freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 1:26pm:


The church competed with the Enlightenment. The Catholics set up the Jesuit order for this reason.

The church also competed with itself. The Hundred Years war wasn't pretty - nor was Oliver Cromwell's revolution. If you think ISIS are bad, go back to the Catholic/Protestant split that helped shape the current map of Europe. 

The refugees from such religious conflict created the American separation of church and state that we understand today. They also created the ideal of religious freedom you've dispensed with in your "criticism" of Islam.

So yes, the war within the church left no alternative than to settle for secularism, which has also led to the slow existential dearth of the role of the church in today's world.

Quote:


How have I dispensed with it? Since when does freedom of religion preclude criticism of religion?

Quote:


There are always alternatives, as Islam demonstrates. You can keep the war going for 1400 years.

Quote:


Sure. Muhammed demonstrated it. Ever heard of Shariah law? Separation of church and state is entirely consistent with Christianity. You even quoted a bible passage the directly supports it. It is anathema to Islam. The muftis get all hot under the collar when you suggest laws against wife beating.

You did however also insist that Europe had to abandon "Christian ideas" in order to adopt a pagan system of government. Would you mind quoting Jesus' explanation of the divine right of kings?

Quote:


All of them, or just the ones that came to an end?

Can you explain why to this day, those enlightenment ideals that made such short work of the divine right of kings still barely penetrate into the original heartland of Islam?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 6:54pm:


Demonstrated it?

That's that then. Abraham demonstrated it, Moses demonstrated it, David and Yeheshua and Paul demonstrated it.

It is a demonstrative world, no?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 8:03pm:


Yeheshua is Jesus in Jewish, effende. He is your Christian prophet, no?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:


The laws revealed to Muhammed are religious laws, FD. Nowhere does Muhammed demand circumcision or public hair trimming or entering the bathroom with your right foot or everything else you pretend comprise the government systems of majority Muslim states like cute and cuddly Malaysia.

You know all this, but you never did say whether you rule out the use of porkies in your campaign against the Muselman, so we'll take it as a given.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 8:58pm:


No worries, FD. Feel free to show where Muhammed legislated these things for all posterity, including which Muslim countries "follow his example" today.

While you're at it, please explain why the laws of Moses - beheadings, stonings, burnings, etc - all legislated for Jews for all posterity in a book called "the law" - are somehow benign and have no influence on Jews today.

You're right. Your prophet Yeheshua made only one real law, to love thy Gud with all thy heart, etc. Nothing wrong with that.

Please include in your reply why this law has no influence on Christians today. 

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 9:27pm:


So can you give me a direct quote by their prophet that looks anything like a system of government or a legal code?

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2016 at 7:17am:


Can’t do it, eh? I understand.

You’ll have a hard time showing where Yeheshua said he was the Messiah too, or where his followers need to be baptised, confirmed, and all the other rules and rituals of the church, which are, incidentally, not negotiable.

Muhammed gave his own followers orders in.a time of war. You’ve been told this many times. Sharia law only borrows from Muhammed. It was a system designed after his death, for followers of his religion.

As you’ve been shown, it never applied to non-Muslims in kingdoms with Islamic rule. Today in Australia,, it’s a voluntary system that applies to civil and family law. Muslims who want the right to practice Sharia criminal law are jokers, but they don’t understand the rules: Muslim.law cannot apply in states with their own legal codes. It is secondary to existing juristictions on the advice of Muhammed.

Render unto Caesar.

This is what Muslims in the world believe and, when they feel like it, practice. You’ve been told this many times. Muslims are advised by their prophet to follow the laws of their land,.

There are very few shariah juristictions in the world today. Most majority Muslim countries are what you call democracies. Even the theocracy of Iran has popular erections.  There is no such thing as a Muslim system of government. Islam arose in a system of kingdoms, or caliphates. This was the way the world was ruled back then.

You know all this. It’s been explained to you many times. Look at your inclusivity graph. East and West rise similtaneously. The Ottomans reformed at the same time as European states, and no wonder - they got their inspiration from the Enlightenment through France and Prussia.

So no, FD, don’t bother pretending you can’t find a Muhammed quote.