[DaveB]

I don't care what this man's convictions are. He does, however, need to keep them off the record.

*** is he thinking? Do Muslims not have already enough reasons to want to kill Americans?

From the L.A. Times...

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has assigned the task of tracking down and eliminating Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and other high-profile targets to an Army general who sees the war on terrorism as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan.

Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the new deputy undersecretary of Defense for intelligence, is a much-decorated and twice-wounded veteran of covert military operations. From the bloody 1993 clash with Muslim warlords in Somalia chronicled in "Black Hawk Down" and the hunt for Colombian drug czar Pablo Escobar to the ill-fated attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran in 1980, Boykin was in the thick of things.

Yet the former commander and 13-year veteran of the Army's top-secret Delta Force is also an outspoken evangelical Christian who appeared in dress uniform and polished jump boots before a religious group in Oregon in June to declare that radical Islamists hated the United States "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."

Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."

"We in the army of God, in the house of God, kingdom of God have been raised for such a time as this," Boykin said last year.

On at least one occasion, in Sandy, Ore., in June, Boykin said of President Bush: "He's in the White House because God put him there."…

db

[TarpleyG]

"I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."
What an idiot! Had this guy bothered to poke his head out of his radical Protestant tee-pee sometime during his youth and read about other religions, he'd know that his God is the very same God that the Muslims pray to. I really hate when folks walk around with blinders on all the time. We are doomed, I tell ya'. DOOMED!!!

GT

[Thumper]

And yet the left condones precisely the same rhetoric from the other side.

[DaveB]

And yet the left condones precisely the same rhetoric from the other side.

That's absurd.

db

[rock jock]

What an idiot! Had this guy bothered to poke his head out of his radical Protestant tee-pee sometime during his youth and read about other religions, he'd know that his God is the very same God that the Muslims pray to.
Tarpley, if your knowledge of firearms is comparable to that of theology, you should limit yourself to water pistols.

[BigG]

Tarpley, If you are denigrating this guy because of his beliefs, don't start calling somebody else, racist, bigot, or idiot for calling you and yours names. It cuts both ways. JMHO

[Justin]

Sorry Rock Jock, but point goes to Tarpley. Islam takes Christianity as its base in much the same way that Christianity is based on Judaism.

As for Lt. Gen Boykin, idiots like that seriously cause me to question my faith.

[DaveB]

Laying aside whatever partisan opinions I have, I do not understand how the General's actions could be defended or rationalized.

He is admittedly following his CIC's lead (Bring 'em on!), and he's going to get Americans killed.

This ain't the movies - unless we let it become the movies.

http://de.geocities.com/barad_dur_hdr/pics_elrondarmee.jpg

db

[corncob]

That thing about Christians and Muslims worshiping the same god is simply not true--depending on who you ask. Muslims claim to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but they do not call Him by His Name. Nor is His Covenant borne out in thier Q'ran (or thier behaviour). I want to make this clear to everyone before this thread gets closed down-

The guy the World Council of Churches put on tv after Spt. 11 doesn't speak for the Christian Church. They have an agenda and it is not to further the Kingdim of God on earth.

This general isn't too smart, apparently, but he is right about one thing--they hate us (and the Jews) because of what they believe, not because of the "injustices we have committed against them."

And GWBush is in the White house because he got more electoral votes, sorry.

[buzz_knox]

Islam takes Christianity as its base in much the same way that Christianity is based on Judaism.

Uh, no. Islam refers to Christ, but lists him as a prophet. That by definition precludes Islam from using Christianity as a base.

[Mark Tyson]

This officer should keep his religious views to himself.

I knew my God was bigger than his

Unfortunately, this is how many of our enemies think. When we demonstrate that our "god" ie our power is greater than theirs, we can bring factions of them over to our side, if only for utilitarian reasons. This has happened historically when different civilizations fight and was most recently seen in Afghanistan. When we demonstrated our overwhelming power, the tribes started coming over to our side. Convert them by winning, so to speak(don't mean that in the religious sense).

Do Muslims not have already enough reasons to want to kill Americans?

I think most of our enemies will want to kill us no matter what words we use. To them it is already a holy war and nothing we do or say can change that.

[Marko Kloos]

Islam has as much of a base in Christianity as in Islam. Muslims recognize Abraham as their ancestor, for example. Just because Muslims don't recognize Jesus as the son of God does not mean that Christianity didn't have a big influence on Islam. After all, Christian theology diverges pretty far from Judaism in some aspects, including theological disgreements about the coming of the Messiah, and the nature of heaven. That doesn't mean that Christianity isn't an offspin of Judaism.

Technically, it is correct to say that Muslims and Christians do not pray to the same God, though. If you take both the Bible and the Koran at face value, they describe two different deities. One has a son and "became flesh" in him. The other does not. They can't both be the same entity, if both books are right.

Back to the subject at hand...it scares me to no end that people like the General actually have positions of responsibility within our government, and that they fervently believe their deity has chosen them to wage a holy war against idolaters.

(What an arrogant claim, by the way. You believe that the Almighty, omnipotent and omniscient Shaper and Ruler of the universe needs your help to get his work done?)

[Sean Smith]

If true, the guy's statements were pretty silly. My god is bigger than your god? Oy vey. :rolleyes:

However, the notion that his statement will make the slightest bit of difference is silly. Radical Islamic terrorists weren't fence-sitters that juuuust baaarely decided that Allah wants them to murder Americans. They are starting with a whole list of a priori convictions that aren't subject to modification by reason.

Sure, the dope gave our enemies some propaganda fodder... assuming the LA Times isn't grossly misrepresenting what was said. But I don't see how we are going to win many "hearts and minds" in a region that was force-fed so much anti-American propaganda over several generation anyway.

Something that most folks just don't grasp is that about 99% of the population of the Middle East already hates our guts for a variety of reasons that go back at least 60 years. The villany of America is a widely held conviction in the great masses of the Middle Eastern population; international terrorism is not a transient malady caused by bible-thumpers and Republicans.

[Phantom Warrior]

So I'll just say this.

Anyone notice that it isn't the Church that is organizing this, but a member of the armed forces at the behest of the secular government? And that the targets are not "holy cities" or Muslims in general, but certain individuals wanted for terrorism and crimes against humanity?

If it looks like a Crusade and it smells like a Crusade, then it's a Crusade. This neither looks nor smells like a Crusade to me...

[DaveB]

You believe that the Almighty, omnipotent and omniscient Shaper and Ruler of the universe needs your help to get his work done?

Well put. :D

db

[2dogs]

Radical Islamic terrorists weren't fence-sitters that juuuust baaarely decided that Allah wants them to murder Americans.

This neither looks nor smells like a Crusade to me...

Oh hell, let's tell 'em IT IS ONE just to p1$$ them off.:evil: :neener:

[buzz_knox]

You believe that the Almighty, omnipotent and omniscient Shaper and Ruler of the universe needs your help to get his work done?

Good example of altering the Christian belief as well as the evidence to get your own point across (especially as the General did not say what you attribute to him).

[Marko Kloos]

buzz,

I have no beef with your average run-of-the-mill believer, those that *don't* run around killing folks over whose God is the true one, but zealots don't come only with keffiyehs on their heads. Some wear yarmulkes, and some call themselves Christian. You cannot deny that there has been an awful lot of killing, even in this country, where the perpetrator claimed to be doing "God's will". Are people like that not implying that God actually *needed* a helping hand?

Zealotry and fundamentalism is a mental disease that's not unique to one religion, nor is any religion immune to it.

I am scared that people who control our military actually display zeal at the idea of this being a "religious war". The reasons for the terrorism issue are more complex than that, and you simply *cannot* make it out to be a "Christianity vs. Islam" issue, unless you see the WoT as a welcome chance to wage a sequel to the Crusades. ("Now we'll show 'em whose God is real!")

Only simple minds look for simple solutions to complex problems. The trouble in the Middle East, and the strife between the monotheistic "Big Three" Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, has its roots in issues that reach back a few thousand years. There is no easy solution to the problem. Painting all Muslims in the same light as fanatic Wahhabists will only compound the problem.

[Bill Hook]

Good, now we have our own nutcase who'd be willing to kill women and children if he thought it was "the will of God." :rolleyes:

Perhaps he'll even roast them on spits or cut them open to see if their insides contain gold. Of course, this is the 21st century, not the 11th.

[DaveB]

Dammit, Bill. Don't write stuff like that. You're going to get me fired. :evil:

db

[longeyes]

How 'bout Reason versus Unreason? Or Individualism versus Collectivism? That work for ya?

[erikm]

I kind of wonder if Boykin knows how people in the middle east view the crusades and the crusaders. Given the state of civilisation at the time and the savageries that are said to have taken place 'Invasion by a raging barbarian horde bent on murder, plunder and rape' probably comes close.

Cheers,
ErikM :evil:

[DaveB]

Reason versus Unreason?

How 'bout 'their national interests' vs. 'our national interests'?

The convenient thing about "they hate us because we're beautiful..." or "they hate us because we're free..." or "they hate us because we worship the wrong God..." or whatever, is that it makes reason unnecessary.

Individualism versus Collectivism?

Alert! Square peg in round hole violation detected!!!

db

[Thumper]

That's absurd.

You must be kidding...or do I just miss the tremendous outcry from the left when the Imam's are shouting about killing the Infidel?

[Mike Irwin]

""I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."


That's funny, considering that it's the same God, and that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe that we are Children of Abraham, and all hold the Old Testament to be a foundational text of our religions.

[Correia]

I could care less what his religious motivations are.

1. Can he fight?
2. Can he lead?
3. Can he teach others to fight?
4. Will his personal knowledge help us win?

I don't care if he worships trees, the guy is an experienced veteran of Delta Force. If his personal motivation is religious in nature, great, whatever keeps him in the fight. Some of our warriors are motivated by God, other by love of country, some by dedication to their family and fellow warriors, others are there for the college money.

[gburner]

'Father, forgive us
for what we must do.
You forgive us, we'll forgive you.
We'll forgive each other
'til we both turn blue.
Then we'll whistle and go
fishin' in Heaven.' John Prine


That we continue to perpetrate the most hideous of offenses on our fellow man and he on us in the name of a
Creator that could just as easily wipe us all from existence and start over is a daily source of wonder and amazement to me. Before there was religion, there was the Creator and it will be so long after religion is gone. Religion is just another set of chains that those in power use to enslave the powerless.:barf:

[buzz_knox]

That's funny, considering that it's the same God, and that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe that we are Children of Abraham, and all hold the Old Testament to be a foundational text of our religions.

Once again, wrong. There are fundamental differences between the JudeoChristian god and the god of Islam. They are given fundamentally different attributes in their respective books and thus cannot be the same.

[DaveB]

I could care less what his religious motivations are.

OK, but publicly announcing his motivations as being commanded by God (to whom he apparently has a hot line) will convince the great majority of Muslims that he, and we, are a direct threat to their religion and their lives.

If the 'Muslim world' takes his views to their logical end point, and as being representative of US policy, we won't be fighting just the crazys anymore: we'll be fighting them all.

db

[buzz_knox]

OK, but publicly announcing his motivations as being commanded by God (to whom he apparently has a hot line) will convince the great majority of Muslims that he, and we, are a direct threat to their religion and their lives.

They don't need him for that. They've already got their imans and most of their "charity" organizations telling them that.

[rock jock]

Sorry Rock Jock, but point goes to Tarpley. Islam takes Christianity as its base in much the same way that Christianity is based on Judaism.
Justin, stick to what you know. Theology is not one of those subjects. You are way out of your league. Why do you think Muslims refer to Jes and Christians as unbelievers (or, in their vernacular, infidels)? It is precisely because they recognize that while these religions may have some shared historicity, they diverge on their fundamental beliefs about the acts and attributes of God. This means that the person of God that the respective religions worship is different.

that they fervently believe their deity has chosen them to wage a holy war against idolaters.
That is a complete misrepresentation. A "Holy War" is waged on the basis of religious differences. Nowhere does General Boykin make this claim. Rather, he simply makes the statement that he believes the Muslims are worshipping a false religion and because of this, his own true God is able to strengthen him against his enemies.

[ojibweindian]

I could care less what his religious motivations are.

1. Can he fight?
2. Can he lead?
3. Can he teach others to fight?
4. Will his personal knowledge help us win?

I don't care if he worships trees, the guy is an experienced veteran of Delta Force. If his personal motivation is religious in nature, great, whatever keeps him in the fight. Some of our warriors are motivated by God, other by love of country, some by dedication to their family and fellow warriors, others are there for the college money.

Exactly.

They want me dead, I want them dead.

Religion has nothing to do with it.

[Derek Zeanah]

This is probably one I should stay out of, but I'll give it a shot anyway.

Quick summary: Abraham wasn't a jew, and he wasn't a christian. He was a man who submitted his will to God, and lived a good life. Islam translates as "submission," and it a reference to submitting to God's will. A muslim is one who practices Islam -- someone who makes his own desires subservient to God's.

Islam is a recreation of Abraham's faith.

My holy book says that Christians, Jews, Believers (Muslims), and Sabians (no-one knows who this refers to any more -- maybe it was the gnostic sects who Mother Church slaughtered during the dark ages) are all eligible for heaven, provided they live properly (reference here (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html), move down to 002:062). I don't care what your religion is, and I don't think God will hold it against you either. Above all, I believe God is fair. That means that if your child dies during birth, he won't go to hell because of the taint of original sin (as the Prespbyterians believed when I started attending the local church in my youth.) I don't believe that Abraham, Moses, Noah, Ismail, Joseph, and all those other folks are going straight to hell because Jeses hadn't died for their sins yet. I believe every man is responsible for how he manages his time here on earth, and that when judgement comes no-one (be it Jesus, or Mohommad, or the Buddah, or anyone else) can speak up for us in our defense. Our actions will stand alone. And I don't believe that Mother Theresa has a lot to worry about when she faces judgement -- she seems to have been a good person, and to have dedicated her life to the care of the most unfortunate people she could find.

For anyone who's not clear, the Qur'an teaches that Abraham and his son Ismail built the Kaba originally (that black building sitting in the middle of Mecca). Promises made to Abraham about his offspring? We're all covered, guys, as Islam traces it roots back to Ismail and through him to Abraham. Prophets accepted by Islam? Most of 'em, to include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus; "The Book" (referencing the bible) is considered holy and truthful, so far as it affirms what is in the Qur'an. The reason Gabriel went and slapped Mohommad on the head that day in the cave was because the people responsible for keeping The Book pure had failed in their duty, and had let their petty desires pollute the holy words they were supposed to pass on to later generations. Mohommad was given the Qur'an to purify monotheism, and bring it back to its roots. There's a reason the original arabic is written next to the english in most translations you find.

Just for kicks, I asked my neighbor (Masters degree in religion) about whether Christians thought Muslims prayed to the same God. His answer was "Mostly yes, unless you're talking about "conservative Christians," in which case they believe Muslims are praying to Satan." I asked how they reconciled the difference between the Jewish God and the Muslim God, and he came back with "well, it's kind of like acknowledging your father, because your were born and it's pretty clear you had a father, and denying your offspring..." :neener:

And no, I don't believe that spoiled rich Saudi men who dislike america are justified in the actions they are taking. They're using religion as a cover, as some "conservative christians" in the south did back when they were still trying to keep the black man down. Just 'cause some long-bearded bozo sitting in a desert somewhere says he knows God's will doesn't make it so. No more than the Pope speaks for the Jehova's Witnesses on my block, or than the Baptists are willing to take responsibility for the teachings of Joseph Smith.

And yes, my holy book does require that I take a stand against oppression. That can take many forms, but if a leader of the mightiest army in the world was talking openly about bringing another crusade to my neighborhood to prove that his god was real and mine was but an Idol, I'd don the body armor, load all the mags, and get my comms up. That was a hugely foolish statement, unless the Bush administration really is itching for a holy war...

Damn. This doesn't feel like the country I grew up in any more. :( :( :(

[Mike Irwin]

Buzz-Knox,

The fundamental differences between the Gods are, as I understand it, in the functional process of venerating the one true God.

As noted, Muslims, Jews, and Christians all hold Abraham to be the father of their faiths, and all hold the Old Testament as a foundational book of faith.

If the God were different, rather than the process of veneration, it's unlikely that all three faiths would share fundamental core commonalities.

It's also unlikely that Muslims would view Jesus as being a prophet of God (just not the savior) if our God was different from their God.

You and I can look at the same gun, and describe it in vastly different ways, and feel about it very differently.

Does that mean, however, that we're not looking at the same gun?

Nope.

[RocketMan]

I vote we send Dave B over there to reason with them.

[Mike Irwin]

Edited on account of an unrighteous post. :D

Art

[Mike Irwin]

[i]As Muslims, we accept all Prophets and Books sent to different peoples throughout history, and regard belief in them as an essential principle of being Muslim. A Muslim is a true follower of Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus, and all other Prophets, upon them be peace. Not believing in one Prophet or Book means that one is not a Muslim. Thus we acknowledge the oneness and basic unity of religion, which is a symphony of God’s blessings and mercy, and the universality of belief in religion. So, religion is a system of belief that embraces all races and all beliefs, a road that brings everyone together in brotherhood."


This is part of an essay, located here (http://www.thewaytotruth.org/islam-humanity/islamsrelations.html), that should leave little doubt about the nature of the Muslim God, and the role of the Muslim in the world today...

The entire website is an excellent resourse.

Anyone who's not familiar with Fethullah Gülen's writings should be.

[buzz_knox]

The fundamental differences between the Gods are, as I understand it, in the functional process of venerating the one true God.

As noted, Muslims, Jews, and Christians all hold Abraham to be the father of their faiths, and all hold the Old Testament as a foundational book of faith.

If the God were different, rather than the process of veneration, it's unlikely that all three faiths would share fundamental core commonalities.


Okay, let's see about that.

In Islam, Allah has no son. In Christianity, He most certainly does. That would be a rather drastic difference, no?

In Islam, Jesus is a mere man, albeit a highly revered prophet. In Christianity, Jesus is God Himself, made flesh. Another rather big difference no?

According to Derek, all "children of the book" will go to Heaven if they lead a good life. I presume that he gets that statement from Allah. In the Christian Bible, it is made explicitly clear that the only way to the Father (and Heaven) is through Christ, the Son of God. God specifically says that you cannot go to "Christian Heaven" by being a good person and not accepting Christ.

So, there were have three fundamental and absolute differences in the nature of the deities in question, before reaching the issue of veneration.

[Derek Zeanah]

In the Christian Bible, it is made explicitly clear that the only way to the Father (and Heaven) is through Christ, the Son of God. God specifically says that you cannot go to "Christian Heaven" by being a good person and not accepting Christ.So, Moses is burning in hell, or will be after the last day?

[buzz_knox]

Nope. Those who believed in God through faith in God's plan and the ultimate redemption prior to Jesus' arrival were, under Christian doctrine, saved by that faith and Jesus' sacrifice.

[Derek Zeanah]

Nope. Those who believed in God through faith in God's plan and the ultimate redemption prior to Jesus' arrival were, under Christian doctrine, saved by that faith and Jesus' sacrifice.Is there a scriptural basis for that?

Does some kid who grew up on an island as a Jew after Jesus lived/died (note that the Qur'an doesn't agree that he died) and lived a pious life get to burn in hell forever and ever, just because he never heard of Jesus?

[TarpleyG]

rock jock,

Maybe you can step out of your religion for the sake of theology on this one. You cannot completey understand a religion unless you let go of your own religious indoctrination and view that other religion without ANY bias at all. To not do so is a recipe for disaster.

Damn. This doesn't feel like the country I grew up in any more.
Derek,

I am not that old and all I can say is amen to that!(pardon the pun)

GT

[Derek Zeanah]

In Islam, Allah has no son. In Christianity, He most certainly does. That would be a rather drastic difference, no?

In Islam, Jesus is a mere man, albeit a highly revered prophet. In Christianity, Jesus is God Himself, made flesh. Another rather big difference no?Now, and edit/replace:In Judaism, Yahweh has no son. In Christianity, He most certainly does. That would be a rather drastic difference, no?

In Judaism, Jesus is a mere man, though he might be a prophet. In Christianity, Jesus is God Himself, made flesh. Another rather big difference no?Are Jews going to burn in hell, or are they OK because they're following the Law as Moses laid it out for them?

[buzz_knox]

Are Jews going to burn in hell, or are they OK because they're following the Law as Moses laid it out for them?

Under Christianity, yup.

Tell me. If I don't follow the five pillars of Islam, am I going to burn in hell? I mean, if I believe in God and Christ, but don't believe in Allah in the least little bit, will I get a break?

[Mike Irwin]

"In Islam, Allah has no son. In Christianity, He most certainly does. That would be a rather drastic difference, no?

Yes, it's a difference in the beliefs of man regarding the progeny of God, not in the fundamental nature of God himself.


In Islam, Jesus is a mere man, albeit a highly revered prophet. In Christianity, Jesus is God Himself, made flesh. Another rather big difference no?"

Jesus is not God himself in Christianity, he is the Son of God.

See the answer to your first question.

This is like saying that a Smith & Wesson Model 19 with a 2.5" barrel is totally different than a Smith & Wesson Model 19 with a 4" barrel.

That's completely false. There are functional differences, but the base remains the same.

Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that you're coming at this with a Fundamentalist Christian leaning?

I believe it was Paul Tillich who wrote that "God became man so man could become God."

If that only applies to a Christian conceptualization of God, does that mean that all non-Christians are not, in fact, men, but are subhuman?

[Oleg Volk]

Let me request that this dicussion continue with mutual respect and not even veiled jabs at those with whom you disagree. It would be too much fun for the enemy to watch us fragment into fratricide over differences which we can tolerate, if not outright respect, in each other.

[buzz_knox]

Maybe you can step out of your religion for the sake of theology on this one. You cannot completey understand a religion unless you let go of your own religious indoctrination and view that other religion without ANY bias at all.

Wrong. There are objective foundational differences between the religions which can be analyzed.

Further, if you accept this argument, then anyone except an atheist should not be posting.

[Bill Hook]

Are Jews going to burn in hell, or are they OK because they're following the Law as Moses laid it out for them?

According to most bible thumpers, YES. However, they WILL try to witness them to Christ, so that they may be "saved."

[Derek Zeanah]

Tell me. If I don't follow the five pillars of Islam, am I going to burn in hell? I mean, if I believe in God and Christ, but don't believe in Allah in the least little bit, will I get a break?You're good to go, provided you live well (works and faith, not just faith). See my above message referencing 002:062, and my point about mother theresa.

Oleg: If I'm the one getting out of line, PM me. I try to keep things toned down in religious discussions. :)

[Mike Irwin]

Are Jews going to burn in hell, or are they OK because they're following the Law as Moses laid it out for them?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Under Christianity, yup.

Tell me. If I don't follow the five pillars of Islam, am I going to burn in hell? I mean, if I believe in God and Christ, but don't believe in Allah in the least little bit, will I get a break?"


Actually, yes, you could. Not all Christian sects immediately condemn those of other faiths to hell.

The more fundamentalist do, but certainly not all.

Does that mean, then, that there are Christians who are Christians, and Christians who are not Christians, simply because those Christians don't believe what the other Christians believe that Christians should believe?

Gets kind of confusing, eh?

[TarpleyG]

One other comment and I may quit--seems that some people fail to realize that all scripture was written by men interpreting their own religion. It cannot, therefore, be without flaw and without bias to the way one lives. Agreed??? The Bible, Quran, Tanakh, and Talmad didn't just fall from the sky one day, did it?

GT

[Derek Zeanah]

The Bible, Quran, Tanakh, and Talmad didn't just fall from the sky one day, did it?Actually, Islam teaches that the angel Gabriel rapped Mohommod on the head and told him to "recite!" afterward. Mohommad was confused, but at various points in his life he could recite the various parts of the Qur'an (translates as "recitation"). It's a long poem essentially, and is still the same as the day it was originally recited (though some have an issue with one particular passage that references Mohommad -- they think it may have been altered by well-meaning people in the past, in the same way that the bible was altered over time.)

Edited to add: this doesn't mean the religion hasn't changed, and it's hard to translate old simitic languages without vowels or punctuation sometimes. Does the Qur'an mean to hack off the hands of thieves, or simply mark their wrists as punishment? They're both valid interpretations.

[Mike Irwin]

"The Bible, Quran, Tanakh, and Talmad didn't just fall from the sky one day, did it?"

Depends on whom you listen to, Tarpley.

To some Christians, the bible is the LITERAL word of God.

To some Muslims, the Koran is the LITERAL word of God.

They're collectively known as fundamentalists.

Others, myself among them, believe that these religious texts include the word of God, as given to prophets, but that it is not, ver batim, the word of God, nor did God give these prophets everything about everything. I feel that the Bible, Koran, and most religious texts, for that matter, are life guides, not laws.

[Bill Hook]

One other comment and I may quit--seems that some people fail to realize that all scripture was written by men interpreting their own religion. It cannot, therefore, be without flaw and without bias to the way one lives. Agreed??? The Bible, Quran, Tanakh, and Talmad didn't just fall from the sky one day, did it?

Most fundamentalists, of any major monotheistic religion, believe that the men who wrote these works were inspired by God and that he directed their efforst such that they are w/o error. How convenient.

Too bad the New Testament editors (Council of Nicea?) never cross checked the Gospels against each other.

[buzz_knox]

Jesus is not God himself in Christianity, he is the Son of God.

Uh, where did that come from? Ever heard of the Holy Trinity? You know "Father, Son, Holy Ghost?" Your comment relates to a heresy from the early days of the Catholic Church and which (to the best of my knowledge) hasn't been accepted by any major branch of Christianity (Protestant or Catholic) for the last 1500 years. There have been a few individuals who have argued this point in an effort to make Christianity more inclusive, but they have had to do some rather creative editing of the bible to get it to fit their theory.

Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that you're coming at this with a Fundamentalist Christian leaning?

Shouldn't matter one way or another. Would it make you feel better if I told you that my recognition of the heresy you referenced above came from my sophmore "History of Europe in the Middle Ages" class?

By the same token, since you argued to the authority of a site dedicated to Islam, shall we assume that "you're coming at this with a Fundamentalist [Islamic] leaning"?

For the record, I'm not trying to denigrate Islam in any way, nor should such be taken from my statements. If my inept presentation leads to that view, I apologize. But I find it rather disheartening to see real differences between religions glossed over in a false ecumencial zeal.

[Sean Smith]

Focusing on the religious "angle" rather misses the point. Religion only matters insofar as it is used as a pretext, or religious feelings are manipulated to serve various (largely selfish) ends by the governments of the Middle East.

Most of the countires in the Middle East, including (and often especially) our supposed "allies," have spent decades on end redirecting the feelings of quite genuine popular sympathy for the Palestinians towards hatred of the United States via relentless propaganda.

The motives for this are quite simple and self-evident, although we have chosen to ignore them and their consequences at our peril. The governments of the Middle East were, and to a large extent still are, tyrannical and undemocratic... but also fundamentally very weak. With their populations howling for Israeli blood - and it is no exaggeration to say that the Arabs largely wanted to exterminate the Jews en masse - these dictatorships, paradoxically, had no choice but to follow the popular lead, and in so doing reinforce it even further. This situation, in and of itself, would easily lead to anti-American feelings simply due to our associations with Israel in general; the friend of your enemy is your enemy.

But things were gradually taken a step further. It was in the interests of these regimes to villify America specifically, not just by association with Israel, because it allowed them to place the blame for their own manifold economic, political, and social failures on the United States. With that in mind, it should not be surprising that the United States was soon being blamed for everything under the sun and moon, even as the governments that owned those propaganda organs often took our aid.

As a short-term responsibility dodge, this has proven very effective. But its internal contradictions were bount to catch up with it, especially in those countries who were our "allies" in the international field. On one hand, these regimes built up the United States as a (sometimes literally) Satanic force. This naturally fostered ever-increasing anti-American sentiment. On the other hand, these countries took aid from the United States, which discredited these regimes over the longer term by making them look hypocritical (which they were). This is why Al-Qaeda is not merely focused on America, but on destroying the entire political status quo in the Middle East... and why our supposedly strongest "allies," Egypt and Saudi Arabia, were in fact the wellsprings of Al-Qaeda... 9/11 was principally a combination of Egyptian brains and Saudi money.

What we are left with, then, is a situation where outright hatred of America is one of the few near-universal values in the Middle East, where the great masses of the people are conditioned from pre-school to look at America as the source of all its woes, and where our alleged allies in the "moderate" regimes are our worst enemies and have the most radical populations.

None of which means that the United States has not acted against the interests of the people of the Middle East at times. Our Middle Eastern policy has been so dumb and contradictory across multiple administrations that it was bound to do so at various times. But it is easy to see how a few generations of anti-American propaganda can lead to mass anger at America being the result of ingrained preconceptions being reinforced after the fact, more than anything that a disspasionate outside observer would consider legitimate grievances.

With that in mind, one guy's dopey comments don't bother me much.

[Derek Zeanah]

To some Muslims, the Koran is the LITERAL word of God.

They're collectively known as fundamentalists. Uhhh. Another point here:

A while after mohommad died (100-200 years? I forget), a Persian (recently conquored) went around and collected the "sayings of the prophet." Basically, "Miss Suzy says that her uncle used to say that once the Prophet Mohommad (peace be upon him) said the following when a lady asked him about how long to breastfeed..."

There are a bunch of these "sayings" (I'd call them rumors, but no-one really asks my opinion about religious matters) that have been produced, and there's something of a "science" around determining which witnesses were accurate, which were mistaken, which made things up, who was too stupid to understand spoken arabic, etc. Many consider these to have equal weight with the Qur'an, and many seem to fixate on certain sayings that appear to be in conflict with the words of the Qur'an itself. Worse, the various factions that have grown into Islam (which is supposed to be a unified, single religion) disagree over which saying are valid.

Some of thes people are generally referred to as "fundamentalists," and from what I can tell it's a reference to wanting to return to an idealized view of how Islam was historically, and they use various "sayings" to give religious weight to their desires.. The Qur'an says nothing about wearing a beard, but the Taliban care. A lot.

The Qur'an says that "wives of the prophet" are to cover their hair, IIRC. Some want this to be interpreted as all believing women. Others say women must cover all exposed flesh, but it ain't in the main handbook of the religion. It goes on and on and on, but I believe I can safely say that "islamic fundamentalism" has nothing to do with interpreting the Qur'an as the literal word(s) of God. If it did, I (the guy talking about hot gay sex while smoking crack in another thread referencing rights) would qualify as a "fundie," and most of those who practice traditional Islam would not.

Noone wants to admit it, but there are cultural issues involved here that are much greater than religious issues.

[buzz_knox]

Noone wants to admit it, but there are cultural issues involved here that are much greater than religious issues.

BINGO! This should have been the first and last post on the subject. Thanks, Derek. You said what I had been thinking but utterly failed to express.

Different people want different things. Some want something out of life and shape their religion to fit their needs.

[TarpleyG]

Jesus is not God himself in Christianity, he is the Son of God.
Mike Irwin,

Actually, the Trinity is God which would also emcompass Jesus. That a hard concept to understand and I think what may be happening here is that some cannot step away from that dogma (the Trinity) to see who God is for others.


Further, if you accept this argument, then anyone except an atheist should not be posting.
Buzz_Knox,

Precisely my point. Atheist means "without religion." An atheist is able to look at any religion and take it with a grain of salt. You and I, however, cannot do that. I try to because I enjoy looking at other religions and the way the followers are.


Too bad the New Testament editors (Council of Nicea?) never cross checked the Gospels against each other.
Bill,

I have often snickered at this one. I think Buzz_Knox eluded to this earlier too.

GT

[Correia]

Last time I checked there were about 1,300 different branches of Christianity, none of which agree about much of anything. There are different doctrines concerning the trinity, and everything else.

I don't think I would get too worked up about any one person's personal feelings and interpretation about their God.



Besides, the Mormons are right and the rest of you are in deep trouble. :D :D

NOTE: the above sentance was sarcasm for the humor impaired.

[Mike Irwin]

Tarpley,

The Trinity -- Father, Son, and Holy Ghost -- are indeed components of God, but individual they are not God himself.

May be a fine semantical interpretation...

[buzz_knox]

The Trinity -- Father, Son, and Holy Ghost -- are indeed components of God, but individual they are not God himself

Nope. Each is fully God in their own right.

Don't ask me to explain. It still hurts my brain to think about it.

[Mike Irwin]

"Besides, the Mormons are right and the rest of you are in deep trouble."

From South Park, scene of hell, with Satan and minions...

Minion: "Hello, all, and welcome to hell..."

Newly arrived (paraphrased): "Hey! This isn't right, we were all Christians, and practiced our faith! What are we doing here?"

Minion: "I'm sorry, but you chose the wrong religion."

NA: "What was the answer then?"

Minion (checking clipboard): "Uh... Mormon. The correct answer was Mormon. Now if you'll come this way..."

[rock jock]

Boy, this is like talking to a bunch of antis. You don't want to listen to facts, you only want to react emotionally. I'll start again.

My comments were no way derogatory towards any religion. I am simply stating facts concerning the tenets of faith of two major world religions, which can be discovered quite easily. Furthermore, I am NOT asserting that either religion or true or false. In fact, I would assert that both religions can be false, but because of their fundamental differences both CANNOT also be true.

To begin, Islam and Christianity share some historicity. BUT, the foundation of their faiths is directly related to their understanding of who God is, i.e., what attributes he possesses and His very nature. Anybody who spends even a modicum of effort researching this will discover quickly that these two belief systems are imcompatible (note that I did not say their adherents can't get along, only that the beliefs system themselves cannot be reconciled to each other to the point where one can say that they worship the same God). There are some similarities, to be sure - they are both monotheistic, both were founded by a single person, both believe in angels, the devil, heaven and hell, a resurrection, salvation, and that God has made himself known to man through a revelation. However, at this point, the religions are quite divergent. Traditional Christianity believes in a triune God, meaning they believe there is one God made up of three distinct persons and that this a fundamental characterisitc of His nature. This is anathema to Islam and is equivalent to blasphemy. Futhermore, Chritianity espouses the belief that salvation cannot come through being a good person, but rather only by acceptance of Jesus as Savior. Since Islam does not regard Jesus as anything more than a prophet (a man), worshipping Jesus is considered idolatry.

There are dozens of other examples, but these are probably the big ones. So, to say that "Islam and Christianity worship the same God" is to deny the very tenets of these faiths. It may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it is not true.



Mike, I hold no degrees in theology, but I have studied the subject quite a bit. If you think I need a degree to validate my assertions, then I suggest you dismiss any and all statements made about the 2A on this board except from attorneys that specilize in Constitutional law.


Derek, I am sorry your neighbor holds such a dim understanding regarding Christianity, especially with a degree. It sounds like he primarily studies liberal theological beliefs in this area. Not unlike law school graduates who believe that the 2A is a collective right.


Tarpley,
To say that an understanding of these religions requires partipation in them is like saying that one must be a fascist, socialist, and capitalist all in turn to understand economics and to realize that these are distinct systems.

[TarpleyG]

Tarpley,
To say that an understanding of these religions requires partipation in them is like saying that one must be a fascist, socialist, and capitalist all in turn to understand economics and to realize that these are distinct systems.
Okay, now you are just reading into stuff. Where, exactly, did I advocate the need to participate in every religion to understand it?

GT

[Mike Irwin]

"Many consider these to have equal weight with the Qur'an, and many seem to fixate on certain sayings that appear to be in conflict with the words of the Qur'an itself. Worse, the various factions that have grown into Islam (which is supposed to be a unified, single religion) disagree over which saying are valid."

Quite frankly, the same sort of opposition exists within the Bible itself, and I believe the Talmud, as well. That's why we have sectarian fundamentalists in Christianity who believe in different interpretations of Biblical reference. Followers of the Septuagint vs. the Hebrew bible springs immediately to mind...

[cloudkiller]

A couple of points in response to things people have said.

1. Not all Christians, or even all Protestants, or even all Baptists are trinitarians. Different independent protestant churches teach different views on this issue.

2. Religion, above all else, is used as a tool for legitimation. That is to justify or prove the legitimacy of other social, political or economic positions. Religious legitimacy is at the root of American identity and foreign policy. As god's new chosen nation we use "right and wrong" to justify foreign policy rather than "because it is good for our economy/rich people/long term interests/national security/Cheney's oil cartel/Clinton's chances of getting laid". For example, religion was used to justify slavery. In fact Biblical stories that DID NOT EXIST ANYWHERE IN THE BIBLE were taught in churches to justify both slavery and segregation. These were loosely based on the stories of Noah and Ham, but expanded considerably. In a similar fashion "Liberation Theologians" used Catholic doctrine to advocate a quasi-catholic socialist system in Latin America.

3. In the Middle-East today religion is used to define conflicts that are primarily economic in nature, not at all doctrinary. For example the issue between Israel and Palestine. Palestinians, culturally, are not religiously conservative by any stretch. However, it serves the interests of pro-Israeli, and pro-Evangelical Christian factions in the US to project them as being akin to the Taliban. That way we can ignore the fact the many of the "rock throwers" in the West Bank are in fact Christians, and not Moslems at all.

In Saudi Arabia, American foreign policy and support of the Royal Family has led to the largest redistribution of wealth in recent history, with total collapse of the middle class, and a huge growth of poverty. Therefore a bunch of well educated, formerly well off people now hate the US. We also support, or have supported dictatorships in Egypt, Pakistan, Irak, Iran, Algiera, and other countries. The military establishment in the Middle east has historically been Anti-islamist. They fear a loss of power should fundamentalists come to power. Unfortunately for American interests, if fully democratic elections were held, with women and men voting, in most Middle eastern countries would elect Islamist goverments. The LONGER THAT IS PREVENTED BY AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY THE MORE POLARIZED, RADICAL AND ANTI-AMERICAN those governments will be. Religion will be used to "Justify" more anti-Americanism by the Islamic clergy, and more deaths will ensue.

Iran's recent history teaches us that an ardent Islamist regime will not enjoy popular support for very long if it does not begin to loosen its grip on a nation's institutions. Recent elections (YES ELECTIONS!!!) in Iran led to a rejection of many Islamist policies. However, the marginalization of Iran by the Bush administration due to the nuclear issue will invariably result in more support for Islamist forces, rather than continued reforms. Their president will lose power to fundamentalists as his reforms will be seen to have had little effect bringing Iran "back into the fold" of the world economy.

Finally, it is essential to remember that only a limited percentage of the worlds moslem's live in the middle east. Much of what we see as Islam is actually middle easter culture in a fundamentalist revival, rather than Islam in its most widely practiced form. Imagine being introduced to Christianity by going to Oral Roberts University, or a Mennonite church.

I abhor fundamentalists of all ilk. Ironically a conservative Christian would actually agree with a fundamentalist Moslem on more issues than he would agree with a liberal Christian.

[buzz_knox]

Okay, now that we are all warmed up, let's have a discussion about the true religions.

Who worships at the altar of Saint Browning?

Who bows a knee to Gaston?

Who lies prostate before Sig and Sauer?

While we're at it, which is the holy number: 9, .45, or .357?

:)

Let the games begin.

[Dave R]

So, is this thread about the military guy's quote, or about Islam/Christianity?

Here's my take on both.

The military guy showed poor judgement. He has the right to believe what he believes, whether he's Duid or Wiccan or Christian. But he kicked a hornet's nest with his public comments.

Islam and Christian the same God? The practical differences are pretty significant to be the same thing.

Christians do not believe you get 70 virgins for becoming a martyr. But that's officially part of the doctrine of Islam, right? Not just some radical interpretation?

Soundbite: There's a quote that I've seen here on TFL, attributed to Ashcroft? Who was it? Anyway, quote is "Islam is a religion that requires you to send your son to die for Allah. Christianity is a religion that teaches God sent his son to die for you".

Christians are not declaring Jihad and flying planes into buildings.

Oh, yeah, and, as a feeble attempt to keep this Firearms related, John Moses Browning was a Mormon ;)

[Mike Irwin]

"Your comment relates to a heresy from the early days of the Catholic Church and which (to the best of my knowledge) hasn't been accepted by any major branch of Christianity (Protestant or Catholic) for the last 1500 years."

A little heresy is good for the soul...

If Jesus were truly God, then why at his Baptism by John the Baptist did the spirit of God appear?

(Matthew 1:16-17) "After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

Later, to the great dismay of the religious leaders, Jesus declared himself to be God, which was to them a heresy.

Yet, was Jesus God? Do his own words support that interpretation of Biblical events?

On the Cross, Jesus called out (Matthew 27:46) "My God, why have you forsaken me!"

If Jesus truly believed himself to be God, instead of the Son of God, why did he apparently forsake himself?

Additionally, while on the cross, Jesus is to have said (Luke 23:34) "But Jesus was saying, "Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing."

Again, is this a case of Jesus calling out to himself?

We have Biblical text of God, by way of a dove, claiming Jesus as his son.

We also have Biblical text in which Jesus claims to BE God.

But do we have any Biblical text indicating that God indicates that Jesus is God?

That's a serious question. I've never been able to find anything in the scriptures that supports that.

I've discussed this point with a number of my Ministers over the years, and I remain unconvinced that Jesus was God. He was, as God himself said, the Son of God. Not God, but a part of God.

[TarpleyG]

But do we have any Biblical text indicating that God indicates that Jesus is God?
No. Here's why. The Trinity was a result of a meeting at the Council of Nicea to address some sqabble the Catholic church was in the midst of. Again, a man-made entity. The Trinity did not exist when Jesus was alive although to proclaim that to most Christians today will get you strung up.

I did a cursory search and came up with this and after reading it through, it describes fairly well what happened and why.

http://www.thunderministries.com/history/Nicea.html

GT

[Derek Zeanah]

Welcome, cloudkiller. Sorry to drag you away from work.

(He's my neighbor, and writes much more eloquently on these issues than I can.)

Rock Jock:So, to say that "Islam and Christianity worship the same God" is to deny the very tenets of these faiths. It may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but it is not true.That's one way to see it. The other is that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the God of Adam, Abraham, Moses, and other folks, though they do so in different ways. Christians (at least lots of Christians) don't go for a standard "there is only one god" approach, but instead assert that there's only one god that's actually three gods.

So be it.

Do you believe Jesus worshiped the same God as Moses and Abraham? If so, your god is the same as mine, so :neener:

[Mike Irwin]

You're no fun, Tarpley. I was trying to sandbag you all.

You went out and found the answer.

I had to do the same thing years ago without the benefit of the Internet. :)

Ah...

Isn't it refreshing to realize that the early church was just as political as the modern church? :)

And just as rancorous?

[DaveB]

I vote we send Dave B over there to reason with them.

Sorry. Can't. Have to stay home and wax the cats.

db

[Master Blaster]

From the L.A. Times

NBC ran the same story last night.

This says it all.

It never ceases to amaze me the effect that the left wing hate America spin meisters have on even intellegent and educated people.

I saw this same story on NBC news last night.

They took a video of this general speaking infront of a CHURCH group expressing his religous convictions in private in a church, and made them out to be a governmental policy statement. It was not.

He was wearing his generals uniform though, which I think is still allowed and is not a violation of the seperation of church and state.

The General is entitled to his religous beliefs. We have freedom of religion in this country for now.

This story has NOTHING to do with the performance of his professional duties. He is and has been under the last four presidents an excellent and highly competent man. He has served the US and Kept YOU safe and free risking his life to do so.

IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO SMEAR THE GENERAL AS A RELIGOUS RADICAL.

SMEAR DEFAME, nothing less.

ITs as credible as the story about blowing up a plane with a teddybear stuffed with nitrocelulose. Notrocellulose stiffed in a teddy bear is not a bomb unless the teddy is made out of welded steel. They even called the nitrocellulose a HIGH explosive which it is not.

NBC carried the story on the teddy bear bomb the night before, flat out bold faced lies masquerading as scientific fact.

They are setting people up to agree to a totalitarian government by scaring them.

Pure and Simple.

PURE SPIN MEISTER CRAP.

[DaveB]

Oh, please: he either said it or he didn't. I use the media to gather facts - I'll draw my own conclusions, thank you.

It doesn't matter who reported it, it's wrong.

Unless, of course, it is the new Crusade, and Bush just forgot to tell us.

db

[Master Blaster]

He said it in CHURCH speaking to a church group.

Dave B has freedom of speech and religion been suspended now in the US??

Are you saying that everyone who runs for Govt. office has to be an aetheist?

[cloudkiller]

In response to the comment about the 70 virgins... here are some fun things that Christians DO believe, or HAVE believed over time!

That God would send bears and other wild animals to kill children for laughing at a prophet's appearance

That a woman turned to a pillar of salt for looking over her shoulder

That a hand built boat carried 2 of every species during a flood

That lots and lots of women, and a few men, were witches and should be burned

That men and women have a different number of ribs, because Adam gave up his rib to make Eve

That creation took place in 7 days



If you DON'T believe some, or any of these things, you can still be a Christian. Why? because you have the option of not taking everything in the bible literally, or blaming translations, or interpretation, or symbolism, fanaticism centuries ago. Using comparisons between modern, secular quasi-christian American beliefs, and Islamic Fundamentalism is akin to comparing modern secular beliefs to ANY fundamentalist religion. Go talk to Pat Robertson, a good, gun toting Republican. He thinks you can heal people by laying on hands, and that you can speak in a divine language no one can interpret. Is he representative of most Christians? You don't even have to go far in our own history to find people who honestly believe that higher melanin content in your skin mark you as being a different, fallen species of human, and that to believe otherwise makes you UNCHRISTIAN!

Furthermore, Christianits have killed considerably more people over the centuries than Moslems. Of course, we got an earlier start by about 600 years, and had better guns. If you have German ancestry I welcome you to study how your people became Christian. -- A French guy lined all of your ancestors by a river and surrounded them and told them to convert, or they would all be killed. He chopped down the tree that was your God at the time, and killed "a few" of your damn heretic ancestors (oops, those were MY heretic ancestors-- sorry Grandpa! Forgot where you came from!)

A civil war in Germany in the 15th century, largely over Christian doctrine led to the death of a higher percentage of people than almost any war in human history. As high as 25% to 30% by some counts. That was the 30 years war. For those of you who argue this war was NOT about religion, but rather about political alliances and alliegance I would argue that you should consider if ANY war has truly been about religion.

Thousands of children were marched to the port cities of the Mediterranean in the Middle Ages because they believed that a "Children's Crusade" of innocents would free the Holy Land from Islam. Those children were sold into slavery and prostitution by good " Christians", and unsurprisingly never made it to Jerusalem

Yes, the terrorists should die. They are among the most evil people alive. But just because many islamists hate us doesn't mean they are in league with Satan. Many Latin American's hate us because for most of the 20th century we kept putting dictators in power in their countries, and suppressing democracy and free speech. Are they Satanic too?

The only way Islamic fundamentalism will die its long overdue death is to have a long term foreign policy that will work to develop the populations in the middle east, rather than lining oil corporate pockets, and furthering the interests of a few well off people.

[Mike Irwin]

"Christians do not believe you get 70 virgins for becoming a martyr. But that's officially part of the doctrine of Islam, right? Not just some radical interpretation?"

No, that's a radical interpretation.

But fanatics calling for believers to martyr themselves for subsequent ethereal rewards is NOT at all limited to the Islamic faith.

In fact, Pope Urban II, the monumental :cuss:hole who kicked off the Crusades with his address to the Council of Clermont (not out of religious beliefs, but because he wanted to get rid of a number of nobles who were making his life difficult) PROMISED immediate manumission of sins and entrance into heaven for any Crusader who died fighting the Muslim invaders, or even those who fell while on their way to fight.

There are a number of contemporary/semi-contemporary accounts of Urban's speech, such as (account of Robert the Monk, written down roughly 25 years later):

""This royal city, however, situated at the center of the earth, is now held captive by the enemies of Christ and is subjected, by those who do not know God, to the worship the heathen. She seeks, therefore, and desires to be liberated and ceases not to implore you to come to her aid. From you especially she asks succor, because as we have already said, God has conferred upon you above all other nations great glory in arms. Accordingly, undertake this journey eagerly for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the reward of imperishable glory in the kingdon of heaven..."



More tellingly is the text from Fulcher of Chartres, a bishop who was at the Council, and who wrote down his account of Urban's speech apparently within a few days after it occurred.

" "All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested."

[Master Blaster]

Wow the Spin meisters are geniuses, they have managed to distract all of you intelligent folks from serious thought by bringing up and feeding religious differences.

They mention what this man said in church and everyone here is at each others throats quoting scripture, arguing religion, and claiming that because this man has religious beliefs that he is not fit to serve as a General.

NBC LA TIMES WASHINGTON POST my hat is off to you guys you are geniuses.

YOUR spinmeister crap and lies and irrelevent information has served to distract everyone here.

We are in deep do do.:cuss: :mad: :(

[buzz_knox]

The only way Islamic fundamentalism will die its long overdue death is to have a long term foreign policy that will work to develop the populations in the middle east, rather than lining oil corporate pockets, and furthering the interests of a few well off people.

So, it's America's fault. I've been waiting for someone to say that.

Of course, when you reference "the few well off people" you are including the ruling classes of Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc., or are you just limiting it to a few white Americans?

And when you talk about foreign policy, are you including the long-standing Middle Eastern tradition of using the Palestinian issue as a foil against Israel? Or are you again just blaming the U.S.?

[DaveB]

Dave B has freedom of speech and religion been suspended now in the US??
Are you saying that everyone who runs for Govt. office has to be an aetheist?

Read the whole thread. I'm saying that a uniformed officer should not try to turn the entire world Muslim population against us by denegrating their religion in public. We have enough trouble already with the radicals.

The general is speaking for the USA when he's got his uniform on. Read up on what happened to George Patton when his mouth overrode his brains.

I don't care what kind of fundimentalist gibberish the general talks as long as he's not speaking for his country. See, it IS about freedom of religion.

Furthermore, I didn't vote for the General.

db

[Mike Irwin]

"They mention what this man said in church and everyone here is at each others throats quoting scripture, arguing religion, and claiming that because this man has religious beliefs that he is not fit to serve as a General."

I never claimed that.

I also don't see much of "people at each other's throats."

I see a lot of well-reasoned debate based on personal beliefs.

As for whether or not the General is fit personally, it certainly beats me.

As for the General having religious beliefs, I personally like my military leaders to have religious beliefs, even if they are different from mine, because it shows to me that they're not entirely grounded in the temporal plane.

Shareing them in public forae, however....

That may be a different matter entirely.



And dammit, DaveB, I hate agreeing with you!

Stop it! Just stop it! :neener:

[Intune]

God sure did talk to people a lot more back then didn't He? That's why I ALWAYS listen to the homeless arm-flappers just in case His siesta is done and another round of direct talks are in order. Just teasin' God, put the lightning bolt down.

[Master Blaster]

Read the whole thread. I'm saying that a uniformed officer should not try to turn the entire world Muslim population against us by denegrating their religion in public

NEWS FLASH THEY ALREADY HATE US.

I'm a Jew, they have sworn to kill everyone of me and mine.

I hear what they say I watch what they do.

He was at his church, he is entitled to his religious beliefs, I also heard him say that he did not consider the terrorists to be muslums, that they (the terrorists) were evil, satan is at work through them.

He also said that its not Islam but radicals using religion as an excuse, many muslums are our friends (maybe yours anyway).

NBC news broadcast that part of his speech/sermon.

I guess those objective folks at the LA times forgot to include that part of his speech.

The La times Beacon of truth.:barf:

[DaveB]

OK, Mike.

It won't happen again. :scrutiny:

Blaster, OKFine, whatever... But I can't help but think that 95% of the Muslims on the planet still don't care whether you or I live or die.

db

[Sean Smith]

I'm saying that a uniformed officer should not try to turn the entire world Muslim population against us by denegrating their religion in public. We have enough trouble already with the radicals.

Dave, they are already against us. The active radicals, the people on the street, the leaders of our alleged allies... the Arab world in general hates our guts, and has done so for a long time. Recent polls (reported by the AP and involving 3,200 people from 8 Arab countries) put anti-American sentiment at ~87% in Saudi Arabia and ~76% in Egypt. You can find lots of examples of similar polls that are even more dire... and they have been consistenly bleak going back for decades.

Just because they all aren't fighting us doesn't mean that most of them don't consider us an enemy. I'm not advocating that we go on a rampage in the Middle East, but we need to be realistic about what people think of us.

EDITED TO ADD: Some clarification of terms that I fairly carefully chose are in order...

Muslim is not equal to Arab and/or a resident of the Middle East. Some in the Middle East are not Muslim, and ALOT (last I checked, a large majority) of Muslims are not in the Middle East. Lots of Middle Eastern folks who are mostly Muslims being hostle to America after decades of being force-fed propaganda by corrupt dictatorships does not tell you much (if anything) about Muslim outlooks in general. But it does tell you something about how we should view the region that provided the bulk of people involved in 9/11.

[DaveB]

Just because they all aren't fighting us doesn't mean that most of them don't consider us an enemy.

C'mon, people. If they're aren't fighting us,

what reason do we have to be fighting them?

db

[Mike Irwin]

Funny you should mention that, Intune...

I firmly believe that God chooses the most humble of his people through whom to speak.

Jesus, the son of a carpenter, instead of the son of a king, for example...

[Sean Smith]

C'mon, people. If they're aren't fighting us, what reason do we have to be fighting them?

Reading is fundamental. Quoting myself:

I'm not advocating that we go on a rampage in the Middle East, but we need to be realistic about what people think of us.

;)

[DaveB]

Sean, you're correct. The tenor here, however, is quite combative, as if the fact that we're disliked is, in and of itself, justification for force.

Anyway...

Lightning bolts are old technology. Viz:

http://www.digitalhimalaya.com/visual/god.jpg

db

[cloudkiller]

Buzz, I do agree with your last point, I didn't mean to imply that all of this was the fault of the United States, but rather that our policies have helped to contribute to the problem more than to the solution, of late.

It may very well be that our interests were better served during the cold war by supporting many of the despotic regimes that created a lot of the Anti-Western sentiment. It may very well have been the lesser of two evils at the time. However, it is time to pay the piper.

My main point is that the US government will often couch its actions in moral language, in terms of god and country and right and wrong. Using those terms makes it difficult to engage in substative debate. If you try to say that a given foreign policy decision makes no sense you are seen as being "against the Judeo Christian God".

That makes dialogue as difficult as a liberal accusing you of being a bigot, or sexist or whatever when you try and engage in any discussion about race or gender.

[chaim]

I really should stay out of this, but there are too many misconceptions.

First, I want to say that some Muslims are our enemies. Most (if not all) of our current crop of enemies are Muslim. That certainly does not mean that all Muslims are our enemies.

Second, there are many forms of Islam just as there are many forms of Christianity and a few of Judaism. Put a Shia, Sunni and Wahhabi together and you will get three very different ideas of what Islam is. Put a Pentacostal, Quaker and Methodist together and you'll get three very different pictures of Christianity. Put a Brelover, Satmar and Lubavitcher (Breslov, Satmar and Lubuvitch/Chabad are three Chassidic groups) together and you'll get three different pictures of Judaism (and they are all Orthodox and all Chassidic), put a Chassidic Jew, Modern Orthodox and Yeshivish Jew together and you'll get three even more different pictures of Judaism (and they are all Orthodox). However, the Muslims are all three Muslim groups, the Christian groups mentioned are all three Christian and the Jewish groups mentioned are all Torah true representations of Judaism.

So, in the arguement over whether Judaism, Christianity and Islam have anything in common, well yes and no. All share some common Monotheistic roots (and argueably worship the same God) yet they are clearly very different religions.


After all, Christian theology diverges pretty far from Judaism in some aspects, Some!!!?:what:


There are fundamental differences between the JudeoChristian god and the god of Islam. They are given fundamentally different attributes in their respective books and thus cannot be the same.

That is true (though what does "Judeo-Christian" mean?).

There are some major differences between Judaism, Islam and Christianity, however we do come from a similar root. Islam really is closer to Judaism than Judaism is to Christianity and it is closer to Christianity than Christianity is to Judiam.

Just a couple examples:
(Islam and Christianity closeness)
Jesus:
In Christianity he is part of God himself.
In Islam he is a very important prophet (one of the three most important- Moses, Jesus, Mohammed)
In Judiasm he is irrelevant, and has no religious significance and certainly wasn't either divine or the messiah (who is not going to be divine).

(Islam and Judaism closeness):
Both Judaism and Islam have only one, unadulterated God. He is one.
In Christianity they manage to claim one God who is also three seperate entities.

Both Judaism and Islam stress good works, following G-d's instructions, and living properly to reach G-d as well as learning texts and theological concepts. Faith is still important but not the only thing.
Christianity stresses faith as the primary (the more liberal view) or only (the more traditional view) way to G-d.


As noted, Muslims, Jews, and Christians all hold Abraham to be the father of their faiths, and all hold the Old Testament as a foundational book of faith.
Sort of. First, to us there is no "Old Testament", in fact it is an insulting concept. There is Tanach (written law, which includes the five books of Moses otherwise known as Chumash, the Prophets, the Writtings, ) and oral law (much was since written down in the Gemorra and Mishnah, collectively known as the Talmud). Also, there are important later works such as Kabbalah and Chassidus which are essentially mystical works (not one volume and much isn't written down at all).

Also, for the holding Abraham as our father... Christians consider him to be their "spiritual father". For most Arabic Muslims and for most Jews (in both cases he is more a "spiritual father" for the converts) Avraham Avinu (Abraham our father) is literally our father, or more accurately our Great great great great..........grandfather. Most Jews are physical decendants of Yitzak Avinu (Isaac) and most Arabs are decendants of Ishmail.

...

...all scripture was written by men interpreting their own religion. It cannot, therefore, be without flaw and without bias to the way one lives. Agreed??? The Bible, Quran, Tanakh, and Talmad didn't just fall from the sky one day, did it?No, not agreed, you are wrong. Tanach was dictated word for word to Moshe (Moses) at Mt. Sinai. Oral Law (including the Talmud), while not all directly given, was taught to us by G-d. He gave the principles by which to arrive at conclusions and some specifics came directly from Him as well. Kaballah and Chassidus are also direct revelations that were included in the Oral Law.

[buzz_knox]

That is true (though what does "Judeo-Christian" mean?).

It means I typed it together by force of habit. It's a short hand term that has less and less meaning over time.

[Justin]

Justin, stick to what you know. Theology is not one of those subjects. You are way out of your league. Fallacious argument. Appeal to authority (yourself, apparently) coupled with dodging the subject via an ad-hominem attack.

Why do you think Muslims refer to Jes and Christians as unbelievers (or, in their vernacular, infidels)? Probably for the same reason that so many Christians go about proclaiming Muslims to be unbelievers, and Jews believe Christians to be misled.

To be quite honest I have no interest in discussing who is going to Hell and for what reason. The way I see it, that's God's job. Nor do I really have any interest in debating why my God can beat up somebody else's God.

But the way I see it, Christians believe as they do because they think that God, via Jesus, showed up and upgraded the religion. Muslims feel the same way, that Gabriel came down from Heaven and handed Mohommad the latest version of religion for distribution to the rest of mankind. Therefore Jews, Christians and Muslims are indeed all worshipping the same God, as opposed to say Hindus or Wiccans. Of course, whether one buys into Judaism, Christianity or Islam all depends on which version you think is the correct one. And, of course, there is no proving which is ultimately correct. After all, I have yet to see God actually show up at my doorstep and spell it out for me. It all boils down to a matter of individual faith, which cannot be unequivocably proven to be right. (Otherwise it wouldn't be faith, now, would it?)

[Bill Hook]

The general is speaking for the USA when he's got his uniform on.

I didn't agree with the class warfare statements, but I 110% agree with that.

[Oleg Volk]

One nitpick: Moslem isn't the same as Arab. More Moselms live in India and SE Asian than in Arabic countries...

[rock jock]

Therefore Jews, Christians and Muslims are indeed all worshipping the same God You obviously ignored everything I wrote. You keep looking at the history of the religion, rather than the object of their worship. The nature of God is fundamentally different for Christians and Muslims. Either Jesus is divine or He is not. Either God is triune or He is not. Either salvation is only throught Christ or it is not. A Muslim who adheres to the tenets of his faith cannot say to an evangilical Christian "Yes, I know your beliefs are blasphemous by claiming God is three distinct persons yet one God, yes you are practicing idolatry by worshipping Jesus, yes you are completely wrong on the teachings of God since you do not read nor follow the Quran, but gosh, we still believe in the same God".

[Mike Irwin]

"Mike, I hold no degrees in theology, but I have studied the subject quite a bit. If you think I need a degree to validate my assertions, then I suggest you dismiss any and all statements made about the 2A on this board except from attorneys that specilize in Constitutional law."

Rock Jock,

As I suspected, you're not a theologian. Neither am I.

However, you're not the only one who has "studied this subject quite a bit."

Others have as well, so to hold yourself out as an expert on the subject while saying that others who have a different interpretation (few things are fact in Theology, othewise we wouldn't have better than 1,000 recognized Christian religions) are wrong is the height of hubris, and is hardly a foundation for establishing your own supposed expertise.

[Preacherman]

Folks, this has gone more than far enough. As always, religion is a divisive topic, it seems. Let's keep it out of our discussions for the sake of peace and quiet, please.