Joe Bloe

All right, now this one just completely baffles me. I don't know whether people have been specifically burned at the stake for translating the Koran, but I know people have been killed in other ways for doing so. And, unlike the Bible, even today anyone who translates the Koran faces the threat of being killed by Muslims defending the Koran. But I can't fathom why that would be considered a good thing, a point in favor for the religion and its scriptures. What is it about Christians burning people at the stake for translating the Bible that makes the Bible so important and worth reading? And if it is that important to Christianity for the Bible to remain in its original languages, why would you ever read them in translation? Dave, are you fluent in Hebrew and Greek and Latin, and read the Bible only in its original languages or authorized Latin version? No? Then how does the fact that Christians in the past burned people at the stake for translating the Bible make you think the Bible is so worth reading, if you yourself don't read it the way they insisted you should?

Oh, wait ... do you mean to be praising not those Christians who burned people at the stake for translating the Bible, but rather to praise those Christians who were burned at the stake for translating the Bible? That they were willing to be true to their understanding of Christianity (that it was important to translate the Bible from its original languages) even to the point of death at the hands of people with a different understanding of Christianity (that the Bible should not be translated)? In that case, yes, there is precisely that parallel with Muslims who translate the Koran from its original language: I don't know if anyone has been specifically burned at the stake for doing so (stake-burning was a medieval Christian hobby, I don't know if that has been a favored method of execution in particular times and places in Muslim history), but I do know that people have been killed in other ways for doing so, and anyone who does so even today does it under threat of death.

So, will you read the Koran, since people have been killed for translating it?

Yes, and that is precisely one of the reasons I am no longer a Christian. Way back in college, I became good friends with someone whose life was changed for the better by becoming a serious Muslim and reading the Koran, and through him I met other people like that. Meeting Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Catholics, Hindus, and Buddhists who were changed for the better by their various versions of their various religions and by reading their religion's scriptures added to my realization that there wasn't anything unique about my version of Christianity or the standard Protestant version of the Bible on this score.

Joe Bloe

What's wrong with the reason I gave when I said
How can you possibly know the Bible really is unique if you haven't given it a fair comparison?

rfmwinnie

Hey what about me? I guess I'll join the long and growing crowd of the ignored.

I gave serveral examples of prophecies (It doesn't matter Dave if you think they are convincing -- they are "gospel" for those believers just like biblical prophecies are "gospel" for you).

I also gave you an example of a private orphanage, funded by private, charity and run by private people -- all MUSLIMS. You can't honestly believe that only Christians do good work? I mean the Jews are well known for the philanthrophy. My inlaws donate more in charity every year than most people make. They aren't Christians.

I also gave you examples of Muslims being persecuted for reading/believing/translating the Quar'ran.

I answered every reason you gave and you now have an obligation to read the Quar'ran.

Or you can keep ignoring me. But other people aren't.

rfmwinnie

Just waiting!

Seeker630

from afdave:

1) It is far and away the best selling book in the history of the planet

I read a quote a long time ago that said that the Bible is the most published, and the least read, of any book on the planet. My contact with the vast majority of people I've met who call themselves Christians definitely reinforces that notion.

You want a good reason to read other, non-Christian holy books? How can you be so certain your's is right if you have nothing else to ompare it to? Most of the regulars in these forums are vastly better read than most of the Christians who pop in here.

Sauron

The difference is between being (a) a place for sick people to come and (b) a place where physicians actually practiced medicine in a structured care environment. The christian church only offered (a). The Islamic hospitals were the first to offer (b).

The lesson for you here is that Wikipedia is not a source. It's a group blog. The National Institute of Health *is* a source. You should learn the difference.

Your question was whether or not Islam had induced people to start hospitals or not. Your question was answered - you lost.


No, you don't.

It's more specific than the majority of the so-called bible prophecies.

Hint: the christian church in Europe taxed its members.

Wrong, it is like the state-enforced tithing of the christian countries.

1. That was not the case in Christianity until very late. Prior to that, it operated just like Islam - by taxing people.

2. Islam has all-voluntary charities as well.

Next diversionary question on your list, poptart?

Sauron

Apparently not since there are dozens of threads awaiting your answers.


A more important question would be: given your evasions, is there any undeserved criticism of you?

Very little if any, I'm afraid.

Minimalist

Give them time....they're working on it.

khalimirov

It's not? Then what the heck are we doing in Iraq? I thought we were fighting Islam.

Smullyan-esque

You have not yet backed up the claim that all scientists falsify their data to support the idea of an old earth.