society,which would you chose?This one intrigues me a lot,because reading atheist post here,leads me to believe atheists think all religions are fantasies and there is not one better than the other.
question 2.if you could live in a 100% christion society or muslim
- Thread starter 1inamillion
- Start date
What denomination of Christianity?
And how much freedom of religion would remain. I mean if it's a Catholic society would they still let me be a Lutheran or would they arrest me for heresy for that?
And how much freedom of religion would remain. I mean if it's a Catholic society would they still let me be a Lutheran or would they arrest me for heresy for that?
If I'm doing business its got to be with Muhammad. He was the Trump of his day making trade deals, building cities left and right. Jesus wouldn't have two coins to rub together and would try to guilt me into letting him ride for free. Now if we're hanging out after the cab ride, Jesus drinks so that's my guy.
Christian and it ain't even close, I've been to Turkey, Jordan and the UAE. Booze is expensive in Turkey, I didn't see any in my brief time in Jordan and unless you buy it in the airport (seriously recommend if going to Abu Dhabi or Dubai) it's ridiculously expensive and only sold in hotels or through stores where you can prove you're a non-Muslim.
PASS.
PASS.
Which one never kills, tortures or oppresses nonbelievers?
Yeah, that was a trick question.
So how about one that isn't doing it at the moment. Which, in most of the world is probably both of them.
I think you need to narrow it down more.
Yeah, that was a trick question.
So how about one that isn't doing it at the moment. Which, in most of the world is probably both of them.
I think you need to narrow it down more.
I would choose the one that doesn't (if their doctrine is taken literally) require all women over the age of 9 to cover their entire body and face in public or their women have less rights than any male child. If you don't know which one that is, just put down your electronic device and suck your thumb until your Mommy arrives.
Does it really matter, though? You can't have pre-marital sex or even use birth control under a strict, Christian interpretation of the Bible. What the hell is the point of seeing all of the uncovered tail around if there's nothing that you can do about it?
Burqas might be the way to go. There really isn't much difference between the two interpretations, if you think about it.
My God, the Islamic music alone should be enough to decide the issue. If you want to spent the rest of your life listening to the soundtrack of a beheading video, pick the Muslims. I'll go with Silent Night and Jingle Bells Rock.
Dude, if you take either literally women are screwed. Christianity is better mostly because so many resist taking it too literally. The literal words in the Bible are pretty harsh on a number of issues. It might also interest you to know that women covering themselves is mostly a cultural thing, not an Islamic commandment from the Quran.
I wouldn't bet on it. You know how he hated on rich people. He would probably see that as damning my soul. He could pay me in wine however.
A lot of conservative denominations are fine with birth control used in marital relationships. I don't find any scripture which would prohibit it outright.
This is why the first question I asked was what denomination was in charge.
Probably applies to both the Christian and the Muslim nations.
As are the aforementioned music and alcohol issues. There are plenty of Bible-belt places in this country where alcohol is frowned upon. Wasn't it until very recently that you couldn't buy actual beer in the entire state of Kansas, but rather some kind of watered-down substitute?
There are plenty of places around where you can't buy beer on Sunday. Hell, I live in Iowa City, one of the debauchery meccas of Western civilization, and I can't purchase alcohol between the hours of 2AM and 6AM, on any day of the week. It's pretty much like Sharia law for us chronic night owls.
Ever been to Utah? Not exactly a ton of partying or frivolity going on there. I'd imagine that Salt Lake City and Dubai have a lot in common.
I have to quibble with this. Both the Quran and the Book of Mormon prohibit intoxicants. The Bible often supports wine drinking. When a Christian restricts alcohol that is probably mostly cultural. But when a Mormon or Muslim does it, it is proscribed by their books.
You are making a somewhat technical point. There are plenty of Christians who consider alcohol every bit as immoral as Muslims do. The idea that wine and booze are free-flowing among all sects of Christians and it's only the backwards followers of Islam that have a problem with it is what I take exception to. It is basically a cultural decision everywhere.
I'm sure there are plenty of places where Muslims can and do drink, just like there are Mormons that violate nearly all of the things that they're not supposed to be doing.
Also, I'm not enough of a Biblical scholar to know whether or not there is some arcane passage hidden in there that could be construed to limit alcohol consumption if a theocratic Christian were so inclined. I'm guessing that there probably is.
You know what part of the bible is unique to Christianity? It doesn't have nearly as many "literal words". I know this isn't your thing and that's fine, but the bible is NOT Christianity in and of itself. Other religions use many of the same books to form their foundations.
How about a nation that's 100% atheist. No one to tell me what to do based on 3000 year old morals.
Sigh, rainbows and unicorns...
Sigh, rainbows and unicorns...
I grant that there are backwards Christians that restrict alcohol. I'm just pointing out the source of that belief is not the Bible. Its often related to their church traditions of supporting the temperance movement or their desires to differentiate their church from mainstream Protestant or Catholic churches that directly celebrate alcohol. The source of that teetotaler position in Mecca or Salt Lake City is their holy books, not cultural traditions.
Except that holy books themselves tend to come from cultural traditions in the first place.
Check out the Old Testament sometime.
I'm a friendly audience for that argument, but supposedly that's not true at all.
What's not true, that the Old Testament was based primarily on Jewish customs at the time?
I admittedly don't know near enough about the founding of Islam to proffer an educated opinion on how the Koran shaped the culture at the time, as opposed to the other way around.
The theory is the books were based on God's revealed word, not the culture. But I'm personally more in line with your thinking.
That's true,. We would have reasonable arguments all day. Every action would be questioned and need to be justified with empirical, testable material evidence. It would be exhausting.
Once the religious folks are gone the enemy will be reassigned to another group and life will go on as it always has.
I guess, I would go with Jesus. He strikes me as the more amiable of the two. ... unless Muhammad was headed to a strip club or to a brothel or wanted some advice on how to find available girls ... or wanted me to connect him to a drug dealer.
I do note see either as being much of a tipper, so this is a tough one.
