Norway Liberal Enriched By Diversity

[sOurDieSel]

Too funny. The invaders he has been supporting and inviting in man-raped him or committed 'ficki ficki' as I like to call it.

Quote for lawlz to demonstrate cuckholdry:

"I am a heterosexual man who was raped by a Somali asylum seeker. My life fell into gravel, but now I feel guilt for which he was sent out of the country."

http://www.nrk.no/ytring/jeg-ble-voldtatt-av-en-mann-1.12852714

[Swish]

wtf is wrong with people?

"Don't deport rapists, they know not what they do.."

?

[Lorian]

The Norwegian should go to Somalia and marry the dude, thats the tradition there you rape someone then you have to marry them. Then the dude and his donkey (and possibly his goat if he's wealthy) can take turns on the Norwegian every night. Because this guy is about the stupidest f***k in history and deserves it!

[Cecily]

That guy is one of the best people in the world and you're making fun of him for it. He was the victim of a horrible crime that wrecked his life (drug abuse and depression) and he is still human being enough to be concerned about the welfare of the person that did it to him.

[Blitzers]

That guy is one of the best people in the world and you're making fun of him for it. He was the victim of a horrible crime that wrecked his life (drug abuse and depression) and he is still human being enough to be concerned about the welfare of the person that did it to him.

So you are PRO-RAPE? If so please post a picture of self :) lol

[Cecily]

http://i.imgur.com/WOy14xV.jpg

[Cecily]

So you are PRO-RAPE?

If that's the take away you got from my post, our public education system has failed us so badly.

[sOurDieSel]

This is the perfect example of what is wrong with liberalism. You are literally defending a rapist under the guise of alturism. The fact you care about a rapist's feelings and well being shows you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I support capital punishment for all rapists and pedophiles.

[Cecily]

It's called forgiveness. It belongs to a higher order of things than law and retribution. And it's not my or your place to choose whether or not it's given.

[Blitzers]

If that's the take away you got from my post, our public education system has failed us so badly.

I think your 1st post to this thread is quite telling on why LIBERALISM is just another self mutilating ideology and why it must be purged from western society.

[Cecily]

I support capital punishment for all rapists and pedophiles.

You might be surprised to know that this isn't an uncommon opinion. I think I might even share it myself. Which is precisely why having a VICTIM have even a shred of empathy for the person who raped him is so surprising. That guy is a good person. You're an average American.

[Blitzers]

It's called forgiveness. It belongs to a higher order of things than law and retribution. And it's not my or your place to choose whether or not it's given.

Theres a difference between forgiveness and STUPIDITY. This is STUPIDITY.

[Blitzers]

You might be surprised to know that this isn't an uncommon opinion. I think I might even share it myself. Which is precisely why having a VICTIM have even a shred of empathy for the person who raped him is so surprising. That guy is a good person. You're an average American.

Somehow I don't think ISIS cares about you forgiving them.

[Cecily]

Please elaborate. Why is it stupid?

[Blitzers]

Please elaborate. Why is it stupid?

Your ignorance of the ISLAMIC ideology is quite sad. Islam doesn't respect the weak and THE QURAN views YOU as a TOOL to be used against western society. YOU EMBOLDEN the Enemies of western society. They know they can use you and your sickophant ideology to infiltrate your government/lands and when they become the majority will force their culture/religion/ideology upon you. Read the "Quran Dillemna" it's a great book that opens your mind to the truth of ISLAM and its ultimate goal. Research the Guise of Allah, you will find there is no such thing as a PEACEFUL ISLAM. Every member of that FAITH has a role to play in the TOTALITARIAN THEOCRACY Revealed to Muhammad. Islam is a death cult built on slavery and mutilation, your weakness only inspires them.

The only way to defeat the ideology is to destroy it.

[Cecily]

I don't think we're discussing Islam or the best way to destroy it in this thread. You and I, specifically, were discussing why forgiving someone who wronged you is stupidity. Would you like to answer that?

[Blitzers]

I don't think we're discussing Islam or the best way to destroy it in this thread. You and I, specifically, were discussing why forgiving someone who wronged you is stupidity. Would you like to answer that?

Has the rapists asked for forgiveness, has he served out punishment equal to his act?

Your NOT talking about FORGIVENESS, your only concern is your self righteousness. Don't give me this shit about forgiveness, when we're really talking about YOU thinking your sooooooooooo evolved compared to everyone else.

And we're specifically talking about the issue of the man being raped and then being a fool about.

[Cecily]

Well he served 4+ years in prison and was deported. So according to the country with jurisdiction, yes he has been punished. The guy we're speaking of feels guilty because he feels the deportation is a second punishment, after the guy had already served time. We Americans can relate to that with how we feel about double jeopardy.

And I don't think I'm being particularly self righteous. I do think you guys are being assholes about this and making it a big joke. Which happens far too often when men are victims of sexual assault. And you didn't answer my question.

[Danth]

Research the Guise of Allah, you will find there is no such thing as a PEACEFUL ISLAM.

This isn't entirely true; the Islamic notion of peace bears some similarity to the old Roman notion of peace. Peace is the end state which occurs once all enemies have been destroyed.

Danth

[Daywolf]

meh has nothing to do with forgiveness, self-righteousness or even time served really. It's a matter of prevention. As a victim you see to it that the person isn't just let go to do it to someone else tomorrow (literally). In this case the perpetrator was incarcerated and then kicked out of the country, proportionately correct under the circumstances of the case. His victims guilt is his own confusion, likely brought on by his progressive ideals.

As for executing such people, this would only result in a new assassin class to say the least. Hire an assassin to seduce someone, they cry rape, the mark is executed by the state. I can see a lot of flaws in disproportionate sentences, and likely leading to other such improper uses of justice such as executing the victim like they do under sharia law.

Any form of acceptable disproportionate extremism leads to a disproportionate counter extremism eventually, a cause and effect result. Western law is more based upon an eye for an eye, where as such executions under disproportionate measure within modern law practice I only know of by examples of sharia law, at least as practiced culturally among a number of countries rather than some often odd local law standards (e.g. laws of the wild west etc).

[Lune]

Cecily mowing down the savages ITT:

http://i.imgur.com/XZ88p7Y.gif

[Csihar]

Your ignorance of the ISLAMIC ideology is quite sad. Islam doesn't respect the weak and THE QURAN views YOU as a TOOL to be used against western society. YOU EMBOLDEN the Enemies of western society. They know they can use you and your sickophant ideology to infiltrate your government/lands and when they become the majority will force their culture/religion/ideology upon you. Read the "Quran Dillemna" it's a great book that opens your mind to the truth of ISLAM and its ultimate goal. Research the Guise of Allah, you will find there is no such thing as a PEACEFUL ISLAM. Every member of that FAITH has a role to play in the TOTALITARIAN THEOCRACY Revealed to Muhammad. Islam is a death cult built on slavery and mutilation, your weakness only inspires them.

The only way to defeat the ideology is to destroy it.

Impressive usage of capital letters here. I could really hear you yelling at the computer screen.

Seriously though, why read the Quran Dilemma? Why not read the actual Quran? Tells you much more. It's about as horrible as the Bible. Sometimes worse, sometimes better.

[iruinedyourday]

lal just came here to say OP knows FUCKALL about any body of land outside his flyover state.

[Blitzers]

Impressive usage of capital letters here. I could really hear you yelling at the computer screen.

Seriously though, why read the Quran Dilemma? Why not read the actual Quran? Tells you much more. It's about as horrible as the Bible. Sometimes worse, sometimes better.

The Quran promotes DECEIT, and characterizes Allahibaba as the "Greatest Deceiver of all" LITERALLY (Sura 3:54) No where in the Bible does it promote deceit or characterize God as a LIAR.

[Jarnauga]

I support capital punishment for all rapists and pedophiles.

Good, just like sharia laws :rolleyes:

[iruinedyourday]

I support capital punishment for shitposters like sOuR

[Danth]

It's hard to compare the two holy books. The Koran is portrayed as the literal word of God, written down by a single individual--a single, perfect, cohesive narrative. You're not really even supposed to translate it. By contrast the various books which compose the Bible were written by many different people over the span of centuries. Even if you limit yourself strictly to the New Testament you're looking at multiple authors, who didn't always agree on everything, with the most prolific being the self-described apostle Paul. He was something of an angry man who made use of the then-small Christian movement for his own political ends after Jesus' death (they never met). Given his dominance of the New Testament and his influence on the early church, the Christian faith is really more of a Paulsian faith, but that doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Simply put, if you argue with the Bible, you're simply arguing with Paul's or Luke's opinions and interpretations. If you argue with the Koran you're arguing against the (purported) direct word of God himself. The constant re-interpretations and infighting of the christian churches were one of the very issues Muhammed sought to resolve.

Danth

[iruinedyourday]

It's hard to compare the two holy books. The Koran is portrayed as the literal word of God, written down by a single individual--a single, perfect, cohesive narrative. You're not really even supposed to translate it. By contrast the various books which compose the Bible were written by many different people over the span of centuries. Even if you limit yourself strictly to the New Testament you're looking at multiple authors, who didn't always agree on everything, with the most prolific being the self-described apostle Paul. He was something of an angry man who made use of the then-small Christian movement for his own political ends after Jesus' death (they never met). Given his dominance of the New Testament and his influence on the early church, the Christian faith is really more of a Paulsian faith, but that doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Simply put, if you argue with the Bible, you're simply arguing with Paul's or Luke's opinions and interpretations. If you argue with the Koran you're arguing against the (purported) direct word of God himself. The constant re-interpretations and infighting of the christian churches were one of the very issues Muhammed sought to resolve.

Danth

You are really misguided here.

First of all, there are plenty of muslims that know the koran is not the literal word of god, just like there are many christians that know the bible is not the literal word of god.

But!.. Just like extremist muslims, there are a bunch of extremist christians that think the bible is the literal word of god.

Im sure that if the christians were from hell on earth area of the globe where they have been at war with people for melinia and are being bombed into the stone age by nearly every developed nation... they would be cutting off peoples heads too.

yall fuckn need to stop pretending that a bunch of fucking fat ass disgruntled nerds that play everquest for free arnt the first people that we should cull from society.

[Daywolf]

And in a single page, the forums IQ drops by 10 pts :o
And there ya have it :)

[sOurDieSel]

Good, just like sharia laws :rolleyes:

Except their prophet Mohammad was a pedophile and the majority of muslim's support pedophilia.

[sOurDieSel]

I support capital punishment for shitposters like sOuR

Thats liberalism for ya.

Free speech for me but not for you. Off to the gas chamber with your First Amendment rights !!

[Sidelle]

Well he served 4+ years in prison and was deported. So according to the country with jurisdiction, yes he has been punished. The guy we're speaking of feels guilty because he feels the deportation is a second punishment, after the guy had already served time. We Americans can relate to that with how we feel about double jeopardy.

And I don't think I'm being particularly self righteous. I do think you guys are being assholes about this and making it a big joke. Which happens far too often when men are victims of sexual assault. And you didn't answer my question.
You're right. Forgiveness is a personal thing that can only be given by the victim in this case. And it's never a joke when anyone is raped, male or female. I get that. What I'm having a hard time with is why the victim is so much more concerned about the rapist being deported back to Somalia as 'added punishment'. Of course it's more punishment! Or rather, consequences, for his own actions. Don't be a scumbag rapist or we'll have to decline your request for asylum. Simple as that. Sexual predators always re-offend and rape is a devastating crime. No one in their right mind should be more concerned with the future prospects of a rapist being given asylum when there are decent law-abiding asylum-seekers waiting in line that wouldn't go around victimizing people in their host countries.

Yeah let's just forgive him and let him stay so he can rape someone else because his life has been so hard, it's not his fault he's the way he is... etc etc...Only next time he'll murder his victims after raping them to avoid being sent to prison again. He absolutely deserved to fuck off back to Somalia. He screwed up his life all by himself because he's an evil fuck. Good riddance. I don't feel sorry for violent criminals, especially rapists and pedophiles.

I feel badly for the victim in this case and really hope he's getting the best psychological support available. It was really brave of him to speak out. Most of the time men won't even report being raped so they won't get the help they need. :(

[Daywolf]

All good, though pref better help than the kind of help that leads to being sad he gets deported. Regressive sjw help it seems to be in this case ;)

[AzzarTheGod]

That guy is one of the best people in the world and you're making fun of him for it. He was the victim of a horrible crime that wrecked his life (drug abuse and depression) and he is still human being enough to be concerned about the welfare of the person that did it to him.

Drug induced endorphin-seeking behavior.

Protracted opiate withdrawal and opiate abuse in general will make you cry, seek to right wrongs, and generally have you acting like an emotional wreck. It is considered a spiritual experience by ALL users of opiate and opioid drugs. In fact, most say this behavior is a requirement to staying clean. He may not have acted this way if he had not struggled with drugs.

If you have the life experience then you know:

One word sums this up: drugs

[Ennewi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sst041HiCUA&nohtml5=False

[Csihar]

The Quran promotes DECEIT, and characterizes Allahibaba as the "Greatest Deceiver of all" LITERALLY (Sura 3:54) No where in the Bible does it promote deceit or characterize God as a LIAR.

Again I'm impressed by the capital letters.

"And the Lord said to him, 'How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.'" (1 Kings 22:22)

The Bible does promote deceit, as you can see above. Also genocide, child murder, slavery, the smashing of babies on the rocks, presenting your virgin daughters for rape to save others, animal abuse etc.

And that Sura 3:54 verse is something that an Arabic speaking person might argue as "the greatest planner of all".

Doesn't matter either way. If it is the correct translation then both promote deceit.

Do you have a response to my question? Why not read the actual Quran to know what it says instead of reading a book about what the Quran says? Jevovah is a terrible entity in both books though. A little better in some aspects and a little worse in other aspects depending on the book.

It's hard to compare the two holy books. The Koran is portrayed as the literal word of God, written down by a single individual--a single, perfect, cohesive narrative. You're not really even supposed to translate it. By contrast the various books which compose the Bible were written by many different people over the span of centuries. Even if you limit yourself strictly to the New Testament you're looking at multiple authors, who didn't always agree on everything, with the most prolific being the self-described apostle Paul. He was something of an angry man who made use of the then-small Christian movement for his own political ends after Jesus' death (they never met). Given his dominance of the New Testament and his influence on the early church, the Christian faith is really more of a Paulsian faith, but that doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Simply put, if you argue with the Bible, you're simply arguing with Paul's or Luke's opinions and interpretations. If you argue with the Koran you're arguing against the (purported) direct word of God himself. The constant re-interpretations and infighting of the christian churches were one of the very issues Muhammed sought to resolve.

Danth

The fact that the Bible clearly has different authors and there are internal contradictions really only says something about its "authenticity" in terms of whether or not the Jewish and Christian faiths are true.

If you read the thing from front to back there is never any doubt that it's (just like the Quran but more poorly) presented as God's book. It's the guide to what God wants you to know and how He wants you to live.

The fact that so many people no longer take it literally has to do with a secular influence more than anything. It's difficult to square certain moral teachings in the Bible nowadays. It's difficult to square disease being the product of demons nowadays. There is ofcourse some serious debate about whether or not certain events are meant to be taken literally (The 7 day creation for example) but most events are presented as fact.
In a lot of the ways the Westborough Baptist Church is a proper representation of Christianity for example. It's not accurate to say "extremist" I think. I'd call most other Christians armchair Christians (that are going to hell according to the doctrine).
Same goes for Muslims and the Quran.

[Csihar]

So off-topic :)

[Daywolf]

Contributing to the OT in the OT https://youtu.be/fXZOPRcTqYU

[maskedmelon]

I don't think its useful to make fun of rape victims or draw comparisons between the Bible and the Qur'an because as my love points out, there are parallels when the two books are compared as a whole. I do think the man in OP is behaving foolishly though, but man always behaves foolishly when he abandons reason for principle.

The problems for Christianity are the dichotomy of the Old and New testaments, or the Tora and the teachings of Christ and his apostles. They offer two very different messages. The latter largely invalidates the former and that is important because it offers a mechanism within the ideology to unequivocally rebuke proponents of the former. Islam lacks that.

Additionally, most contemporary Protestant ministers teach passages from the Old Testament through a New Testament filter, because without Christ's perspective it's just Judaism, which has only been checked my millennia of persecution.

It honestly blows my mind though that most Christians do not favor a more liberal agenda given Christ's message of forgiveness and humility. It just goes to show that even with a tool for combatting disagreeable language, the presence of the language has a germane effect and offers an avenue for exploitation to which all ideologies are susceptible.

On of the problems for Islam, is (someone more versed in the Qur'an may correct me if I am wrong here) that one passage is no more authoritative than another. They are all words from the mouths of god and his apostle Mohammad. That means that even if you find a passage that preaches peace, there is nothing making it anymore valid than one preaching war. That is aside from the fact that most 'peaceful' language within the Qur'an is either concerned exclusively with Muslims or includes others in some underhanded fashion.

Christianity was stopped from being a global terror by disempowerment it and by extension minimizing the exploitation of it. There is no avenue to do that with Islam. It is a very real threat to humanity.

[Csihar]

Good post maskedmelon. There are reasons why Christianity will never be a threat on the same level as Islam but the difference doesn't really lie in the actual words.

Another thing I might add is that the Quran emphasizes the importance of actually following your Holy Book. It basically says the Jews receives the Word of God but didn't live up to His standards. The Christians received the Word of God and didn't live up to his standards. So now the Quran is more firm on living up to His standards. The Bible very clearly states that all these Sunday Christians who cherry-pick their passages are going to Hell so ultimately it has the same message but the Quran simply includes "REMINDER: ACTUALLY DO WHAT YOU'RE TOLD TO DO" every few pages.

Then there is also Arabic culture which slips in (I would argue that a lot of the women unfriendly attitude comes from that culture. The Quran is more pleasant for women than the Bible) and the political situation in the Middle East and North Africa. People have been invading Middle East for a very long time (pre-guns) and we're reaping the horrible fruits. It's a mixture of a lot of things + the religion.

[sOurDieSel]

People have been invading Middle East for a very long time (pre-guns) and we're reaping the horrible fruits. It's a mixture of a lot of things + the religion.

lol if you're referring to The Crusades.

Jihad vs Crusades (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo)

[Csihar]

lol if you're referring to The Crusades.

Jihad vs Crusades (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo)

I'm not.

"lol"

[maskedmelon]

Good post maskedmelon. There are reasons why Christianity will never be a threat on the same level as Islam but the difference doesn't really lie in the actual words.

Another thing I might add is that the Quran emphasizes the importance of actually following your Holy Book. It basically says the Jews receives the Word of God but didn't live up to His standards. The Christians received the Word of God and didn't live up to his standards. So now the Quran is more firm on living up to His standards. The Bible very clearly states that all these Sunday Christians who cherry-pick their passages are going to Hell so ultimately it has the same message but the Quran simply includes "REMINDER: ACTUALLY DO WHAT YOU'RE TOLD TO DO" every few pages.

Then there is also Arabic culture which slips in (I would argue that a lot of the women unfriendly attitude comes from that culture. The Quran is more pleasant for women than the Bible) and the political situation in the Middle East and North Africa. People have been invading Middle East for a very long time (pre-guns) and we're reaping the horrible fruits. It's a mixture of a lot of things + the religion.

I mostly agree with all of this, I just think you are still discounting the importance to christians of Christ, their namesake. The whole idea of christianity is that people no longer need to endure horrific penalties for ordinary actions everyone participates in because god sacrificed his own son so people would not have to pay for being their nasty selfs. That idea is what allows and encourages christians to function peacefully in society independent of Levitican law. And most do.

The west borough baptist church is a fringe group because it embraces principles, be they from the bible, that run contrary to Christ's later teachings, which Christianity is founded on. And most Christians whether they sympathize with the motives or not, call out that church on those grounds. That is something we don't get from followers of Islam. In fact we get the opposite and the reason is as you said, the law is they law, they've had no peaceful reformer who has said, "Hey, you don't have to do this anymore!"

[Csihar]

Would you mind replying to this quote attributed to Christ first?

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Not 100% sure of your point (I can see it going two ways) but I think your answer to this would clarify it. Also, it's always interesting to place this side by side with the whole "let he who is without sin.." bit.

[maskedmelon]

That quote is probably the best example of what I've said ^^. Blood sacrifice was the proscribed atonement for sin by the Hebrew god in the Old Testament. In the passage that you quoted, he is saying that atonement for all sin is achieved through his coming death.

The law demanded blood sacrifice for atonement of sin, a benevolent god sent his son in human form as sacrifice for global atonement, fulfilling the requirement of the law. That is central idea of Christianity: All people have done wrong and will go to hell, but for the sacrifice of a benevolent creator.

[Csihar]

I think especially among Messianic Jews it holds a very different meaning. The law also, in my understanding refers to the Torah (aka the Book of Laws).

"not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Here I see that the Law stands until the end of days.

But that's a different discussion.

I do understand and very much agree with your point (if I understand it correctly). Christians tend to look at Christ mostly and therefore use the New Testament as a guide. I agree that this is a factor which tends to differentiate Christians from Muslims in terms of violence.
I don't, however, feel it's Biblically justified. A lot of Christians speak of the Old Testament as if it's an old TV in the attic. Outdated, out of use and since been replaced wih the new TV.
The Old Testament simply means the divine contract of Abraham which preceeded the divine contract with Yeshua. It just means 'old' in terms of time.

Yeshua's "sacrifice" did negate the blood sacrifices (that God so enjoyed the aroma of) that were necessary in the times of the Old Testament and it introduced Heaven and "corrected" the mistakes of the Garden of Eden etc. but it didn't negate the Old Testament.

So I agree that Christ is the reason why Christians don't pose as much of a threat as Muslims but I don't think the difference is actually in the writing (which I'm not sure you disagree with).

Bit tired and wrote this out fast. But in short: I agree with your original point and I should have mentioned Christ in differentiating Islam and Christianity.

[AzzarTheGod]

lol if you're referring to The Crusades.

Jihad vs Crusades (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo)

I was taught in a 400 level course on the Crusades that there was a Golden Age of Islam (700 years occupational government), where Portugal, Spain and France prospered under the government of Islam for 700 years and allowed freedom of religious practices. Jews, Christians, Muslims practicing in the same city peacefully respecting each other. Everyone held hands.

They said that Spain initiated the crusades unfairly against a peaceful and benevolent government under, that government being that of Golden Age Islam. A regime which was "very tolerant", the "most tolerant" government that Europe had ever seen, in fact.

We were taught this verbatim. Something to consider there are two sides to every story. You link a youtube video, but what University does this Dr. teach at? What are his credentials?

Don't believe everything you see from some white guy.

[Daywolf]

I think especially among Messianic Jews it holds a very different meaning. The law also, in my understanding refers to the Torah (aka the Book of Laws).

"not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

Here I see that the Law stands until the end of days.

To quantify the bible in a simplistic way, from a point of it meaning what it says in a literal fashion (that what it says is what it means), the flow of the OT is looking forward to the future fulfillment of Christ on the cross, the work of redemption, while the NT is looking back to the fulfillment of Christ on the cross.

The OT not only looks forward to this work, but also provides a filter, in that no common man is able to fulfill, that man always falls short of perfection and in no way could fulfill the work of God's son on the cross. The law, especially, was put there not to save in any way, but is death to man, as no man can pass through such a filter, but only look forward to one that can and will do so.

Now looking back as the NT does, the law was fulfilled, it served it's purpose, and is credited so by Christ who fulfilled the law, applied to him. It's not gone, it's just fulfilled, and a reminder that only the Christ had the ability to fulfill the requirements of the law, and even still today no other who attempts to fullil that law is able to, even though they can try if they wish as it hasn't been taken away or destroyed.

So in other words, the law is still there if you want to try to prove that you are the real christ spoken of in the bible (and needs to be perfect from birth to grave). But for everyone else, it was already fulfilled and now it is replaced with grace thru the one that fulfilled it.



"And the Lord said to him, 'How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.'" (1 Kings 22:22)

The Bible does promote deceit, as you can see above.

That was from the deceiving spirit, not God directly. I see no problem with it. umm... I'll put it this way in context of the thread. The man got raped, the victim turned in the perpetrator in which he went to prison. You know what happens in prisons? Robbery, rape, murder etc. and the perpetrator became subject of that by being sent to it. Oh and then deported.

Now did the victim directly send the perpetrator there himself and by his own power? No, someone else, like a judge or magistrate, they sent him there on behalf of the victim who sent the judge to deal with him. Does that mean the perpetrator is now the victim and the victim the perpetrator since all the unspeakable things are or may be happening to him in prison? That would be nuts, the victim is still only the victim and whatever happens to the perpetrator, it's of no fault of the victim. The victim didn't pass sentence, didn't judge him, only testified.

This is no different. This was a judgement carried out, and the spirit used deception to do it, no different than in a modern court of law with lawyers and such. Do we throw judges into prison dependent on what lawyers, juries, witnesses, bystanders do? If we don't like the way the layers handle things to make a case do we throw them out and let the defendant fend for himself? No, the lawyers do what they do, however they may do it by their own choices, their own discretion. Even the prison warden is not micro-managed by the judge, has their own task and their own choices in which to deal with things.

See if we follow the other logic, we close all prisons, no more judges, no more lawyers. Then everyone becomes a victim and a perpetrator, just as much as the victim in this case feels as a perpetrator over the rapist being deported. I could probably write this better, more understandable, but I'll roll with it.

[eadric]

I was taught in a 400 level course on the Crusades that there was a Golden Age of Islam (700 years occupational government), where Portugal, Spain and France prospered under the government of Islam for 700 years and allowed freedom of religious practices. Jews, Christians, Muslims practicing in the same city peacefully respecting each other. Everyone held hands.

They said that Spain initiated the crusades unfairly against a peaceful and benevolent government under, that government being that of Golden Age Islam. A regime which was "very tolerant", the "most tolerant" government that Europe had ever seen, in fact.

We were taught this verbatim. Something to consider there are two sides to every story. You link a youtube video, but what University does this Dr. teach at? What are his credentials?

Don't believe everything you see from some white guy.It sounds to me that you had a biased professor. The true history of the Iberian peninsula is extremely complex. Were the Moors morally better or worse than the primitive Christians they conquered or the militant Catholics they were pushed out by? That's a matter for debate.

[Csihar]

That was from the deceiving spirit, not God directly. I see no problem with it. umm... I'll put it this way in context of the thread. The man got raped, the victim turned in the perpetrator in which he went to prison. You know what happens in prisons? Robbery, rape, murder etc. and the perpetrator became subject of that by being sent to it. Oh and then deported.

Now did the victim directly send the perpetrator there himself and by his own power? No, someone else, like a judge or magistrate, they sent him there on behalf of the victim who sent the judge to deal with him. Does that mean the perpetrator is now the victim and the victim the perpetrator since all the unspeakable things are or may be happening to him in prison? That would be nuts, the victim is still only the victim and whatever happens to the perpetrator, it's of no fault of the victim. The victim didn't pass sentence, didn't judge him, only testified.

This is no different. This was a judgement carried out, and the spirit used deception to do it, no different than in a modern court of law with lawyers and such. Do we throw judges into prison dependent on what lawyers, juries, witnesses, bystanders do? If we don't like the way the layers handle things to make a case do we throw them out and let the defendant fend for himself? No, the lawyers do what they do, however they may do it by their own choices, their own discretion. Even the prison warden is not micro-managed by the judge, has their own task and their own choices in which to deal with things.

See if we follow the other logic, we close all prisons, no more judges, no more lawyers. Then everyone becomes a victim and a perpetrator, just as much as the victim in this case feels as a perpetrator over the rapist being deported. I could probably write this better, more understandable, but I'll roll with it.

Remember that I was replying to Blitzers. In the passage God sanctions the deceit, which I find to be of equal footing with the quote from the Quran. I made no judgement about God's action itself, it was all just pointing out the error in Blitzers' post.

I don't really see how that led you to the rest of your post.

Regardless, I don't think any analogy comparing human beings with God ever works. God is not a human being and the circumstances are never, ever the same.

To quantify the bible in a simplistic way, from a point of it meaning what it says in a literal fashion (that what it says is what it means), the flow of the OT is looking forward to the future fulfillment of Christ on the cross, the work of redemption, while the NT is looking back to the fulfillment of Christ on the cross.

The OT not only looks forward to this work, but also provides a filter, in that no common man is able to fulfill, that man always falls short of perfection and in no way could fulfill the work of God's son on the cross. The law, especially, was put there not to save in any way, but is death to man, as no man can pass through such a filter, but only look forward to one that can and will do so.

Now looking back as the NT does, the law was fulfilled, it served it's purpose, and is credited so by Christ who fulfilled the law, applied to him. It's not gone, it's just fulfilled, and a reminder that only the Christ had the ability to fulfill the requirements of the law, and even still today no other who attempts to fullil that law is able to, even though they can try if they wish as it hasn't been taken away or destroyed.

So in other words, the law is still there if you want to try to prove that you are the real christ spoken of in the bible (and needs to be perfect from birth to grave). But for everyone else, it was already fulfilled and now it is replaced with grace thru the one that fulfilled it.

Remember that the OT is only the OT for Christians. Your interpretation would not be agreed with by any Jewish person. Considering the Old Testament/Tanakh and even the New Testament are very much Jewish books I tend to side with the Jewish interpretation.
The Christian version (and I think 'version' is the right word here) is marred by its translation, politics and non-Jewish interpretation.

To be a bit less general, I'm not seeing why 'the law' is being interpreted as the messianic prophecy? Why does 'the Law' not refer to the Torah? The numerous laws have been summarized into 1 or 2 sentences (can't remember which) even before Christ.

[sOurDieSel]

I was taught in a 400 level course on the Crusades that there was a Golden Age of Islam (700 years occupational government), where Portugal, Spain and France prospered under the government of Islam for 700 years and allowed freedom of religious practices. Jews, Christians, Muslims practicing in the same city peacefully respecting each other. Everyone held hands.

They said that Spain initiated the crusades unfairly against a peaceful and benevolent government under, that government being that of Golden Age Islam. A regime which was "very tolerant", the "most tolerant" government that Europe had ever seen, in fact.

We were taught this verbatim. Something to consider there are two sides to every story. You link a youtube video, but what University does this Dr. teach at? What are his credentials?

Don't believe everything you see from some white guy.

I'm not surprised you were 'taught' that in school. Most history in schools is taught as "White Europeans are bad bad bad, everyone else was good good good." The notion of other people like Christians and Jews being happy and 'prosperous' under a 'benevolent' and 'tolerant' Islamic rule is laughable, because it sure isn't like that today with the Religion of Peace.

Why does it matter if the guy is White, if he had brown skin would you believe him then? I researched the facts and drew my own conclusion. One conclusion being that I nor anyone else I know would EVER want to live under Islamic rule no matter how 'tolerant' and 'benevolent' it may be.

It sounds to me that you had a biased professor. The true history of the Iberian peninsula is extremely complex. Were the Moors morally better or worse than the primitive Christians they conquered or the militant Catholics they were pushed out by? That's a matter for debate.

I'm sure his professor was just teaching the normal Cultural Marxism that is prevalent at all levels of schooling as required curriculum. I doubt he informed you about the White Europeans (Christians) enslaved by the Moors either.

[Daywolf]

Remember that I was replying to Blitzers. In the passage God sanctions the deceit, which I find to be of equal footing with the quote from the Quran. I made no judgement about God's action itself, it was all just pointing out the error in Blitzers' post.

I don't really see how that led you to the rest of your post.

Regardless, I don't think any analogy comparing human beings with God ever works. God is not a human being and the circumstances are never, ever the same.

You mean God the Father? Analogies are all there, among other things, in every place you look. Archetypes, analogies, metaphors, just different ways to coney a structured logic in a message, and usually well formatted so not to confuse say metaphoric parables with historic accounts of specific people and events etc.

But Blitz puts it, God cannot lie. And your response is by proxy, that he deceives. But this was a judgement, and that from their own doing and by the will of the deceiving spirit (which are usually demons). In this case God allowed it, just as he allows suffering and free-will etc. The bible doesn't "promote" deceit, just recognizes it.



Remember that the OT is only the OT for Christians. Your interpretation would not be agreed with by any Jewish person. Considering the Old Testament/Tanakh and even the New Testament are very much Jewish books I tend to side with the Jewish interpretation.
The Christian version (and I think 'version' is the right word here) is marred by its translation, politics and non-Jewish interpretation.

To be a bit less general, I'm not seeing why 'the law' is being interpreted as the messianic prophecy? Why does 'the Law' not refer to the Torah? The numerous laws have been summarized into 1 or 2 sentences (can't remember which) even before Christ.What, relative truth? i.e. what is true for me is not necessarily true for you? People can be 100% wrong and in denial of it. Gosh, human history shows this so well, people can be wrong. The only way that could be is by absolute truth. Even relative truth at it's core is defeated by absolute truth. One would say what is true for you may not be true for me, well that in itself is an absolute truth, or attempts to be, this defeats itself.

So yeah, at a point, things changed (were fulfilled as I explained), and in an absolute way, for everyone, as happens by many examples. Those that stayed with what was... well are in error. After all, in this case, the beginnings of the church were 100% jews until it was given to Paul to reveal it to the gentiles as well. Even today, jews still become Christians, while others don't.

Now, there is a movement like that, it's called Eccumenicalism, in which a form of relative truth is practiced. In this case, Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, everything and everything, is all the same one in all and all in one. imo defies logic though, even mathematically. 1 + 1 always equals 2 no matter what the new logic in colleges try to teach which is relative logic/truth (e.g. 1 + 1 is not always 2). So it's not really by a basis of any spiritual belief that I think it's kinda bunk, but that there is mathematical logic that never takes everything and adds it together to make up some relative product that works for every answer or position.

[Daywolf]

Remember that the OT is only the OT for Christians. Your interpretation would not be agreed with by any Jewish person. Considering the Old Testament/Tanakh and even the New Testament are very much Jewish books I tend to side with the Jewish interpretation.
The Christian version (and I think 'version' is the right word here) is marred by its translation, politics and non-Jewish interpretation.

To be a bit less general, I'm not seeing why 'the law' is being interpreted as the messianic prophecy? Why does 'the Law' not refer to the Torah? The numerous laws have been summarized into 1 or 2 sentences (can't remember which) even before Christ.So to expound on this a little more clearly (was in a rush to go somewhere), this isn't true of all jews. Like I said some do become Christians even today, as has happened the past couple thousand years and even started as such.

Interpretation is not withstanding here, as I pointed out from saying a generally 'what it says is what it means' prospective. I'm just not defining the nuances here for great wall of text sake. And really, much of today's Judaism is not so much based on the original Abrahamic religion as given to the 12 tribes, but engrossed with it's own commentaries which propel themselves over the actual text of the scriptures. Which was true to even 2k years ago, and part of the message given within the NT and the many commentaries delivered by the first century church about the issue.

I mean after all, even as you said "jewish interpretation", but you do realize there were another 11 tribes those scriptures were delivered to, right? These tribes were dispersed, but very likely still exist today by blood line anyway, possibly regionally at that. And 2k years ago this issue with the jews were in question, even to rebuke, to just how they interpreted what they did believe, because they really didn't believe, not all of them anyway. And note the correction was made, and the scriptures as well dispersed and back into the hands of those lost tribes and the rest of the world as well. It wasn't exclusively a jewish religion to start with, and still isn't today due to what transpired 2k years ago.