In post #3 Bunced Said:
He's an extremist, and, like extremists of any religion, Christianity included, he will not be happy until he has made everyone else join his religion
See, the thing is... even with so-called Christian extremists... Yes, Christians would LOVE for everyone to become a Christian, however, we do not FORCE people to become Christian by threat of death or subjugation.
You would be VERY hard-pressed to find ANY Christian terrorists in our world -- seriously. And, please don't bring up Timothy McVeigh because he was more closely associated with Islamic Terrorists than any Christian group! (Read Jayna Davis' The Third Terrorist if you have doubts about this...).
According to Islam, his invitation to accept Islam is a necessary step before an attack. That way if we refuse to submit they are within their rights to attack us according to Mohammed's rules. This is according to historic precedent. It's not like Osama and Al Qaeda, and other Radical Islamic Militant Terrorist groups haven't made this "offer" before though...
And if a presidential candidate, influenced by Islam, won an American election~ is a frightening thought.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Spring is my thing!Spring my t mytp://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc288ytoots/434834mnz0ts3r2i1.gif[/IM]
See, the thing is... even with so-called Christian extremists... Yes, Christians would LOVE for everyone to become a Christian, however, we do not FORCE people to become Christian by threat of death or subjugation.
You would be VERY hard-pressed to find ANY Christian terrorists in our world -- seriously. And, please don't bring up Timothy McVeigh because he was more closely associated with Islamic Terrorists than any Christian group! (Read Jayna Davis' The Third Terrorist if you have doubts about this...).
Hah I have no idea who Timothy McVeigh is so I shall take your word for it.
Christians have tried to do conversion by the sword in the past - certainly, in English history during certain periods it has been common place, and you could also look at the Spanish Inquisition. Now, many would argue that these are not Christians, but they did act under the banner of Christianity, same as Osama Bin Laden is acting under the banner of Islam.
Now, I think Christianity has largely grown up from this phase, but there are certainly still elements of dangerous fundamentals in some parts of the world, and I certainly think some Christians in what they say, if not in their actions, can be very abrasive and offensive - look at the Phelps family for instance.
Other groups sometimes operate under the banner of Christianity - the Ku Kux Klan for instance, or the IRA, or individuals like Eric Robert Rudolph.
Of course, the majority (as in 99.999999999999%) of Christians are peace loving gentle people who despise these groups as well as others. But it just goes to demonstrate that extremism in any religion is dangerous.
Is this equivalent to a terror attack such as 9/11 or July 7th 2007. Well of course not - it would be insanity to claim they are. But we musn't deny that extremism in any religion has the potential to be.
Now what the right way to combat this current threat from Osama Bin Laden? Well, I have to admit I am not wholly sure on this, but I am fairly confident that the current approach taken by the White House is not it (yes, I am probably what some would call an anti-war idiot!), because I feel that it is alienating much more people without actually solving the problem, and is in danger of becoming an idealogical battle on the part of George Bush.
I think we have missed an important message in his speech. i read the transcript and he said basically we should over throw our gov't.
He is an extremist who is using his knowledge of us against us. He even tried to persuade Christians by telling us Jesus and Mary are in the Quarn.
Jesus is in there. Christ is written in as a prophet and not as Savior and Lord.
It's interesting when I see things like this and then I speak with those who I know are devout Muslims. They uphold their teaching the Jews and Christians should be respected and considered a part of their "church". In fact they are even allowed to intermarry with them.
Then you read this from Bin Ladan and you see how the other side twists it even more and uphold the kill the infidals passages.
This whole just points more and more that it is not of God and is not His Word.
__________________
You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. -- I John 4:4
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Hah I have no idea who Timothy McVeigh is so I shall take your word for it.
Christians have tried to do conversion by the sword in the past - certainly, in English history during certain periods it has been common place, and you could also look at the Spanish Inquisition. Now, many would argue that these are not Christians, but they did act under the banner of Christianity, same as Osama Bin Laden is acting under the banner of Islam.
Now, I think Christianity has largely grown up from this phase, but there are certainly still elements of dangerous fundamentals in some parts of the world, and I certainly think some Christians in what they say, if not in their actions, can be very abrasive and offensive - look at the Phelps family for instance.
Other groups sometimes operate under the banner of Christianity - the Ku Kux Klan for instance, or the IRA, or individuals like Eric Robert Rudolph.
Of course, the majority (as in 99.999999999999%) of Christians are peace loving gentle people who despise these groups as well as others. But it just goes to demonstrate that extremism in any religion is dangerous.
Is this equivalent to a terror attack such as 9/11 or July 7th 2007. Well of course not - it would be insanity to claim they are. But we musn't deny that extremism in any religion has the potential to be.
Now what the right way to combat this current threat from Osama Bin Laden? Well, I have to admit I am not wholly sure on this, but I am fairly confident that the current approach taken by the White House is not it (yes, I am probably what some would call an anti-war idiot!), because I feel that it is alienating much more people without actually solving the problem, and is in danger of becoming an idealogical battle on the part of George Bush.
Well, there's my randomness over with.
There is a massive flaw in you thinking. English actually Europeans didn't do anything in Christ's name. They used Him for their own greed.
The Crusades, the Inquistion etc were all done to control and for greed. They simply used the one tatic they had to bend the population to their wishes and that was through God and Christ.
It is amazing how people don't put the phrase lip service into practice. Just because someone says they are Christian does not make it so. They don't quake like a Christian then they aren't.
__________________
You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. -- I John 4:4
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Yet there are millions of moderate Muslims who claim that Osama Bin Laden and his cronies aren't Muslim too. Surely the Quaking principle can also be applied there too.
The Europeans did it claiming to be doing so for the cause of Christ. This was a major flaw in their thinking. Now, whether they were actually doing it for Christ is irrelevant - that was the claim they made, same as OBL is claiming to be doing his actions under the banner of Islam.
You and I both know conversion by the sword is incompatible with Christianity. Yet there are those who would seek to use Christianity to get their own violent ends, whether they are true Christians or not
Hah I have no idea who Timothy McVeigh is so I shall take your word for it.
Christians have tried to do conversion by the sword in the past - certainly, in English history during certain periods it has been common place, and you could also look at the Spanish Inquisition. Now, many would argue that these are not Christians, but they did act under the banner of Christianity, same as Osama Bin Laden is acting under the banner of Islam.
Now, I think Christianity has largely grown up from this phase, but there are certainly still elements of dangerous fundamentals in some parts of the world, and I certainly think some Christians in what they say, if not in their actions, can be very abrasive and offensive - look at the Phelps family for instance.
Other groups sometimes operate under the banner of Christianity - the Ku Kux Klan for instance, or the IRA, or individuals like Eric Robert Rudolph.
Of course, the majority (as in 99.999999999999%) of Christians are peace loving gentle people who despise these groups as well as others. But it just goes to demonstrate that extremism in any religion is dangerous.
Is this equivalent to a terror attack such as 9/11 or July 7th 2007. Well of course not - it would be insanity to claim they are. But we musn't deny that extremism in any religion has the potential to be.
Now what the right way to combat this current threat from Osama Bin Laden? Well, I have to admit I am not wholly sure on this, but I am fairly confident that the current approach taken by the White House is not it (yes, I am probably what some would call an anti-war idiot!), because I feel that it is alienating much more people without actually solving the problem, and is in danger of becoming an idealogical battle on the part of George Bush.
Well, there's my randomness over with.
OK, I'll take this in parts:
1. Timothy McVeigh: (Sorry didn't realize you were in GB -- )OK, very quickly... Timothy McVeigh was one of the people who perpetrated the Oklahoma City Bombing Attack. He was painted as a Domestic Terrorist with ties to a Christian/White Supremacist Separatist Group, but evidence shows that he and another one of his co-perpetrators Terry Nichols were indeed working with Radical Islamic Terrorists -- some of whom are STILL living in Oklahoma, and gave aid to the 9/11 Hijackers in Norman, Oklahoma...
2.) The inquisition and such was centuries ago... We are talking about CURRENT events in relation to Islam so I don't think the crimes of the church back then have any bearing on events today honestly. On the other hand Islam has a long history of violence and it hasn't stopped, and wasn't just a few dark periods in their history, either.
3.) Fred Phelps is NOT a Christian. He is a cultist frankly. There is nothing Christian about the way he acts, and frankly when one examines the fact that he is supportive of leftist politicians (like Al Gore), one may wonder whether he is indeed claiming to be a Christian in order to paint Christians with a bad name... (I hope I explained that clearly enough -- Phelps is only a Christian because he claims he is, and his whole group is made up of only his family members...)
4.) Granted some of the groups you mentioned CLAIM to be Christians. However, there is no RELIGIOUS backing for their actions, unlike the Radical Islamic Terrorists who CAN find many commandments from Mohammed to justify their violent actions towards non-Muslims and apostate Muslims as well. Jihad and Fatwas are an integral part of their religion. On the other hand, Christians are Commanded NOT to do violence, but to love our enemies. The only violence that is acceptable is in self-defense...
5.) I don't agree with you when you say extremism in ANY religion is dangerous. Take the Amish for instance. Most Christians would say they take things to an extreme, but they are the farthest thing from being dangerous -- indeed they are pacifists... as are adherents to other religions around the world.
6.) Honestly, no matter what the US does we will not stop their violence. This has been going on for CENTURIES, literally, and as far as terrorists -- it's been going on for a lot longer than Bush has been in office. The Radical Islamic Terrorists we are fighting against are not going to stop until they are; a.) No longer able to fight, or b.) The U.S. (and ALL other nations) bow to Islam and submit to a world-wide Caliphate. No amount of appeasement will work with these people. No one likes WAR, but when you are dealing with people who believe as these people do there is no choice but to fight back. War is never good, but there are good reasons to fight a war, and combatting againt these people IS a good reason to fight.
It is already an ideological battle, but that is not Bush's fault. As I stated before this has been going on for a lot longer than the last 6 years! It is indeed an ideological battle because our enemies in the WOT are ideologically pursuing this course of action. As I said, no amount of appeasement will stop their actions barring the total submission of the U.S. AND other nations to Islam which is not going to happen.
OK, those are my views of what we are dealing with in our world. As I said, no-one is in favor of war, but I will not submit to Islam, nor allow people bent on the destruction of my country and other free people and nations to triumph. I would hope that you wouldn't either...
Last edited by Tangeloper; 9th September 2007 at 12:51 PM.
But on the other hand, though they use quotes from the Qu'ran to back what they are doing, there are thousands of other Muslims who say that such extreme groups aren't true Muslims - indeed, the Muslim Council of Great Britain (again, sorry - the Atlantic Ocean seems to pose a huge problem to both of us!!!!) called such a violent world view a "lethal misinterpretation" and "unIslamic", much in the same way we call Phelps and co "unChristian" - and incidentally, I do fully condone what you say in points 3 and 4.
As to the best way to deal with it. Well, not the way we're currently doing it. I think it's important to understand that it is an idealogical battle (yeah, bad choice of words for me first time, I apologise - I meant Bush seemed to be seeing it as a personal crusade and a reason to get his way on a whole host of issues. Laziness on my part and I apologise whole heartedly!) and that part of it is winning the hearts and minds of people in the Middle East. Unfortunately, this is something the US is chronically bad at doing, and nice as it would be to lay this all at Bush's feet, I can't do that. Previous administrations have been meddling in affairs so much there just to get their own way that it has led to a hatred of the US, which groups like Al-Queda can prey upon. Much of the hatred is self-inflicted because the US has played fast-and-loose too often with people in the Middle East, and they are only making it worse by their gun-hoe attitude of solving things. They are currently digging their own grave through their own actions - their actions create easy pray for disillusioned young men in these countries by radical groups
It's also important to understand that Al-Queda isn't one entity, but it is very much a viral network, so it works in lots of independent cells. Therefore, it is much harder to fight by traditional military means.
Instead, I think we need to be working on a basis of winning hearts and minds through showing respect to the mainstream of peoples in the US (respect is a major thing in Muslim culture), but focus on bringing to justice those behind the attacks - and that's a hard thing, and one that will take a while to see results. But the current line of thinking and the "personal crusade against terror" is only going to harm the US and not help it.
Of course I would never submit to such a view of Islam - but we need to rethink our methods, and the Pentagon needs to realise that it cannot just blow problems up but may actually need to think about them and show some sensitivity and intelligence
By the way - you make some intelligent points, and though I disagree with them, you make them well - it's good to talk with you
)OK, very quickly... Timothy McVeigh was one of the people who perpetrated the Oklahoma City Bombing Attack. He was painted as a Domestic Terrorist with ties to a Christian/White Supremacist Separatist Group, but evidence shows that he and another one of his co-perpetrators Terry Nichols were indeed working with Radical Islamic Terrorists -- some of whom are STILL living in Oklahoma, and gave aid to the 9/11 Hijackers in Norman, Oklahoma...
Linear Mode
