"Muslims are Terrorists!" - its a line that I often find visible in a vivid way now a days. Many Hubbers here use these two words interchangeably so often that even being an atheist I have started to feel empathy for those Muslims who has nothing to do with terrorism. Theres approximately 1.5 Billion Muslims in the world among whom only 20% lives in Middle-east. Even among those 20% probably a handful can be considered as extremists! Given the statistical figure I find it really absurd & irrational to call the Muslims as terrorists! In fact the word 'Terrorist' is just reflecting our Hatred & Prejudice against the Muslims which needs to be corrected. In order to get rid of misconceptions, I like to present few information below:
The word Jihad?
- The general interpretation for Jihad means struggling or fighting with inner-self which is considered as a great virtue. Of course just like the Gospels, there are many alternative interpretations of Quran too & some people do love to use those as weapons.
Foundation of Terrorism?
- Its older than you think. The first terrorists are probably the Jewish zealots in Iudaea Province rebelled, killing prominent collaborators with Roman rule. Till then there had been terrorism in every era of mankind. If you want to talk about modern day car bombing & suicide killing then again we have to credit a segment of the Jews called the Lehi or the Stern Gang.
Respect for other religions?
- Well every religion has a code of conduct. Its called 'My way or the high way'. A particular religion only ensures Hell for other religious followers & heaven for its believers. Quran is no exception but it do teaches to respect others believes. For instance, Jesus is a very respected figure in Islam & I have never seen a Muslim insulting Jesus in front of me. But I have met plenty of Christians who would call Mohammed as an worshiper of devil or a pervert lunatic!
Now give me a break! Im not taking sides. I just think that sometimes we say things without any judgment which can trigger hatred among us...Whats your views on this?
The founder of Terrorism?
Let me tell you about institutionalized "terrorism" before the word was even invented. I can describe it in three letters...KKK. Only when "terrorists" started killing white people did it become "terrorism". As long as they were killing minorities, it was perfectly acceptable.
Plus, if all Muslims were terrorist, all non-muslims would be dead by now.
Thank you for the thought. If even only several people who understand not all Muslim is extremist or terrorist, it is mean a lot for Muslim.
Many Muslim want to do nothing but to live our life away from all chaos this world able to bring. But somehow, in so many places, it seem impossible.
Anyway, thank you.
I don't think anyone really believes that all Muslims are terrorists! It is the Islam religion that's at the root of the problems.
And many Americans, including us Christians, want to live our lives away from all the chaos too. And these days that seems impossible because of the outside influences that have invaded our Country.
The current controversy is NOT all about Muslims' feelings and "rights", in case nobody has made that clear to you and other Muslims. WE are here in this world too, and in the U.S.A. in particular, WE are having to fight for our rights. Can't Muslims see that it's only adding more problems and more stress upon our Nation when they want to bring their religious conflict here? But apparently that doesn't matter at all. People like the Imam who wants the Mosque in New York are only thinking about themselves and their agenda, not what is best for the U.S.A.
I can't answer for what I never did. Those whose done bad things who's have the answer of your question.
Personally, I believe building the mosque in the place where the hatred toward Muslim emerged at first time just like put salt in others pain; not wise at all. But again, I don't know how to answer why they still doing that because I am not the one who made that decision.
But I strongly believe it is not Islam who caused the problem, but it is the result from many problems which combined together into giant monster ball which make several people lost their way. If it is Islam fault then all Muslim will become the extremist and not only 3% of all Muslim.
the 911 terrorists were all Muslims
the other ninety nine percent of Muslims have not distanced themselves with enough vigor from these Muslims.
Religion- mystic form is the foundation for terrorism. It creates delusional fanatics and it comes from second they open their mouth to supposedly spout off what they know or believe is truth.
I will openly take sides and say that Muslim and terrorist have nothing to do with one another. I have several American friends who happen to be Muslim. Just like Christian fundamentalists who are willing to murder abortion doctors in cold blood, Muslims, too, have a fringe group who want to terrorize others. It's an unfortunate side effect of religion, I think.
You are talking more about social issues and philosophy than religion.
It's easy to get them all mixed up together when one is passionate about opinions while HP gives limited categories for expressing thoughts and ideas.
Labeling Muslims as terrorists has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with politics and prejudice.
"Politics and Social Issues" might be a better HP Forum category for your post.
I agree, Rishy Rich. I am not religious either, and yet I find myself being forced to defend Islam more and more because I am an American and believe in the principles of this nation. I'm not even all that fond of Islam, to be honest; I am as quick to point out it's glaring absurdities as I am with other faiths. And yet I defend it.
I'm tired of the righteous, the terrified and the stupid trying to broad-brush a billion-plus people in one lazy, ignorant stroke. That attitude is so tiny-minded and ignorant I can hardly fathom how low the IQs must be, or how yellow the stripes upon their quivering spines must be, to make people unwilling to stand up for freedom.
If we don't fight for the equality of AMERICAN CITIZENS to practice Islam in peace, without persecution, we have abandoned our ideals.
Thanks for sharing your view, Shadesbreath.
It amazes me that even in this age of Globalization, how alien one culture is to another culture. Theres no lack of information, its just the media & peoples reluctance to learn more. I appreciate your feedback. Thanks again.
well, we just have to deal with it don't we? it sucks, but what ya gonna do? Write about it.
They have to accept at least some of the blame for the name calling did not happened until they blew up the towers. (and I am not racial, just logical)
Whenever you say "THEY" in a sentence where you are assigning blame to something like the bombing of buildings to a group of people that numbers over a billion, you are being a racist.
For THEY to have been responsible for the blowing up of the towers, THEY would have had to all get together, all 1.5 billion of THEM, and agree, "Yes, let's blow up the towers."
Now I could be wrong, and perhaps THEY did. Maybe there was a big old "Let's Kill the 'Mericans" meeting in some back alley bar in Baghdad or Kabul, but it seems like at least one Westerner would have noticed a gathering of that size and mentioned it to someone in the press.
So, not only is it ridiculous to think that 1.5 billion people could and did get together agree on that, it is totally and completely racist to say it.
Sorry, but, that's how it works.
Shades: naw not racist,,,that has to do with genotype. It's just plain religous idiocy. Monotheism of any ilk is founded , soley, upon idiocy.
Man is a religiously inclined idiot.....period.
As much as I agree with you on many levels regarding religion, I still have to say that you just can't say "THEY" and get me to agree with ANYTHING you say.
What if someone said, "Writers on HubPages are a bunch of spammers who do nothing but puke stolen information into the internet and seek to corrupt commerce with manipulative anti-consumer search tactics."
Then, the government said, "THat's right, those hubpage writers, THEY are all evil bastards. Let's throw THEM all in jail."
I bet you would have a problem with that "grouping" thing when they showed up and threw your ass in the clink.
Shouldn't the last line read 'show up'.... not a grammatical error, just a fact rather than a presumption!
Quite sure we are ALL on someones snatch list!
Shades: Sure I can group them and with several thousand years of violent history to back me up.
Monotheists, in my book, are the least evolved of the human species in thought and action.
I haven't yet read the thoughts of spammers in the forum who request the death of all who don't believe as they.
Since monotheism, has risen to become the religious "fad" of the day, the only concept that is responsible for more human death and suffering than it, is the concept: the automobile.
"Whenever you say "THEY" in a sentence where you are assigning blame to something like the bombing of buildings to a group of people that numbers over a billion, you are being a racist."
No she isn't, she is using the word "THEY" as a description. You take issue with it and want to call it racism, typical response from a liberal.
"So, not only is it ridiculous to think that 1.5 billion people could and did get together agree on that, it is totally and completely racist to say it."
"Sorry, but, that's how it works."
No that is not how it works.
For 1000 yrs Roman catholics were the scourge of humanity...they were terrorists! It's now Islams turn?....maybe?
Isn't is at least in part a matter of taking responsibility for ones actions?
How can one take responsibility for ones actions if from the day of birth one has been born into a "cult" that demands total obedience to the writings in a book and in some cases forces children during the brains formtive yrs to memorize that book word for word.
What kind of human being who has been so programmed would understand taking responsiblity for ones actions in any other manner than what has been ingrained into it's young mind.
Pls read my short "hub" ref this subject...ty
whenever an idea becomes so absorbed in once psychic that it becomes view of life and person becomes so obsessed with that view that he/she can take other's life for its sake..that is dangerous..religion easily fits the bit but behind religion is thought and that thought comes from human brain which can come without religion too...
While you guys play your little game of semantics, I will continue to use the word "they." When I use that word, I do not mean all muslims, but I find it easier to say than "the muslims/islamists/whatevers that believe in violence and that everyone that is not a muslim should die."
I also use the term "they" when talking about muslims that do not believe women are equal, that participate in that sham they call a legal system, that train young children to be terrorists and those that fund muslim terrorists.
Anyone have a problem with that?
I've seen the word "Americans" bandied about here in the forums quite loosely when discussing this topic, but I don't hear anyone getting riled up about it. We're actually intelligent enough to understand what you mean.
You have to admit, there is a HUGE referential difference between a statement like:
I don't like Muslims; they blew up our buildings.
And a statement like:
I don't like Islamic fundamentalist extremists; they blew up our buildings.
I don't think it's so much a "semantic" argument as it is one where the "they" is clearly defined first with a specific subject/noun. I'm sure you had to do all the same exercises in writing classes that I did, and one of the things we were taught is, in most writing, placing the subject noun in a piece before using pronouns to replace it makes for better clarity.
If the subject is not clearly defined, a statement of simply, "They blew up the buildings," relies on the listener knowing what you mean somehow. You are relying on luck or intimacy for the person you are communicating with to know precisely what "they" you are talking about. You expect your audience to somehow conclude exactly what you have in your head.
A non-referential pronoun makes for misunderstanding. It is bad communication. Conflicts often result from bad or lazy communication. It's not semantic; it's fact. Important fact sometimes.
Wow, SB, I feel like I'm on a different planet right now. I find you intelligent, well-spoken and totally hilarious. And until now, I have never disagreed with anything you had to say.
That said, I agree that not all Muslims blew up our buildings. But all Islamic fundamentalist extremists didn't either. So I fail to see your logic.
EDITED TO ADD: I also would like to state that I am really durn sick and tired of trying to be "politically correct" all the time. I very often feel like it's only us Americans who tiptoe around our words, even if what we mean is sincere and harmless.
Being a terrorist has nothing to do with religion. What about that young man in Oklahoma? He wasn't Muslim. The young man who shot and killed over 20 people at Virginia Tech? He wasn't religious.
There are the extremist Muslims. There are the extremists in all religions. I don't believe it is the religion that is causing the problems, but the human who is hiding behind the religion.
So, is it sports cars, lawnmowers, bowling, or some other activity or ideology causing the terrorism? No, it is over religious ideals and beliefs, however sick and twisted. Many Christians here have claimed they would die for their beliefs, which is equally sick and twisted.
I believe I agreed that some of the terrorist are religious. Some of them aren't. That's a fact. I don't live far from Virginia Tech. That massacre had nothing to do with religion. The bombing in Oklahoma had nothing to do with religion. Open your eyes. It isn't all religion. The problem isn't religion. The problem is the human element. Since that one guy who killed all those people was an athiest I guess all athiest are evil terrorist?
Really? Even though Cho admitted that he likened himself to Jesus Christ and that he was schizophrenic? You pick one case out of many and you're still wrong.
That's what your religion teaches you, that it is the human element, when humans are actually compassionate and altruistic by nature in contrast to what you're taught. Open your eyes.
Really? Even though Cho admitted that he likened himself to Jesus Christ and that he was schizophrenic? You pick one case out of many and you're still wrong.
Well if he did say that, there was no mention of it on the news around here.
Yes, it is the human element. Unless of course, all crimes are created by Christians or Muslims? None of the Christians I know do anything to hurt any one.
I suppose the jails are full of Christians? Of course I have heard that they do tend to "find God" once those doors slam shut.
Funny you should mention the comparative number of "believers" who are in jail.
Read the stats and weep!
There are people who believe in God, but don't walk the christian way. Then the doors slam shut behind them and they turn to God. Some times these people get out of jail, start doing the same ole things again. I know people like that.
There are people who are living a christian life, then, fall.
There are people who don't believe in God, but do walk the christian way.
One of my grandfathers was an athiest. From what I was told, just before he died, he turned to God.
Whether you managed to not hear it on the news is irrelevant to the words he said. The point is that you pick out one case out of so many to argue that religious conflicts are not about religion. They are about religions.
Yes, I understand that your religion teaches you that the "human element" is what is at fault and that it is highly unlikely you will ever disagree with that belief. But, that is pure nonsense if we look at the history of Christianity and the atrocities committed in the name of your god. They didn't call them the "Human Wars" - they were called the "Holy Wars."
Yes, they are full of Christians, overflowing, in fact.
They were Christians when they committed crimes before they went in. They were never taught any morals or values in regards to humanity, but instead were taught to obey and worship their god.
As you said, I picked one case out of MANY. I understand that some of the problems are with people who claim to be religious. Why can't you understand that not all are?
One man just killed his wife and neighbors because his wife didn't serve him his eggs the way he wanted. Do tell me what that has to do with religion?
It is the human and their comprehension of God's word that is creating the religious wars. To think other wise is pure nonsense.
Yes, there are people who believe in God who do not walk the christian path. They commit crimes and go to jail. Once in jail they turn to God.
Some people may walk the christian way then let the frustrations and temptations of this world turn them away and they commit a crime.
But of course you know every one in jail so you know their true nature.
God does teach morals and values. Not every one follows.
well atheist too can be terrorist but his/her motivation wont be ticket to heaven or getting saved by killing other or my way only way theme..atheist might kill someone out of his frustration knowing well that his action wont give him some points for some heaven thing..religion provides motivation for such acts...since heaven,after live , being in good books of god etc can woo people and 9/11 or such terror acts are living example of that..
I don't believe killing some one will get me any points either, not good points. I just believe it is the extremist who become the terrorist. I don't believe all Muslims are evil. Evil comes in all walks of life.
It is the teaching and strict adherence to the quoran and bible that makes terrorists.
Why don't religionists see the one great parallel in all religions.
A belief in a hate filled Tome.
I can quote from either to demonstrate the truth of what is written in these books.
Only to have the words ignored, or some dumbassed "out of context" argument, or "jesus cancelled all that!"
No he bloody didn't. and nor can he distance himself from the OT.
Fear ridden babble the lot of it.
It's all in your head folks, get it fixed before you become yet another fundamentalist.
There are extremist in all. Every one doesn't go to the extreme.
I believe in God, Jesus.
I believe we are suppose to love one another, even those who does evil towards us. I believe we are suppose to help one another. We aren't suppose to offend one another. We are suppose to control our anger and resolve it peacefully.
So, what is the harm in how I am trying to live my life? That is how the christians I know are trying to live.
Why would you avoid every single point I made is the best question I can ask here.
What point did I miss?
I agreed there are extremist. They are either terrorist or just really out there. There are also some who are really good people.
We aren't going to agree on the Bible. I disagree with some christians also.
You have read it. You know what it says. Some times people comprehend things differently. We each believe it says what we comprehend it to say.
We can argue about what we believe it to say, but will it change any ones mind?
How about just read it directly from the book?
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)
If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)
Can't see any inducements to terrorism? No hate? No death threats?
Sick people, just plain sick.
The words in you bible or quoran can't be twisted to mean anything other than what they are.
I have read my bible cover to cover several times. Yes, I read all this. And I am very thankful that I didn't live back then.
Back in the days of the old testament, once a year they would make a sacrifice for their sins. There was a problem with that, the Priest would sin also, and it was just once a year. So the new covenant came in. Jesus.
Jesus paid the ultimate sacrifice for our sins. There is no need for another.
You argue that Jesus didn't change anything. I have heard Christians say that too. How ever, Moses said and eye for an eye. Jesus said, forgive, turn the other cheek. A woman caught in adultry was to be stoned. Jesus said, He with no sin cast the first stone. Jesus said, Judge not lest ye be judged.
Holding to the letter of the law is what Jesus had against the scribes and the Pharasees. They held to the letter of the law and didn't look into the heart of man.
And you choose to ignore the OT and make the big jesus disconnect from the words of his father.
The long and short of it, Earnest, is that those were words written for those times. (Not that I agree with any of them, mind you...) But we have shown ourselves to be intelligent creatures, capable of learning and growing and adapting and figuring out what's right and what's wrong. Not all religions and peoples have been that fortunate.
To stilljustwonderin: I completely agree with you that there are extremists in every religion or group and that we are all supposed to love, help and accept each other and not offend one another. Also, I believe, most religions promote peace and harmony. Your other point: people comprehend the Bible differently is absolutely correct. We all have our own interpretation and personal experience which shape one's beliefs. Thank you for sharing your viewpoint!:-)
"Your other point: people comprehend the Bible differently is absolutely correct."
What if you actually read the whole bible including those parts I just posted. Do they mean something other than what they say?
I didn't ignore your post. I had left the computer for a few.
I have read the Bible, all of it, several times.
You may care to address the scripture I posted and it's "real" meaning.
I think it's real meaning is real clear. Some parts of the world still hold to it.
I know you heard on the news about the woman in Iran who was going to be stoned. The parts of the world that still hold to that, believes Jesus was just a man and they don't follow his teachings.
Hi, I think when we study Gods word he will reveal to us what he wants us to know. I think, there is something different for different people. He won't put more on you than what you can take. If I think something is a sin, it is a sin for me. If you don't think the same thing is a sin, for you it isn't. I think that is where some of the differences come from. I think most people want peace and harmony, they just comprehend things differently.
My opinion, we all have one.
To stiijustwonderin-Thank you-well said!:-)
To earnestshub: The bible is not an easy book to comprehend. We need to think who the author's intended audience/reader is and how it was written. For instance, some parts of the bible were written figuratively, some were written in songs, parables and so forth. It is not like any textbook, memorize the facts and be done with it. We need to figure out the literayy style, genre, the figures of speech and what the author is trying to tell us. I am currently reading the "Bible: Everything You Need to Understand the Old and New Testaments" by Rev. John Trigilio Jr., PH.D., TH.D. and Rev. Kenneth Brighenti, PH.D. I've had this book for many years, but I have just started reading it again lately and I find it fascinating:-).
I no longer find anything about the bible fascinating.
I find it contradictory and psychotic.
The shear number of disparate belief systems propagated by this tome is enough to prove it is not understood by those who peddle it.
That is your choice-many people still find it fascinating. I was just letting you know that the bible is not to be read like a textbook. Many still insist on doing this and that's why they become frustrated and just give up on it altogether. Admittedly, many Christians misinterpret it for the same reason and thnk that their interpretation is the "only" correct way. I believe no one should impose their beliefs on anyone unless it was sought after.
Hmmm? Caroline is that the reason there are today close to 40,000 protestant sects wordwide and growing? ....and all think they have interpreted "the word" correctly. Golly, I'm confused. The catholics say theirs is the only correct interp...how can a
thinking" man decide?...lololol
Welcome to HP. You will find that some people on here who don't believe, considers it their duty to " educate and enlighten" the believers. They do not want our belief's shoved in their face. However, they have no problem shoving their belief in ours.
It can be enjoyable when we can share and get other believers views.
Just don't let the non believers drag ya down.
Why is it that we shouldn't read the Bible like a textbook? It is full of academic, cultural, historical information, narratives, poetry, etc... would you rather we read it uncritically?
Myth: It shouldn't be just "read" like a textbook. It should be studied.
It's evolution and history should preface it's study.
There is nothing in history that is "factually" correct.
All history has been corrupted by human interpretation and inventive meanderings.
If one reads the bible, it should be read like any fictional tale written by abjectly ignorant, highly imaginative human creatures steeped in primeval fear and superstition.
If one enjoys it, so be it. There's sumthin' for everyone.
I've studied it and it's history and evolution...borrrring!
Evil hides everywhere that it can.
When it comes out of hiding it is seen or what it is.
Muslims can stand up and be heard as peace-mongers. The more Muslims are seen as regular people going about their lives the better.
Mind you the fundamentalist nut jobs whether Muslim or Christian or whatever scare the hell out of me. If all we ever get to see and read about are the fundamentalist Muslim nut jobs then of course the followers of the Koran with be feared and hated. The idea of building a mosque or a payer center at ground zero New York was a really bad one. It has generated a lot of resentment.
That is why Muslim is another word and terrorist is another word, they are not the same - nor it can be used as adjective
Religion isn't evil ... What is evil is the extremists twisting religion and delivering it to serve their own manifesto.
Crusades and Jihads are excellent examples, as they are the act of creating armies to settle differences rather than seeking peaceful means.
But some will argue, we can't reason with our enemy as they are too radical to do so, and oddly enough, that's the same viewpoint they have of us. The sad truth is it can never be truly resolved as both sides are unable to come together to do so.
America was a great experiment in bringing religions together to live peacefully within one country, but it's failed here as well. Sadly, there can be no peace until everyone recognizes they live under the same God or abandons God all together.
So long as there are those who feel they are donning holy armor to fight in the name of their supreme deity there will never be peace.
No, it's not religion that's evil, but rather, the men who use it to control others and the men who allow themselves to be controlled, without seeking the truth for themselves.
This is why so many of us have turned our backs to religion, as we no longer care to trust those empowered with teaching it ... for so many of them hold their own agendas and care little about making the world a better place for all to live in.
Religion was created to provide an orderly way for us to all live together in peace, not to force obedience and to terrorize others - those were concepts later added by those who sought power through the faith of others.
That's why I sanction the idea of not belonging to any church. Instead, do what's right by others and hope your actions grow like a cancer, eradicating all that is evil in this world.
But alas, terrorists would not exist, were it not for those who decide to be free of bondage - which is why terrorism will always exist in the presence of those who wish to be free.
Terrorism isn't a religion - it's a suppression of beliefs. As such, religion doesn't breed terrorism; it's the things done falsely in the name of religion that allow it to grow.
All extremists do is adhere strictly to the words in their tomes.
The same words I post here from the bible or quoran regularly that are ignored.
Do some of you guys read the bible with one eye closed???
The Torah and the Holy Bible:
Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill
17:33: And do not take any human being's life - that God willed to be sacred
This leaves no room for the Crusades or terrorism. So if these radicals are interpreting everything literally and understanding it thoroughly, how are they both able to violate one of their most basic and fundamental laws?
Read deeply enough into any of these three books and you can find the room to sanction any action. This is what radicals do. Radicalism is never about serving God, but rather, it's about extinguishing any opposition to their own self-sanctioned beliefs.
I grant that you are totally right when you say they follow their teachings unwaveringly, but they are being led by those who are twisting faith to make it into a sword.
Show me the passage in any of these books where it literally says to *murder those who believe differently*.
You won't find it.
And yet, if you look deep enough you will find passages that could be convoluted to make it seem the right and proper thing to do.
God created the great flood to purge the lands of the wicked, so surely he would want us - images of God's likeness - to do the same, right? Well, you and I know different, but to a radical the story of the great flood could be easily twisted to show that God sees it fit to kill those who are wicked.
From there, it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to determine those who are wicked are those who sin, and those who sin are those who don't strictly adhere to the laws set forth for them.
From a radical point of view, this is all the gun powder one needs to refute the 'thou shalt not kill' rule and make it a perfectly acceptable means for purging the Earth of sin.
However, a person taught by a good teacher (who doesn't self-interpret the words given), or a person who teaches themselves that living good is a better way, can not and will not subscribe to this corruption of beliefs.
Radicalism is taught by men and learned by children, and until we stand up against radicalism and support those who are victimized by it, things won't change soon. Education is the key to winning such a decisive battle, but so long as they hold the people under their cloak of disinformation such things will always be difficult to teach.
Again, religion isn't at fault, it's the people who use it as a tool to deceive others.
But, hey, if we all abandon religion it would make the world a bit more peaceful, as the radicals would then all be out of a job.
I think you are better off if they do read the Bible and the Koran with one eye closed earnest. Let's keep the terrorism down. At the same token there are okay passages in the bible and if people stick with them then they are non-violent and that suits me.
I agree with you 100%. Very well said.
What is amusing is that if I post the hate filled crud from the quoran other religionists who follow the other book leap on it as proof!
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)
All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)
All who curse their father or mother must be put to death.
Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
If we consider the times (Exodus) Just left Egypt and with putting up with all the other bickering and worshiping a golden calf etc.
Not knowing "just how badly" parents were being treated by their children such punishment might have been a self defence measure.
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
Considering that a million ?? people were taking a trip through the desert they didn't need these problems added to all of the rest.
I don't think that it matters who makes any LAWS they are going to be seen as unfair.
I guess beating your parents and committing Adultery is OK ?
We just don't know what these people were like.
If people had kept those laws the world would not be in the shape that it is in today.
And if there is a life after death, would it be so bad to be taken out of this life to be reborn back into it?
I don't know anything but I do see where conditions might require drastic measures to preserve the fall of what would otherwise be perfect world.
You guys are not talking about what people believed or complied with socially. You are basing your current day beliefs on it!
It matters not what life was like then.
These are the words of a sociopath in any time or place.
In a different day and time you might feel justified to kill a small child instead of giving it a peanut butter sandwich.
To me that is the worst choice of words I have ever seen on any forum.
Yes it is sad but true
Imagine if a few catastrophes were to occur.
A million people are starving to death every day.
No end in sight.
You were prepared ... Hidden away back in the bush with your family. Barrels of peanut butter. Enough for you and your family for six months.
A child comes by. sees you eating. If you feed the child you will have to keep it. If you keep it , its family and 50 of their friends are going to come looking for it.
If the child goes back to its family the tribe is going to come back to where it got a sandwich.
You and your family are going to die.
What are you going to do??
You will say that you are going to give all your food away?
And you and your family will cheerfully starve?
You can not say that the times do not change the circumstances and the rules of engagement..
I was laughed at the other day when I said that if the worst case scenario were to happen I would want to be an early victim.
All these folks that are preparing for this in their survivalist camps and such have already considered things such as this.
Now that is cold. That is why I'm living life as if the worst thing that could happen doesn't.
I was just making a point. Rules of behavior do change as our conditions change. Simple fact.
Just look at where we have come from in the past 50 years where we are at today , project this decline forward just a decade. Now that is cold.
God don't have to have anything to do with it.
Just look at where we are headed. We are doing it to ourselves.
In answer to my question above.. you betcha if I have peanut butter I'm giving it away.
That is a very good point.
Things change and so do people.
Didn't the rules change for our children as they grew and learned?
Yes, the rules they had as children doesn't apply today.
Good mornin ... When my children were infants I layed down laws according to the situation. I would not have said quit doing that, unless they were already doing that. Like crossing the street by themselves.
Later I said you can cross the street but don't play out there.
A few years later they were playing basket ball in the street. I even put up the net or them.
Ya don't make up rules against something unless you see that that issue is about to get out of control and cause them pain and suffering.
Ah, you speak of this:
12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul;
13 that whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
These versus are from Chronicles 2, Asa's Reforms. And I might add, another corruption encountered while reading. To get the full context you need the text surrounding it:
1 And the Spirit of God came upon Azari'ah the son of Oded:
2 and he went out to meet Asa, and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin; The LORD is with you, while ye be with him; and if ye seek him, he will be found of you; but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you.
3 Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law.
4 But when they in their trouble did turn unto the LORD God of Israel, and sought him, he was found of them.
5 And in those times there was no peace to him that went out, nor to him that came in, but great vexations were upon all the inhabitants of the countries.
6 And nation was destroyed of nation, and city of city: for God did vex them with all adversity.
7 Be ye strong therefore, and let not your hands be weak: for your work shall be rewarded.
8 ¶ And when Asa heard these words, and the prophecy of Oded the prophet, he took courage, and put away the abominable idols out of all the land of Judah and Benjamin, and out of the cities which he had taken from mount E'phra-im, and renewed the altar of the LORD, that was before the porch of the LORD.
9 And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them out of E'phra-im and Manas'seh, and out of Simeon: for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the LORD his God was with him.
10 So they gathered themselves together at Jerusalem in the third month, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Asa.
11 And they offered unto the LORD the same time, of the spoil which they had brought, seven hundred oxen and seven thousand sheep.
12 And they entered into a covenant to seek the LORD God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul;
13 that whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
14 And they sware unto the LORD with a loud voice, and with shouting, and with trumpets, and with cornets.
15 And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he was found of them: and the LORD gave them rest round about.
This is Asa gathering a bunch of believers and asking them to take an oath, that they will purge the lands of non-believers. It's not God telling them to do this - they're clearly taking matters into their own hands in God's name.
It's nothing more than another corruption - within the Bible no less - changing the original beliefs to meet with the wants and desires of radicals. You'll find the same in other religious works as well.
Constant rhetoric is given in each book where God *changed his mind* and *told a man what was wrong yesterday is okay today* - but only in God's name. That's as convoluted and twisted as it gets. Any deity of supreme power would lay the laws down once and they would remain untouched throughout eternity. After all, by definition, an omnipotent being would be able to see forward enough in time to realize what was best for his people.
But yes, Earnest, I can see how such words would corrupt people.
After all, if it says in the book *God changed his mind and is now okay with this*, who are we to question the book? And that's the problem ... no one questions it. No one sees the discontinuity and how things evolve away from that which was once stated as irrefutable law.
If one believes any of these tomes in all of their entirety then they must inevitably come to the conclusion that their God is flawed, for being unable to get the laws right the first time.
And for those who truly believe, they can only accept those first laws handed down to man, with the knowledge that most else these books contain is nothing more than rhetoric, created by radicals and aimed at extinguishing all other beliefs.
Again, it's the straying away from the original message, not the original message itself.
I see a different world than the one I came to know as a young man.
A world where there is more race tolerance in America, where all the young people I know are smarter nicer people than the generation before, who have good social skills and lead great lives.
Education has leapt ahead as have the sciences, providing new medical breakthroughs almost daily and major scientific questions either answered or about to be.
I see the same tired old religious threats in a thousand guises, the same arguments that amount to saying that not believing fantasy is fact is a religion and all sorts of rot about "interpretations" and "content."
The book all this is based on is a patchwork of old tripe that has been recycled in every part of the globe in one form or another.
I see global warming.
I see an oil supply coming to an end while our dependence on it increases,
I see a world at war over oil and diamonds.
I see millions of Gang members in the US alone that thrive on violence selling drugs and millions of their customers loosing their minds.
I see fat cats on wall street draining every drop of financial stability that is left in the system.
And how many children starving to death each day?
How many homeless people that lost their jobs?
No God didn't dun it
NO We dunit .... all by ourselves without Gods help.
I think that he has been sitting back for the last 42 Months;watching us do it without him/it
Prophesy doesn't cause anything to happen.
Prophesy ... like "If you keep playing on the ice covered lake you are going to fall through some day.
But no one is listening .. But that isn't anyones fault cause there are 10,000 different "Interpretations" of the warning.
"I see a different world than the one I came to know as a young man.
A world where there is more race tolerance in America,"
There is more race tolerance in America than in most countries.
Has your country ever had a black leader?
No Muslims are not Terrorists, but the Terrorists in the case of 9/11 were muslims.
This knowledge alone makes one wonder why the Muslims who insist upon a mosque at ground zero will not move it, in sympathy for those who lost there lives and their loved ones to these radical warmongers.
It is very unsettling to many Americans and while not every Muslim are extremists such as these do they not have to show compassion.
This does not make any sense.
Many of your fellow Americans killed while working in the Towers were Muslims.
I guess you were only thinking about the perpetrators.
A good point earnest. One I have made a few times over the last couple of days.
And are serving in the U.S. military in combat roles.
Caving in to intolerance is not an act of compassion, it is an act of cowardice.
It is not intolerance to ask someone to have compassion, it does show intolerance to show no compassion.
Asking for compassion to justify their hateful ignorance? The people protesting the mosque are truly suffering. Continuing and abetting their intolerance will not in the end, make them feel any better. Their suffering is self-inflicted and fueled by political opportunists.
Their suffering will end only after they set aside their mis-directed anger.
I'm sorry I do not agree. Even the Iranian ambassador to the US believes they should move it, in the interest of showing compassion and understanding. So while you think the people are hurting and have misplaced anger, they do not.
They understand full well that not all muslims are terrorists, but they also realize that the terrorists who are muslims will see this as a victory. And it is like a slap in the face of All who suffer.
Yes, listen to Iran. We all know they have our best interests in mind. We force the mosque to move, we piss off the middle east more. Extremists will want to hit us even more, for being anti-muslim.
the misplaced anger, is why we were attacked in the first place. Our own government caused it.
As for victory, they already have it. No twin towers, an attack on our own soil, and dead americans.
they bought the place five months ago, and announced what they were going to do immediately. I wrote about it in May. Bitching about it now, makes you all hypocritical. It's fine they build it, except on the anniversary. Well, the next is also the opening for the mosque, so get ready for it.
Are you saying you are afraid of doing anything unless they say it is okay to do so because it might piss off the Extremists.
I'm saying Iran would love to see america screw itself. America supposedly has this tolerant christian society out trying to help the world find their personal "true god and savior", and aren't trying to upset muslims calling their Islam the devil's religion. You're actually advocating making war, to prove america knows better. Kind of what got the towers taken down, if you remember.
As for pissing off extremists, I love it! christians are the worst. I want to see the mosque finished. It'll show the world, christians are actually the most volitile. Even moreso than extremist muslims.
If by volatile, you mean violent, then yes I'm sure you will see it. Because I beleive if it does get finished then some radical will take matters into their own hands.
I do not agree with that but I believe it will happen.
Actually I believe you like confilict.
No. Did my time in the sevice. Don't like seeing the others there now. And it would've never happened if our leaders weren't idiots. I'm more anarchist. Non-violent, though. We hold campaigns.
Maybe I did not correctly communicate my thought, and that is that it was a group of muslims who attacked our towers that day, and for that reason are being labeled terrrorists, is this not a true statement?
I very rarely see anyone using the words 'muslim' and 'terrorist' interchangably, and I can't remember ever reading or hearing anyone suggest that all muslims are terrorists.
However, what I have heard regularly is people using this 'not all muslims are terrorist you know' line whenever anyone critizes Islam for creating the conditions in which terrorism arises, or for any other reasons. These people somehow fail to see that this is only a rebutal if the person is actually saying that all muslims are terrorists, and is not a valid rebuttal of any and every criticism of Islam.
You're shooting down straw men.
Now I may agree that all Muslims are not terrorists, however the number is not the issue. There is a segment of Islam that is either actively militant or supports their actions.
Do you remember the tens of thousands, across many nations, that took to the streets and cheered in joy at our grief on 9/11/2001? Do you remember them marching and shouting approval of the actions that murdered thousands of innocents?
Another question, how is that such a “small faction” of radical Islamics can continue to exist, flourish and raise billions of dollars to propel their proclaimed war in many nations around the world, without detection or betrayal by the "Good Muslims"?
One more, were does all the money to buy arms and munitions, support their intelligence, action planning and operations come from?
I’m willing to bet not many Atheists, Agnostics, Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Hindus, just to name a few, are contributing.
Trying to imply all muslims donate to the cause, is as ridiculous as saying all protestants donated to the IRA, when they were able to afford weapons.
Where did I say "All" Muslims contributed?
Nor did I imply it.
I did imply that of those that were contributing to terrorist organizations very few were non-Muslims.
And I did imply that it takes a lot of contributors to raise the billions of dollars that have sustained them for over 50 years.
And I don’t recall the IRA using Qassam rockets at roughly a $1000.00 ea. or an RPG launcher at $500.00 ea. plus $100.00 for each shell or Stinger missiles at $38,000.00 ea.
And you can multiply these costs by myriad number of factors to be able to obtain them on the black market.
I’m not sure I recall the IRA using Airplanes either.
Yes, there's been some inflation over the years. Odd part about it, is the american weapons involved. My point is, not just muslims are involved. Greed has christians making money off the misery. You can't say every step of the way when weapons from america are used against american soldiers, it was a muslim involved. Like the IRA. They got lots of funding from americans.
As for airplanes, no big buildings in England to attack. The queen's castle would've worked, though. But what would the point have been? 9-11 was to just kill americans, and show they can attack anywhere. They weren't looking for a treaty. And with the way christians is acting over Islam, there never will be peace between the religions.
Muslims are terrorists, and christians are murderers. If you have one, you have to accept both. Murdering abortion doctors, bombing clinics, makes christians all the same, since they all advocate it anyway. They do come up with the funding through the collection plates. I guess all religions are death hunters. Except Buddhists, of course. Tantrism is very peaceful.
DeVlin I do agree in part with your views.
Also paar states Budda also was a prophert of Alah??
yes some abortion Dr's have been murdered, that is true. But it is done by Americans in America, not killing in another country by act's of TERROR
bit different I think.
Christians do not cut a mans head off on TV, ( notice they are too scared to show their face's)
Christians do not fly planes into building's to kill thousands.
Christians last time I looked were not bomb carring TERRORIST'S.
Christians allow freedom of worship, freedom of speech, Freedom to carry 'your own Bible'
Christians do want peace with all religions but NOT PEACE AT ANY PRICE.
As a christian I belive this, and I have Muslim (TURKS) living next to me and unlike paar do not attack Jesus, they are peacefull reasonable and Honest, I even get a 'merry Christmas' from them at Christmas Time.
So Islam and Christians can be peacefull to each other.!
But this is rare 99% of Muslims want the whole World to be UNDER SHRIAN LAW , because Mohammed hated democary and wanted it destroyed.
So yes I do belive with verry few exceptions Muslum's are indead Terrorist.s, and I also belive the way Islam is behaving, their ACTIONS could lead to a world War based on RELIGION' that I pray NEVER HAPPENS and if Islan CANNOT beat the Jews , how will they BEAT the rest of the WORLD.
Please wake up Islam this can happen as the world is getting sick and tired of TERRORISM
That is what I belive can happen any comments??????
that illustrates the point I was trying to make perfectly. DevLin uses the line 'not all muslims....' as a rebuttal, despite the fact that readytoescape had never suggested that all muslims were anything.
It is a desperate attempt by someone who has no valid point of view to offer - to imply that someone has said something that they actually haven't said, merely for the purpose of criticizing them for it.
Straw men, like I said.
Sorry, stepped out. This statement implies a collective of muslims are conspiring to be terrorists.
"Another question, how is that such a “small faction” of radical Islamics can continue to exist, flourish and raise billions of dollars to propel their proclaimed war in many nations around the world, without detection or betrayal by the "Good Muslims"? "
Nothing straw about what was said. How can they be undetected by the good muslims? Give me a break. Over a billion of them, and you start implying they're in cahoots together? readytoescape even goes as far as using expenses as proof there is conspiriacy involved. Did you perhaps take offense to being refered to as a murderer?
Well, a collective of muslims are conspiring to be terrorists. In fact lots of collectives are.
I don't see how that statement suggests in any way that all muslims are terrorists. What it does suggest is that Islam creates the conditions in which terrorism can flourish.
I think the one label for all policy is best and that it should be highly visible like on the forehead or across one's chest, except of course if you are built like Pamela Anderson. Then you would be the only one who could read it. I personally would not object to wearing such a label, especially before espousing an opinion as the suckers have a tendency to be void of any basis in fact. My label of choice for the lot, including myself would be IGNORANT! That way we would all know where we stand and we could start from there.
At least it's honest!
From its beginning, all monotheism has been the acme of terrorist activity.
Lip service to the contrary is naught but the unenlighteneds attempt to cover up their ignorance of the history and evolution of their beliefs in metaphysical superthings.
1. Define terrorist action.
2. Evidence please.
Sure Aqua: it's the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion....simple as that.
If you can't relate that to the history of monotheism, I'd suggest you'd broaden your studies of the history and evolution of your narrowly conceived beliefs in the supernatural.
Most Muslims are peace-loving people.
It's only a very few, who also happen to be Muslim and who have an extremely warped belief of their sense of duty to Jihad, that commit inhumane acts of terror in the name of their Allah.
After the fall of communism, the world lost a common enemy and the US identified a new threat to the West and then Hollywood played its role in embedding the unfair association of terror with Muslims into people's psyche. Most reasonably educated people know that it is an unfair stereotyping but for the less so educated their minds can easily be warped. Maybe I'm wrong and it's the fault of the education system and not Hollywood but for sure I'm sick and tired of people thinking Muslim = terrorist. Let's get ourselves more educated and educate others against unfair prejudice.
You'll notice I never blame terrorism on one "cult." I group them into the classification of "monotheism.
Those who 'follow" without education are the "fools" I refer to.
Hi friend richtwf
You are right to suggest that terrorist should be identified from the Muslims in general.
paarsurrey, how 'bout you go tell people in the Muslim countries that they should not label Christians with the label of terrorist?
Tell them they're inciting hatred and wrath when they burn Bibles and burn our flag.
Tell them they need to consider what being a Christian is all about instead of automatically assuming Christians are evil.
Tell them they need to consider what following the religion of Islam really means and challenge them why they want to even be a part of a religion like that.
Tell them to tell Iran to release our hostages.
Tell them America is a nation of Christian majority no matter what a fool in the White House wants to let them believe, and that THEY should respect OUR sovreignty.
Tell them that the Christians say Jesus died for THEM too so that they can be saved and go to Heaven, not Allah or Muhammad wanting THEM to die for THEM and maybe have 70 virgins to kiss their toes in some twisted version of what they're told Heaven will be like.
I'm sorry, but I'm getting a bit fed up with people explaining and explaining and taking up for the so-called rights of Muslims in America, while rightful Christians here are accused of inciting hatred and violence when they're being patriots and soul-winners AND exercising their rights as U.S. citizens. Just like that Pastor in Florida. Our own President insulted him while taking up for the Muslim Imam in our government. I say horse hockey to him (Obama) and to all those people who are putting the Muslim religion into a protected group of "civil rights" while shunning, downplaying, or outright denying the rights of true patriotic Christians under the excuse of "separation of church and state".
I'm sorry Debra- I am sooooo slow. All this time I thought you were serious about what you were saying. I now see that you were intentionally being outrageous and scary for the entertainment value and the money you can make with your church lady gimmick! Just like I use my mean/friendly gimmick to attract readers.
I didn't realize you were being mean and ridiculous and scary on purpose. I'm really sorry I took you so seriously.
The Christians had been roaming about the globe; you have so much to tell the world and you don't like how America is being run these day. Why don't you migrate to Afghanistan or Pakistan or Iraq and tell them directly whatever you have got with you to tell them?
You say America is a Christian state;other Americans do not accept it. They say it is not.
And then there are the Muslims that want non-Muslims (aka Christians) to die, and there are those that don't. What's your point, paar?
My point is that there are a very small minority of Muslims who are terrorists; most Muslims are peaceful.
Do you blame Brenda for what past Christians have done? You're addressing her... and keeping up the "arguments about the ancients" which weren't solved by the wisest in their day...
What makes you think your points will hit home here?
I just start thinking I will enjoy a bit of the discourse in some of these threads then WHAMMO... struck in the eyes by the conflict I see here lol
Oedipus must have left a spare brooch around here somewhere... lol
"Why don't you migrate to Afghanistan or Pakistan or Iraq and tell them directly whatever you have got with you to tell them?"
Well I would guess mainly because they would kill you for preaching the gospel, which is OK I suppose, after all it's just getting home early.
Like I said before, when Saudi Arabia allows a church to be opened, and folks to carry Christian bibles, I'll start taking your claims of 'peaceful Islam' more seriously.
MUSLIMS DO NOT BURN HOLY BOOKS OF ANY KIND.
“Most Muslims are peace-loving people.” richtwf
You are very right there.
Perhaps they are.
But I will ask you this----then why are their troops fighting alongside U.S. troops to free them from Islamic tyranny? They have the right to. And why are they NOT rising up themselves in larger numbers to fight the Taliban and find the terrorists, instead of invading America and building Mosques here? Why don't they RISE UP and fight for their Country (Countries) so we can get our own troops back home here? Why, instead, are they burning OUR FLAG and OUR BIBLES, and then coming HERE to be free to shove the Quran down our throats?
Where were THEY when the terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center and over a thousand lives?
Why, instead of continuing to promote the Quran, don't they denounce the people who attack Christianity? Could it possibly be.....because THEY themselves ARE opposed to Christianity? Seems to me they expect Christians to protect them, but they don't care if Christians' rights and/or lives are destroyed.
After one becomes indoctrinated by family and church the bible is not read, it is "interpreted" to suit one of 4,000 beliefs.
I'm a Brit who can remember what it was like to live under the constant threat of terrorist attacks perpetrated in 'the name of God' i.e. by Catholic Irish Republicans. They and their 'Protestant' counterparts committed more atrocities within the British Isles than Al-Qaeda will ever do, yet none of the media ever labelled these thugs 'Christian terrorists.'
Why then demonise the entire Islamic faith for the actions of a few?
I was just about to make the same point but you got there first
Because we all knew that they were not really Christians, the words Christian terrorist are an oxymoron, as the bible does not allow for the use of force or violence to witness to folk.
Therefore NOBODY who kills does so for Christ, or has the right to call themselves Christian.
However, the Quran does, and indeed orders force and violence to be used as a method of subjugating 'infidels' (that' you and me).
When all the Mullahs stand together and demand equality for women, open reciprocity for Christians to open churches in Islamic states, and condemn terrorists, ordering their faithful to NOT provision them, and that the MUST report all terrorists to the appropriate authorities, THEN I may stop viewing ALL Muslims as a potential danger.
Can anybody tell me what a good Muslim looks like, how do I KNOW WHICH ONES WILL NOT EXPLODE?
Terrorism in Northern Ireland was never inspired by religion or done in 'the name of God' - the IRA didn't kill people because they were protestant - it was always essentially nationalistic between two groups who happened to belong to different religions.
I don't think it's a case of labelling all Muslims as Terrorists.
More a case that at the moment most Terrorists are Muslims!
I hear a lot of complaining from the peace loving Muslim community about the sweeping generalisations that tar all Muslins with the same brush.
However what I don't see or hear is what the same peace loving majority is doing to stop their more aggressive fundamentalist brethren from committing their terrorist acts so we can all live in peace.
I don't like demonising people, but both, the bible and quoran are the source of this religious hate, so both sides should be doing something about changing their core beliefs in a psychotic entity that is gonna kill those non-believers on the other side no matter what else is believed about the matter. :
Leaving aside your known prejudice against religion, I agree with you, anybody who kills for religion should be stopped.
How do you stop them?
Christianity has no 'core belief' that violence is permitted whatsoever, and as I have frequently stated, anybody 'killing for Christ' cannot actually be a Christian in the first place.
But how do you stop a religion that openly states that it's aim is to subdue and control the world, by force if required?
Makes the JW's and Mormon door knockers look tame by comparison!
I know you will be familiar with the bible version.
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles
) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)
And this is the sort of tripe that makes it flourish.
Qur’an 8:55 Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve.
It is much easier to kill when those you kill are determined to be "vile animals" first.
The bible uses the same crud.
Where in the New Testament does the bible use this 'same crud'?
Because the New Testament was a new covenant, brought to humanity by Christ, and anything from the OT that is not reiterated in the NT is no longer part of the new covenant.
You have been exposed to Churchianity we both know, but Christianity is a different thing, and follows the words of Christ.
I am not a Jew, still attempting to please God via the Pentateuch and the prophets, I am a disciple of Christ.
Yes the Muslims also share the OT as a religious text, but just as their 'new revelation' inspires them to mayhem and murder, so the Christian new revelation inspires believers to non violence.
See the difference?
You always try to decry Christ by citing OT texts, which you should know better about, it's deceptive.
Muslims believe in the NT and Jesus Christ in some way. I'm not sure how important he is to the Muslim Religion, but I know he is respected as a great prophet to them. I think that's why you don't see Muslims threatening to burn the Bible.
Christianity's history IS littered with fanatics who have killed in God's name and plucked a few Bible verses out of context in order to justify it. The Witch Hunts, Anti-Semitism, the Crusades -- all largely based on the Old Testament since the New, admittedly, contains few if any calls to commit violence. One obscure text is centred on Jesus himself who mysteriously instructs his followers to buy a sword as his mission nears its climax.
I think that this raises an interesting side point in how the Christian should view the Old Testament. In many parts it is more morally questionable than the contents of the Qur'an, and we are taught that God is unchanging. Does the Father of Jesus Christ then still advocate and stand by what he said back there?
It would seem to depend on "context"
In other words, there is continuity, (10 commandments for example) when it suits the argument and if it does not then it is quoted "out of context"
The problem is it is always "out of context" or ignored if it asks a question of believers.
Like I said Earnest, if it's reiterated in the NT, then it's relevant to Christianity... for instance the ONLY food prohibition still extant is regarding consuming blood, and rather than kill those who reject the word of God, we are instructed to 'dust our feet' - in other words, leave them to their own fate and get onward, which is why I no longer try to 'witness' to you directly, you are not interested, and that's fair enough.
BTW, you must acknowledge that I always try to answer any 'questions' and can normally argue totally from scripture, which after all is what you normally 'question'
As to the sword issue...
Luke 22 35-42
....When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.
And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.
And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.
And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,
Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
Let's get some context here, Christ knew that the Sanhedrin were coming to arrest Him, and that things were about to get rough, not by His command, indeed He commanded Peter to put his sword away, and healed the damaged ear that Peter had cut off (and that must have unsettled those arresting Him).
What we are seeing is an indication (not a command) that in perilous times we believers ARE permitted to DEFEND ourselves, family and anybody who is being attacked, hence it's acceptable for believers to be in the army and police forces.
But NOWHERE in the testimony of Christ, does He condone or suggest any violent action against anybody, and as He said, He COULD have commanded an army of angels against the Romans, except that He was, in the final sentence, "nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" showing that He was committed to doing the will of God, and that will was; that Christ should die ONCE, as an innocent perfect sacrifice, to be able to offer all humanity escape from the clutches of Satan.
There is also the possibility that for a brief moment, Jesus DID consider some kind of armed resistance as a way to achieve God's Kingdom. Remember John the Baptist's fiery preaching which coincided the advent of the Messiah with imminent judgment? Jesus must have been influenced by this and it would have appeared to be a tempting alternative to the sacrifice of himself, even if he ultimately saw it as a futile means to fulfil prophecy.
you're never really going to get anywhere, because the premise for your title is wrong.
Now, there are, I'm sure, some people, somewhere, who assume that everyone who claims to be a Muslim is a terrorist. They say stuff like "Muslims are terrorists".
Then, there are people who say things like this : "The authorities of Islam, which are power figures, not just to Islam but to the nations they run, rule by violence, power, and the ability to exact punishment upon those who disagree with them, or threaten their rule and absolute power".
For examples of this, we look at Iran, the world-wide head of the Shia sect of Islam. The Ayatollah who is currently the recognized "top" of the rung has no problem with killing people who don't conform to his fatwas, and he also has no problem with threatening or overruling laws or government officials, when it fails to suit his purposes. Or, even having them killed.
Also, Iran provides people to both do and train others to go to Iraq and bomb schools and markets and highways, in an effort to incite terror. All of this is, of course, justified by the leaders of the various sects of Islam as being in accordance to the Koran, etc. Is it? Doesn't matter. Islam is what it claims it is, and those who are its subjects have no voice in changing that, the only change will be national overthrow or complete military defeat of every Islamic ruled country.
Did I just "label" Muslims as terrorists? Of course not. But i did demonstrate that Islam can be considered a sponsor of terrorism and in fact, a terrorist ideology, as well.
For those who wish to simplistically promote propaganda, for partisan purposes, the accusation of "labelling Muslims as terrorists" may get plaudits for its creativity and high hopes for its effectiveness, but in reality, it gets a complete zero for its truthfullness and integrity.
There you'll discover that 99% of Muslims are peaceloving individuals.
First of all, Iran is not the representative of the whole Muslim world. Its only a small portion of the Islamic world. Try study some statistical evidence. Im sure Iran would love to say the same things about USA but dont think media would listen to them since its mostly controlled by USA. Logically, a person would become a suicide bomber when he or she is totally helpless against his enemies but has enough reason to become so. We need to know those reasons too. If u dont read between the lines, u would be just memorizing headlines like parrots do. Secondly, Both Bin Laden & Saddam Hussain used to be Best friends with USA. Now both of them are Doomed!...Why?? I dont find it FUNNY coz its PHONY! Alas, that media doesnt find it interesting to Broadcast past relationships for certain reason!
Using terrorist to alienate the adversaries is an old technique & not a muslim one. It is especially done when your adversary is strong or you dont want to get caught red handed. Its true Iran does that but so is USA!! Do I have to remind you that USA too used the Talibans & Laden for terrorist attacks on Soviets. At that time, the Muslim Laden was Friends with the Christian USA which explains a lot that it is less religion & more political interest.
Take my advice, dont just memorize the headlines, try reading between the lines too!
If you want to ditch the OT and start again, you better read what jesus sed.
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.
Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)
Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself.
Jesus said so.
I you are quoting Jesus .. did he not simplify what the laws are when he said that if you love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as much as you do your self, you have kept all of the ten.
I don't remember where, but I remember Jesus asking the pharisees and scribes why are YOU making up so many rules but not keeping them yourself. You don't go in yet you are keeping others from doing so.
Just woke up ...Yawn ... gulp maybe coffee will help..
Maybe YOU had better read what Jesus said, take a look at the word LAW in relationship to COMMANDMENTS and you may realise what was being said... as Jerami said, Christ castigated the Pharisees for ADDING to the law/ten commandments, which they had increased to 633 commandments!
OK, they meant well, after all a religious system based upon self righteousness needed to cover EVERY possible infringement, but they kinda got carried away, which was why Christ had to return to 'FULFIL' the law, and demonstrate (which he did constantly) that God never intended that it be made difficult (His yoke is NOT heavy)but that given free will, man will keep piling on regulations that eventually proved that it was (and still is) impossible to comply with man's laws, but relatively simple to comply with Gods law.
Christ fulfilled ALL of the law, kept every single one, the only man to ever do so 100%.... which made Him the PERFECT sacrifice.
1 John 2:6-8 (Amplified Bible)
Whoever says he abides in Him ought [as [a]a personal debt] to walk and conduct himself in the same way in which He walked and conducted Himself.
Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the message which you have heard [the [b]doctrine of salvation through Christ].
Yet I am writing you a new commandment, which is true (is realized) in Him and in you, because the darkness ([c]moral blindness) is clearing away and the true Light ([d]the revelation of God in Christ) is already shining.
Christ completed everything that was required for man to commune with God
I don't need to ditch any of it, which would be obvious to any reader. I ditched it 30 years ago!
The law was superseded by the Christian dispensation Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6
The law was not superseded by the Christian dispensation
Jesus is also said to have said.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)
I never thought of that angel. that is yet another verse that I can add to the reasons that I think Jesus was truthful when he said "this" generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.
Or you could look at it logically and mention the futility of speaking of the "new order"
Earnest At one time I had "ALMOST" come to the same conclusions as you. But then I saw a prophetic timeline comparison to out time.
I had enough faith left that I investigated what if this is accurate and true,
I found that whether I wanted to believe it or not; at least the prophesy does lay out like a connect by number picture.
Scripture makes sense If the second coming did happen the way that scripture says that it would.
When this fact is Interpreted away, that causes a total upheaval in everything else that is written.
A need was created making it necessary to interpret everything else.
The same way that the Jews eyes were blinded to the arrival of their Messiah ... His second coming was also hidden.
so that the second stage of prophesy (Rev)might be fulfilled.
Until you have fully investigated the concept that 62 weeks of prophesy is the same period of time as approx. 568 of our years Your studies are incomplete.
This will show that "some" of your animosity toward religion is warranted; but NOT all.
Faith in God is not the same thing as having faith in religion as it teaches scripture. As you say, which version is the true one.
I would answer .... the one that doesn't interpret Prophesy.
I'll be back later. I gotta work on the wifes car to get it back on the road.
She has been driving my old Mustang and don't like it.
It's called self fulfilling prophecy. It's self fulfilling in the same way a woman believes her husband is cheating on her even if he isn't. She will believe it so much that ultimately she pushes her husband into the arms of another woman.
At that time, she would then say that she knew it all along and no matter how much her husband pleaded and reasoned with her that it was not true; she will say it was because in the end...
You should get the point.
Yes he does.
Sandra.. I liked your story and it does hold true the way that you told it.
But I ask you .
What if the scenario ran just the opposite of what you described?
What if she refused to jump to that conclusion and followed the trail of evidence with an optimistic heart. She kept finding more and more evidence but wasn't going to come to any conclusion until she came to the end of the trail.
And then she saw "THEM"
Would it then be sensible or her to draw any conclusions?
What if people could read something and not turn it on its head just so they can think of something that THEY think is cute.
Well Jerami that is exactly what you did! I was just pointing it out.
Geeze! Don't you understand your own thread?
Then it wouldn't be jumping to conclusions. It's called hard evidence, forgive the unintended pun. She would be wise to not jump to conclusions and wait for real hardcore evidence. Catching them in bed is pretty hardcore. Then if he was like, "It's not what you think." Then if she concluded that he was full of it, she would be justified to kick his arse!
The point is that life isn't like the movie Minority Report where you can convict people before they have actually done anything wrong because there isn't any evidence to back it up before or after.
The unfairly convicted person could say "he wouldn't have done it", but you would never know. The idea of convicting people of crimes they haven't committed because you have faith that they will is not good.
Not even to the women who ignores her intuition about her husband, 80% of the time they are wrong. In fact, so many relationships are destroyed by fears of infidelity rather than infidelity itself.
When it comes to the idea of End Times Prophecy, you do realize that Armageddon is NOT a divine fulfillment. It would be fulfilled by people accusing each other of their god being the devil or whatever.
Realistically, people are striving for this Armageddon type of resolution both sides believing they are right and the other must be destroyed. Truly it doesn't make either one right.
It doesn't have to be that way and it never did.
I've seen it many times. Unharnessed fears all too often create a situation that encourages our fears to come true.
...or harnesses us in its yoke - which if you follow, is supposed to be "L(l)ight"...
...and come - True(th)... are we not to ask....
but i am not being cute....
the more the merrier...all things are indeed, coming to pass... just as in the days of NOAH, so shall the day of the coming of the Son of Man be.... and were there not angels coming down from heaven and "mingling" with men and women sexually? get acquainted with a modern view of aliens, since modernity's hand is smudging over the truth...
these current 'angels', as it were, are taking the form of what evolutionary "science" plays directly into the hands of (satan) and uses the idea of an evolving earth and places it in a more galactic/universal state so that if there is life 'out there' then due to time/space issues, it could be older and more evolved - hence - there are aliens visiting who are old, wise and technologically advanced.... BUT WAIT..
do we not hear of these advanced beings coming to the planet we call home and conducting sexual experiments? and why? genesis 3:15 ring a bell??? "and i will put enmity ... between thy seed and the seed of the woman..." so, it appears that when the angels (fallen ones) were coming down to the earth in the time of noah they were running archaic sorts of genetic trials - and why? enmity, don't forget...they wanted (fallen angels) to spoil the seed lineage of the christ from adam on to mother mary...
these days, they appear to have upgraded - (knowing our "science"/laughing at us) they take humans inter-dimensionally and they play space geneticists, all in a grand attempt to create an antithesis to who was already born of the spirit of god - jesus... the ALIEN from space then - as the unwitting star in the devil's plan - tricking mankind into believing that we evolved, so they too, must simply be that...if even aliens TRULY exist...
the trick is to keep people guessing... armageddon will happen, but it will not be what hollywood has painted it as, nor your favorite musicians who have perhaps emboldened many of us to say farewell to faith... so why faith?
all science (human science) is just that...or have we forgotten that much of what we say is fact is swallowed in the wake of an impermanent strata of slow and universal decay...everything is changing from life to death - everything, and all that is good to fear is that which we know in our hearts...
that is, we may all be wrong ...
Well at least I feel confident that you are wrong after reading that.
ROTF, Mary was sexually abused by an alien? I have never seen an alien depicted with wings... wait a gosh darn minute. LOLOLOL
War of the Worlds!!! ROTF
Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments
People in general are peaceful ... until an excuse comes along.
And after they look at that excuse long enough it will become justification.
The problem is simple. Unless you are blind, you will read the exact instructions in both the quoran and bible. There are thousands of such threats and incitements in both.
The biggest threat posed by both the Koran and the Bible and other sources of religion is the idea that the followers have to go crazy with multiplication. Back in the bronze age this was fine. Now it is disastrous. Some religious people tend to read between the lines and are able to support the idea of a smaller world population where there is plenty of food and land for all. Others think they have to act like bronze age subjects of their god. The ones that will go bronze age insane with multiplication will make the world an unsafe place. I am with Dick Smith on this one. With only 6% of Australia being good farmland our country is very much under threat by the multiplication idiots that don't understand that times have changed and the UK is also under threat for the same reasons.
Joe says .... Hay Mr Muslim, I got a knife for sale. For A nickel; na what the heck you can have it for free cause you are my riend.
Then Joe walks across the street. Hay Mr Christin, I am pretty sure that Mr Muslim has gotten his self a knife; You better watch out. Maybe you need a sword? I've got one in the trunk of the car. You can have it for a nickle.
Joe says.. Hay Mr Muslim. I didn't know it when I gave ya a knife, but that Christian HAS a SWORD!!!
That knife isn't going to do you any good against a sword. You better get a pistol ! I know where I can get ya one !
It will cost you $500.oo ea. But it will be worth it since he has a sword !!
Joe says .. Hay Mr Christian You might be in trouble? He has a gun! I saw it. You better get a cannon if you want to protect yourself. $ 10,000 will get it here by morning.
Joe says ... Hay my Friend ... see what he has at his front door?
............ for $1,000,000 I'll get ya something that can deal with that !
a few years later Joe is talking to his neighbor in Hawaii..
I'm glad I moved way out here... Away from all the crazys Just look at what those idiots are doing.
They are causing Ssooo much trouble in the world;
I think that we aught to Nuke the whole lot of them. Crazy ba-----s.
by gulnazahmad7 years ago
If western media, politicians and other public say that Muslims are terrorists and Islam is a terror spreading religion why don't they look at their own history and present scenario. If killing innocent people is...
by Rezwanul Kabir3 months ago
Does Islam support terrorism?Suddenly this question comes in my mind. As a Muslim I know Islam doesn't support terrorism. If anyone read Holy Qur'an and research the life of Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh), he can easily...
by navneetjha3 years ago
All muslims are not terrorists but all terrorists are muslims. What do you think?I know its bit sesitive issues. However I was thinking why most of the terrorists in the world are muslims? Is it something to do with...
by Mohammad Mohsin13 months ago
What you suggest for the Muslims to get rid of the label of terrorism?I can’t understand why Islam is supposed to be religion of terrorism; I think it’s a religion of peaceDo you know how we Muslims could stop this?
by cjhunsinger2 years ago
As the President of the United States continues to refuse to identify on going acts of Islamic terrorism with Islam; is his refusal to do so a direct or tacit approval or support for the religion of Islam and Sharia law...
by Sushmita3 years ago
I was checking out this Hub on Whoopi Goldberg and 'The View' and came upon Whoopi and Baver walking out of the show, on the remark of Bill O'Reilly that 'Muslims killed us on 9/11'. I then went looking and found...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.