Suicide bomb hits Nigerian Catholic church

  • Thread starter Thread starter jakasaki
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Funny, I criticize Catholic Inquisition and I cannot criticize suicide-bombers…
You are definitely Muslim…

You called me ignorant. Sorry, I prefer my ignorance to your wisdom. Sorry.

But you are raining in the wet, as Brazilians say. Everybody, I repeat, I repeat, everybody knows that NOT ALL Muslim are suicide bombers. Whom are you trying to convince? Do you think that you are giving great news? Or do you think we all are here stupid?

  1. *]Suicide bombers ARE wrong. But the point here is that Christians had its share of extremism.
    *]Now you call me Muslim? Thou shalt not bear false witness. It’s in the Bible.
    *]I never called you ignorant. What you’ve said is however. And “my wisdom” comes from history.
 
So besides the crusades what about the other two?
The inquisition was no worse and was in many cases better than the secular courts at the time. A lot of the horror stories you hear about it were from the protestant propaganda machine that was in full gear during the reformation

As to “Native Americans” please be specific, you are talking about a large group of people whose only similarity is sharing the same continent. Also what are you you say Hispanic, but are you Mexican, Honduran, Guatemalan, Salvadoran? I myself am Mexican and Choctaw.

To put this in historical perspective, Nigeria is an unatural product of British imperialism. In the Muslim north they have cows and sand, in the Christian south they have oil, farmland and minerals. Despite this the Northern Muslims control the resources and the government leaving the Christians (who make up 50% of the population) relatively powerless and poor. The UK still backs the Muslim north allowing them to not only run the government but to pilfer the south’s resources.
 
Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel wrote, “Woe to them that say 'Peace” when there is not peace." Things haven’t changed all that much.
 

  1. *]Suicide bombers ARE wrong. But the point here is that Christians had its share of extremism.
    *]Now you call me Muslim? Thou shalt not bear false witness. It’s in the Bible.
    *]I never called you ignorant. What you’ve said is however. And “my wisdom” comes from history.

  1. But the point here is that Christians had its share of extremism.
    Again, whom are you teaching to? Everybody knows this! You are saying obvious things that everybody knows. I tell you one: slavery.

    How can I not suspect you are Muslim? You only defend Muslims and attack Christians? All the time…

    No, you said that I was ignorant and I said that I am. Thanks. You wisdom comes from “your history”. You simply DO NOT know Universal History. Otherwise you would not talk that way. Maybe you know the History of your town, state and some of the Presidents of the USA, but Universal History, no. So, think of it as YOUR History.
 
Perhaps correct, but who said democratic values were Christian ones? If so, it took us more than a millennium to figure that out! LOL
But we figure it out.
What about the arabs countries? Syriam Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and the Arab Spring !!!
 
This just shows extremism is extremism and nothing more. If any disagrees just look at the numbers of times people died in history by the hands of Christian extremism (crusades, inquisition, native americans etc.)
Excuse me but how are the crusades or the inquisition considered as extremism? You need to brush up on some history. 😉
 
Again, whom are you teaching to? Everybody knows this!
Then, what is this discussion about anyway? :confused:
How can I not suspect you are Muslim? You only defend Muslims and attack Christians? All the time…
I NEVER, EVER attacked Christians in these threads. Like I said, I was only saying that Christianity has its share of extremism just like Islam.
No, you said that I was ignorant and I said that I am.
I said “I wanted to dismantle ignorance” Not “you are ignorant.”
Thanks. You wisdom comes from “your history”. You simply DO NOT know Universal History. Otherwise you would not talk that way. Maybe you know the History of your town, state and some of the Presidents of the USA, but Universal History, no. So, think of it as YOUR History.
Do you know me personally? No! Then don’t tell me what I do and don’t know. Maybe, I’m wrong about the topics we’re discussing but how can you I don’t know universal history? How do you know I don’t know about the other topics of history? You don’t know who I am.
Excuse me but how are the crusades or the inquisition considered as extremism? You need to brush up on some history. 😉
People were killed? 🤷
 
Then, what is this discussion about anyway? :confused:

I NEVER, EVER attacked Christians in these threads. Like I said, I was only saying that Christianity has its share of extremism just like Islam.

I said “I wanted to dismantle ignorance” Not “you are ignorant.”

Do you know me personally? No! Then don’t tell me what I do and don’t know. Maybe, I’m wrong about the topics we’re discussing but how can you I don’t know universal history? How do you know I don’t know about the other topics of history? You don’t know who I am.

People were killed? 🤷
  1. “Then, what is this discussion about anyway?” You should know. Read back the posts!
  2. “Like I said, I was only saying that Christianity has its share of extremism just like Islam.” - again, attacking Christians and saying that you are not attacking Christians. So, Christian extremism is like Muslim extremism. In which University did you study?
  3. “I said “I wanted to dismantle ignorance” Not “you are ignorant.”” - Sorry, I am not stupid: you were talking to me.
  4. “You don’t know who I am.” As for whether you are married, have 1 or 15 children, I know nothing. But I know the “YOU” you are showing. And that is of a person ignorant of Universal History.
  5. And you want me to tell that you know Universal History. Sorry, I am not doing your job. IF YOU WANT, study Gibraltar (Gabral Taraik) (the rape and assault of Muslims), (the Muslim rape of Spain)), Charles Martel (Charles martelThe Battle of Wien. I suppose that in all of them you at the side of Muslims…
  6. If you had a little bit, I repeat, a little bit of search for accuracy in History, you had it all here: read the Timeline of the Crusades, that you know nothing about. The Truth about Crusades
Would you mind to answer to you question? People were killed? who were killed: Muslims or Christians? And finally: who started it all, the war: Muslims or Christians?
 
. If any disagrees just look at the numbers of times people died in history by the hands of Christian extremism (crusades, inquisition, native americans etc.)
Who cares???

None of this has a single thing to do with this bombing, unless you are trying to justify this murder. It is typical that when a Church is bombed that the Crusades are brought up, as if somehow the two incidents are related. There is zero excuse for this horrific act of terrorism and this discussion of which side had adherents committing violence over the last millenium is sickening. Let us return to this twenty-first century and the terrorism of today by religious extremists. We know not all of this stuff is done in the name of Islam. There was also that Japanese cult that released Sarin gas a few years back. There is also the violence of Ireland in the last half of the twentieth century. None of this has anything to do with this bombing, though, as if somehow other criminal acts can justify an apology of Islamic violence.
 
People were killed? 🤷
The crusades were a just war as they were a direct response to to Muslim aggression. The Christians had every right to re-take christian lands conquered by the Moslems and while immoral actions were committed, they do not detract from the just cause of the war. The sackings of Jerusalem and Constantinople were in fact, condemned by the crusade’s leaders.

Although, these sackings were horrible and unfortunate events that should be frowned upon as atrocious. However, the crusaders had their reasons for sacking the two cities and while these reasons certainly did not justify their actions, we have to realize that these sackings were not done mindlessly, out of bloodlust nor out of greed. Prior to the sacking of Jerusalem, the crusaders suffered immensely from both the heat of the sun and the effects of the desert winds, which drained moisture from their bodies.The Moslems had also poisoned the wells near the city and the men were desperate for hydration, resorting to licking dew of grass or digging in the ground to find moist earth. When they had finally taken the city, they went wild, killing several innocent people. The sacking of Constantinople was done because the Emperor failed to honor his side of the bargain. He had promised the crusaders payment for reinstating him (as his throne had been usurped), yet they received nothing. The crusaders waited for word from the emperor but to no avail. They had to live an entire winter with barely any food. Since the crusaders were not given their due, they felt justified in raiding his lands as a means of “paying themselves”.

Though crusade leaders such as Simon de Montfort and Godfrey de Boullion condemned such actions, the crusades were a large and unorganized mess and taking into consideration that the circumstances prior to those events were conducive to a sacking, those horrors as we know them today were very likely to happen.
  1. The inquisition was founded by Queen Isabella, who knew that the unity of Spain relied on a strong church. Moors and Jews, who didn’t believe in Christian doctrine, rose into powerful positions in both the Church and the government. This was a huge problem and the Inquisition was made for this reason, to differentiate who was a true Christian and who was not. Abuses were frequent early on but when Torquemada was appointed grand inquisitor to solve these problems procedures became more lenient, torture was reduced significantly, prison conditions were improved and money was even given to the families on those on trial. The inquisition was also considered a “more just court than most” and criminals would even pretend to be heretics just to be transferred into the hands of the inquisition. We should also take into consideration that during these times, torture was used by all governments as a means of extracting confessions. People who were found guilty in the inquisition were considered traitors to both the state and church and were charged with execution. Those who were found guilty were given a chance to repent. However, if one refused to repent or relapsed he would then be sentenced to death. Out of the 100,000+ that were put on trial, only 2000 were executed.
Again, you can’t push 21st century morals into medieval people* (ex: torture was a common practice during those times)*. You have to take into context the times and circumstances surrounding those events. To label both the crusades and the inquisition would be incorrect in my opinion. 😃
If any disagrees just look at the numbers of times people died in history by the hands of Christian extremism (crusades, inquisition, native americans etc.)
As for the last one, I don’t know. I’m not American and I have yet to read more on that subject.
 
  1. “Then, what is this discussion about anyway?” You should know. Read back the posts!
On second thought, I think there has been a misunderstanding. Apparently, we both misunderstood. You seem to have thought I was defending Muslims, and I seem to have thought you thought All Muslims are terrorists.
  1. “Like I said, I was only saying that Christianity has its share of extremism just like Islam.” - again, attacking Christians and saying that you are not attacking Christians. So, Christian extremism is like Muslim extremism. In which University did you study?
I think everyone form of genocide by any religious or non-religious group is wrong. I didn’t mean to attack other Christians. I wanted to say that people shouldn’t group all these violent people with the rest of Islam, just like it would wrong to group violent people with normal everyday Christians.
  1. “I said “I wanted to dismantle ignorance” Not “you are ignorant.”” - Sorry, I am not stupid: you were talking to me.
That was not my intention, and I’m sorry you feel that way.
  1. “You don’t know who I am.” As for whether you are married, have 1 or 15 children, I know nothing. But I know the “YOU” you are showing. And that is of a person ignorant of Universal History.
Or maybe I’m just ignorant of the crusades or the inquisition. And not ignorant of the rest of history. I know about many historical subjects. Apparently, this is not one of them.
  1. And you want me to tell that you know Universal History. Sorry, I am not doing your job. IF YOU WANT, study Gibraltar (Gabral Taraik) (the rape and assault of Muslims), (the Muslim rape of Spain)), Charles Martel (Charles martelThe Battle of Wien. I suppose that in all of them you at the side of Muslims…
  2. If you had a little bit, I repeat, a little bit of search for accuracy in History, you had it all here: read the Timeline of the Crusades, that you know nothing about. The Truth about Crusades
Would you mind to answer to you question? People were killed? who were killed: Muslims or Christians? And finally: who started it all, the war: Muslims or Christians?
I DO know about the horrible stuff violent people have done in the name of Islam. And it’s was wrong, I’m not “siding” (or at least I’m not trying to ) side with them. What some of the stuff Muslims did were wrong, stuff of the stuff we did was wrong. That’s what I was trying to say, because I knew people would group these violent people with the rest of the Islamic community. And that’s what I was trying to prevent, apparently it led to a big misunderstanding.
 
Who cares???

None of this has a single thing to do with this bombing, unless you are trying to justify this murder. It is typical that when a Church is bombed that the Crusades are brought up, as if somehow the two incidents are related. There is zero excuse for this horrific act of terrorism and this discussion of which side had adherents committing violence over the last millenium is sickening. Let us return to this twenty-first century and the terrorism of today by religious extremists. We know not all of this stuff is done in the name of Islam. There was also that Japanese cult that released Sarin gas a few years back. There is also the violence of Ireland in the last half of the twentieth century. None of this has anything to do with this bombing, though, as if somehow other criminal acts can justify an apology of Islamic violence.
Again, what I meant to say came out wrong, what I was trying to do what prevent people from group normal Muslims with violent extremists just like we shouldn’t group Christian extremists with normal Christians, because that would be wrong. My intentions were not represented well.
 
The crusades were a just war as they were a direct response to to Muslim aggression. The Christians had every right to re-take christian lands conquered by the Moslems and while immoral actions were committed, they do not detract from the just cause of the war. The sackings of Jerusalem and Constantinople were in fact, condemned by the crusade’s leaders.

Although, these sackings were horrible and unfortunate events that should be frowned upon as atrocious. However, the crusaders had their reasons for sacking the two cities and while these reasons certainly did not justify their actions, we have to realize that these sackings were not done mindlessly, out of bloodlust nor out of greed. Prior to the sacking of Jerusalem, the crusaders suffered immensely from both the heat of the sun and the effects of the desert winds, which drained moisture from their bodies.The Moslems had also poisoned the wells near the city and the men were desperate for hydration, resorting to licking dew of grass or digging in the ground to find moist earth. When they had finally taken the city, they went wild, killing several innocent people. The sacking of Constantinople was done because the Emperor failed to honor his side of the bargain. He had promised the crusaders payment for reinstating him (as his throne had been usurped), yet they received nothing. The crusaders waited for word from the emperor but to no avail. They had to live an entire winter with barely any food. Since the crusaders were not given their due, they felt justified in raiding his lands as a means of “paying themselves”.

Though crusade leaders such as Simon de Montfort and Godfrey de Boullion condemned such actions, the crusades were a large and unorganized mess and taking into consideration that the circumstances prior to those events were conducive to a sacking, those horrors as we know them today were very likely to happen.
  1. The inquisition was founded by Queen Isabella, who knew that the unity of Spain relied on a strong church. Moors and Jews, who didn’t believe in Christian doctrine, rose into powerful positions in both the Church and the government. This was a huge problem and the Inquisition was made for this reason, to differentiate who was a true Christian and who was not. Abuses were frequent early on but when Torquemada was appointed grand inquisitor to solve these problems procedures became more lenient, torture was reduced significantly, prison conditions were improved and money was even given to the families on those on trial. The inquisition was also considered a “more just court than most” and criminals would even pretend to be heretics just to be transferred into the hands of the inquisition. We should also take into consideration that during these times, torture was used by all governments as a means of extracting confessions. People who were found guilty in the inquisition were considered traitors to both the state and church and were charged with execution. Those who were found guilty were given a chance to repent. However, if one refused to repent or relapsed he would then be sentenced to death. Out of the 100,000+ that were put on trial, only 2000 were executed.
Again, you can’t push 21st century morals into medieval people* (ex: torture was a common practice during those times)*. You have to take into context the times and circumstances surrounding those events. To label both the crusades and the inquisition would be incorrect in my opinion. 😃

As for the last one, I don’t know. I’m not American and I have yet to read more on that subject.
Okay. Now I know more about these two subjects.
 
Again, to everyone what I said came out wrong. I didn’t mean to justify violent acts done by Muslims. I just didn’t want people to put these violent extremists and good Muslims together. Sorry to everyone on here.
 
This a problem of Islam, a problem of Qoran.
Qoran is a book of hate.
Pardon and Forgiveness does not exist in Islam.
Islam’s God is a God of fear and not of Love.
The arrival of Islam into the World, as the famous quotation of Benedict XVI said, and that provoked so much anger (here comes, anger and violence) in the Muslim World, the arrival of Islam only brought violence and war.

Islam, in 622 aD, did not bring anything new to the Montheistic Religions, Judaism and Christianism.
On the contrary,
The ideology of the Quran forced the COPTIC-speaking and SYRIAC-speaking Middle East to be tranformed to so-called “ARAB” countries. Its a great tragedy that today Christians are forced to pray to the Arab idol called “ALLAH”.
 
On second thought, I think there has been a misunderstanding. Apparently, we both misunderstood. You seem to have thought I was defending Muslims, and I seem to have thought you thought All Muslims are terrorists.
I meant defending Muslim extremism
 
The ideology of the Quran forced the COPTIC-speaking and SYRIAC-speaking Middle East to be tranformed to so-called “ARAB” countries. Its a great tragedy that today Christians are forced to pray to the Arab idol called “ALLAH”.
Yeah to murtad, “Allah” is the Arabic word for God.
 
Yeah to murtad, “Allah” is the Arabic word for God.
Yes, I know that 😃 as I am an “Arab” myself (amid long years of Arabisation as a Muslim) and was baptised into my ancestral Church, the Chaldean Church of the East since I reverted to my Chaldean roots. I oppose Saddam Hussein and Sunnis as I hate Pan-Arabism and even Pan-Sunnism. I defend Iran and Pan-Shiaism and applaud US President George Bush for liberating Iraq from “Arab slavery” and building bridges with Shias, who are actually Zoroastrians. Today, our mother tongue, the Chaldean language, the exact similar dialect of Aramaic Jesus spoke is one of the 5 national languages of Iraq.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top