- This topic has 3,170 replies, 53 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Ed, you really need to wake up.
You think God is going to save your country and God is on the side of your country?
I tell you God is on the side of no country. God is with the individual. God is spirit and wants those who worship him in spirit and truth and not in any set place.
America and most of the world is full of sin witchcraft magic pornography egotism adultery riches entertainment idolism and pollution.
Just saying Ed – I know what you are meaning.Hi Miia,
You don’t reach out to others by agreeing with falsehood, that isn’t God’s way.
And when someone wants to explain how God does reach out to others
you then get scared and say that you are not interested._______________
God bless
Ed JHi Miia,
You really need to watch this video…
(Jonathan Cahn here speaks of God’s purpose)MESSAGE TO AMERICA:FULL VERSION:JONATHAN CAHN
ADDRESSES THE PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURAL PRAYER BREAKFASTI know you can’t, but no it’s instead that you don’t want to.
_______________
God bless
Ed JI guess the popular use of terrorism is those who cannot afford war. You often here comments like they cannot directly fight against the might of the USA or coalition, so they resort to terrorism. But yeah, all war installs terror that is for sure. And it is a hard topic to tackle too.
e.g., Should the UK and Europe have declared war against Hitler. Should they have just done nothing. Should people do nothing about ISIS and let them rape, murder, and destroy till they are content? The nothing option seems like it would just let evil rule the planet.
Hard questions because as Believers we should not murder and should not turn the other cheek. However, should we install this belief at country level? It is one thing to sacrifice yourself, but quite another to sacrifice a whole nation or the free world.
t8 yes… “Those who cannot afford war”.
Modern “Terrorism” started with the Irish actually -they were the first “terrorists”; from Wiki:Ireland
One of the earliest groups to utilize modern terrorist techniques was arguably the Fenian Brotherhood and its offshoot the Irish Republican Brotherhood. They were both founded in 1858 as revolutionary and militant nationalist groups, both in Ireland and amongst the emigre community in the United States.
After centuries of continued English rule, and influenced most recently from the devastating effects of the 1840s Irish potato famine, these revolutionary fraternal organisations were founded with the aim of establishing an independent republic in Ireland, and began carrying out frequent acts of violence in metropolitan Britain to achieve their aims through intimidation.
In 1867, members of the movement’s leadership were arrested and convicted for organizing an armed uprising. While being transferred to prison, the police van in which they were being transported was intercepted and a police sergeant was shot in the rescue. A bolder rescue attempt of another Irish radical incarcerated in Clerkenwell Prison, was made in the same year: an explosion to demolish the prison wall killed 12 people and caused many injuries. The bombing enraged the British public, causing a panic over the Fenian threat.
Although the Irish Republican Brotherhood condemned the Clerkenwell Outrage as a “dreadful and deplorable event”, the organisation returned to bombings in Britain in 1881 to 1885, with the Fenian dynamite campaign, beginning one of the first modern terror campaigns.[49] Instead of earlier forms of terrorism based on political assassination, this campaign used modern, timed explosives with the express aim of sowing fear in the very heart of metropolitan Britain, in order to achieve political gains – (Prime minister William Ewart Gladstone was partly influenced to disestablish the Anglican Church in Ireland as a gesture by the Clerkenwell bombing). The campaign also took advantage of the greater global integration of the times, and the bombing was largely funded and organised by the Fenian Brotherhood in the United States.
The first police unit to combat terrorism was established in 1883 by the Metropolitan Police, initially as a small section of the Criminal Investigation Department. It was known as the Special Irish Branch, and was trained in counter terrorism techniques to combat the Irish Republican Brotherhood. The name became Special Branch as the unit’s remit steadily widened over the years.
All acts of terror or invasion by another country installs fear.
What would you call the US led invasion of Iraq for example if not an act of terror?
Terrorism has come to mean persons or groups who create terror for an ideology of some kind. But the word may have to have to take on the wider meaning you say it has if they want to call ISIS terrorists as they have a self-declared state. If their state becomes recognised in years to come, they would not be considered terrorists by the usual definition.
@t8,
This thread assume that Islam is one united group when in truth it, just like Christianity, is a kingdom divided against itself. ISIL is just as much a threat against Muslims as it is against anyone else. I doubt even its members hold to one doctrine, though many of them are violent humans.
@t8,
From what this states she was a devout Muslim who was falsely accused of a crime because she caught someone in authority violating the Koran. Christians and Jews used to do that as well. They probably still do as evil many humans will always seek to look righteous in the eyes of other while doing their evil deeds.
Farkhunda had previously been arguing with a mullah named Zainuddin, in front of a mosque where she worked as a religious teacher,[2] about his practice of selling charms at the Shah-Do Shamshira Mosque, the Shrine of the King of Two Swords,[7] a religious shrine in Kabul.[8] During this argument, Zainuddin reportedly accused her of burning the Quran. She responded
“I am a Muslim, and Muslims do not burn the Quran!”[9]
According to eyewitnesses, hundreds of angry civilians flocked to the mosque upon overhearing the mullah’s accusation. They dragged out Farkhunda and started to beat her.[5] She was thrown from a roof, run over by a car, and beaten with sticks and stones outside the mosque. The mob then set her body alight and dumped it in the Kabul River while police allegedly looked on.[8][10] Farkhunda’s parents said the killing was instigated by the mullah with whom Farkhunda had been talking, who, according to Tolo News, began loudly accusing her of burning the Quran “in order to save his job and life.”[11] An eyewitness said that the mob was chanting anti-American and anti-democratic slogans while beating Farkhunda.[12]
This thread assume that Islam is one united group when in truth it, just like Christianity, is a kingdom divided against itself. ISIL is just as much a threat against Muslims as it is against anyone else. I doubt even its members hold to one doctrine, though many of them are violent humans.
I am not sure why you make this point.
The Koran has things written in there that encourage Believers to kill what they call infidels, beheadings, etc. The different sects read the same book from what I can tell. Yes in a big religion, there will be many views.
Christians and Jews used to do that as well.
Kerwin, if you understood the words of our Lord, you would know that Christians or true followers of Christ would not do that. If they did, they would need to repent. Murderers, those who bear false witness, and the hateful do not inherit the Kingdom of God. This goes for any person regardless of what religion, race, or gender.
The word ‘Christian’ is a loose term. If you mean those of the way, then you are wrong. If you mean those who call themselves that because they were born culturally with that name, and still act like those in the world, then yes they are no different.
There are the children of God, and the children of the world/devil. There are wheat and tares growing side by side.
There is also the Bible and the Koran in the context of this discussion. Both cannot be right.
BTW, if there was a Youtube video of so-called Christians burning a non-Trinitarian at the stake back when the Vatican was very powerful, then yes, I wouldn’t hesitate to post that video for the same reason. We judge a tree by its fruit. Wisdom is known by her children.
t8,
Shiite battle Sunni and Turk battle Arab. In the later case they can even be the same religion. The Kurd’s are Sunni and have no difficulty battling other non-Kurd Sunnis. They have even allied with individuals of other religions to do so.
The Ottoman Empire fell in part because the Allies in WWI allied with the Arabs against the Turks.
Alevis of the Shia and Twelvers of the Shia and other within the Shiite community.
In short there is iron mixed with clay.
In Egypt the Muslim army over-through the more conservative Muslim government the was democratically elected. A similar thing happened in the Palestine regions though the democratically elected Hamas retained control of some of that.
Churchill on Islam
Churchill served in Sudan where he was able to observe first hand what Is Islam is truly about. He wrote a book called The River War published in 1899, which chronicled the reconquest of Sudan. In the book, he showcased what he had observed by writing,
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
