Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Does Islam preach forcible conversion?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by eider View Post
    Are you claiming that Iranian Bahais do not and cannot visit the temple on Mount Carmel? They can you know.
    NOT from Iran.


    Sadly, once a Bahai World would be established, the Bahai World Government (UHJ) can decide to take notice of those entries in the Bayan.
    Since enrollment is voluntary, and being extremely hypothetical about the distant future, your assertion is false.


    Here you go........... some Iranian Bahais who traveled to Israel, they got in to some trouble but they were there, alright.

    Iran claims arrested Baha’i members were spying for Israel

    Officials says two of 14 detainees were trained at Baha’i center in Haifa, formed network in region; religious group says they were studying social causes
    They were accused of being spies, which is the modus operandi of the Iran government, No it is not safe for Baha'is to even try, even if a few are able to bribe there way. I sincerely believe that these Baha'is were set up to be arrested upon return from the beginning.

    Your very gullible concerning the Iran government. To be a member of the Baha'i Faith is illegal in Iran. They step on when and where they choose/
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-15-2023, 12:01 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • [QUOTE=shunyadragon;n1465989]

      NOT from Iran./QUOTE]
      Huh? Waitasec.......

      Since enrollment is voluntary, and being extremely hypothetical about the distant future, your assertion is false.
      The future? Oh, for sure, Bahai will never become a Bahai World, the people of the world will see to that.
      But Bahai would like to, it even has criminal and civil legislation all ready to launch, with punishments extending to execution, even.
      All hypothetical..... won't ever actually happen.

      They were accused of being spies, which is the modus operandi of the Iran government, No it is not safe for Baha'is to even try, even if a few are able to bribe there way. I sincerely believe that these Baha'is were set up to be arrested upon return from the beginning.
      Hang on! THey never even went there! NOT FROM IRAN!

      Your very gullible concerning the Iran government. To be a member of the Baha'i Faith is illegal in Iran. They step on when and where they choose/
      We (here) don't much like the Iranian government, we here that many of the women (not Bahais) that have been demonstrating for freedom from dress codes have disappeared or been publicly executed. But as far as I know, no Bahais were executed last year.
      There are 300,000 Bahais in Iran, and as far as I know not one of the 45,000 boat people landing on our beaches to seek asylum was one of them.

      You tell me that Bahai cannot leave Iran......... are you suggesting that Iran likes Bahais to stay in Iran? That all looks rather wobbly, no?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by eider View Post
        NOT from Iran.
        Huh? Waitasec.......


        The future? Oh, for sure, Bahai will never become a Bahai World, the people of the world will see to that.
        But Bahai would like to, it even has criminal and civil legislation all ready to launch, with punishments extending to execution, even.
        All hypothetical..... won't ever actually happen.
        Hypothetical in the distant future is not a reasonable argument for anything that may happen hundreds of years ot thousand years in the future.


        Hang on! THey never even went there! NOT FROM IRAN!
        I know many Baha'is that escaped Iran, lost relatives executed in Iran, and are in prison in Iran. They even executed a young girl and US citizen for being a Baha'i


        We (here) don't much like the Iranian government, we here that many of the women (not Bahais) that have been demonstrating for freedom from dress codes have disappeared or been publicly executed. But as far as I know, no Bahais were executed last year.
        There are 300,000 Bahais in Iran, and as far as I know not one of the 45,000 boat people landing on our beaches to seek asylum was one of them.
        There is not much for anybody to like concerning the current government of Iran. The persecution of Baha'is and subjugation of women are only part of the human rights violations of Iran.

        You tell me that Bahai cannot leave Iran......... are you suggesting that Iran likes Bahais to stay in Iran? That all looks rather wobbly, no?
        Not whobly at all. Allowing Baha'is to leave Iran would encourage growth in world outside and would have more testimony of the persecution of Baha'is in Iran.
        Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-16-2023, 07:40 AM.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

          So as expected you pirouette away from addressing your mistakes.


          I'll put the list of sources up that I've provided against Donner and Crone any day of the week.

          It's relatively easy to find sources that parrot nonsense. There are scores of them out there. I mean I've cited one who insist that jihad is about women's rights and resisting apartheid

          Farid Esack, a visiting Professor at Auburn Theological Seminary, even told those gullible enough to believe him that jihad has nothing to do with waging Holy War to spread Islam but instead was all about (are you ready for this?) "resisting apartheid or working for women's rights." Riiiiight. Jihad is all about "working for women's rights."


          And there are those who will blindly accept and regurgitate this sort of taqqiya/idtirar.

          Now, one of your own sources states

          Once the war was over, people received dhimma in return for the payment of jizya and were generally left in peace


          Are you, apparently unlike your source, ready to discuss dhimmitude and exactly what that entailed? As I've already said, if you think stuff like Jim Crow laws were incredibly unjust, you probably won't be a fan of dhimmitude.

          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

            NO! Not a single source over the course of this thread. Revered Scholars in the history of both Islam and Christianity advocated forced conversioan and worse.


            Again your extreme biased view is classic ignoring the facts of history where Christians committed forced conversion and worse and believed it Biblical. The recent history of forced conversion in church Native American Christian schools is a classic example up into the 1950's and 60's.
            Still waiting for you to show where Jesus not demanded forcible conversions like Muhammad. Heck, I'll even take where he merely condoned it. Sheesh, at this point I'll even take a quote from someone who forcibly converted saying that Jesus commanded it.

            So far you've flailed and failed in all instances.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              Still waiting for you to show where Jesus not demanded forcible conversions like Muhammad. Heck, I'll even take where he merely condoned it. Sheesh, at this point I'll even take a quote from someone who forcibly converted saying that Jesus commanded it.

              So far you've flailed and failed in all instances.
              Again, in all the ancient tribal scriptures like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam they most oft selectively cited to justify the agenda of the believers. Remember, Christians follow the ENTIRE Bible as the Revelation of God's Word, and the slaughter, threats against non-believers occur throughout the Bible. The following is an example of a New Testament parable told by Jesus.

              Source: https://truthbook.com/jesus/parables...sent-landlord/


              "There was a good man who was a householder, and he planted a vineyard. He set a hedge about it, dug a pit for the wine press, and built a watchtower for the guards. Then he let this vineyard out to tenants while he went on a long journey into another country. And when the season of the fruits drew near, he sent servants to the tenants to receive his rental. But they took counsel among themselves and refused to give these servants the fruits due their master; instead, they fell upon his servants, beating one, stoning another, and sending the others away empty-handed. And when the householder heard about all this, he sent other and more trusted servants to deal with these wicked tenants, and these they wounded and also treated shamefully. And then the householder sent his favorite servant, his steward, and him they killed. And still, in patience and with forbearance, he dispatched many other servants, but none would they receive. Some they beat, others they killed, and when the householder had been so dealt with, he decided to send his son to deal with these ungrateful tenants, saying to himself, `They may mistreat my servants, but they will surely show respect for my beloved son.' But when these unrepentant and wicked tenants saw the son, they reasoned among themselves: `This is the heir; come, let us kill him and then the inheritance will be ours.' So they laid hold on him, and after casting him out of the vineyard, they killed him. When the lord of that vineyard shall hear how they have rejected and killed his son, what will he do to those ungrateful and wicked tenants?"

              And when the people heard this parable and the question Jesus asked, they answered, "He will destroy those miserable men and let out his vineyard to other and honest farmers who will render to him the fruits in their season." And when some of them who heard perceived that this parable referred to the Jewish nation and its treatment of the prophets and to the impending rejection of Jesus and the gospel of the kingdom, they said in sorrow, "God forbid that we should go on doing these things."
              Jesus saw a group of the Sadducees and Pharisees making their way through the crowd, and he paused for a moment until they drew near him, when he said: "You know how your fathers rejected the prophets, and you well know that you are set in your hearts to reject the Son of Man." And then, looking with searching gaze upon those priests and elders who were standing near him, Jesus said: "Did you never read in the Scripture about the stone which the builders rejected, and which, when the people had discovered it, was made into the cornerstone? And so once more do I warn you that, if you continue to reject this gospel, presently will the kingdom of God be taken away from you and be given to a people willing to receive the good news and to bring forth the fruits of the spirit And there is a mystery about this stone, seeing that whoso falls upon it, while he is thereby broken in pieces, shall be saved; but on whomsoever this stone falls, he will be ground to dust and his ashes scattered to the four winds."

              When the Pharisees heard these words, they understood that Jesus referred to themselves and the other Jewish leaders. They greatly desired to lay hold on him then and there, but they feared the multitude. However, they were so angered by the Master's words that they withdrew and held further counsel among themselves as to how they might bring about his death. (173:4.2)

              © Copyright Original Source


              You are still avoiding the FACTs that throughout the history of Christianity forced conversion, persecution and the slaughter of nonbelievers is far too common, and they indeed believed that they were following the teachings of Jesus. The ancient tribal scripture of Christianity and Judaism contain both citations of tolerance, and absolute intolerance and persecution and death of non-believers.

              The parable clearly threatens non-believers with their life if they do not convert. There is also the history of 'Conversion by the sword' practiced since Constantine.
              Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-16-2023, 08:12 AM.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                The basic question that rogue06 needs to address is how does he rationalise his various statements about forced conversion being a central tenet of Islam - including these more recent remarks:




                And



                With as Donner notes, evidence that:

                churches that are not destroyed—but, rather, continue in use for a century or more after the "conquest"—or evidence that new churches [with dated mosaic floors] were being constructed.[...] why evidence of widespread destruction of towns, churches, and so on, is largely lacking in the archaeological evidence of relatively well-explored areas, such as Syria-Palestine.


                Or as Crone notes:

                But the conquered population at large rarely seems to have been given a choice between conversion and death, and it is by omitting this point that the stereotype misleads. Once the war was over, people received dhimma in return for the payment of jizya and were generally left in peace, again whether they were pagans or People of the Book. One should not think of jihād as something conducted along the lines of Charlemagne's forced conversion of the Saxons.
                You really are thick aren't you?

                I'll type this really slow in hopes you can follow.

                Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians are people of the Book and therefore aren't required to convert. This is something I've pointed out again and again in this thread.

                If Muslims were allowing pagans to become dhimmis then they were going against what Muhammad expressly taught -- particularly surah 9:5 (Ayat al-Sayf or the Verse of the Sword) which abrogated (nullified) ALL previous verses calling for peaceful co-existence. The doctrine of abrogation is stated in the Qur'an itself (2:106): "Such of our revelation as we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof." So a later statement that contradicts an earlier one is thought to be better and abrogates the earlier statement.

                Abrogation not only included the abolishing, dropping or replacing of a verse by another (often contradictory) verse, but it also includes abolishing a provision of a verse without eliminating its wording or text from the qur'an. So the verses that were later repealed and replaced remain in the Qur'an but are no longer in effect.

                Some Muslims, knowing that most non-Muslims are not familiar with abrogation will quite cheerfully engage in taqqiya/idtirar and cite the earlier abrogated ayats and pretend that they are still valid. And you'll get more than a few western scholars who will ignorantly parrot it.

                But, as eider has shown, Muslims don't always follow Muhammad's explicit instructions, like where the Iranian government allows a substantial number of followers of Baha'ism to exist (even though they are subjected to an incredible level of discrimination -- very similar to dhimmitude).

                Just like Christians don't always follow the teachings of Jesus (although I'll bet that you already knew that) like when they would forcibly convert. Particularly when they do so in the name of Jesus (although I'm still waiting for @shunyadargon to show his evidence that some of those quoted Jesus saying that forcible conversions were the way to go).

                So, once again, as the qur'an and hadiths make clear, Muslims are required to forcibly convert people to Islam. The only exception allowed are those who are considered people of the Book -- and they are subject to oppressive dhimmitude meaning if they keep their heads down, are careful and pay the tax that permits them to exit (and boy you'd be surprised what the paying of that entails!) they'll be just fine.



                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                  Again, in all the ancient tribal scriptures like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam they most oft selectively cited to justify the agenda of the believers. Remember, Christians follow the ENTIRE Bible as the Revelation of God's Word, and the slaughter, threats against non-believers occur throughout the Bible. The following is an example of a New Testament parable told by Jesus.
                  Fine. Show me where in the Bible that Jesus instructed His followers to force people to become Christians

                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Source: https://truthbook.com/jesus/parables...sent-landlord/


                  "There was a good man who was a householder, and he planted a vineyard. He set a hedge about it, dug a pit for the wine press, and built a watchtower for the guards. Then he let this vineyard out to tenants while he went on a long journey into another country. And when the season of the fruits drew near, he sent servants to the tenants to receive his rental. But they took counsel among themselves and refused to give these servants the fruits due their master; instead, they fell upon his servants, beating one, stoning another, and sending the others away empty-handed. And when the householder heard about all this, he sent other and more trusted servants to deal with these wicked tenants, and these they wounded and also treated shamefully. And then the householder sent his favorite servant, his steward, and him they killed. And still, in patience and with forbearance, he dispatched many other servants, but none would they receive. Some they beat, others they killed, and when the householder had been so dealt with, he decided to send his son to deal with these ungrateful tenants, saying to himself, `They may mistreat my servants, but they will surely show respect for my beloved son.' But when these unrepentant and wicked tenants saw the son, they reasoned among themselves: `This is the heir; come, let us kill him and then the inheritance will be ours.' So they laid hold on him, and after casting him out of the vineyard, they killed him. When the lord of that vineyard shall hear how they have rejected and killed his son, what will he do to those ungrateful and wicked tenants?"

                  And when the people heard this parable and the question Jesus asked, they answered, "He will destroy those miserable men and let out his vineyard to other and honest farmers who will render to him the fruits in their season." And when some of them who heard perceived that this parable referred to the Jewish nation and its treatment of the prophets and to the impending rejection of Jesus and the gospel of the kingdom, they said in sorrow, "God forbid that we should go on doing these things."
                  Jesus saw a group of the Sadducees and Pharisees making their way through the crowd, and he paused for a moment until they drew near him, when he said: "You know how your fathers rejected the prophets, and you well know that you are set in your hearts to reject the Son of Man." And then, looking with searching gaze upon those priests and elders who were standing near him, Jesus said: "Did you never read in the Scripture about the stone which the builders rejected, and which, when the people had discovered it, was made into the cornerstone? And so once more do I warn you that, if you continue to reject this gospel, presently will the kingdom of God be taken away from you and be given to a people willing to receive the good news and to bring forth the fruits of the spirit And there is a mystery about this stone, seeing that whoso falls upon it, while he is thereby broken in pieces, shall be saved; but on whomsoever this stone falls, he will be ground to dust and his ashes scattered to the four winds."

                  When the Pharisees heard these words, they understood that Jesus referred to themselves and the other Jewish leaders. They greatly desired to lay hold on him then and there, but they feared the multitude. However, they were so angered by the Master's words that they withdrew and held further counsel among themselves as to how they might bring about his death. (173:4.2)

                  © Copyright Original Source
                  You're joking right?

                  [*checks calendar to make sure it isn't April 1st*]

                  Seriously?

                  That is what you think constitutes Jesus telling His followers to force people to become Christians?

                  You need to have a nice long lie down after which have a talk with your doctor about your prescriptions.


                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  You are still avoiding the FACTs that throughout the history of Christianity forced conversion, persecution and the slaughter of nonbelievers is far too common, and they indeed believed that they were following the teachings of Jesus. The ancient tribal scripture of Christianity and Judaism contain both citations of tolerance, and absolute intolerance and persecution and death of non-believers.
                  I've never avoided it. I've openly and repeatedly acknowledged it over and over.

                  Now what you have definitely avoided (projection?) is that while Christians were doing so they had to be directly ignoring what Jesus taught -- unlike the Muslims who were expressly taught to forcibly convert.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    So, once again, as the qur'an and hadiths make clear, Muslims are required to forcibly convert people to Islam. The only exception allowed are those who are considered people of the Book -- and they are subject to oppressive dhimmitude meaning if they keep their heads down, are careful and pay the tax that permits them to exit (and boy you'd be surprised what the paying of that entails!) they'll be just fine.
                    If the people of the Book managed to get too far ahead of the average Muslim despite dhimmitude, they ran the risk of getting whacked en masse (the Armenian Genocide was not an isolated incident). It's also rather easy to force dhimmis to convert; all it takes is a jealous neighbor to allege that you've converted (which, after all requires only a short recitation), and you're now a Muslim - and if you protest otherwise, it's grounds for execution because of apostasy.
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post




                      So, once again, as the qur'an and hadiths make clear, Muslims are required to forcibly convert people to Islam. The only exception allowed are those who are considered people of the Book -- and they are subject to oppressive dhimmitude meaning if they keep their heads down, are careful and pay the tax that permits them to exit (and boy you'd be surprised what the paying of that entails!) they'll be just fine.
                      Since I'm pretty sure that H_A will do everything but inquire about what life is like under dhimmitude, I figure I'll provide a taste.

                      Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Dhimma

                      The "Dhimma" or "responsibility/protection" is the compact which the Islamic state makes for the "protection" of its non-Muslim subjects. According to British-Egyptian scholar Bat Ye'or [1], the dhimma is the continuation of Jihad, the subjection of a non-Muslim people to the political rule of Islam. As part of the dhimma, the conquered people are humiliated and forced to pay for the very right to live through the jizya. The subjects of the dhimma or "protection" are the dhimmis, whose lives and religions are tolerated, though the dhimmis themselves are subject to numerous personal restrictions that reduce them to the state of 2nd class citizens, while their religion is neutered of any possible threat it could pose to Islam. The scholars are quite clear, in agreement with the Qur'an, that the dhimmis must feel themselves humiliated and subdued, never equals to Muslims. According to the scholars, it ought to apply to all non-Muslims living under Muslim rule at all times and should be the only choice given to all infidel people in the world besides conversion to Islam or death. As such the dhimma can be seen as an extension of the warlike state of the Islamic polity towards its conquered subjects, a never ending jihad to wipe kufr and shirk from the face of the earth. Although ISIS did attempt to bring back the dhimma in Iraq, this proved short-lived as their caliphate. Outside of extremists like ISIS, debate continues to take place in the Islamic scholarly world over the place of jizya and other dhimmi laws in modern Islamic societies. Although most of the injunctions against dhimmis, such as that they always give way to Muslims on the street, that their testimony in criminal court not be entered as evidence against a Muslims, that they wear special clothing, have not been enforced in most Islamic countries for decades (in most of the Middle East this came to a complete end with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the first World War), Islamic scholars to this day do continue their calls for re-instatement of the dhimma upon non-Muslims as part of a continuation of Jihad.


                      And a taste of what is involved with the paying of the jizya (there a good deal more involved)

                      …on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]...[2]
                      Al-Ghazali (1101)

                      Forget what I said about Jim Crow laws. Compared to the treatment of dhimmis, those laws look like unfettered freedom.





                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                        Hypothetical in the distant future is not a reasonable argument for anything that may happen hundreds of years ot thousand years in the future.
                        I don't think Bahai has a chance because the emancipation of women and strong warnings from the disfellowshipped (CBs) have taken and will take their toll.

                        I know many Baha'is that escaped Iran, lost relatives executed in Iran, and are in prison in Iran. They even executed a young girl and US citizen for being a Baha'i
                        Bahais have been executed in past decades, I can remember one young woman who was teaching children about Bahai... In Iran!!
                        A Bahai recently wrote how she loses a Bahai friend to execution every-day, but when I asked her for any one victim's name she started rambling about a friend who had a bad time some months back.
                        Bahais don't escape from ran (like that film called 'Argo') they simply leave and don't return, That can put their relatives in to a difficult position so I'll bet that there's not much love lost there.

                        The thing is, Bahais are just like any humans, and some will break laws. I met a Bahai in Canterbury about 45 years ago, the Brit police locked him up and he got 3 years in prison, not for being a Bahai but for running a Ponsi-type scheme that devastated eldferly pensioners all around the area. My late wife knew him quite well, I went to his house once. But Bahais don't get attacked, locked up or killed for just being Bahais.

                        There is not much for anybody to like concerning the current government of Iran. The persecution of Baha'is and subjugation of women are only part of the human rights violations of Iran.
                        I honestly don't think that a Bahai country would have a much better reputation, Shuny. Bahais could follow the Bayan and turn non-Bahais out of their homes or cities, nobody outside could vote or take part in anyn local or national government........ I forget the word now but an Iranian Bahai once told me that Bahais there despise western Bahais a bit.
                        It's all there to read and see, mostly because honest Bahais translated writings that were not for publication to the west. Cohen? Cole? ..a name like that was one of them.

                        Not whobly at all. Allowing Baha'is to leave Iran would encourage growth in world outside and would have more testimony of the persecution of Baha'is in Iran.
                        Nah....... too late. Abdul Baha sent Bahai so deeply in to the States and Shoghi Effendi took it round the whole world. That gate is well open.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                          Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians are people of the Book and therefore aren't required to convert. This is something I've pointed out again and again in this thread.
                          Perhaps you should have thought more carefully before you opened this thread with quotes from ourselves and other statements.


                          After the following exchange in another thread

                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          Islam does not preach forcible conversion. That Muslims have forcibly converted [as have Christians] is another matter.

                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          So far from the truth that the phrase wronger than wrong springs to mind.


                          So warfare against non-Muslims until they were converted or utterly oppressed was mandated by Muhammad.



                          I am not entirely sure that utter oppression would permit the building of churches. What do you think?

                          However, that you could write such an arrogant remark

                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          I'll put the list of sources up that I've provided against Donner and Crone any day of the week.


                          Makes it obvious that in your deluded mind you consider yourself as something of an expert on these matters. I will therefore leave you to your fantasies.
                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by eider View Post
                            I don't think Bahai has a chance because the emancipation of women and strong warnings from the disfellowshipped (CBs) have taken and will take their toll.


                            Bahais have been executed in past decades, I can remember one young woman who was teaching children about Bahai... In Iran!!
                            A Bahai recently wrote how she loses a Bahai friend to execution every-day, but when I asked her for any one victim's name she started rambling about a friend who had a bad time some months back.
                            Bahais don't escape from ran (like that film called 'Argo') they simply leave and don't return, That can put their relatives in to a difficult position so I'll bet that there's not much love lost there.

                            The thing is, Bahais are just like any humans, and some will break laws. I met a Bahai in Canterbury about 45 years ago, the Brit police locked him up and he got 3 years in prison, not for being a Bahai but for running a Ponsi-type scheme that devastated eldferly pensioners all around the area. My late wife knew him quite well, I went to his house once. But Bahais don't get attacked, locked up or killed for just being Bahais.


                            I honestly don't think that a Bahai country would have a much better reputation, Shuny. Bahais could follow the Bayan and turn non-Bahais out of their homes or cities, nobody outside could vote or take part in anyn local or national government........ I forget the word now but an Iranian Bahai once told me that Bahais there despise western Bahais a bit.
                            It's all there to read and see, mostly because honest Bahais translated writings that were not for publication to the west. Cohen? Cole? ..a name like that was one of them.


                            Nah....... too late. Abdul Baha sent Bahai so deeply in to the States and Shoghi Effendi took it round the whole world. That gate is well open.
                            Your rambling of the hypothetical, misinformation, poor context and jumping around all over the place reflects an adverse agenda against the Baha'i Faith makes your posts not worthy to respond to any longer.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              Fine. Show me where in the Bible that Jesus instructed His followers to force people to become Christians


                              You're joking right?

                              [*checks calendar to make sure it isn't April 1st*]

                              Seriously?

                              That is what you think constitutes Jesus telling His followers to force people to become Christians?

                              You need to have a nice long lie down after which have a talk with your doctor about your prescriptions.



                              I've never avoided it. I've openly and repeatedly acknowledged it over and over.

                              Now what you have definitely avoided (projection?) is that while Christians were doing so they had to be directly ignoring what Jesus taught -- unlike the Muslims who were expressly taught to forcibly convert.
                              The parable reflected what Jesus taught, 'Non-believers are subject to the punishment of death.' Your rambling based on a selective agenda.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                                The parable reflected what Jesus taught, 'Non-believers are subject to the punishment of death.' Your rambling based on a selective agenda.
                                I have a hard time you can be this dense and still be able to post on the internet . . . your selective agenda is showing as well as your awful interpretation of the parable. I posted this in the other thread where you continue to struggle to grasp the simple point but it seems that it needs to be posted here:

                                So the fact that our laws say that murders are subject to the death penalty means that we can lynch those we deem guilty of murder?

                                Of course not, but those who have the authority and duty can carry out the death penalty. That is all that is being communicated in the parable - that God who has the authority will carry out the penalty for those who remain in rebellion to him, it says NOTHING about us a Christians going on a crusade to execute those who do not believe.
                                We know J6 wasn’t peaceful because they didn’t set the building on fire.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                186 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,517 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X