To which I responded that such is not in the Gospels; and I even let you take a shot with the NT. I would love some examples.And you’d be wrong because the passage about witches has been used in the past to justify the execution of “witches” and witch-hunting.
Why just the Gospels? Is it because the remainder of the Bible is somehow invalid or is it because the criteria has to be rigged in such a way as to produce the conclusion you want? Rather odd that on the one hand you have no issue using all of the Quran and the inclusion of the Hadiths to “prove” your point, but need us to limit ourselves to just a very small part of the Christian holy text.To which I responded that such is not in the Gospels; and I even let you take a shot with the NT. I would love some examples.
Islam can justify such using the Hadith, and has oppressive messages in Surah 9. Not to mention its treatment of women in Surah 4:34.
We’re discussing Islam; where approx 90% of the adherents are Sunni, who accept the Hadith I have posted as strong Hadith. If you can’t refute them, and you can’t give just one simple case of a Christian quoting the NT to carry out atrocities; I can only assume that Christianity is a Religion of peace and Islam is not.Why just the Gospels? Is it because the remainder of the Bible is somehow invalid or is it because the criteria has to be rigged in such a way as to produce the conclusion you want? Rather odd that on the one hand you have no issue using all of the Quran and the inclusion of the Hadiths to “prove” your point, but need us to limit ourselves to just a very small part of the Christian holy text.
First, Christianity’s status as a religion of peace has nothing to do with individual passages within Christianity’s holy text (which does actually include the OT). Islam’s status and every other non-Christian non-Judaism status as not being a religion of peace (and here peace is defined as one’s relationship with God and the completion of one’s self that comes through this relationship; not as the “we are the world, lovely dovey” definition that seems so popular on this thread) has nothing to do with individual passages in their assorted holy texts. It all has to do with the completeness of truth or lack of completeness that these faiths have.We’re discussing Islam; where approx 90% of the adherents are Sunni, who accept the Hadith I have posted as strong Hadith. If you can’t refute them, and you can’t give just one simple case of a Christian quoting the NT to carry out atrocities; I can only assume that Christianity is a Religion of peace and Islam is not.
We’re discussing the Religion as it equates to peace. The Hadith calls for the stoning of women; Christianity calls to forgive the adulteress.
If I were discussing Shia Islam, I would not have mentioned those hadiths.
Nope. If it was believed that Jesus said to kill all who reject Him then there would be a lot more crazy Christians.First, Christianity’s status as a religion of peace has nothing to do with individual passages within Christianity’s holy text (which does actually include the OT). Islam’s status and every other non-Christian non-Judaism status as not being a religion of peace (and here peace is defined as one’s relationship with God and the completion of one’s self that comes through this relationship; not as the “we are the world, lovely dovey” definition that seems so popular on this thread) has nothing to do with individual passages in their assorted holy texts. It all has to do with the completeness of truth or lack of completeness that these faiths have.
Muhammad called for the stoning of adulterers. Simple as that; he’s the highest example for Muslims. How much less complicated can it get?Second, being able to take a passage from the holy text of a particular faith and solely using this passage without bothering to place said passage within context of the holy text itself and the actual theology of the faith doesn’t “prove” or answer anything about the faith or its status with either of the definitions of the term “peace” I mention above. All this actually “proves” is that the person doing so either a)is willfully remaining ignorant on the subject matter in order to maintain their current views of the faith being discussed b)doesn’t realize they are engaging in a logical fallacy (cherry picking) or c) has such a shallow understanding of how theology is formed in Abrahamic religions as to not understand what they are doing.
So the Hebrews passage was just jibber jabber?Thirdly, quoting from the NT or the OT doesn’t matter because both form the holy text of Christianity. Such an artificial condition (quoting out of context from just one particular part of a faith’s holy text) is only of value to those who understand that their position would be invalidated if the entirety of Christianity’s holy text were used.
And lastly, I’m pretty sure that stoning for adultery can be found in the holy text of all the Abrahamic faiths.
Is “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” a passage from the Bible?Nope. If it was believed that Jesus said to kill all who reject Him then there would be a lot more crazy Christians.
Muhammad called for the stoning of adulterers. Simple as that; he’s the highest example for Muslims. How much less complicated can it get?
So the Hebrews passage was just jibber jabber?
I’m pretty sure Jesus saying ‘don’t stone people’ is found too. And after all we are CHRISTians.
Yes, but I suppose every word previous to this question is just being thrown out to repeat the same point?Is “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” a passage from the Bible?
So the Bible is no different than the Quran in that individuals with an “ax to grind” can cherry pick passages to “prove” their point; and that any real discussion on what a particular passage indicates about the faith it comes from must include as part of the discussion that particular passage within context of the holy text it is taken from and the theology of the faith in question.Yes, but I suppose every word previous to this question is just being thrown out to repeat the same point?
They don’t; and in 2000 years of history I can’t find specific examples of Christians quoting specific texts to commit atrocities.So the Bible is no different than the Quran in that individuals with an “ax to grind” can cherry pick passages to “prove” their point; and that any real discussion on what a particular passage indicates about the faith it comes from must include as part of the discussion that particular passage within context of the holy text it is taken from and the theology of the faith in question.
“Witchcraft was one of 12 capital crimes decreed by Connecticut’s colonial government in 1642. The legal precedent cited by the devoutly Puritan colonists was of a divinely higher order: biblical passages such as Exodus 22:18 (“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”) and Leviticus 20:27 (“A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death”).”They don’t; and in 2000 years of history I can’t find specific examples of Christians quoting specific texts to commit atrocities.
If I remember correctly, approx 17 people died in Salem over 300 years ago? I’m no expert, but did they even quote said passage you present?
Regardless, fine; if Jesus consistently preached “find witches and kill them” chances are we would be. You’re obviously digging deep here since you have failed to find any NT passage. After all, according to you we can cherry pick “any” religious text.
Stoning for adultery is in the OT, and Jesus clarified such. Anyone who thinks the old way is proper is being dishonest. Regardless you ignored my post on Hebrews and basically everything else.
If I claim to be a Prophet and say “stone women” and someone else makes the same claim and says “don’t stone women” the chances are the people following me will stone women more than the one who says not to.
I already explained why. Why don’t you comment on it?“Witchcraft was one of 12 capital crimes decreed by Connecticut’s colonial government in 1642. The legal precedent cited by the devoutly Puritan colonists was of a divinely higher order: biblical passages such as Exodus 22:18 (“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”) and Leviticus 20:27 (“A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death”).”
history.com/news/before-salem-the-first-american-witch-hunt
Martin Luther- "Martin Luther shared some of the views about witchcraft that were common in his time.[8] When interpreting Exodus 22:18,[9] he stated that, with the help of the devil, witches could steal milk merely by thinking of a cow.[10] In his Small Catechism he taught that witchcraft was a sin against the second commandment[11] and prescribed the Biblical penalty for it in a “table talk”:
On 25 August 1538 there was much discussion about witches and sorceresses who poisoned chicken eggs in the nests, or poisoned milk and butter. Doctor Luther said: “One should show no mercy to these [women]; I would burn them myself, for we read in the Law that the priests were the ones to begin the stoning of criminals.”[12]"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_magic
"the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony adopted the following statute in 1641: “If any man or woman be a WITCH, that is, hath or consulteth with a familiar spirit, they shall be put to death. Exod. 22. 18. Levit. 20. 27. Deut. 18. 10. 11.” The statute encompasses passages from the Bible written circa 700 B.C. Exodus states: “Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.” Leviticus prescribes the punishment. Witches and wizards “shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.” And Deuteronomy states: “There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch. Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.”
news.lib.uchicago.edu/blog/2012/10/29/the-salem-witch-trials-a-legal-bibliography-for-halloween/
The above are just a few examples of Scripture being used to justify the execution of “witches,” including those at Salem.
So it has to be something Jesus said? So the OT, a rather large part of the Christian holy text, doesn’t count? Please explain why.
Yes, you dismissed it as not being from the NT and ignored my queries as to why you view the OT as being somehow less valid as the NT.I already explained why. Why don’t you comment on it?
Nope. I posted Hebrews and you ignored.Yes, you dismissed it as not being from the NT and ignored my queries as to why you view the OT as being somehow less valid as the NT.
-I didn’t ignore your reference to Hebrews, it just doesn’t matter because you are relying on the passage I quoted being placed within the context of the rest of the Bible and Christian theology. It would only matter if we were talking about people using the Bible to justly justify their actions. But since we are just talking about people justifying their actions with no regard to these acts being just or unjust- not relevant.Nope. I posted Hebrews and you ignored.
Also, again you’ve dismissed that I’ve actually stayed on topic when the person mentioned a “Catholic to use the Gospels.”