Islam is not bad, too many of you are ignorant of history.

[Mr Khan]

Joelcool7 said:

superchunk said:

ProdigyBam said:

 

ProdigyBam said:

 

I can say it HUNDRED times and you wont understand it, huh?

when so called christians are killing someone its not the fault of christianity because they do what is AGAINST the bible, killing someone even your enemys is one of the biggest sins in the bible

but if so called ISLAMISTS kill other people in terrorist acts they act like real muslims because the quran want them to do such things, thats the f***ing difference

 

In the Quran is written "KIll every infidel" not "kill the attacking arabs who arent muslims yet" that would be historical context, like it is in the old testament

BUT there are more than HUNDRED orders most of them NEWER verse from the medinesic time that annull older, meccanic verses and the quran was given to muhammad for all time and the orders are effective until forever according to the quran.

please dont believe a muslim, like i said it, read the quran and the hadiths for yourself if you want to know the truth

Man you drive me crazy.

Also, the OT has the exact same commands by God to kill infidels and other unbelievers. Difference is, you read the entire paragraph and know it is refereing to events that were current or about to take place, such as wars when Israelites took control of what would become Judea. These commands to kill all that were not Jews are no different, actually far more harsh than Qur'anic laws of war, than the commands where Muslims were to fight the pagans in Arabia during the time the Qur'an was written.

But, you keep spreadin' your hate.

God refered to specific people during the time. I don't recall in the old testiment God saying to kill all who don't believe. He names specific tribes and people that had angered him. The jews did carry out several brutal attacks but not all of the attacks recorded in the Old Testiment were ordered by God and those that were , were specific orders not kill all that don't believe.

Even the Old Testiment clearly said "Though shalt not murder". I don't know if the Qur'an has a similiar order in it, though I have read many passages which may have been taken out of context but support killing infidel.

Also the Old Testiment is not the cornerstone of Christianity. It is the basis of Jewish beliefs. The New Testiment follows the life and teachings of Jesus Christ which supercede anything found in the Old Testiment. Why? Jesus death was meant to atone for all the sins any man commits. His sacrafice was to cleanse man of their sins as a lamb used to be sacraficed to do so. Jesus was the lamb and according to the New Testiment and Christ himself all those that believe in Jesus and follow his teachings will be forgiven of their sins and they are to try to lead all non-believers into a relationship with Christ Jesus our Lord.

So clearly the teachings of Jesus do not promote killing of anyone outside of defence. The Old Testiment is history it teaches many of God's laws. However the punishments for those who break those laws are forgiven by Jesus death. So the idea of stoning prostitutes and adulterers is replaced with showing mercy and love.

Yes prostitution, adultery and such are still wrong but Jesus teaches that no one is without sin and all should be forgiven and treated lovingly.

Making the Old Testiment more of a guidline for how to live our lives rather then law. Don't use the Old Testiment to try and make Christians look as bad as Islam! Because Christianity is not based on the Old Testiment rather the new one.

I'll tell you that Commandment 5, as far as "murder" was probably meant specifically regarding killing other Jews. Most of the commandments are taken so far out of context these days as to have little to do with their original meaning. "Honor thy father and thy mother," for instance, is a commandment directed at the guy who doesn't want to pay his mom's nursing home bills (or the era's equivalent), and not the kid who doesn't want to go to bed on time, as is the modern, out-of-context interpretation

And we can see in our modern days the people that take this stuff to be seriously directed at them in their context, like the people who literally interpret the Levitical prohibitions against homosexuality, which were more about keeping domestic peace than because God hates it (i.e. adult men who would have sex with each other were likely married, thus creating all kinds of interfamilial fun), and can see how contextual issues of intra-Arabian conflict could, just perhaps, be taken to justify blowing up skyscrapers in a country that didn't even exist at the time?