.

[FireDragon76]

What would they be ashamed for? I'm not being sarcastic. I always assumed they did these attacks because they were disgusted by the West's secularism and decadence, at least from their point of view.

The disgust and decadence is only partly right as a motivation. People don't get disgusted in a vacuum. It comes from internalized shame. Probably from being a minority in a country where being a Muslim is difficult, but also a narrative of radicalization that exists within Islamic tradition itself. It's a religious tradition that sees a strong place for "defensive" use of violence, without necessarily having clear guidelines on what that means.

Many Muslim societies actually have a deep seated sense of shame in them, due to the failure of political implementation of Islam to produce a just, Godly society that is influential and not subjugated, which is a major theme in the Islamic tradition. Islam, unlike Christianity, has had a strong political emphasis since close to the beginning, esp. after Muhammed's death.

Though Nabdeel Qureshi IMO makes some modernist mistakes in his assumptions about what Islam is in essence (trying to equate it with a kind of fundamentalism), I think this might be helpful from an evangelical Christian perspective in understanding the shame that exists in many Muslim cultures viz a viz the failure of the long tradition of political Islam:

And here's an article on Islam and Jihad, trying to understand it from a mainline Christian perspective (Lutheran). It's quite long but it talks about the grounding for Jihad in Islam thought and the diversity of legal opinions among Islamic scholars about when violence to defend Islam and restrain evil is necessary. It seems evident to me, particularly reading the second and third part of the paper, during much of its history, Islam has been dominated by a school of legal opinion that violence to spread Islam is a legitimate means to produce a Godly and just world. It's also interesting there is no concept of divine promise or covenant between God and the Islamic community as a whole (the emphasis is on individual salvation), which might account for a lot of insecurity and uncertainty, and provide for a basis for a narrative of shame:

http://www.elca.org/JLE/Articles/883

 

[Philip_B]

I am sure we need a better narrative than this. We are called to follow Jesus. We have decided to follow Jesus.

Jesus proclaimed a new Kingdom. Not simply a new King, but a new way of understanding Kingdom. The dominant themes of this new Kingdom are not power, but love, not judgement, but forgiveness, not death, but new life.

My understanding - limited as it is - is that there is a high level of resistance within Islam to anything like what we would call Biblical Criticism. Some people speak of modern Islam, new Islam, or even call for a reformation within Islam. We have been through various of these movements within Christianity. Islam has not, or at least has not institutionalised it. As such, to a 21st Century Christian looking from the outside Islam may well look very different to how it looks from the inside.

Somehow we need to listen, and we need to be heard, for there is a better way. A kingdom of heart and minds set for peace and love, a place where we respect the image and likeness that we all carry. I can't see how us racing back 1500 years to a world where bigger guns and faster horses could right the course of history does anything but set us back.

I hate the violence. I do not hate Muslims. I would like to see Islam speak out against the violence. I do not believe that will happen if all we offer is violence in return. We can react, and I understand that, what is far more important is how we respond.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I am sure we need a better narrative than this. We are called to follow Jesus. We have decided to follow Jesus.

Jesus proclaimed a new Kingdom. Not simply a new King, but a new way of understanding Kingdom. The dominant themes of this new Kingdom are not power, but love, not judgement, but forgiveness, not death, but new life.

My understanding - limited as it is - is that there is a high level of resistance within Islam to anything like what we would call Biblical Criticism. Some people speak of modern Islam, new Islam, or even call for a reformation within Islam. We have been through various of these movements within Christianity. Islam has not, or at least has not institutionalised it. As such, to a 21st Century Christian looking from the outside Islam may well look very different to how it looks from the inside.

Somehow we need to listen, and we need to be heard, for there is a better way. A kingdom of heart and minds set for peace and love, a place where we respect the image and likeness that we all carry. I can't see how us racing back 1500 years to a world where bigger guns and faster horses could right the course of history does anything but set us back.

I hate the violence. I do not hate Muslims. I would like to see Islam speak out against the violence. I do not believe that will happen if all we offer is violence in return. We can react, and I understand that, what is far more important is how we respond.

This is an extremely difficult situation for the entire world, and for Christians, it's even more complicated.

One thing that gets us off on the wrong foot is confusing the roles of individual Christians, churches, and governments. For example, an individual Christian can't be a vigilante. He can't kill in response to killing; however, the state can. It has been set up by God for that purpose (putting teeth into the law).

 

[Frisky Wren]

There is only one real solution to the "Islamic problem" and it is neither liberalism, isolationism or genocide. Missionaries, Righteous soldiers and those who welcome refugees from the wars and failures of the Muslim world all witness to that better way. Welcoming Muslims running from Muslims is an act of Christian compassion and a witness to Christ. Christians share a faith and hope in a God that through Jesus Christ has demonstrated that it is possible to transform people into something better. Are there criminals, murderers and useless people in the mix? Yes of course and it was from such people that the church of God and indeed America was originally formed by Gods grace and mercy

Christians have been in the middle east longer than the United States of America has existed. We're talking centuries! Do you imagine that's the solution to Muslim terrorism? Missionaries?
Muhammad denied Jesus was the son of God. To associate their god with a man, Jesus, or to claim Jesus is the son of Allah is the greatest sin a Muslim can commit. It's called shirk. The Qur'an denies Jesus died on a cross.
These are a people that hope Allah's grace finds them once they're dead. So that they see paradise at his election. They don't believe in life they'll go to paradise.
But to believe in Jesus as the son of God tells them they'll surely go to Hell. You're asking terrorists who hate everything the west stands for to stop their evil and find God and Jesus. When terrorists beheaded Coptic Christians on a beach in Egypt. Slaughter Christians, behead them, hang them, slaughter Christian children for not converting to Islam under threat of death.
And you believe more Christian's need to step up and keep trying to stop terrorism through missionary work, proselytizing?
Muslims believe in Jesus! He was a prophet sent by Allah. They don't believe anything else, including his virgin birth. But they do believe if they accept what Christianity teaches they'll go to the Hell they already believe in through the teachings of Islam.

You have to understand one thing about Islam. It isn't ecumenical. It doesn't play well with others. If you want to live in the world where Islam rules through Sharia and you're not Muslim but are an infidel or what is called a Kafir you'll pay. You'll pay a tax called a Jizya.
Pay or die.

You don't fight Islamic terrorism with tracts.

 

[Philip_B]

He can't kill in response to killing; however, the state can. It has been set up by God for that purpose (putting teeth into the law).

I don't believe that the purpose of the state being set up, is to kill in response to killing. In a democracy (if there are any of them left) it is like saying killing is only OK if we have a good reason and we 51% agree. This becomes especially difficult when dealing with question of governments whose credentials are in question. Islamic State may be neither, in the same way that the Holy Roman Empire was none of the above.

And of course what do we do when we have questions about those in Government, like how will you respond if Hilary is not in Prison, but the White House again. (One way or another I guess there may be guards at the door!)​

If it is OK for us to encourage and lobby the State to Kill, because we as individuals don't have the authority, isn't that a little like saying it is OK for the state not to have a moral compass. I guess it raises the whole question of a 'just war', I know its a forgotten concept, and I guess it just doesn't make good headlines.

Our traditional concept of war has been state vs state - yet somehow this seems entirely different. It seems an individual does something, and then depending on the 'success' or outrage it causes, then a group claims responsibility for it. It remains unclear if the leadership of that group was aware of or sanctioned the action before it happened, or if that even matters.

I don't for one moment think any of it is easy.

 

[sparow]

I am sure we need a better narrative than this. We are called to follow Jesus. We have decided to follow Jesus.

Jesus proclaimed a new Kingdom. Not simply a new King, but a new way of understanding Kingdom. The dominant themes of this new Kingdom are not power, but love, not judgement, but forgiveness, not death, but new life.

My understanding - limited as it is - is that there is a high level of resistance within Islam to anything like what we would call Biblical Criticism. Some people speak of modern Islam, new Islam, or even call for a reformation within Islam. We have been through various of these movements within Christianity. Islam has not, or at least has not institutionalised it. As such, to a 21st Century Christian looking from the outside Islam may well look very different to how it looks from the inside.

Somehow we need to listen, and we need to be heard, for there is a better way. A kingdom of heart and minds set for peace and love, a place where we respect the image and likeness that we all carry. I can't see how us racing back 1500 years to a world where bigger guns and faster horses could right the course of history does anything but set us back.

I hate the violence. I do not hate Muslims. I would like to see Islam speak out against the violence. I do not believe that will happen if all we offer is violence in return. We can react, and I understand that, what is far more important is how we respond.

As I see it there are two issues, one is salvation the narrow path that leads to life that few find; most preachers say it is easy but the Gospels and Revelation say it is hard. Secondly there are many Muslims who could be converted; but prophesy says things are going to get progressively worse (we have a long way to go yet) and this may not be obvious to every one because they will be calling evil good and good evil.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I don't believe that the purpose of the state being set up, is to kill in response to killing. In a democracy (if there are any of them left) it is like saying killing is only OK if we have a good reason and we 51% agree. This becomes especially difficult when dealing with question of governments whose credentials are in question. Islamic State may be neither, in the same way that the Holy Roman Empire was none of the above.

And of course what do we do when we have questions about those in Government, like how will you respond if Hilary is not in Prison, but the White House again. (One way or another I guess there may be guards at the door!)​

If it is OK for us to encourage and lobby the State to Kill, because we as individuals don't have the authority, isn't that a little like saying it is OK for the state not to have a moral compass. I guess it raises the whole question of a 'just war', I know its a forgotten concept, and I guess it just doesn't make good headlines.

Our traditional concept of war has been state vs state - yet somehow this seems entirely different. It seems an individual does something, and then depending on the 'success' or outrage it causes, then a group claims responsibility for it. It remains unclear if the leadership of that group was aware of or sanctioned the action before it happened, or if that even matters.

I don't for one moment think any of it is easy.

I should have used the word, "execute" rather than "kill". God has placed the state in power specifically for that purpose. It's not a matter of democratic decision.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.​

 

[sparow]

I don't believe that the purpose of the state being set up, is to kill in response to killing. In a democracy (if there are any of them left) it is like saying killing is only OK if we have a good reason and we 51% agree. This becomes especially difficult when dealing with question of governments whose credentials are in question. Islamic State may be neither, in the same way that the Holy Roman Empire was none of the above.

And of course what do we do when we have questions about those in Government, like how will you respond if Hilary is not in Prison, but the White House again. (One way or another I guess there may be guards at the door!)​

If it is OK for us to encourage and lobby the State to Kill, because we as individuals don't have the authority, isn't that a little like saying it is OK for the state not to have a moral compass. I guess it raises the whole question of a 'just war', I know its a forgotten concept, and I guess it just doesn't make good headlines.

Our traditional concept of war has been state vs state - yet somehow this seems entirely different. It seems an individual does something, and then depending on the 'success' or outrage it causes, then a group claims responsibility for it. It remains unclear if the leadership of that group was aware of or sanctioned the action before it happened, or if that even matters.

I don't for one moment think any of it is easy.

True but why is it hard, when the littlest oldest poorest old lady could do it.

 

[Philip_B]

True but why is it hard, when the littlest oldest poorest old lady could do it.

With all due fairness, I do not see this as a response. I seems that you have used this as an opportunity to promote a particular ministry with nearly 2 hours of video sermons, which do not seem to represent a response to "At least 84 dead, hundreds injured after truck drives into Bastille Day crowd in France" or the question of the state being involved in state sponsored killing. I don't take the matter lightly. I think you should respond to the topic of the forum. I question you post and wonder if it is honouring the spirit of the Christian Forum Forum Rules.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Christians have been in the middle east longer than the United States of America has existed. We're talking centuries! Do you imagine that's the solution to Muslim terrorism? Missionaries?
Muhammad denied Jesus was the son of God. To associate their god with a man, Jesus, or to claim Jesus is the son of Allah is the greatest sin a Muslim can commit. It's called shirk. The Qur'an denies Jesus died on a cross.
These are a people that hope Allah's grace finds them once they're dead. So that they see paradise at his election. They don't believe in life they'll go to paradise.
But to believe in Jesus as the son of God tells them they'll surely go to Hell. You're asking terrorists who hate everything the west stands for to stop their evil and find God and Jesus. When terrorists beheaded Coptic Christians on a beach in Egypt. Slaughter Christians, behead them, hang them, slaughter Christian children for not converting to Islam under threat of death.
And you believe more Christian's need to step up and keep trying to stop terrorism through missionary work, proselytizing?
Muslims believe in Jesus! He was a prophet sent by Allah. They don't believe anything else, including his virgin birth. But they do believe if they accept what Christianity teaches they'll go to the Hell they already believe in through the teachings of Islam.

You have to understand one thing about Islam. It isn't ecumenical. It doesn't play well with others. If you want to live in the world where Islam rules through Sharia and you're not Muslim but are an infidel or what is called a Kafir you'll pay. You'll pay a tax called a Jizya.
Pay or die.

You don't fight Islamic terrorism with tracts.

The Holy Spirit managed to bring you and I to our knees in worship of Him. You think It can't do the same through the use of devoted missionaries?

 

[sparow]

With all due fairness, I do not see this as a response. I seems that you have used this as an opportunity to promote a particular ministry with nearly 2 hours of video sermons, which do not seem to represent a response to "At least 84 dead, hundreds injured after truck drives into Bastille Day crowd in France" or the question of the state being involved in state sponsored killing. I don't take the matter lightly. I think you should respond to the topic of the forum. I question you post and wonder if it is honouring the spirit of the Christian Forum Forum Rules.

I am not SDA and I am not promoting that religion, only what this speaker had to say; I was careless I should have anticipated SDAphobia, which usually comes from Dispensationalists. I have in the past posted utubes from other denominations without intending promoting there religion without censure. So I have to wonder is it a perceived off topic or the fourth commandment of God that has offended you.

I should have preambled the linkage between my post and the subject, "At least 84 dead, hundreds injured after truck drives into Bastille Day crowd in France"; I assumed my earlier posts would serve that purpose.

I assume because this is a Cristian forum, Christian context is used to discuss this Islamist attack and expanding the topic "THATBRAIN" gave a list of around 50 Islamist attacks world wide for a month.

I assume from Prophesy that this terror problem will get worse because it is Satan's anger that is expressed and cannot be suppressed except by God in the manner he has foretold; Satan's anger, and the reason for it and the consequences of it and how to protect oneself from it are discussed in the first video. I believe this puts the videos on topic.


From the OT we learn about the cause and effect of sin; like the Babylonian captivity, failing the 490 years to make the way straight and having the kingdom of God taken from them. Satan's insanity is an effect, the everlasting Gospel of the three angels explain the case and the cure.

 

[Philip_B]

Thank you sparrow for the courtesy of your response. I have no issue with Seventh Day Adventists, per se, save clearly we do not agree on everything. I have had along the way some good friends who lived the faith within that tradition.

I however must say that I clearly did not take from nearly two hours of YouTube videos a message that I particularly regarded as being on topic. I apologise for having mistaken you intent.

I don't usually use the word Dispensationalist so I had to look it up. I don't think I am one, and I am not sure if I should be one, and I don't know if that helps.

I now have a better understanding of the point you were making.

In my earlier post "I said I am sure we need a better narrative than this. We are called to follow Jesus. We have decided to follow Jesus." The narrative that that was referring to was a proposed response that some appeared to be advocating that we meet violence with violence. I make no apology for think that the topic is complex and sensitive, and that we need to ensure that we respond, not simply react, and hopefully that might mean respond as we would understand Jesus would have us respond.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

There is only one real solution to the "Islamic problem" and it is neither liberalism, isolationism or genocide. Missionaries, Righteous soldiers and those who welcome refugees from the wars and failures of the Muslim world all witness to that better way. Welcoming Muslims running from Muslims is an act of Christian compassion and a witness to Christ. Christians share a faith and hope in a God that through Jesus Christ has demonstrated that it is possible to transform people into something better. Are there criminals, murderers and useless people in the mix? Yes of course and it was from such people that the church of God and indeed America was originally formed by Gods grace and mercy

And this would be better served with Trump's proposal of setting up safe zones within these countries of conflict rather than uprooting them and forcing them into different cultures and demographics, sometimes of which can be so overwhelming in secular tolerance that that can not comprehend.

 

[mindlight]

And this would be better served with Trump's proposal of setting up safe zones within these countries of conflict rather than uprooting them and forcing them into different cultures and demographics, sometimes of which can be so overwhelming in secular tolerance that that can not comprehend.

There are no safe zones for Christians, Yazidis indeed many Sunni and Shia in these countries. Without boots on the ground this will not be achievable and there is no political will for a return to occupying such troubled lands. Asylum is the most viable option for the genuinely persecuted.

 

[fat wee robin]

The people and the individual who did this were well known to the police .The armed police were withdrawn just a brief time before the carnage took place . There is now a huge drama ,where a young police officer from Nice, accused the Minister of the Interior Caseneuve ,of supressing information indicative of suspicious neglect, which of course is being covered up by the National police ,most of whom are freemasons .
Please pray for this brave young women Sandra, who is beig harrassed now for telling the truth about a very shady situation .

 

[fat wee robin]

I am sure we need a better narrative than this. We are called to follow Jesus. We have decided to follow Jesus.

Jesus proclaimed a new Kingdom. Not simply a new King, but a new way of understanding Kingdom. The dominant themes of this new Kingdom are not power, but love, not judgement, but forgiveness, not death, but new life.

My understanding - limited as it is - is that there is a high level of resistance within Islam to anything like what we would call Biblical Criticism. Some people speak of modern Islam, new Islam, or even call for a reformation within Islam. We have been through various of these movements within Christianity. Islam has not, or at least has not institutionalised it. As such, to a 21st Century Christian looking from the outside Islam may well look very different to how it looks from the inside.

Somehow we need to listen, and we need to be heard, for there is a better way. A kingdom of heart and minds set for peace and love, a place where we respect the image and likeness that we all carry. I can't see how us racing back 1500 years to a world where bigger guns and faster horses could right the course of history does anything but set us back.

I hate the violence. I do not hate Muslims. I would like to see Islam speak out against the violence. I do not believe that will happen if all we offer is violence in return. We can react, and I understand that, what is far more important is how we respond.

Islam is being used to further the goals of the .........

 

[HerbieHeadley]

Islam is being used to further the goals of the .........

I think that's goals of the ...... not ".........".