Well, if all Christians gave up Christianity that would be a start towards peace with the Muslim world, since they have a global mission of evangelism…sorta like what Christians have. So, how can the world be both Christian and Muslim if they are mutually incompatible faiths?So the Christian faith should only practice in secret and or simply discontinue altogether since it also incites violence among Muslims?
That’s another point that’s been debated to death in this thread… extremist Muslim groups were already known to be violent due to insults to their faith so again he had very good reason to believe that his actions would result in violence. But ultimately it doesn’t matter which came first… what matters is how we deal with it moving forward and inciting more violence is not the answer Jesus would want us to pursue.You know, the ironic thing is that the pastor of which this story originates actually burned the Koran because of what the muslims keep doing. So, which came first the burning or the killing?
It’s not a matter of what I would propose, honestly I’ve not given it any thought as to what I could propose. I didn’t claim to have the answers but, I recognize that doing the same thing that Jones did would just lead to more violence and that is clearly not the answer.So would act would you propose that doesn’t incite violence
So you bring nothing the discussion?It’s not a matter of what I would propose, honestly I’ve not given it any thought as to what I could propose. I didn’t claim to have the answers but,.
And what did you bring? The suggestion of more violence. Well done.So you bring nothing the discussion?
If these muslims knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that if they continued to violently murder people for their faith that we would burn their holy book, then one would assume they would stop killing, right?That’s another point that’s been debated to death in this thread… extremist Muslim groups were already known to be violent due to insults to their faith so again he had very good reason to believe that his actions would result in violence. But ultimately it doesn’t matter which came first… what matters is how we deal with it moving forward and inciting more violence is not the answer Jesus would want us to pursue.
That said because of his example we know beyond ANY doubt that it would result in violence… so as I asked before… why would you do it? Since God is the only one that can judge you let’s say at judgment he asks you “knowing that this would lead to violence why did you do it?” how would you answer him?
It’s not a matter of what I would propose, honestly I’ve not given it any thought as to what I could propose. I didn’t claim to have the answers but, I recognize that doing the same thing that Jones did would just lead to more violence and that is clearly not the answer.
I can’t help but thinking about when the Pope gave that speech in Regensburg some years ago, and Muslims also went crazy over that. I dont remember if there were any casualties, but really, the Pope has been declared the number one enemy of Al Quida (I am happy to be on the Pope’s team ) and anything he says or does, including baptising that former-muslim and journalist a few years ago in the spot light of the media, could be said to be a great provocation against Islam.Well, at least you’ve answered my question.
You obviously would burn the Koran despite knowing that it will cause violence and probably not even towards you. It’s one thing to endanger your own life with such an act but knowing that it could (and as we’ve seen likely would) result in the death of others I can’t say I see as being ok. However, since of course only God can judge you… what do you think He would think of that?
Again… we as Christians are to ask what Jesus would do… not what Muslims would do.If these muslims knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that if they continued to violently murder people for their faith that we would burn their holy book, then one would assume they would stop killing, right?
**You are wrong. Jihad and terrorism is not a “few decades old”. I recently walked past a monument in Vienna that said that Muslim armies were beaten at that place… they tried to take over Europe in the Middle Ages, but were beaten back because they were not so passifistic back then as today. You prabably know another version of the Crusades…Well, how exactly did the Jews get rid of the Canaanites? Peaceful persuasion?
** GraceDK: Unchristian ways, ways which God never intended to be the beginning nor the end of dealing with things. Islam however begins and ends with the bloodshed caused by Muhammad.**
And yet, throughout history so many Christians have done just what Islamic terrorists are trying to do now: spread their faith through violence, in spite of the teachings of their savior. At the same time, Islamic terrorism is just a few decades old. How can one tie this very modern phenomenon to a fourteen century old text? Did they discover some new hadiths telling believers to hijack planes? What took so long? Or perhaps ther are other explanations for why there is so much violence in the Middle East.
As far as what you said about the Pope… I agree… however, it is not a fair comparison. The Pope was practicing his faith which some faiths don’t agree with. Jones specifically attacked the Muslim faith.I can’t help but thinking about when the Pope gave that speech in Regensburg some years ago, and Muslims also went crazy over that. I dont remember if there were any casualties, but really, the Pope has been declared the number one enemy of Al Quida (I am happy to be on the Pope’s team ) and anything he says or does, including baptising that former-muslim and journalist a few years ago in the spot light of the media, could be said to be a great provocation against Islam.
The Pope probably knew some people were going to be less than pleased with his words and deeds, but he is to say the truth, not tickle peoples ears.
I hope you agree.
I understand what passion drove the pastor to burn the Quran, which is a false revelation that encourages the killing and subduing of non-muslims, but I cant get my mind around understanding people that get even close to saying they understand the terrorists who just committed bestial murders.
What are you saying? Was Pope Pius VII’s book burning edict applicable at the time? If so, then all the talk of his fallibility and having to answer for his wrongs, is irrelevant, too.and also that it’s not applicable for all time.
I’d be perfectly fine with that statement if he were the one dead.My guess is that Pastor Jones primarily wanted to show the world that the Quran is an evil book. **He choose to risk his life **for the sake of that statement. If it was just for the sake of attention he could have burned the empire state building at night and gotten even more publicity.
You don’t get it… You think someone even needs to add fuel to the fire … the fire is already very ablase in a dry land… every little branch cathes its angry flames.As far as what you said about the Pope… I agree… however, it is not a fair comparison. The Pope was practicing his faith which some faiths don’t agree with. Jones specifically attacked the Muslim faith.
Nobody has claimed to understand the “logic” behind the murders. It’s not a matter of understanding why they happened but understanding that they undoubtedly WILL and trying to prevent them, not acting in such a way that will trigger more to take place. Logical or not we know it will happen, why add fuel to the fire?
In Islamic states its punishable with death to even say that Muhammad was a false prophet. Do you realise that?I’d be perfectly fine with that statement if he were the one dead.
We’ve already established that there’s no logic nor limit to the violence that extremist Muslims will exhibit. Jones should have considered that and realized it wasn’t just his life he was putting at risk. Even if he does get attacked do you think he’d be the only one to be killed? His actions were irresponsible.
You are wrong. Jihad and terrorism is not a “few decades old”. I recently walked past a monument in Vienna that said that Muslim armies were beaten at that place… they tried to take over Europe in the Middle Ages, but were beaten back because they were not so passifistic back then as today. You prabably know another version of the Crusades…]
Tell me Grace, how do you think the Poles and Lithuanians became Christian. Baptism by the sword, that’s how. Christian countries ravaged and conquered as much as Muslims did. The Russians and Austrians pushed the Turks back then went on to take over Muslim areas in the Balkans, and after the Reconquista did the Spanish stop conqering? No; they, the French and the Italians would later take over Muslim North Africa, to say nothing of the repeated attempts to take over Palestine and much of Syria during the Crusades. Jihadism is very old, but it was just as much a Christian habit as a Muslim one. Often the Muslims were much better occupiers than Chrisitians were. I’d much rather be an Indian in the Mughal Empir or a Jew in the Moorish empire than a Jew in Catholic Spain up until the nineteenth century.
Anyway, lets start by the example of Muhammad: This is from his biography:
If I may, I would just like to add to the above that many years thereafter, Serbians slaughtered thousands of Bosnian Muslims in a campaign called ethnic cleansing.The Russians and Austrians pushed the Turks back then went on to take over Muslim areas in the Balkans…