ABSURDITY OF THEOCRACY?
-
This is a common tactic of TheNabi, when he has no answers he runs around in circles
-
Albion
If we are going to be speaking of common tactics, can you please tell your split personality of 'vincentia' to come back please? Thank you.
-
Albion
If we are going to be speaking of common tactics, can you please tell your split personality of 'vincentia' to come back please? Thank you.
Were you around some 2 months ago albion has like 12 other personalities...
-
Were you around some 2 months ago albion has like 12 other personalities...
I don't think i was...damn did i miss any others? Which ones?
edited
I think you are referring to the 12 mysterious personalities that emerged after the poll? Yes i was there... )
-
Were you around some 2 months ago albion has like 12 other personalities...
I don't think i was...damn did i miss any others? Which ones?
It was when Damon set up a poll to obtain forum members' views to see if they want albion expelled or not. The final tally is a draw, but during the days of the poll many new people registered on the board. Damon and I suspected that these might be albion registering new 'members' to rig the poll, or managed to get some friends to back him up. None of the 'new members' ever show up again after that.
Here's the thread.
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3682
-
Salaam,
can you please tell your split personality of 'vincentia' to come back please?
That was albion being a good Christian. Lying about who he or she or he-she was and trying to spread his beliefs in a corrupt way. Funny how another christian also resorts to a similar argument about alkitaab.
Joe
-
What is needed is international rights. Law only comes into play when a right is violated and in this case the only law we need is the law of equivalence to punish the violator. Let each community make its own laws based on those principles of unchangeable God-given human rights. Competition and open borders (the right to freedom of movement) will naturally take care of the rest.
Can you clarify this - this does not mean Eye for an Eye, Tooth for a Tooth does it?
It means that the punishment is equivalent to the crime. For example, someone who steals a loaf of bread gets punished by working to repay the bakery not by getting his hands cut off. An eye for an eye is just a metaphor for that.
Peace,
Ayman
-
(Eye for an Eye) means that the punishment is equivalent to the crime. For example, someone who steals a loaf of bread gets punished by working to repay the bakery not by getting his hands cut off. An eye for an eye is just a metaphor for that.
In this punishment the final word belongs to man and different from the one announced by God in 538. In spite of that, should we still presume that it is what God has decided in His divine dictatorship?
What I mean is Noah's claim
"...its a theocracy. the difference is that in a democracy man is the final word. in a theocracy, God is (this means his book)"
By the way, Dear Ayman, may I ask a favor from you. In a forum someone said that using initial letters as is done in the Quran was a preislamic tradition in the literature of the Arabs. It was a means of attracting the attention of the listeners by the poets who recited their poems at Kaaba. Is that true? Do you have any poems to verfy this calim?
Peace,
Hasan -
agreed. Good post. I guess i need to rethink my stand on how the state should interact with the populaton.
NoahBack to the drawing board for you Noah?
Please do come back after you have re-thought everything.
-)Regards,
No not at all...
I guess i need to rethink my stand on how the state should interact with the populaton.
In the context you pulled this out of, it should be obvious what im to rethink.
personally i think youre a fucking idiot! just being honest brother.
Would swearing be allowed in your Theocracy?
-)Regards,
-
Peace Hasan,
Thank you for your kind questions.
In this punishment the final word belongs to man and different from the one announced by God in 538. In spite of that, should we still presume that it is what God has decided in His divine dictatorship?
What I mean is Noah's claim
"...its a theocracy. the difference is that in a democracy man is the final word. in a theocracy, God is (this means his book)"
It is not different. The hands in 538 are not to be taken as physical hands no more than the hands in 3845 and 3817 are physical hands. The story of Youssef provides a clear example of the punishment decreed in 538 on the thief.
By the way, Dear Ayman, may I ask a favor from you. In a forum someone said that using initial letters as is done in the Quran was a preislamic tradition in the literature of the Arabs. It was a means of attracting the attention of the listeners by the poets who recited their poems at Kaaba. Is that true? Do you have any poems to verfy this calim?
There are several untrue statements in that claim.
- What are termed Jahiliya poems has been proven to be actually post-quranic literature.
- I am not aware of any such Jahiliya poems using so-called initials and if even there were some, then they are probably later fabrications that are copying the style of the great reading.
- The so-called initials are not "initials" to begin with. They are written as words and that is how they should be read and understood. The Arabic language is full of such abbreviated words that seem like initials.
- Eleven of the twenty nine words have been shown to have meaning and the meaning fits in the context.
- There is no evidence of any Arabic poems recited at religious or political events. In fact, from pre-quranic manuscripts and inscriptions we can see that the religious and political elite did not use Arabic.
- The stone cube was originally named Chobar and it continued to represent the Nabataean idol Allat well into the Umayyad dynasty. It was renamed to Kaaba over 100 years after the revelation of the great reading.
I hope this helps.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
It is not different. The hands in 538 are not to be taken as physical hands no more than the hands in 3845 and 3817 are physical hands. The story of Youssef provides a clear example of the punishment decreed in 538 on the thief.
salam Ayman.
538 is the only verse that tells us how to punish the thief . and it is crystal clear . 1275 is about joseph's time . the koran has replaced all the laws and scriptures . that is what i understand .i think discussion about theft punishment should continue in this thread http//free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3399&sid=9d30f40701a70cf304167795f223c7a9
salam and best wishes.
fahad. -
It is not different. The hands in 538 are not to be taken as physical hands no more than the hands in 3845 and 3817 are physical hands. The story of Youssef provides a clear example of the punishment decreed in 538 on the thief.
538 is the only verse that tells us how to punish the thief . and it is crystal clear . 1275 is about joseph's time . the koran has replaced all the laws and scriptures . that is what i understand .
The principle of equivalence never changes. I will continue my reply on this issue in the other thread.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace Noah,
Your post was just brought to my attention. Please note that it is not permitted to use offensive language on the board.
- Mind your language (foul and/or obsene langauge will not be tolerated).
- Respect other users (this includes personal insults or remarks).
- Do not repeat posts that have been moved or deleted.
- Do not disrupt existing threads with non-related posts (posts will be deleted and user may be banned).
- Post in the correct category (posts in the wrong category risk being deleted entirely)
- Do not use multiple usernames.
-
Peace,
lol Never thought I would see Noah lose his temper! Keep your cool, they are just words. This is a forum for tolerant individuals that can keep calm throughout debates.
Nural