Again, I don't disagree. Your experience with your jewish pal does flag up the problem of comparing elements of religion, especially when as you say, they do all see, to be strange to say the least. When you say that the book is open to interpretation, that to me is part of the problem. If they are interpreting it differently, then where are they drawing these alternative values from? The books in themselves are not the answer, in fact in many respects they are more than just a part of the problem, particularly when someone holds its contents to force their views on others. How can an atheist, heathen etc blaspheme?
You're mixing up the existence of God with the words in the various holy books. The words in the books are disprovable in so far as them being the word of god. I've already given one example of why.
Reading from an Asian paper yesterday whilst I was at a family. Apparently it's only applicable to Muslims of Brunei
Corbyn: I strongly disagree with what Filou said and he should be disciplined. Journalist: So your saying that you hate Israel...
Makes for interesting reading. The bits about the planets they knew about, and other things that have later turned out to be accurate, leave big questions about their version of our creation. You can certainly see it in the later 'holy' books.
I just find people who are against faiths...rarely know the depths of a faith. Just a bit they heard from their mates and the rest from what TV and other forms of media has taught them through life. I'm responsible for my own actions and no scripture has ever encouraged me to just blame it on God.
Not completely true. Certain laws are only applicable to Muslims but certainly those concerning adultery and homosexual sex are applicable to all. Only been there once - probably the worlds most boring country.
I don't know about the place in terms of never been But in what I was reading it was a specifically in this new issue. What it said was that it was applicable to the Muslim citizens of Brunei and that 3 witnesses needed to come forward to prove any such act/action took place. Here's an interesting thought, nno that it would work, but if you are a practising Muslim/christian/Jew etc then say you broke one of your own rules, should you get your own punishment? So a thief gets hand cut off (after all particular criteria is fulfilled not like Saudi etc). After all if you truly "believe" then the punishment is administered so it's dealt with here and not the hereafter?
The Aussies didn't have much chance - now they've absolutely none. Would be funny if they didn't make it through the pool stage...
I kinda feel the same, though I do kind of enjoy watching people who hate DMD squirm and feel uncomfortable when they agree with him "If he is right, then I want to be wrong!" please log in to view this image
They made false assumptions and applied labels on the strength of them almost from the off. Whenever they've got into a serious conversation, they turn out to not just agree with most of my principles, but show themselves to be much further to the right than I am. They've spent much of the last few years confused because reality doesn't fit their fantasy. When it creeps in, they claim I must be lying.
Certainly seen the bit about the witnesses, who must be of high moral standing, and also seen that the Sultan has said that he doesn't intend for the punishments to actually be used but that they should act as a deterrent to make people stop doing these 'crimes'! Does it actually say in the Quran that if you accept your punishment on earth then its considered dealt with. I understood that if you repent your actions afterwards you should be forgiven and Allah will also forgive you. Presumably if you don't repent your actions you are punished and are you not forgiven?
