Like "islamophobia" isn't warranted....stop killing and burning and maybe people will listen to you. Still waiting on the supposedly peaceful muslims to decry the recent acts of violence but I don't think that I will.
Rufus wrote: The United States military is no place for Christians.
Why not? Its probably not a place too grow in your faith per se but, it certainly is a segment of the population that is desperately in need of the gospel. We need God and people who serve Him in our military just like we need Him in every single area of our country.
Justin Pierce wrote: I support the right of people to assemble in their homes as a normative right. However, as I have preached about this particular issue directly. I feel that I must address several problems here. 1. Every church is seen as a business and must have a business license, then they either file for tax exemption or not. 2. A certificate of occupancy is necessary in order to comply with safety codes and standards. 3. If a Chirch building is being built, it has different standards than a garage. These people had the right to assemble I their home but they chose to build a building in their back yard for the purpose of church services, yet they got a permit for a garage only. They decirved the officials and the pouted about the consequences. My next issue is that they are being heralded as Christian martyrs, yet they are Modoliat and deny the God of the Bible.
I agree with you for the most part in that statement. My only concern here is that if they were watching something like a football game that this wouldnt be an issue. In other words religious discrimination.
Phoebe wrote: These are not The Pharisee's. The Pharisee's are in churches. As you INTERPRET the Word of God "there can be no obedience to the Government on this issue"? Are you inciting civil disobedience leading to broader unrest and insecurity in your country? That is not Christian. What is the point of going to that area to preach the Word of God in a nation that is known for having a church on every street corner? Do you think there might be an occassion when Christians stop preaching where the Word of God is continuously rejected? ... as in the days of Noah... When you see the pot boiling you know the meat will soon be thrown in.
Yes, I am supporting civil disobedience on this singular issue (only in a peaceful way). I believe this is a Biblical perspective unless someone wishes to take on the task of convincing me otherwise. If you look in Pauls ministry he never stopped preaching the gospel even after being imprisoned. Its amazing to me how the Bible already covers this issue and provides examples of how we should handle it.
McGra wrote: I guess I'll never convert you to love thy neighbour when he is far away, foreign and down an' out. As for 'E' above I think it is very mean of you to denigrate the "World Boxing Council" in that way.
Everyone knows I wasnt talking about the World Boxing Council. Your argument is ridiculous. We are 16 TRILLION dollars in debt. We do not have money to help anybody. How can you not understand that! And just because someone is down and out doesnt mean they deserve a handout. Christianity is not defined by the giving of goods to the "down and out" anybody can do that
I think of when Christ was ministering to people on the Sabbath the pharisees were upset and tried to stop Him and accuse Him. Christ continued on anyways. As I understand the Bible right now there can be no obedience to the government on this issue. Day or night we are commanded to be a witness and share our faith. As a Christian our faith should NOT be scheduled it should be consistent and as the Spirit leads.
McGra wrote: a] You know very well that is a lie. b] Please tell me if I got this [hate] right! = Yeah y'all got that right. c] Not true! Now you are just being facetious. d] Not true! Unobjective Bias! e] Would you attack your own countrymen and religion for those same reasons? f] You've got more than enough - A lot more than Jesus and the Apostles had. g[ It is parasdise to those who have no education, no money and no future.
A. If I was wrong in interpreting your argument you should have elaborated B. Ad Hominem C. It is true that they have been fighting each other and Israel for years.( the Koran commands them to) this one is easy if you have read history D. The only objective standard I could think of is to compare to US being that education, liberty, and womens rights are celebrated here and we do live better than them. (there must be a connection somewhere) E.Absolutely I have decried the workings of WBC on more then one occasion. I do not believe they are Christians. The difference is I do it peaceably. F. Glad you are aware of my finances but isnt that really off topic. Basically SO WHAT I have more than them. It in no wise makes me obligated to Muslims. G. That describes plenty of people in Fayetteville but seriously off top
I have a hard time understanding the line where Christ said to obey them that have rule over you and where Christ openly defied the pharisees. When it came to taxes and that stuff we are commanded to obey but whenever someone attempted to stop or correct Christ or even paul for that matter when they were giving the gospel and practicing their faith they were steadfast and unapologetic to the point of imprisonment, torture, and even death.
McGra wrote: Oh I don't know! Imagine if some of those poverty struck, coarse, unsophisticated, boorish, uneducated person of little financial means OR FUTURE, were able to boast of this little rich patch of soil. Wouldn't that kind of wealthy mammon worshipping decadent little paradise have quite an effect upon their outlook and way of life???
So now your argument is that because I supposedly have it better than them they deserve a handout or an excuse? Please tell me if I got this right! Their problems stem from the fact that they have been fighting each other for years along with others which keeps them in constant poverty. Their strict laws on liberty, education and of women keeps them in a bad spot. Also the "supposedly peaceful" Muslims do not decry or try to stop the violence in fact as I stated earlier I believe they support the violence by their silence. Throwing money we dont have at Muslims will not give them a better or changed life. Money or land does not make people better people. Oh and I know this is off topic but Fayetteville is a far cry from paradise.
McGra wrote: I do not agree with mjg, it seems his statement emerges from the arrogance and egoism found all to often in the western nations. The eastern nations are beset with many problems including a distict lack of civilizing influences such as education. That is not a 'fault' per se, but a geographic deficiency through no fault of their own, for example the abject poverty that is in these countries. Thus many people and nations try to sympathise with there predicament and help through genuine aid projects. That is the Christian thing to do - Not egotistical verbal attacks.
I am glad that you are willing to condemn my views as a Christian while being completely unwilling to condemn the Islamic views on violence. This gives us a place to start. So if I am reading your argument right all their problems stem from the fact that they are located on a different patch of soil then me? This may account for poor crop production but does not account or permit for acts of violence Nor does it stop "peaceful Muslims" from speaking out against these acts of violence which I have not seen yet. And why should we send money we dont have to them. They wont help us later if we become in need. That much is certain. And how was that egotistic?
The irony here is that Dawkins is ascribing characteristics to something he doesnt believe exists. Meaning he has to build some kind of an image of God before he can knock it down. Essentially a strawman tactic. You dont waste time attacking something that doesnt exist. Instead Dawkins only course of action would be to say he believes that those people in the Tanakh/OT were just delusional and psychotic.
Weird that they would burn the Tanakh with the New Testament considering much of what is in the Koran is found in the Tanakh. Also interesting to note that no Muslim embassies were broken into over this video.
Samuel Palin wrote: You really know how to display that you have no evidence at all for your bile.
All you had to do for a cogent rebuttal was to post several examples (preferrably from Yemen, Libya or Afghanistan) of Muslims denouncing the recent violent actions but, all you did was just say I was wrong. Please I want to learn! Show me where I am wrong and that we should give money we dont have to Muslims. I really want to know if there are Muslims decrying these actions in these countries. I desperately want to know that our money isnt going to fund Islamic violence...sadly I think I already have my answers.
Samuel Palin wrote: It is Al-Qaeda that is encouraging violence against America and its citizens. The US does not give $345MM of aid to Al-Qaeda. Education and instruction is better than anger against your ignorance. Aid - don't die of ignorance!
I have not heard one dissenting voice from yemen regarding their violence nor for that matter the entire muslim world. If you know of some post them please. If supposedly peaceful Muslims are not willing to stand against this "small faction" then by default they are with them. In fact I would go so far as to say that they support their apostles. I think any money given to an Islamic nation will go in some part to support their continuing war effort. You have to remember in their do or die religion they are just as quick to kill their own people as they are to kill others. So of course the Muslim world supports them even if it is in the form of "shakedown money" And another questio why are we aiding them when we are so far in the hole we cant see the ligt! We have our own mountains of debt to deal with we dont need to be giving handouts to Muslims or anyone else for that matter.
these people actively encourage violence against America and its citizens. We are already desperately in debt and we are giving them 345 million this year.why! I am not sure that angry is a strong enough word for what I feel about this.
I think its weird that people are trying to act like this normal. We all know that moms will still tell their kids its not polite to stare...the kids stare becaue they have the honesty to admit that these people look like freaks while everyone else tries to pretend that these people are normal.
San Jose John wrote: The only reason the Republican party is more "godly" than the Democrat party is that they are running away from God at a slower rate than the Dems and therefore, relatively speaking, ARE in fact the "godly" party.
I disagree completely. That is like saying an atheist is more "godly" then a satan worshipper. Both in fact are completely ungodly.