We fought communism why cant we fight muslism?

[Bullfrog 31581]

No country since WW2 has warred more than America. How can you oppose Islam on this basis and remain a patriotic American?

War is sometimes right and necessary. But conning one's followers to die in war for one's personal advancement (as Muhammad did) is strong evidence that Muhammad was just another manipulative cult leader that used people for his own purposes.

And regardless as to the validity of the teaching, the point of posting it is to show that Islam at its core does demand Muslims to fight and kill to advance Islam, and they are told it is one of the highest forms of worship to do so. Its right there out of Muhammad's mouth. A Muslim that denies the call to fight unbelievers is denying Muhammad himself.

[Common Sense]

Originally Posted by castor

So tell me: are you arguing that ALL Muslims should be treated as extremists?

I doubt Belch would say yes to that; but I think ALL Muslims should be treated as exremists. I know that most Muslims are not extremists; just as I know that most snakes are not poisonous. But I taught my children to stay away from all snakes, because you just never know when it will be a rattler instead of a gopher snake.

I say send all Muslims who are non-citizens packing. If they are citizens, use legal and moral surveillance. As long as we support Isreal, occupy Muslim countries, and have drones bombing Muslims; we can only expect more terrorism.

[castor]

Originally Posted by D3Lifer

How is it that there are 20+ regional conflicts in the world, and EVERY one involves muslims who can't (or won't) get along with their neighbors?

I asked about America. You dropped the logic. Afraid to answer?

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

He did not say that the Old Testament is still binding on us. He said that He fullfilled the Law.

That's not what it says:

Matthew 5:17
[ The Fulfillment of the Law ] "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

It says He "came to", not that it is completed. Christianity teaches that He is still with us and we are still working out our salvation.

Now that He has fullfilled the Old Law, we are free from it

That's not what it says:

Matthew 5:18
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

In other words the OT law remains until the end.

Muslims don't really believe in the Old Testament.

On the one hand you argue that Muslim beliefs are so rigid that all Muslims are a threat to the West. On the other hand you say that whenever their beliefs don't fit your biases they don't believe their own Bible. I suggest that if this is really your beliefs, your beliefs are not logical and you have bought into extremist right wing propaganda.

They believe that the Old Testament has been corrupted by Jews and Christians and that Muhammad received the "corrected" revelation. They believe that some parts of the Old Testament are true, and others are not, but its impossible to know which parts have been modified and which haven't, therefore they don't rely on it. The same is true of the Gospels.

No doubt some believe that. In a faith that is the largest in the world it is preposterous to suggest that any one interpretation is common to all people. Any more than all Christians believe like David Duke. It sounds to me like you are simply regurgitating extremist propaganda.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

War is sometimes right and necessary.

Islamics believe that from the beginning of the 20th Century onward the West has done to Islamic peoples things that would cause us to attack them if they did it to us. In 1995 Al Qaeda gave clear public warning to America to stop, but America refused. If this is correct, doesn't that make 9-11 a right and necessary thing for them to have done?

On the other hand, if the entire war on terrorism is just the west getting dragged into a grudge match between Osama bin Laden and his Saudi family, isn't it time the west bugged out?

But conning one's followers to die in war for one's personal advancement (as Muhammad did) is strong evidence that Muhammad was just another manipulative cult leader that used people for his own purposes.

Many people feel that way about the Bush administration.

And regardless as to the validity of the teaching, the point of posting it is to show that Islam at its core does demand Muslims to fight and kill to advance Islam, and they are told it is one of the highest forms of worship to do so. Its right there out of Muhammad's mouth. A Muslim that denies the call to fight unbelievers is denying Muhammad himself.

You have presented no evidence to show that. If what you say is true, why don't you agree that whatever come out of David Duke's mouth must be considered mainstream Christian thought?

[dglover]

Evidence. Hmmmmmm......

Nick Berg. Daniel Pearl. 9/11 What else do you need?

Beheading in the Name of Islam :: Middle East Quarterly

This does not mean that all muslims are at fault. But until the enemy has the cahonas to unmask themselves and quite hiding among ordinary Muslims we must take apporpriate actions to protect ourselves.

We cannot continue to pander to political correctness in the process as it is being used against us.

You can abide by the constitution and not be politically correct.

As stated before they do not intertwine. Racial slurs are not Politically correct but they are protected by the constitution.

[acousticmood]

O.K. I will take this question on... There are many apologetics that will provide an argument that indicates Allah is in fact not the same as our Judaic/Christian God, but instead has its roots in one of the pagan religions of the period. I'd have to do a google search for references but it was a lesson at one of my church's services that was backed up with references etc.

I don't understand how anyone can claim the same God as mine when the Bible claims that God completed all the prophesies (other than the end of times) with the arrival of the Messiah, who then warned against future "false prophets".

"No one comes to the father but through me?.... How does a Muslim reconcile that and still accept the teachings of the Koran?

[acousticmood]

Castor you are not taking the entirety of the bible when you say that we are bound to the OT laws. There are laws that are eternal e.g wages of sin - then there were laws of behaviour that OT used to train Gods people to understand the coming Messiah's role. The eternal laws are and always will be in play, however God has given us freedom over them through the ulimate sacrificial lamb - Jesus. By accepting the price he paid on our behalf we are freed from the death that we would otherwise suffer.

[castor]

One thing common to all Protestant churches I have attended is that no two churches have exactly the same take on everything. This church takes tongues more seriously, that church takes laying on of hands more seriously. A man from outer space unfamiliar with our culture could be forgiven for thinking we all worshipped different gods. I think the same thing happens between Christians and Muslims. Some groups of individuals will form a group, call it a church within the context of a larger denomination and yet have a very personalized form of worship depending on the leaders. Sometimes it is extremist, both for Christians and Muslims. Osama bin Laden for instance is extremist and (I suspect) personally disinterested in real faith, using churches only for political gains in his fight for Saudi power. Ditto for David Duke in his seeking of power in the US. These people are extremist. That doesn't mean the majority of Christians or Muslims are extremist.

CS has noted on several occasions that the state of war presently existing between the US and the Gulf is reason enough to suspect all Muslims. There is truth in what he says. My personal belief is that Western nations have constitutions that require us to not react the way, for instance, that a Saudi neighborhood might react to a Southern Baptist congregation that parachuted into their midst. Our traditions of freedom are more advanced (if that is fair to say) than theirs. We have always said that freedom isn't free and we are willing to take the risks to preserve freedom. Historically speaking, the gun-owning crowd I grew up reading, mostly American, all said that. Now we're being challenged to put our money where our mouths are.

I still believe that the constitution is right and that freedom is worth the risks. Every time the government takes more power to "keep us safe" we risk never getting the lost freedom back. Especially in this day and age, new powers require new employees in government jobs with pensions and good pay. You end up with instant lobbies to make sure they keep their jobs. What are their jobs? Controlling me in ways I have never been controlled before. No thanks. I'd rather take my chances with freedom. If my military can take their chances over there, I can take my chances here. I'd like to think they can come home to the freedom they fought for.

[Common Sense]

Originally Posted by castor

CS has noted on several occasions that the state of war presently existing between the US and the Gulf is reason enough to suspect all Muslims. There is truth in what he says. My personal belief is that Western nations have constitutions that require us to not react the way, for instance, that a Saudi neighborhood might react to a Southern Baptist congregation that parachuted into their midst.

Just cause CS thinks we brought much of this on ourself's, don't mean the rest of the group does!!!!

Even if I am right, we cannot ignore the problem. My father, an avid smoker, had lung cancer. The doctor didn't say "Stop smoking and it will get all better". The doctor said to cut out the cancer AND stop smoking. Likewise, if we pull out of all Muslim countries right now, it won't get much better in our lifetimes. I am all for leaving the Muslims alone; but also send those here away. We have a cancer here in America, it needs to be removed or contained.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Common Sense

Just cause CS thinks we brought much of this on ourself's, don't mean the rest of the group does!!!!

Even if I am right, we cannot ignore the problem. My father, an avid smoker, had lung cancer. The doctor didn't say "Stop smoking and it will get all better". The doctor said to cut out the cancer AND stop smoking. Likewise, if we pull out of all Muslim countries right now, it won't get much better in our lifetimes. I am all for leaving the Muslims alone; but also send those here away. We have a cancer here in America, it needs to be removed or contained.

Here's hoping they don't do the same to all Christians when they become the majority sometime between 2020 and 2050.

[Common Sense]

Originally Posted by castor

Here's hoping they don't do the same to all Christians when they become the majority sometime between 2020 and 2050.

If you don't think most Muslims don't want to send all Westerners out of their countries, you are pretty naive. And as far as I am concerned, if they do turn all Christians away, that's their business.

[Bullfrog 31581]

I note that nobody is replying to my point that we and Muslims worship the same God. If you are so profoundly convinced that our God never tells us to make indiscriminate wars on other peoples, why do you want to do it to all Muslims?

God has commanded wars in the past. What he has never done is command us to spread our belief by the sword, as Muslims have. That's the whole point of our arguments.

Are all Muslim's extremists? No, of course not. But are the extremists accurately representing what Islam really stands for? According to the Koran and the life Muhammad lived, yes. Its impossible to be a "better" Muslim than Muhammed, yet Muhammed preached and practiced what the extremists do today.

[Bullfrog 31581]

That's not what it says:

Matthew 5:17
[ The Fulfillment of the Law ] "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

It says He "came to", not that it is completed. Christianity teaches that He is still with us and we are still working out our salvation.

It wasn't completed at the time He said those words. He hadn't died on the cross yet. He completed the Law when He died on the cross and rose again. All aspects of the Law were accomplished when He did those things.

You ignored the second verse I posted. Why? The New Testament is very clear that Christ fullfilled the law.

Romans 7 4-6
⁴So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. ⁵For when we were controlled by the sinful nature,^[a] the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. ⁶But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Romans 10 1-13
¹Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. ²For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. ³Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. ⁴Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. ⁵Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: "The man who does these things will live by them."^{[a] 6}But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'^[b]" (that is, to bring Christ down) ⁷"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'^[c]" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). ⁸But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"^[d] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: ⁹That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. ¹⁰For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. ¹¹As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."^{[e] 12}For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, ¹³for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."^[f]

That's not what it says:

That, my friend, is EXACTLY what it says.

On the one hand you argue that Muslim beliefs are so rigid that all Muslims are a threat to the West. On the other hand you say that whenever their beliefs don't fit your biases they don't believe their own Bible.

Your using straw man logical fallicies. You're putting words in our mouth that we aren't saying. I never said any of that. You're making my argument up.

The Old Testament is NOT in the Quran. Many of the events of the Old Testament are mentioned in the Quran or re-told differently, but the text of the Old Testament IS NOT anywhere in the Koran. I tripple dog dare you to find where any book of the Old Testament is in the Koran.

In a faith that is the largest in the world it is preposterous to suggest that any one interpretation is common to all people. Any more than all Christians believe like David Duke. It sounds to me like you are simply regurgitating extremist propaganda.

No, that's what Islam teaches. I'm not aware of any Islamic sect or individual Muslim for that matter that believes otherwise. If they did believe that the Old Testament today was valid, they couldn't be Muslims because the Old Testament contradicts the Koran.

[Bullfrog 31581]

You have presented no evidence to show that.

I've presented it in droves through the Quran and the Hadith, the words of Muhammed himself. How do you answer for that?

If what you say is true, why don't you agree that whatever come out of David Duke's mouth must be considered mainstream Christian thought?

Because David Duke isn't Christ nor did he divinely inspire the Bible. I don't base anything I believe on the words and commands of David Duke, I base my beliefs on Christ. Muslims base their beliefes on the words and commands of Muhammed. Muhammed preached and practiced that Muslims should fight to convert, enslave, or kill all other Muslims. Therefore when they do it today they are simply following his commands. Those Muslims that don't are disobeying Muhammed.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

I've presented it in droves through the Quran and the Hadith, the words of Muhammed himself. How do you answer for that?

You don't read my arguments, eh?

Because David Duke isn't Christ nor did he divinely inspire the Bible.

Ditto Mohammed. Nor does Mohammad claim to inspire the Bible from what I know? Maybe you're just a religious warrior who wants to kill Muslims because Mohammed wants to raise himself to the level of Jesus?

I don't base anything I believe on the words and commands of David Duke, I base my beliefs on Christ. Muslims base their beliefes on the words and commands of Muhammed. Muhammed preached and practiced that Muslims should fight to convert, enslave, or kill all other Muslims. Therefore when they do it today they are simply following his commands. Those Muslims that don't are disobeying Muhammed.

I think you accidentally mis-stated your argument, but you keep missing the point. The stress that you put on that facet of Islam is (IMO) exaggerated by western propaganda. The same as radical Islam exaggerates the things they are able to use about Christianity that scares their people. The vast majority of Islam doesn't believe and follow those precepts any more than most Isrealis wear dreadnoughts or most Christians think they should condemn all non-Christians.

Christianity says to turn the other cheek yet you keep wanting to fear and hate Muslims? Lots of inconsistencies out there, eh? Maybe those of us who think we know how millions of other people think simply have our heads up our collective asses?

The kinds of things you are repeating are the same things that leaders have sucked people into believing forever using state sponsored propaganda. Hitler did it to the Jews, some westerners are doing it to Muslims. Same old same old.

[Bullfrog 31581]

Quote:

You don't read my arguments, eh?

Quote:

Ditto Mohammed. Nor does Mohammad claim to inspire the Bible from what I know? Maybe you're just a religious warrior who wants to kill Muslims because Mohammed wants to raise himself to the level of Jesus?

Quote:

I think you accidentally mis-stated your argument, but you keep missing the point. The stress that you put on that facet of Islam is (IMO) exaggerated by western propaganda. The same as radical Islam exaggerates the things they are able to use about Christianity that scares their people. The vast majority of Islam doesn't believe and follow those precepts any more than most Isrealis wear dreadnoughts or most Christians think they should condemn all non-Christians.

Christianity says to turn the other cheek yet you keep wanting to fear and hate Muslims? Lots of inconsistencies out there, eh? Maybe those of us who think we know how millions of other people think simply have our heads up our collective asses?

The kinds of things you are repeating are the same things that leaders have sucked people into believing forever using state sponsored propaganda. Hitler did it to the Jews, some westerners are doing it to Muslims. Same old same old.

I have read your "arguments" and they really aren't arguments at all. You're just saying "uh un, that's not true" and not supporting your position. I've had the pleasure of debating with some really hard core liberals here on Jesse who knew how to argument their points. I think you're just a troll and I'm done debating you. I think its evident to others who read this thread that you can't answer our challenges. You're defeated, and I'll let the evidence of that speak for itself.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

I have read your "arguments" and they really aren't arguments at all. You're just saying "uh un, that's not true" and not supporting your position.

Bull-what? Your position seems to be that because I will not read and debate from your version of the Koran I have not supported my arguments. I have resorted to my Bible instead. Pity you won't recognize it. If the thread carries on long enough I might read a Koran. Right now I have other books on the go and I do more with my life than debate here.

I've had the pleasure of debating with some really hard core liberals here on Jesse who knew how to argument their points. I think you're just a troll and I'm done debating you.

Interpretation: A name caller. A sore loser who is incapable of following a debate unless it progresses down the line of thought he had planned. It doesn't sound to me like you were military - not of any rank or responsibility anyway. If you had been, you would likely possess the attribute of flexibility of thought.

I think its evident to others who read this thread that you can't answer our challenges. You're defeated, and I'll let the evidence of that speak for itself.

Are they grateful that you have deigned to both do their thinking for them and announce it so humbly?

Fine. Quit. There are two undeniable aspects of my argument the truths of which you presumably either doubt, disbelieve or are ignoring. The first is the Constitution of the US. All that I have ever said is that it must be followed in order to deprive anybody of his rights. Once your case has been legally proven it does not matter what religion he or she follows.

The second truth you deny is the Holy Bible. If you are right and it is all fiction, you can presume the last laugh when you die and that is the end.

Cheers. Unless you are unable to ignore.

[castor]

Originally Posted by acousticmood

O.K. I will take this question on... There are many apologetics that will provide an argument that indicates Allah is in fact not the same as our Judaic/Christian God, but instead has its roots in one of the pagan religions of the period. I'd have to do a google search for references but it was a lesson at one of my church's services that was backed up with references etc.

I don't understand how anyone can claim the same God as mine when the Bible claims that God completed all the prophesies (other than the end of times) with the arrival of the Messiah, who then warned against future "false prophets".

"No one comes to the father but through me?.... How does a Muslim reconcile that and still accept the teachings of the Koran?

How do religions reconcile anything? My understanding of Scripture is that it is intended by God to remain an ultimate mystery. We are called on to believe and obey. It is possible that God tells some of us sometimes to teach others lessons, even to kill them. I believe that 99% of all people who believe that about themselves are incorrect - Christians and all others. If we spend our whole lives focusing on bettering ourselves we still won't get it.

I believe that the first five books of the Bible - the Pentateuch - are held as true by the mainstream Judaic, Christian and Muslim faiths. You are saying that you might be able to find an Internet source that disagrees. Obviously you are just searching for a reason to disagree. If all you wish to do is find a reason to disagree be my guest, but that does not give your position much credibility.

Finally, "No one comes to the father but through me." That particular verse has been used by the Roman Catholic Church as the authority for much abuse and many atrocities over the years. The Spanish Inquisition for one. Untold murders as Christians murdered everybody who could be arguably declared to be outside the Church - just like some Muslims today. Good company to be in for your argument about the evils of Islam.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

It wasn't completed at the time He said those words. He hadn't died on the cross yet. He completed the Law when He died on the cross and rose again. All aspects of the Law were accomplished when He did those things.

You ignored the second verse I posted. Why? The New Testament is very clear that Christ fullfilled the law.

I only just spotted this post and I must go out for the rest of the day. I'll try to remember to get back to it.

The Old Testament is NOT in the Quran. Many of the events of the Old Testament are mentioned in the Quran or re-told differently, but the text of the Old Testament IS NOT anywhere in the Koran. I tripple dog dare you to find where any book of the Old Testament is in the Koran.

Never said it was. Don't believe it is, either. Do you want your beliefs spoon-fed to you? The world is not that simple to understand and history is not that kind or simple, IMO.

No, that's what Islam teaches. I'm not aware of any Islamic sect or individual Muslim for that matter that believes otherwise. If they did believe that the Old Testament today was valid, they couldn't be Muslims because the Old Testament contradicts the Koran.

How kind, logical and knowledgeable of human nature of you to believe that other cultures cannot believe contradictions that you cannot understand. Are you aware that every single gospel contradicts every other gospel in telling the Easter story? Not just in small details, but directly saying things that literally contradict things claimed by each other. Didn't know that, eh? Or are you not a believer and that is why? Try Hebrews 11:1 KJV for what I think of as the most poetic and best possible answer to the mysteries of the Bible.

[Sodhunter]

...YAWN...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[castor]

Originally Posted by Sodhunter

...YAWN...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Gee, the first time this page that the old sod has replied and he says something typical of Long Beach, CA.

[dglover]

Originally Posted by Sodhunter

...YAWN...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

That's funny I was just thinking the same thing!:rot flmao:

Worst part is though the conversation here is stale I am bored enough to look at it.

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

War is sometimes right and necessary. But conning one's followers to die in war for one's personal advancement (as Muhammad did) is strong evidence that Muhammad was just another manipulative cult leader that used people for his own purposes.

How about a POTUS who lies to get the people to war?

[castor]

Originally Posted by Bullfrog 31581

I've had the pleasure of debating with some really hard core liberals here on Jesse who knew how to argument their points. I think you're just a troll and I'm done debating you.

Name calling. I win.