Ashura thread - To commomerotate the great Imam Hussein (AS)

  • Thread starter ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ
  • Start date
eile

eile

Well-Known Member
The Shia have been persecuted for over 1000 years, they didn't turn back on their faith. I dont know why you think is this special to early Christians who were a small group and existed underground to escape persecution until the ruler adopted their faith and imposed it.
you're indeed missing the point. it's pretty simple: if a religion is being fulfilled thru x, then one would reasonably expect this religion to persist and grow in numbers, rather than dwindle and disappear, thru x, and vice versa

if a religion is persisting and growing in numbers, rather than dwindling and disappearing, thru 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution', then it is a reasonable indication that 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution' is an essential part of this religion, that this religion is being fulfilled or is being true to itself, to its founder, thru 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution'; case of Christianity (this is the point which you ought address)

likewise, if the shia sect persisted and grew in numbers thru 'being persecuted and killed while fighting and resisting against own persecution', then being 'persecuted and killed while fighting and resisting against own persecution' is an essential part of the shia sect (the sect's founder(s) e.g hussein). one would thus not expect their numbers to dwindle or their sect to disappear if/when they are being persecuted and killed while fighting against own persecution. however, their constant or continued fringe status within islam can be explained by them being predicated also upon mohammad where 'being persecuted and killed while fighting against own persecution' goes contrary to the nature of muhammad's message and the corresponding claims he spouted (proving all the more the point stated above and in my previous post)
 
Last edited:
  • Advertisement
  • Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    He told me that if you have been arguing all these years and still know next to nothing about the very basics of Christianity, then you must be doing something wrong and you need to correct it :)
    You need to remove the imaginary crown around your head when arguing religion. But good to display you're such a liar who doesn't even mind attribution lies to God, even though we both know that presently there is not divine revelations. Otherwise there would be zero atheists.
     
    Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    you're indeed missing the point. it's pretty simple: if a religion is being fulfilled thru x, then one would reasonably expect this religion to persist and grow in numbers, rather than dwindle and disappear, thru x, and vice versa

    if a religion is persisting and growing in numbers, rather than dwindling and disappearing, thru 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution', then it is a reasonable indication that 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution' is an essential part of this religion, that this religion is being fulfilled or is being true to itself, to its founder, thru 'being persecuted and killed and without resisting persecution'; case of Christianity (this is the point which you ought address)

    likewise, if the shia sect persisted and grew in numbers thru 'being persecuted and killed while fighting and resisting against own persecution', then being 'persecuted and killed while fighting and resisting against own persecution' is an essential part of the shia sect (the sect's founder(s) e.g hussein). one would thus not expect their numbers to dwindle or their sect to disappear if/when they are being persecuted and killed while fighting against own persecution. however, their constant or continued fringe status within islam can be explained by them being predicated also upon mohammad where 'being persecuted and killed while fighting against own persecution' goes contrary to the nature of muhammad's message and the corresponding claims he spouted (proving all the more the point stated above and in my previous post)
    Please this is not mathematics where you use X and Y. And dont complicate your explanation using a,b,c,d,e etc. Use simple words so you be understood.

    You're actually the one evading the point and refusing to see the obvious. Being powerless, therefore not resisting persecution, and then growing in numbers, doesn't mean you do not have the will to or the faith in self defense. The question is had the Roman emperor not adopted Christianity as a state religion, what would have become of Christianity? Afterwards, when you had the power, were Christians pacifists? You're only using a particular period you were small in numbers and persecuted and had little means to fight back to say that was all about your reality.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    You need to remove the imaginary crown around your head when arguing religion. But good to display you're such a liar who doesn't even mind attribution lies to God, even though we both know that presently there is not divine revelations. Otherwise there would be zero atheists.
    impressive. i provide you sources, priests explaining, and you still insist it is a lie :) that is the textbook definition of denial my friend. you are a very insecure person in you faith my friend. your on going stubbornness and denial are a sharp testament to that.

    subject has just been demoted from understanding next to nothing about Christianity to having issues understanding in general. subject also exhibits consistent patters of cognitive dissonance in addition to the ongoing symptoms of cognitive bias. subject is not responding well to therapy :p
     
    !Aoune32

    !Aoune32

    Well-Known Member
    The Shia have been persecuted for over 1000 years, they didn't turn back on their faith. I dont know why you think is this special to early Christians who were a small group and existed underground to escape persecution until the ruler adopted their faith and imposed it.
    existed underground? I suggest you go and read properly bro.
    they didn't exist underground. they were hammered by the roman empire itself. they would feed christians to the lions.
    what point are you trying to make aslan?
     
    Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    impressive. i provide you sources, priests explaining, and you still insist it is a lie :) that is the textbook definition of denial my friend. you are a very insecure person in you faith my friend. your on going stubbornness and denial are a sharp testament to that.

    subject has just been demoted from understanding next to nothing about Christianity to having issues understanding in general. subject also exhibits consistent patters of cognitive dissonance in addition to the ongoing symptoms of cognitive bias. subject is not responding well to therapy :p
    I see this tirade as an outburst aimed at making yourself feel better. You keep jumping from one subject to another and you refuse to treat the pertinent questions and objections. You have now turned yourself into an oracle who reads people's minds and also mix that up with abuse.
     
    Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    existed underground? I suggest you go and read properly bro.
    they didn't exist underground. they were hammered by the roman empire itself. they would feed christians to the lions.
    what point are you trying to make aslan?
    Yes, that made many to practice their faith underground. Some even went as far as renouncing their faith. When a decree was issued to make every subject of Rome produce a certificate of sacrifice to the gods, Christians would offer bribes for fake certificates. You know little of your history. That's not my fault.
     
    !Aoune32

    !Aoune32

    Well-Known Member
    Yes, that made many to practice their faith underground. Some even went as far as renouncing their faith. When a decree was issued to make every subject of Rome produce a certificate of sacrifice to the gods, Christians would offer bribes for fake certificates. You know little of your history. That's not my fault.
    Again I ask what is the point you are trying to make?
    Second I know my history very well. It is you who doesn't know your history. You conquered the ME by the sword and 2elak 3ein te7ke?
     
    eile

    eile

    Well-Known Member
    Please this is not mathematics where you use X and Y. And dont complicate your explanation using a,b,c,d,e etc. Use simple words so you be understood.

    You're actually the one evading the point and refusing to see the obvious. Being powerless, therefore not resisting persecution, and then growing in numbers, doesn't mean you do not have the will to or the faith in self defense. The question is had the Roman emperor not adopted Christianity as a state religion, what would have become of Christianity? Afterwards, when you had the power, were Christians pacifists? You're only using a particular period you were small in numbers and persecuted and had little means to fight back to say that was all about your reality.
    first of all, Christianity isn't a pacifist religion at least not in the naive sense of the word, and early Christians weren't anarchists either. the point however is that while both state authority and self-defense in principle are legitimate in Christianity, Christianity (in its essence) goes above and beyond both

    second of all, you ask 'had the Roman emperor not adopted Christianity as a state religion, what would have become of Christianity?' Christianity most likely would have continued its exponential growth and expansion, inside and outside and despite the Roman empire, thru being non-resistedly persecuted, just as was the case before the Roman empire adopted it, up until the Roman empire would have either completely disintegrated, and with it the then rich deposit of our human civilization, or adopted it (as it did thanks be to providence) and gotten purified, salvaged and transformed

    third of all, the point that seemingly is causing you to rather chop off your own head than even think of processing it is that a religion growing in numbers by not resisting persecution (rather than resisting it and getting defeated) indicates that 'not resisting persecution' is at the heart of the religion, in which case 'being persecuted and killed because of the lack of the means or power to fight against persecution' doesn't apply (whereas in the case of 'resisting persecution and getting defeated', it certainly does, e.g muhammad in his 'peaceful years', or the shia)
     
    Last edited:
    Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    Again I ask what is the point you are trying to make?
    Second I know my history very well. It is you who doesn't know your history. You conquered the ME by the sword and 2elak 3ein te7ke?
    Yeah, we conquered the Middle East by the sword because we are from Jupiter. Lol. I have never held a sword before.

    If you want to know my point, read through the posts, where the discussion started.
     
    Lebmonage

    Lebmonage

    Legendary Member
    first of all, Christianity isn't a pacifist religion at least not in the naive sense of the word, and early Christians weren't anarchists either. the point however is that while both state authority and self-defense in principle are legitimate in Christianity, Christianity (in its essence) goes above and beyond both

    second of all, you ask 'had the Roman emperor not adopted Christianity as a state religion, what would have become of Christianity?' Christianity most likely would have continued its exponential growth and expansion, inside and outside and despite the Roman empire, thru being non-resistedly persecuted, just as was the case before the Roman empire adopted it, up until the Roman empire would have either completely disintegrated, and with it the then rich deposit of our human civilization, or adopted it (as it did thanks be to providence) and gotten purified, salvaged and transformed

    third of all, the point that seemingly is causing you to rather chop off your own head than even think of processing it is that a religion growing in numbers by not resisting persecution (rather than resisting it and getting defeated) indicates that 'not resisting persecution' is at the heart of the religion, in which case 'being persecuted and killed because of the lack of the means or power to fight against persecution' doesn't apply (whereas in the case of 'resisting persecution and getting defeated', it certainly does, e.g muhammad in his 'peaceful years', or the shia)
    The point I am not getting and the point I am not getting. I don't need or want to get your point. You point is irrelevant. You're the one who brought in the matter of a persecuted band of Christians in the early centuries to prove that Jesus didn't or couldn't have ask his follower to buy swords to resist. This is a red herring by mixing up two unrelated issues.
     
    !Aoune32

    !Aoune32

    Well-Known Member
    Yeah, we conquered the Middle East by the sword because we are from Jupiter. Lol. I have never held a sword before.

    If you want to know my point, read through the posts, where the discussion started.
    yeh thats what your religion is about violence and the sword. good luck with it.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I see this tirade as an outburst aimed at making yourself feel better. You keep jumping from one subject to another and you refuse to treat the pertinent questions and objections. You have now turned yourself into an oracle who reads people's minds and also mix that up with abuse.
    khayye wth is wrong with you? when you are given something with reference sources, leish betdallak tsheri3?

    you can disagree with the concept, but you cannot claim it is a lie or made up. gharib amrak. now i understand a little bit better why you and the sunnis have been at each other's necks for the last 1400 years, you really do not process neither what you are told nor what you say. you argue blindly just to argue. for all the years that you have been arguing, you have not added anything of value to this discussion, you neither explained anything about islam nor did you learn anything about Christianity. so what is the meaning of this ongoing jadal?

    you lack the very basic requirements for a discussion. either that or 3am tenme7en, which makes it even worse. khalas khayye, rou7 bsabilak.
     
    !Aoune32

    !Aoune32

    Well-Known Member
    khayye wth is wrong with you? when you are given something with reference sources, leish betdallak tsheri3?

    you can disagree with the concept, but you cannot claim it is a lie or made up. gharib amrak. now i understand a little bit better why you and the sunnis have been at each other's necks for the last 1400 years, you really do not process neither what you are told nor what you say. you argue blindly just to argue. for all the years that you have been arguing, you have not added anything of value to this discussion, you neither explained anything about islam nor did you learn anything about Christianity. so what is the meaning of this ongoing jadal?

    you lack the very basic requirements for a discussion. either that or 3am tenme7en, which makes it even worse. khalas khayye, rou7 bsabilak.

    where there is persecution the church grows.
    There are an estimated 93 million to 115 million Protestants in China and about 10 million to 12 million Catholics. Most belong to unregistered churches. If the rate of growth continues, China is expected to have the world’s largest Christian population by 2030.
     
    Top