(April 28, 2015 at 3:12 pm)orangebox21 Wrote:Jaime killed a king... he's the kingslayer!(April 28, 2015 at 10:31 am)pocaracas Wrote: And god is automagically exempt from its own rule by a technicality of language, huh?Jaime killed a man. Billy murdered a man. Does that mean Jaime isn't guilty of murder based on a technicality of language? Or does it mean what it says, that Jaime killed a man and Billy murdered a man because killing and murdering are two different acts?
A technicality, let's not forget, that doesn't carry too well into "future" translations... Sounds dubious for a rule handed out directly from a god that, if we are to believe those "in the know", should know the future.
Now seriously.... the commandment "thou shall not murder" requires the extra bit of information as to what "murder" is considered to be. Do remember that we're talking about giving out rules of conduit to a bunch of slaves who had no formal education. "Murder" is not defined.
It is so not defined that many later translations just wrote "kill".
This lack of precision does speak volumes about the man-made, post-hoc, fabrication that this story really is....
anyway...
(April 28, 2015 at 3:12 pm)orangebox21 Wrote:(April 28, 2015 at 10:31 am)pocaracas Wrote: I guess he's the same god that made arabic be the one and only perfect language to convey its message a few centuries later, huh? The right language is always the on in use where it "speaks" to people, it seems...The God of the Bible is not the god of the Qur'an.
BUHAHAHAHA!!!
The god of the Bible is the god of Moses, is it not?!
The god of the Qur'an is the god of Moses, is it not?!
But, somehow.... these are not the same?!
Look at some of the earliest texts mentioning Muhamad:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History...lysaw.html
Quote:One of the most interesting accounts of the early seventh century comes from Sebeos who was a bishop of the House of Bagratunis. From this chronicle, there are indications that he lived through many of the events he relates. He maintains that the account of Arab conquests derives from the fugitives who had been eyewitnesses thereof. He concludes with Mu‘awiya's ascendancy in the Arab civil war (656-61 CE), which suggests that he was writing soon after this date. Sebeos is the first non-Muslim author to present us with a theory for the rise of Islam that pays attention to what the Muslims themselves thought they were doing.[31] As for Muhammad, he has the following to say:
"At that time a certain man from along those same sons of Ismael, whose name was Mahmet [i.e., Muḥammad], a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learnt and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion. Abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God who had appeared to their father Abraham. So, Mahmet legislated for them: not to eat carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. "
Enjoy your learning curve.
