Why should Immoral people change?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

Recently in India a 5 yr old was raped by her neighbour for two days and things inserted in her.
He deserves nothing less than a public execution or will you advocate mercy for him?

He CERTAINLY deserves to be held accountable.
But who are you to decide he deserves death?

who do you suggest should decide?

reply to post by logical7

he was illiterate. He recited the Qur'an and it was memorised by his companions.Qur'an kept being revealed for 23 years.

It's said that Jesus was also illiterate.
You are admitting that you believe other people's versions of what Muhammed "supposedly" said are accurate! The same argument applies to the Torah and the Old Testament and the New Testament.....

ALL OF THEM are hearsay.

reply to post by logical7

who do you suggest should decide?

Neither you nor I 'should' decide.
It's not up to us!
Killing people is wrong - whether it's done to show that 'killing' people or 'raping' people is wrong, it's still WRONG to kill people! - it is NOT MY JOB (or yours) to decide who needs 'death'.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

I am not saying drinking causes rape.
It just increases the chances of rape, violence, rash driving etc.

I disagree. There are plenty of responsible 'drinkers'. Just as there are plenty of 'responsible' atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc.' Being 'responsible' has NOTHING - necessarily - to do with one's choice of 'religion'. In my opinion.

i will not argue simple facts with you. You are just justifying by giving a good sub-group in every group.
Drinking is a cause of increased accidents and violence. Responsible drinkers don't change that fact.

You can say that you accept that much accidents and violence as ok to keep believing that drinking should be allowed.

reply to post by logical7

You are just justifying by giving a good sub-group in every group.
Drinking is a cause of increased accidents and violence. Responsible drinkers don't change that fact.

And you are 'condemning' by lumping all 'drinkers' into wrong-doers of 'every group'.

Drinking does not cause violence any more than religion causes morality. You have to get down to the person's upbringing...the parenting that they got. ....
okay, I'm about done for tonight.
Great thread. I look forward to talking more tomorrow, log7.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

he was illiterate. He recited the Qur'an and it was memorised by his companions.Qur'an kept being revealed for 23 years.

It's said that Jesus was also illiterate.
You are admitting that you believe other people's versions of what Muhammed "supposedly" said are accurate! The same argument applies to the Torah and the Old Testament and the New Testament.....

ALL OF THEM are hearsay.

he din't just say it, he memorised it word to word, so did companions and today millions of muslims know it by heart. Many don't even know arabic yet remember the whole Qur'an.
The fact that it can be memorised completely is amazing in itself.
The only book that will remain till humans remain if all books were destroyed(including electronic) is Qur'an.

You tell me how difficult is it to memorise a book in a foreign language without even knowing the language?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

who do you suggest should decide?

Neither you nor I 'should' decide.
It's not up to us!
Killing people is wrong - whether it's done to show that 'killing' people or 'raping' people is wrong, it's still WRONG to kill people! - it is NOT MY JOB (or yours) to decide who needs 'death'.

so what punishment is just and who has the authority to decide?

reply to post by logical7

The fact that it can be memorised completely is amazing in itself.
The only book that will remain till humans remain if all books were destroyed(including electronic) is Qur'an.

You tell me how difficult is it to memorise a book in a foreign language without even knowing the language?

What?
There are people who have 'memorized' the Bible, entire volumes of poetry, classics like Shakespeare, etc...

'The only book that will remain... is Qu'ran'?
That is just unbelievably limited thinking. I respect you a lot, logical7, but...
that statement is just not logical.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

You are just justifying by giving a good sub-group in every group.
Drinking is a cause of increased accidents and violence. Responsible drinkers don't change that fact.

And you are 'condemning' by lumping all 'drinkers' into wrong-doers of 'every group'.

Drinking does not cause violence any more than religion causes morality. You have to get down to the person's upbringing...the parenting that they got. ....
okay, I'm about done for tonight.
Great thread. I look forward to talking more tomorrow, log7.

yet you were happy to agree about eradicating religion but not drinking!
If you are so set in your ways on a tiny thing like drinking, how you expect immoral/greedy people to give up their more potently addictive ways of life just because it causes thousands to die everyday?

reply to post by logical7

he din't just say it, he memorised it word to word,

Who is "he"? I think I must have missed something there.

Okay, really, I have to go now. Apparently (judging by the smell coming in the window) there is/was a skunk outside (although it might be my dog's flatulence).

G'night, my friend. I wish you peace. And I wish you well.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

The fact that it can be memorised completely is amazing in itself.
The only book that will remain till humans remain if all books were destroyed(including electronic) is Qur'an.

You tell me how difficult is it to memorise a book in a foreign language without even knowing the language?

What?
There are people who have 'memorized' the Bible, entire volumes of poetry, classics like Shakespeare, etc...

'The only book that will remain... is Qu'ran'?
That is just unbelievably limited thinking. I respect you a lot, logical7, but...
that statement is just not logical.

ok that was not completely logical but you can't take away the fact that its very easy to memorise(millions have, not a few) yet amazingly deep in meanings, for the later part you may have to study it more deeply than just reading a translation.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

he din't just say it, he memorised it word to word,

Who is "he"? I think I must have missed something there.

Okay, really, I have to go now. Apparently (judging by the smell coming in the window) there is/was a skunk outside (although it might be my dog's flatulence).

G'night, my friend. I wish you peace. And I wish you well.

"he" is Prophet Muhammad pbuh. He heard it from Jibrael(Gabriel) and memorised it.
Till 40yrs of age he was known by pagan arabs as "the truthful", "the trustworthy" yet when he asked them to believe in only one God, they became his worst enemies.

Gud nite. Salam.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Could you give some examples of these different meanings? Specific words that differentiated them? Also, was the Greek word for fear in 1 John 4:18 different from the translated Greek form of the Hebrew word for fear in the OT?

If they didn't mean fear, they wouldn't have translated it into the English word for fear, they would have translated it as "admiration" or "reverence", but they didn't.

edit on 5-5-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Okay, for example as mentioned earlier in English we have "love", in Greek there are four different distinct words for the different usages of the English word "love", they are:

Agape, Eros, Philia, and Storge.

Hebrew is similar, in English we have one word "praise", that in the OT is seven different words with different definitions. Those seven different words are:

Halal, Yadah, Towdah, Shabach, Barak, Zamar, and Tehillah.

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by logical7

 

If God is loving to the criminal, it would be injustice to the victim.

So would you say that people who die in the act of murdering innocent people are in Hell?

people will be judged by their intentions. A murderer does not automatically qualify for hell. Hell is also not eternal for everyone that went in.

That's a bold statement.

I would think someone who dies in the unrepentant sin of murdering innocent people would have a first-class ticket to Hell.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

i find punishment for rape lenient if its less than capital punishment.

So, you ARE saying that rape deserves the death penalty. Is that correct?

Again, is this thread a push for Sharia law?

EDIT: It really makes me wonder what your personal experience is with "rape." I have not personally experienced it, nor has anyone in my family.

edit on 5-5-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

No worries. It doesn't hardly ever make it to trial.

You see, under sharia law it takes 4 male witnesses to the act of rape to testify before a man can be charged with rape.

You know, those crazy women aren't trustworthy enough to know if they have been raped or not unless 4 men say they were.

reply to post by wildtimes


You know the Tower of Babel myth? God got angry because the Babylonians tried to build a tower to heaven. Babel literally means "confused medley of sounds". Words are a medley of sounds, and the bible is a book of words which causes confusion, hence the 40,000+ denominations. That means the bible is a "confusing medley of sounds".

Little do Christians know, they are making the same mistake the Babylonians did by thinking their "tower" (the bible) reaches to the heavens and is a gateway to god. Boy are they ever wrong.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


We're not talking about the word love, we're talking about the word fear. Give examples of the word fear having different meanings in Hebrew please.

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by logical7

 

A baby is not naturally shy about their nakedness, it is society that makes them shy and embarrassed about it. There are tons of naturists around the world who raise their children without clothes and the children are 100% fine with it from birth.

NO, naturist teach them to live that way.
At birth the baby is unaware of self, when the awareness of body comes, then the shyness comes. It will go if trained otherwise.

But the opposite is not true? How can children be taught to not be embarrassed of their bodies but not the opposite? That's ridiculous logic. I guess Adam and Eve were "taught" not to be embarrassed (before the apple) even though they were the only humans of the time?

Get real!

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Seems pretty backwards doesn't it.

I love the sarcasm, so here's a star.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

That's a bold statement. I would think someone who dies in the unrepentant sin of murdering innocent people would have a first- class ticket to Hell.

murder is one of the 1st sin that would be asked about. Unrepentant murderer sure deserves Hell.
How is it bold to say, "i don't know, only God will Judge" ?