If Devout Jews rule Israel: Should Shabbath breakers be killed?

[gnostic]

The current Jews in Israel are evil.
Amongst them u find many sabbathbreakers, apostates and homosexuals.
Are u saying they must be cleansed first?

Or their offspring will become devout never breaking commandments?

So you are saying that you consider people that actually engage in stoning to be evil. So you believe that all Muslims that currently engage in stoning are evil, right?

I think that whenever a Muslim badmouthing Jews as being corrupted and wicked, always end up shooting their own foot. Especially when Muslims practised such forms of punishment as prescribed from the Qur'an and from sharia.

How many times we hear news of Muslims wanting to flog or stone women or girls for committing adultery or fornication, or simply walking in public without male kin escort or unveiled? And all this is very recent.

In some backward places in the world, Muslims would still stone and burn alleged witches.

Some Islamic scholars recently announced that a husband raping his wife is it rape, and it is okay to beat a wife for "disobedience", because they can quote from 4:34 which make allowances for domestic violence.

Some of these idiotic clerics even call for unmarried girls to marry their rapists. How sick is that?

I don't think Muslims can say what Jews are doing as being unjust, if they don't look at what their own laws, communities and societies are doing today.

 

[outhouse]

I don't think Muslims can say what Jews are doing as being unjust

I have seen examples of Judaism in this thread alone, as deserving what ever they get. Not all Jews mind you, but many ask for what they receive in full.

Ive seen antagonism

 

[gnostic]

I have seen examples of Judaism in this thread alone, as deserving what ever they get. Not all Jews mind you, but many ask for what they receive in full.

Ive seen antagonism

I am not saying that Judaism is or should be exempted from scrutiny, criticism or from protest.

Judaism, as well as Islam and Christianity, are all far from perfect, but if Muslims want to put Judaism under the spotlight, they should not protest too loudly, when others put their own religion and their people that administer their own law, under the same spotlight.

 

[outhouse]

I am not saying that Judaism is or should be exempted from scrutiny, criticism or from protest.

Judaism, as well as Islam and Christianity, are all far from perfect, but if Muslims want to put Judaism under the spotlight, they should not protest too loudly, when others put their own religion and their people that administer their own law, under the same spotlight.

I agree with you full hearted.

Just had to throw that in because sometimes they are unjust. And yes I'm out of context, but I need to vent.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Sorry, but Jesus didn't introduce a new law, and he had no new law enforced.

Much of what Jesus preached, were if not parables, were merely rhetoric.

Jesus said that if a man look at woman with desire, and they are not married, then he has already committed adultery. IF that's law, then it is not only impractical (and utterly stupid), it is unenforceable.

Also stupid (IF it happen to be law) is Jesus teaching that anyone marrying another person AFTER a divorce is committing adultery.

Yes you are right
Christ said these words
He said --
I come even fulfilled the law
And I do not want the law Cancel
And here he finished his words of Christ in other places
God said spirit worship him in spirit right
Christ put the focus of his teachings is that God moves from monopoly to the World Jewish internationalism
He also said the money was given to Caesar and Caesar's money God to God
And either committed adultery eye
I think it's a special concept
Because the concept ofHere's our view of Christ wants to be a regular look at them away from sex
I think it's a valid moral teachings
With all due respect to you

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

This verse is about Jews..?? Can you read?

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what God and His Messenger, nor condemn the religion of truth from those who were given the book until they pay tribute out of hand and they are submissive (29))Saying: (from those who were given the book), I mean: who gave the book of God, they are the people of the Torah and the Bible (until they pay tribute)

 

[psychoslice]

Lets hope that no devout anyone, ever rules the world.

 

[leibowde84]

Yes you are right
Christ said these words
He said --
I come even fulfilled the law
And I do not want the law Cancel
And here he finished his words of Christ in other places
God said spirit worship him in spirit right
Christ put the focus of his teachings is that God moves from monopoly to the World Jewish internationalism
He also said the money was given to Caesar and Caesar's money God to God
And either committed adultery eye
I think it's a special concept
Because the concept ofHere's our view of Christ wants to be a regular look at them away from sex
I think it's a valid moral teachings
With all due respect to you

I think the following is the best translation of what Jesus supposedly said:
"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose."

Jesus took away the requirement to follow such stringent laws because he, himself, became the example to follow. Before he came the law was designed to provide a construct of how to live under God. But, Jesus explicitly stated that people come first and the law comes second. Live for each other, not for the law. The law was a tool designed to help us, not to hinder us from helping our fellow man. People come first ... the law (and God, imho) come second.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

I think the following is the best translation of what Jesus supposedly said:
"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose."

Jesus took away the requirement to follow such stringent laws because he, himself, became the example to follow. Before he came the law was designed to provide a construct of how to live under God. But, Jesus explicitly stated that people come first and the law comes second. Live for each other, not for the law. The law was a tool designed to help us, not to hinder us from helping our fellow man. People come first ... the law (and God, imho) come second.

Yeah
This is the philosophy of modern laws
And it is studied in the philosophy of law
Jesus knew this was and how this relationship be announced Mq Caesar and with God

 

[leibowde84]

Yeah
This is the philosophy of modern laws
And it is studied in the philosophy of law
Jesus knew this was and how this relationship be announced Mq Caesar and with God

Can you rephrase that. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here.

 

[Akivah]

I think the following is the best translation of what Jesus supposedly said:
"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose."

Jesus took away the requirement to follow such stringent laws because he, himself, became the example to follow.

Which is totally contradictory. "I didn't come to abolish the Law, just don't follow it anymore".

 

[leibowde84]

Which is totally contradictory. "I didn't come to abolish the Law, just don't follow it anymore".

You ignored the remainder of my comment where I provided an explanation. That is why you are confused. Read the explanation provided and get back to me with comments addressing it. Don't just cut out half of what I wrote to serve your own purpose. It's dishonest.

 

[Akivah]

You ignored the remainder of my comment where I provided an explanation. That is why you are confused. Read the explanation provided and get back to me with comments addressing it. Don't just cut out half of what I wrote to serve your own purpose. It's dishonest.

I only quoted the relevant part. Your other sentences attempted to provide justification for jesus abolishing the law, but didn't negate the contradiction.

 

[leibowde84]

I only quoted the relevant part. Your other sentences attempted to provide justification for jesus abolishing the law, but didn't negate the contradiction.

Basically, he was saying that he wasn't coming to abolish the law, but, instead, provide another guide. IMHO, Jesus was upset that the law was considered as more important than our fellow man. Thus, he was saying that it was more important to follow his example than follow the law of Moses. He wasn't abolishing it, but, instead, saying that our first thought should be serving each other rather than serving God.

 

[Akivah]

Basically, he was saying that he wasn't coming to abolish the law, but, instead, provide another guide. IMHO, Jesus was upset that the law was considered as more important than our fellow man. Thus, he was saying that it was more important to follow his example than follow the law of Moses. He wasn't abolishing it, but, instead, saying that our first thought should be serving each other rather than serving God.

Everything you're saying is supporting the contradiction.

G-d gave Laws to Moses and the Israeli people. These laws gave us guidelines how to treat our fellow man, our animals, our environment, and how to elevate ourselves. Then this guy jesus purportedly comes along and says to get rid of those Laws. He has a different way. If jesus said that the law was considered more important than our fellow people, then he didn't understand the Law. Especially if he held himself as knowing better than Moses, that proved that he knew nothing. Once you turn away from the G-d given Laws to something else, then the Laws have been effectively abolished. You either follow them or you don't.

 

[outhouse]

G-d gave Laws to Moses and the Israeli people

Faith, not historical. This ruins all credibility if you have a real point to address here.

Then this guy jesus purportedly comes along and says to get rid of those Laws

No.

he was a Aramaic Jew following that particular Judaism

Once you turn away from the G-d given Laws

No such thing.


There were laws made by multiple cultures of Israelite peoples, that evolved over a long period of time.

Hellenist later changed some of those laws to meet their needs.

 

[leibowde84]

Everything you're saying is supporting the contradiction.

G-d gave Laws to Moses and the Israeli people. These laws gave us guidelines how to treat our fellow man, our animals, our environment, and how to elevate ourselves. Then this guy jesus purportedly comes along and says to get rid of those Laws. He has a different way. If jesus said that the law was considered more important than our fellow people, then he didn't understand the Law. Especially if he held himself as knowing better than Moses, that proved that he knew nothing. Once you turn away from the G-d given Laws to something else, then the Laws have been effectively abolished. You either follow them or you don't.

Obviously, that's not the way Jesus supposedly saw it, as he certainly saw himself as knowing better than those who came before him.

 

[outhouse]

Jesus was upset that the law was considered as more important than our fellow man.

No sir.


What they Hellenist have reported in the NT is nothing like what Jesus would have practiced or said.

Christianity was the divorce of Hellenistic Judaism from cultural Judaism, that had nothing to do with what jesus taught.

It had everything to do with the martyrdom after his death, and the growing theology surrounding the martyrdom

 

[outhouse]

Obviously, that's not the way Jesus supposedly saw it, as he certainly saw himself as knowing better than those who came before him.

That's false in entirety.

 

[outhouse]

Your both off the rails so to speak both speaking of different apologetic rhetoric that has nothing to do with what really happened.