Why

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I agree. I didn't mean to imply any particular position for you... I didn't know your position. But it's rampant.

"it's rampant."
So,
just lump all sinners together then,
as if all sinners need Jesus ?
Hey,
that's exactly Yhwh's Plan !

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

70% of the US military is Christian.

Maybe on paper.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

And that is where the distortions come in. If Muhammad was a bloodthirsty murderer then so was Moses, Samuel, and most of the other prophets in the Tanakh.

Slandering those called and chosen by the Creator Yhwh won't benefit you.

History in fact shows mummad was what he was, without life in Jesus and without Yhwh.

Moses, Samuel and the prophets were not as you say "bloodthirsty" , no matter if your parents or whoever/whatever teacher told you they were.
(maybe you ave some strange definition of bloodthirsty?)

Most people don't think of the soldiers who dropped the atom bombs on Japan as "bloodthirsty", even though so many people died.
"Bloodthirsty" has its own game, not in justice nor truth nor right.

 

[BrianJK]

"it's rampant."
So,
just lump all sinners together then,
as if all sinners need Jesus ?
Hey,
that's exactly Yhwh's Plan !

"All sinners need Jesus." is a far cry from "All Muslims want to kill people and take over the world."

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

"All sinners need Jesus." is a far cry from "All Muslims want to kill people and take over the world."

Not really.
All muslims are evil, according to all Scripture, and all need Jesus.
*note: All humans are evil, according to all Scripture, and all need Jesus.
not just one group. just happens to be one under discussion.
No matter how 'nice' someone wants to say this, it doesn't change.
A lot of Presidents wanted to be world leaders,
and a lot of Presidents killed a lot more people than most muslims .
Go figure.

 

[amariselle]

"it's rampant."
So,
just lump all sinners together then,
as if all sinners need Jesus ?
Hey,
that's exactly Yhwh's Plan !

Well, we are ALL, sinners and we ALL fall short.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Well, we are ALL, sinners and we ALL fall short.

Yes. That's the point.
As you quoted me "Hey, that's exactly Yhwh's Plan ! "

 

[BrianJK]

Not really.
All muslims are evil, according to all Scripture, and all need Jesus.
*note: All humans are evil, according to all Scripture, and all need Jesus.
not just one group. just happens to be one under discussion.
No matter how 'nice' someone wants to say this, it doesn't change.
A lot of Presidents wanted to be world leaders,
and a lot of Presidents killed a lot more people than most muslims .
Go figure.

Not all unsaved people are out to kill and take over the world. So it's still quite the far cry.

It's accurate to say that all Muslims are evil only insofar as all unsaved people are. But that's not the rampant implication. The implication is a special, more dangerous evil. A Muslim is no more evil than a Buddhist.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Well, is that supposed to be comforting to a whole world going to destruction ?
The label on the people doesn't matter.
People are doomed, subject to sin and to the devil.
Vessels of (............) what does Yhwh's Word say ?
Sons of disobedience.
Lost and without hope in the world without Jesus.
i.e. not just a penny-ante game here - it is life and death for eternity.

Does anyone want their neighbor, brother, father, son or daughter
to remain separate from Jesus for eternity,
to be resurrected to shame and destruction ?

Does anyone want that kind of opposition to Jesus taught to their little children ???
(remember everyone needs Jesus; so who is opposed to Him ? )

 

[BrianJK]

Well, is that supposed to be comforting to a whole world going to destruction ?

Going to destruction? Granted but no more than any other time in the last couple millenia.

The label on the people doesn't matter.

It does if such a label breeds fear, hatred and maltreatment.

People are doomed, subject to sin and to the devil.
Vessels of (............) what does Yhwh's Word say ?
Sons of disobedience.
Lost and without hope in the world without Jesus.
i.e. not just a penny-ante game here - it is life and death for eternity.

And being the light of the world is the only thing that we can do to try and affect change in that. When there is darkness, we must shine light, not shout at the darkness.
Obtusely telling people how evil they are doesn't do anything because they cannot understand that in their condition. They must be lovingly led to the cross well before they can understand that. So what good is applying labels which will only serve to drive these people further into rebellion?

Does anyone want their neighbor, brother, father, son or daughter
to remain separate from Jesus for eternity,
to be resurrected to shame and destruction ?

Of course not. That's why spreading fear is so counterproductive. We haven't been given a spirit of fear!

Does anyone want that kind of opposition to Jesus taught to their little children ???
(remember everyone needs Jesus; so who is opposed to Him ? )

No. Nobody wants that. I also don't want my children to learn that Christians spread fear. Instead I want them to learn that unbelievers are not to be feared, but instead to be displayed by us the love of Christ so that they might believe in Him who can open their eyes to their sins.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

It does if such a label breeds fear, hatred and maltreatment.

How about Jesus' Gospel ?
It is written the exact same good news is an aroma of life to those who believe ,
and an aroma of death to all those others who reject the Gospel.
The whole world hates Jesus and the Gospel and God.
How are you going to go anywhere then , if anywhere you go "breeds hatred and maltreatment" ?
The apostles and disciples just went anyway, as Jesus directed them.
And, as a result, they were murdered often. hated everywhere.
BUT a few they preached to were saved.

Of course not. That's why spreading fear is so counterproductive. We haven't been given a spirit of fear!

So ? Who is afraid ?

No. Nobody wants that. I also don't want my children to learn that Christians spread fear.

Don't teach them history then.
(Unless, of course, you show them the difference between the fake christians of history who warred against others, and spread much evil round the world,
and true Christians, who were always persecuted and few in number comparatively)

 

[smaneck]

They may be nominally "Christian", that doesn't mean they actually are. And the word "Christian" did not come up in that article.

Ah, there we have it. The No True Scotsman argument again.

A true Christian obeys Christ.

And a Muslim should obey Muhammad who prohibited the killing of women, children, the elderly, etc. He also insisted on the protection of Christians. So by your own logic, how is ISIS, Islamic?

 

[amariselle]

Ah, there we have it. The No True Scotsman argument again.

Anyone who wants to honestly know how a true Christian should act, needs to look to the example of Christ Himself in the Bible.

I am sick and tired of this "no true Scotsman" argument. It is nothing more than a lazy dismissal by those who are not willing to take an honest look at the obvious.

And a Muslim should obey Muhammad who prohibited the killing of women, children, the elderly, etc. He also insisted on the protection of Christians. So by your own logic, how is ISIS, Islamic?

You should read the Quran if that's what you think. You may be referring to Muhammed's earlier teachings, but you're certainly not referring to his later ones.

 

[smaneck]

Dr. Omid Safi, Director of Duke Islamic Studies Center.:
"If the attack outside the Prophet's Mosque in Medina is by ‪#‎ISIS‬, let's say it loud: They are not Muslim.
Yes, I have been hesitant to get into the takfir game of deciding who is and who is not a Muslim. But if you blow up human beings, in Ramadan, outside the gate of he is a Mercy to all the Universes, you are not a Muslim."

He is alluding to an important point. Muslims are perfectly willing and eager to condemn acts of terrorism. But except for Salafis, they are extremely reluctant to point fingers at one another and say, "You are not a Muslim." To do so is a heresy associated with the Kharijites which is why they stigmatize jihadists using that term.
The kind of religiosity represented by Bin Laden and ISIS grew out of the Islamic revival movements of the 18th and 19th centuries. While there are a number of differences between these groups, one of the things they share in common is the tendency to pronounce *takfir* against their fellow Muslims. This meant that they declared Muslims who believed differently from them as infidels and apostates, objects of holy war, worthy of death. Because of the value most Muslims place upon the unity of the community most rejected this kind of sectarianism and I submit that they were right to do so. But if such a position is to be consistently upheld they cannot then turn around and say that these people are not Muslims. It would be more accurate and honest to acknowledge that evil and sin exists within the Islamic community just as there is within the Christian community, rather than to make judgments as to who is really Muslim or a Christian. We need to acknowledge that the demarcation line between good and evil runs through each of our own communities and our own hearts, it is an axis which exists ‘out there’ apart from us, and dividing us from them.
In Islam the paramount ethical value is unity, tawhid, the unity of God, the unity of religion, the unity of humanity. The worst sin then is to destroy that unity. This can be done in two ways. First is by doing what the Muslims call ‘joining partners with God.” That can mean idolatry in the literal sense; it also includes the more subtle ways in which we make things more important in our lives than God is.
The second type of sin which is destructive to unity is sectarianism, creating divisions within the religion of God and hence giving rise to fanaticism. Much as the Prophet Muhammad decried sectarianism, He recognized that Islam would not be immune to its effects. He is said to have stated, “The Jews have 71 sects, the Christians 72, while my people will have 73 sects.” (He never came to America, obviously.) The point, of course, is that Muhammad could forsee that sectarianism would prove as destructive to the Islamic community as it had to Judaism or the church. I submit to you that this kind of sectarianism is at the very heart of that ‘othering’ process which leads to the kind of bloodshed associated with ISIS. The Qur’an states that what causes sectarianism is that each group takes a part of the truth and insists on making it the whole, cleaving to what is their own. And this applies not only to people’s behavior within a religion, it also applies to the way religions relate to one another.

 

[smaneck]

Anyone who wants to honestly know how a true Christian should act, needs to look to the example of Christ Himself in the Bible.

Okay. Once upon a time, 2000 years ago there lived a Christian . . .

I am sick and tired of this "no true Scotsman" argument.

Then stop making it.

You should read the Quran if that's what you think. You may be referring to Muhammed's earlier teachings, but you're certainly not referring to his later ones.

LOL. I've read the Qur'an numerous times, in English and in Arabic. How many times have you read it?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Anyone who wants to honestly know how a true Christian should act, needs to look to the example of Christ Himself in the Bible.

Good and thank God for His Word.
Also, btw, read ACTS.
Most "Christians" never get that far - and after they read it,
they refuse to obey Jesus. They have 'better' things to do instead.

 

[BrianJK]

How about Jesus' Gospel ?
It is written the exact same good news is an aroma of life to those who believe ,
and an aroma of death to all those others who reject the Gospel.
The whole world hates Jesus and the Gospel and God.
How are you going to go anywhere then , if anywhere you go "breeds hatred and maltreatment" ?
The apostles and disciples just went anyway, as Jesus directed them.
And, as a result, they were murdered often. hated everywhere.
BUT a few they preached to were saved.

Hatred and maltreatment toward those we are trying to save... this is what I meant. The Gospel is not convincing people to fear and hate unbelievers, yet that is what is going on today by professing Christians.

So ? Who is afraid ?

The people who are calling for war, for banning certain classes of people from entering nations, for the denial of care for refugees, for the forced visual identification of some religions... those people are afraid, and attempting to spread their fear.

Don't teach them history then.
(Unless, of course, you show them the difference between the fake christians of history who warred against others, and spread much evil round the world,
and true Christians, who were always persecuted and few in number comparatively)

It's not just history. It's happening now. And I want my children to understand that is not the spirit Christ had given His people.
Christ dined with those who were ungodly. I would not have my children learn to reject such hospitality toward those who need God's love.

 

[BrianJK]

LOL. I've read the Qur'an numerous times, in English and in Arabic. How many times have you read it?

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. Probably be best for another thread. Do you know if the site is equipped to handle the alphabet of Arabic language? I'm always keen to practice my languages.

 

[smaneck]

Slandering those called and chosen by the Creator Yhwh won't benefit you.

Then I suggest you not do it in regards to Muhammad.

Moses, Samuel and the prophets were not as you say "bloodthirsty"

,

No more and no less than Muhammad. Actually, Muhammad was much less since he never allowed for genocide and the killing of women and children.

no matter if your parents or whoever/whatever teacher told you they were.

My parents? They were Christians. So was I. But I know the Bible.

(maybe you ave some strange definition of bloodthirsty?)

I'm taking the definition of those who applied it to Muhammad.

 

[amariselle]

Okay. Once upon a time, 2000 years ago there lived a Christian . . .

Then stop making it.

I'm not making it, YOU are. The "No True Scotsman" argument/accusation is, in fact, a type of non sequitur, and is, in actuality, irrelevant to this discussion.

LOL. I've read the Qur'an numerous times, in English and in Arabic. How many times have you read it?

Then you are aware of the later, more violent commands Muhammed made.