Yes: that's why people like Roy Moore put up Ten Commandments at courthouses: because Christians believe that the law of the Old Testameny no longer applies.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
British Values
- Thread starter Notanumber
- Start date
If you would have read my whole post, it said that Christians are still held to the MORAL LAWS. These are the TEN COMMANDMENTS and THOSE LIKE. Your knowledge of Christian doctrine is poor.
Last edited:
Notanumber
A Free Man
You answer the question if you think it is relevant.
What concerns me is the ideology that is just as relevant today as it was when Muhammad was terrorising the non-believers.
The Quran Distinguishes Muslims from Non-Muslims
and Establishes a Hierarchy of Relative Worth
The Quran makes it clear that Islam is not about universal brotherhood, but about the brotherhood of believers:
The Believers are but a single Brotherhood (49:10)Not all men are equal under Islam. Slaves and the handicapped are not equal to healthy free men, for example (16:75-76). The Quran introduces the “Law of Equality,” which establishes different levels of human value when considering certain matters, such as restitution for murder (2:178).
Neither are Muslim believers equal to non-Muslims:
Are those who know equal to those who know not? (39:09)
Is the blind equal to the one who sees Or darkness equal to light? (13:16)
A believing slave is superior to an unbeliever (2:221 speaking of a prospective wife)The Quran plainly tells Muslims that they are a favored race, while those of other religions are “perverted transgressors”:
Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors. (3:110)As we shall see later, Allah condemns non-Muslims to Hell based merely on their unbelief, while believers are rewarded with the finest earthly comforts in the hereafter, including never-ending food, wine and sex (56:12-40).
Much of the Quran is devoted to distinguishing Muslims from non-Muslims and impugning the latter. Among other things, non-Muslims are said to be diseased (2:10), perverse (2:99), stupid (2:171) and deceitful (3:73).
The first sura of the Quran is a short prayer that is repeated by devout Muslims each day and ends with these words:
Keep us on the right path. The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray. (1:6-7)Muhammad was once asked if this pertained to Jews and Christians. His response was, "Whom else?" (Bukhari 56:662, Sahih Muslim 34:6448). Since Allah makes such a strong distinction between Muslims and those outside the faith, it is only natural that Muslims should incorporate disparate standards of treatment into their daily lives. The Quran encourages segregation and enimity and tells Muslims to be compassionate with one another but ruthless to the infidel:
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are severe against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves… (48:29)The Arabic word used to describe the ideal treatment of non-Muslims (shin-dal-dal) is the same word used in over 25 places in the Quran to describe how painful Allah has made Hell for them. The reasoning is found in the verse prior to this (48:28), which simply says that Islam is superior over all other religions.
Islamic law actually forbids formal Muslim charity (in the form of the zakat payment) from being used to meet the needs of non-believers.
Allah intends for Muslims to triumph over unbelievers:
And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way to triumph over believers [Pickthall – “any way of success”] (4:141)The only acceptable position of non-Muslims to Muslims is subjugation under Islamic rule:Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (9:29 Jizya is the money that non-Muslims must pay to their Muslim overlords in a pure Islamic state.)
A common criticism of many Muslims is that they often behave arrogantly toward others. Now you know why.
The Quran Dehumanizes Non-Muslims
and Says that They are Vile Animals
The Ayatollah Khomeini, who dedicated his entire life to studying Islam, said that non-Muslims rank somewhere between "feces" and the "sweat of a camel that has consumed impure food." Small wonder. The Quran dehumanizes non-Muslims, describing them as “animals” and beasts:Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)
Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. (8:55)
Verse 7:176 compares unbelievers to "panting dogs" with regard to their idiocy and worthlessness.
Verse 7:179 says they are like "cattle" only worse.
Verse 9:28 says the unbelievers are unclean.
Verse 6:111 says they are ignorant.
Verse 23:55 says they are helpers of the devil.
Verse 5:60 even says that Allah transformed Jews of the past into apes and pigs. This is echoed by verses 7:166 and 2:65.
A hadith (Bukhari 54:524) says that Muhammad believed rats to be "mutated Jews" (also confirmed by Sahih Muslim 7135 and 7136).
Verses 46:29-35 even say that unbelieving men are worse than the demons who believe in Muhammad.
According to Islamic law, non-Muslims may be owned as property by Muslims, but - in keeping with Islam's supremacist message - a fellow Muslim should never be (unless they convert to Islam after they are enslaved).
Christians and Jews are not considered fully human in Islam. The penalty for killing one of them is limited to one-third of the compensation due for unintentionally killing a Muslim. Muhammad made it clear that a believer cannot be put to death for killing a non-believer, since they are not equal (see Conclusion). Thus, killing kafir is less serious than engaging in a consenting sexual relationship outside of marriage.
Is the Quran Hate Propaganda?
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Christians are held to all the laws of the countries which they are in.
There are hundreds of guidances, rules and laws for Christians to uphold.
I'm talking about Torah Law.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Jews are left to live their lives in peace in Iran, so long as they don't demonstrate on behalf of Israel. Jews feel more safe in Iran than they do in France.
If you had your way, would Muslims be in danger or difficulties here in the UK?
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Ah, well, most Christian Churches do seem to cherry pick from the Mosiac Laws. The Cherry Pickers.
Go back and read my posts. I have explained this several damn times. The Law is categorised in to three categories. Christians only observe the laws of one category. The Moral Laws. This is in accordance with their doctrine and has been since the advent of the faith.
What are the main divisions of the Old Testament Law? | CARM.org
The main differences between the civil, ceremonial, and moral aspects of the Law of Moses as revealed in the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) are in their purposes. The civil law deals mainly with relationships between individuals, the settling of disputes, and the description of proper behavior. The ceremonial law deals with the priesthood initiation and the priestly procedures as they related to the various sacrifices through which the people of the Old Testament were cleansed of there sins. The moral law is based on the character of God and extends from the Old into the New Testament. Therefore, as it was wrong to lie in the Old Testament, it is still wrong to lie in the New Testament.
Ceremonial and Civil Laws are NOT followed by Christians and never have been.
The main differences between the civil, ceremonial, and moral aspects of the Law of Moses as revealed in the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) are in their purposes. The civil law deals mainly with relationships between individuals, the settling of disputes, and the description of proper behavior. The ceremonial law deals with the priesthood initiation and the priestly procedures as they related to the various sacrifices through which the people of the Old Testament were cleansed of there sins. The moral law is based on the character of God and extends from the Old into the New Testament. Therefore, as it was wrong to lie in the Old Testament, it is still wrong to lie in the New Testament.
Ceremonial and Civil Laws are NOT followed by Christians and never have been.
Notanumber
A Free Man
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
There isn't a 'Moral Law' category in the OT Laws.
There are 106 Sacrificial Laws all dumped by the Baptist and Jesus in favour of Mercy (Mercy and not Sacrifice), and the other 507 laws were essential (back then) for the cohesion, strength, health, growth and success of the Israelites.
So there are categories, such as the poor laws, which Christians could focus closely upon, but I've never ever heard a Christian quote a single one with a modern day application.
As far as the 'health' or 'protection from sickness' category the shellfish law was EVERY BIT as important and essential as the 'NO ADULTERY' law etc, but I've never heard any Christian identify with that. Either could wipe out masses of folks, the shellfish somrewhat quicker, like in an afternoon.
I don't think you're clued up on the OT laws......
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
I read it...........
You're too heaped with prejudice even to acknowledge Muslims who show beyond any doubt that they support freedom of expression, gender and freedom from persecution for moderation within Islam to really benefit from reading about such folks.
You have shown beyond any doubt that you yearn to collect the opinions of the extremists in order to support your agenda which appears to want to enhance hatred against all Muslims regardless of their sections within Islam.
Unfortunately Britain is scattered with whites-matter, racist groups AS WELL as our fair share of religious nutters from varying backgrounds, but some of our BRIT VALUES have to be moderation, equality for all, protection for all, freedom fropm harassment for all......
We need to push back all and any extremist nut cases.
PS: Do me a favour, instead of telling me to read what other folks are saying, tell me about yourself and what you think.
What county do you live in? Let's start there.
I don't think you're clued up on Christianity. Even the Jewish people divide the Torah Laws into categories. The Christians NEVER WERE BOUND BY LAWS THAT ARE NOT CONSIDERED MORAL. NOT EATING SHELLFISH IS NOT A MORAL LAW.
Also, the Jews still follow Torah today; it's not for 'back then'.
This link specifies the categories.
Taryag Mitzvot - a list of the 613 Commandments
Last edited:
They're not confusing if he would actually read what I wrote. I think he thinks I mean that in the Torah itself are headings saying 'MORAL LAWS' and 'CEREMONIAL LAWS'.I'm glad that I'm an atheist; all these confusing religious laws
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
My earlier post stands.
Christians have taken laws that were intended for the strength, cohesion, protection, health, success and growth of the Israelite people and 'spun' them into their own idea of what is moral or immoral and it is/was just there that they lost the plot.
By all means show a couple of Moral Laws so that I can explain why they were intended for one of the reasons that I have shown.
The hypocrisy is that Christians seem to ignore laws that are seriously important for a strong and cohesed community, the OT poor laws are a fine example.
You didn't need to quote the 613..... I already have such lists.
EDIT: Christians who don't pay attention to the shellfish laws can die horribly. Look up 'shellfish poison paralysis'......... the OT laws are amazing.
Altfish
Veteran Member
They are confusing to me!
I thought that Christians believed and followed the Bible - I always thought that contained the New and Old Testaments - and good Christians obeyed the teaching therein. Now I'm told they don't.
I follow the Golden Rule and I'm about home and dry, easy.
For goodness sakes. On the link I showed there is a description of the different categories of laws.
From Chabad:
Generally speaking, the mitzvot are divided into two categories: logical mishpatim ("laws" or "judgements") and supra-rational chukkim ("decrees").
The mishpatim are mitzvot such as the commandment to give charity or the prohibitions against theft and murder, whose reason and utility are obvious to us, and which we would arguably have instituted on our own if G‑d had not commanded them. The chukkim are those mitzvot, such as the dietary laws or the laws of family purity, which we accept as divine decrees, despite their incomprehensibility and — in the most extreme of chukkim — their irrationality.
[A third category, the eidot ("testimonials"), occupies the middle ground between the decrees and the laws. A testimonial is a mitzvah which commemorates or represents something — e.g., the commandments to put on tefillin, rest on Shabbat, or eat matzah on Passover. These are laws which we would not have devised on our own, certainly not in the exact manner in which the Torah commands; nevertheless, they are rational acts. Once their significance is explained to us, we can appreciate their import and utility.]
Christians follow the Moral Laws. These are the Laws that Chabad defines as "whose reason and utility are obvious to us, and which we would arguably have instituted on our own if G‑d had not commanded them. "
Do not murder
Do not steal
etc.
The other Laws, which humans would not have come up with on their own, such as Shabbos, wearing fringed garments and eating cows but not horses. Christians do not follow these. They have no rational backing and are unexplainable.
The Logic of the Mitzvot
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
I'm glad that I'm an atheist; all these confusing religious laws
The 106 sacrificial laws are not for us, but many of the remaining 507 are brilliant.
I forget whether you support right or left politics, but if you support left-=politics some of the poor laws are just great.
Example:- The retail doesn't put damaged, returned or old stock in the store's skips whole or intact, it smashes everything to pieces for security reasons. By OT law that practice would be forbidden and such items be left for the poor to collect and use where possible.
Example:- Where a tradesmen has trouble in repaying a debt, a bailif is not allowed to seize any of that tradesman's tools whhich he uses in his trade. That is an OT law brought to modern times. There are many of these.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
If the categories are not written in the OT then they are not genuine.
Oh.... this is fun!
The OT does not ask folks to give charity, it ORDERS them to follow exact poor-laws!
There is not one single dietary law in the 507 that isn't as obvious as day. All easily comprehensible.
Try me?
They build cohesion, and 'sure', there isn't much need for a person who is not an Israelite to remember the passover night, or the flight from Egypt. Like I said before, some were intended for 'back then' or for 'Israelites.
Christians follow the Moral Laws. These are the Laws that Chabad defines as "whose reason and utility are obvious to us, and which we would arguably have instituted on our own if G‑d had not commanded them. "
Do not murder
Do not steal
etc.
Many of them are easily explainable.
WE follow some garment laws here in Britain, they are part of our heritage here!
You've got a lot to discover about the OT laws. Honest.