"Easter Worshipers"

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CCHcolonel said:
News just reported that the attacker’s have said it was a retaliatory attack for the mosque shooting in New Zealand.
Click to expand...
It honestly just doesn’t make any sense. Shi Lanka is a tiny nation off the coast of Indian with a 7% Christian population and approx 10% Islamic population.

The guy in New Zealand was a white supremacist, atheist.

I just don’t see any logic in this horrific act.
 
Last edited:
Indeed. There’s no logic. A retaliation against a white supremacist attacking non-white Muslims entailed killing other non-whites?

This is what happens when barbarism, fanaticism, and hate meet stupidity.
 
CCHcolonel said:
He was not even Christian, but in my experience with traditional/fundamentalist Muslims, that doesn’t matter. They view the entire west as a Christian society and its people as a Christian enemy, and Christian is synonymous with catholic to them.
Click to expand...
People who hate all Muslims don’t seem to make any differentiation between them, either.
 
phil19034 said:
It honestly just doesn’t make any sense. Shi Lanka is a tiny nation off the coast of Indian with a 7% Christian population and approx 10% Islamic population.

The guy in New Zealand was a white supremacist, atheist.

I just don’t see the logic in this horrific act.
Click to expand...
There isn’t any. My guess is that whoever planned this was going to do it anyway and was just looking for some excuse or trigger to mention.

If you want to have a retaliatory attack, I would expect it to be in the same region or country as the first attack, or in some place with a connection to that first attack, none of which is the case here.
 
But the phrase was used to highlight the fact that the victims were at Easter worship services, no?
 
On the contrary, the Muslims triumphantly claim that Christianity is extinct in the West.
 
Zach said:
Yes the type of which you speak have the goal to convert or wipe off the face of the Earth all infidels. Now for the obligatory not all Muslims believe this.
Click to expand...
But it still doesn’t make sense because Shi Lanka is a buddhist nation (with Hindus being the 2nd largest religion). Muslims (according the Islamic law) can tolerate Christians and Jews, but non Abrahamic religious people must convert or die according to them.

So why a minority Islamic population would attack an even smaller minority Christian population is beneath me - unless his goal was a to escalate conflict worldwide.

Strategical speaking, a war against Christians in Shi Lanka makes no sense. So his goal must have been to further flame worldwide conflict.

Jesus, Mary & Joseph; pray for us.
 
Extremists don’t think logically. They find a soft target anywhere and attack.
 
Last edited:
“Appeasement politics” to my mind adequately describes the phenomenon. Some people, of a certain world-view, choose to detach themselves from anything genuinely contentious by magnifying the travails of others whilst erasing themselves from the picture. Hence they can speak of Muslims all the day long, but cannot refer to Christianity except by way of euphemism.

On the other hand they make great hay out of the issues which affect basically nobody, so that they can appear to be forward-thinking.

Its particularly cowardly and irritating.
 
Last edited:
Hello,
At the time of this post I was under the impression that we were being accused of being pagan worshippers of Eostre or Easter, yet I still said I’m not a fan of getting riled up over it.
 
I’m not on social media.

But news coverage of a major tragedy is not hysteria. There are thousands of news sources today , so it may feel overwhelming.

What I’m trying to get at is that is the roles were reversed, many ‘leaders’ would have defended Islam or Muslims and point put how Christianity or Christians are just as bad.

No one has criticized Muslims or at least called for their community to do some self introspection . Now we know it is in retaliation for the new Zealand incident. Did all the pandering help?
 
Of course not. But what ‘radicalized’ them? A sincere and complete interpretation of the Koran?
 
Is this controversy a purely American phenomenon? To my mind “Easter worshippers” means “people who are worshipping on Easter Sunday”. It seems to be obvious that people who are worshipping on Easter Sunday are Christians.
 
Uh-oh. Looks like Anglicans started the Easter Worshipers conspiracy a century ago.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
JSAD said:
But news coverage of a major tragedy is not hysteria. There are thousands of news sources today , so it may feel overwhelming.
Click to expand...
To be clear, I only used the word hysteria in conjunction with the MSMS because of this statement from your post: “Just imagine the hysteria the MSM would create if it were the other way around.”
JSAD said:
What I’m trying to get at is that is the roles were reversed, many ‘leaders’ would have defended Islam or Muslims and point put how Christianity or Christians are just as bad.
Click to expand...
I agree that Islam is often defended while Christianity is not. I just don’t see this as an example of that problem.
 
Ok good. Fair enough.

I do think the MSM need to be held accountable , however I do agree with what I think you’re implying which is - The real tragedy has caused hurt pain and fear. We have to caution directing all of that emotion into attacking the MSM and to pray for healing and justice. For the victims and families .
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top