christians should reject that stoning people so much, was ever initiated by God
Debate Rounds (3)
my guess is that that muslim, given his emotional investment, decided to continue thinking stoning is okay. his emotional response shows he probably has an issue with it too, but decides to compare notes and rationalize his beliefs, despite how obviously barbaric they are.
it seems ironic he took the route of justifying his complicitness with stoning in his culture. he was able to do this by comparing himself to chrisnitanity. he as a follow up asks for where stoning was every over turned explicitly, but doesn't note that Jesus said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". to me it seems that God never was for stoning. if the bible says that he was, as it does, and as he points out, then the bible is wrong. i'd argue it was jesus himself who said it was wrong, and who essentially points out the bible is wrong too.
one could try to argue as colassians says, that the requirements of the law have been done away with having "nailed them to the cross". and from this, that things like stoning are no longer required. i'd argue though, that from what Jesus said, and what we can gather about a loving God, stoning is wrong. otherwise a Christian would be forced to admit that stoning was one time okay, the will of God.
that's just ridiculous.
Stoning in the Bible
One can often find Christians attacking Islam due to the issue of stoning, they claim that this proves that Islamic law is barbaric, and is backward! For instance Christian apologist David Wood has released a new blog thread on his answeringmuslims.com site concerning a stoning that took place in Somalia:
David Wood posts the story as a bad thing; and it obviously works since the comments from his Christian fans show that they obviously disliked what happened, and this can be seen from many other Christian apologists and their supporters.
All of this brings me to the main point, what in the world are these Christians talking about? Have Christians failed to read their Bible? If one were to read the Bible, then one would know that the stoning that took place in Somalia is 100% Biblical!! So it makes you wonder, are these Christians hypocrites? Or are they simply ignorant?
In fact, the Bible doesn't just call for stoning on adultery, but calls for stoning on a whole range of issues! Here are the Biblical passages on stoning:
anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death. (Leviticus 24:16)
If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death?the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 22:23-24)
If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5)
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
'A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads.' (Leviticus 20:27)
While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp." So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses. (Numbers 15:32-36)
But seat two scoundrels opposite him and have them testify that he has cursed both God and the king. Then take him out and stone him to death." (1 Kings 21:10)
Now Christians may give us the same usual response, that the verses on stoning come from the Jewish Bible, so it doesn't apply for them. Okay, that's fair enough, but the question remains, why do you attack Islam for supposedly being barbaric because it calls for stoning? Stoning laws may not apply to modern day Christians, but they're still in the Bible, and stoning laws from the Bible did apply in one point in history! So if stoning laws are barbaric and backwards, then the same should apply to the Bible, the Bible was backward and barbaric for establishing stoning laws in one point in history!
Furthermore Christians have a problem with the issue of stoning, the reason they oppose it is not because stoning doesn't apply to them anymore, and rather Christians have a major issue with the stoning itself. They see it as savagery, barbarism, and something terrible. So if Christians want to be consistent, then they should also condemn their Bible for having stoning laws, because I repeat, Christians have a problem with the stoning itself, their problem isn't because stoning laws was for the Jews only! If Christians are honest enough they will even admit it, that they're main problem is with the stoning itself, not that the time of stoning is no more.
So Christians just prove their double standards, they will savagely attack stoning in Islam, calling it barbaric, brutal, and backwardness. Yet they will completely ignore it when it's in their own Bible, and they will continue to praise their God for being so holy and lovely!
1. So as you know I have questioned prop's faith in that of the bible even though we can see that there are different versions of this and that it has changed over the past centuries as much as how each section of Christianity differs from one another and how the church has been manipulated by governments and powerful figures so who's to say they might not have changed the bible.
2. Secondly Christianity has never been a perfect religion that has condoned all forms of violence in fact quite an interesting amount of Christians have caused crimes just as bad. The leaders of the world caused people into slavery and killed many people treating them as if they were lower beings and not equals,so why would they not do something similar to that of stoning?
3. Since my host seems kind enough to be using the bible as his sole source I shall follow in his footsteps and quote what has been said by the bible from both the new and old testament in my second argument
so now that i have brought up my main points i await your reply to begin my argument
the other point has some merit to it, some persustion, but not enough, and nothing definitive. he says Christians have caused all kinds of genocide and murders and wars throughout time, so why wouldn't they be into stoning or thinking it's from God? the problem, what Christians choose to do, their personal actions, are not necessarily God directed. personal sins. but what the bible says might be God directed. their personal decisions don't have anything to do w whether or not the bible is God directed, or whether it's credible that stoning was from God. there's some general culture points that might make it more likely that GOd directed it, but it's way too off to tie directly enough to stoning etc.
con basically says too much that doesn't follow.
For the nation and kingdom that will not serve you shall perish; those nations shall be utterly laid waste (Isa 60:12).
Thus says the Lord of hosts, "" Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey" (1 Sam 15:2-3). (Saul did not carry this command fully in that he spared some cattle as booty. For this action God rejected Saul as king of Israel (verses 8-9, 13-15, 26), and gave the kingdom to David, although even David killed only men and women in the conquered lands of other nations and spared the cattle. (1 Sam 27:8-9, cf. 2 Sam 8:2) These are perfect examples that say God accepts Violence and initiates it also in the opening quote of pro we clearly see that God accepts violence so in essence what i am saying is God allows violence.And stoning certainly is violence
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ameliamk1 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||1|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro at least gave his argument some effort, although he should really capitalize his sentences a little more.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.