Cartoons - offence must be retaliated

[doughgirl]

Fakhri said, "Being a faithful Moslem, I cannot but feel towering contempt to those unscrupulous people who find it amusing to draw ungodly cartoons depicting Mohammed. They call it press freedom? I call it disrespect of religious feelings that look rather like scorn. I'm no extremist or bigot but in this situation I fully approve the cartoon riots of my brothers-on-faith for this is an insult that must be retaliated! Moslems are no barbarians and we can fight for our religion and Allah! From this moment on I start to uphold Islamic extremist organizations! Find the offenders and make them pay! Allah Аhbar!"

You demonstrate that Islam is not a religion of peace. You demonstrate what the Koran says. Your religion teaches that Jihad, or Holy War is to be waged until the Day of Judgment, or until the world is under complete domination by Islam. According to your so called holy book, if a non-Muslim will not repent and turn to Islam, then “Slay them wherever you find them” and “When you encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter against them.” Obviously you hold to these scriptures.

There are many people in this world, not all of them are Muslims.
I am a Christian , a faithful Christian and as much as it hurts to see someone curse in Christs name, or draw things that dishonor my faith,,,,,,,,they have that right. I do not have the right to do violent things against them just because they said or published something I might disagreed with.


Maya is right. Islam is the most intolerant religion in the world.You do not see any other faith act like the Muslims have done in the Middle East?

Whats funny is that liberals say that Christianity is so inclusive......Where did Jesus ever say, force anyone to believe Me....."go out and kill those who reject me"? If men have done this, killed people into submission of the faith, it was because of sin, not because that is what Jesus said to do. You have free will to either accept or reject.

Funny how the media and those who just hate Christians, portrays Christianity as being unfair…….then they turn around and say how peaceful and fair Islam is. This if proof postitive that they aren't.

Fakhri said and I repeat, "Moslems are no barbarians and we can fight for our religion and Allah! From this moment on I start to uphold Islamic extremist organizations! Find the offenders and make them pay! Allah Аhbar!"

You are scary and the reason I am for wire tapping in the United States. They can wiretape my phone any day to catch those like you who might seek violence against people that you might want to hurt in th ename of your so called peaceful Muhammed.

I believe there are very loving and kind Muslims in this world. Muslims that would denounce your attitude that are secure enough in their faith that they need not try to harm others. You however are not one of them.

 

[aquapub]

You demonstrate that Islam is not a religion of peace. You demonstrate what the Koran says. Your religion teaches that Jihad, or Holy War is to be waged until the Day of Judgment, or until the world is under complete domination by Islam. According to your so called holy book, if a non-Muslim will not repent and turn to Islam, then “Slay them wherever you find them” and “When you encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter against them.” Obviously you hold to these scriptures.

There are many people in this world, not all of them are Muslims.
I am a Christian , a faithful Christian and as much as it hurts to see someone curse in Christs name, or draw things that dishonor my faith,,,,,,,,they have that right. I do not have the right to do violent things against them just because they said or published something I might disagreed with.


Maya is right. Islam is the most intolerant religion in the world.You do not see any other faith act like the Muslims have done in the Middle East?

Whats funny is that liberals say that Christianity is so inclusive......Where did Jesus ever say, force anyone to believe Me....."go out and kill those who reject me"? If men have done this, killed people into submission of the faith, it was because of sin, not because that is what Jesus said to do. You have free will to either accept or reject.

Funny how the media and those who just hate Christians, portrays Christianity as being unfair…….then they turn around and say how peaceful and fair Islam is. This if proof postitive that they aren't.

Fakhri said and I repeat, "Moslems are no barbarians and we can fight for our religion and Allah! From this moment on I start to uphold Islamic extremist organizations! Find the offenders and make them pay! Allah Аhbar!"

You are scary and the reason I am for wire tapping in the United States. They can wiretape my phone any day to catch those like you who might seek violence against people that you might want to hurt in th ename of your so called peaceful Muhammed.

I believe there are very loving and kind Muslims in this world. Muslims that would denounce your attitude that are secure enough in their faith that they need not try to harm others. You however are not one of them.

AMEN! This post is dead on. :smile:

 

[Maya]

You are scary and the reason I am for wire tapping in the United States. They can wiretape my phone any day to catch those like you who might seek violence against people that you might want to hurt in th ename of your so called peaceful Muhammed.

I believe there are very loving and kind Muslims in this world. Muslims that would denounce your attitude that are secure enough in their faith that they need not try to harm others. You however are not one of them.

I too am in favour of not just wire tapping , but may be the U.S did the right thing to ask Yahoo , google , and other search engines to give them a list of pedophiles .........Now i hope U.S is able to look for people the Islamic Fundamentalists too that may be searching the sites to join Jihadi groups and conduct Jihadi activities.

I am orignally from India , i must say not all Muslims are hard core fanatics as i went to school with so many of them . Infact , India which may be majority Hindus , but has a massive population of Muslims was the most peacefull in demonstrations. So i must say not all Muslims are fanatics . But since the Muslim population is ruled by the majority fantical Muslims , i must say i am afraid of these fanatics Mullahs !!

 

[jfuh]

I would expect that if it is indeed a Muslim then English probably isn't his first language and his spelling and grammar would naturally be poor.

Wow, how racists can you be dude? Islam is a religion not an ethnicity. You're naturally assuming that a muslim would not be a native english speaker? You really are much more ignorant than I ever thought.

 

[jfuh]

Don't you just love it when anti-Christians like Kal-el think they can take a Bible verse in isolation, then cite it out of context, then go apopletic when they are called on it.

I don't really see the problem, christians commonly take bible verses out of contect and in isolation. Religion is always up for interpretation. So it's just as game for Kal-el to use it at his disposal. Doesn't mean it's right but why not?

I hate to use this word, but it is the mark of someone bigoted against the Christian faith.

The otherside of the spectrum being religious fanatics.

But then what of all the Islam bashing on this site these days? I wonder if you will speak out in the same context as well?

 

[jfuh]

LMAO And you're quoting Old Testament BC... hmmm before Christ. God had every right to be pissed off at the people before Christ came to earth.

And no right after? That hardly seems an omnipotent being. Not to mention I would be surprised then that God is not pissed especially now.

Hell, the first man and woman he created took it upon themselves to be something they weren't.

In what way? they used free will that god gave them, so how did they "become" something they were not?

BUT... if God hated the people so much, why is there a New Testament?

This doens't explain anything at all.

Why is there celebrations of Christ's birth, and subsequent death on the cross?

There's a celebration of Christ's birth? Really? I wasn't aware of any such celebration in November.

But God hates mankind so much. Try reading the New Testament.. and then tell me once that God wants to destroy man.

Again, this doesn't explain anything. Wait are you rejecting the old testement then?

If that were the case, the entire earth would have been gone LONG before this, and there would have never been the need for him to send Christ to earth.

Why would an omnipotent being need to reproduce through a human? Why not just appear?

He could have just started over :roll:

How do you know the world didn't start over?

 

[Jerry]

Brokeback Mohammed

"Thursday, February 09, 2006
In the news:

"The National Endowment for the Arts has granted $100,000 to an artist to create an art work to be called "**** Mohammed."

* * *

"The Brooklyn Museum will sponsor an exhibit in which the Prophet Mohammed is covered in dung and cut-outs of male genitalia.

* * *

"Playwright Terence McNally’s new show will soon appear on Broadway. In Brokeback Mohammed, Mohammed and his early followers are depicted as homosexuals who whose idea of prayer was to form “daisy chains” facing Mecca. The play could not have been produced without the support of fellow playwright Tony Kushner. McNally and Kushner have both said that they will brave fatwas against them, if necessary, in the fight against religious intolerance and on behalf of freedom of expression."

 

[kal-el]

LMAO And you're quoting Old Testament BC... hmmm before Christ.

Wow, a keen observation.

God had every right to be pissed off at the people before Christ came to earth.

Huh? He cannot have any emotions, as they are incompatable with omniscience. As an emotion is a reaction to something unexpected, and being omniscient, nothing should be unexpected. That's why I believe the biblegod to be a legend or myth, cause he is sketched as having emotions and throwing monumental hissy fits if something isn't about him.:lol:

Hell, the first man and woman he created took it upon themselves to be something they weren't.

Huh? Please explain this little articulation, please.

BUT... if God hated the people so much, why is there a New Testament?

The NT isn't about god, ignoramus, it's about Jesus turning the OT world upside-down.

Why is there celebrations of Christ's birth, and subsequent death on the cross?

Uhh, his coming is predicted in the OT. Malachi foretold of his coming. The life of Jesus changed everything from power structure to world views. The religious leaders of the time didn't get it. They had witnessed Jesus as a child grow up, they knew his parents, they have been to his town. And he was claiming to be the son of god???? They just lapped it all up with a smile. Much like you would today if someone claimed they were the son of god. And the thing that really pushed their buttons was the little fact that Jesus confronted them alot on their own hipocracy. First they were ticked, then maybe jealous, finally they wanted him dead. Look at this acusation made against the early Christians:

Acts 17:5-6
But the Jews were jealous, so they rounded up some bad characters from the marketplace, formed a mob and started a riot in the city. They rushed to Jason's house in search of Paul and Silas in order to bring them out of the crowd. But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other brothers before the city officials shouting, "These men who have caused trouble all over the world have come now here, and Jason has welcomed them into his house. They are all defying Ceasar's decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus."

Of course there were celebrations of Christ's birth numnuts, throughout the OT, the Hebrews were promised a messiah. But they thought the messiah was most likely going to be a military ruler who would destroy their enemies, but this was not the kind of person Jesus was. He came to show us another way of living, not winning, he came to save us from ourselves?

But God hates mankind so much.

Finally, someone agrees with me.

Try reading the New Testament.. and then tell me once that God wants to destroy man.

Actually, after the flood, he said he will never destroy man again. And Jesus is the main character of the NT, god just has a supporting role.

If that were the case, the entire earth would have been gone LONG before this, and there would have never been the need for him to send Christ to earth. He could have just started over :roll:

Once again, if he's omniscient, and can forsee what's going to take place, doesn't have to play this stupid game anyway, it's a bit like seeing a movie and you know exactly what's going to happen. Why make something if you know it will be broken?

 

[kal-el]

Dude, it's apparent you've not truly read the Old Testament,

Haha. Why is that? Cause I don't adhere to your opinions?

because the Israelites were FAR from intelligent.

I don't believe I said they were smart. I said god likes insulting their intelligence, that's not exactly placing them in the same class as Einstein.

They were selfish, they whined constantly.. notice how they roamed the desert for 40 years because they continually wished to be enslaved in Egypt again. Moses, leading the people out of Egypt, sat and watched as these moron's built statues and such adulating other God's, and these people were just praising god because they'd been freed from Pharoah. But because the road to freedom, was a difficult one, they would rather be slaves? Give me a break.

They didn't wish to be enslaved in Egypt again. Yes, they did wander in the desert for 40 years, but after, they were at the border of their homeland for the second time. Then god gave them Joshua. He was a militarist and a strategist. The book of Joshua is a gory book full of war stories about the battels the Israelites waged to ressettle their land.

Hmm, name me one time when God required ANY person in the Bible to sacrifice his/her children?

Does Abraham's son ring a bell? Of course, this god fellow provided a lamb or something instead, but Abe didn't know that at the time, he thought god was being serious. And of course, god demands blood sacrifices, as he sacrificed his son on the cross.

The sacrifices required were animals, in atonement for their MANY sins.

Actually, the part about shedding an innocents blood for the atonement of bad deeds was part of the Gentile's history, and Jewish. (Genesis 4:4-5). The book of Leveticus gives guidlines for sacrifices.

So how is it hypocritical that God detests those who burn his/her children, when he's never required it? Hmmm Einstein.

2 words: Jesus Christ. Hmmm Einstein.:lol:

 

[kal-el]

Hmmm your claim was that the Bible commanded Christians to kill non believers? But now your assertion is God will kill non-believers?

I never said god will kill non-believers. I said he will kill those who worship the wrong god, if you're gonna mimic me, get the wording right.

Again, read the New Testament.

Again, I have red the entire bible, from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21.

When Christ was born, and came to earth, and fulfilled God's plan for Salvation

Let me get this straight. God knowingly sent his son to die such a horrible, brutal death for attonement of sin, when he has the ability to just do away with sin with the snap of a finger, why play this petty game then, he must have been bored on his cloudy throne.:lol:

(geesh, even my children understand this concept) MOST of the old law.. the Old Testament.. was swept away.

No it wasn't. He came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill the law. Geese, read your bible man.

No longer were required animal sacrifices as atonement for sin...

Wrong. In NT times, people sacrificed according to the OT guidlines. Even Mary brought baby Jesus to the temple and offered a sacrifice for her purification. When Jesus healed the leper (Luke 5:12-14), he instructed him to go to the priest and make a sacrifice. But with Jesus' death, animal sacrifice became redundant. After the Jewish temple was destroyed, the Jews no longer sacrificed, and this was around 70 A.D.

Christ was the ultimate sacrifice, and belief in him brought about salvation to ANYONE... ANYONE who chose to do so. God, through Jesus, commanded his followers to spread the Gospel, the umm Great Commission if you will, to all the corner's of the earth, springing forth the message of hope and faith in Jesus Christ.

Actually, Jesus says you don't need to believe in him nor god to get salvation:

Matthew 19:16-17
Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?" "Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only one who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments." Which ones? The man inquired. Jesus replied, "Do not murder, do not steal, do not commit adultery,do not give false testimony, honr your father nd mother, and love your neighbor as yourself."

Your arguments are weak,

This coming from the person that's getting their ass handed to them.:lol:

and here's what's funny. I don't actively participate in religion of any kind..

I can tell... you seem like a novice.

and I can understand CLEARLY the meanings of the old and new testaments without batting an eyelash. But then again, I look outside the box, and rather than pick apart a verse here and there, I read them ALL. Try it sometime... you might just understand.

Big words coming from a Jake Gyllenhall double for Brokeback Mountain.:lol:

 

[ludahai]

Again, I have red the entire bible, from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21.

I would have to question that since you have cited verses that don't even exist?

Have you read the books of Sirach, Wisdom, Song of Songs, I and II Maccabees? If you have only read a PROTESTANT Bible, then you have NOT read the entire Bible. Further, you don't even seem to comprehend the meaning of what you claim that you HAVE read.

Considering you cited a verse from the NONEXISTANT fourth chapter of Malachi, I am not going to take you seriously when it comes to interpreting the Holy Scriptures.

 

[JOHNYJ]

All this Bible quoting is a waste. Its what people do with what the Bible says. Christians help the poor ,treat the sick, and educate the ignorant.
Muslims,use the Koran to, indoctrinate the ignorant, and kill people. Thats the point.

 

[jfuh]

All this Bible quoting is a waste. Its what people do with what the Bible says. Christians help the poor ,treat the sick, and educate the ignorant.
Muslims,use the Koran to, indoctrinate the ignorant, and kill people. Thats the point.

Christians do not use the bible to indoctrinate the ignorant and kill people? May I remind you that Hitler was a Christian? The Spanish Inquistions was Catholicism? The Crusades were a Catholic war against the East? KKK claim to be loyal Christans. Then there are the Megachurchs of the US and such speakers such as Pat Buchanan of the 700 club that are just as much trying to indoctrinate the ignorant?

Now on the Muslims, do they not help the poor treat the sick and so on as just any religion does?

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

Christians do not use the bible to indoctrinate the ignorant and kill people? May I remind you that Hitler was a Christian? The Spanish Inquistions was Catholicism? The Crusades were a Catholic war against the East? KKK claim to be loyal Christans. Then there are the Megachurchs of the US and such speakers such as Pat Buchanan of the 700 club that are just as much trying to indoctrinate the ignorant?

Now on the Muslims, do they not help the poor treat the sick and so on as just any religion does?

You are using a very broad brush and going way back in history to attempt to paint both religions with one brush. Hitler claimed he was a christian, his actions were entirely against the teachings.
Pat Buchanan may yell and rant and rave, and most people have little use for him, but he isn't calling for the death of anyone that disagrees with him. Nor do christians strap on bombs and blow themselves and women and children up, then have their religious leaders talk about how brave they were and noble.
You are twisting points and it is blatantly obvious.

 

[kal-el]

I would have to question that since you have cited verses that don't even exist?

Maybe in your NASB, but in evey single thought for thought translation, they do, so you're deceiving yourself, not to mention being dishonest. God doesn't take well to dishonesty.

Have you read the books of Sirach, Wisdom, Song of Songs, I and II Maccabees?

Last time I checked "wisdom" was not a book, rather a sacred type of scripture teaching one how to live by certain things like intellect, understanding, and of course, common sense. I think when you say "wisdom" you are reffering to the books of Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiates. Why would you ask such an imprudent question? Song of Songs is the book in the OT before Isaiah. Once again, another preposterous catechism. And the Maccabees refers to one of Jesus's disciples. 2 Maccabees is the history of the revolt against the Seleucids. I am not familiar with Sirach, maybe you can fill me in?

If you have only read a PROTESTANT Bible,

Where are you getting this anarchistic, phantasmagoric, supposition from?

then you have NOT read the entire Bible. Further, you don't even seem to comprehend the meaning of what you claim that you HAVE read.

O, so tiring. I have read the entire bible. Just because I did not come to the same conclusion about it's contents does not mean that I do not comprehend it, it also goes to show it is not infallible.

Considering you cited a verse from the NONEXISTANT fourth chapter of Malachi,

Did you even read the bible? It doesn't seem like it, it seems like you are "winging it". Malachi very well has 4 chapters. Even in your NASB, it should have 4.

I am not going to take you seriously when it comes to interpreting the Holy Scriptures.

OMG, I can't believe what I'm reading here. I think you're talking to the mirror, buddy. Try posting counterclaims to my post answering your last delphic assertions, then talk to me.:lol:

 

[kal-el]

It is not a commandment to christians to destroy nonbeleavers.It does not state when he will destroy them for not beleaving in him and following his
commandments.

You're absolutely right, it doersn't state when, it just states that god will destroy non-believers. And Jesus doesn't seem to have a problem with this, as he never condemns this, he even says you must worship the lord, your god.

Perhaps you should messing with those fake liberal christian sites that just pull a verses out of their ass to demonize real christians.

Huh? What "fake liberal christian sites" are you talking about? Nobody's pulling anything from a crevice here, it's all in the bible, alls one has to do is read it.

If you actually read the bible you would know that things in the bibile progresss throught the books in the bible.

Where do you fellas get off saying I never read the bible? I should be saying that to you, as your buddies aren't doing a suffient job defending the faith here.:lol:

For exaple at first it was okay to eat any kind of meat,then it was not okay to eat any kind of meat and now it is okay to eat any kind of meat.

Do you have any idea what you are arguing? Let me help you out, It was ok to eat part of the sacrifice because the people believed that they became closer to god eating from the same animal. In the NT, Paul believed that eating meat as a sacrifice causes believers to stumble.

If you actually read the bible you should be able to find those verses,I do not think those liberal sites will help you.

Hahaha, here's a couple:

Leveticus 11:1-2
The lord said to Moses and Aaron "Say to the Israelites: Of all the animals that live on the land, these are the ones you may eat"

1 Corinthians 8:13
Therefore, If what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again.

 

[aquapub]

You are using a very broad brush and going way back in history to attempt to paint both religions with one brush. Hitler claimed he was a christian, his actions were entirely against the teachings.
Pat Buchanan may yell and rant and rave, and most people have little use for him, but he isn't calling for the death of anyone that disagrees with him. Nor do christians strap on bombs and blow themselves and women and children up, then have their religious leaders talk about how brave they were and noble.
You are twisting points and it is blatantly obvious.

BTW, Pat Buchanan doesn't rant and rave. He is politically incorrect and he is brilliant. He gets cast as some rabid, obtuse hate-monger for advocating sensible immigration laws, the abolition of race preferences, and the sanctity of American traditions, but he couldn't be further from what liberals smear him to be. His commentary is calm, extremely well-researched and educated, and compelling.

 

[Blue Collar Joe]

My apologies. I got buchanan and robertson confused again. Old age.:doh

 

[FreeThinker]

Being a faithful Moslem, I cannot but feel towering contempt to those unscrupulous people who find it amusing to draw ungodly cartoons depicting Mohammed. They call it press freedom? I call it disrespect of religious feelings that look rather like scorn. I'm no extremist or bigot but in this situation I fully approve the cartoon riots of my brothers-on-faith for this is an insult that must be retaliated! Moslems are no barbarians and we can fight for our religion and Allah! From this moment on I start to uphold Islamic extremist organizations! Find the offenders and make them pay! Allah Аhbar!

Muhhamed was homosexual.

What you going to do? Jihad all over my face?

I'm going to come to your house and beat you bloody with the King James version of the Bible then tatoo the jewish star on your forehead.

...but seriously, I have all the respect in the world for peaceful protest about the cartoon. When someone makes a joke out of something dear to your heart you have every right to be offended. But killing people because your prophet was shown in a cartoon?

Start a boycot of the newspaper? Fine. Boycot their sponsors? Fine. Boycot any business that sells them goods they need to run their newspaper? Fine.

Violence?

No.

People are going to make jokes about anything and everything. That doesn't give you the excuse to hurt someone.

 

[ludahai]

Maybe in your NASB, but in evey single thought for thought translation, they do, so you're deceiving yourself, not to mention being dishonest. God doesn't take well to dishonesty.[/quote[

No dishonesty from this end. I don't even know what the NASB is. I am quoting from the New American Bible, which was granted imprimatur by Patrick Cardinal O'Boyle, D.D. Who granted imprimatur to the versions you are citing?

Last time I checked "wisdom" was not a book, rather a sacred type of scripture teaching one how to live by certain things like intellect, understanding, and of course, common sense. I think when you say "wisdom" you are reffering to the books of Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiates.

Check again. Wisdom is a book that falls between Songs and Sirach and has 19 chapters.

Why would you ask such an imprudent question? Song of Songs is the book in the OT before Isaiah. Once again, another preposterous catechism. And the Maccabees refers to one of Jesus's disciples. 2 Maccabees is the history of the revolt against the Seleucids. I am not familiar with Sirach, maybe you can fill me in?

Maccabees are two books in the OLD Testament before the book of Job.

O, so tiring. I have read the entire bible. Just because I did not come to the same conclusion about it's contents does not mean that I do not comprehend it, it also goes to show it is not infallible.

If you didn't read these books, then you didn't read the entire Bible. You are also mistaking me for a Protestant who believes that the literal word of the Bible is true and that it is the sole source of knowledge about God.

Did you even read the bible? It doesn't seem like it, it seems like you are "winging it". Malachi very well has 4 chapters. Even in your NASB, it should have 4.

Malachi only has three chapters. It is from pages 1100-1103 in the New American Bible. Where did this mysterious fourth chapter come from?

OMG, I can't believe what I'm reading here. I think you're talking to the mirror, buddy. Try posting counterclaims to my post answering your last delphic assertions, then talk to me.:lol:

You are the one who took single verses out of context to try to show that the Bible tells believes to kill non-believers.

 

[ludahai]

1 Corinthians 8:13
Therefore, If what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again.

You love to take single verses out of context, don't you.

Read the entire paragraph, which encompasses verses 8-13.

(8)Now food will not bring us closer to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, nor are we better off if we do.(9) But make sure that this liberty of yours in no way becomes a stumbling block to the weak.(10) If someone sees you, with your knowledge reclining at table in the temple of an idol, may not his conscience too, weak as it is be "built up" to eat the meat sacrificed to the idols? (11) Thus through your knowledge the weak person is brought to destruction, the brother for whom Christ died. (12) When you sin in this way against your brothers and wound their consciences, weak as they are, you are sinning against Christ. (13) Therefore, if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause my brother to sin."

In this era, many converted Hebrews sought to maintain the old dietary laws. This passage was meant for teachers of the truth of Christ to modify their behavior, even if permissible for the purpose of not leading others to slide to to weakness. Notice, the use of "if food causes my brother to sin."

There is a New Testament passage regarding the consumption of food, but I can't recall it at the top of my head. Still, considering all you still have to answer for, I am not going to be overly burdened by it.

 

[jfuh]

You are using a very broad brush and going way back in history to attempt to paint both religions with one brush. Hitler claimed he was a christian, his actions were entirely against the teachings.
Pat Buchanan may yell and rant and rave, and most people have little use for him, but he isn't calling for the death of anyone that disagrees with him. Nor do christians strap on bombs and blow themselves and women and children up, then have their religious leaders talk about how brave they were and noble.
You are twisting points and it is blatantly obvious.

No, I'm merely pointing out that religions with buddhism as an exception, have all had individuals using "god" for thier radicalist movements or thier own self agendas. The radicalist islamics do not represent who a true muslim is. Plain and simple.

 

[jfuh]

BTW, Pat Buchanan doesn't rant and rave. He is politically incorrect and he is brilliant. He gets cast as some rabid, obtuse hate-monger for advocating sensible immigration laws, the abolition of race preferences, and the sanctity of American traditions, but he couldn't be further from what liberals smear him to be. His commentary is calm, extremely well-researched and educated, and compelling.

Yes and I'm sure that his blame of Arieal Sharron's stroke being a damnation from god due to his returning land to the palestinians to be "well researched, educated, and compellling."
It really goes to show the kind of religious fundamentalist you are as well if you see Pat in such light.

 

[doughgirl]

Kal-el said, “Actually, Jesus says you don't need to believe in him nor god to get salvation”

You are dead wrong on this one.

"I tell you the truth, unless a man is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God... unless a man is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God (John 3:3,5)."

He CANNOT SEE OR ENTER IN THE KINGDOM.

Jesus said the kingdom will come to the whole world, not only the Jews, and that Nicodemous wouldn’t be a part of it unless he was personally born again. The entrance into the kingdom isn’t based on heritage, what country you belong to, but the kingdom is personal and the entrance to it, are repentance and SPIRITUAL REBIRTH. Jesus also said that His kingdom already had begun in the hearts of believers. Read Luke 17:21.

"Someone asked, 'Lord, will only a few be saved?' Jesus answered, 'Make every effort to enter through the narrow gate, because I tell you this: many will try to enter but will not be able to... For narrow is the gate, and narrow is the path which leads to Life, and few will find it (Luke 13:23,24; Matthew 7:14).'"

"I am the Door [Gate]... by Me if any man enter in, he shall be saved (John 10:9)."

"'So how can we know the way?' Jesus answered, 'I am the Way [Path]'... (John 14:5)."

Buddah is not the way, Muhammed is not the way, nor are any Popes, pastors or clergy………..Jesus Christ is the only way and He said this Himself.


You mentioned Matthew 19:16….To this man seeking assurance of eternal life, Jesus points out that salvation does not come from good deeds unaccompanied by love for God. The man needed a whole new starting point. Instead of adding another commandment to keep or good deed to perform the man needed to SUBMIT to Christ.
Jesus in these passages really is telling this guy that he isn’t that good…. That there is only one who is good and that is God. No matter what we do on earth it isn’t good enough to go to heaven. We only get there through Christ.

Jesus told his disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6).
Notice He does not say “A WAY” rather He says he is the “ONLY WAY”.

You either believe in Him or you do not enter through the narrow gate because Jesus is the Life, He is the Truth and He is the Way. The ONLY way.

"God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

Whoever believes in”HIM”. HIM is Christ. If you reject Him then you do not enter the Kingdom and does not have eternal life.

Christ promises those who turn to him:

"Whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed from death to life" (John 5:24).

HEARS MY WORDS…..”MY” BELIEVES HIM “HIM”

 

[SixStringHero]

Dude, it's apparent you've not truly read the Old Testament, because the Israelites were FAR from intelligent. They were selfish, they whined constantly.. notice how they roamed the desert for 40 years because they continually wished to be enslaved in Egypt again. Moses, leading the people out of Egypt, sat and watched as these moron's built statues and such adulating other God's, and these people were just praising god because they'd been freed from Pharoah. But because the road to freedom, was a difficult one, they would rather be slaves? Give me a break.

Hmm, name me one time when God required ANY person in the Bible to sacrifice his/her children? The sacrifices required were animals, in atonement for their MANY sins. So how is it hypocritical that God detests those who burn his/her children, when he's never required it? Hmmm Einstein.

I don't consider myself a religious person and I boarder on agnosticism at best, but the story of JOBE (sic?) was one story that I never could come to terms with. Why would a god demand that a man have his family killed, his home destroyed and still be expected to be subservient?

I admit, I'm no scholar, so maybe I'm missing something here, but it always left a bad taste in my mouth.