Is Islam a threat to Christianity around the globe?

[staffsgt7]

Some bad news about Fox news I got this morning. The Wahabbi Prince Alwalweed is eyeing buying more of its stock. It went from 4.5% a few yrs ago to 14% and now they want more. At 4.5% they had enough clout to change how Fox was reporting the Muslim riots in France. Now we don’t even hear about them. What will be next when they buy more? The article tells us of how they influenced Fox news here.

I guess what has come out of the OIC and Saudis meeting on how to get us to shut up about talking about islam is to buy the news sources out and keep on suing people like Michael Savage and Joe Kaufman from frontpagemag.com

 

[bridgeforsale]

Some bad news about Fox news I got this morning. The Wahabbi Prince Alwalweed is eyeing buying more of its stock. It went from 4.5% a few yrs ago to 14% and now they want more. At 4.5% they had enough clout to change how Fox was reporting the Muslim riots in France. Now we don’t even hear about them. What will be next when they buy more? The article tells us of how they influenced Fox news here.

I guess what has come out of the OIC and Saudis meeting on how to get us to shut up about talking about islam is to buy the news sources out and keep on suing people like Michael Savage and Joe Kaufman from frontpagemag.com

Your report is correct, but it’s complicated. Alwaleed owns 90% of Rotana (by far the largest entertainment company in the Arab speaking world, which reaches a market estimated at 300 million). Incidently Murdoch is negotiating the purchase of between a 10 and 20% interest in Rotana (and in furtherance of this entered into the arrangement you’re referring to here). Keep in mind Murdoch owns a majority stake in Fox (so the 5% stake owned by the prince isn’t consequential to Murdochs control).

Nonetheless, it’s still an interesting fact (and I certainly appreciate the info). I think it is important to understand and question these sort of relationships. With regard to your last point, they can sue Savage all they want, but I assure you they can’t succeed. There’s very few exceptions to our first amendment right of free speech, and political speech (no matter how inflammatory) is the most protected form of speech. Michael Savage has nothing to worry about (and guys like him have to deal with all sorts of wacky lawsuits all the time anyway, so whether or not it’s some Saudi prince, or some fruit cake in anytown USA, his lawyers will always have a job).

trueslant.com/devonpendleton/2010/01/19/what-does-rupert-murdoch-want-from-saudi-arabia/

 

[Jehoshua]

The point is though Contarini. Each incidence in the bible where God orders the Israelites to slay a particular group doesn;t apply to all the heathens, and infidels outside of that group does it. It is always in a specific instance and purpose targetted at one group not others. Although at the present time it would be looked at as genocide (because thats what it is) at the timeperiod such acts were much more common. Just look at the historical actions of the Assyrian Empire.

However in a uniquely Christian context if you look at the New Testament there is not a single exhortation to violence in otder to kill the heathen or infidel. Now we as christians understand that Christ made a new covenant to replace the old Jewish covenant which was broken many times by the Jews. This makes the New Testament much more important in regards to Christianity proper, then the old. Now considering the New Testament has no violent exhortations at all, and the Old testament has it only in very specific cases, for specific purposes (such as the Amalekites) whereas the Quran’s exhortations in many cases are general against the heathens, and even a few verses against fellow monotheist, I think that my explanation before was quite valid.

Because the biblical exhortationsin the Old Testament to violence are not of the same nature (general and continuing) as the Quran’s, and because the New Testament has none at all.

 

[KathleenGee]

There used to be about 4 Plantens using the same name.

I think this Planten is number 3 and is the most sincere and enduring…you have to take him where he is now. It takes time to build relationships.

I am also recalling what the son of a Hamas leader said that Islam will implode on itself in 10 years…I really believe in the power of prayer and penance which this week should be used for and I am trying inspite of all the things I have to do right now.

I get very affected and offended when Muslims deny the crucifixion and cannot see through some things…don’t want to get into…and I know about their prayers…saw one in Saudi Arabia…and it sure looked like it was pointed at us…all the more we need to unite as a country…

And I believe the more we unite, there will also be more healing between Catholics and Protestants…

This summer I cared for an Alzheimer and I was really needing a change, and this thought came to my mind, …'if you have faith the size of a mustard seed you can move a mountain…and the mountain is Islam…but you have to recognize elements of true religion within Islam and consider where their culture was 100 years ago…

I know that those Egyptians and others who are doing horrific things to Christians will get theirs just like the Nazis did, and the communists who profited so much from their malignment of us…they will get theirs too, but it will be by God Himself…

 

[staffsgt7]

There used to be about 4 Plantens using the same name.

I think this Planten is number 3 and is the most sincere and enduring…you have to take him where he is now. It takes time to build relationships.

I am also recalling what the son of a Hamas leader said that Islam will implode on itself in 10 years…I really believe in the power of prayer and penance which this week should be used for and I am trying inspite of all the things I have to do right now.

I get very affected and offended when Muslims deny the crucifixion and cannot see through some things…don’t want to get into…and I know about their prayers…saw one in Saudi Arabia…and it sure looked like it was pointed at us…all the more we need to unite as a country…

And I believe the more we unite, there will also be more healing between Catholics and Protestants…

This summer I cared for an Alzheimer and I was really needing a change, and this thought came to my mind, …'if you have faith the size of a mustard seed you can move a mountain…and the mountain is Islam…but you have to recognize elements of true religion within Islam and consider where their culture was 100 years ago…

I know that those Egyptians and others who are doing horrific things to Christians will get theirs just like the Nazis did, and the communists who profited so much from their malignment of us…they will get theirs too, but it will be by God Himself…

I just listened to a series of videos by Walid Shoebat and he thinks the same thing. He backs it up with your Bible. I found him very intriguing and looked up a lot of the passages he was referencing in both my Bibles (Catholic and King James). If you chose to view these videos don’t be offended by one of their commercials with one of their subjects that I found odd (Catholics believe same as Islam). I couldn’t believe how odd a statement that was but it shows me that not all Protestant leaders know Islam either and are very prejudice against Catholics .

It isn’t only the Egyptians doing horrorific things. It is coming out of all areas that Muslims are located in such as Kosovo, Africa, India, and quite a few other Asian countries. Those are just a few countries that I name. We just had a guy who people claimed was religious gunning down unarmed people while they go shopping at Ft. Hood. Not too many Muslims are making sure that their teachings change about Jihad and that violence is always an option (it says that in Sharia laws) and all the other stuff I mentioned that are repugnant in Islam changes. they only turned around and started claiming they were the victims when it was all based on diverting the attention from what their Jihadists do.

 

[KathleenGee]

You know, Staffsgt,

I get immediately offended, have been a cradle Catholic…but the Lord comes to me within an hour after being mad at somebody…and it is like He wants us to be injured, as He is calling us to follow Him and endure the same things…

Have faith…the heart of the human being was created and directed at God…it is the fulfillment of our identity and to not let scandal destroy our faith…if we do, then we are to blame…

Yes, I know of Shoebat as well but was disappointed to hear…and I also think everyone who holds false impressions of others, will suffer as well.

 

[staffsgt7]

You know, Staffsgt,

I get immediately offended, have been a cradle Catholic…but the Lord comes to me within an hour after being mad at somebody…and it is like He wants us to be injured, as He is calling us to follow Him and endure the same things…

Have faith…the heart of the human being was created and directed at God…it is the fulfillment of our identity and to not let scandal destroy our faith…if we do, then we are to blame…

Yes, I know of Shoebat as well but was disappointed to hear…and I also think everyone who holds false impressions of others, will suffer as well.

It wasn’t Shoebat who said the stuff in the short commercial. If I gave that impression I am sorry. It was someone else.

 

[bridgeforsale]

And I believe the more we unite, there will also be more healing between Catholics and Protestants…

And that’s the problem with religion right there, everyone wants to unite with each other (which is of course an impossible and I think undesireable wish). What you mean is you’d like everyone to think like you do; and it bothers you that they don’t. This notion has opposed individual liberty since I’m sure further back in history than we can possibly dig. It’s not that I (as a skeptic) would like everyone to think as I do (I think that would make for an incredibly boring world); rather I simply understand how religion (regardless of how it’s expressed, whether it’s a belief in a celestial being, or a socioeconomic system like Marxism, or even a totalitarian ideology like fascism) can poison everything. Why not learn to actually appreciate diversity? I’m sure you mean the things you say in a very nice and charitable way, but as subtle as it is, and as nice as some of its proponents are, this mentality has been behind virtually every warped chapter in the history of the human race

 

[Contarini]

The point is though Contarini. Each incidence in the bible where God orders the Israelites to slay a particular group doesn;t apply to all the heathens, and infidels outside of that group does it.

You already made that point, and I accepted it. The violence in the OT and the violence in the Qur’an are different. The violence in the OT is much more vicious, but you are right that it’s relatively easier to relativize. However, both pose problems for any religion that considers these texts the Word of God. You choose to focus *only *on the differences that make our holy text look good and the Qur’an look bad. That is, as I said earlier, special pleading. It’s illogical and unjust.

Although at the present time it would be looked at as genocide (because thats what it is) at the timeperiod such acts were much more common. Just look at the historical actions of the Assyrian Empire.

Does God change with time? Does God become more moral as time goes on? This would be blasphemous.

I think we have to bite the bullet and say that these genocidal commands did not in fact accurately reflect the will of the eternal, unchanging, ever-loving God, but reflect how the ancient Hebrews understood God’s command for them to be a holy people separated to Him and to oppose the corruption and tyranny of Canaanite society. Only at that point do your remarks about the cultural context become relevant. And only at that point can we claim an advantage over Islam, not because our holy book has less troubling content than theirs, but because we have a more nuanced understanding (at least compared to most Muslims) of what it means for a text to be the inspired Word of God.

However in a uniquely Christian context if you look at the New Testament there is not a single exhortation to violence in otder to kill the heathen or infidel.

Not an exhortation exactly. But there is harsh, demonizing language toward “false believers” (language enjoining excommunication which was explicitly cited by St. Thomas Aquinas to support the execution of heretics). And more obviously there is language of horrific violence in the book of Revelation, which is ascribed to the eternal God and to the glorified Christ riding out on a white horse and slaughtering his enemies.

Specific injunctions, such as the Muslims have, would have been better from one perspective, because they would have provided limits on Christian violence. As a matter of historical fact, Christian violence has been fueled by the apocalyptic language and has at times known no limit or restraint.

I think that this is indeed more than compensated for by the fact that many Christians have found ways to renounce violence altogether (and many more to limit it to self-defense–a position also taken by many Muslims).

Now we as christians understand that Christ made a new covenant to replace the old Jewish covenant which was broken many times by the Jews. This makes the New Testament much more important in regards to Christianity proper, then the old.

In what sense do you regard the Old Testament as the Word of God? Saying it’s “less important” is vague.

Now considering the New Testament has no violent exhortations at all, and the Old testament has it only in very specific cases, for specific purposes (such as the Amalekites) whereas the Quran’s exhortations in many cases are general against the heathens, and even a few verses against fellow monotheist, I think that my explanation before was quite valid.

It’s special pleading because you pre-select the criteria for comparison which give you the desired result, instead of fairly and honestly comparing *all *the relevant factors.

Something that no one has mentioned so far is that, oddly enough, the religious tradition that could be expected to give the OT the most veneration (rabbinic Judaism) has the least record of violence of the three monotheistic traditions. Granted, much of this stems from lack of opportunity (the Hasmoneans engaged in forcible circumcision, and some Israelis today seem to use the OT to justify violence against the Palestinians), but I don’t think it all does. Given what the Talmud does with OT laws on capital punishment, I think a case could be made that the Talmud has been far more effective than the New Testament in restraining the potential for violence found in the Old Testament/TaNaKH.

Edwin

 

[KathleenGee]

Bridge…

There is a fractured Christ among us who believe in Him…and this fracture goes back 500 years…and then 500 before that the schism of the two lungs breathing the same air of the Holy Spirit…Latin Catholics and the Orthodox.

We also join ourselves to all people of good will who have the same values…but to have Christ is a grace…and His presence within is the cause through His Spirit to share Him with others.

But I am not one so much inclined for words, but witness of my action in relationship with others…I do not have the inner emptiness some people of good will complain of. There is a new life, a new beginning that is transcendent and open to all…

I think people like yourself know little of the charisms of Christianity, I mean that lived out throughout time…not the scandals the world wishes to expound on.

 

[dzheremi]

Far be it for me to confirm cynicism, but…

And that’s the problem with religion right there, everyone wants to unite with each other (which is of course an impossible and I think undesireable wish).

That’s not the problem with religion. You can’t take one person’s comment from a message board in isolation and use it to prove that everyone who is religious has this problem. I don’t want to unite with Protestants. I want Protestants to return to faith in Christ as it has been passed down from the apostles. If they are unwilling (and if they were, they wouldn’t be Protestants), then that is there lost. The gates of heaven are never closed while we are still alive to walk through them, but the road to them is narrow.

What you mean is you’d like everyone to think like you do; and it bothers you that they don’t.

See above. I wouldn’t say that it “bothers” me that they don’t, but I do recognize that the Church is not a democracy. If you cannot assent to it, you should go somewhere else that allows you to believe whatever you do believe in, but you do so with the realization that you cannot have it both ways: Those who have left the apostolic faith cannot at the same time claim to be in accordance with the the early church. This is what gets me about Protestants - the belief that sacraments, liturgy, and other basics of the faith which have been upheld throughout the centuries are “extra”, “unnecessary” or even a perversion of the true Christian faith. Call me crazy, but I’d rather follow St. Basil, St. Ephrem the Syrian, St. James and the other saints of the early, undivided church than some guy in Europe or America in 1600, 1800 or any other late period who taught the abandonment and evisceration of the Church in the name of a fake “purity” of doctrine that is in no way reflected in the history of the church.

This notion has opposed individual liberty since I’m sure further back in history than we can possibly dig.

I don’t necessarily think that this is true. I think that some ways in which it can be expressed can be very oppressive to individual liberty, but then the kind of (abuse of) individual liberty that lets everyone do whatever they want is itself opposed to the cohesiveness of an ecclesiastical community, so it cuts both ways. In Paul’s letters to the churches of Asia Minor, he often writes against divisions in the communities. Is this unfair or oppressive? I do not think so. Not when the reasons to condemn such division are so clear. Paul writes (1 Corinthians 1:10-13):

• I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose.
  
  For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers, by Chloe’s people, that there are rivalries among you. I mean that each of you is saying, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"*

Again, if this does not persuade you, then you are not obliged to join the community.

It’s not that I (as a skeptic) would like everyone to think as I do (I think that would make for an incredibly boring world); rather I simply understand how religion (regardless of how it’s expressed, whether it’s a belief in a celestial being, or a socioeconomic system like Marxism, or even a totalitarian ideology like fascism) can poison everything.

So because some people can use religion to oppress rather than to better then it must be religion’s fault, not the fault of those doing the “poisoning”?

Why not learn to actually appreciate diversity?

If what you mean by “appreciating diversity” is actually embracing heresy and sin, then I am not sure why you would think any religious person should want to do this. Diversity for diversity’s sake is not a particularly commendable thing, as some kinds of diversity (e.g., syncretism) harm, rather than enrich, the churches they are found in. It can hardly be argued, for instance, that the division of the Anglican Vhurch into separate wings based on acceptance or rejection of homosexual clergy has strengthened or enriched that church communion. On the other hand, diversity which preserves orthodox theology and practice is indeed a great asset. How sweet it is to hear the Syriac Orthodox Qurbana in English, for instance! Or Psalm 102 in Romanian? With all things, diversity is respected so long as whatever is expressed is not objectionable to an orthodox understanding of the subject.

 

[bridgeforsale]

Far be it for me to confirm cynicism, but…

That’s not the problem with religion. You can’t take one person’s comment from a message board in isolation and use it to prove that everyone who is religious has this problem. I don’t want to unite with Protestants. I want Protestants to return to faith in Christ as it has been passed down from the apostles. If they are unwilling (and if they were, they wouldn’t be Protestants), then that is there lost. The gates of heaven are never closed while we are still alive to walk through them, but the road to them is narrow.

No you don’t want to unite with protestants (or whomever), you want them to come to you. Do you even bother at least trying to listen to yourself?

See above. I wouldn’t say that it “bothers” me that they don’t, but I do recognize that the Church is not a democracy.

You’re right, democracies don’t burn their fellow human beings alive for thinking the wrong thing, only churches do.

If you cannot assent to it, you should go somewhere else that allows you to believe whatever you do believe in, but you do so with the realization that you cannot have it both ways:

Yes, believe in my version of absurd ancient mythology, or I’ll think you’ll burn in an eternal (fictitious) hell (and try my very best to interfere with your life and cause you as much misery as I can while you’re alive).

I don’t necessarily think that this is true. I think that some ways in which it can be expressed can be very oppressive to individual liberty,

let me guess, unless it’s expressed your way?

If what you mean by “appreciating diversity” is actually embracing heresy and sin, then I am not sure why you would think any religious person should want to do this.

When you say heresy and sin, you really mean things you don’t like (and as much **** as you guys can get away with).

Diversity for diversity’s sake is not a particularly commendable thing, as some kinds of diversity (e.g., syncretism) harm, rather than enrich,

typical

the churches they are found in. It can hardly be argued, for instance, that the division of the Anglican Vhurch into separate wings based on acceptance or rejection of homosexual clergy has strengthened or enriched that church communion. On the other hand, diversity which preserves orthodox theology and practice is indeed a great asset. How sweet it is to hear the Syriac Orthodox Qurbana in English, for instance! Or Psalm 102 in Romanian? With all things, diversity is respected so long as whatever is expressed is not objectionable to an orthodox understanding of the subject.

You mean the type of diversity that suits me, which of course isn’t diversity at all. So is it OK for me to say all religious people are slavish brainwashed sheep who are too stupid to grasp logic and too weak to let go of absurd primitive ancient fairy tales; so I won’t rest until everyone thinks exactly like me

 

[bridgeforsale]

Bridge…

There is a fractured Christ among us who believe in Him…and this fracture goes back 500 years…and then 500 before that the schism of the two lungs breathing the same air of the Holy Spirit…Latin Catholics and the Orthodox.

We also join ourselves to all people of good will who have the same values…but to have Christ is a grace…and His presence within is the cause through His Spirit to share Him with others.

But I am not one so much inclined for words, but witness of my action in relationship with others…I do not have the inner emptiness some people of good will complain of. There is a new life, a new beginning that is transcendent and open to all…

I think people like yourself know little of the charisms of Christianity, I mean that lived out throughout time…not the scandals the world wishes to expound on.

I think if the church remained united we’d still be driving around on horse and buggies (and in fact we probably wouldn’t have even advanced that far).

 

[KathleenGee]

Bridge…

It is the Lord HImself Who exhorts us again and again to be one…in Him.

Perhaps it is more intense for us Who live of the Eucharist, His Body and Blood…

When you are really connected to another person, you share their joys and happiness, sorrows, and do what you can to help the other…and vice versa…communion.

When we receive Christ, we receive Holy Communion…it is reality.

To be more connected to Christ is to desire to be more connected to others…real people.

 

[GraceSofia]

There used to be about 4 Plantens using the same name.

.

How does that work? Is that even allowed by the forum?

Funny, now that you mention it, it crossed my mind recently that there seemed to be two distinct Plantens, but I put it down to sometimes he was more upset when he was writing and other times more calm.

 

[GraceSofia]

Muslim Europe

The disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership is in the process of going into effect, with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.

The European human rights group called Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership

And I live here, and I haven’t heard about it from the MSM.
All I can find is from the SIOE web site and Pamela Geller. Nobody else seems to be writing about it.

 

[staffsgt7]

How does that work? Is that even allowed by the forum?

Funny, now that you mention it, it crossed my mind recently that there seemed to be two distinct Plantens, but I put it down to sometimes he was more upset when he was writing and other times more calm.

I thought there was a different planten but someone who has been on this forum longer probably can detect more differences between his posts.

Sometimes his writing styles are different. What I detected was one planten that was more comfortable with English and another who was obviously writing in English but it was not his first language.

 

[staffsgt7]

Muslim Europe

And I live here, and I haven’t heard about it from the MSM.
All I can find is from the SIOE web site and Pamela Geller. Nobody else seems to be writing about it.

I belong to SIOA besides Act for America. It is a sister organization. The first I heard of SIOA was when the Muslims had a prayer in at Washington DC last year. SIOA was out there as were some few from Act.

You won’t hear much from the MSM about much of this. The MSM are the Muslim Brotherhood’s useful idiots in the West.

 

[GraceSofia]

What I detected was one planten that was more comfortable with English and another who was obviously writing in English but it was not his first language.

Yes, that was what I picked up on, but I assumed it was one person and that when he got upset, his English went south a bit. I speak a second language (badly) and when I get upset, I can hardly remember a word of it! Never dawned on me that different people could use the same username here.

 

[Jehoshua]

Contarini.

You say im “special pleading” so to say. But I ask what area’s i could point out in the bible that look bad. To my knowledge the area’s in the bible that do look bad are the area;s which order the genocide of the Amalekites and other such acts.

As to your response to the new testament book of revelation, you do have to understand its apocalyptic and prophetic nature, in no way does tell the believer now to go and slay the heretic. Disregarding that text it is true that some passages critical of heretics have been used by theologians and the Church to develop the “Just war” theory and to justify the less pacific nature that christianity adopted once it became the state religion. This of course neccesitated such a justification due to the nature of a sovereign state.

In regards to the Old Testament i mentioned that the New testament is more important in understanding Christianity due to the nature of the new covenant. We as christians believe that jesus established a new covenant and abolished the old, and that the new is to be followed over the old. This is why we don;t follow mosaic law for instance. Therefore most definitely the New testament is more important in understand christianity as seperate from Judaism despite the fact that the old testament is still divinely inspired and of great merit.

–

As to the cultural context which i mentioned, im sure you understand that society at the time was more brutal then todays. Many things which are totally forbidden now were practiced. Polygamy and brothers marrying their deceased siblings wife are an example. God is eternal but it is possible he recognised this societal brutality and thus acted accordingly in specific instances for the benefit of his people. God is omnibenevolent but it is clear that in some instances he works for the greater good. Note the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah, and the Flood. In a simplistic sense an omnibenevolent God wouldn;t do this, but taken into wider context these events helped humanity and were better on the whole for the whole then if they didn;t happen (profusion of vast immorality in both cases)

Now taken into the context of the Amalekites, note that this is only my speculation, it is possible that God decreed their destruction due to this people actions, which would have eliminated the Israelites otherwise. The Amalekites were attacking the Israelites, the israelites were homeless. it is therefore theoretically possible that God allowed such a barbaric act as occured, considering the primitive and barbaric context of the time, in order to allow the Israelites the opportunity to survive and become an example to all peoples and return to the land they were promised free, instead of as slaves.For it is clear based on the Amalekite threat that they would definitely have faced the possibility of their own genocide or enslavement if they acted in a pacific manner, or in a less decisive way. Speculating on this it is important to note again the specificity of the situation, which if anything shows that this was for a specific purpose, possibly the reason i have theorised on. Now this is just theorisation, and I am unaware of the churches teaching regarding the issue, but it seems to me to be at least a valid possibility to explain the genocide of the Amalekites in the context of the era and of the time.