Apostates

[Montalban]

well the fact that the prophet Muhammad established a society and implemented the laws of islam is more than enough proof that islam is in fact a complete system no matter what anyones opinion's say.

He didn't establish a society, he built upon an existing tribal society (note some Arabs were already believers in one god)

and it was this system that allow and protected the coptic christians to continue as a community, what do you think the crusaders would have done to the copts if they ruled over them?? either accept their version christianity or be put to death. How long did the coptic christians live within the realm of political and economic islamic structure?

Indeed he did make a special rule for the Copts, possibly due to some influence of Mary the Copt one of his wives, but most likely because he could use the animosity between the Copts and the rest of the Christian world, much like Israel has frequently allied itself with a Muslim off-shoot, the Druze.

Nothing 'godly' about being politically expedient.

However this expediency has not been extended to other Christian groups who have been constantly harrassed by Islamic rulers, and subject to occassional massacres.

 

[ServantofTheOne]

"He didn't establish a society"

hopefully this will be evidence of your lack of knowledge of history. It calls into question all your other posts making wild allegation and spreading misinformation.

 

[Montalban]

"He didn't establish a society"

hopefully this will be evidence of your lack of knowledge of history. It calls into question all your other posts making wild allegation and spreading misinformation.

You said he established a society. I pointed out reasons why I think you're wrong in saying so.

You just retort with a just-so. Sorry that I didn't just 'submit'

 

[ServantofTheOne]

what was your evidence? i might have missed it.

after rereading your posts, i don't see anything of substance.

"He didn't establish a society, he built upon an existing tribal society (note some Arabs were already believers in one god)"

is this what your referring to? and you accuse me of "just-so" statements.

i refer you to most if not all middle east history scholars, they would disagree with you.

Before Muhammad(pbuh) the arabs were fragmented warring tribes.

Muhammad(pbuh) established a society based upon the laws of the Creator.

Don't let your prejudice blind you from reality.

 

[Montalban]

Before Muhammad the arabs were fragmented warring tribes.

True.

Muhammad established a society based upon the laws of the Creator.

This could be true to a degree, but it ignores the legacy of montheism that he built upon. I would be more than happy to agree that the society that emerged was one that he shaped, yes. Now that you've actually presented an argument. I would still disagree with your refusal to acknowledge what he built upon though.
Yes, in thinking about what you've said you are correct. He made a rule that all Arabs must conform to his 'ideal' and if they didn't they were to be killed.

Don't let your prejudice blind you from reality.

You're heading to ad hom.

 

[ServantofTheOne]

"He made a rule that all Arabs must conform to his 'ideal' and if they didn't they were to be killed."

your confusing islam with the christian inquisitions.

 

[Montalban]

"He made a rule that all Arabs must conform to his 'ideal' and if they didn't they were to be killed."

your confusing islam with the christian inquisitions.

Not at all. If anyone is confused it would be your good self. Muhammed is the 'example' for all Muslims, he gave Arabs the choice of death or convesion.

The inquistion was not the 'example' for all Christians (it wasn't practiced by the Orthodox).* And as far as I'm aware wasn't used on non-Christians (though I could be wrong - it was my belief that it was used on people who had professed Christian faith, and had become Apostate)

*If you think it was the example, please make a connection between Christ's teaching and it.

 

[S Walch]

The spanish inquesition uwas enacted on Jews as well as apostates.

The rest of the Inquesitions were used on those whom the Roman catholic church deemed "heretics" such as anabaptists, protestants, presbyterians and other sub-group denominations.

But then, there is the protestant inquestition that happened in germany and switzerland, were they executed anabaptists.

 

[Dark_Lite]

In the Baha'i Faith there is no penalty to withdraw one's membership. The person is not treated any differently except that they no longer have any administrative privileges such as voting or holding office in the Baha'i community.

They can also re-apply for membership anytime they wish to.

Then there's the miniature "dark side" of Baha'i-ism... Covenant Breakers.

 

[Arthra]

Then there's the miniature "dark side" of Baha'i-ism... Covenant Breakers.

Thanks for your post "Dark light"!

Nowadays the correct designation is Baha'i Faith rather than "Bahaism".

As before anyone who wishes to leave the Baha'i Faith does so... there are no penalties...

Someone however who chooses to attack our Faith from the inside and sets about doing that is simply left alone. We don't interfere with their business and they are free to ply their wares...elsewhere.

Our Faith has existed for a hundred and sixty two under extreme persecution and repression... In that time some have sought to turn the Faith to their own devices.

Very few persons have been designated "covenant breakers" in our Faith and their efforts are usually directed toward attempts at self promotion and leadership... Mostly these efforts have shrivelled in time.

The administration of our Faith is through democratic elections held regularly... It is the believers themselves who elect representatives.

Thanks for the post!

- Art

 

[ServantofTheOne]

Not at all. If anyone is confused it would be your good self. Muhammed is the 'example' for all Muslims, he gave Arabs the choice of death or convesion.

The inquistion was not the 'example' for all Christians (it wasn't practiced by the Orthodox).* And as far as I'm aware wasn't used on non-Christians (though I could be wrong - it was my belief that it was used on people who had professed Christian faith, and had become Apostate)

*If you think it was the example, please make a connection between Christ's teaching and it.

death or conversion?
if this were true then there wouldn't be any non muslim communities throughout the muslim domain. there wouldn't be any christian copts around in the ME, all would be dead, same goes for jews, and hindus.

lets not forget prior to the inquisition, muslims ruled spain. they were also victims of the inquisition, not only jews.

 

[whatiswatanabe]

I figure Islam and Christianity are the only faiths that "damn" their apostates. I could be wrong.

Lots of people get Apostate problems as they get older.

 

[Canadian75]

Lots of people get Apostate problems as they get older.

LOL!!

 

[Montalban]

death or conversion?
if this were true then there wouldn't be any non muslim communities throughout the muslim domain. there wouldn't be any christian copts around in the ME, all would be dead, same goes for jews, and hindus.

Little Phil (Phil Sherridan) said "The only good indian is a dead indian" but American indians still live; despite the fact that they were subject to genocide. The fact that they do still live, having managed to survive does not negate genocide.

There were still Jews in Europe at the end of WWII. The fact that some managed to survive does not negate genocide.

There are Christian communities still living in Moselm nations. The fact that they have managed to survive does not negate Moslem massacres and oppressions of them. Some Moslem leaders did not strictly follow Islamic law and were appalled by their own co-religious communities.

As for the Hindus, Islam never took over all of India. Those bits that they did, there were so many Hindus that you couldn't massacre them all, so a legal fiction was invented to cope; by extending 'dhimmi' status over them. You need to do a bit of research. The Hindu religion was accorded status of 'people of the book' when Hinduism has nothing to do with Judeo-Chrisitanity BECAUSE it was the only way the Moslem rulers could cope.

lets not forget prior to the inquisition, muslims ruled spain. they were also victims of the inquisition, not only jews.

And before the Muslims rules spain, it was Christian (again selective picking from evidence).
In Spain the inquisition came into being against people who had converted to Catholicism (it wasn't used against Jews or Moslems). It was not a Europe-wide phenomena. You've shown no causal link between it's use and any doctrine of Christ. Your statement makes as much sense as me blaming the atomic bomb on Judaism, beacuse of the large number of Jewish scientists who worked on it. Try to actually connect the dots to an argument.

"The Spanish Inquisition was the Inquisition acting in Spain under the control of the Kings of Spain. This Inquisition was the result of the reconquest of Spain from the Muslims and the policy of converting Spanish Jews and Muslims to Christianity. The Inquisition was an important tool in enforcing the limpieza de sangre ("cleanliness of blood") against descendants of converted Jews or Muslims"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition
It was used on those who professed Catholicism, but may have lapsed.

 

[Mushroom]

Muhammed is the 'example' for all Muslims, he gave Arabs the choice of death or convesion.

Its really hard not to laugh when christians - who propose that everyone who doesnt convert to their religion is going to burn - Actually try to turn this sort of mentality against muslims .

 

[Montalban]

Its really hard not to laugh when christians - who propose that everyone who doesnt convert to their religion is going to burn - Actually try to turn this sort of mentality against muslims .

What is more funny is when people resort to strawman - that is what you've done; constructed an argument in your mind about what you think I believe and then 'debunk' that.

 

[InnerPhyre]

death or conversion?
if this were true then there wouldn't be any non muslim communities throughout the muslim domain. there wouldn't be any christian copts around in the ME, all would be dead, same goes for jews, and hindus.

lets not forget prior to the inquisition, muslims ruled spain. they were also victims of the inquisition, not only jews.

Um....psst....Spain was taken by force by Muslims.

 

[Montalban]

Um....psst....Spain was taken by force by Muslims.

That's Islamic revisionism of history at play. There was a hue and cry some time ago about some Muslims who wanted to pray in a church in Spain - they said it had once been a mosque; forgetting again not to deal in half-truths, because yes, it had been a mosque, but before that a church!

So much for 'respect' of other religions, Haiga Sophia, one of the best churches in the world was turned into a mosque (it's now a museum).

 

[Mushroom]

What is more funny is when people resort to strawman - that is what you've done; constructed an argument in your mind about what you think I believe and then 'debunk' that.

Last time I checked hell is a widely accepted christian doctrine . No strawman there .

 

[Montalban]

Last time I checked hell is a widely accepted christian doctrine . No strawman there .

Now you're attempting a goal shift.

We're not discussing the mere concept of hell, but you are trying to discuss the concept of who goes there; based on strawman.

You simply constructed in your own mind an idea of what you believe I would believe on who goes to hell, and debunked that. That is a straw-man argument.

Now instead of addressing that you seek to move to another topic.