Well, there are individuals who have debated Dr. James White who would gladly stand against hateful, bloodthirsty Muslims like that, and they are not alone. But it's easy for us to criticize from quasi-comfortable Western civilization; can you imagine how difficult it must be if you were a Muslim who eschewed the despicable tactics of the ones you rightly point out and lived in an area were those in charge would seek to destroy you or your family for standing against the bloodthirsty status quo? Btw, we could go back and forth in the "proof" wars all day long. Can YOU produce proof that they are all as you say? All is a pretty all-inclusive word and means just that; ALL. I find the claim incredibly bombastic and worthy of nothing more than fear-mongering and keeping the faithful to Jesus Christ afraid of witnessing to Muslims out of fear that they may be strict Sharia adherents. Let's keep our criticism clear and free from conspiracy theory claptrap; Islam is an inconsistent religion that misunderstands the Trinity, misunderstands the OT/NT, and misunderstands salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. We do not wage war as the world does, but through prayer and the power of the Spirit through the faithful proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ!
Nice try, but I was specifically talking about how you refused to answer the witnessing questions earlier in seemingly defending the comments from the man earlier who seemed to write them all off. I am talking about YOU and those like yourself, not Christians you have given their lives for the cause of Christ in Islamic nations, so don't do that to me or anyone else who refuses to buy this "Never trust a Muslim" mantra, it's offensive and insulting and I don't appreciate you accusing me of besmirching them. Thank you for finally answering that you have witnessed, and I hope your message comes across clearly and that is encouraging. I don't deny anything you are saying, for it is basically Islamic doctrine concerning their rejection of Christ. It amazes me that you didn't see that I asserted your attitude will HELP them to JUSTIFY their rejection; of course they reject on their own! My point is by seemingly lumping all Muslims together as extremist Sharia-loving individuals I believe you are hurting not helping the cause of Christ among them. Unless I misunderstood your stance I have nothing further to say about this. I believe each Muslim should be judged as we would want to be judged, on our own merits, and not fear-mongering.
Well, I am emotional about it, and please forgive me for being so, but I grow incredibly weary of Christians seemingly casting off Muslims as being unworthy of the kingdom of God and they themselves not willing to witness to them due to fear, hatred, ignorance, or some unholy conglomeration of the three. I think comments like the previous gentleman and yours hurt the cause of Christ among the Islamic community and are more at home with some of the religious extremists and terrorists you so decry. You haven't answered my questions about witnessing to them, I provided real dialogue about what I know of the Qur'an and the Hadith literature, and you have dismissed them by refusing to engage my points. So are you saying all Islamic interpretations of Sharia are the same among all Muslims? So you're saying ALL Muslims want to destroy American law and jurisprudence then, and you have evidence of this? How have I bypassed the reality of Islam? I mentioned how there are many who interpret Sharia in ways that are in contradiction and opposition to our way of life, but yet you fail to engage any of the points I've made. Respectfully, the astounding dodging and ignorance is your own. Should we witness to Muslims? Are all Muslims militant Sharia promoters? Will this woman promote Sharia?
John UK, I appreciate your candor and willingness to dialogue (though I know it is late for you, haha!). I am one of those professing Christians that say rock music CAN be fine for Christians, provided that it does not provoke them to sin. The problem here, most respectfully, is that YOU say it is of the devil; but where does the Scripture say it? You didn't respond to the point I made about 1 Cor. 8, and I would also like to ask what you think about what we can clearly define as worldliness? I do believe that Scripture does give clear parameters as to what defines worldliness, and if you could please show me where a certain style of music is declared devilish or somehow inherently worldly? Where do we draw the line then? Only Scottish tunes? Or American tunes? Or what exactly? Not that I want this to get away from the original topic of tattoos, but I think you get my point. Thanks again brother, and have a good night!
John UK wrote: Hi Mike NC, No you assumed wrongly, and I agree with you. In situations like this it may even be necessary to apply sanctified common sense, as well as compile a whole plethora of scriptures which speak to what we are to do with our body, which is after all, the temple of the Holy Spirit. What we have to decide is whether or not this thing is of the world, or is it of God? I say that it is not only of the world and not of God, but that it is of the devil. There is no getting away from it. Everything is either of the flesh or the Spirit. And I believe this is one the clear-cut ones.
Sorry for the wrong assumption, friend, but I have to respectively disagree. I cannot find any clear-cut Scriptural evidence that condemns fashionable body marking that is not promoting or celebrating the worship of false deities or anything of the like. I myself don't have a tattoo, nor would I get one, but the issue has more to do with financial stewardship. I really think that to say a skin marking is of the devil I think is way too far a statement to make, most respectfully. Also, when you say everything is of the flesh or of the Spirit, then how should we understand Paul in 1 Cor. 8? For some it's sin, and others it is not; how does that fit your pa
JohnUK, you cited me speaking of Leviticus in support of opposing the modern practice of tattooing, so I just assumed that your question was couched in the context of the Levitical injunction against marking oneself for the dead. My response was much more nuanced than a just, â€śYes, God does,â€ť or a â€śNo, God doesnâ€™t,â€ť for I do not believe that the Bible explicitly speaks to the modern-day practice of fashionable tattooing per se any more than the Bible explicitly speaking of 21st Century democratic governments. That being said, we cannot then conclude that the Bible is silent concerning the issue of tattooing, because as I stated in my reply, God does speak an awful lot about vanity, pride, and proper stewardship of monetary resources, all issues that touch on the present-day practice of tattooing. This is how I think the subject needs to be approached, NOT by ripping Leviticus 19:28 out of its original context and applying it unethically to present day practices. Something might preach well enough, but its biblical support may be lacking. Does this answer your question?
ken, the Law in its ritual and ceremonial aspects are fulfilled in Christ, while the moral thrust and principle of the law remain for all time (if one makes the claim that the Law is still in effect the same way it was for OT Israel, then why do we no longer sacrifice animals? We need to remember that our Bible is a progressive revealing of truth over time, culminating in Jesus Christ, the fulfillment of the Law for all who believe). John UK, God is concerned with where our hearts are at. If we get a tattoo because of pride, vanity ,or any other heart sin, then of course heâ€™s not â€śokâ€ť with it, just as He is not OK with mere religious externalism and vain traditions of men. But to equate the Levitical injunction against marking one for the dead with getting someone's name or a piece of art on their skin is a leap that is exegetically unallowable. WayneRap, you know what I mean about modern practice, so I donâ€™t appreciate the intellectual coyness. Once again, sexual immorality and sorcery are not only evil in principle, but are actually repeated in the NT in multiple places, so a little but of apples and oranges at play if you ask me. If not, then would you be ok with ham and shellfish, or perhaps mixing fabrics or trimming your beard? Btw, I haven't said that I am for tattoos.
You do know that in Islam it is not only the Qur'an that is quoted but other hadith that are cited as authoritative and the lens through which the Qu'ran is translated (ranging from sahih, hasan, daif, and mawdu, with Sahih being the most reliable, ala Sahih Al-Bukhari), so to just say go with the Qur'an is a bit of a misnomer. It's like having a Mormon only read the book of Mormon without consulting the Doctrines and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price. There are troubling parts of the Qur'an and I would say it is disqualified on the basis of its inconsistency (different Islamic traditions will apply those passages differently and many, yes, will apply them violently, but others will not). Have you had one translated from Arabic? I know what Sharia means, thank you, and I am fully aware that Muslim majority countries following certain Islamic traditions (non-western) are oppressive at the best. But this still does nothing to answer the logical fallacies of saying ALL Muslims would support Saudi-style Sharia, or that they all agree on what constitutes Sharia or how it should be carried out. Western Muslims are not the same as Mid-Eastern, generally speaking, and typically are much more moderate. Also, ALL Muslims are demon possessed? Would any of you reach out to them to witness?
Allie wrote: Dr. James White held an interfaith dialogue with an Imam in 2017 at a church in Tennessee. Dr. White is theologically sound yet did this. This nonsense is not just happening amongst nominal Christians. When someone of Dr. White's caliber does this it should make us all give pause and understand that we should be witnessing to Muslims not dialologing with them.
I cannot believe this long after this event and so much ignorance is still flying concerning this event. Dr. White preached the gospel at this event! Both men affirmed that they were not co-religionists!
John Yurich USA wrote: She is a Muslim. That is all the proof needed as all Muslims are advocates for Sharia law. All Muslims are insane and psychotic and demon possessed.
And this is all the proof a Muslim non-believer dead in their trespasses and sins needs to continue to justify their rejection of Christ and perpetuate the idea that Christians are nothing but close-minded bigots who can barely be heard above the scrapping of their own knuckles as they drag them behind themselves. Do you know "all" Muslims to make such a universal statement and therefore condemn a whole segment of humanity? And even if they were, do you want them all to die and burn forever in eternal hell according to what the Scriptures teach, and are you not willing to take up your cross and suffer for the cause of Christ so that Muslims may be saved? Do you even begin to understand the basic tenets of the Islamic faith and the main Islamic traditions in the world today before you spew your ignorant, vile, anti-Christian comments? Seriously, do you have incontrovertible proof that "all" Muslims are advocates of Sharia law?? Where is this proof? Where is the basis for you irrational hatred?
Frank wrote: Leviticus 19:28 - Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I [am] the LORD. Pronounce: kah-ak-ah' Strong: H7085 Orig: from the same as 6970; an incision or gash:--+ mark. H6970 Use: TWOT-2046a Noun Masculine Grk Strong: 1) incision, imprintment, tattoo, mark
One needs to remember that words studies, while incredibly important, are not the end-all be-all some think they are. Words are set in literary context as well. For those that would cite Leviticus in support of opposing the modern practice of tattooing, would you also place yourself contextually under the rest of the laws of Leviticus (nay, the entire Torah) as what was intended by Moses (and therefore the Spirit of God) to the original recipients, that being OT Israel under the Mosaic Covenant?
Life in all its fullness Wisdom vs Folly. God vs Self.
Proverbs is deceptive. It sounds too simple and easy to understand to bless and shape the Christian and the Church. But that's what we need today -- simple, courageous language. We need to recover wisdom, preach it in our churches, and speak it to the lost.
Christopher000 wrote: Mike, I'm not so sure the "you" in that first sentence was referring to yourself. Seems to me that it was a part of the BB statement itself, and not Penny's own words. Could be wrong, but that's how I read it.
If that was the case, then I am not sure why he would post ambiguously the way that he did, but perhaps I am wrong. If the statement was made towards me, then my comments stand. If they were not, then many of my comments still stand, although I would be in the wrong for directing them so strongly at him. I guess if and when he replies, we will find out. Thanks for the comment, though, and it reminds me to be careful. I should have probably asked for clarification first, and in that I have transgressed. Sorry about that...
All I can say is, wow; thanks for proving my point. You have no idea WHO I am, and yet you assume that I am leading the way for all of these subversive elements of society?! I'm calling for mature discussion and mutual showing of respect without compromise on biblical truth! You're post sounds more like something hijacked from Pulpit and Pen and just a rehash of other polemical opinions. I in now way in my comments was defending the ADL, but was making a most obvious observation that anyone with a shred of discernment would be able to see from all the childish dialogue on these ignorant com-boxes. I was trying to help Connor to see the error in individuals like yourself that seem to shoot first and ask questions later, if later even ever comes. Can't you at least admit, "Hey, perhaps I was too sharp with a brother?" No, of course not... Your post responds to nothing I was saying, but is seems to be just another excuse for you to snipe. How sad...how winsome you are, indeed!
Unfortunately Conner, that seems to be what many experience on this site's news comments. Instead of intelligent dialogue among well-meaning believers and perhaps even non-believers (religious or irreligious), what we (and unfortunately the rest of the world) many times are treated to is pseudo-intellectualism, immature back-biting, open slander, lazy research, anti-semitism, and open religious bigotry (and what I mean by that is NOT disagreeing with and speaking against faulty, heretical doctrine, but rather hatred of other religions for seemingly other areas of disgust, usually related to a rejection of the KJV somewhere [as is many other issues I've encountered on here as well]). That's a big reason I stopped frequenting the news sections on here, because I couldn't stand the non-Christian and even anti-Christian attitudes and hatred I would see on here. It's a shame, especially when our Lord expressly says that it is by the disciple's LOVE that all men would know of His existence.