the conclusion that the founders intended to institute a secular-based form of governance.
In a short span of 16 years (1775-1791), the nation was transformed from maintaining religious establishments in nine of 13 colonies to achieving disestablishment at the national level and in 10 new states (or 11, depending on how one views Vermont).
At the same time, the United States became the first nation in history to abolish religious disqualifications from officeholding and civic engagement. The founders purposely created a nation that based its legitimacy on popular will, not on some higher power.
If one refines the question to ask whether the Founding Fathers were motivated to act as they did based on their Christian faith, the answer becomes a little murkier, but the response is still “no.”
Many of the leading founders were theological liberals who approached religion from a rational perspective.
Even though we have come to appreciate that other founders held more conventional Christian beliefs, all of them, including many clergy of the day, perceived little conflict between their religious faith and Enlightenment natural rights.
By the time of the Revolution, ideas of providence and of America’s millennial role had been modified, if not secularized, by Enlightenment rationalism.
If Benjamin Franklin, the only self-professed deist among the leading founders, could believe in God’s general providential plan for the United States, then the ubiquitous references to God’s interposing providence tell us little about the influence of distinctive religious thought on the founding generation.
If, finally, the meaning of the question is whether Christian impulses and rhetoric existed during the founding period and impacted the “great debate” about revolution and republican governance, then the answer is “yes” (although the question would then lose its distinctiveness at this level of abstraction).
Without question, non-Anglican clergy rallied to the patriot cause and justified the Revolution and new government on religious terms. Similarly, political leaders employed religious rhetoric to explain and legitimize their efforts.
However, the use of religious discourse at such a momentous time — for distinguishing one’s cause from the enemy during war and for rallying popular support for one’s side — is hardly surprising.
The majority of the founders also believed that religion was necessary for maintaining moral virtue and assumed that the nation would remain culturally Christian.
But people should be cautious about reading too much into the religious rhetoric during the founding period.
From where did the idea of America’s founding as a Christian nation arise? In a nutshell, it arose in the early 19th century as later generations of Americans sought to establish a national identity, one that distinguished and exemplified the founding by sanctifying the nation’s origins.
This is the origin of the “Christian nation” myth.
Kevin M. Kruse, professor of history at Princeton University, is author of the recent book “One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America.”
Demographically speaking, America certainly resembled a “nation of Christians” at the time of its founding and has ever since. But it’s a rather different proposition to claim that the founders established the new American government as a “Christian nation.” Clearly, they did not.
To be sure, the Declaration of Independence appealed to “the laws of Nature and Nature’s God” and asserted that all men had basic rights “endowed by their Creator.” But the Constitution — the document that actually enumerated and enshrined those rights — lacked even those vaguely drawn references to a deity.
The closest approximation came in its date, which was presented, in the standard style of the 18th century, “in the Year of our Lord.” (Even that lone mention was a late addition, as the draft voted on at the Constitutional Convention lacked any reference to the Lord.)
Meanwhile, in the text of the Constitution, religion was deliberately kept at arm’s length from the state. In radical departures from the era’s norms, there would be no religious tests for federal officeholders, no establishment of any national religion and no congressional interference with individual citizens’ free exercise of their own faith.
This was no accident. Despite their respect for religion and their belief in the divine origins of human rights, many of the Founding Fathers worried that religion would corrupt the state and, conversely, that the state would corrupt religion.
In his longest rumination on the topic in the Federalist Papers, for instance, James Madison challenged the idea that religion in politics would lead men to “cooperate for their common good” and asserted instead that it would make them “vex and oppress each other.”
Accordingly, Madison praised the new Constitution for keeping faith out of federal officeholding, which would welcome individuals “of every description, whether native or adoptive, whether young or old, and without regard to poverty or wealth, or to any particular profession of religious faith.”
If the founders had not made their stance on this “Christian nation” issue clear enough in the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, they certainly did in the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli.
Begun by George Washington, signed by John Adams and ratified unanimously by a Senate still half-filled with signers of the Constitution, this treaty announced firmly and flatly to the world that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
Despite the founders’ intent, later generations of Americans began to assert that the country they created was indeed Christian.
Though the idea originated in the early 19th century, it wasn’t until the mid-20th that it became a fixed part of politics and government.
RON SPECIAL TREAT FOR YOU HERE:
Since RON is interested in so much in sexual fantasies, let me bring back the birth of jeebus THROUGH ADULTERY…
BIRTH OF JEEBUS THROUGH ADULTERY PROVEN WITHOUT DOUBT:
1. Luke 1 clearly hints to the point that like the birth of John the baptist to Elizabeth, jeebus also had 9 months gestation period in the womb of Mary.
2. All human children born through sexual intercourse have 9 months gestation period.
3. Matthew and Luke claim that Mary got pregnant by unholy ghost magically and that jeebus is god’s son.
4. Gosepls say that Joseph was ready to divorce Mary as she got pregnant before they ever got together. This clearly shows that Mary’s pregnancy was NOT because of Joseph. Poor old Joseph…I pity him..
5. WIth any 9 month gestation period of a child, semen from a male must be injected into a female to fertilize the female eggs and lead to conception…
The obvious question is where did this the sperm that entered into Mary come from? Whose sperm it is?
Unholy ghost is said to be some spiritual entity…Do spiritual entities produce sperm from their essence? NO..
So how did unholy ghost create the sperm? It is NOT from unholy ghost’s body as ghost has no body, where did it come from? Did unholy ghost create sperm out of nowhere? Then how can one call jeebus as god’s son? It is just another creation….
6. Now, if we assume unholy ghost created sperm out of nowhere, what is so special about that sperm? Jeebus was born through 9 month’s gestation period as any normal child born through sexual intercourse….
Jeebus in womb went through the usual stages of foetus development for 9 months as any other normal child born through sexual intercourse…..
Then the doubt arises if the unholy ghost took all the trouble and created sperm out of nowhere, why would he NOT just make Mary pregnant with fully developed jeebus embryo and make birth of jeebus more miraculous?
Why does the miracle stop at conception (which any human being, either a rapist or lover) can do as well? A miracle must be humanly impossible…What is humanly possible is NO miracle at all…
The doubt comes why no miracle in gestation period? If jeebus can do miracles as adult, why does jeebus NOT do miracle in womb avoiding 9 month gestation period? It could have been made say 2 days or 3 months or anything much less than 9 months…
But Luke clearly shows through hints that Mary had 9 months gestation period as usual….
Using Occam’s razor logic, often the simplest possible answer is true….
Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
The simplest possible answer here is adultery…there is no assumption like existence of unholy ghost, dreams, visions etc..which is normally not seen…especially when jeebus was born normally through 9 month’s gestation period like any other child…
From this we can see that clearly jeebus was born through sexual intercourse with somebody other than jeebus, through adultery…It could be consensual sex or rape….but Mary got pregnant outside of wedlock…
7. Another argument is why would a true god be conceived in secret (even to engaged husband of Mary, Joseph did NOT know about conception until after it happened) unknown to even Mary’s husband?
Why would any god behave like a adulterer? An adulterer impregnates his lover in secret without the knowledge of husband. Why should god act in this manner?
Your gospels itself show that Joseph had no knowledge of Mary’s conception and knew it only after it happened.
Matthew 1:19
Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.
It is after this that the gospel says Joseph had a dream where angels told him about Mary’s so called miraculous birth..
Is God like an adulterer that without first informing the husband he impregnates other people’s wives?
Obviously
8. NOTE that only 2 gospels (Matthew and Luke) talk about virgin birth….However earliest gospel Mark or John do NOT even mention the virgin birth, showing these stories were made up later….
=============================
These points clearly show that jeebus was born through adultery in SIN and is a sinner…….Jeebus was revolting against existing hierarchy of jews because he was himself born in sin to an unknown father and so in his delusion he had started believing in his “divine” birth theory. His thirst for the biological father in life has made him address god as “abba” or father and his obsession with god and payment for sins through blood sacrifice as in old testament.
http://www.bluffton.edu/~humanities/1/celsus.htm
BOOK 1
Chap. 28
…[Celsus] accuses [Jesus] of having “invented his birth from a virgin,” and upbraids Him with being “born in a certain Jewish village, of a poor woman of the country, who gained her subsistence by spinning, and who was turned out of doors by her husband, a carpenter by trade, because she was convicted of adultery; that after being driven away by her husband, and wandering about for a time, she disgracefully gave birth to Jesus, an illegitimate child, who having hired himself out as a servant in Egypt on account of his poverty, and having there acquired some miraculous powers, on which the Egyptians greatly pride themselves, returned to his own country, highly elated on account of them, and by means of these proclaimed himself a God.”…
Ron says:
===========================================
This is hindu god/goddess/demon who is worshipped by hindus
Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_(demon)
====================================================
I pity this illiterate fellow…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_(demon)
This article is about the Hindu demon. For other uses, see Kali (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with the goddess Kali, who is pronounced “Kālī”, with both vowels long).
Kali =demon
kAlI = goddess
They are two different beings, one a male demon and another a female Goddess…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingam
The lingam (also linga, ling, Shiva linga, Shiv ling, Sanskrit: लिङ्गं, liṅgaṃ, meaning “mark”, “sign”, or “inference”[1][2]) is a representation of the Hindu deity Shiva used for worship in temples.
The lingam is often represented alongside the yoni (Sanskrit word, literally “origin” or “source” or “womb”), a symbol of the goddess or of Shakti, female creative energy.[8] The union of lingam and yoni represents the “indivisible two-in-oneness of male and female, the passive space and active time from which all life originates”.
Phoenix says:
===========================================
It has come to my attention that human sacrifice is still a ongoing practice in your society.
We find in the Mahabharata how a mother set a precedent by killing her children to appease the gods.
Mahabharata 1:XCVIII (p.210)
More child killing:
Mahabharata 1:XCIV (p.200)
=====================================================
It has come to my attention that in West incest and family members including fathers raping their daughters…
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/i-was-conceived-when-my-father-raped-his-daughter.-should-i-have-been-abort
My father raped his daughter. And I am their baby. My story.
We find in bible, Lot has incest with his daughters and reproduces and this has set a precedent for this behavior among christians….Your argument sounds as silly as this argument…
It has already been quoted that infanticide or killing of embryos is sinful……
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/gpu/gpu06.htm
Garuda Purana CHAPTER IV.
An Account of the Kinds of Sins which lead to Hell.
1. Garuḍa said: For what sins do they go on that great Way? Why do they fall into the Vaitaraṇī? Why do they go to hell? Tell me this, O Keśava.
5-12. Slayers of Brāhmiṇs, drinkers of intoxicants, slayers of owe, infanticides, murderers of women, destroyers of the embryo, and those who commit secret sins,
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Wow, talk about intellectual impotence. Slave trading is purchasing someone for the purpose of forced labor. When you repay someones debt to free him then it refutes the whole purpose of being a slave.
===========================================
This argument would have worked if Philemon was NOT Christian at all….Unfortunately for you Paul himself says that Philemon was a christian…
When Paul could teach his followers not to commit adultery and such other sins, if slavery was a sin why could Paul just order his Christian follower or at the least let Christian follower Philemon know it is sinful to enslave another….
However, Paul pays the debt owned to Christian philemon to release him. A simple statement that slavery is sinful would have avoided slavery itself. This shows that Paul did NOT find anything wrong in slavery…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Slavery is so ingrained in Hindu society that they barely even recognize its existence. Although most slaves were not captured in war, they were usually confined to the Sudra caste. Sudras must be slaves. Their whole reason for being is to serve the Brahmin caste.
==========================================
Servants are NOT slaves….Shudras are servants, NOT slaves……Shudras are free to own properties and live their own lives independent of brAhmins…
The verses which talk about shudras being servants of Brahmins, talks about spiritual emancipation of shudras attained through serving Brahmins wh are spiritual teachers…This is the meaning of the verse….It does NOT talk about slavery of shudras…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
A blatant ignorance of history. India,China and ancient Romans and Greeks were practicing slavery long before the Christians.
===========================================
No…nowhere Hindus went around enslaving others…especially Brahmins cannot capture prosoners of war….these are slaves of warriors and princes…the verses correspond to them…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
You’re omitting the part where he neither explicitly sanctions slavery. You still do not know how to provide a logical argument here. Go ahead because until you do, silence does not equate approval. Show me where it does.
==============================================
Already answered here….jeebus aware of slavery and yet did NOT condemn it…Implication is jeebus did NOT care about this issue, ie it is not at all a issue for him….
Phoenix says:
===========================================
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s156.htm
Let’s settle this once and for all.According to the Law library: “Pure and simple silence cannot be considered as a consent to a contract,”
How do you bullshit your way out of this one?
=============================================
this is with regard to business contracts and other legal issues….You cannot use arguments used in legal issues here…..your quote is irrelevant bull shit….
http://editthis.info/logic/Informal_Fallacies#Argument_from_Silence
To make a valid, or evidential argument from silence, an arguer must demonstrate that the person in question would 1) have had the opportunity to be aware of claim and, knowing of the claim, would have had the opportunity to make mention of it.
When one is able to demonstrate these issues, then one has made a valid Argument from Silence.
My argument is very very simple and straightforward that any non-christian child can also understand…however a hypocritical Christian like you will find it hard to swallow the bitter truth…..
Jeebus was quite aware of slavery in the world he used to live in…His parables show it he was aware of slavery and its abuses……
When jeebus mentions slaves and how he would bebeaten by his/her master, it would have been a marvelous opportunity for Jeebus to condemn the institution of slavery and its abuse of slaves. But he is not recorded of having taken it:
Luke 12:45-48: “The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.”
If jeebus found anything wrong with slavery he would have definitely taken it head on…..however, he did NOT and that shows slavery being a non-issue for jeebus and he did NOT find anything wrong in it at all…implication here is assent…No amount mental gymnastics can hide this fact…
Now try bull shit your way out of this…..
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Which humane document are you refering to? Vedas or Manu? To oppose slavery is to oppose these texts.
===========================================
Tu-quoquo…….So you do agree that you do NOT have valid argument against bible NT or OT approving slavery and its abuses…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
This is an absurd argument. Of course non-physical qualities are to be acquired,experienced and expressed. That’s the purpose of spirituality.
But Hinduism takes it a step further and its adherents not only dress as their favorite gods during certain festivals but emulate them to the tee.
“Hindus worship various gods depending on the characteristics they wish to emulate and according to their needs.You can read about some popular ones here:-”
Statements from websites do not define Hinduism. Hindu scriptures do…Especially vedic mantras describe supernatural qualities and powers of Vedic Gods….These cannot be emulated at all by any human.
In Hindu festivals, if at all people dress themselves as their favorite gods, it is in drama stages or dance fstivals….NOT to emulate them. Nobody dresses like Gods at home even in festivals….That is BULL SHIT….LOL…
The purpose of spirituality in Hinduism is to realize one’e own worth (svabhava) depending on the different schools of thought. It is never to emulate any Hindu God in each and every act. ONE CANNOT FOR EXAMPLE EMULATE CREATION OF UNIVERSE BY VEDIC GOD. The ONLY case where it should be emulated is when the teachings itself is meant for the human beings…Rest of your post is laughable BULL crap.
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Whatever Christians applied does not change the fact that there is no punishment for adultery in Christianity. If there is then show me the verse in the New Testament. The New testament contains the words and deeds of the founder of Christianity and the first Christians. The OT contains the words and deeds of Jews. There are no Christians in the OT.
=========================================
Clearly you do NOT know Christianity or Judaism as well….There is NO christianity without OT. Your jeebus himself approves death punishments in OT and approves explicitly many of OT laws…
your jeebus and first Christians have approved both OT punishments and laws and also capital punishments dished out from ruling authorities. They do NOT oppose any of these capital punishments…..
Matthew 15
3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; [a] and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’[c] Thus you have made the commandment[d] of God of no effect by your tradition.
Clearly here jeebus explicitly says that god’s commandment is death for anybody who curses his father or mother…If it is god’s commandment then jeebus obviously approves this teaching of OT….if jeebus approves death for insulting parents, then surely he approves death punishment for ADULTERY which is god’s commandment as well….He does NOT see any moral or ethical conflict here….
Now lets see if first Christians saw any conflict in capital punishments dished out by governments…
Hebrews 10
28 Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
Here clearly Paul approves the OT death punishments for rejecting Moses’ law….that it is JUST…Paul compares that to using jeebus sacrifice to sin will result in even more serious punishment..
NOTE: We have seen now that there is no MORAL or ETHICAL impediment to capital punishment awarded in OT for violating Moses’ laws either by first Christians or even jeebus himself…
Now the next step is if there is any objection or do the first Christians or jeebus approve implementation of these capital punishment….If proven, then Christianity has no problem in implementing these laws as well….Do they or do they not?
At no point, however, does Jesus deny that the State has authority to exact capital punishment.
John 19:11
11 Jesus answered, “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above.”
When Pilate calls attention to his authority to crucify him, Jesus points out that Pilate’s power comes to him from above that is to say, from god. State authority to punish comes from god as per jeebus himself.
Romans 13
Submit to Government
4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
Paul repeatedly refers to the connection between sin and death. He writes to the Romans, with an apparent reference to the death penalty, that the magistrate who holds authority “does not bear the sword in vain; for he is the servant of God to execute His wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:4). No passage in the New Testament disapproves of the death penalty.
TRADITION:
Turning to Christian tradition, we may note that the Fathers and Doctors of the Church are virtually unanimous in their support for capital punishment, even though some of them such as St. Ambrose exhort members of the clergy not to pronounce capital sentences or serve as executioners. To answer the objection that the first commandment forbids killing, St. Augustine writes in The City of God:
The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being allows certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice.
HISTORY
WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE HISTORY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT FOR ADULTERY IN MANY EUROPEAN COUNTRIES…
CONCLUSION:
1. Clearly NT and jeebus approves death penalty and Moses laws MORALLY AND ETHICALY.
2. NT and jeebus also approve state authority as agent of god and approves death penalty GIVEN by state authorities.
3. Church priests like Augustine etc. have approved death penalty.
4. History also shows death penalty awarded for adultery and many other crimes for not conforming to Moses’ laws…
So there is
1. no ethical or moral dilemma as well as
2. no dilemma in implementation of death penalty for state authorities are god’s servant and their power is from god..
BACK TO THE MAIN POINT
Coming to the main point….NOT only adultery, but many crimes are awarded capital punishment with moral authority from jeebus and god himself.
THIS IS CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT JEEBUS WAS NOT ABSOLUTE PACIFIST AS PEOPLE CLAIM. JEEBUS APPROVES MORALLY MANY OT LAWS THAT INCLUDE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.
THE OBVIOUS CONCLUSION IS THAT THEN JEEBUS ALSO APPROVES MANY OT (TANAKH) WARS, SEXUAL SLAVERY AND GENOCIDE AND BIBLICAL SHARIAH ON NON-CHRISTIANS…JEEBUS SEES NO MORAL CONFLICT HERE…
ALSO SINCE THE FIRST CHRISTIANS SEE RULING AUTHORITY AS GOD’S OWN INSTRUMENT, THIS MEANS RULING AUTHORITY CAN IMPLEMENT CHRISTIAN SHARIAH INTO FORCE THROUGH LEGISLATION AND LAWS…THIS IS MORAL AND ACCORDING TO GOD’S WILL IN CHRISTIANITY…THIS IS WHY CONSTANTINE COULD IMPLEMENT CHRISTIAN SHARIAH AGAINST ROMAN PAAGANS..CHURCH COULD IMPLEMENT CHRISTIAN SHARIAH AGAINST NON-BELIEVERS FOR 1600 YEARS AS PROVEN BY HISTORY..
@Phoenix,
Awesome job!!! You made your points very clear!!!
This is hindu god/goddess/demon who is worshipped by hindus
Kali is the great-great-grandson of Lord Brahma. He is the son of Krodha (Anger) and his sister-turned-wife Himsa (Violence). He is the grandson of Dambha (Vanity) and his sister-turned-wife, Maya (Illusion). He is the great-grandson of Adharma (Impropriety) and his wife, Mithya (Falsehood). Adharma was originally created from Lord Brahma’s back as a Maleen Pataka (a very dark and deadly sinful object).
Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_(demon)
Hindus worship penis. Surprising but true.
http://www.thaimedicalnews.com/health-care-medical/the-power-of-the-penis/
Jesus is the way, the truth, and life.
Jesus is sinless
Jesus did miracles
Jesus gave life to the dead, he cured the sick and gave sight to the blind.
Jesus died for all our sins and rose again.
Jesus always answers prayers if you earnestly seek him.
Just say “Lord Jesus reveal yourself to me if you are the true living God and come to me in dreams and visions and if you don’t reveal yourself to me then I will continue to worship what I am worshipping now”. Try this for at least a week. He (Jesus) will answer your prayers even before your week is over”
James Madison
SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECRETARY OF STATE; FOURTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven.71
I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.72
====
James Manning
MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; PRESIDENT OF BROWN UNIVERSITY
I rejoice that the religion of Jesus prevails in your parts; I can tell you the same agreeable news from this quarter. Yesterday I returned from Piscataway in East Jersey, where was held a Baptist annual meeting (I think the largest I ever saw) but much more remarkable still for the Divine influences which God was pleased to grant. Fifteen were baptized; a number during the three days professed to experience a change of heart. Christians were remarkably quickened; multitudes appeared.73
====
Henry Marchant
MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF RHODE ISLAND; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; FEDERAL JUDGE APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON
And may God grant that His grace may really affect your heart with suitable impressions of His goodness. Remember that God made you, that God keeps you alive and preserves you from all harm, and gives you all the powers and the capacity whereby you are able to read of Him and of Jesus Christ, your Savior and Redeemer, and to do every other needful business of life. And while you look around you and see the great privileges and advantages you have above what other children have (of learning to read and write, of being taught the meaning of the great truths of the Bible), you must remember not to be proud on that account but to bless God and be thankful and endeavor in your turn to assist others with the knowledge you may gain.74(to his daughter)
=====
George Mason
DELEGATE AT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; “FATHER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS”
I give and bequeath my soul to Almighty God that gave it me, hoping that through the meritorious death and passion of our Savior and Redeemer Jesus Christ to receive absolution and remission for all my sins.75
My soul I resign into the hands of my Almighty Creator, Whose tender mercies are all over His works. . humbly hoping from His unbounded mercy and benevolence, through the merits of my blessed Savior, a remission of my sins.76
====
James McHenry
REVOLUTIONARY OFFICER; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; SECRETARY OF WAR UNDER PRESIDENTS GEORGE WASHINGTON AND JOHN ADAMS
[P]ublic utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. Without the Bible, in vain do we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our institutions.77
Bibles are strong protections. Where they abound, men cannot pursue wicked courses and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience.78
=====
Thomas McKean
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR OF DELAWARE
In the case Respublica v. John Roberts,79 John Roberts was sentenced to death after a jury found him guilty of treason. Chief Justice McKean then told him:
You will probably have but a short time to live. Before you launch into eternity, it be¬hooves you to improve the time that may be allowed you in this world: it behooves you most seriously to reflect upon your past conduct; to repent of your evil deeds; to be incessant in prayers to the great and merciful God to forgive your manifold transgressions and sins; to teach you to rely upon the merit and passion of a dear Redeemer, and thereby to avoid those regions of sorrow – those doleful shades where peace and rest can never dwell, where even hope cannot enter. It behooves you to seek the [fellowship], advice, and prayers of pious and good men; to be [persistent] at the Throne of Grace, and to learn the way that leadeth to happiness. May you, reflecting upon these things, and pursuing the will of the great Father of light and life, be received into [the] company and society of angels and archangels and the spirits of just men made perfect; and may you be qualified to enter into the joys of Heaven – joys unspeakable and full of glory!80
=====
Gouverneur Morris
REVOLUTIONARY OFFICER; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; “PENMAN OF THE CONSTITUTION”; DIPLOMAT; U. S. SENATOR
There must be religion. When that ligament is torn, society is disjointed and its members perish… [T]he most important of all lessons is the denunciation of ruin to every state that rejects the precepts of religion.81
Your good morals in the army give me sincere pleasure as it hath long been my fixed opinion that virtue and religion are the great sources of human happiness. More especially is it necessary in your profession firmly to rely upon the God of Battles for His guardianship and protection in the dreadful hour of trial. But of all these things you will and I hope in the merciful Lord.82
=====
Jedidiah Morse
HISTORIAN OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION; EDUCATOR; “FATHER OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHY”; APPOINTED BY SECRETARY OF STATE TO DOCUMENT CONDITION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom and political and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. All efforts made to destroy the foundations of our Holy Religion ultimately tend to the subversion also of our political freedom and happiness. In proportion as the genuine effects of Christianity are diminished in any nation… in the same proportion will the people of that nation recede from the blessings of genuine freedom… Whenever the pillars of Christianity shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government – and all the blessings which flow from them – must fall with them. 83
====
John Morton
LEGISLATOR; JUDGE; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
With an awful reverence to the Great Almighty God, Creator of all mankind, being sick and weak in body but of sound mind and memory, thanks be given to Almighty God for the same.84
====
James Otis
LEADER OF THE SONS OF LIBERTY; ATTORNEY & JURIST; MENTOR OF JOHN HANCOCK AND SAMUEL ADAMS
Has [government] any solid foundation? Any chief cornerstone?… I think it has an everlasting foundation in the unchangeable will of God… The sum of my argument is that civil government is of God.85
Robert Treat Paine
MILITARY CHAPLAIN; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MASSACHUSETTS; JUDGE
I desire to bless and praise the name of God most high for appointing me my birth in a land of Gospel Light where the glorious tidings of a Savior and of pardon and salvation through Him have been continually sounding in mine ears.86
I am constrained to express my adoration of the Supreme Being, the Author of my existence, in full belief of His Providential goodness and His forgiving mercy revealed to the world through Jesus Christ, through whom I hope for never ending happiness in a future state.87
I believe the Bible to be the written word of God and to contain in it the whole rule of faith and manners.88
====
William Paterson
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; U. S. SENATOR; GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE
When the righteous rule, the people rejoice; when the wicked rule, the people groan. [invoking Proverbs 29:2 to instruct a grand jury].89
Timothy Pickering
REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; JUDGE; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; POSTMASTER GENERAL UNDER PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON; SECRETARY OF WAR UNDER PRESIDENTS GEORGE WASHINGTON AND JOHN ADAMS; SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER PRESIDENT JOHN ADAMS
Pardon, we beseech Thee, all our offences of omission and commission; and grant that in all our thoughts, words, and actions, we may conform to Thy known will manifested in our consciences and in the revelations of Jesus Christ, our Savior.90
[W]e do not grieve as those who have no… resurrection to a life immortal. Here the believers in Christianity manifest their superior advantages, for life and immortality were brought to light by the gospel of Jesus Christ [II Timothy 1:10]. Prior to that revelation even the wisest and best of mankind were involved in doubt and they hoped, rather than believed, that the soul was immortal.91
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; LEGISLATOR; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; DIPLOMAT
To the eternal and only true God be all honor and glory, now and forever. Amen!92
John Randolph of Roanoke
CONGRESSMAN UNDER PRESIDENTS JOHN ADAMS, THOMAS JEFFERSON, JAMES MADISON, JAMES MONROE, JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, ANDREW JACKSON; U. S. SENATOR; DIPLOMAT
I have thrown myself, reeking with sin, on the mercy of God, through Jesus Christ His blessed Son and our (yes, my friend, our) precious Redeemer; and I have assurances as strong as that I now owe nothing to your rank that the debt is paid and now I love God – and with reason. I once hated him – and with reason, too, for I knew not Christ. The only cause why I should love God is His goodness and mercy to me through Christ.93
I am at last reconciled to my God and have assurance of His pardon through faith in Christ, against which the very gates of hell cannot prevail. Fear hath been driven out by perfect love.94
[I] have looked to the Lord Jesus Christ, and hope I have obtained pardon.95
[I] still cling to the cross of my Redeemer, and with God’s aid firmly resolve to lead a life less unworthy of one who calls himself the humble follower of Jesus Christ.96
Benjamin Rush
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; SURGEON GENERAL OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; “FATHER OF AMERICAN MEDICINE”; TREASURER OF THE U. S. MINT; “FATHER OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION”
The Gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations! . . . My only hope of salvation is in the infinite tran¬scendent love of God manifested to the world by the death of His Son upon the Cross. Noth¬ing but His blood will wash away my sins [Acts 22:16]. I rely exclusively upon it. Come, Lord Jesus! Come quickly! [Revelation 22:20]97
I do not believe that the Constitution was the offspring of inspiration, but I am as satisfied that it is as much the work of a Divine Providence as any of the miracles recorded in the Old and New Testament.98
By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects… It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published.99
[T]he greatest discoveries in science have been made by Christian philosophers and . . . there is the most knowledge in those countries where there is the most Christianity.100
[T]he only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government is the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible.101
The great enemy of the salvation of man, in my opinion, never invented a more effective means of limiting Christianity from the world than by persuading mankind that it was improper to read the Bible at schools.102
[C]hristianity is the only true and perfect religion; and… in proportion as mankind adopt its principles and obey its precepts, they will be wise and happy.103
The Bible contains more knowledge necessary to man in his present state than any other book in the world.104
The Bible, when not read in schools, is seldom read in any subsequent period of life… [T]he Bible… should be read in our schools in preference to all other books because it contains the greatest portion of that kind of knowledge which is calculated to produce private and public happiness.105
Roger Sherman
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; “MASTER BUILDER OF THE CONSTITUTION”; JUDGE; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; U. S. SENATOR
I believe that there is one only liv¬ing and true God, existing in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the same in substance, equal in power and glory. That the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are a revelation from God, and a complete rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him. . . . That He made man at first perfectly holy; that the first man sinned, and as he was the public head of his posterity, they all became sinners in consequence of his first transgression, are wholly indisposed to that which is good and inclined to evil, and on account of sin are liable to all the miseries of this life, to death, and to the pains of hell forever. I believe that God . . . did send His own Son to become man, die in the room and stead of sinners, and thus to lay a foundation for the offer of pardon and salvation to all mankind, so as all may be saved who are willing to accept the Gospel offer. . . . I believe a visible church to be a congregation of those who make a credible profession of their faith in Christ, and obedience to Him, joined by the bond of the covenant. . . . I believe that the sacraments of the New Testament are baptism and the Lord’s Supper. . . . I believe that the souls of believers are at their death made perfectly holy, and immediately taken to glory: that at the end of this world there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a final judgment of all mankind, when the righteous shall be publicly acquitted by Christ the Judge and admitted to everlasting life and glory, and the wicked be sentenced to everlasting punishment.106
God commands all men everywhere to repent. He also commands them to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and has assured us that all who do repent and believe shall be saved… [G]od… has absolutely promised to bestow them on all these who are willing to accept them on the terms of the Gospel – that is, in a way of free grace through the atonement. “Ask and ye shall receive [John 16:24]. Whosoever will, let him come and take of the waters of life freely [Revelation 22:17]. Him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out” [John 6:37].107
[I]t is the duty of all to acknowledge that the Divine Law which requires us to love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourselves, on pain of eternal damnation, is Holy, just, and good. . . . The revealed law of God is the rule of our duty.108
True Christians are assured that no temptation (or trial) shall happen to them but what they shall be enabled to bear; and that the grace of Christ shall be sufficient for them.109
“The volume which he consulted more than any other was the Bible. It was his custom, at the commencement of every session of Congress, to purchase a copy of the Scriptures, to peruse it daily, and to present it to one of his children on his return.”110
Richard Stockton
JUDGE; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
[A]s my children will have frequent occasion of perusing this instrument, and may probably be particularly impressed with the last words of their father, I think it proper here not only to subscribe to the entire belief of the great and leading doctrines of the Christian religion, such as the being of God; the universal defection and depravity of human nature; the Divinity of the person and the completeness of the redemption purchased by the blessed Savior; the necessity of the operations of the Divine Spirit; of Divine faith accompanied with an habitual virtuous life; and the universality of the Divine Providence: but also, in the bowels of a father’s affection, to exhort and charge [my children] that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, that the way of life held up in the Christian system is calculated for the most complete happiness that can be enjoyed in this mortal state, [and] that all occasions of vice and immorality is injurious either immediately or consequentially – even in this life.111
Thomas Stone
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; SELECTED AS A DELEGATE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Shun all giddy, loose, and wicked company; they will corrupt and lead you into vice and bring you to ruin. Seek the company of sober, virtuous and good people… which will lead [you] to solid happiness.112
Joseph Story
U. S. CONGRESSMAN; “FATHER OF AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE”; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT JAMES MADISON
One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law. There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying at its foundations.113
I verily believe that Christianity is necessary to support a civil society and shall ever attend to its institutions and acknowledge its precepts as the pure and natural sources of private and social happiness.114
Caleb Strong
DELEGATE AT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO FRAME THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; RATIFIER OF THE CONSTITUTION; U. S. SENATOR; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
He called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . . all nations may know and be obedient to that grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ.115
Zephaniah Swift
U. S. CONGRESSMAN; DIPLOMAT; JUDGE; AUTHOR OF AMERICA’S FIRST LEGAL TEXT (1795)
Jesus Christ has in the clearest manner inculcated those duties which are productive of the highest moral felicity and consistent with all the innocent enjoyments, to which we are impelled by the dictates of nature. Religion, when fairly considered in its genuine simplicity and uncorrupted state, is the source of endless rapture and delight.116
Charles Thomson
SECRETARY OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; DESIGNER OF THE GREAT SEAL OF THE UNITED STATES; ALONG WITH JOHN HANCOCK, THOMSON WAS ONE OF ONLY TWO FOUNDERS TO SIGN THE INITIAL DRAFT OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE APPROVED BY CONGRESS
I am a Christian. I believe only in the Scriptures, and in Jesus Christ my Savior.117
Jonathan Trumbull
JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; GOVERNOR OF CONNECTICUT; CONFIDANT OF GEORGE WASHINGTON AND CALLED “BROTHER JONATHAN” BY HIM
The examples of holy men teach us that we should seek Him with fasting and prayer, with penitent confession of our sins, and hope in His mercy through Jesus Christ the Great Redeemer.118
Principally and first of all, I bequeath my soul to God the Creator and giver thereof, and my body to the earth to be buried in a decent Christian burial, in firm belief that I shall receive the same again at the general resurrection through the power of Almighty God, and hope of eternal life and happiness through the merits of my dear Redeemer Jesus Christ.119
He called on the State of Connecticut to pray that . . .
God would graciously pour out His Spirit upon us and make the blessed Gospel in His hand effectual to a thorough reformation and general revival of the holy and peaceful religion of Jesus Christ.120
George Washington
JUDGE; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY; PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; FIRST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; “FATHER OF HIS COUNTRY”
You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.121
While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.122
The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.123
I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.124
Daniel Webster
U. S. SENATOR; SECRETARY OF STATE; “DEFENDER OF THE CONSTITUTION”
[T]he Christian religion – its general principles – must ever be regarded among us as the foundation of civil society.125
Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens.126
[T]o the free and universal reading of the Bible… men [are] much indebted for right views of civil liberty.127
The Bible is a book… which teaches man his own individual responsibility, his own dignity, and his equality with his fellow man.128
Noah Webster
REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIER; JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; EDUCATOR; “SCHOOLMASTER TO AMERICA”
[T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles… This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.129
The moral principles and precepts found in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws.130
All the… evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.131
[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament, or the Christian religion.132
[T]he Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children under a free government ought to be instructed. No truth is more evident than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.133
The Bible is the chief moral cause of all that is good and the best corrector of all that is evil in human society – the best book for regulating the temporal concerns of men.134
[T]he Christian religion… is the basis, or rather the source, of all genuine freedom in government… I am persuaded that no civil government of a republican form can exist and be durable in which the principles of Christianity have not a controlling influence.135
John Witherspoon
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; PRESIDENT OF PRINCETON
[C]hrist Jesus – the promise of old made unto the fathers, the hope of Israel [Acts 28:20], the light of the world [John 8:12], and the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth [Romans 10:4] – is the only Savior of sinners, in opposition to all false religions and every uninstituted rite; as He Himself says (John 14:6): “I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.”136
[N]o man, whatever be his character or whatever be his hope, shall enter into rest unless he be reconciled to God though Jesus Christ.137
[T]here is no salvation in any other than in Jesus Christ of Nazareth.138
I shall now conclude my discourse by preaching this Savior to all who hear me, and entreating you in the most earnest manner to believe in Jesus Christ; for “there is no salvation in any other” [Acts 4:12].139
It is very evident that both the prophets in the Old Testament and the apostles in the New are at great pains to give us a view of the glory and dignity of the person of Christ. With what magnificent titles is He adorned! What glorious attributes are ascribed to him!… All these conspire to teach us that He is truly and properly God – God over all, blessed forever!140
[I]f you are not rec¬onciled to God through Jesus Christ – if you are not clothed with the spotless robe of His righteousness – you must forever perish.141
[H]e is the best friend to American liberty who is the most sincere and active in promoting true and undefiled religion, and who sets himself with the greatest firmness to bear down profanity and immorality of every kind. Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not to call him an enemy to his country.142
Oliver Wolcott
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; MILITARY GENERAL; GOVERNOR OF CONNECTICUT
Through various scenes of life, God has sustained me. May He ever be my unfailing friend; may His love cherish my soul; may my heart with gratitude acknowledge His goodness; and may my desires be to Him and to the remembrance of His name….May we then turn our eyes to the bright objects above, and may God give us strength to travel the upward road. May the Divine Redeemer conduct us to that seat of bliss which He himself has prepared for His friends; at the approach of which every sorrow shall vanish from the human heart and endless scenes of glory open upon the enraptured eye. There our love to God and each other will grow stronger, and our pleasures never be dampened by the fear of future separation. How indifferent will it then be to us whether we obtained felicity by travailing the thorny or the agreeable paths of life – whether we arrived at our rest by passing through the envied and unfragrant road of greatness or sustained hardship and unmerited reproach in our journey. God’s Providence and support through the perilous perplexing labyrinths of human life will then forever excite our astonishment and love. May a happiness be granted to those I most tenderly love, which shall continue and increase through an endless existence. Your cares and burdens must be many and great, but put your trust in that God Who has hitherto supported you and me; He will not fail to take care of those who put their trust in Him….It is most evident that this land is under the protection of the Almighty, and that we shall be saved not by our wisdom nor by our might, but by the Lord of Host Who is wonderful in counsel and Almighty in all His operations.143
Samuel Adams
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
I . . . [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.9
The name of the Lord (says the Scripture) is a strong tower; thither the righteous flee and are safe [Proverbs 18:10]. Let us secure His favor and He will lead us through the journey of this life and at length receive us to a better.10
I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.11
He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . .
the peaceful and glorious reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole family of mankind.12
we may with one heart and voice humbly implore His gracious and free pardon through Jesus Christ, supplicating His Divine aid . . . [and] above all to cause the religion of Jesus Christ, in its true spirit, to spread far and wide till the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.13
with true contrition of heart to confess their sins to God and implore forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior.14
=====
John Hancock
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement.37
He called on the entire state to pray “that universal happiness may be established in the world [and] that all may bow to the scepter of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the whole earth be filled with His glory.”38
He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray . . .
that all nations may bow to the scepter of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and that the whole earth may be filled with his glory.39
that the spiritual kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be continually increasing until the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.40
to confess their sins and to implore forgiveness of God through the merits of the Savior of the World.41
to cause the benign religion of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to be known, understood, and practiced among all the inhabitants of the earth.42
to confess their sins before God and implore His forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.43
that He would finally overrule all events to the advancement of the Redeemer’s kingdom and the establishment of universal peace and good will among men.44
that the kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be established in peace and righteousness among all the nations of the earth.45
that with true contrition of heart we may confess our sins, resolve to forsake them, and implore the Divine forgiveness, through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, our Savior. . . . And finally to overrule all the commotions in the world to the spreading the true religion of our Lord Jesus Christ in its purity and power among all the people of the earth.46
====
John Hart
JUDGE; LEGISLATOR; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
[T]hanks be given unto Almighty God therefore, and knowing that it is appointed for all men once to die and after that the judgment [Hebrews 9:27] . . . principally, I give and recommend my soul into the hands of Almighty God who gave it and my body to the earth to be buried in a decent and Christian like manner . . . to receive the same again at the general resurrection by the mighty power of God.47
=====
Patrick Henry
REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; LEGISLATOR; “THE VOICE OF LIBERTY”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA
Being a Christian… is a character which I prize far above all this world has or can boast.48
The Bible… is a book worth more than all the other books that were ever printed.49
Righteousness alone can exalt [America] as a nation…Whoever thou art, remember this; and in thy sphere practice virtue thyself, and encourage it in others.50
The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone, that renders us invincible.51
This is all the inheritance I can give to my dear family. The religion of Christ can give them one which will make them rich indeed.52
====
Samuel Huntington
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; JUDGE; GOVERNOR OF CONNECTICUT
It becomes a people publicly to acknowledge the over-ruling hand of Divine Providence and their dependence upon the Supreme Being as their Creator and Merciful Preserver . . . and with becoming humility and sincere repentance to supplicate the pardon that we may obtain forgiveness through the merits and mediation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.53
=====
James Iredell
RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON
For my part, I am free and ready enough to declare that I think the Christian religion is a Divine institution; and I pray to God that I may never forget the precepts of His religion or suffer the appearance of an inconsistency in my principles and practice.54
====
John Jay
PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; DIPLOMAT; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; ORIGINAL CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT; GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK
Condescend, merciful Father! to grant as far as proper these imperfect petitions, to accept these inadequate thanksgivings, and to pardon whatever of sin hath mingled in them for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Savior; unto Whom, with Thee, and the blessed Spirit, ever one God, be rendered all honor and glory, now and forever. 55
Unto Him who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His manifold and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and salvation by His beloved Son. . . . Blessed be His holy name.56
Mercy and grace and favor did come by Jesus Christ, and also that truth which verified the promises and predictions concerning Him and which exposed and corrected the various errors which had been imbibed respecting the Supreme Being, His attributes, laws, and dispensations.57
By conveying the Bible to people . . . we certainly do them a most interesting act of kindness. We thereby enable them to learn that man was originally created and placed in a state of happiness, but, becoming disobedient, was subjected to the degradation and evils which he and his posterity have since experienced. The Bible will also inform them that our gracious Creator has provided for us a Redeemer in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed – that this Redeemer has made atonement “for the sins of the whole world,” and thereby reconciling the Divine justice with the Divine mercy, has opened a way for our redemption and salvation; and that these inestimable benefits are of the free gift and grace of God, not of our deserving, nor in our power to deserve. The Bible will also [encourage] them with many explicit and consoling assurances of the Divine mercy to our fallen race, and with repeated invitations to accept the offers of pardon and reconciliation. . . . They, therefore, who enlist in His service, have the highest encouragement to fulfill the du¬ties assigned to their respective stations; for most certain it is, that those of His followers who [participate in] His conquests will also participate in the tran¬scendent glories and blessings of His Triumph.58
I recommend a general and public return of praise and thanksgiving to Him from whose goodness these blessings descend. The most effectual means of securing the continuance of our civil and religious liberties is always to remember with reverence and gratitude the source from which they flow.59
The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.60
[T]he evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds… they who undertake that task will derive advantages.61
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.62
=====
Thomas Jefferson
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; DIPLOMAT; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA; SECRETARY OF STATE; THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.63
The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.64
I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.65
I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.66
=====
William Samuel Johnson
JUDGE; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; PRESIDENT OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE; U. S. SENATOR
[I] . . . am endeavoring . . . to attend to my own duty only as a Christian. . . . let us take care that our Christianity, though put to the test . . . be not shaken, and that our love for things really good wax not cold.67
In an address to graduates:
You this day. . . . have, by the favor of Providence and the at¬tention of friends, received a public education, the purpose whereof hath been to qualify you the better to serve your Creator and your country. You have this day invited this au¬dience to witness the progress you have made. . . . Thus you assume the character of scholars, of men, and of citizens. . . . Go, then, . . . and exercise them with diligence, fidelity, and zeal. . . . Your first great duties, you are sensible, are those you owe to Heaven, to your Creator and Redeemer. Let these be ever present to your minds, and exemplified in your lives and conduct. Imprint deep upon your minds the principles of piety towards God, and a reverence and fear of His holy name. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom and its [practice] is everlasting [happiness] . . . . Reflect deeply and often upon [your] relations [with God]. Remember that it is in God you live and move and have your being, – that, in the language of David, He is about your bed and about your path and spieth out all your ways – that there is not a thought in your hearts, nor a word upon your tongues, but lo! He knoweth them altogether, and that He will one day call you to a strict account for all your conduct in this mortal life. Remember, too, that you are the redeemed of the Lord, that you are bought with a price, even the inestimable price of the precious blood of the Son of God. Adore Jehovah, therefore, as your God and your Judge. Love, fear, and serve Him as your Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier. Acquaint yourselves with Him in His word and holy ordinances. . . . [G]o forth into the world firmly resolved neither to be allured by its vanities nor contaminated by its vices, but to run with patience and perseverance, with firmness and [cheerfulness], the glorious career of religion, honor, and virtue. . . . Finally, . . . in the elegant and expressive language are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things” – and do them, and the God of peace shall be with you, to whose most gracious protection I now commend you, humbly imploring Almighty Goodness that He will be your guardian and your guide, your protector and the rock of your defense, your Savior and your God.68
=====
James Kent
JUDGE; LAW PROFESSOR; “FATHER OF AMERICAN JURISPRUDENCE”
My children, I wish to talk to you. During my early and middle life I was, perhaps, rather skeptical with regard to some of the truths of Christianity. Not that I did not have the utmost respect for religion and always read my Bible, but the doctrine of the atonement was one I never could understand, and I felt inclined to consider as impossible to be received in the way Divines taught it. I believe I was rather inclined to Unitarianism; but of late years my views have altered. I believe in the doctrines of the prayer books as I understand them, and hope to be saved through the merits of Jesus Christ. . . . My object in telling you this is that if anything happens to me, you might know, and perhaps it would console you to remember, that on this point my mind is clear: I rest my hopes of salvation on the Lord Jesus Christ.69
====
Francis Scott Key
U. S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; AUTHOR OF THE “STAR SPANGLED BANNER”
[M]ay I always hear that you are following the guidance of that blessed Spirit that will lead you into all truth, leaning on that Almighty arm that has been extended to deliver you, trusting only in the only Savior, and going on in your way to Him rejoicing.70
Shoot, I almost missed this one.
Christians will always spout pious lies…
Again I will let the secular Americans explain t to you..
The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any supreme being.//
Exactly, the document is secular it does not need to mention God. However, its contents was inspired by the faith of the Founding Fathers. Most Founding fathers were devout Christians, with only a handful of Deists and Christian Deists. So clearly, the inspiration for the constitution could only have been from the Christian faith. If you have any other alternative sources then share it with me.
JOHN ADAMS
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.1
Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company: I mean hell.2
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.3
Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited. . . . What a Eutopia – what a Paradise would this region be!4
I have examined all religions, and the result is that the Bible is the best book in the world.5
——–
John Quincy Adams
SIXTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; DIPLOMAT; SECRETARY OF STATE; U. S. SENATOR; U. S. REPRESENTATIVE; “OLD MAN ELOQUENT”; “HELL-HOUND OF ABOLITION”
My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.6
The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].7
In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.8
====
Samuel Adams
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
I . . . [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.9
The name of the Lord (says the Scripture) is a strong tower; thither the righteous flee and are safe [Proverbs 18:10]. Let us secure His favor and He will lead us through the journey of this life and at length receive us to a better.10
I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.11
He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . .
the peaceful and glorious reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole family of mankind.12
we may with one heart and voice humbly implore His gracious and free pardon through Jesus Christ, supplicating His Divine aid . . . [and] above all to cause the religion of Jesus Christ, in its true spirit, to spread far and wide till the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.13
with true contrition of heart to confess their sins to God and implore forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior.14
====
it has come to my attention that human sacrifice is still a ongoing practice in your society.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/11908176/Four-year-old-boy-beheaded-in-human-sacrifice-witchcraft-ritual-in-India.html
“A four-year-old boy has reportedly been beheaded as a “human sacrifice” as part of a witchcraft ritual in India.
The man accused of carrying out the “ritual” was apparently caught by a village mob and set alight in a case that has shocked the country.
Tirumala Rao, 35, seized the child, named in reports as Manu Sagar, from a nursery in the Prakasam district of Andhra Pradesh, southern India.
He then took the boy to his house and cut off his head, offering the child’s blood to Goddess Kali seeking “divine powers”, the Times of India reported”
We find in the Mahabharata how a mother set a precedent by killing her children to appease the gods.
Mahabharata 1:XCVIII (p.210) And the king, while thus enjoying himself with his wife, had eight children …But, O Bharata, those children, one after another, as soon as they were born, were thrown into the river by Ganga who said, ‘This is for thy good.’ And the children sank to rise no more.”
More child killing:
Mahabharata 1:XCIV (p.200) And Bharata begat upon his three wives nine sons in all.But none of them were like their father and so Bharata was not at all pleased with them.*Their mothers ,therefore,became angry and slew them all*
jeebus’ lack of explicit condemnation is the issue here…….His lack of condemnation of slavery points to slavery being a non-issue to jeebus//
You’re omitting the part where he neither explicitly sanctions slavery. You still do not know how to provide a logical argument here. Go ahead because until you do, silence does not equate approval. Show me where it does.
===
Strawman and tangential arguments….non-issue for me…….This shows that jeebus was aware of slavery and his lack of condemnation shows slavery/slave trade at the least being a nonissue for jeebus if not for his approval//
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s156.htm
Let’s settle this once and for all.According to the Law library: “Pure and simple silence cannot be considered as a consent to a contract,”
How do you bullshit your way out of this one?
===
A humane document which abolishes slavery abolishes it once and for all….It does NOT lay rules to treat slaves properly….Rules to treat slaves properly actually propagates slavery as a good institution…As usual u r spouting pious lies//
Which humane document are you refering to? Vedas or Manu? To oppose slavery is to oppose these texts.
yes after paying the debt….showing even Paul did NOT say to Philemon that slavery is wrong….By paying debt, Paul approved of slave trading and taking slaves”
Wow, talk about intellectual impotence. Slave trading is purchasing someone for the purpose of forced labor. When you repay someones debt to free him then it refutes the whole purpose of being a slave.
===
Why would Hindus need to abolish slavery, when they did NOT practice it…..There is no history of Hindus practicing slavery//
Of course, this reminds me of the “fish in the water” analogy. When asked how it feels to live in water, the fish replied “what water?”.
Slavery is so ingrained in Hindu society that they barely even recognize its existence. Although most slaves were not captured in war, they were usually confined to the Sudra caste. Sudras must be slaves. Their whole reason for being is to serve the Brahmin caste.
Sudras in Ancient India
===
Slavery came into being because of bible and christians…most slave owners in US justified slavery based on bible and christianity….Even if christians were behind abolition of slavery, it does NOT condone bible or christianity from establishing slavery//
A blatant ignorance of history. India,China and ancient Romans and Greeks were practicing slavery long before the Christians.
In Vedas actions of Gods are never to be emulated…..these actions by definition are supernatural and NOT commands or actions to be emulated//
This is an absurd argument. Of course non-physical qualities are to be acquired,experienced and expressed. That’s the purpose of spirituality.
But Hinduism takes it a step further and its adherents not only dress as their favorite gods during certain festivals but emulate them to the tee.
http://www.religiousportal.com/Hindu_Deities.html
“Hindus worship various gods depending on the characteristics they wish to emulate and according to their needs.You can read about some popular ones here:-”
===
1. Neither Jeebus nor his followers (in NT) as already proven through arguments did NOT say anything about adultery punishments.”
“did NOT say anything” meaning neither pro nor con. So you cannot charge him with with a pro stance if he said nothing on the matter, at least according to your reasoning.
2. Circumcision is just only one example where NT explicitly says NOT to follow. This cannot be extended to every other case. If it is extended, then even 10 commandments in OT (except 2 which jeeebus quoted as important) can be done away with//
You really know nothing about the bible. There is also no dietary codes, dress codes and animal sacrificial rites meant for Christians, yet the OT abounds in them
===
3. If nothing is said in NT, the benefit of doubt goes to the bible (OT) and how christians historically have understood through church/christian govt writings, laws etc. This is why Augustine, Thomas Aquinas etc. scholarly christians wrote on just war theory//
Again, no comprehension of the Christian bible. It is always the NT which supercedes the OT never the inverse.
===
4. As already quoted in Christian history and jewish sources on how to punish adulterers (stoning, strangulation or hanging, burning are 3 methods of punishing adulterers), christians have applied strangulation ie hanging for the case of adultery//
Whatever Christians applied does not change the fact that there is no punishment for adultery in Christianity. If there is then show me the verse in the New Testament. The New testament contains the words and deeds of the founder of Christianity and the first Christians. The OT contains the words and deeds of Jews. There are no Christians in the OT.
Finally, none of these apologetic christians have proven either through arguments or historically that christianity does NOT support christian shariah and implementation of christian shariah against unbelievers…
I have already shown historicaly how catholic church and christian governments applied christian shariah from the inception of christianity…
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Censorship/Christian%20Intolerance.htm
THE CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION OF PAGANISM
THE REIGN OF TERROR OF THE FOURTH CENTURY
http://www.ushmm.org/research/the-center-for-advanced-holocaust-studies/programs-ethics-religion-the-holocaust/articles-and-resources/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the-centuries
Christian Persecution of Jews over the Centuries: Introduction
Inquisitions
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
Crusades
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_the_Crusades
All these show christianity is no different from islam, when it comes to implementation of christian shariah laws…
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
i will let christians explain it to you
http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=2556
========================================================
Christians will always spout pious lies…
Again I will let the secular Americans explain t to you..
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Tripoli.htm
The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any supreme being.
Although the Constitution does not include the phrase “Separation of Church & State,” neither does it say “Freedom of religion.”
Many Christian’s who think of America as founded upon Christianity usually present the Declaration of Independence as “proof” of a Christian America. The reason appears obvious: the Declaration mentions God. (You may notice that some Christians avoid the Constitution, with its absence of God.)
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
– John Adams
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
I do not care for the good verses in Manu. The bad ones are making an astronomical impact in Indian society. Just as you do not care for any good biblical verses either.
=================================================
Then this is a non-issue…..According to Hinduism, it has been proved beyond doubt that women are to be treated properly at house with respect….
So all your claims that Hinduism leads to such and such mistreatment of women is STRAWMAN….whether some Hindus act in this way is irrelevant as they act NOT according to Hindu scriptures…
second, nobody reads Manu smriti these days. To say that actions of some Hindu men are inspired by Manu smriti is dishonest and intellectual hypocrisy…
On both accounts all your quotes are irrelevant and non-issue to Hindu society..
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
We’ve been through this and I pointed out your fallacy which you did not address. Jesus silence on the issue of slavery does not mean his approval. You remind me of Muhammad who thought a woman’s silence means her consent. This is borderline sociopathy.
=============================================
wow…….even after explaining so much you cannot get it….silence on any issue neither approves it not disapproves it….IT IS UNKNOWN….
here it goes again…..Jeebus’ silence….jeebus was NOT silent on slavery….he used slavery as example in parables showing that he is well aware of slavery issue….jeebus being a observant jew definitely cannot condemn what has been authorized and allowed by god….
jeebus’ lack of explicit condemnation is the issue here…….His lack of condemnation of slavery points to slavery being a non-issue to jeebus….
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
This is just plain dumb. A parable is an allegory which means the characters and events are symbolic, as opposed to actual. To dumb it down further for you. Jesus’ messsage was not actually about slavery.
===============================================
Strawman and tangential arguments….non-issue for me…….This shows that jeebus was aware of slavery and his lack of condemnation shows slavery/slave trade at the least being a nonissue for jeebus if not for his approval….
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
Treating slaves humanely is the first step in the abolitionist movement. Hinduism does not even remotely come close. In fact hinduism demands slaves to be treated brutally and must endure slavery for life. In hinduism sudras are automatically born slaves and can never be freed. There is no such inhumane document in christianity.
=============================================
Even OT, quran and sahih hadiths contain rules to treat slaves humanely and not to mistreat them….Does this imply that these texts were actually meant to abolish slavery….
A humane document which abolishes slavery abolishes it once and for all….It does NOT lay rules to treat slaves properly….Rules to treat slaves properly actually propagates slavery as a good institution…As usual u r spouting pious lies….
The slavery sudras are born into mentioned in Many smriti is NOT physical or lega slavery…ts a karmic slavery….or slavery of evil acts performed in previous births…Shudras are NOT required to serve any masters legally…They are free to earn a livelihood and own properties…Slaves do NOT own properties. They are properties of master.
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
My response to number 3 applies here as well.
==============================================
Your response is wrong…
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
yes he does send him back but paul pleas on his behalf and says he’s willing to repay Onesimus’ debt. Philemon eventually frees Onesimus.
=======================================================
yes after paying the debt….showing even Paul did NOT say to Philemon that slavery is wrong….By paying debt, Paul approved of slave trading and taking slaves….
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
Slavery was abolished by Christians not by hindus who see nothing wrong with it. Secular laws do not create themselves. They were created by Christians.
==============================================
Why would Hindus need to abolish slavery, when they did NOT practice it…..There is no history of Hindus practicing slavery……….
Secular laws were practiced by Hindus much before you European savages were mired in religious bigotry and barbarism….India was a multireligious/multiethc society for more than 2000 years…
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
Christianity is responsible for the abolition of slaves. Not hinduism or atheism but christians because of christianity.
===============================================
Slavery came into being because of bible and christians…most slave owners in US justified slavery based on bible and christianity….Even if christians were behind abolition of slavery, it does NOT condone bible or christianity from establishing slavery…
Phoenix Says:
=================================================
These mantras are meant to inspire the worshipper. They are prayers to the gods who are to be emulated. Thus when the worshiper kills his enemy he believes it is really the gods who have killed them. But don’t take my word. Just look at the epidemic
http://www.smh.com.au/world/double-child-sacrifice-casts-spotlight-on-witchcraft-in-india-20101125-189e5
=================================================
wow…..I have never seen a dumb ass fellow like you…LOL…..
In Vedas actions of Gods are never to be emulated…..these actions by definition are supernatural and NOT commands or actions to be emulated….
Second, presently and in past as well NOT many except learned Vedic scholars (namely brAhmins) understand or even recite these mantras. By tradition, others are NOT even initiated in these worship procedures or even listen to these procedures….
Third mantras are recited ONLY by brAhmins….ONLY brAhmins can use these mantras in worship….even the meanings are hidden from others traditionally….
Fourth, brAhmins are FORBIDDEN to use any weapons or any sort of physical attacks on anybody by tradition…their only power was to bless or curse…..
So to say, present day tribals or uneducated folks in villages (who are NEVER exposed to Vedas, Atharva Veda is even more secretive than other Vedas) were inspired by the Vedic verses to act in one way (against witchcraft) is ABSOLUTE BULL SHIT…
Phoenix Says:
=================================================
Not everything in the bible applies to christians. Just because there is stoning does not mean christians must embrace the practice. For example, circumcison is prescribed for all jewish men and pork is prohibited to eat but they are not rules for christians because Jesus did not see any significance in their application. Of course there are christians who are circumcised and don’t eat pork but they are not adhering to christian principles when they do or don’t do these things. Likewise, when christians murder adulterers they are not following any christian law mandated by Jesus.
================================================
1. Neither Jeebus nor his followers (in NT) as already proven through arguments did NOT say anything about adultery punishments.
2. Circumcision is just only one example where NT explicitly says NOT to follow. This cannot be extended to every other case. If it is extended, then even 10 commandments in OT (except 2 which jeeebus quoted as important) can be done away with.
3. If nothing is said in NT, the benefit of doubt goes to the bible (OT) and how christians historically have understood through church/christian govt writings, laws etc. This is why Augustine, Thomas Aquinas etc. scholarly christians wrote on just war theory…
4. As already quoted in Christian history and jewish sources on how to punish adulterers (stoning, strangulation or hanging, burning are 3 methods of punishing adulterers), christians have applied strangulation ie hanging for the case of adultery…
===============================================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Christianity
Until a few decades ago, adultery was a criminal offense in many countries where the dominant religion is Christianity, especially in Roman Catholic countries (see also the section on Europe).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Europe
Adultery is no longer a crime in any European country. Among the last Western European countries to repeal their laws were Italy (1969), Malta (1973), Luxembourg (1974), France (1975), Spain (1978), Portugal (1982), Greece (1983), Belgium (1987), Switzerland (1989), and Austria (1997).
Before the 20th century, adultery was often punished harshly. In Scandinavia, in the 17th century, adultery and bigamy were subject to the death penalty, although few people were actually executed. Examples of women who have been executed for adultery in Medieval and Early Modern Europe include Maria of Brabant, Duchess of Bavaria (in 1256), Agnese Visconti (in 1391), Beatrice Lascaris di Tenda (in 1418), Anne Boleyn (in 1536), and Catherine Howard (in 1542). The enforcement of adultery laws varied by jurisdiction. In England, the last execution for adultery is believed to have taken place in 1654, when a woman named Susan Bounty was hanged.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has had the opportunity to rule in recent years on several cases involving the legitimacy of firing a person from their job due to adultery.
=====================================================
Clearly all these christian majority countries influenced by chrstianity and church punishing adulery legally and even awarding capital punishment until before this century…
All of the above points clearly show that christianity supports punishment based on OT laws. This is why christians practiced slave trading for 1600 years or more…………..no amount of mental gymnastics is going to hide the truth regarding Christian shariah…
@AH, thanks for the elucidation.
I find it absolutely mind-boggling that someone from a culture where slavery is inseparable and a necessary part of the ideology (Hinduism) in its most authentic and crude form, not only claim to oppose slavery but hate the very culture and beliefs (Christianity) which inspired the abolition of slavery. To oppose slavery is to contradict Hinduism. Christianity does not have these problems.
Also, no other religion explicitly espouses racism like Hinduism. Islam does associate blacks with negative events but Hinduism is more systematic and detailed in its application of racist programs.
@Ron
Fool Hindu leaders made a Muslim president of India, a Sikh prime minister of India, A Sudra and ex-Hindu was the maker Indian constitution. Fool Hindu leaders made a law to give subsidy to Muslims for Haz. 99% population of Indian & Pakistani Muslim are converted from Hinduism. Why not Hindu punished these people for leaving the religion and practicing anit-Hindu religion as people are punished in Islam according to Sharia for apostasy.
@Ron
Brother, Hindu are fool enough they worship even animals, trees, mountains.
Hindu are worst of people, coward & fool. Why did they allow muslims to live in their country inspite of partition of country on the name of religion. Why do not they get back their land (Pakistan) from Muslims and throw them in Arabia from their muslims came to loot the country. Gandhi was greatest fool of Hindus who asked to Government of India to give money to Muslims of Pakistan to get roof the same Muslims attacked three times on India.
Hindus worship rapist gods
Soma,Indra & Brihaspati are rapist gods
Devi Bhagavatam 4:15:59-64. Look! The Moon stole away per force knowingly the wife of Brihaspatî; Indra, knowing what is religion stole away the wife of Gautama; Brihaspatî enjoyed forcibly the wife of his younger; and also he outraged his elder brother’s wife in her pregnant state and cursed the boy in the womb and…
Devi Bhagavatam 4:17:48. Was not the doing of Hari like a thief when he stole away the Lady Rukminî and fled quickly to his own place.
Manu Smriti and Hindu laws of Slavery
Sudras will always be the slave of Brahmins
Laws of Manu 8:413. But a Sudra, whether bought or unbought, he may compel to do servile work; for he was created by the Self-existent (Svayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmana.
414. A Sudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude; since that is innate in him, who can set him free from it?
Seven types of slaves
Manu 8:415. There are slaves of seven kinds, (viz.) he who is made a captive under a standard, he who serves for his daily food, he who is born in the house, he who is bought and he who is given, he who is inherited from ancestors, and he who is enslaved by way of punishment.
Sudras can’t own property
Manu 8:417. A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for,as that (slave) can have no property, his master may take his possessions.
Sudras must remain in poverty
Manu X:129. No collection of wealth must be made by a Sudra, even though he be
able (to do it); for a Sudra who has acquired wealth, gives pain to Brahmanas.
Sudras are despicable
Manu 8:16 For divine justice (is said to be) a bull (vrisha); that (man) who violates it (kurute ‘lam) the gods consider to be (a man despicable like) a Sudra (vrishala); let him, therefore, beware of violating justice.
This is how Manu wanted women to be treated
Here are some of the ‘celebrated’ derogatory comments about women in the Manusmriti :
1. “Swabhav ev narinam …..” – 2/213. It is the nature of women to seduce men in this world; for that reason the wise are never unguarded in the company of females.
2. “Avidvam samlam………..” – 2/214. Women, true to their class character, are capable of leading astray men in this world, not only a fool but even a learned and wise man. Both become slaves of desire.
3. “Matra swastra ………..” – 2/215. Wise people should avoid sitting alone with one’s mother, daughter or sister. Since carnal desire is always strong, it can lead to temptation.
4. “Naudwahay……………..” – 3/8. One should not marry women who has have reddish hair, redundant parts of the body [such as six fingers], one who is often sick, one without hair or having excessive hair and one who has red eyes.
5. “Nraksh vraksh ………..” – 3/9. One should not marry women whose names are similar to constellations, trees, rivers, those from a low caste, mountains, birds, snakes, slaves or those whose names inspires terror.
6. “Yasto na bhavet ….. …..” – 3/10. Wise men should not marry women who do not have a brother and whose parents are not socially well known.
7. “Uchayangh…………….” – 3/11. Wise men should marry only women who are free from bodily defects, with beautiful names, grace/gait like an elephant, moderate hair on the head and body, soft limbs and small teeth.
8. “Shudr-aiv bharya………” – 3/12.Brahman men can marry Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaish and even Shudra women but Shudra men can marry only Shudra women.
9. “Na Brahman kshatriya..” – 3/14. Although Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaish men have been allowed inter-caste marriages, even in distress they should not marry Shudra women.
10. “Heenjati striyam……..” – 3/15. When twice born [dwij=Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaish] men in their folly marry low caste Shudra women, they are responsible for the degradation of their whole family. Accordingly, their children adopt all the demerits of the Shudra caste.
11. “Shudram shaynam……” – 3/17. A Brahman who marries a Shudra woman, degrades himself and his whole family ,becomes morally degenerated , loses Brahman status and his children too attain status of shudra.
12. “Daiv pitrya………………” – 3/18. The offerings made by such a person at the time of established rituals are neither accepted by God nor by the departed soul; guests also refuse to have meals with him and he is bound to go to hell after death.
13. “Chandalash ……………” – 3/240. Food offered and served to Brahman after Shradh ritual should not be seen by a chandal, a pig, a cock,a dog, and a menstruating women.
14. “Na ashniyat…………….” – 4/43. A Brahman, true defender of his class, should not have his meals in the company of his wife and even avoid looking at her. Furthermore, he should not look towards her when she is having her meals or when she sneezes/yawns.
15. “Na ajyanti……………….” – 4/44. A Brahman in order to preserve his energy and intellect, must not look at women who applies collyrium to her eyes, one who is massaging her nude body or one who is delivering a child.
16. “Mrshyanti…………….” – 4/217. One should not accept meals from a woman who has extra marital relations; nor from a family exclusively dominated/managed by women or a family whose 10 days of impurity because of death have not passed.
17. “Balya va………………….” – 5/150. A female child, young woman or old woman is not supposed to work independently even at her place of residence.
18. “Balye pitorvashay…….” – 5/151. Girls are supposed to be in the custody of their father when they are children, women must be under the custody of their husband when married and under the custody of her son as widows. In no circumstances is she allowed to assert herself independently.
19. “Asheela kamvrto………” – 5/157. Men may be lacking virtue, be sexual perverts, immoral and devoid of any good qualities, and yet women must constantly worship and serve their husbands.
20. “Na ast strinam………..” – 5/158. Women have no divine right to perform any religious ritual, nor make vows or observe a fast. Her only duty is to obey and please her husband and she will for that reason alone be exalted in heaven.
21. “Kamam to………………” – 5/160. At her pleasure [after the death of her husband], let her emaciate her body by living only on pure flowers, roots of vegetables and fruits. She must not even mention the name of any other men after her husband has died.
22. “Vyabhacharay…………” – 5/167. Any women violating duty and code of conduct towards her husband, is disgraced and becomes a patient of leprosy. After death, she enters womb of Jackal.
23. “Kanyam bhajanti……..” – 8/364. In case women enjoy sex with a man from a higher caste, the act is not punishable. But on the contrary, if women enjoy sex with lower caste men, she is to be punished and kept in isolation.
24. “Utmam sevmansto…….” – 8/365. In case a man from a lower caste enjoys sex with a woman from a higher caste, the person in question is to be awarded the death sentence. And if a person satisfies his carnal desire with women of his own caste, he should be asked to pay compensation to the women’s faith.
25. “Ya to kanya…………….” – 8/369. In case a woman tears the membrane [hymen] of her Vagina, she shall instantly have her head shaved or two fingers cut off and made to ride on Donkey.
26. “Bhartaram…………….” – 8/370. In case a women, proud of the greatness of her excellence or her relatives, violates her duty towards her husband, the King shall arrange to have her thrown before dogs at a public place.
27. “Pita rakhshati……….” – 9/3. Since women are not capable of living independently, she is to be kept under the custody of her father as child, under her husband as a woman and under her son as widow.
28. “Imam hi sarw………..” – 9/6. It is the duty of all husbands to exert total control over their wives. Even physically weak husbands must strive to control their wives.
29. “Pati bharyam ……….” – 9/8. The husband, after the conception of his wife, becomes the embryo and is born again of her. This explains why women are called Jaya.
30. “Panam durjan………” – 9/13. Consuming liquor, association with wicked persons, separation from her husband, rambling around, sleeping for unreasonable hours and dwelling -are six demerits of women.
31. “Naita rupam……………” – 9/14. Such women are not loyal and have extra marital relations with men without consideration for their age.
32. “Poonshchalya…………” – 9/15. Because of their passion for men, immutable temper and natural heartlessness, they are not loyal to their husbands.
33. “Na asti strinam………” – 9/18. While performing namkarm and jatkarm, Vedic mantras are not to be recited by women, because women are lacking in strength and knowledge of Vedic texts. Women are impure and represent falsehood.
34. “Devra…sapinda………” – 9/58. On failure to produce offspring with her husband, she may obtain offspring by cohabitation with her brother-in-law [devar] or with some other relative [sapinda] on her in-law’s side.
35. “Vidwayam…………….” – 9/60. He who is appointed to cohabit with a widow shall approach her at night, be anointed with clarified butter and silently beget one son, but by no means a second one.
36. “Yatha vidy……………..” – 9/70. In accordance with established law, the sister-in-law [bhabhi] must be clad in white garments; with pure intent her brother-in-law [devar] will cohabitate with her until she conceives.
37. “Ati kramay……………” – 9/77. Any women who disobey orders of her lethargic, alcoholic and diseased husband shall be deserted for three months and be deprived of her ornaments.
38. “Vandyashtamay…….” – 9/80. A barren wife may be superseded in the 8th year; she whose children die may be superseded in the 10th year and she who bears only daughters may be superseded in the 11th year; but she who is quarrelsome may be superseded without delay.
39. “Trinsha……………….” – 9/93. In case of any problem in performing religious rites, males between the age of 24 and 30 should marry a female between the age of 8 and 12.
40. “Yambrahmansto…….” – 9/177. In case a Brahman man marries Shudra woman, their son will be called ‘Parshav’ or ‘Shudra’ because his social existence is like a dead body.
Source:
http://nirmukta.com/2011/08/27/the-status-of-women-as-depicted-by-manu-in-the-manusmriti/
@Phoenix,
I like your contributions very much here on Faith Freedom International.
You wrote:
“For example, circumcision is prescribed for all Jewish men and pork is prohibited to eat but they are not rules for Christians because Jesus did not see any significance in their application.”
In Acts 15 you can read how the issue of circumcision was solved by the church leaders on the Council at Jerusalem, about 20 years after the dead of Jesus and dated to around the year 50 AD. Because by that time many converts to Christianity were not Jewish. This problem did not play any role in Jesus` days. The Council of Jerusalem is unique among the ancient pre-ecumenical councils in that it is considered by Catholics and Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of the later Ecumenical Councils and a key part of Christian ethics. The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Law of Moses, including the rules concerning circumcision of males.
i will let christians explain it to you
http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=2556
Nevertheless, we must not think for a moment that the federal Framers did not sanction the nation’s intimate affiliation with Christianity, or that they attempted to keep religion out of the Constitution. On the contrary, the Christian religion is inherently assumed and implicitly present in the Constitution. In fact, the United States Constitution contains a direct reference to Jesus Christ! Consider three proofs for these contentions (See Constitution of the United…, 1789).
===
These are empty claims with half-knowledge… Following verses from Manu smriti will prove your claims are false….//
I do not care for the good verses in Manu. The bad ones are making an astronomical impact in Indian society. Just as you do not care for any good biblical verses either.
Wife killing,wife beating and keeping women wholly dependant on men is what manu is all about.
Manu11:67. Stealing grain, base metals, or cattle, intercourse with women who drink spirituous liquor, slaying women, Sudras, Vaisyas, or Kshatriyas, and atheism, (are all) minor offences, causing loss of caste (Upapataka)
Manu 8:416. A wife, a son, and a slave, these three are declared to have no property;the wealth which they earn is (acquired) for him to whom they belong.
Manu 5:147. By a girl, by a young woman, or even by an aged one, nothing must be done independently, even in her own house.
148. In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband,when her lord is dead to her sons; a woman must never be independent.
Manu 8:371. If a wife, proud of the greatness of her relatives or (her own) excellence,violates the duty which she owes to her lord, the king shall cause her to be devoured by dogs in a place frequented by many.
299. A wife, a son, a slave, a pupil, and a (younger) brother of the full blood, who have committed faults, may be beaten with a rope or a split bamboo,
===
PUNISHMENTS FOR ADULTERY
Men burnt to death & women eaten by dogs in public
Manu 8:371. If a wife, proud of the greatness of her relatives or (her own) excellence, violates the duty which she owes to her lord, the king shall cause her to be devoured by dogs in a place frequented by many.
372. Let him cause the male offender to be burnt on a red-hot iron bed; they shall put logs under it, (until) the sinner is burned (to death).
377. But even these two, if they offend with a Brahmani (not only) guarded (but the wife of an eminent man), shall be punished like a Sudra or be burnt in a fire of dry grass.
Purify yourself with a gift if you kill adulterous women
Manu 11:139. For killing adulterous women of the four castes, he must give, in order to purify himself, respectively a leathern bag, a bow, a goat, or a sheep.
Sage orders his sons to kill his adulterous wife
Bhagavata Purana SB 9:16:5 The great sage Jamadagni understood the adultery in the mind of his wife. Therefore he was very angry and told his sons, “My dear sons, kill this sinful woman!” But the sons did not carry out his order.
Sage orders youngest son to kill his mother & brothers
SB 9:16:6 Jamadagni then ordered his youngest son, Paraśurāma, to kill his brothers, who had disobeyed this order, and his mother, who had mentally committed adultery. Lord Paraśurāma, knowing the power of his father, who was practiced in meditation and austerity, killed his mother and brothers immediately.
Vishnu Purana 3:11(p.309)…He who commits adultery is punished both here and hereafter; for his days in this world are cut short, and when dead he falls into hell…”
Vishnu [SBE] 5:43. He who has had connection with a woman of one of the lowest castes, shall be put to death.
Manu 8:359. A man who is not a Brahmana ought to suffer death for adultery (samgrahana); for the wives of all the four castes even must always be carefully guarded.
1. Jeebus was a believing jew….….he believed OT laws are god given…he is unlikely to condemn slavery, sexual slavery etc. mentioned and commanded and approved by OT go//
We’ve been through this and I pointed out your fallacy which you did not address. Jesus silence on the issue of slavery does not mean his approval. You remind me of Muhammad who thought a woman’s silence means her consent. This is borderline sociopathy.
===
2. Jeebus was quite aware of slavery existing in his time and even used slavery as examples in his parables showing that he was aware of slavery//
This is just plain dumb. A parable is an allegory which means the characters and events are symbolic, as opposed to actual. To dumb it down further for you. Jesus’ messsage was not actually about slavery.
===
New testament itself is full of instances where christian masters with slaves were never asked to redeem the slaves they own….showing that even NT followers of jeebus never condemned slavery as evil….Rather only asked its Christian masters to treat their slaves properly….whatever that means when one is in slavery…CLEARLY ONE CAN BE A CHRISTIAN AND YET OWN A CHRISTIAN SLAVE//
Treating slaves humanely is the first step in the abolitionist movement. Hinduism does not even remotely come close. In fact hinduism demands slaves to be treated brutally and must endure slavery for life. In hinduism sudras are automatically born slaves and can never be freed. There is no such inhumane document in christianity.
===
4. If slavery was against Christianity, why didn’t Paul (as above) or any other follower of jeebus say/command explicitly that slavery was against Christianity and all Christian masters should free all slaves? Rather only asked its Christian masters to treat their slaves properly….whatever that means when one is in slavery//
My response to number 3 applies here as well.
===
5. Paul sends back Onesimus back to his Christian master Philemon and asks him to receive as his brother in christ, but never asked him explicitly to manumit him from slavery. THIS SHOWS THAT PAUL DID NOT WANT SLAVERY ABOLISHED. REFER TO POINT 3 IN CAPITALS BEFORE YOU SPOUT MORE STRAWMAN NONSENSE//
yes he does send him back but paul pleas on his behalf and says he’s willing to repay Onesimus’ debt. Philemon eventually frees Onesimus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_slavery
“He does, however, encourage Philemon to welcome Onesimus “not as a slave, but as more than a slave, as a beloved brother”.[52] (According to tradition, Philemon did free Onesimus, and both were eventually recognized as saints by the Church.)”
===
6. Slavery was practiced by Christians for last 1600 years or more and was ONLY recently abolished because of secular laws and NOT DUE TO CHRISTIANITY//
Slavery was abolished by Christians not by hindus who see nothing wrong with it. Secular laws do not create themselves. They were created by Christians.
===
7. WESTERN RACISM is ROOTED IN CHRISTIAN SLAVERY//
Christianity is responsible for the abolition of slaves. Not hinduism or atheism but christians because of christianity.
Who is Agni, Indra, Bhava, Sarva? You think they are human….These are Hindu Gods and these verses are prayers to Hindu Gods against those who worship demonic forces and attack vedic follower//
These mantras are meant to inspire the worshipper. They are prayers to the gods who are to be emulated. Thus when the worshiper kills his enemy he believes it is really the gods who have killed them. But don’t take my word. Just look at the epidemic
http://www.smh.com.au/world/double-child-sacrifice-casts-spotlight-on-witchcraft-in-india-20101125-189e5
===
Regardless of the history of Christians, the story of jeebus cannot be used as evidence where jeebus was against punishing adulterers//
Not everything in the bible applies to christians. Just because there is stoning does not mean christians must embrace the practice. For example, circumcison is prescribed for all jewish men and pork is prohibited to eat but they are not rules for christians because Jesus did not see any significance in their application. Of course there are christians who are circumcised and don’t eat pork but they are not adhering to christian principles when they do or don’t do these things. Likewise, when christians murder adulterers they are not following any christian law mandated by Jesus.
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Killing witches in India is an epidemic.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/21/thousands-of-women-accused-of-sorcery-tortured-and-executed-in-indian-witch-hunts/
This is sanctioned by the Vedas:
Atharva Veda III:1,7.7 Do thou, O Agni, *drag hither the sorcerers, bound in shackles; then Indra with his thunderbolt shall cut off their heads*!
Atharva Veda III:1,8,3 *Slay the offspring of the sorcerer*, O soma-drinking (Indra), and subject (him)! Make drop out the farther and the nearer eye of the braggart (demon)!
Atharva veda 10:1:19 …Let that go back to whence it came, turn thither like a horse and *kill the children of the sorcerer*.
23.Bhava and Sarva cast the flash of lightning, the weapon of the Gods, against the sinner who made the evil thing, who deals in witchcraft!
31.The brood of wizard, sorcerer, the purposer of evil deed.Crush thou, *O Krityā spare not, kill those practisers of magic arts*.
For more than 6000 years hindus have persecuted witches on the sub continent in accordance with their scriptures.
============================================
Man I have NOT seen dumber guy than you….Please educate yourself before you quote things which you do NOT understand…
Who is Agni, Indra, Bhava, Sarva? You think they are human….These are Hindu Gods and these verses are prayers to Hindu Gods against those who worship demonic forces and attack vedic followers….
Thunderbolt of Indra (vajrayudha) is a weapon of Vedic God Indra..
Atharva Veda verses you quoted are called mantras….They are used in Vedic fire rituals to pray to Vedic Gods and magically destroy the enemies whp practice witchcraft against followers of Vedas.
There are NO commandments here (or anywhere in Vedas) to destroy witches…Vedas are exclusively mantras or prayers directed to Vedic Gods….
What a numb-skull…LOL….
=============================================
So for more than 2000 years Christians had it wrong and were supposed to stone adulterers?
=============================================
Regardless of the history of Christians, the story of jeebus cannot be used as evidence where jeebus was against punishing adulterers….This story if anything, it shows that jeebus was aware of OT laws, capital punishments against adultery….and yet jeebus did NOT condemn it just like jeebus was aware of slavery and did NOT condemn it explicitly anywhere….
Again…jeebus being a believing jew, it is very unlikely jeebus would call death punishments by stoning or burning or hanging/strangulation (all jewish punishments for adultery for different cases) for adultery as ungodly….This is perfectly logical point….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Judaism
By strangulation (similar to hanging) the following six crimes are punished: 1. Adultery (Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22; Sanh. xi. 1, 52b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 11; Sifre, Deut. 241; see Adultery)
The crimes punished in rabbinic law with death by burning are accordingly the following ten: 1. Sex ( to be referred to as “criminal conversation”) by a priest’s daughter (Lev. xxi. 9; Sanh. ix. 1, 76a; Sifra, Emor, i. 14 et seq.)
Stoning is well known punishment for adultery…..
Christians in history have punished adultery with death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Europe
Before the 20th century, adultery was often punished harshly. In Scandinavia, in the 17th century, adultery and bigamy were subject to the death penalty, although few people were actually executed.[122] Examples of women who have been executed for adultery in Medieval and Early Modern Europe include Maria of Brabant, Duchess of Bavaria (in 1256), Agnese Visconti (in 1391), Beatrice Lascaris di Tenda (in 1418), Anne Boleyn (in 1536), and Catherine Howard (in 1542). The enforcement of adultery laws varied by jurisdiction. In England, the last execution for adultery is believed to have taken place in 1654, when a woman named Susan Bounty was hanged.
Christian historical interpretation of adultery as crime deserving of capital punishment proves my point further about jeebus opinion on adultery…
All your arguments are again strawman and misinterpreting without connecting all the points I have raised….
For over 2000 years jews did not stone adulterers…does this mean Judaism does Not have this teaching…Its in the bible….Non-application of any law does NOT mean it is as per Christian law..
Phoenix says:
===========================================
You must be borderline illiterate. Read your definition again. “asserts that qualities…merely by an irrelevant association”
Watch how I analyze and expose your fallacious reasoning:
A guilt by association fallacy attempts to link the target (Jesus) with a negative position (slavery) through a supposed shared concept (not condemning slavery). But Jesus’ neither explicitly condemns nor condones slavery. His position is unknown because it’s unstated and therefore does not indicate support. To implicate Jesus into a pro-slavery position requires at least one of three things:
1. Jesus had to explicitly condone slavery
2. Engaged in at least one instance of slave-trading
3. His disciples had to interpret Jesus’ message as pro-slavery and engaged in slavery themselves.
=============================================
LOL….I need not even argue against pointless meaningless repetitive strawman fallacies here…..
My points are simple and straightforward…
1. Jeebus was a believing jew….….he believed OT laws are god given…he is unlikely to condemn slavery, sexual slavery etc. mentioned and commanded and approved by OT god…
2. Jeebus was quite aware of slavery existing in his time and even used slavery as examples in his parables showing that he was aware of slavery…..
3. New testament itself is full of instances where christian masters with slaves were never asked to redeem the slaves they own….showing that even NT followers of jeebus never condemned slavery as evil….Rather only asked its Christian masters to treat their slaves properly….whatever that means when one is in slavery…CLEARLY ONE CAN BE A CHRISTIAN AND YET OWN A CHRISTIAN SLAVE…
Colossians 4:1: “Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.”
Ephesians 6:5: Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
4. If slavery was against Christianity, why didn’t Paul (as above) or any other follower of jeebus say/command explicitly that slavery was against Christianity and all Christian masters should free all slaves? Rather only asked its Christian masters to treat their slaves properly….whatever that means when one is in slavery…
5. Paul sends back Onesimus back to his Christian master Philemon and asks him to receive as his brother in christ, but never asked him explicitly to manumit him from slavery. THIS SHOWS THAT PAUL DID NOT WANT SLAVERY ABOLISHED. REFER TO POINT 3 IN CAPITALS BEFORE YOU SPOUT MORE STRAWMAN NONSENSE…
6. Slavery was practiced by Christians for last 1600 years or more and was ONLY recently abolished because of secular laws and NOT DUE TO CHRISTIANITY…
7. WESTERN RACISM is ROOTED IN CHRISTIAN SLAVERY…
ALL THESE POINTS TOGETHER PROVE THAT CHRISTIANITY IS SIMILAR TO ISLAM AND IT HAS ITS OWN CHRISTIAN SHARIAH..
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Theatre of the absurd. There is no command to murder contained in these two laws. You are clearly engaging in wishful thinking.
=============================================
Are you thick-headed… commandments itself do NOT ask you to apply punishments for breaking them….however OT elsewhere has prescribed death for breaking these punishments…this is why Moses murdered his fellow Jews for worshiping a golden calf….This means 10 commandments are the basis for establishing legal laws as per bible and just like adultery leads to death by stoning, praying to other gods or images leads to death as well.
The basis for such harsh laws against unbelievers and their religion is because of 10 commandments…please do NOT act this dumb again…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
False. This proves Jesus was pro secular and approved of seperation of church and state.
===========================================
How does this prove this? This is a clear example of an argument taking an unfounded logical leap…Is there any other example where jeebus says civil laws and religious laws are to be separated explicitly? NO…The simplest explanation is jeebus wanted his followers to obey existing civil authorities and their laws….This is clear from ur bible itself…
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. (Romans 13:1)
There is NO concept of separation of state and church anywhere in bible….Are you saying 2000 years of Christian shariah being applied on non-believers is wrong and you are only right?
Now if jeebus wanted existing civil authorities to be obeyed, then he agrees to its courts, laws, judgments and punishments, be it capital punishment or anything else..
Actually this proves my point that jeebus was no Universal pacifist and approved all judgments and punishments in old testament too, for it was established by God as per ur own new testament and also OT bible…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Poorly designed argument. It’s a non-sequitir.. You cannot provide a deductive argument with a transitive link proving Jesus stance on these issues. Your argument (if one can call it that) takes an unfounded logical leap.
The FACT that Jesus did NOT apply any OT punishments disprove your claims. No amount of mental gymnastics can change this fact.
============================================
Strawman argument again…again another clear display of severe lack of comprehension skills of simple statements…..Read the argument again…..and again until you understand…
“One need NOT personally do an act like personally punishing the criminals, say through imprisoning them or catching thieves or murderers or executing them. There are enough citizens in any country who do NOT do such acts, but essentially agree with the morality of such laws and punishments, including capital punishments. Similarly, just because jeebus did NOT do certain act, it does NOT mean he did NOT approve it or believe in it as god’s commandment.”
NOTE carefully Phoenix…….Here I did NOT claim this argument proves that jeebus EXPLICITLY supported capital punishments in OT….
What I am saying is jeebus’ non-application or execution of certain OT laws DOES NOT PROVE HE DID NOT BELIEVE IN THEM AS GOD’S COMMANDMENT……AT BEST JEEBUS’ NON APPLICATION OR EXECUTION OF OT LAWS SHOW JEEBUS’ POSITION ON THESE OT LAWS IS UNKNOWN….
THIS ARGUMENT IS VALID SINCE JEEBUS IS A MERE CITIZEN AND NOT AUTHORITY OF LEGAL JUDGE TO PRONOUNCE PUNISHMENTS….
Do you see the difference in my argument….Read again and again and PLEASE IMPROVE UR COMPREHENSION SKILLS BEFORE YOU SPOUT MORE AND MORE STRAWMAN NONSENSE…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Secular Humanism has no objective and universal derived ethics to base their laws upon. secular. America’s secular laws were drafted and implemented by Christians and Christian principles are the basis for the laws.
=============================================
I will let your secular citizens talk to you rather than me…..
https://www.au.org/resources/publications/is-america-a-christian-nation
The U.S. Constitution is a wholly secular document. It contains no mention of Christianity or Jesus Christ. In fact, the Constitution refers to religion only twice in the First Amendment, which bars laws “respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and in Article VI, which prohibits “religious tests” for public office. Both of these provisions are evidence that the country was not founded as officially Christian.
The United States, in short, was not founded to be an officially Christian nation or to espouse any official religion. Our government is neutral on religious matters, leaving such decisions to individuals.
Your bible does NOT allow free exercise of other religions. As per your biblical shariah, followers of other religions will not be allowed to build their worship places or propagate their religions. You are a LIAR…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Female infanticide in India is a direct consequence of the anti-female bias that litters hindu scriptures. Women are portrayed in hindu texts as the root of all evils, whores, untrustworthy, slave-girls, stupid, sinful , poisonous, can’t receive inheritance,etc. Even manu’s laws considers the killing of women a minor offence. Her life is of little to zero value.
=============================================
These are empty claims with half-knowledge… Following verses from Manu smriti will prove your claims are false….
Manu-smriti:
3:56. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards.
3:57. Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers.
3:58. The houses on which female relations, not being duly honoured, pronounce a curse, perish completely, as if destroyed by magic.
Clearly as per Hinduism if women are merely NOT happy in a family it perishes, then female infanticide leads to even more problems.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/gpu/gpu06.htm
Garuda Purana CHAPTER IV.
An Account of the Kinds of Sins which lead to Hell.
1. Garuḍa said: For what sins do they go on that great Way? Why do they fall into the Vaitaraṇī? Why do they go to hell? Tell me this, O Keśava.
5-12. Slayers of Brāhmiṇs, drinkers of intoxicants, slayers of owe, infanticides, murderers of women, destroyers of the embryo, and those who commit secret sins,
See clearly slayers of embryos, infants and women are grouped with slayres of Brahmins and end up in hell….Clearly Hinduism is against al these things….
The reason for high rate of female infanticide is India is economic in nature (lands, dowry etc.) and has nothing to do with hindu texts…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_India#Causation
According to Marvin Harris, another anthropologist and among the first proponents of cultural materialism, these killings of legitimate children occurred only among the Rajputs and other elite land-owning and warrior groups. The rationale was mainly economic, lying in a desire not to split land and wealth among too many heirs and in avoiding the payment of dowries.
//Lets say all the so called witch killings etc. exist in India, it is still very rare occurrence in India and unsupported by Hindu texts. That is why it occurs very rarely among uneducated Hindus in remote corners of India//
Killing witches in India is an epidemic.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/21/thousands-of-women-accused-of-sorcery-tortured-and-executed-in-indian-witch-hunts/
This is sanctioned by the Vedas:
Atharva Veda III:1,7.7 Do thou, O Agni, *drag hither the sorcerers, bound in shackles; then Indra with his thunderbolt shall cut off their heads*!
Atharva Veda III:1,8,3 *Slay the offspring of the sorcerer*, O soma-drinking (Indra), and subject (him)! Make drop out the farther and the nearer eye of the braggart (demon)!
Atharva veda 10:1:19 …Let that go back to whence it came, turn thither like a horse and *kill the children of the sorcerer*.
23.Bhava and Sarva cast the flash of lightning, the weapon of the Gods, against the sinner who made the evil thing, who deals in witchcraft!
31.The brood of wizard, sorcerer, the purposer of evil deed.Crush thou, *O Krityā spare not, kill those practisers of magic arts*.
For more than 6000 years hindus have persecuted witches on the sub continent in accordance with their scriptures.
Clear example of one with severe comprehension disabilities who cannot read and understand simple questions….We see again another STRAWMAN….
Definition of Association fallacy
An association fallacy is an inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association//
You must be borderline illiterate. Read your definition again. “asserts that qualities…merely by an irrelevant association”
Watch how I analyze and expose your fallacious reasoning:
A guilt by association fallacy attempts to link the target (Jesus) with a negative position (slavery) through a supposed shared concept (not condemning slavery). But Jesus’ neither explicitly condemns nor condones slavery. His position is unknown because it’s unstated and therefore does not indicate support. To implicate Jesus into a pro-slavery position requires at least one of three things:
1. Jesus had to explicitly condone slavery
2. Engaged in at least one instance of slave-trading
3. His disciples had to interpret Jesus’ message as pro-slavery and engaged in slavery themselves.
Since you can’t prove 1-3, your reasoning is illogical. You simply have no case.
Here’s an example of a Guilt by association fallacy which is similar to the one you’re making. it is the 4th example in the link.
http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-guilt-by-association.html
“Not standing up to speak out against an unpopular political idea with all detractors and thus being considered a part of that political group even though you aren’t really a part of it.”
I’m done here. I said more than enough on this issue and have thoroughly disproven your position. Unless you can provide a sound deductive syllogism in support of your position, which I seriously doubt.
1. Jeebus clearly stated give unto Caesar what is unto Caesar and to god what is unto god…
This one statement is enough to prove that jeebus was NOT against any of the government sanctioned laws or courts or justice system, including capital punishments//
False. This proves Jesus was pro secular and approved of seperation of church and state.
===
2. One need NOT personally do an act like personally punishing the criminals, say through imprisoning them or catching thieves or murderers or executing them. There are enough citizens in any country who do NOT do such acts, but essentially agree with the morality of such laws and punishments, including capital punishments. Similarly, just because jeebus did NOT do certain act, it does NOT mean he did NOT approve it or believe in it as god’s commandment.//
Poorly designed argument. It’s a non-sequitir.. You cannot provide a deductive argument with a transitive link proving Jesus stance on these issues. Your argument (if one can call it that) takes an unfounded logical leap.
===
3. Jeebus was a believing jew. There is NO evidence anywhere in gospels that he condemned old testament or its laws as ungodly. Therefore your argument falls flat regarding capital punishment//
The FACT that Jesus did NOT apply any OT punishments disprove your claims. No amount of mental gymnastics can change this fact.
===
4. Finally to your example….
This has nothing to do with jeebus abolishing capital punishment, but a shrewd jeebus escaping intelligently the trap laid down by the jews.//
So for more than 2000 years Christians had it wrong and were supposed to stone adulterers?
This is ONLY because church has lost its power and secular humanism is enshrined into most Christian majority countries. These countries do NOT have Christian laws, but secular human laws protecting minorities//
Secular Humanism has no objective and universal derived ethics to base their laws upon. secular. America’s secular laws were drafted and implemented by Christians and Christian principles are the basis for the laws.
//which religious text asks Hindus to kill female children? This is absolute LIES…
ust because the death tolls is more, does that absolve killing and murder of unbelievers or the Christian shariah laws that lusts for blood of unbelievers? Tu-quoquo again//
Female infanticide in India is a direct consequence of the anti-female bias that litters hindu scriptures. Women are portrayed in hindu texts as the root of all evils, whores, untrustworthy, slave-girls, stupid, sinful , poisonous, can’t receive inheritance,etc. Even manu’s laws considers the killing of women a minor offence. Her life is of little to zero value.
===
//Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Based on these 2 laws so many murders and genocide of entire communities of unbelievers and converts were committed or pagan temples were broken all over the world from Rome to India. You have no idea what 10 commandments are which is nothing but biblical shariah law//
Theatre of the absurd. There is no command to murder contained in these two laws. You are clearly engaging in wishful thinking.
However, in christianity inquisitions, genocide and holy wars or crusades where Jews, pagans, Hindus were persecuted and murdered under the direction of Christian churches and christian rulers….
besides this tu-quoquo does NOT absolve Christianity and Church of its numerous campaigns of inquisitions and genocide for last 1600 years….This has been going on until recently
Phoenix says:
===========================================
If the bible encouraged Christians to engage in religious wars we would witness such a trend even until the present. Also, we would have Christian Jihadis akin to the Islamic version spreading Christian terror on a global scale. Your argument is therefore false and a fallacious false association.
===========================================
This is ONLY because church has lost its power and secular humanism is enshrined into most Christian majority countries. These countries do NOT have Christian laws, but secular human laws protecting minorities.
However, in Islamic nations, the laws enshrined are directly from quran and Sunnah and therefore such problems from muslims…who are also educated or rather brainwashed by quran teachings just as Christians were once brainwashed with church teachings…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
You never denied Roman Barbarisms, then what is this earlier response to Richard?
“Roman Barbasim????? really Richard…..You think Roman barbarism (If at all any,it was 2000 years back)”
==========================================
Where have I denied Roman barbarism? I clearly said that it was 2000 years back…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
Firstly, female infanticide is only one of the evils spawned by your religious texts. Secondly, the number of infant murders alone by far exceed the death tolls of the Inquisition. And lastly, the Inquisition has long been history, while female infanticide is an ongoing atrocity, as well as witch killings, child sacrifice and of course the inhumane caste system.
==========================================
which religious text asks Hindus to kill female children? This is absolute LIES…
Just because the death tolls is more, does that absolve killing and murder of unbelievers or the Christian shariah laws that lusts for blood of unbelievers? Tu-quoquo again…
Lets say all the so called witch killings etc. exist in India, it is still very rare occurrence in India and unsupported by Hindu texts. That is why it occurs very rarely among uneducated Hindus in remote corners of India…
Besides, Hinduism is not monolithic…it has certain forms which are directly opposing Hindu texts…and yet practiced by some miniscule minority of Hindus….All Hindus are NOT perfect…This is bound to happen in any society…Such acts were NOT carried out under the direction/teachings of orthodox Hindu schools or Hindu rulers ever….
However, in christianity inquisitions, genocide and holy wars or crusades where Jews, pagans, Hindus this tu-quoquo does NOT absolve Christianity and Church of its numerous campaigns of inquisitions and genocide for last 1600 years….This has been going on until recently
Phoenix says:
===========================================
The caste system is a hindu creation with Manu smriti justifying caste oppression.
===========================================
Nowhere in manusmriti oppression of any caste is mentioned…This is ur illusion…
Phoenix says:
===========================================
My point was that you equated Islam and Christianity but the one has laws designed to protect minorities while the other don’t.
===========================================
Where in Christianity it is mentioned that minorities or unbelievers’ rights are protected or that unbelievers have rights in government posts or like…..On the other hand, bible (both NT and OT) is full of verses demeaning and isolating unbelievers. Please stop posting LIES…
1 Corinthians 10:20-21 “But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.”
1 Corinthians 5:9-13
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
Unbelievers are devil worshipers in Christianity…you should NOT even eat with them…then how can devil worshipers be allowed equal rights with Christians in government or personal lives?
Phoenix says:
===========================================
You have no idea what the 10 commandments are do you? There’s nothing in the 10 commandments even remotely comparable to Sharia law.
===========================================
Nothing wrong with the 10 commandments……Shariah law has everything to do with 10 commandments and Christian shariah law of breaking all pagan temples and regarding all other religions’ gods’ as devils….There is everything wrong with 10 commandments especially the second and third commandants which carry death penalty as per bible if one breaks these laws..
Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Based on these 2 laws so many murders and genocide of entire communities of unbelievers and converts were committed or pagan temples were broken all over the world from Rome to India. You have no idea what 10 commandments are which is nothing but biblical shariah law…
Phoenix says:
==========================================================
And wherever Christians are the majority, mean have they have the power to murder unbelievers but they don’t because their ideology is nothing like islam.
============================================================
1. Again the reason Christians do not murder today is because of secular law protecting minorities and education of Christians on secular laws.
2. Christians until recently as 1960 in USA have killed blacks by hanging, shooting, bombing and lynching them for just drinking water from the same tap or attending same school.
3. There is a history of 1600 years of Christian genocide against unbelievers, apostates and heretics by burning at stake, witch hunting, hanging, torture in inquisitions, cutting off eyelids and fingers of children of unbelievers before the parents as in Goan inquisitions, holy wars or crusades against Jews, hindus, Buddhists, and muslims, Roman pagans, heretics, apostates etc. etc.….endless crimes to mention as mentioned historically for 1600 years…It did Not happen yesterday….Neither Hindus nor jains nor Buddhists attempt such henous global campaigns against unbelievers….Only Christians and Muslims did this…So Christianity is no different than Islam….get it into ur head…
Phoenix says:
=========================================================
But you have failed to implicate Jesus to performing any brutal act. None of his followers interpreted his messages as condoning any death penalties. The stoning of adulterers is one example where Jesus’ rescinded a capital punishment.
=========================================================
1. Jeebus clearly stated give unto Caesar what is unto Caesar and to god what is unto god…
This one statement is enough to prove that jeebus was NOT against any of the government sanctioned laws or courts or justice system, including capital punishments.
2. One need NOT personally do an act like personally punishing the criminals, say through imprisoning them or catching thieves or murderers or executing them. There are enough citizens in any country who do NOT do such acts, but essentially agree with the morality of such laws and punishments, including capital punishments. Similarly, just because jeebus did NOT do certain act, it does NOT mean he did NOT approve it or believe in it as god’s commandment..
3. Jeebus was a believing jew. There is NO evidence anywhere in gospels that he condemned old testament or its laws as ungodly. Therefore your argument falls flat regarding capital punishment…..
4. Finally to your example….
jeebus condoning the adulteress story….if you read the verses you can see that some jews were trying to set up jeebus for going against mosaic laws regarding stoning adulteress and adulterer….
jeebus was shrewd enough to know that guys are trapping him by getting only the woman and not the man who committed adultery. Jewish law requires both adulterer and adulteress to be caught red handed doing sexual intercourse by two witnesses minimum. Besides execution of adulterers has to be decided by a jewish courts, judges etc. and not by mob rule where a mob kills arbitrarily some adulteress..
jeebus saw conspiracy and cleverly came out of the situation by asking the mob one who is NOT guilty of sin can throw the first stone….
What did he mean by this? Jeebus said that as per old testament law, one who bears false witness is guilty of the same crime and punishment as the one the false witness is casting on the victim….Here is OT evidence
Deuteronomy 19:16-21 “If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing, 17 “then both men in the controversy shall stand before Yahweh, before the priests and the judges who serve in those days. 18 “And the judges shall make careful inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, 19 “then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother; so you shall put away the evil from among you. 20 “And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you. 21 “Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
If what jeebus said is against moses laws, he would have been caught by these jews and prosecuted for blasphemy against Mosaic laws. However, clearly the jews understood that jeebus meant that anyone who casts first stone would be taken to judges and his witness examined. If his testimony is found false (especially absence of adulterous man here), they would be executed with same punishment as adultery. Therefore, jews beat a fast retreat and went back.
This has nothing to do with jeebus abolishing capital punishment, but a shrewd jeebus escaping intelligently the trap laid down by the jews.
Phoenix says:
It was your attempt to portray Jesus as condoning those activities but your attempt is a guilt by association fallacy. I will have to remind you of this fallacy because it’s a recurring theme in your posts.
Your “charge” does not implicate Jesus to any crime. So it is meaningless.
Guilt by association fallacy. Not explicitly condemning a certain act does not link the person to the group which engages in the act.
Clear example of one with severe comprehension disabilities who cannot read and understand simple questions….We see again another STRAWMAN….
Definition of Association fallacy
An association fallacy is an inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.
Example…. Jane is good at mathematics. Jane is dyslexic. Therefore, all dyslexic people are good at mathematics.
I made clear statement in the beginning that I am NOT blaming jeebus for committing any crimes…Then comes this statement that I am blaming jeebus of equal guilt by association…did I? NO…
My question is:
Where did jeebus explicitly or implicitly condemn sexual slavery and trading slaves, slavery, wars, taking women and pre-pubescent girls (Numbers 31:17-18) as sex slaves, genocide of unbelievers in OT including suckling infants (1 Samuel 15:3) and murder of children, capital punishments like stoning etc. etc.?
Does this question either directly or indirectly imply that I charge him with the guilt equal to the crime of committing the crimes? NO….
Then where is the Association fallacy here? NONE whatsoever….
The question is very much valid…
1. .Jeebus reacted violently to shopkeepers in the synagogue for polluting the temple….
2. jeebus called Pharisees as synagogue of satan and as belonging to devil for their faults…
3. It is clear that jeebus was quite aware of laws of jews and torah very much for he was teaching in synagogues to many rabbis…
4. Jeebus used slavery as example in parables, knowing he is aware of existence of slavery in society and tanach (old testament)…
However this same jeebus did NOT say one word against SEXUAL SLAVERY, SLAVERY, capital punishment etc….why?
Jeebus is an observant believing jew. As a believing jew he believed in god giving the commandments of tanach to commit genocide and take girls for sexual slavery and therefore did NOT find anything wrong in the numerous OT commandments.
Therefore jeebus did NOT utter one word against all the evils in the OT, including sexual slavery, holy wars, death punishments for praying to other gods or propagation of other religions etc. etc.
THIS IS WHY CHURCHES, CHRISTIAN KINGDOMS AND RULERS ETC. INSTITUTED INQUISITIONS, COMMITTED MURDERS AND GENOCIDE AGAINST JEWS, UNBELIEVERS, APOSTATES, HERETICS ETC. AS CLEARLY SEEN IN HISTORY….
This clearly shows Christianity in no different than Islam when it takes over.
Christianity from historical point of view and theological point of view is very much similar to Islam…From history and theology we have seen that bible encourages holy wars, discrimination, inquisitions, death penalty for apostates, application of christian shariah against unbelievers etc//
If the bible encouraged Christians to engage in religious wars we would witness such a trend even until the present. Also, we would have Christian Jihadis akin to the Islamic version spreading Christian terror on a global scale. Your argument is therefore false and a fallacious false association.
===
//t is perfectly applied…I never denied Roman barbarism anywhere….so where did I show any distress…you quoted Roman barbarism in reply to the Christian barbarism I quoted….This is NOTHING but tu quoque…It does NOT absolve what christians did for 2000 years//
You never denied Roman Barbarisms, then what is this earlier response to Richard?
“Roman Barbasim????? really Richard…..You think Roman barbarism (If at all any,it was 2000 years back)”
The 5 question marks after Roman barbarism means the term really confuses you, hence my elucidation of the term.
===
Really…..so you are comparing “female infanticide” which some poverty stricken uneducated Indians do these days, with christian governments, christian Kingdoms and church instituted inquisitions and numerous murders by burning apostates, heretics etc. by quoting biblical verses….You must be some genius indeed//
Firstly, female infanticide is only one of the evils spawned by your religious texts. Secondly, the number of infant murders alone by far exceed the death tolls of the Inquisition. And lastly, the Inquisition has long been history, while female infanticide is an ongoing atrocity, as well as witch killings, child sacrifice and of course the inhumane caste system.
===
1. blame Indians for caste system, because I quoted historically how christians are no different from mooslimes who applied their shariah law.//
The caste system is a hindu creation with Manu smriti justifying caste oppression.
\\2. When I point out your racism, you christians say we have laws which protect them.
Well so does India have its own laws to protect low castes. So what is your point?//
My point was that you equated Islam and Christianity but the one has laws designed to protect minorities while the other don’t.
\\You christians are obfuscating my point. So lets stick to the main point being, christianity like Islam, historically has imposed its own shariah laws against infidels….This is biblical concept….application of 10 commandments involves forcing unbelievers to follow christian shariah….This has been the case historically and I quoted with proof//
You have no idea what the 10 commandments are do you? There’s nothing in the 10 commandments even remotely comparable to Sharia law.
@ why?
//Nobody charged ur jeebus of doing these activities……This is strawman……talk about obfuscating the truth and hiding clear existence of christian (biblical) shariah with tangential arguments….you christians are expert in it//
It was your attempt to portray Jesus as condoning those activities but your attempt is a guilt by association fallacy. I will have to remind you of this fallacy because it’s a recurring theme in your posts.
===
“My charge is where did jeebus abolish or even spoke one word against slavery, sexual slavery or slave trading?”
Your “charge” does not implicate Jesus to any crime. So it is meaningless.
“Where did jeebus speak against numerous religious wars fought against unbelievers by bible believing rulers or governments?”
Guilt by association fallacy. Not explicitly condemning a certain act does not link the person to the group which engages in the act.
“where did your jeebus speak against killing of unbelievers in so called holy wars or inquisitions or those who convert and worship other gods?”
Guilt by association fallacy and I still do not detect any criminal offence by Jesus.
“Where does jeebus speak again courts, judges, laws, capital punishments?”
Guilt by association fallacy and Jesus is still without any transgression.
“Nowhere jeebus was against soldiers, wars, courts, capital punishments, application of biblical death punishments against followers of other gods etc”
Guilt by association fallacy and Jesus nor his disciples did not mete out any capital punishments
====
NOTE: JEEBUS’S TEACHINGS ARE LIMITED TO INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIETY. IT DOES NOT OVER RULE DRACONIAN BIBLICAL DEATH PUNISHMENTS AGAINST UNBELIEVERS OR SAY PROPAGATORS OF OTHER RELIGIONS//
But you have failed to implicate Jesus to performing any brutal act. None of his followers interpreted his messages as condoning any death penalties. The stoning of adulterers is one example where Jesus’ rescinded a capital punishment.
“This is exactly why christian church over 1600 years committed genocide against Roman pagans, Christian heretics, APOSTATES etc. through inquisitions and holy wars”
Your conclusion is false because it is derived from false premises as I’ve shown above.
“My quotes of christian violence against unbelievers in history proves the case…….If Christians are given power, like the dark ages and middle ages, they will start murdering unbelievers”
You have proven nothing. You are attempting to apply arguments that are used against Islam and then to apply them to Christianity as well. But this only exposes your dishonesty. Muslims don’t need to be in power to begin murdering unbelievers. London bombings, Paris shootings,etc. And wherever Christians are the majority, mean have they have the power to murder unbelievers but they don’t because their ideology is nothing like islam.
Phoenix Says:
=================================================
The honest question you should ask is: “Where did Jesus practise slavery?”. And the answer is nowhere. Neither Jesus nor his disciples or any Christian character in the bible enslaved no one, took no captives, no spoils of war, no sex slaves and did not engage in slave trading. To charge Jesus with the crime of unlawfully trading, capturing and owning persons is dishonest and highly irrational.
===============================================
Nobody charged ur jeebus of doing these activities……This is strawman……talk about obfuscating the truth and hiding clear existence of christian (biblical) shariah with tangential arguments….you christians are expert in it…
==================================================
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
==================================================
My charge is where did jeebus abolish or even spoke one word against slavery, sexual slavery or slave trading?
Where did jeebus speak against numerous religious wars fought against unbelievers by bible believing rulers or governments?
where did your jeebus speak against killing of unbelievers in so called holy wars or inquisitions or those who convert and worship other gods?
Where does jeebus speak again courts, judges, laws, capital punishments?
Just because jeebus taught NOT to judge your brothers, can we say jeebus was against judges and courts? That would be foolishness..
Similarly, Richard foolishly quoted some out of context quotes of jeebus against religious wars and violence…..
Nowhere jeebus was against soldiers, wars, courts, capital punishments, application of biblical death punishments against followers of other gods etc….
NOTE: JEEBUS’S TEACHINGS ARE LIMITED TO INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS IN SOCIETY. IT DOES NOT OVER RULE DRACONIAN BIBLICAL DEATH PUNISHMENTS AGAINST UNBELIEVERS OR SAY PROPAGATORS OF OTHER RELIGIONS.
This is exactly why christian church over 1600 years committed genocide against Roman pagans, Christian heretics, APOSTATES etc. through inquisitions and holy wars..
My quotes of christian violence against unbelievers in history proves the case…….If Christians are given power, like the dark ages and middle ages, they will start murdering unbelievers…
Phoenix, you must be an expert in obfuscating issues and going tangent…Let me restate my main issue…
Christianity from historical point of view and theological point of view is very much similar to Islam…From history and theology we have seen that bible encourages holy wars, discrimination, inquisitions, death penalty for apostates, application of christian shariah against unbelievers etc.
Your response is that India has caste system and female infanticide.
Now tell me if this is NOT tu quoquo…..
Phoenix says:
=================================================
Your tu quoque charge is missapplied. My post was in response to your distress regarding the term “Roman Barbarisms”, as if it is a misnomer. When clearly the list of pagan Roman atrocities is soaked in blood.
=================================================
It is perfectly applied…I never denied Roman barbarism anywhere….so where did I show any distress…you quoted Roman barbarism in reply to the Christian barbarism I quoted….This is NOTHING but tu quoque…It does NOT absolve what christians did for 2000 years
Phoenix says:
=================================================
The rules of YOUR game is such that you find a crime epidemic in a predominantly Christian nation then search for a biblical verse that make mention of a similar crime, even if it’s distorted or ripped out of context, as long as one could give the illusion of a correlation between said verse and crime. All I did was play your game using your rules.
=================================================
Really…..so you are comparing “female infanticide” which some poverty stricken uneducated Indians do these days, with christian governments, christian Kingdoms and church instituted inquisitions and numerous murders by burning apostates, heretics etc. by quoting biblical verses….You must be some genius indeed…
There is nothing ripped out of context anywhere in my quotes…
Phoenix says:
=================================================
Your concern stated above simply cannot be genuine. It is too ignorant of current affairs.
==================================================
Why? because you say so…I know you christians are never genuine…
Phoenix says:
=================================================
Most (if not all) western nations have policies that combat racism and laws that protect the rights of minorities against discrimination. There are Human Right Codes protecting the individual from hate propoganda.
=================================================
I do not know how one can address the hypocrisy of you christians….
On the one hand you christians
1. blame Indians for caste system, because I quoted historically how christians are no different from mooslimes who applied their shariah law..
2. When I point out your racism, you christians say we have laws which protect them.
Well so does India have its own laws to protect low castes. So what is your point?
You christians are obfuscating my point. So lets stick to the main point being, christianity like Islam, historically has imposed its own shariah laws against infidels….This is biblical concept….application of 10 commandments involves forcing unbelievers to follow christian shariah….This has been the case historically and I quoted with proof.
Phoenix says:
=================================================
Under islamic law, no such rights exist for non-muslim minorities, who are severly restricted in nearly all sectors of society. I’m guessing I need not paste the list of human rights violations against non-muslims by the Sharia law adherents?
=================================================
Who disagreed and this is NOT the point of contention here…Please stick to the point….
Phoenix says:
=================================================
Once again, your concern over the discrimination of minorities in the States is rather noble but India has its hands full and can barely deal effectively with its own ancient discriminatory practices. See link http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0306/feature1/
==================================================
tu-quoquo
Show me one place where jeebus abolished slavery…..Jeebus knew about slavery so much that he used parables using slavery, but did NOT condemn slavery even ONCE or abolish it. JEEBUS agreed to slavery in old testament//
The honest question you should ask is: “Where did Jesus practise slavery?”. And the answer is nowhere. Neither Jesus nor his disciples or any Christian character in the bible enslaved no one, took no captives, no spoils of war, no sex slaves and did not engage in slave trading. To charge Jesus with the crime of unlawfully trading, capturing and owning persons is dishonest and highly irrational.
@why?
Your tu quoque charge is missapplied. My post was in response to your distress regarding the term “Roman Barbarisms”, as if it is a misnomer. When clearly the list of pagan Roman atrocities is soaked in blood.
===
one word…..Strawman…….has nothing to do with Hinduism. Poverty/lack of education is the issue here.
Whether there are problems in my country or not, I can still expose the demonic christian faith as it is. Nothing changes it//
The rules of YOUR game is such that you find a crime epidemic in a predominantly Christian nation then search for a biblical verse that make mention of a similar crime, even if it’s distorted or ripped out of context, as long as one could give the illusion of a correlation between said verse and crime. All I did was play your game using your rules.
===
f one has to be perfect in order to criticize evil religions like christianity, then no criticism is possible. Why don’t you christians first set right the present racism prevalent in your western societies, where blacks largely live in segregated parts of cities in US for example? Why do you criticize Islam before setting right racism, discrimination in your societies?//
Your concern stated above simply cannot be genuine. It is too ignorant of current affairs.
Most (if not all) western nations have policies that combat racism and laws that protect the rights of minorities against discrimination. There are Human Right Codes protecting the individual from hate propoganda. Under islamic law, no such rights exist for non-muslim minorities, who are severly restricted in nearly all sectors of society. I’m guessing I need not paste the list of human rights violations against non-muslims by the Sharia law adherents?
Once again, your concern over the discrimination of minorities in the States is rather noble but India has its hands full and can barely deal effectively with its own ancient discriminatory practices. See link http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0306/feature1/
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
PS, if you like I could share with you all the barbaric practices of ancient Rome and Greece that Christians abolished and replaced with civilized customs.
Ok, I’ll post a short list of ancient Roman barbarisms that anti-Christians wished were never revealed.
================================================
Tu quoque (“you too”, appeal to hypocrisy, I’m rubber and you’re glue) – the argument states that a certain position is false or wrong or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position.
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
– Slavery was always legal and a social norm in ancient Rome. Unlike in Christianity where prior to the abolition movement it was always a highly contentious practice with some groups opposing it while others supported it.
===============================================
Show me one place where jeebus abolished slavery…..Jeebus knew about slavery so much that he used parables using slavery, but did NOT condemn slavery even ONCE or abolish it. JEEBUS agreed to slavery in old testament.
Tu quoque (“you too”, appeal to hypocrisy, I’m rubber and you’re glue) – the argument states that a certain position is false or wrong or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position.
=========================================================
Phoenix Says:
I suggest you focus your dubious concerns closer to home and try to alleviate the plight of India’s females, who are currently experiencing the worst form of genocide via female infanticide, which is supposedly a hindu phenomenon
========================================================
one word…..Strawman…….has nothing to do with Hinduism. Poverty/lack of education is the issue here.
Whether there are problems in my country or not, I can still expose the demonic christian faith as it is. Nothing changes it.
Phoenix Says:
===============================================
Since you’re such a social justice warrior, why not mitigate the horrible predicament of the low castes and outcastes of India? That way your pretense can appear somewhat worthwhile.
================================================
If one has to be perfect in order to criticize evil religions like christianity, then no criticism is possible. Why don’t you christians first set right the present racism prevalent in your western societies, where blacks largely live in segregated parts of cities in US for example? Why do you criticize Islam before setting right racism, discrimination in your societies?
Christian hypocrites….cannot swallow the truth…about their demonic religion..
Richard Says:
===================================================
Luke 22 49-51
49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, ‘Lord, should we strike with our swords?’ 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.
51 But Jesus answered, ‘No more of this!’ And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
==================================================
and this proves what? Perhaps you christists need some proper education on babble just like mooslimes need proper education of quran.
In this instance, jeebus merely wanted his plan (his belief that he is dying for everybody’s sin) to go forward. Nothing more.
“Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given?” (John 18:11)
There is nothing here where jeebus says that his followers should follow “Universal pacifism”…..
“‘Put your sword back in its place,’ Jesus said to him, ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’. Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way? Am I leading a rebellion?” (Matt. 26:53-55)
Clearly jeebus himself has command of a legion of demonic warrior angels (whether jeebus’ delusions are true or false is irrelevant), showing clearly he does NOT oppose religious wars when necessary. Jeebus is NOT teaching Universal pacifism here. Should it be chritist god’s plan, then religious wars and persecution of unbelievers (whether by demon angels or by his demon possessed followers) is perfectly justified as per jeebus himself. Clearly jeebus does NOT oppose anywhere in gospels the several brutal genocidal religious wars against unbeleivers in Torah. He in fact supports religious wars when approved by demon god of torah. Otherwise why would a Universal pacifist have an army of demonic angels?
“‘Put your sword back in its place,’ Jesus said to him, ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’
The above statement of jeebus is situational to particular circumstance of rebellion. If the disciples drew the sword, surely they would have died at the hands of soldiers by their swords. The statement ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’ is NOT an Universal truth taught by jeebus here. If it were, his argument of having an army of ghostly invisible demon angels will NOT make sense. It is situational remark from simple observation that disciples were outnumbered and also going against jeebus and his demon god’s plans and that they would die for that.
If the statement (‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’ ) were a Universal law, then jeebus is absolutely wrong for there are many soldiers who did NOT die by sword. Examples are many like the many US soldiers who returned from war (veterans) and died natural deaths, and soldiers of many other countries from history and present day.
NOTE:
So finally, jeebus’ teaching in gospels are MOSTLY pertaining to INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS between believers called as brothers in gospels and unbelievers called as enemies in gospels.
Jeebus says NOTHING AGAINST
1. government laws and SOLDIERS.
2. Capital punishments or appropriate punishments awarded by judges against criminals
(can one use the aphorism ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’ here to deflect court system and punishments. Similarly one cannot use this statement against govt sanctioned religious wars or inquisitions. This is how christian churches correctly interpret(ed) gospel teachings.)
3. Religiously sanctioned wars (crusades) and inquisitions. Nothing against torahs many genocidal wars. A Universal pacifist will tear into pieces such criminal genocidal wars, showing jeebus did agree with religious genocides against unbelievers under right situations. This is why he had imaginary invisible demon angels ready for war with him.
4. Institution of Slavery in old testament. In fact jeebus uses slavery as examples in parables.
Richard Says:
===================================================
Of course all religions (and secular ideologies for that matter – eg Dialectical materialism -Stalin) do this (including Jews and Hindus by the way) – the common factor is human beings.
===================================================
What does “do this” mean Richard?
Only Islam and christianity did this and perhaps jews as recorded in torah were involved in religious persecution of unbelievers…
Do not like mooslimes claim all religions “did this” whatever that means…
Christians like mooslimes were involved in global “holy wars (crusades and jihad)”, torture of unbelievers and apostates in their kingdoms globally (inquisitions and genocide of people as a whole) and looting/raping globally.
Neither Hindus nor buddhists nor Jains were involved in global campaigns of holy wars or inquisitions. So please stop claiming “all did this” like your brethren mooslims..
Perhaps you should educate yourself in real history before spouting garbage.
@why?
Ok, I’ll post a short list of ancient Roman barbarisms that anti-Christians wished were never revealed.
– Ancient Roman law prohibited autopsies but was legalized with the arrival of Christianity where remarkable advancements were made in human dissection.
– Ancient Roman blood sports that pitted man against beast for pleasure was banned under Christian rule.
– Infanticide was legal and strongly encouraged in pagan Rome.
– Slavery was always legal and a social norm in ancient Rome. Unlike in Christianity where prior to the abolition movement it was always a highly contentious practice with some groups opposing it while others supported it.
– Romans made no significant contribution to science, while Christians like Roger Bacon, Sir Francis Bacon, Descartes and Newton were pioneering the scientific method.
– Pagan Romans were bloodthirsty contrary to revisionists who make remarkable claims of Roman tolerance. See link for list of Roman battles: roman-emperors.org/battles.htm#
– Pagan Romans massacred at least 1,6 million jews compared to the Christians who are responsible for about 150 000 jewish deaths. See link: http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_pers1.htm
*Ad 70. Romans kill 1 million jews.
*Ad 132: Bar Kochba was defeated and half-a-million jews were slaughtered by the Romans.
– Pagan Romans tortured jews merely for being the “other” and christians for apostatizing from the polytheistic religion of pagan Rome.
– Romans travelled to foreign lands invaded their territories and wiped out and subjugated the native population into slavery, such as the Druids. After all, Palestine was under Roman occupation during the time of Christ.
That’s all for now. You can refute any of the above or we can discuss the concept of apostasy in hinduism. Your choice.
@why?
You should save your anti-christian rhetoric for the gullible because those of us who actually reside in predominantly christian nations know through experience that Christianity is by far superior and nothing like Islam.
I won’t even bother giving you a list of all the positive things Christains have done that surpasses that of your atrocity list. They range from advancements in the scientific method,to curating Aristotelian logic, to philosophy, to mathematics, to astronomy, to charities, to building of hospitals, to abolition of slavery, to the initiation of the Geneva convention, to women’s rights by Eleanor Rooseveldt, etc. List is too long but you get the point.
I suggest you focus your dubious concerns closer to home and try to alleviate the plight of India’s females, who are currently experiencing the worst form of genocide via female infanticide, which is supposedly a hindu phenomenon
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/un-report-on-india-girl-child-female-infanticide/1/171595.html
Since you’re such a social justice warrior, why not mitigate the horrible predicament of the low castes and outcastes of India? That way your pretense can appear somewhat worthwhile.
PS, if you like I could share with you all the barbaric practices of ancient Rome and Greece that Christians abolished and replaced with civilized customs.
Islam will lose and Muslims will abandon Islam and accept Christ.
We have to the pray for the persecutors and also the persecuted.
Watch this clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUkElD9gF0M
Did you just brand all people from the East as Muslims/terrorists with that pic? This is just bias, misunderstanding and frankly a wee bit racist.
@Why
Of course all religions (and secular ideologies for that matter – eg Dialectical materialism -Stalin) do this (including Jews and Hindus by the way) – the common factor is human beings. But you are wrong – there is plenty in the Bible that opposes this – eg Luke 22 49-51
49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, ‘Lord, should we strike with our swords?’ 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.
51 But Jesus answered, ‘No more of this!’ And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
The difference with Islam is that the violence is built into the Holy books and the life of the founder.
(By the way your intemperate language doen’t help your argument)
Richard Says
============================================
It is true that some Christians became infected with the Roman barbarism – but over time this has been whittled away – and the teaching at the heart of the faith has been the reason for that – it is just stupid to dismiss it as you do.
============================================
Typical christian taqqiah….
Roman Barbasim????? really Richard…..You think Roman barbarism (If at all any,it was 2000 years back) has been responsible for christian barbarism for 2000 years now…Please let me know how Roman barbarism is responsible for calling Jews as jeebus killers and their 2000 years of persecution under christianity, or calling of jews as christ killers or inquisitions and burning of witches from Europe to Salem, or inquisitions set in Goa, Americas etc. around 1500s…or genocide of other christians in Europe….Give me a break…
What teaching at the heart of christian faith says that inquisitions or holy wars and murder of unbelievers is NOT allowed by christian rulers or governments? and why should it take 2000 yrs for the christists to learn a lesson if central teaching of christianity is against persecution of unbelievers….
christists are liars and taqqiah experts much better than islamists…There is NOTHING in bible (old or new fabricated one) that says holy wars, inquisitions etc. are wrong….This is the reason that pagans were persecuted from the beginning under the pretext of biblical teachings..
Here is the historical example of christian influence on the pagan beliefs…..nothing different from Islam…
===================================================
http://www.sau.edu/The_Academy_for_the_Study_of_St_Ambrose_of_Milan/Students_and_Scholars/Joosten.html
Theodosius and the Relationship Between Church and State
During this time Ambrose was a close spiritual and political advisor to Theodosius.
Unless the Emperor repented, Ambrose could not offer the sacrifice in his presence. When the Emperor tried to enter a church in Milan where Ambrose was about to celebrate mass, the bishop stopped him and rebuked him for what he had done (King, 1960)…….Ambrose scolded and accused Rufinus for being compliant with the massacre. Ambrose readmitted the emperor to the Eucharist only after several months of penance and when he promoted a law, which in the case of death sentences would allow a thirty-day lag before the execution would be enforced. When Theodosius consented, it marked a new chapter in the history of church and state.
After Gratian’s death Symmachus, the Prefect of Rome and a Pagan, wrote to the new Emperor Valentinian II in 384 requesting the restoration of the altar (Williams & Friell, 1995). Symmachus’ request was met with strong resistance by Ambrose, Bishop of Milan. Ambrose wrote a letter to Valentinian II that stated it is his business to defend religion and not superstition. He also warned Valentinian that if he did not listen, he will incur the censures of the church. During this time, Ambrose held a great deal of power over the young emperor so the altar was not restored. Further petitions were sent to Theodosius in 391 but were deflected as part of his suppression of the old pagan religions (Ambrose Letter 17a).
In a series of decrees called the “Theodosian decrees” he progressively declared that those Pagan feasts that had not yet been declared Christian ones were now to be workdays in 389(King, 1960). The apparent change of policy that resulted in the “Theodosian decrees” has often been credited to the increased influence of Ambrose.
Ironically, the new Christian Empire persecuted pagan religions.
=====================================================
READ THROUGH IT. Theodosius was directly influenced by the bible, church and its teachings. Persecution of unbelievers is inherent in bible, whether new testament or old testament…There is nothing in mamzer man-god jeebus’ teaching that does NOT allow persecution of unbelievers.
The fact is jeebus does call unbelievers as enemies and says nothing against old testament wars or slavery proves this fact.
@Why
The fact that you are down to listing individual examples of “Christian” atrocities here shows how few there are compared to the Islamic equivalent – which can only be addressed statistically.
You have to bear in mind that Christianity inherited an extremely barbaric state (by modern standards) and acted as a civilising influence- many of the Roman pagan practices that were stopped were themseles cruel and unjust.
It is true that some Christians became infected with the Roman barbarism – but over time this has been whittled away – and the teaching at the heart of the faith has been the reason for that – it is just stupid to dismiss it as you do.
Ron Says:
==============================================
If you look at Islamic history then you will find that Islamic armies generally prevailed over animists, pagans (Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs etc.) , fire-worshippers (Persians) and atheists (communists).
==================================================
Is this a fact? First of all Islamic armies despite being large in numbers as compared to India and Islamic armies despite having been replenished by multiple Islamic countries over centuries (1200 years) were unable to Islamize Indian subcontinent fully. Why?
In the very beginning stages, Zoroastrians lost, majority of christian middle east (Byzantine empire) lost lands several times the size of subcontinent within 100-200 years of establishment of Islam. However India today largely remains Hindu, despite losing much land (Afghanistan which was Buddhist largely, Pakistan and Bangaladesh). It is because of Hindu zeal and our Vedic God.
No matter how many false religions religions and false corpse gods come, eternal Vedic religion will remain in India as long as Vedic God deems necessary for his followers.
Ron Says:
==============================================
They were stopped in their advancement by the Christians. If the Brits had not colonised the Indian subcontinent and the Brits and other Europeans powers had not colonised Africa, Asia and some parts of Middle East etc. and defeated the Ottomans then the world would have been majority Islam today.
==============================================
The history (quoted already) shows why christian armies succeeded. It is because of majority of christian countries (majority of Europe) during islamic invasions were untouched. THIS is the only reason that christian armies could succeed.
Why were the christian countries untouched? Because Islam is centered around middle east?
1. Russia (much of siberia), Northern/Eastern Europe were lands much far away as compared to say India, Persia, Afghanistan etc.
2. There were powerful Persian armies, Byzantine armies and others which had to be first defeated before reaching Northern/Eastern Europe or Russia.
This is the ONLY reason that christian armies could rebuild and recuperate to attack Islamic armies with success.
3. Hindus did NOT have the religious idea of forcible conversions at sword and were NOT utterly barbaric to implement laws and sword to convert others, which both christians and islamic armies used.
None of these advantages existed for India or such vile tactics were used by Hindus, unlike christians or islamists. Despite lack of advantages and being civil and obeying Hindu morals under worst attacks, India is still today Hindu majority.
Now Ron will say jeebus the dead corpse did NOT teach any of these blah blah….It is irrelevant argument. History shows christians who converted were as barbaric and sometimes more barbaric than their Islamic counter parts as a community and were killing each other and other non-christians as well. So in the end conversion to christianity is NOT going to help the world, for it will merely change the demonic god they worship and NOT their behavior. Again HISTORY is the evidence for this and HISTORY repeats itself. Jewish and heretic persecution proves christianity as a religion and belief in dead corpse mamzer man-god jeebus is as dangerous as Islam.
Evidence christianity is same as islam historically. Christian shariah example below from the beginning of christianity.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm
Ancient Pagans
As soon as Christianity was legal (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.
Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.
Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.
Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as “temple destroyer.” [DA468]
Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]
==================================================
Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]
According to Christian chroniclers he “followed meticulously all Christian teachings…”
In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.
===================================================
In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]
The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
[DO19-25]
Converting mooslimes from one false religion to another false religion of a dead corpse worshipers is NOT going to help at all. It will merely create a different kind f problem to the world. Corpse worshipers are no less than islamic worshipers. Given a chance they will engage in inquisitions, holy wars, conversions and endless persecutions. History is testament to this and history often repeats.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm
Jews
Already in the 4th and 5th centuries synagogues were burned by Christians. Number of Jews slain unknown.
In the middle of the fourth century the first synagogue was destroyed on command of bishop Innocentius of Dertona in Northern Italy. The first synagogue known to have been burned down was near the river Euphrat, on command of the bishop of Kallinikon in the year 388. [DA450]
17. Council of Toledo 694: Jews were enslaved, their property confiscated, and their children forcibly baptized. [DA454]
The Bishop of Limoges (France) in 1010 had the cities’ Jews, who would not convert to Christianity, expelled or killed. [DA453]
First Crusade: Thousands of Jews slaughtered 1096, maybe 12.000 total. Places: Worms 5/18/1096, Mainz 5/27/1096 (1100 persons), Cologne, Neuss, Altenahr, Wevelinghoven, Xanten, Moers, Dortmund, Kerpen, Trier, Metz, Regensburg, Prag and others (All locations Germany except Metz/France, Prag/Czech) [EJ]
Second Crusade: 1147. Several hundred Jews were slain in Ham, Sully, Carentan, and Rameru (all locations in France). [WW57]
Third Crusade: English Jewish communities sacked 1189/90. [DO40]
Fulda/Germany 1235: 34 Jewish men and women slain. [DO41]
1257, 1267: Jewish communities of London, Canterbury, Northampton, Lincoln, Cambridge, and others exterminated. [DO41]
1290 in Bohemian (Poland) allegedly 10,000 Jews killed. [DO41]
1337 Starting in Deggendorf/Germany a Jew-killing craze reaches 51 towns in Bavaria, Austria, Poland. [DO41]
1348 All Jews of Basel/Switzerland and Strasbourg/France (two thousand) burned. [DO41]
1349 In more than 350 towns in Germany all Jews murdered, mostly burned alive (in this one year more Jews were killed than Christians in 200 years of ancient Roman persecution of Christians). [DO42]
1389 In Prag 3,000 Jews were slaughtered. [DO42]
1391 Seville’s Jews killed (Archbishop Martinez leading). 4,000 were slain, 25,000 sold as slaves. [DA454] Their identification was made easy by the brightly colored “badges of shame” that all jews above the age of ten had been forced to wear.
1492: In the year Columbus set sail to conquer a New World, more than 150,000 Jews were expelled from Spain, many died on their way: 6/30/1492. [MM470-476]
1648 Chmielnitzki massacres: In Poland about 200,000 Jews were slain. [DO43]
(I feel sick …) this goes on and on, century after century, right into the kilns of Auschwitz.
Religious Wars
15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain. [DO30]
1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action). [DO31]
1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. Thousands were actually slain. [DO31]
1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee. [DO31]
17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, “cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals… and then dumped him into the river […but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [… and] dragged what was left … to the gallows of Montfaulcon, ‘to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows’.” [SH191]
17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. “In a single church fifty women were found beheaded,” reported poet Friedrich Schiller, “and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers.” [SH191]
17th century 30 years’ war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [DO31-32]
@Ron
Whilst the general thrust of you comment is fine – it is important to recognise the fact that Britian and France – by opposing Russia in the Crimean War effectively put the Ottoman Empire on Life support for another 65 years. During that time the Armenian Genocide occurred. Britain has not been particularly consistent in opposing Islam. The most consistent opponent has always been Russia – and it is because of Russia that countries like Bulgaria , Romania etc are not Islamic today.
May God also bless Mr. Janos Ader of Hungary for defending his country from Muslim horde migrants!
So, today, the enemies of Christianity are Great Britain, France, Germany, and the United States, and the only proud in their Christian heritages are Russia and Bulgaria. May God bless Putin and Rosen Plevneliev, and punish Francois Hollande, David Cameron, Angela Merkel, and Barack Hussein Obama for allowing Islam to spread in their countries.
Under Obama’s Presidency, Americans are no more saying “Happy Christmas” to their neighbors: they have to say “Happy holiday” in order to please the Muslims.
Their survival was linked to all the oil wells in their back yard…
If you look at Islamic history then you will find that Islamic armies generally prevailed over animists, pagans (Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs etc.) , fire-worshippers (Persians) and atheists (communists).
They were stopped in their advancement by the Christians. If the Brits had not colonised the Indian subcontinent and the Brits and other Europeans powers had not colonised Africa, Asia and some parts of Middle East etc. and defeated the Ottomans then the world would have been majority Islam today.
So taking a cue from history we should note that a secular and atheist Europe will fall to Islam and it’s a matter of time. The atheists and leftists who dislike Christianity will usher this downfall faster.
The only way to change the trend is evangelizing the Muslims and others to Christianity peacefully by spreading the love and message of salvation through Christ.
As for the title of the above article “Islam will lose, The West already lost.” To over over this title. the first part of the title. It is true because Islam had in foundations in the the writings of a book , the Koran, that is not only a falsehood and a hoax but it the outcome of someone who was sometimes very subtle and always very deceptive. To more specific that someone was a false prophet who’s name was Muhammad. The coming of such false prophets ,as Muhammad, Jesus had predicted and warned about. As seen in. for example Matthew 7:15. If a person has any doubts about that there is a Christian internet site that replies to the many different claims made by the apologists for Islam. It’s answering-islam.org In other words, Since Islam is a false religion and is based on lies and falsehoods it’s fated to lose. To go over the second part of the above title the West,sadly and tragically, may have already lost. For Brigitte Gabriel ,who is the head and founder of actforamerica.org might , might be right in her statement about many of the people of the West. For in her book BECAUSE THEY HATE she wrote “The West in ignorant and refuses to learn. ” Just to leave the people of Europe alone, as an American I can keyboard that many I have found that many American don’t want to invest either their time of effort in the study of the subject of Islam and Islamic terrorism. In spite of being able to obtain good books on the topic by scholars such Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. Such Americans have the small mentally to rather sit a a bar with a cigarette in one hand and a beer on the other hand and watch sports. All at the same time many of the followers of Islam invest their time and effort in the jihad, both, stealth and militant jihad, In that sense the West may had already lost. Many Americans might dislike and even be offended at that last part of what I keyboard. Nevertheless, this only reflects the realty of the truth and should be stated
@Fazi K.
Actually Spain did it differently first time around – sadly it looks like they will not be so determined this time.
The tactic has always been the same. Muslims invade a country, settle there, turn it into an Islamic hell-hole; then migrate to another country and start all over again. India did it differently; it was invaded, then severed the tumour (partition). But this time, they are being welcome to settle in Europe and will overcome the European civilisation as Europeans are too old and tired to defend it.
In future, the three economic powers will be US, China and India; the three military powers will be US, China and Russia – none Islamic. Post-oil Saudi Arabia will be a sad story.
One country is not behaving like the rest of Europe – it is Russia. Russia is returning to its traditional values and is proud of it’s history, Remember that it was Russia that liberated Bulgaria and Romania from the Ottomans – it would have wiped Islam off the map of europe but for the cynical politicking of Britain and France who supported Islam in the Crimean war