Philo

Once again you retreat to the NT as if the OT was irrelevant to Jesus and his teachings, you won't get a place in heaven if you keep doing that.

And, yeah what Opionated2 said.

Further on in Mark, if an entire city should refuse to accept Jesus as saviour, this choice can bring on actions worse than the annihilation of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Mark:

6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Luke had similar admonitions as Mark in 10:14, 10:15.

How peaceable is damning entire populations to hell for not becoming Christians, Philo? Does talk of this type bring about peace?

Finally if you are going to make disparaging claims about other religions, you'd better read your NT first.

While Opinionated2 works Philo over with the biblical quotes, I'd like to take him to task on his "how to solve the problem" post.

Because unless I am being particularly sensitive this morning, it is one of the most offensive observations he has yet made on the topic.

And that's saying a lot.

>>The only way they will unite is by tight control of belief. How is this to be enforced; only by classing discenters as a heretic's and shot, burned at the stake or beheaded<<

But Philo, this is exactly how your own religion used to react to those they wished to eradicate. The witches of Salem spring to mind.

"One victim of the Salem witchhunt was not hanged, but rather pressed under heavy stones for two days until his death."

http://home.texoma.com/~adwignall/index.htm

Also, on a wider scale, the Spanish Inquisition, which became a byword for religious intolerance and murder.

"An estimated 31,912 heretics were burned at the stake"

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html

It would seem that you approve of the methods your own religion used in order to impose its will on the populace, since you now urge another religion to take the same approach.

But I have to ask - did it actually work for Christianity? Or is it an aspect of the religion's past that you (collectively of course) are ashamed of?

Received wisdom is the second of these. In which case, the only reason that you would recommend it for Islam must be mischievous.

Or simply insulting. I can't quite decide which.

Pericles,
Thanks for emphasizing exactly my point. [It has never been how my Church have acted on differences of belief]. I am not a believer in the 3rd century Roman Church doctrine of the trinity, for which I would have been burnt at the stake in past days.

Opinionated2,
Fulfilling the law does not mean enforcing the punishments of Mosaic Laws post Jesus in the Church. Jesus by his death took all punishment for sins under the Royal law. The Mosaic laws were for the Nation of Israel in their culture and time, the Royal law remains i.e. The 10 principles for living. Read John 8 on how Jesus interpreted the stoning laws in the case of the woman taken in adultry. Though Jesus lived in Israel under Mosaic law. He demonstrated a kingdom view of grace see John 1: 16 - 18. The slave trader John Newton on understanding the concept of grace wrote the song "Amazing Grace that saved a wretch like me." Fulfilment of the law means its closure as an instrument of punishment in the kingdom of God. Forgiveness and grace is the principle of relationship in the Kingdom of God.

Mosaic law applies to the nation of Israel even as our national law applies to us. However the Royal law is universal and applies to every person. Christianity teaches Christ took all the punishments for sin in violations of the eternal Royal law. He did not take the punishments of having your bull gore your neighbour under National Israeli law even as he did not take the fines emposed by the state for your traffic offense.

The important principle is that the law was made for man for good social relationships and not that man made for the law as thouigh the laws are paramount. However grace envisages redemption and living positive empowered lives.

Dear Philo,

I want to appeal to your sense of logic.

Dr Myhammad Tahir-ul-Qari's 600 page judgement
sets out a point by point rebuttal of every
argument used not only by al-Qaeda recruiters,
but by Islamic fundamentalists. It is an attempt
to get its theological arguments taken up by
Muslims in Western nations. It disqualifies the
validity of martyrdom and is an absolute condemnation
of terrorists and terrorism. Its purpose is to
appeal to the young - that martyrdom and violence goes
against the teachings of Islam.

Surely you can see that this is a genuine and brave
attempt at doing something positive towards achieving
peace?

Thanks for your reply Philo... I didn't really want to go down the religious contradiction journey on this thread.

However, I think you have just pointed out that Jesus' teachings contradict one another in a few places, sometimes contradicting the OT and whilst at times seemingly harsh (Refer Severin's post), he was generally a peace loving person.

Pericles did however pick up a very important point which you have ignored. You typed

>>The only way they will unite is by tight control of belief. How is this to be enforced; only by classing discenters as a heretic's and shot, burned at the stake or beheaded<<

Not a very Christian view I would think, and one that makes you sound somewhat unChristian.

Does your quoting of John 8 make you also a little hypocritical?

Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri steps up to the plate, probably putting his life at risk, and openly denounces terrorism, correcting many of the falsities used by terrorist organisations to recruit new members (the 72 virgins rubbish).

I remind you again

Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

Instead of you saying well done, fantastic to hear... you start preaching your gospel of intolerance.

Maybe you should re-read John 8:6-11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:%206-11&version=NIV

Aren't you the one throwing stones or doesn't that verse apply to you?

And also you typed "It's Ok to crucify me..." Can you get any more melodramatic?

Are you comparing the pain and suffering metered out to Christ with the pain of our questioning your stance?

Severin's biblical quotes are very relevant... again you chose to ignore these!

Philo, I don't see too much "GRACE" being illustrated in your comments... maybe you should reflect on YOU a little more before instructing others.

There's a rumour out there that "Judgement Day" might be in 2012 and Jesus is planning to say "I never knew you" to quite a few of his self-declared followers.

Matthew 7:21-23 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A21-23&version=NIV

Be careful... just saying you are a follower isn't enough.

Pericles

I'm stumped, really. I don't think I'll ever understand religious extremists, from whatever side they come from.

I suspect your right though, they really don't follow or understand the doctrine of their faith. No wonder so many people are becoming disillusioned and denounce them as hypocrites, enacting their own brand of terrorism again in the name of God.