Persecuted Christians finally getting noticed

Of course. You cannot allow yourself to understand, so you must flee immediately!

Impression I got was that you are the one having so much trouble understanding, the situation is hopeless. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No, I have no problem understanding. Rather you have been expressing your own problems understanding.Yet again, God's Law is God's Law is God's Law is God's Law. Regardless of which god is credited for God's Law, they are all exactly the same (except for minor differences in the details of their content and in their origins back-story), they are all treated the same, they are all implemented the same, they are all administered and enforced the same, and they all have the same effects.All God's Laws were created by Man, written down by Man, transmitted to each succeeding generation by Man, implemented by Man, interpreted by Man, enforced by Man, abused by Man, and believed by Man to be of divine origin and therefore perfect. That is true of each and every instantiation of God's Law would still hold true even if there were one instantiation of God's Law that were actually of divine origin; Man has his pudgy little fingers in that pie throughout the entire process just as he does with the entire religion business.So, given Man's typical heavy-handedness in implementing God's Law, grave injustice will inevitably result. What recourse would the victims of that grave injustice have? None, nor would any recourse be possible. Since the law in question is part of God's Law, you cannot question that law without also questioning God, something which is not allowed under God's Law. When Man creates a law that is bad, you can oppose that law and petition to have it either changed or struck down. You cannot do that with God's Law, since opposing God's Law means also opposing God, which God's Law forbids. Even if a corrupt government takes power and misuses God's Law for its own corrupt purposes, as long as they wield God's Law, opposing them would be the same as opposing God. Actually, that is what happened with the Protestant philosophy of The Divine Right of Kings.Clearly, we must do everything we can to keep God's Law from being implemented.Now are your problems with understanding resolved?

This is not a comparison I could imagine being invited a sensible person defending the Bible. The Bible describes plenty of evil treatment of slaves as being perfectly allowable and in some cases proscribed by law. We can also find plenty of descriptions of stoning and other types of capital punishment in response to violations of laws concerning infidelity, picking up sticks on the wrong day, witchcraft, and blasphemy.Indentured servants who were Hebrews were treated humanely. But actual slaves could be beaten severely with impunity.

When a copy of Hammurabi's Code was found, it was compared to Mosaic Law. The two law codes were found to parallel each other very strongly, suggesting strongly that either Mosaic Law had been derived from Hammurabi's Code or a derived law code, or both Mosaic Law and Hammurabi's Code had both been derived from another antecedent law code.However, in comparing the same laws in the two law codes, it was found that Hammurabi's Code was more benign. For example, in questions about slavery and whether a particular individual would be a slave (eg, the child of a slave and a freeman), Hammurabi would err on the side of freedom whereas Moses would err on the side of slavery.I forgot to mention that Hammurabi's Code is also of divine origin. It had been given to him by the god and goddess, Bel and Anu. So if Moses did derive his Law from Hammurabi's, then the Bible is in error for not properly crediting Bel and Anu for it.Edited by dwise1, : Bel and Anu.

Sahih al-Bukhari - Book of Manumission of Slaves

---

Lev 21:9

---

And the Bible has passages describing various jihads against non-Israelites. Such as...?

quote:

---

I forgot to mention that Hammurabi's Code is also of divine origin. It had been given to him by the god and goddess, Bel and Anu. So if Moses did derive his Law from Hammurabi's, then the Bible is in error for not properly crediting Bel and Anu for it.

---

Bel and Anu are myths.....of course one can argue that all gods...including the monotheistic ones...are myths, though I would disagree. From your cultural vantage point, all gods are myths. From my cultural standpoint, all gods are either myths or demons...except the one I worship.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Indeed. Gods are gods are gods. They're all pretty much the same. But of course, one's own god must be completely different from the rest! (here I am invoking a sense of humor as we are sharing a common personal joke; in each other's physical presence, we would be smiling and cocking an eyebrow)And then there's that ambiguous word, "myth".In one sense, the far more common sense, "myth" means "false", "not true". I take that to be the meaning that you are applying. In this sense, calling something "myth" intends to diminish it and its importance.The other sense is what I had learned by watching the PBS series with Joseph Campbell, "The Power of Myth". In that sense, a myth is a story or a truth that is so important that it transcends mere factual truth. This sense does not diminish a story or figure in the least, but rather elevates it to a position of very great importance. It makes it truly mythic.Bel and Anu are not mere "myths", diminished discredited stories that are not true. Rather, they are mythic! They gave us Hammurabi's Code, a cornerstone of law.Gods are gods are gods. None of them truly distinguish themselves from the others. All of them are human inventions. Even if some supernatural entity were to actually exist, it would not be the same as the human inventions of what "God" would be. The supernatural is beyond human perception or comprehension. We have imagined what "God" would be, but that is still a human invention, at best a reflection of fallible human inability to comprehend "God".Bel and Anu gave us Laws. Bel and Anu are mythic! Not mere false "myths", but rather truly mythic.On another tangent, I'm sure that you've heard this argument before. Atheists do not believe in the gods. Christians do not believe in all gods except for one. Christians are virtually no different from atheists, since they differ by only one god.

You and I differ through our beliefs...if only that "One" thing. GOD existed long before humans were capable of imagining Him. He invented us long before we even could invent Him. And because of this dogmatic assertion by many Christians---we get persecuted by others who are furious that we dare profess such a belief. Persecutors are probably angry that their own belief is thought of as less than ours. Do you have any other plausible explanations as to why people get persecuted...apart from opposition to human plans and egos?

I do. Because people tend to be tribalist assholes.And you aren't being persecuted, Phat, any more than Faith is. Miriam Ibrahim, OK. Catholics under Cromwell or Cathars in France, check. But not you guys.

Sweet baby jesus, Phat. You have no clue what actual persecution is. Go to an American Indian reservation then tell them how persecuted Christians are. Go to a third world country and tell them how persecuted Christians are. Go to a black neighborhood (if you're not too scared) and tell them how persecuted you and your christian friends are (but be sure to remind them about slavery).Walk down the street and count how many CHRISTIAN churches you see. Now, how many mosques? How many synagogues?Tell me: how badly are you persecuted? Christians are persecuted to such an extent that they don't even have a voice in the government of damn near EVERY country in the world.Your ignorance knows no bounds, does it?Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

Here's a story in the Wall Street Journal giving the history of Meriam Ibrahim's imprisonment and partial escape (she's apparently at the US Embassy now, but there isn't much information coming out about her situation recently). The article goes on to describe the genocides and persecutions against Christians in that part of the world for many years now.ABE: In answer to Hooah, this article mentions the anti-Christian attitude in the West that is responsible for tolerating the persecutions of Christians elsewhere in the world. Christians in the West aren't being actively or violently persecuted, but we could call the indifference and the ridicule we get, the angry denunciations, the mischaracterizations of our beliefs, the general nastiness against us, the false moral equivalence with Islam as just another fundamentalism, the distortion of history, "soft persecution."Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And here's a story about the negotiations to get her out of Sudan now that she's at the US Embassy and why it's not easy to do.

You only see those things because you spend all of your time engaging in discussions with people that don't agree with you. Step out into the real world and you will see that Christians are not in any way persecuted in the West. Especially in the U.S.. Let me know when it becomes a problem for a United States politician to profess their Christianity. Let me know when it becomes a problem for even the leading "progressive" presidential candidate (that bitch is so far from progressive it's revolting) to say her favorite and most influential book is the fucking bible. When that happens, you can maybe say you are persecuted. Until that time comes, you are making a mockery of actual persecution. Your White American Christian privilege is so thick you are blind and you don't even know it.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

I have to agree with Hooah on this. You and Phat have the wrong end of the stick. You aren't being persecuted here. Something near 75% of Americans identify as Christian, but somehow they are persecuted by the remaining Americans.Some Christians feel persecuted when people say "Seasons Greetings" to them during the Christmas holidays. Other Christians believe not being able to express their hatred of gays is some kind of persecution. Well it is not.And complaining about indifference? What kind of whining is that?And you Faith? Complaining about how someone else distorts history? Distorting history is your main shtick here. You never tell history correctly. Well, that and telling other Christians that they are not Christians.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.