In your recent blog posting on Numbers Chapter 31, I responded to your quotation of Number 31 by referring you to Walters Classic work on the Distinction between the Office of the Law and the Gospel in Scripture:
I assume with this most recent quotation of Exodus 21:20-21, you have not had a chance to read through the work. You still seem unware of the Holiness of God and what God requires of Man.
Does not Jesus say in Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect?
or in Leviticus 19:2
“Speak to all the congregation of the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy
or in Deuteronomy 18:13 “You shall be blameless before the LORD your God.
In your previous posting, you mentioned the Christian Dilemena – but in actuality there is no Dilemena Christian; for the Eternally Perfect Justice of God and the Eternally Perfect Mercy of God is met at the Cross – So the only Dilemena presented is the Delemena for Islam – for they have no cross –
Now getting back to Exodus 21:20-21
As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obediance.
The Apostle Paul (Peace be upon him) in Hebrews Chapter 12: makes this perfectly clear:
And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
12 Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees;
Mr Williams, since you are in need of good theology on the Law and Holiness of God, I thought I would share with you John Calvins commentary on Exodus 19:16 that will shed some light on this present discussion on the office of the Law:
Exodus 19:16
¶ And it came to passe on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thicke cloud vpon the mount, and the voyce of the trumpet exceeding lowd, so that all the people that was in the campe, trembled.
Calvin Commentary on Exodus 16:
. And it came to pass on the third day. We must bear in mind what I have already adverted to, that this terrible spectacle was partly to set the presence of God before their eyes, that His majesty might urge the beholders to obedience, and vindicate His doctrine from contempt, and partly to express the nature of the Law, which in itself produces nothing but mere terror. The air was disturbed by thunder and lightning’s, and the sound of the trumpet; the mountain was wrapped in smoke and darkness, that the people might humbly prostrate themselves before God, and solemnly embrace the covenant proposed to them; since religion never penetrates the mind so that it seriously receives God’s word until its vices are cleansed and corrected, and it is really subdued. And this fear is common also to the Gospel; for as in the promulgation of the Law God shook the earth, so when He speaks by the Prophet of the coming of Christ, and the restoration of His Church, He says, “Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens and the earth,” etc. (Haggai 2:6.) Thus, too, David, when he would point to God as the avenger of His Church, describes Him under this image; for no doubt when, in Psalm 18:7-9, he says, “Then the earth shook and trembled, the foundations also of the hills moved and were shaken, — there went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured; he bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet,” he alludes to the history which Moses here relates. Habakkuk 3:3 yet more plainly does so, — “God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran.” Meanwhile the other point remains, that the awful prodigies, at which the people needs must tremble, were added as seals to the promulgation of the Law, because the Law was given to cite slumbering consciences to the judgment-seat, that, through fear of eternal death, they might flee for refuge to God’s mercy. http://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/exodus/19.htm
As holy Paul says (Peace be upon him) 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
We should always consider what the opposite side has the offer. If one doesn’t do that then that means he/she doesn’t really care about the truth but just want to remain in his/her comfort zone.
Keep in mind – when Paul William hurls these scriptures at simple Christians who haven’t been educated in sound theology, those of us that are learned in sound biblical theology will most aptly step in to provide a clear and concise answer to the issue at hand. In my experience on this site – Muslims have also stepped in to help explain passages of scripture in the Koran. This is to be commended on both sides and I have showed respect to other Muslims on this forum When they are weighing in on a particular subject.
Now all I have done in my posting is provide clarification for this passage citing the classic work on the distinction between statements Law and statements of Gospel and understand the office of each.
Now getting back to Exodus 21:20-21 I stated:
As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obedience, this is the office of the Law – instruction in righteousness and to restrain sin
We deal in like mannor with our children;
– Do we not also correct our children?
-For our Christian scriptures also speaks of God dealing with us in the same manner which is why I quoted from Hebrews 12:
So Atlas, as far you not understanding this: We also have a passage of Scripture dealing with that as well
For Jesus states in Mark 4:11-12
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
As an Anglican, this is the historic position – And as you well know – the Puritan divines loved preaching on these passages – It is a given that most Modern Christians from the church of last week are unable to deal with such passages since they are no longer educated in historic Christine doctrine – Even James White’s (Who claims to be a real Calvinist) recent DL broadcast wasn’t able to respond to your posting on the Christian Delema either – I think White’s response was that the passage in Numbers was complicated – Shame on White for not understanding a basic foundation of reformed doctrine of Law & Gospel. But to be honest I’m not surprised by White’s statement – To often, Calvinism is associated with Election – but a major contribution of both Luther and Calvinism to the churches was the understanding of Law & Gospel.
And Trust me Mr Williams – I get that you do accept these historic theological positions, especially from the Magisterial Reformation.
I think Paul Tillich said it the best when he summed up and identified only two religions in the world naming Catholics and Protestants – And As a Protestant I am perfectly willing to accept Muhammad as a good catholic –
[As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obedience, this is the office of the Law – instruction in righteousness and to restrain sin
We deal in like mannor with our children;
– Do we not also correct our children?]
Yes we correct our children but we don’t beat them to a near death experience where as long as they get up after two days everything is fine.
[-For our Christian scriptures also speaks of God dealing with us in the same manner which is why I quoted from Hebrews 12]
I don’t think you can link those verses with those of exodus. God can not only beat us to correct us but He can sometimes beat us to death (as punishment or to test our faith). So God can even go beyond the beating without killing His slave/servant. The relation of God to His slaves is not like the relation between a Master to his slaves. God has authority and superiority over His slaves whereas a Master has only the authority over his slaves.
[So Atlas, as far you not understanding this: We also have a passage of Scripture dealing with that as well
For Jesus states in Mark 4:11-12
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.”]
I’m really trying to understand what you’re saying. Are you implying that Exodus 21:20-21 should be taken as parables? The context of those verses do not imply a sign of a parable at all.
I think you are imposing a view on these passages that don’t fit. In the NT it is said that a slave must obey his Master, even the harsh conditions.
Let me try to make it clearer for you to understand:
First it is important to read what’s in the Mosiac Law and what’s not in it:
Its says:
Exodus 21:20-21 King James Version (KJV)
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
Now given there is a distinction in civil laws over Free men and slaves,but you’ll notice God has no respect to persons with regard to murder; but avenges the death of a slave and a free-man in the same way, if he should die immediately of his wound.
Whereas the barbaric system of the Romans and other nations placed life and death in the hands of the owner of the slaves.
No where in Exodus 21:20-21 does it say to beat the slave to a pulp, or for the slave to be maimed. This passage is not talking about unjust cruelty –
It is not allowable for cruel and truculent masters to wound their slaves severely; and this is what the words expressly imply, for the smiter is only exempted from punishment when he shall have so restrained himself as that the marks of his cruelty should not appear. For that the slaves should “stand for one or two days,” [38] is equivalent to saying, that they were perfect and sound in all their members; but if a wound had been inflicted, or there was any mutilation, the smiter was guilty of murder. None, therefore, is absolved but he who only meant to chastise his slave; and where no injury appears, it is probable that there was no intention to kill him. Whilst, then, this law prohibits bloodthirsty assaults, it by no means gives greater license to murder. The reason, which is added, must be restricted to the private loss; because a murderer would never be absolved on the pretext that he had purchased his slave with money, since the life of a man cannot be so estimated.
Hebrews is also discussing the same Chastisement as us as sons of God.
Proverbs 13:24King James Version (KJV)
24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes
As far as the quote of Mark – was in reference to not making sense of our scriptures – I didn’t mean that Exod 21 was a parable – it takes on a much stronger reference that you didn’t pick up – but that’s beside the point, I was just having fun with you in reference to that passage
“For that the slaves should “stand for one or two days,” [38] is equivalent to saying, that they were perfect and sound in all their members; but if a wound had been inflicted, or there was any mutilation, the smiter was guilty of murder”
I like that explanation but murder for a wound seems to much of a punishment to me though.
But as always I must ask:
Can you please provide some evidence for that. Were there Jewish commentators that have written such explanation in their commentary?
Does this only refer to male slaves or also female slaves as well? Please provide some evidence for that too if you don’t mind.
I think Paul Tillich said it the best when he summed up and identified only two religions in the world naming Catholics and Protestants – And As a Protestant I am perfectly willing to accept Muhammad as a good catholic –
Nani?! (What!?)
How is Muhammad (sallahu alayhi wa salaam) a good Catholic? I find that to be insulting to the Prophet, saws.
There are two types of religious people: those who are enthusiastic and those who are superstitious.
Islam tends to be more on the former, while Catholics tend to be more on the latter. I suppose I wasn’t superstitious to be Catholic. Muslims can be “superstitious” if they emphasize taqlid too much.
My first reflection is, That superstition is favourable to priestly power, and enthusiasm not less or rather more contrary to it, than sound reason and philosophy. As superstition is founded on fear, sorrow, and a depression of spirits, it represents the man to himself in such despicable colours, that he appears unworthy, in his own eyes, of approaching the divine presence, and naturally has recourse to any other person, whose sanctity of life, or, perhaps, impudence and cunning, have made him be supposed more favoured by the Divinity. To him the superstitious entrust their devotions: To his care they recommend their prayers, petitions, and sacrifices: And by his means, they hope to render their addresses acceptable to their incensed Deity. Hence the origin of PRIESTS, who may justly be regarded as invention of a timorous and abject superstition, which, ever diffident of itself, dares not offer up its own devotions, but ignorantly thinks to recommend itself to the Divinity, by the mediation of his supposed friends and servants. As superstition is a considerable ingredient in almost all religions, even the most fanatical; there being nothing but philosophy able entirely to conquer these unaccountable terrors; hence it proceeds, that in almost every sect of religion there are priests to be found: But the stronger mixture there is of superstition, the higher is the authority of the priesthood.
My statement referencing Muhammed as a good Catholic has nothing to do with superstitious practices in the Church of Rome – but as it is common in most religions, they share a work based righteousness where the protestant understand it’s all of Gods Grace.
Certainly you don’t have a problem saying Muhammed did good works?
(4) Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have I caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him (without any serious fault), then expiation for it is that he should set him free. (Book #015, Hadith #4079) Sahih Muslim
my commentary:
In Islam the magnitude of the offence that justifies a beating is decided by the slavemaster. Mohammed is not there to judge. There is no regulation, as in the law of Moses, which limits the damage and punishes the slavemaster who has been over zealous to correct the sloth of his slave.
LOL, madman thinks his “commentary” means anything or has any authority? Do you get up every morning and think to yourself “how can make an idiot of myself today”?
You are such an idiot that you think the hadith is somehow outdone by the Biblical law, which allows a slavemaster to beat his slave to the point of death, whereas Islamic law allowed a light beating or slap if the slave disobeyed his master. There is no comparison here! But madman’s lying spirit is dead-set on making an idiot out of him! LOL!!
Blogging Theology 
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT that was in the OT.
Amazing refutation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The NT does nothing to make it better.
LikeLike
https://bloggingtheology.net/2018/01/16/little-known-bible-verses-you-will-not-believe-2/
LikeLike
liberalism 1
biblicism 0
LikeLike
Paul Williams
In your recent blog posting on Numbers Chapter 31, I responded to your quotation of Number 31 by referring you to Walters Classic work on the Distinction between the Office of the Law and the Gospel in Scripture:
I assume with this most recent quotation of Exodus 21:20-21, you have not had a chance to read through the work. You still seem unware of the Holiness of God and what God requires of Man.
Does not Jesus say in Matthew 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect?
or in Leviticus 19:2
“Speak to all the congregation of the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy
or in Deuteronomy 18:13 “You shall be blameless before the LORD your God.
In your previous posting, you mentioned the Christian Dilemena – but in actuality there is no Dilemena Christian; for the Eternally Perfect Justice of God and the Eternally Perfect Mercy of God is met at the Cross – So the only Dilemena presented is the Delemena for Islam – for they have no cross –
Now getting back to Exodus 21:20-21
As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obediance.
The Apostle Paul (Peace be upon him) in Hebrews Chapter 12: makes this perfectly clear:
And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
12 Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees;
Mr Williams, since you are in need of good theology on the Law and Holiness of God, I thought I would share with you John Calvins commentary on Exodus 19:16 that will shed some light on this present discussion on the office of the Law:
Exodus 19:16
¶ And it came to passe on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thicke cloud vpon the mount, and the voyce of the trumpet exceeding lowd, so that all the people that was in the campe, trembled.
Calvin Commentary on Exodus 16:
. And it came to pass on the third day. We must bear in mind what I have already adverted to, that this terrible spectacle was partly to set the presence of God before their eyes, that His majesty might urge the beholders to obedience, and vindicate His doctrine from contempt, and partly to express the nature of the Law, which in itself produces nothing but mere terror. The air was disturbed by thunder and lightning’s, and the sound of the trumpet; the mountain was wrapped in smoke and darkness, that the people might humbly prostrate themselves before God, and solemnly embrace the covenant proposed to them; since religion never penetrates the mind so that it seriously receives God’s word until its vices are cleansed and corrected, and it is really subdued. And this fear is common also to the Gospel; for as in the promulgation of the Law God shook the earth, so when He speaks by the Prophet of the coming of Christ, and the restoration of His Church, He says, “Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens and the earth,” etc. (Haggai 2:6.) Thus, too, David, when he would point to God as the avenger of His Church, describes Him under this image; for no doubt when, in Psalm 18:7-9, he says, “Then the earth shook and trembled, the foundations also of the hills moved and were shaken, — there went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured; he bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet,” he alludes to the history which Moses here relates. Habakkuk 3:3 yet more plainly does so, — “God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran.” Meanwhile the other point remains, that the awful prodigies, at which the people needs must tremble, were added as seals to the promulgation of the Law, because the Law was given to cite slumbering consciences to the judgment-seat, that, through fear of eternal death, they might flee for refuge to God’s mercy.
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/exodus/19.htm
God Bless
Jonathan
LikeLike
broken record
LikeLike
Well Burnhanuddin1
No matter how many times you ask whats 2+2, I will play the record over and over again that says 2+2 = 4
We preach Law to the hard of heart, and Gospel to the Broken hearted
But I did notice Burnhanuddin1, you didn’t deal with the issue or my response:
LikeLike
I’m not asking. your preaching sucks
LikeLike
1 Corinthians 1:18-31King James Version (KJV)
As holy Paul says (Peace be upon him) 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We should always consider what the opposite side has the offer. If one doesn’t do that then that means he/she doesn’t really care about the truth but just want to remain in his/her comfort zone.
LikeLike
That being said, I still don’t see how that really explains Exodus 21:20-21.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments Atlas
Keep in mind – when Paul William hurls these scriptures at simple Christians who haven’t been educated in sound theology, those of us that are learned in sound biblical theology will most aptly step in to provide a clear and concise answer to the issue at hand. In my experience on this site – Muslims have also stepped in to help explain passages of scripture in the Koran. This is to be commended on both sides and I have showed respect to other Muslims on this forum When they are weighing in on a particular subject.
Now all I have done in my posting is provide clarification for this passage citing the classic work on the distinction between statements Law and statements of Gospel and understand the office of each.
Now getting back to Exodus 21:20-21 I stated:
As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obedience, this is the office of the Law – instruction in righteousness and to restrain sin
We deal in like mannor with our children;
– Do we not also correct our children?
-For our Christian scriptures also speaks of God dealing with us in the same manner which is why I quoted from Hebrews 12:
So Atlas, as far you not understanding this: We also have a passage of Scripture dealing with that as well
For Jesus states in Mark 4:11-12
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
God Bless
Jonathan
LikeLike
It doesn’t. Its off topic. He said it himself. He is only interested in preaching his fallacious ideology.
LikeLike
Jonathan, I used to be a follower of John Calvin but I am no longer. I do not accept his theology or his interpretation of the Bible.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for your comments Mr Williams,
As an Anglican, this is the historic position – And as you well know – the Puritan divines loved preaching on these passages – It is a given that most Modern Christians from the church of last week are unable to deal with such passages since they are no longer educated in historic Christine doctrine – Even James White’s (Who claims to be a real Calvinist) recent DL broadcast wasn’t able to respond to your posting on the Christian Delema either – I think White’s response was that the passage in Numbers was complicated – Shame on White for not understanding a basic foundation of reformed doctrine of Law & Gospel. But to be honest I’m not surprised by White’s statement – To often, Calvinism is associated with Election – but a major contribution of both Luther and Calvinism to the churches was the understanding of Law & Gospel.
And Trust me Mr Williams – I get that you do accept these historic theological positions, especially from the Magisterial Reformation.
I think Paul Tillich said it the best when he summed up and identified only two religions in the world naming Catholics and Protestants – And As a Protestant I am perfectly willing to accept Muhammad as a good catholic –
God Bless Paul Williams – good talking with you
LikeLiked by 1 person
[As a slave must learn obenience from his Master, so we Christians as sons of God must learn obedience, this is the office of the Law – instruction in righteousness and to restrain sin
We deal in like mannor with our children;
– Do we not also correct our children?]
Yes we correct our children but we don’t beat them to a near death experience where as long as they get up after two days everything is fine.
[-For our Christian scriptures also speaks of God dealing with us in the same manner which is why I quoted from Hebrews 12]
I don’t think you can link those verses with those of exodus. God can not only beat us to correct us but He can sometimes beat us to death (as punishment or to test our faith). So God can even go beyond the beating without killing His slave/servant. The relation of God to His slaves is not like the relation between a Master to his slaves. God has authority and superiority over His slaves whereas a Master has only the authority over his slaves.
[So Atlas, as far you not understanding this: We also have a passage of Scripture dealing with that as well
For Jesus states in Mark 4:11-12
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.”]
I’m really trying to understand what you’re saying. Are you implying that Exodus 21:20-21 should be taken as parables? The context of those verses do not imply a sign of a parable at all.
I think you are imposing a view on these passages that don’t fit. In the NT it is said that a slave must obey his Master, even the harsh conditions.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comments Atlas –
Let me try to make it clearer for you to understand:
First it is important to read what’s in the Mosiac Law and what’s not in it:
Its says:
Exodus 21:20-21 King James Version (KJV)
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
Now given there is a distinction in civil laws over Free men and slaves,but you’ll notice God has no respect to persons with regard to murder; but avenges the death of a slave and a free-man in the same way, if he should die immediately of his wound.
Whereas the barbaric system of the Romans and other nations placed life and death in the hands of the owner of the slaves.
No where in Exodus 21:20-21 does it say to beat the slave to a pulp, or for the slave to be maimed. This passage is not talking about unjust cruelty –
It is not allowable for cruel and truculent masters to wound their slaves severely; and this is what the words expressly imply, for the smiter is only exempted from punishment when he shall have so restrained himself as that the marks of his cruelty should not appear. For that the slaves should “stand for one or two days,” [38] is equivalent to saying, that they were perfect and sound in all their members; but if a wound had been inflicted, or there was any mutilation, the smiter was guilty of murder. None, therefore, is absolved but he who only meant to chastise his slave; and where no injury appears, it is probable that there was no intention to kill him. Whilst, then, this law prohibits bloodthirsty assaults, it by no means gives greater license to murder. The reason, which is added, must be restricted to the private loss; because a murderer would never be absolved on the pretext that he had purchased his slave with money, since the life of a man cannot be so estimated.
Hebrews is also discussing the same Chastisement as us as sons of God.
Proverbs 13:24King James Version (KJV)
24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes
As far as the quote of Mark – was in reference to not making sense of our scriptures – I didn’t mean that Exod 21 was a parable – it takes on a much stronger reference that you didn’t pick up – but that’s beside the point, I was just having fun with you in reference to that passage
God Bless
Jonathan
LikeLike
Thanks for the reply Jonathan
“For that the slaves should “stand for one or two days,” [38] is equivalent to saying, that they were perfect and sound in all their members; but if a wound had been inflicted, or there was any mutilation, the smiter was guilty of murder”
I like that explanation but murder for a wound seems to much of a punishment to me though.
But as always I must ask:
Can you please provide some evidence for that. Were there Jewish commentators that have written such explanation in their commentary?
Does this only refer to male slaves or also female slaves as well? Please provide some evidence for that too if you don’t mind.
LikeLike
Nani?! (What!?)
How is Muhammad (sallahu alayhi wa salaam) a good Catholic? I find that to be insulting to the Prophet, saws.
There are two types of religious people: those who are enthusiastic and those who are superstitious.
Islam tends to be more on the former, while Catholics tend to be more on the latter. I suppose I wasn’t superstitious to be Catholic. Muslims can be “superstitious” if they emphasize taqlid too much.
http://www.english.upenn.edu/~mgamer/Etexts/hume.superstition.html
As salaamu alaykum, my fellow enthusiast (who is a Protestant).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for your comments Latis
My statement referencing Muhammed as a good Catholic has nothing to do with superstitious practices in the Church of Rome – but as it is common in most religions, they share a work based righteousness where the protestant understand it’s all of Gods Grace.
Certainly you don’t have a problem saying Muhammed did good works?
LikeLiked by 1 person
A little known hadith verse perhaps:
(4) Zadhan reported that Ibn Umar called his slave and he found the marks (of beating) upon his back. He said to him: I have I caused you pain. He said: No. But he (Ibn Umar) said: You are free. He then took hold of something from the earth and said: There is no reward for me even to the weight equal to it. I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who beats a slave without cognizable offence of his or slaps him (without any serious fault), then expiation for it is that he should set him free. (Book #015, Hadith #4079) Sahih Muslim
my commentary:
In Islam the magnitude of the offence that justifies a beating is decided by the slavemaster. Mohammed is not there to judge. There is no regulation, as in the law of Moses, which limits the damage and punishes the slavemaster who has been over zealous to correct the sloth of his slave.
LikeLike
LOL, madman thinks his “commentary” means anything or has any authority? Do you get up every morning and think to yourself “how can make an idiot of myself today”?
You are such an idiot that you think the hadith is somehow outdone by the Biblical law, which allows a slavemaster to beat his slave to the point of death, whereas Islamic law allowed a light beating or slap if the slave disobeyed his master. There is no comparison here! But madman’s lying spirit is dead-set on making an idiot out of him! LOL!!
LikeLike