Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 7:53am:


I already explained to you through scripture why you cannot understand the things of the Spirit of God:

1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Nor do I desire to cast pearls before a willful unregenerate. The school teacher is likely not "willingly committing sin" because more than likely she is ignorant of the verse or doesn't understand it.

Rom 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

So if a person is ignorant, is too young or mentally handicapped to understand, or lives in some remote tribe and has never been shown or understood the Gospel of Jesus Christ, there is no transgression because for them there is no law.

Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 7:53am:


It is a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, and it wouldn't matter what day of the year it fell on, though the scriptures don't go much easier on the Christmas tree than they do idols:

Jer 10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. 4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. 5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.

Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 7:53am:


Guffaw! Yes, "said" by a bunch of semi-literate SW Arabian desert dwellers in a ridiculous pile of poppycock of a scripture-contrary, counter-religion with a pre-Muhammad history-devoid, archaeology-absent, reality-rejecting, geographically-impossible so-called "tradition", that masquerades as thousands of years of pre-Muhammad history, yet was all created and put to the pen in the 7th to 10th centuries AD (from 100 to 300 years after Muhammad) without reference to any actual historical record that preceded the 6th century AD.

A counter-YHWH anti-religion with a carnal tradition of prostrating toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol and Kaaba in Mecca five times a day - located 1200 kilometers away from THE Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs - while praying in the "vain repetitions as the heathen do", in the names of the Arabian pagan deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad. Even compelled to perform adopted, adapted and thinly veneered pagan Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn-devil worship rituals.

While the 1600 year record of YHWH to mankind is well supported by history, ever increasingly supported by archaeology as well as fulfilled prophecy, is consistent with matter of fact physical geography, and can even be confirmed mathematically.
falseprophetmuhammad.com/evidence_for_islam.htm

You must have missed the "History of Mecca" thread:
ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1388067196

Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 7:53am:


THE FACT IS that it IS AN ORDINANCE in Islam that all Muslims are to prostrate themselves toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol.

Not surprisingly, that in your desperation you falsely accuse me of depicting "all Muslims as people who buy the blood of Christians to wash their hands with."
Thus reducing yourself to outright lies and libel, which you apparently can't see does not help your case, but it is perfectly consistent with what I am to expect in these times:

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.    2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,    3  Without natural affection,trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce.....

Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 11:01pm:

You certainly aren't alone in suffering such self-delusion.

Jhn 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

Yadda wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 6:06am:


You hypocrit, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Did you miss what I said before, which by the way was from your own Holy Scriptures?

But have reverence for Christ in your hearts, and honor him as Lord. Be ready at all times to answer anyone who asks you to explain the hope you have in you,  but do it with gentleness and respect

Again, you didn't answer, so i'll ask again. 

Stratos wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 1:08pm:


If indeed you are worried at all about these people going to hell or not, which I seriously doubt

You are wasting your time with stratos there peter, believe me i gave up ages ago...
he/she will just revert to childish ridicule and baseless claims of I won... nanee nanee na na

freediver wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 10:28am:


By the way, your throw-away line about democracy that you want to pass as an adequate "explanation" only makes sense for apostasy laws, not for stoning for adultery laws. So if you wouldn't mind getting off your high horse for once and come up with another lame-arsed "explanation" for why stoning isn't even close to being on the books, that would be appreciated.

freediver wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 10:28am:


He also made an earlier point about the islamic state of Aceh, and how stoning and executing apostates never happens there - and I also pointed out that stoning has just recently been removed from a new draft of the criminal code.

freediver wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 10:28am:


You are not in any way refuting my point that a) in every election the ruling BN party runs away with the majority of Malay votes while openly and proudly adopting a zero-tolerance to hudud policy, and b) that the issue was seen as such an embarassment to the opposition that their leader was forced to make an announcement distancing the party from it, and gagging the fringe islamist party from talking about it - not unlike Tony Abbott's response to Cory Bernardi.

freediver wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 10:28am:


There are so many things wrong with this; firstly you have to ask how on earth the ruling party, that continues to attract the majority of Malay votes, could adopt such an open and unambiguous anti-hudud policy - if its true that Malays feel so strongly the other way? Secondly, it is not true that Malays only had a choice between two anti-hudud parties - there is a pro-hudud party, everyone knows who they are - and their leader(s) DO stand up and give Malays the hudud option. Yet they continue to reject them - in droves. Even when Anwar tried to distance himself from it, why didn't the pro-hudud majority Malays flock to PAS in droves, instead of giving them a pathetic 14% of the vote?

Seems the political capital in Malaysia lies in being anti-hudud - or at the very least, it doesn't harm your political fortunes. What does that say?

freediver wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 10:28am:


Nothing to do with hudud, so I have no idea what your point is.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:



Err yes, thats the point FD 

Why does a muslim state with shariah law reject stoning and executing apostates?

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:



By declaring, on behalf of all PR parties including PAS, that hudud would never be implemented - even though PAS obviously would disagree with this stance.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:


ummm... thats the point FD. According to you thats exactly what the BN did - adopt a policy that the majority (of Malays) oppose - and yet their voter base is Malays. Especially now after a "chinese tsunami" abandoned BN in droves during last eleciton.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:


What you continue to fail to appreciate is that such a scenario suggests that by allowing the major parties to de-emphasise issues like Iraq, the public is not all that serious about those issues after all. Even if we see record breaking protests in the streets on the issue. And by the way, the iraq example is a bad one to use - since at the time of the election the invasion was already over. The public was vehemently opposed to the invasion, but once we were there, we were actually supportive of staying there to "finish the job". Thus both labor and liberal adopted policies on Iraq that were consistent with public opinion.

Also, you are losing track of the whole point here. This whole process we are quibbling about should indicate very clearly that Malays who profess support for stoning and executing apostates in a consequence-free survey, simply aren't doing anything about acting on this support in real life. No street protests (unlike Iraq in Australia), no serious debate, and most significantly, the party that stands in the heartland of Malay voter-land openly and proudly takes an anti-hudud stance - and Malays overwhelmingly stick with them. In short, Malays simply don't care about implementing hudud laws - and while you try and obfuscate that they really are passionate about it (gotta maintain that zealot tag after all) but not having the unity or organization or whatever to implement it - the truth is there simply isn't any evidence of any sort of enthusiasm about it. Thats why you are wrong to label them "little Hitlers" and a threat to our way of life, and all round evil people based on this one survey - and ignoring their demonstrated behaviour.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:



Correct. All major parties had a no-hudud policy, and whenever the one fringe islamist party tried to bring it up, they were howled down by everyone. Thats what you call "without a serious debate ever happening", and the Malay voters seemed a-ok with that, as they overwhelmingly voted for anti-hudud parties.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:


lol aren't Malays supposedly lunatics for wanting stoning and death for apostasy? But as always you miss the point. If there was political mileage to be gained from promoting hudud, the major parties would be capitalising on it - or at the very least wouldn't be stating so openly that they are opposed to it.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 8:14am:


Nonsense. Hudud in Malaysia has only ever been proposed for Malays only. Indeed, other surveys have shown that Chinese and Indian Malaysians are not opposed to hudud because they believe that it won't affect them. So it really is a Malay-only issue, and which the success or otherwise of its implementation lies solely in the hands of the Malay public. And the fact is the Malays, who have significant political representation, have not in any way exercised the democratic levers at their disposal (protests, media etc, and especially not voting) to implement what they are supposed to want so passionately.

freediver wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:18pm:




But, but, freediver, i was under the impression, that [between the two of you], it was gandalf, who is the moslem ?






freediver,

Is gandalf sure that he is a moslem ???

Or is gandalf just one of those moslem impersonators       [i.e. one of the, not 'REAL' moslems, which we hear so much about these days] ?

61% of Malaysians are Muslims. Of these, 86% favour Sharia law being the law of the land. Of these, 60% support stoning adulterers to death and 62% support the death penalty for apostasy. That makes roughly 31% and 33% of the total population.

When Gandalf and Ian demanded I explain why these laws have not come to pass in Malaysia, I suggested democracy might have something to do with it, as roughly two thirds of the population oppose these laws. It would be reasonable to presume they oppose them strongly enough to vote against any party that supports them. Apparently this explanation is not good enough.

This does not mean of course that they do not have similar laws. For example, Malaysia has "rehabilitation" camps for Muslim apostates and blasphemy is illegal. The government refuses to officially acknowledge Muslims who reject Islam and still classifies them as Muslims.

Gandalf has taken the extraordinary position that the reason they do not have these laws is because the 1/3 of the population that supports them don't really care enough to get them, rather than because 2/3 of the population oppose them - as "passionately" as you would expect people to oppose letting Muslims start killing people in the name of Islam. Despite having significant minor parties that push the issue, and Anwar Ibrahim needing to clarify prior to the last election that his coalition opposes the laws, Gandalf even tried to argue that there is not even any serious debate on the issue.

Gandalf, the reason I felt the need to start a new thread is because that seems to have far more success in getting you to see common sense. It worked very well with the rape conviction rate debate and I anticipate you suddenly seeing common sense on this issue also.

Gandalf's latest efforts to push this nonsense - by way of clarification, Gandalf insists on using the Malaysian government's official racial classification scheme. That is "Malay" actually means Malaysian Muslim. Gandalf uses this term so he can talk about the "majority of Malays" as if democratic principles support his argument that the only reason 1/3 of the population don't get their way over everyone else is because they don't really want what they say they want.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:35am: