Duck Dynasty: Beginning of the End?

Off Topic
281

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Why does no one believe in Zeus, Minerva, or Fujin anymore? [/quote]

Actually, a pretty good number of people believe in Fujin, and Tenjin, and Amaterasu. The Japanese are, as a race, some of the most atheistic and scientific (I won’t say “rational”, because I was married to one) folks around, but they get verrrrry touchy if you suggest that their native gods don’t exist. You can choose to believe in Jesus, or choose to follow the teachings of Buddha, but the Shinto gods are an incontrovertible fact if you happen to have been born Japanese.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, would think of opening a business or building a new house without making the proper propitiations to the deities: shrines to the various kami are found in the tiniest village and the biggest cities. And a friend of mine–a very well-educated, successful business man, married to an American woman–swears that he saw an apparition of Konohanasakuya-hime (the goddess of Mt. Fuji) standing in the clouds atop a black dragon when his plane passed over the mountain.

The gods are quite real in Japan. At least as real as Jesus and Yahweh and Allah are to Christians and Jews and Muslims, and in a way which is hard to put one’s finger on, perhaps even a bit more so.

282

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

Bible:
http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

Quran:
http://www.wvinter.net/~haught/Koran.html

283

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

Yes, and it’s very clearly stated in American state and federal laws to kill people convicted of capital crimes.

Capital punishment is an option in a number of legal systems, secular and religious. We just happen to call it “crime” rather than “sin”.

284

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century.

285

Haha, what happened to this thread? Can’t we all just get along?

I’m an atheist and have christian friends and we get along just fine. We just don’t talk about that religious stuff together and focus more on stuff going on in our everyday life.

286

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.

287

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.

288

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.

289

Can someone explain to me the draw of this show?

I haven’t watched an episode myself, but it doesn’t appear to be particularly interesting.

290

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Can someone explain to me the draw of this show?

I haven’t watched an episode myself, but it doesn’t appear to be particularly interesting.[/quote]

A family whom people would assume are backwoods hicks are actually pretty sharp business people with a good product. Throw in some “back woods wisdom”, strong family values, shticky shenanigans and messing around outdoors.

It has also become cool to grow a big shitty beard and act like you have some sort of the aforementioned back woods wisdom.

291

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.
[/quote]

Who claimed that the Bible promotes murder? No holy book, as far as I am aware, promotes or condones murder. They all condemn murder, but, like our present legal system, they go to extensive lengths to specify all the kinds of killing that “don’t count” as murder.

Blaze’s initial statement, which you viewed as inflammatory, was that the Bible and the Qur’an both specified death as a punishment for sin.

My response to that was, “yeah, so?”

We kill sinners all the time in our enlightened, secular society. Sinners who have sinned against society or humanity, perhaps, rather than against God, but those same sins would have been met with the same punishment in the days of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Or, indeed, Hammurabi.

292

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.
[/quote]

Who claimed that the Bible promotes murder? No holy book, as far as I am aware, promotes or condones murder. They all condemn murder, but, like our present legal system, they go to extensive lengths to specify all the kinds of killing that “don’t count” as murder.

Blaze’s initial statement, which you viewed as inflammatory, was that the Bible and the Qur’an both specified death as a punishment for sin.

My response to that was, “yeah, so?”

We kill sinners all the time in our enlightened, secular society. Sinners who have sinned against society or humanity, perhaps, rather than against God, but those same sins would have been met with the same punishment in the days of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Or, indeed, Hammurabi. [/quote]

I didn’t necessarily find his statement inflammatory personally. To do that I would have actually had to have cared what he was saying, but for the purpose of debate I was looking for him to support his statement with fact.

293

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.
[/quote]

Who claimed that the Bible promotes murder? No holy book, as far as I am aware, promotes or condones murder. They all condemn murder, but, like our present legal system, they go to extensive lengths to specify all the kinds of killing that “don’t count” as murder.

Blaze’s initial statement, which you viewed as inflammatory, was that the Bible and the Qur’an both specified death as a punishment for sin.

My response to that was, “yeah, so?”

We kill sinners all the time in our enlightened, secular society. Sinners who have sinned against society or humanity, perhaps, rather than against God, but those same sins would have been met with the same punishment in the days of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Or, indeed, Hammurabi. [/quote]

I didn’t necessarily find his statement inflammatory personally. To do that I would have actually had to have cared what he was saying, but for the purpose of debate I was looking for him to support his statement with fact. [/quote]

So do you believe that the statement “it’s very clearly stated in the Quran and Bible to kill sinners” is not supported by the texts themselves?

294

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.
[/quote]

Who claimed that the Bible promotes murder? No holy book, as far as I am aware, promotes or condones murder. They all condemn murder, but, like our present legal system, they go to extensive lengths to specify all the kinds of killing that “don’t count” as murder.

Blaze’s initial statement, which you viewed as inflammatory, was that the Bible and the Qur’an both specified death as a punishment for sin.

My response to that was, “yeah, so?”

We kill sinners all the time in our enlightened, secular society. Sinners who have sinned against society or humanity, perhaps, rather than against God, but those same sins would have been met with the same punishment in the days of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Or, indeed, Hammurabi. [/quote]

I didn’t necessarily find his statement inflammatory personally. To do that I would have actually had to have cared what he was saying, but for the purpose of debate I was looking for him to support his statement with fact. [/quote]

So do you believe that the statement “it’s very clearly stated in the Quran and Bible to kill sinners” is not supported by the texts themselves?[/quote]

The Quran I can not speak of. The Bible no, or if it does it would be in the Old Testament. And as a Christian I believe that Jesus Christ died on the for all of our sins. I also believe very strongly in the Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that ye be judged”.

295

Pwi in 3, 2, 1 …

296

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Pwi in 3, 2, 1 …[/quote]

Yup. This thread has definitely been PWIned.

297

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
So, you do realize that said dog is an animal, and anytime you went to sleep without tying this animal up you had faith, some would say blind faith, that this dog wasn’t going to maul you in your sleep right?

Every single time that dog licked your face out of your perceived love, you had faith it wasn’t going to bite you. Every, single, time.

Everyone has faith. [/quote]

This right here launched my sides into orbit.

Almost as silly as the fact that, in the year of our Flying Spaghetti Monster 2013, people are STILL not covering their banana stems in Saran Wrap (or wax like an enlightened patrician) and opening them from the correct end.

298

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Well, if anything will kill a thread about the musings by a Louisiana duck hunting mogul about vaginas and anuses it’s Stormtrooper Atheist College Student and his rants about the blight of religion.[/quote]

You can almost feel the hate radiating off him.

299

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Can someone explain to me the draw of this show?

I haven’t watched an episode myself, but it doesn’t appear to be particularly interesting.[/quote]

Well it’s funny…it has strong family values and even though people like to make fun of “hicks” their duck call business has given them a net worth of around 80 million dollars (Forbes).

People like to make fun of people in flyover states, but you can tell they care about each other, and they are very successful people as well.

300

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]JCMPG wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
“A lot of atrocities were done under religious systems, but they have nothing to do with religious systems. Christianity isn’t necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. It just so happened to be that the guy(s) at the top was drunk with power and a fucking cunt.”

That you can’t or won’t see that is just willful closed-mindedness and blind faith that your ideology is better than the one you oppose. It’s precisely the type of zealotry that has resulted in all the worst of religious history.[/quote]

Except it’s very clearly stated in the quran and bible to kill sinners.[/quote]

If you are going to say something as inflammatory as that you will need to cite your proof.[/quote]

It’s not necessarily an inflammatory statement. Both Judaic law and Shari’a specify death for a number of offences, many of them also capital offenses in secular legal systems. Blasphemy is still punishable by death in a number of countries, and was a hanging offence in England until the end of the 17th century. [/quote]

Within the Judaic Laws and Shari has there been any interpretation of another text to deduce these laws? If so then I think it throws that argument out. But now we are down to splitting hairs and that is pointless in a debate.
[/quote]

Sorry, I’m not sure I follow. What “argument” do you think merits being “thrown out” and for what reason?

Clarify what you mean by “interpretation of another text to deduce these laws”. Christian and Shari’a laws were both developed in the context of Judaic law, which likely had its roots in Babylonian and Egyptian law. Capital crimes today were capital crimes in the time of Hammurabi.
[/quote]

If we are speaking of if the Bible specifically promotes murder.

Some of the mitzvot d’oraita are clear, explicit commands in the text of the Torah (thou shalt not murder; you shall write words of Torah on the doorposts of your house), others are more implicit (the mitzvah to recite grace after meals, which is inferred from “and you will eat and be satisfied and bless the L-rd your G-d”), and some can only be ascertained by deductive reasoning (that a man shall not commit incest with his daughter, which is deduced from the commandment not to commit incest with his daughter’s daughter).
Source - Judaism 101: Halakhah: Jewish Law

I was referring to the fact that some of the Judaic Laws have been deduced from the bible.
[/quote]

Who claimed that the Bible promotes murder? No holy book, as far as I am aware, promotes or condones murder. They all condemn murder, but, like our present legal system, they go to extensive lengths to specify all the kinds of killing that “don’t count” as murder.

Blaze’s initial statement, which you viewed as inflammatory, was that the Bible and the Qur’an both specified death as a punishment for sin.

My response to that was, “yeah, so?”

We kill sinners all the time in our enlightened, secular society. Sinners who have sinned against society or humanity, perhaps, rather than against God, but those same sins would have been met with the same punishment in the days of Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Or, indeed, Hammurabi. [/quote]

I didn’t necessarily find his statement inflammatory personally. To do that I would have actually had to have cared what he was saying, but for the purpose of debate I was looking for him to support his statement with fact. [/quote]

So do you believe that the statement “it’s very clearly stated in the Quran and Bible to kill sinners” is not supported by the texts themselves?[/quote]

The Quran I can not speak of. The Bible no, or if it does it would be in the Old Testament. And as a Christian I believe that Jesus Christ died on the for all of our sins. I also believe very strongly in the Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that ye be judged”.
[/quote]

Did you read the links I posted?