Islam vs western values

[MikeDwight]

The Russian Revolution was a period of political and social revolution that took place in the former Russian Empire, begun during World War I. This period saw Russia abolish its monarchy and adopt a socialist form of government following two successive revolutions and a bloody civil war.

Bolsheviks ("Ones of the Majority"), a far-left party led by Vladimir Lenin, for political power and popular influence.

The volatile situation in Russia reached its climax with the October Revolution, which was a Bolshevik armed insurrection by workers and soldiers in Petrograd that successfully overthrew the Provisional Government, transferring all its authority to the Bolsheviks.

Lucy Petway Holcombe Pickens was a 19th-century American socialite of Tennessee and Texas, known during and after her lifetime as the "Queen of the Confederacy". In January 1858, after his defeat for a Senate seat, he accepted an appointment as the US ambassador to Russia. Suddenly she accepted his previous proposal, and they were married at Wyalucing on April 26, 1858. He was old enough to be Lucy's father and had daughters from his two late wives.
The Pickens took two household slaves to Russia with them, Lucinda and Tom. Lucy became a favorite at the Russian court of Alexander II.
The Tsar called Frances Douschka, "Darling" in Russian, a nickname she kept all her life.. Lucy, then visiting her family in Texas, sold some of her jewelry, including pieces given to her by the tsar in Russia, to raise money for them.

 

[MikeDwight]

 

[Valjean]

Doesn't the Bible also "condone" beating anyone else the same way? Or is there a scripture that tells, don't beat people? Yes, I think there is, the love your neighbor as yourself. I think no one who obeys that, beats people (slaves are people also), except maybe in self-defense. That same rule also means, nobody would keep anyone as slave against the persons will.

Yes. Don't beat people, ie: neighbors, fellow Hebrews. Slaves and foreigners were a different story. Different moral rules applied to different sorts of people.

“And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property. Exodus 21: 20-21 ​

I think God has right to kill anyone, because He has given life. But, I believe He does so only in the case if people are evil and unrighteous. I can accept it, because I think it is not good, if evil continues forever. Do you think evil should be endless?

Were the first born children of the Egyptians evil and unrighteous? How about the wives and children of the Midianites or Amalchites? How about Psalm 137:9, should we dash the infants of our enemies against rocks? Are such children evil?
And why does God order the slaughter of livestock, as well as all the citizens? Were the sheep evil and unrighteous?

No. The Old Testament God is a cruel, jealous, tribal warlord, who enjoys the odor of burning animals, and Jesus had no intention to change this, by even a jot or tittle.

He knew his son could not die, because God had made promises for him that would not be fulfilled, if his son would die.

I don't think that is true. Or can you show a rule from the Bible that says, all Shabbat breakers should be killed?

Please show the scriptures that you are referring to?

"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death." Exodus. 35:2

I think Biblical morality is actually based on the question, is person righteous or not. If not, then that person doesn't live forever. And I think that is good. If unrighteous people would live forever, they would make life eternal suffering for all.

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life.
Matt. 25:46

Evil actions like adultery can be signs that person is not righteous. And if person is not righteous, he deserves death.

However, all people don't have the right to be judges. And for those who were judges, appointed by God, there was also these rules:

So says Jehovah of hosts, saying, Judge true judgment, and practice kindness and pity, each man with his brother.
Zac. 7:9
And I commanded your judges at that time, saying, Hear between your brothers; and judge with righteousness between a man and his brother, and his alien. You shall not respect persons in judgment; you shall hear the small as well as the great; you shall not be afraid because of the face of a man, for the judgment is God's; and the thing too hard for you, you shall bring near to me, and I shall hear it.
Deu. 1:16-17
You shall not utter a false report; You shall not put your hand with the wicked, to become a violent witness. You shall not run after many to gain evil things. And you shall not testify as to a lawsuit, to turn aside after many in order to pervert justice . And you shall not favor the lowly in his lawsuit.
Ex. 23:1-3
At the mouth of two witnesses or three witnesses shall he that is to die be put to death. He shall not be put to death at the mouth of one witness.
Deu. 17:6

So, person can deserve death for being evil, but, lawful Judges should be better than what atheists are. And I think Biblical morality is much better than atheistic "compassion" and "common sense", because it is against evilness and doesn't accept and encourage to do bad things.

The Biblical understanding of evil was not what anyone would consider just or fair today, plus it's "justice" was tribal, and didn't necessarily apply to foreigners or outsiders. The modern concept of generalized human rights did not exist.

Again, you're treating this book as axiomatic, as the definitive Word of God. You quote it to support all your beliefs, as if it were actual evidence, and not just mythology.

Can you support any of your "facts" with actual evidence, or your ethical ideas with actual, consequence-based principles?

 

[MikeDwight]

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Far too many.
Double digits, as many a pool have already shown in the past.

Which polls? There are many polls that have methodological and reliability issues, especially when they try to gauge sentiments in countries with highly stifled freedom of speech and belief. I wouldn't consider their results to be definitive.

Either way, though, I think there are many factors aside from just a religion that give rise to militant activities and support thereof. That includes socioeconomic, geopolitical, and educational ones, mainly. Of course, a subset of ideologies are more likely to be held by militants, but I think such ideologies usually develop and arise in the first place not because of something inherent in any given religion but because of material conditions and circumstances like the few I listed.

When it comes to Islam, the most militant sects and interpretations of it clearly don't inspire the vast majority to "blow each other up," and the religion is far too diverse and large of an umbrella for most generalized statements to accurately apply to it.

 

[MikeDwight]

Which polls? There are many polls that have methodological and reliability issues, especially when they try to gauge sentiments in countries with highly stifled freedom of speech and belief. I wouldn't consider their results to be definitive.

Either way, though, I think there are many factors aside from just a religion that give rise to militant activities and support thereof. That includes socioeconomic, geopolitical, and educational ones, mainly. Of course, a subset of ideologies are more likely to be held by militants, but I think such ideologies usually develop and arise in the first place not because of something inherent in any given religion but because of material conditions and circumstances like the few I listed.

When it comes to Islam, the most militant sects and interpretations of it clearly don't inspire the vast majority to "blow each other up," and the religion is far too diverse and large of an umbrella for most generalized statements to accurately apply to it.

Because the Quran is in Arabic does not mean that Arabs are superior to non-Arabs. Rather, all humans are equal. However, God chose to reveal His final message to mankind to a people who had a very high sensitivity and appreciation to the finest nuances of the language. The Arabs of the 7th century took great pride in their linguistic skills

Why do Muslims read the Quran in Arabic? Is the Quran translated into different languages? If so, what is the difference between the Arabic and the translated versions?

The Quran is only in Arabic.

Nuanced Meanings Gets Lost in Translation​

Now if We had willed this [divine writ] to be a discourse in a non-Arabic tongue, they [who now reject it] would surely have said, “Why is it that its messages have not been spelled out clearly?” (Quran 41:44).

Conclusion​

Ultimately, the Quran was primarily revealed in Arabic because it was revealed to Muhammad peace be upon him who lived in Arabia. Furthermore, the Arabic language is unique among other languages in its nuance, grammatical structure, syntax, and style. Despite the Quran being revealed in Arabic does not mean its general message cannot be translated in other languages. However, those translations are not called Quran because they are actually the words of the translator and not God Himself. Have more questions about the Quran?

 

[Valjean]

the eve of the Civil War, Christianity had pervaded the slave community. Not all slaves were Christian, nor were all those who accepted Christianity members of a church, but the doctrines, symbols, and vision of life preached by Christianity were familiar to most.

Not seeing your point.

 

[MikeDwight]

While we see the Course of the final abolition of human Slavery is onward, & we give it the aid of our prayers & all justifiable means in our power, we must leave the progress as well as the result in his hands who sees the end; who Chooses to work by slow influences; & with whom two thousand years are but as a Single day.

Robert E. Lee

 

[MikeDwight]

Debate about Islamic dress[edit]​

Marianne has featured prominently in the Islamic scarf controversy in France as a symbol of a certain idea of Frenchness and femininity. The American historian Joan Wallach Scott wrote in 2016 that it is no accident that Marianne is often depicted as bare-breasted regardless of where she is or what she is doing, as this reflects the French ideal of a woman, which has been used as an argument for why Islamic dress for women is not French.[38] Scott wrote the topless Marianne has become "...the embodiment of emancipated French women in contrast to the veiled woman said to be subordinated by Islam".[38]

Later in 2016, the French Premier Manuel Valls stated in a speech that the burkini swimsuit was an "enslavement" of women and that Marianne was usually topless which The Economist noted: "The implication seemed to be that women in burkinis are un-French, while true French women go topless."[39] In a speech on 29 August 2016, Valls said: "Marianne has a naked breast because she is feeding the people! She is not veiled, because she is free! That is the republic!".[40] Angelique Chisafis of The Guardian newspaper reported: "The inference that bare breasts were a symbol of France while the Muslim headscarf was problematic sparked scorn from politicians and derision from historians and feminists".[40] The French president François Hollande sparked much debate in France with his controversial statement "The veiled woman will be the Marianne of tomorrow".

 

[ChristineM]

As a woman, I reject your misogynistic views. I am very happy living here in the free country I live in where I'm not subjugated to the likes of people like you. Your version of morality is repulsive to me.

He doesn't respond to women for some reason, i guess it's the typical misogyny we have come to expect

 

[Pro Gamer]

They don't lead a better life. That's why so many want to come to the West.

We have a massive problem with illegal migration in Europe, much of it from muslim countries. I am unaware of any significant migration in the reverse direction. Why do you think that is?

because you guys are bombing their countries, isn't it obvious?

 

[ChristineM]

because you guys are bombing their countries, isn't it obvious?

Right lets flee to the country that's bombing us. That really makes sense

 

[Father Heathen]

He doesn't respond to women for some reason.

I think @Pro Gamer is intimidated by them.

 

[Mock Turtle]

because you guys are bombing their countries, isn't it obvious?

Why aren't they fleeing to the rich Arab nations?

 

[ChristineM]

I think @Pro Gamer is intimidated by them.

Probably right. Years of training that women are second class and not to be tolerated, reality must come as a great shock when he sticks his nose into the west.

 

[1213]

Don't beat people, ie: neighbors, fellow Hebrews.

Please show a scripture that says don't beat neighbors.

Were the first born children of the Egyptians evil and unrighteous? How about the wives and children of the Midianites or Amalchites? How about Psalm 137:9, should we dash the infants of our enemies against rocks? Are such children evil?
And why does God order the slaughter of livestock, as well as all the citizens? Were the sheep evil and unrighteous?

I don't know what they were. But, I believe God's punishments are for evil and unrighteous people. But, in the case of animals, in Biblical point of view they can be killed even if they are not guilty for something (lambs and doves were killed, even though not necessary evil).

No. The Old Testament God is a cruel, jealous,..

Sorry, I disagree with that.

"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death." Exodus. 35:2

Thank you for the scripture.

The Biblical understanding of evil was not what anyone would consider just or fair today, plus it's "justice" was tribal, and didn't necessarily apply to foreigners or outsiders. The modern concept of generalized human rights did not exist.

I disagree with that. For example the story about Niniveh indicates otherwise.

Rise up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and cry out against it; for their evil has come up before Me.
Jonah 1:2
And Jonah began to enter a day's journey into the city. And he cried out and said, Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown!
Jonah 3:4
But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. And let them call with strength to God. And let them each one turn from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their palms. Who knows? He may turn, and God may have pity and turn away from the glow of His anger, that we do not perish. And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way. And God was compassionate over the evil that He had declared to do to them, and He did not do it
Jonah 3:8-10
But it was a great calamity to Jonah's eye, and it kindled anger in him. And he prayed to Jehovah, and said, Please, O Jehovah, was this not my word while I was on my own land? On account of this, I fled to Tarshish before, for I knew that You are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and One who repents over calamity.
Jonah 4:1-2
and should I not have pity on Nineveh, the great city in which are more than a hundred and twenty thousand men who do not know between the right and the left hand , and many cattle?
Jonah 4:11

I believe God is extremely good, fair, patient and merciful, but, there is a limit for how evil people can be. And the same is with all people.

And I think Bible shows more than generalized human rights, because it says for example:

as the native among you, so shall be the alien who is staying with you; and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am Jehovah your God.
Lev. 19:34

 

[1213]

That would be an immoral position in humanism. Moral behavior is that which best facilitates maximal societal well-being even for the creator of that society, which is why humanists reject arguments about a good tri-omni god running a world filled with gratuitous suffering. They expect more of any moral agent.

And I think God shows more than that, because He doesn't kill anyone arbitrarily and maximizes the well-being for people.

...More and more we see believers softening their doctrine to reflect a kinder god. I was just in discussion with one this week about hell, which, like you regarding the commonest understanding of the Abraham story, she says is unbiblical. She just refuses to believe in a god that would build a torture chamber for people that didn't believe in it or who violated one of its commands.

Why do you think God build a torture chamber? Bible tells there will be death for unrighteous and life for righteous.

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life.
Matt. 25:46
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is everlasting life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

And people who are thrown to hell are destroyed. Do you think person who is utterly destroyed will feel or do anything anymore?

And you should not fear the ones killing the body, but not being able to kill the soul. But rather fear Him being able to destroy both soul and body in Hell.
Matt. 10:28

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I think God shows more than that, because He doesn't kill anyone arbitrarily

Having selected targets doesn't make killing moral. The targets of the mafia and drug cartels aren't arbitrary, either. A god shouldn't be killing anybody. It shouldn't be necessary.

and maximizes the well-being for people.

Not by humanist standards. There are too many unhappy and suffering people in the world to say that human well-being has been maximized. A good god wouldn't allow humanity to cook its world. A god good wouldn't allow multiple clashing religions and cultures. The world is far from the humanist vision for it.

Why do you think God build a torture chamber?

I don't. I'm an unbeliever. But that is mainstream Christian doctrine taught from pulpits for centuries and to children to coerce their obedience and religious compliance. It's what I was taught as a Christian - hell was a real place that sinners go to suffer at the hands of demons and fire forever.

 

[SkepticThinker]

He doesn't respond to women for some reason, i guess it's the typical misogyny we have come to expect

Oh awesome. Well, at least he's consistent.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Please show a scripture that says don't beat neighbors.

I don't know what they were. But, I believe God's punishments are for evil and unrighteous people. But, in the case of animals, in Biblical point of view they can be killed even if they are not guilty for something (lambs and doves were killed, even though not necessary evil).

Sorry, I disagree with that.

Thank you for the scripture.

I disagree with that. For example the story about Niniveh indicates otherwise.

Rise up, go to Nineveh, the great city, and cry out against it; for their evil has come up before Me.
Jonah 1:2
And Jonah began to enter a day's journey into the city. And he cried out and said, Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown!
Jonah 3:4
But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. And let them call with strength to God. And let them each one turn from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their palms. Who knows? He may turn, and God may have pity and turn away from the glow of His anger, that we do not perish. And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way. And God was compassionate over the evil that He had declared to do to them, and He did not do it
Jonah 3:8-10
But it was a great calamity to Jonah's eye, and it kindled anger in him. And he prayed to Jehovah, and said, Please, O Jehovah, was this not my word while I was on my own land? On account of this, I fled to Tarshish before, for I knew that You are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and One who repents over calamity.
Jonah 4:1-2
and should I not have pity on Nineveh, the great city in which are more than a hundred and twenty thousand men who do not know between the right and the left hand , and many cattle?
Jonah 4:11

I believe God is extremely good, fair, patient and merciful, but, there is a limit for how evil people can be. And the same is with all people.

And I think Bible shows more than generalized human rights, because it says for example:

as the native among you, so shall be the alien who is staying with you; and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am Jehovah your God.
Lev. 19:34

I have a question ...

How did you determine that God is the good one in the Bible and satan is the evil one?

How did you determine that "God is extremely good, fair, and merciful" .... ? 'Cause I'm not seeing it.