Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I noticed on another forum a poster by the handle "Shafique" challenged a member to compare Christian and Islamic teachings in how they relate to human rights and modernity.

A third member, going by the nick "backspace" took "Shafique" up on his challenge:

backspace wrote:

Shafique wrote:Now, if Truth were actually interested in a debate comparing and contrasting Islamic and Christian teachings

We could start with a list of Muslim and Christian nations which grant equal rights to believers and unbelievers.

Next, I would want to compare teachings of mainstream Christian denominations (Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox) to Sunni and Shia - the criteria would be teachings deemed "reactionary". It would be subjective, but I think it would be easy to agree most world bodies, nations and people would view death for apostasy as a reactionary teaching. Do you agree? So, that would be our criteria for determining "reactionary" teachings.

So, why don't you start? List the Muslim majority nations Muslims and non-Muslims enjoy equal rights. I'll then provide my own list of Christian majority nations in reply.

http://forums.understanding-islam.com/s ... ions/page2

"Shafique" unfortunately fled the challenge and called the member a troll when that member simply offered to take "Shafique" up on his own statement.

However, in "Shafique's" babbling, he did say we should compare teaching for teaching to decide which religion - Christianity or Islam - is most compatible with modernity and human rights. I agree that it is the teachings in these respective religions that we should judge them by.

You can see that I answered your post there eh - and pointed out how you were trolling that forum too. You started that thread, then created the nick 'backspace' to reply to a post of mine! (I should have been flattered).

Your friend Jude lost the argument, and is no longer posting on the forum as he's now banned. Have you been banned there too?

Anyway, here is my reply, and I intend to indeed follow the last line of the post in this case:

interesting that backspace is using his new identity to reply to a thread he started under a previous alias. Why is that?

Has the 'truth-is-reason' usefulness run out now that he's been called out as a troll by others in this and other threads? He's been banned from other forums for his anti-Muslim posts - such as 'The only time Muslims seek peace is when they need to reload.' and condones extremist Christian and Jewish terrorists.

See:
philosophy-dubai/most-extreme-religous-fanatic-here-t41961.html

He also avoids numerous Biblical confusions he's raised over the years:
philosophy-dubai/biblical-confusion-t47353.html

You will indeed know a tree by its fruit!!

I suggest we avoid feeding the troll.

Cheers,
Shafique

Thank you for your short but pointless babbling. When you say you've answered a post that should mean you responded to the contents of the post - but clearly nothing in the post's contents have been addressed.

Here they are, again:

We could start with a list of Muslim and Christian nations which grant equal rights to believers and unbelievers.

compare teachings of mainstream Christian denominations (Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox) to Sunni and Shia - the criteria would be teachings deemed "reactionary"

We can also add a third criteria - how religion affects/dictates social life (Muslims and non-Muslims are compelled to follow Muslim religious practices during Ramadan where, thankfully, Jews, Christians and others in Christian majority nations and Israel are not) in Muslim/Christian majority nations.

Surely most would view forcing citizens to follow Catholic fasting days is reactionary and that, logically, imprisoning Muslims and non-Muslims in Muslim majority nations for not observing fasting is likewise reactionary.

Ah, glad to see you two love birds are having off DF forum fun. Could you guys keep it there and not stink up this place

Thanks in advance

^You're welcome.

However, it seems that eh and another troll were banned there too. eh's been losing arguments left, right and centre - hence why pants are well and truly twisted these days!

(The 'eating pork' discussion was started in the other place.. and eh conceded defeat here. )

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:(The 'eating pork' discussion was started in the other place.. and eh conceded defeat here.)

I decided the "discussion" was pointless when you were claiming I said things the exact opposite of what I actually wrote.

philosophy-dubai/did-jesus-really-free-people-from-law-t51701.html#p416112

But I guess you've conceded defeat here since you can't address the points backspace made that I quoted in this thread.