The Khilafah, is it a choice or required

Well I guess, had I argued that Christianity dictates a democracy, you would of had a point.

Your statement: "... doesnt dictate a theocracy as the proper form of government. Quite the opposite." implies such.\

Did you have a different implication in mind?

References to relationships among people and people, people and god in the bible are heirarchical, unquestionable, hardly democratic.
 
Werbung:
Your statement: "... doesnt dictate a theocracy as the proper form of government. Quite the opposite." implies such.\

Did you have a different implication in mind?

Democracy is not the absence of theocracy.
 
It is extremely important to box our enemies into as small a box as possible so that others will be our allies or at least stay out of it.
Attacking the religion itself does not accomplish this.
In order to bring change, you must propose an alternative that is acceptable to the masses, has support from some leaders of the masses, and that can conceivably work. Without alternatives, we cannot expect the status quo to change. And if we create alternatives that are not acceptable to the people who must live under them, we are making more enemies.

Support for suicide bombings against civilians has fallen sharply across the Muslim world since 2002, a major survey has suggested.

In Lebanon, Bangladesh, Jordan, Pakistan and Indonesia, the proportion of Muslims who support suicide bombing has declined by half or more since 2002.

There is also declining support among Muslims for Osama Bin Laden. In Jordan, just 20% express a lot or some confidence in Bin Laden, down from 56% four years ago.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6914959.stm


I suspect, had we complied with every demand in Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa, following 9/11, support for terrorism and Bin laden would have doubled, as opposed to being cut in half over the last 5 years. Maybe, when dealing with people who wish you dead, Machiavelli was right. It is better to be feared than loved.
 
Support for suicide bombings against civilians has fallen sharply across the Muslim world since 2002, a major survey has suggested.

In Lebanon, Bangladesh, Jordan, Pakistan and Indonesia, the proportion of Muslims who support suicide bombing has declined by half or more since 2002.

There is also declining support among Muslims for Osama Bin Laden. In Jordan, just 20% express a lot or some confidence in Bin Laden, down from 56% four years ago.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6914959.stm


I suspect, had we complied with every demand in Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa, following 9/11, support for terrorism and Bin laden would have doubled, as opposed to being cut in half over the last 5 years. Maybe, when dealing with people who wish you dead, Machiavelli was right. It is better to be feared than loved.

You are assuming that support rises and falls with America's actions. It might just be that muslims are sick of violence and bloodshed and terrorism and that they are seeing the truth of what these terrorists are really doing to their religion. Considering that it has increased horrendously in Afghanistan and Iraq...I would say our policy makes little difference.
 
Basically, all this proves is neither the Bible nor the Quran legitimately promote democracy in any valid way. As I said, none of the Abrahamic faiths, taken literaly - set the stage for a democracy.

I think our founding fathers took a lot of ideas from the bible when they created our democracy but any government could have done so. The Bible could be applicable in any government system and does not promote any one to the best of my knowledge.

For example Jesus clearly expects that people will give to the poor voluntarily but if they choose to live communally there would be nothing un-Biblical about that.
 
I think our founding fathers took a lot of ideas from the bible when they created our democracy but any government could have done so. The Bible could be applicable in any government system and does not promote any one to the best of my knowledge.

For example Jesus clearly expects that people will give to the poor voluntarily but if they choose to live communally there would be nothing un-Biblical about that.

Actually, the founding father's took nothing from the bible - most of their ideas came from studying the Greeks, for example, as well as the great thinkers and ideas from the Enlightenment.
 
Actually, the founding father's took nothing from the bible - most of their ideas came from studying the Greeks, for example, as well as the great thinkers and ideas from the Enlightenment.

Ever read Locke's 'Reasonableness of Christianity'?
 
Actually, the founding father's took nothing from the bible - most of their ideas came from studying the Greeks, for example, as well as the great thinkers and ideas from the Enlightenment.


Our U.S. Constitution was founded on Biblical principles and it was the intention of the authors for this to be a Christian nation. The Constitution had 55 people work upon it, of which 52 were evangelical Christians.(3) We can go back in history and look at what the founding fathers wrote to know where they were getting their ideas. This is exactly what two professors did. Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman reviewed an estimated 15,000 items with explicit political content printed between 1760 and 1805 and from these items they identified 3,154 references to other sources. The source they most often quoted was the Bible, accounting for 34% of all citations. Sixty percent of all quotes came from men who used the Bible to form their conclusions. That means that 94% of all quotes by the founding fathers were based on the Bible. The founding fathers took ideas from the Bible and incorporated them into our government. If it was their intention to separate the state and church they would never have taken principles from the Bible and put them into our government. An example of an idea taken from the Bible and then incorporated into our government is found in Isaiah 33:22 which says, "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers took this scripture and made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive.

http://www.therefinersfire.org/more_evil_bible.htm

"Patrick Henry, who is called the firebrand of the American Revolution, is still remembered for his words, "Give me liberty or give me death." But in current textbooks the context of these words is deleted.

Here is what he actually said: "An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not to the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."

The following year, 1776, he wrote this: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here."

Consider these words that Thomas Jefferson wrote on the front of his well- worn Bible: "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus. I have little doubt that our whole country will soon be rallied to the unity of our Creator ".

He was also the chairman of the American Bible Society, which he considered his highest and most important role.

It is the same Congress that formed the American Bible Society. Immediately after creating the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress voted to purchase and import 20,000 copies of scripture for the people of this nation."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1320483/posts

All one has to do to see the influence of the Bible on our founding documents is to count the number of times that God is referenced in them and remember that it is none other than the Christian God that is being referenced.

E.G. "The Declaration of Independence acknowledges that mankind is created and that the Creator God bestows the rights. That means, that no man can take them away, and that government, instituted by God, is to protect those rights. By implication, government cannot deprive a person of those rights absent due process of law. Thus, God gave mankind free will, and a function of government is to protect the electorates exercise of free will. That is a Christian concept."

"Benjamin Franklin, considered a deist by many, said, "He who shall introduce into the public affairs the principles of a primitive Christianity, will change the face of the world." And Thomas Jefferson, also considered a deist, said, "The reason that Christianity is the best friend of government is because Christianity is the only religion that changes the heart." Jefferson is even quoted as having said, "I am a Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ."

George Washington, the father of our nation said, "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible."

James Madison, the fourth president and the Father of the Constitution said,

The future and success of America is not in this Constitution but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded."



http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/heritage/heritage19.html

These are the very same men who believed in a separation of church and state, I.e. the state should not mess with the church and there should be no state established church. But just because the state was not to establish a church did not mean it could not promote religiosity.

Things have changed a lot since then. A stricter separation is not all bad.
 
Werbung:
..............
These findings are from surveys in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Indonesia...
On average, about three out of four agree with seeking to “require Islamic countries to impose a strict application of sharia,” and to “keep Western values out of Islamic countries.” Two-thirds would even like to “unify all Islamic counties into a single Islamic state or caliphate.”
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56503

Support was particularly strong in Jordan, Palestine, and Egypt, where
approximately two-thirds of Muslim respondents stated that the Shari'a must be the only source of legislation; while the remaining third believed that it must be “one of the sources of legislation”
http://www.css-jordan.org/new/REVISITINGTTHEARABSTREETReport.pdf

"One day my dear Muslims," shouted Anjem Choudary, "Islam will govern Britain!"...
"Democracy, hypocrisy," Choudary chanted as the crowd echoed him. "Tony Blair, terrorist! Tony Blair, murderer! Queen Elizabeth, go to hell!"...
"Brothers and sisters, make no mistake. Make no mistake. The British government, the queen, the MPs in this country, they are enemies to you, enemies to Allah and enemies to the Muslims."...
"Of course," he replied, "we want Islam to be a source of governance for all of mankind. And we also believe that one day America will be ruled by Islam."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56503
 
Back
Top