Our attitude concerning mockery of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
- Thread starter tresbien
- Start date
Oh ,ok I see now kadark, if a country is divided and or poorly governed it is ok to invade and occupy it, I should have seen it before, my bad.
How do you think the Byzantine Empire got so big? It conquered and invaded every place that was weaker than it. In the end, Byzantine suffered the same fate as the bigger, badder Ottomans strolled into town. All empires experience this, so excuse me if I refuse to shed a tear for the Turkish domination of Byzantine.
Kadark the Adroit
There is a third possibility: permitted or allowed. Imposed, not offered; avoidable, not avoided.SAM said:
Again, if you want the Christian take on this, ask the Christians - I assure you, there has been much thought and deep consideration of the nature of the Crucifixion and so forth. Arsalan is not pointing out matters that the Christian theologians have overlooked all these centuries.
Well, what would you do? You're a human, aren't you? I expect you'd be a bit nervous probably.
That's the beauty of it - He was like us, just for a while. It's very, very humbling.
And telling them, when they give it to you, that they're missing the point. And forcing them to repeat themselves by a willful refusal to consider what they have actually said.SAM said:
You might even be able to find a Christian or two you can trap in a confusion or doctrinal inconsistency. Then what ?
The point was to redeem.SAM said:
I'm addressing Arsalan's point there, which I believe Geoff was missing. Perhaps the concept of martyrdom is different in the eastern context. One does not complain while committing hara kiri, so to say. If its a noble and just cause that one is giving up all for, one does it like a "hero" with impassioned speeches on the cause, rather than grumbling about the suffering involved. I'm not negating their belief, I just don't comprehend why they call it sacrifice. It doesn't look like a choice.
It is you who have missed Geoff's points. Arsalan's are simplistic, and reveal a basic incomprehension of Christian belief. Geoff is responding as a believer, and correcting Arsalan as well as you.SAM said:
And shallower, less meaningful ? Apparently, if you and Arsalan speak for the "eastern context". But not beyond an easterner's understanding, surely, if approached in good faith.SAM said:
Guess its just a difference in outlook, but then I don't see any believing Christians endorsing redemption over punishment, which makes me wonder at their belief. In fact, all their heroes appear to follow the shallow meaningless model.
You won't see many things, if you don't look around.SAM said:
Here's a start, in the Protestant tradition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Berry
Among his many books, the book of essays entitled "Sex, Economy, Freedom, and Community" might prove accessible, and he was old enough without being too old when he wrote it. One of the essays is labeled "Peaceableness Toward Enemies", and makes a reasonable introduction to that particular believing Christian's approach. It begins in consideration of the Gulf War of '91, which was recently over at its writing.
Last edited:
So would Wendell Berry believe that a murderer be forgiven and sent home because Christ died for him? I'm trying to understand why Christians hold this belief; most Christian nations follow the Islamic model of justice and western (mostly Christian) human rights organisations have even criticised those Islamic states where forgiveness is a model of justice, although it is based on a Quranic injunction that to pardon is better than to punish.