Once again, another prominent evangelical preacher, Ted Haggard, has been caught with his pants down, for receiving ‘massages’ from a homosexual prostitute, as well as buying hard drugs through him. Ted Haggard denied having sex with the male prostitute, which sounds just as credible as Bill Clinton’s denial of entering Monica Lewinsky. What is a fact is that Ted Haggard’s wife could not provide the same ‘massage’ as the male prostitute that he hired! Because, who would buy something that is already available to them? The three previous well-known cases of sexual scandals involving prominent TV-Evangelists were Jimmy Swaggart, Marvin Gorman and Jim Bakker. So, Ted Haggard is not the first, and most certainly, he will not be the last.
Can anyone cite a prominent Imam or an Islamic Scholar, who was caught red-handed in a similar scandal? Even in the entire history of Islam, you would be hard pressed to find a single case. I am not gloating, but merely pointing out the words of the Bible: “by their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7: 15-16), to those Christian-Zionist zealots and the nasty TV-Evangelists like Pat Robertson that are constantly foul mouthing Islam. The reality shows Islamic scholars and prominent Imams have ‘only’ produced the best fruits. This is something the sincere followers of Jesus should think about and reflect upon.
The cult of TV-Evangelism is also a potential money-making lucrative business. Thus, many more have been caught embezzling funds raised from their followers than in sexual scandals. To increase your revenue, you need to raise your profile and ratings. Consequentially, some have resorted to claiming they are in direct communication with God. One TV-Evangelist, Oral Roberts, claimed that God told him to raise $8 million, otherwise he would be raised to the heavens, and consequentially he raised $9.1 million. Another is Peter Popoff, who was exposed for his apparent healing miracles and prophetic acts, which were in fact part of an elaborately stage-managed setup, including planting of people in the audience.
Such examples illustrates how gullible so many Americans are, giving millions to a man who simply makes a claim of receiving divine revelation, without offering any proof. Even more gullible are those who believe that these charlatans can perform miracles. One of these idiotic preachers approached me, claiming that they can cure AIDS, and all sorts of illness through their healing powers. Well, I then retorted “in that case you should put the medical profession out of business by now, and perhaps also rewrite the laws of physics in the process”.
This level of ignorance, naiveté and religious superstition amongst the US masses, may explain why the politicians and the media have been able to manipulate the masses so easily on issues like terrorism, war on terror etc. It is even more surprising that ordinary Americans still flock to these fraudulent TV-evangelists. Because, by now any rational person would become a sceptic of these characters and adopt the assumption that: those who are still preaching are simply the ones who have not been caught as yet. May be it is also time to test the followers of Ted Haggard, and ask them: “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at Ted Haggard.”
The Catholic Church also face similar problems, as their celibate priests are often caught relieving their natural sexual desires on boys and girls that they are entrusted to look after. I find it strange that celibacy can be advocated as something positive. Imagine all the men and women decided to be celibate in following the example of Jesus. You would have created the biggest suicide bomb in human history! Inevitably, the Catholic Church will have to do a u-turn on this issue as they had to do on Galileo.
Clearly, both the Protestants and the Catholics are frustrated as they are losing followers to other religions and many more to the non-religious based ideologies. In addition, they have failed to halt the tide of Islam penetrating into Europe and the US, despite the intense propaganda against Islam. Surely this is a better example of a miracle, in comparison to those shown by the fraudulent TV-Evangelists! In frustration, came the notorious anti-Islamic comments from the Pope, and recently a German priest, Ronald Weisselberg, committed suicide in protest about the rise of Islam in Europe.
It is unfortunate for the Christians that they see their battle with Islam and not with the secular forces around them. Militant secularism has been continuously diluting Christianity, thus making it irrelevant, over the last three to four hundred years. It has got to a point where insulting the fundamentals of Christian faith is tolerated, not because the Bible says so, but the dictation of militant secularists. To keep silent, when ones parents are insulted is not an act of tolerance but one of a shameful coward, and this same principle should be applied even more rigorously to the divine message, because it has a higher status.
A consequence of this dilution of Christianity has led to many Christians confusing Biblical values with Secular values. Often they use secular values to interpret the Bible. As an example, “equality of sexes”, which means women can hold positions which were traditionally barred for them on religious grounds. The Bible itself goes against the notion of gender equality; you have from Adam to Jesus, male dominated Prophets sent by God, so by secular criteria God must be sexist. A son and not a daughter of God were sacrificed to redeem the sins of mankind, meaning a female sacrifice is not good enough!
Take another example of homosexuality. While a section of Christians oppose homosexuality, another has adopted it as legal, to the extent that they have gay priests. Clearly, the Christians are confused on such a fundamental issue. The underlying argument for those who favour homosexuality is drawn not from the Bible, but from secular notion of equality, regardless of one’s sexual orientation. In that case where does one draw the line? Will the constant repetition of Christian ‘love’ ad nauseam extend to anyone regardless of their sexual orientation? In that case, why not extend that love to Ted Haggard and let him continue his duty. Now is the time to demonstrate the notion of Christian love and forgiveness that we keep hearing about.
The final example of their confusion is the attack on Muslims for practicing polygamy, while they advocate monogamy. Which I find perplexing, because the Old Testament contains ample example of polygamy, and in contrast, the New Testament indicates the trend towards celibacy as Jesus never married. I fail to see where the Bible endorses ‘only’ monogamy. Those who cite Adam and Eve as evidence of monogamy fall flat on their faces due to it not being decisive, because where was the evidence prohibiting Adam from taking more than one Eve? Nor does the Bible say the only the example of Adam and Eve must be followed. As stated earlier, the evidences in the Old Testament clearly permits polygamy. Hence, to claim that the Bible only permits monogamy is to contradict the contents of the Bible.
According to the medieval Christian theology, sex was the necessary sin of the flesh, it served procreation; continuation of the human race. Perhaps this negative attitude was inspired by Jesus remaining celibate. That may explain why they get critical or to be precise they get envious, when they see Islam encourages Muslim men and women to engage in a healthy sexual life and produce children. Women were known to complain to the Prophet (SAW) against men who pursued extreme austerity and neglected their marital duties. The Prophet (SAW) scolded such men, reminded them spirituality is not just in worship but also looking after your wives and family.
This negative attitude towards sex, I also find from secular sceptics, they criticise Islam for permitting too much sex in the way of polygamy, while at the same time they advocate and promote sexual freedom. How bizarre! Yet these people hilariously class themselves as ‘freethinkers’, when they have not yet reached mediocrity, which is evident from their statements.
The fanatical missionaries knock on people’s doors, inviting them to the gospel or go berserk on evangelical TV stations claiming the truth of the Bible over all religions, usually by mocking them. The underlying message is: “my religion is better than yours”. It is hypocritical to mock other religions and then preaching to them about love and turning the other cheek. As Muslims we are prohibited from mocking the Gods of other religions, and passing derogatory remarks. For sure, we do not have the equivalent of Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell etc. It seems these missionaries are prepared to even sell their religion, and exploit the poverty of poorer nations to gain converts; such type of behaviour is disgusting and betrays the message of Jesus.
Often I get Christian nutcases emailing me with one sentence that usually says: your religion is false and you should accept Jesus as saviour. Sometimes they use obscene language against the Prophet (SAW) and then end with lecturing me about the ‘love’ of Christ! Do they expect that I should jump in the air proclaim Hallelujah, I have been saved, now I can see, I can see, like Eddie Murphy often does in his movies. It is time for the voiceless moderate Christian to come out and give a better representation of their religion and marginalise the fanatical missionaries, and the fraudulent TV-Evangelists.
Another Christian fanatic lashed out at me, saying that Islam was built on murder. I retorted that gruesome murder was the central pillar of Christianity and to the extent that the metaphorical drinking of Christ’s blood and eating his flesh is symbolically re-enacted in Church gatherings. If there was no crucifixion of an innocent man, there would be no resurrection and thus no Christianity. He then claimed the murder of Jesus was an act of love, but then God displaying Human sacrifice like the pagans used to; and how can one see love in such a brutal act where the father-the-God allegedly permits his only ‘begotten’ son or God-the-son to be crucified in this manner, while the God-the-Holy-Ghost remained a spectator?
I am not interested and nor do I have the desire to criticise Christianity, but we do have the right to respond and we will. In any case, our battle is with liberal democracy and Capitalism, and not the remnants of secularised-Pauline-Christianity that is trying to save itself from getting fully digested within the secular framework.
There has been a frantic attempt to portray the non-moderate Muslims in the image of these true Christian fanatics, who are ready convert people by force, if they are given the opportunity. As one genuine priest wrote on Osama Bin Laden’s calm appearance and presentation has left many confused. Largely because of their own propaganda, they had already built up a false perception. Their expectation was to see an angry bearded man, who would be waving a gun and screaming vengeance. The reality is the reverse. Force conversion has been a feature of Christianity and not Islam; and angry emotional men can be seen thumping the Bible irrationally on the TV.
In their zeal to confront Islam, the fanatical Christian missionaries will go to any lengths. They even side with people who actually mock Jesus (PBUH), and even those who hate Jesus (PBUH) from the heart by calling him a liar and His mother a prostitute. How strange, they side with such venomous people and scorn Muslims, who have never shown such contempt towards Jesus (PBUH), which would be an act of apostasy according to Islam. On the contrary Muslims have shown utmost devotion to Jesus and his Mother (PBUH). If anyone insulted Jesus (PBUH), it is the Muslims who are far more likely to come to His defence than the Christians, because the Christians must live up to the tolerant image set by their neo-secular Gods.
Sometimes, I wonder if the Christian zeal is driven by insecurity. Perhaps these missionaries find tranquillity when they see others adopt Christianity, helping them to deal with their own uncertainty about Christianity. For sure, the complex and contradictory notion of the Trinity is bound to raise doubts. Another factor is the central concept that an innocent man can be tortured to death for the sins of others, which contradicts the notion of natural justice.
Muslims on the other hand always supported the Christians and the Jews against the unbelievers and pagans, because we consider them to be the people of the Book and hence a degree to closer to us. The most prominent example of that is from the battle between the Persian and the Romans during the life of the Prophet (SAW). The pagan Arabs was taunting the Muslims for the defeat of the Christian Romans by the Persians, who were polytheists. The Prophet (SAW) and His companions sided with the Romans, and prophesised that the Romans would win in the next battle. So they did! Similarly an excellent example was set by the Christian King of Abyssinia, when He came to the defence of the Muslim refugees against the Arab polytheists.
Instead of attacking Muslims and Islam, the Christians should seek a better alliance with the Muslims and help us to challenge the transitory and vague values of secularism. In my opinion, no one else is capable of leading a resistance to militant secularism. Therefore, Muslims have always been the primary target and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Yamin Zakaria (www.iiop.org)
London, UK
Copyright © Yamin Zakaria 2006
Rate this post:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Stumble It!
radio relay said,
The reason why you don’t hear about your killer imams having affairs, and other unsundry daliances (homosexual and otherwise) is because such things simply are not splashed all over the left wing media, and their own muslim media outlets would never ever release such information, because they are scared to death of the hatefull retribution which would certainly follow.
The religion of hateful, violent beheaders, and stupidity… islam…. does not have a one up, when it comes to moral conduct.
I lived in Saudi Arabia for three years, and witnessed the faithfull muslims (sic) heading to Bangkok, and Cypris, and Las Vegas during ramadan, and hajj. Not to mention the riotous parties that took place every night during ramadan.
Islam is a joke, and full of just as many sinners, and hippocrits as any other religion. It also has way too many violent, intolerant, sadistic killers. Way more than any other religion on the planet. It is the religion of Satan. NOT the religion of God.
November 13, 2006 at 8:18 am
amfortas said,
But this - quote “Sometimes, I wonder if the Christian zeal is driven by insecurity”. Nice one Yamin, my lad. And what drives chopping hands off and beheading live (!) on the internet? And murdering your daughter if she kisses the boy next door? Or blowing up Tube trains full of innocent wage-earners? A sound sense of Muslim security?
It is good to see you comparing todays Zealot ‘Christians’ (hey, Yamin, you and I both know there is nothing Christian about them) with todays Muslims. It makes a change from comparing todays Muslims to Christians of 500 years ago.
Keep on hacking them necks Bro. It makes ramming your views down their throats so much easier.
November 13, 2006 at 8:22 am
Mike LaSalle said,
I dare say that Muslim civilization has been empowered precisely because of the west’s tendency to tolerate (and assimilate) non-western cultures.
Also, your argument that ‘Muslim religious leaders do not suffer public sex scandals’ is a post hoc fallacy because Muslims would deny that such behavior on the part of their Imams was even possible. How can you have a sex scandal involving an Imam if you begin by denying the premise?
November 13, 2006 at 8:38 am
KushinLos said,
Are you even allowed to look?
Do we Christians have bad apples? Should we be more pressed to fix ourselves?
Yeah, we have less than perfect people in our mists and some of them are in our clergy. We aren’t perfect.
I have read some of your opinions and have come of with the impression that you don’t like having gross overextending generalizations towards your religion. You don’t, however, see where you get off doing so to any of ours.
You claim that your clergy are the best fruits? Can you honestly be sure of that when you can’t even question the minutest detail of your holy book or one iota of your prophet’s life or sayings.
Ted Haggard? Don’t really care, he’s not of my denomination and if he chooses to be non-commital to the Word then it is his fault. The Catholic priests who violated their vows with children and those who covered it up? An embarrassment to the faith all of whom should be dropped from the priesthood AT THE LEAST.
There is the question of whether or not these people are plants from groups who dislike (hate and seek to destroy) Christianity or whether they fell into sin like the rest of us.
As for letting comedians and others make jokes at our expense, we were told we were to be persecuted, that they would do it out of hatred of The Lord and we are blessed when it happens.
Yours doesn’t allow for even a question without riots. Cartoons about Mohamed and what his followers do when they thing they are being persecuted leads to the same results “predicted”, if one can assume a cartoon is able to do so, by the cartoon.
Before pointing out the splinter in yours neighbor’s eye, take out the plank in yours. (this is, of course, paraphrased, I don’t even know where to look for the original in the Bible, one of my failings)(what? I never said I was perfect, nor do I expect anyone else to be.)
I could go on, it wouldn’t be hard to do. I don’t have the time too nor the inclination to have my family murdered for my words, something that can happen and does when one “insults” the religion of “Peace”.
November 13, 2006 at 8:40 am
bodisartha said,
November 13, 2006 at 8:55 am
Mike LaSalle said,
November 13, 2006 at 9:10 am
bodisartha said,
Yamin, wasn’t your prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon him) interested in little kids and raping and pillaging to accomplish his goals? How is this any different than the evangelical christains you seem so against?
November 13, 2006 at 9:17 am
bodisartha said,
November 13, 2006 at 9:27 am
TheManOnTheStreet said,
“I am not interested and nor do I have the desire to criticise Christianity…”
Gee, good thing too!
TMOTS
November 13, 2006 at 9:28 am
jarruda said,
It’s been stated by myself on various comments on this site, and by others, but to insult christians for sinning is a moot point.
We are all human, and we make mistakes. Christianity is a way for us to own up to those mistakes and move on. Is it also so surprising that people take lead roles in a religion to make a profit or gain something from it (such as televangelists, or pedophile priests)?
In contrast to what you have said, think also of the great good christianity has done. Charitable works abound in the name of christianity. Perhaps you may not know them all from where you write, but the number of faith-based charitable groups are astounding. How many Catholic or Christian clergy and lay people have died outside the US while working in poor areas of the world? Many are killed by the warlords that rule the area.
But we are not told of their sacrifice for the good of others, instead we hear of the one or two high profile cases of wrongdoing.
But that’s not the whole point of your article, only the first bit.
I would say, in some form of refutation to the rest of your writing here (which I can in some form generalize by sying that chrisitanity is confused/different amongst itself, etc.) is that there are many denominations of christianity. Each one has its own interpretation.
To criticize christianity as a whole for having different opinions is just poor practice. There is too much variation to do that succesfully.
Basically, there is not enough room (especially on an internet comment board) to adequately refute your writing and explain where we feel you are wrong. The size of the article, and the amount of times you shift gears make it difficult. In some paragraphs alone each sentence is a new idea or topic, with assumptions behind each one that are incorrect or ill-founded, especially in reference to christian thought.
The easiest way to respond is that you are criticizing christianity from YOUR perspective. An example is that you said you did not see how Jesus dying on the cross is not ‘love’. To a christian, it is nothing but love. To give of oneself for the good of all? How much love must it have taken for God to give his only Son up in such a horrible manner for the good of us, the sinners? This makes sense to us (the christian) but perhaps not to you.
And now I am rambling. Let me ask you, that when you write again to try to be more concise, or perhaps on topic. There are those of us here who wish to respectfully respond to your writings in the interests of dialogue, free speech, and a greater understanding.
Your perspective is one that we hear very little of in this form, so your representation of islam, or whatever you follow is critical. Just like I do not want televangelists and pedophiles to be thought of when people mention christianity, I am certain you do not want murderers and terrorists to be associated with your faith. Please make your representation of your faith as well as you can, so that we can understand, and I hope the readers and responders can do the same in the comments for you.
With respect,
jarruda
November 13, 2006 at 9:36 am
chas said,
I sense you have some envy when you write about all that money Christians send to their rock star preachers wishing it all went to Mecca.
Christians in the US do not practice monogamy; they practice serial monogamy, one bitch at a time, and that probably won’t last another generation.
Christianity is greater than Islam because more than twice as many people are Christian than Muslim, and Muslims kill anyone trying to leave. There would be a lot fewer Muslims if they were free to convert to other religions.
I think you are also bothered that Christians in the US are not as apostate as they are in Europe and you are discovering it will be a lot harder for Muslims to take over the US than is was to take over Europe.
I’ll start believing, “Christians should seek a better alliance with the Muslims and help us to challenge the transitory and vague values of secularism.” when all you Muslims stop politically backing the apostate secular party of Democrats, and support the rednecks who are the only ones left who are opposing the secularists.
November 13, 2006 at 9:47 am
bodisartha said,
November 13, 2006 at 9:51 am
conservativation said,
It is a little painful to read some of the responses here. As Mike said your piece requires thoughful response, not provocations, and I see the everpresent tossing back and forth of “your guy(s) did this, but my guy(s) did this” as anything but thoughtful, and I’m sorry Yamin you too are guilty of that unproductive debate strategy, though sometimes you are sucked into it.
I read your article and found a great deal I could in fact agree with in your critical comments. I’d like to focus on the parts we agree on, but I’ll say that listing off the problems within Christianity is not an adequate indictment of the religion, not even close, and if it were, you must agree and respond in kind to the legitimate parallel critical facts about Islam (historically and currently, doctrinally and as practiced), so your over arching point is hollow.
However, on the televangelists, you are correct mostly. One point I rarely see made on the whole “slain in the spirit” and healing crowd is that, contrary to the claims of the leaders who say that your faith must be super strong to experience these miracles, my Bible tells me faith is belief in the unseen and the pathological need to go watch Benny Hinn knock down a stadium full of people by waving his jacket seems like these followers really need to SEE somehting to fuel their faith. I find these things insidious because the worst form of untruth is that which resides closest to the truth.
Secularism is a religion, has adherents more fanatical than Christianity, and is a blot on the soul of our country that is spreading like gangrene. You are correct in observing that Christians are adopting the tenants of secularism, and you are correct in noting hypocrisy, though show me a strong belief system, religion or otherwise, and I will show you hypocrisy, it is a human condition and we all have a touch of it in some area of our moral code, some far more then others, so I see hypocrisy as a bad thing but illuminating it makes no real points.
In Christianity it has become supremely frustrating though, to listen to “leaders” rant on gay marriage while parishoners divorce at greater rates than unbelievers and the church offers “Divorce Care”, assisting couples in an act that God says he hates, while shouting Amen as the preacher decrys homosexuality, which the Bible calls an abomination….lets see, He hates divorse, homosexuality is an abomination, uh, would they rate similar disdain? (I speak of no-fault divorce here for those prone to berate me on Biblical grounds for divorce)American families are crumbling under the current “system” of Christianity due to what Yamin has rightly pointed out as its secularisation.
One other point you make, I also get frustrated by, when Christians simply state their belief, insult you, and demand you accept Christ. Worse is when Christians quote scripture in the very beginning of a conversation on faith, where the listener puts no stock in the truiths of the Bible. WE should be prepared to defend our faith, share our faith, and do so multidimensionally. While no one is going to become a Christian as a result of a scientific debate, they may give a better listen to what one says about Christ…etc.
But Yamin, in closing, you’ve succeeded in pointing out some of the “hair” on the Christian church, but you’ve done zero to promote Islam, and your absolute broken record style of what sometimes comes across as blind or even silly avoiding of calling bad things what they are seriously damages your credibility (for me). Note how I have agreed with many of your criticisms, not responded with irrational insults, and generally explained where you failed (with me) to make a hint of a point. Perhaps if you could write (similar to what I did) something agreeing with the legitimate critiques of Islam, you could at least establish your ability to think with an open mind. But it seems Islam prevents its adherents from ANY looks internal and reflection on how men could have corrupted what you consider to be truth.
November 13, 2006 at 10:03 am
BSensible said,
Just 40 years ago in the U.S., we rarely read any news items or literature about homosexuals. It was not something most American families ever discussed or even mentioned, not even on TV. It doesn’t mean homosexuality wasn’t taking place.
As someone mentioned. The Press in the Islamic world would also NEVER report such a scandal, even with video tape evidence.
However, just as there are homosexuals in U.S. society in the 1940’s, even though no one ever read or heard anything about them, there are homosexuals in Islamic society then and now, including in the clergy.
Most Islamic societies are socially, scientifically and educationally backward compared to the West. Therefore science, which has determined that homosexuality is found in nearly all mammal populations, as a normal varient of human sexuality, is not only something that is beyond the understanding of a Muslim raised in these societies, but also beyond the understanding of most people living in a relatively backward society where a predominate religious group considers homosexuality to be a grave sin.
Aptly, in many truly primitive societies, untouched by modern civilization and major religions, most accept homosexual behavior in certain situations as a perfectly normal part of their culture.
November 13, 2006 at 4:01 pm
fubrics short said,
You are right the scriptures do say “that by their deeds you will know them”… So when was the last time you heard of a bombing or terrorist attack by a fundamentalist Christian organization on the Islamic people? Europe and North America are not Christian entitites, they are secular.
Indeed we shall know THEM by their actions and your actions and the fanatical islamofascists actions are in the news everyday for the last twenty years if not more!
November 13, 2006 at 5:04 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
Likewise the offensive comments from bodisartha has been removed but the tone or the substance of his remarks had not changed.
As one of your more intelligent contributor, Jarruda, pointed out: “LaSalle is correct, responding with harsh and assaulting tones is only going to further faith in the writers position” -
The response given here only confirms what I have written now and in the previous threads, that Americans need to learn the notion of free speech and how to engage in a discussion with civillity.
I will now address some of the pertinent points.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 6:11 pm
jarruda said,
I agree with conservativation on most points, and I see that you do as well.
Sescularism is the enemy of religion, in that it brings people to like the temporary bursts of joy and emotion, without promoting long lasting life and love. In this regard, christianity and islam/muslim faiths need to join together.
The flip side of that is the extent to which the faiths may decry secularism. This is the cause of much friction between the faiths (i.e. the agency of women, etc.). There are methods that also differ.
Secondly, some have stated that you must make similar statements about the ‘extreme’ in the islamic religion. You are not required to, if you do not feel that way. This is a free internet (for the most part) and you can express what you wish).
All we ask is that the issues you raise (which can be relevant and worthy of discussion) take into account the flip side. I am not aware of your residence, but I think it is/should be an american criticism to examine yourself as well as others when making a criticism. In the very least it is Christian (remove the plank from your own eye before removing the splinter from your brother’s).
I enjoy having you on this site, it is a perspective that we get so little of. I hope that, like the televangelists for you, or the radical muslims for us, that we can understand the differences between the TRUE values of our respective faiths and what we can do to preserve them in a peaceful way.
Thanks!
November 13, 2006 at 6:26 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
I am very perplexed by the first part of your comment. I cannot recall where I have mentioned or implied that secular tradition has made western civilization weak. The article was talking about certain types of Christians and exposing their inconsistencies and responding to some of their attacks. So I cannot even make a remote connection with your comments. Moreover, I in fact agree with you that cultural, technological and economic domination of the West has been the result of secularisation, removal of the Church which led to the renaissance, and then we had the Industrial revolution, etc.
Your statement about Muslim civilisation is also perplexing. It was the Islamic civilisation that gave impetus to the European renaissance through Islamic Spain. The tolerance in fact came from the Islamic world, when the Medieval Europe was anything but tolerant. Hence Muslim civilisation preceded the post medieval European society.
The final point about Muslims denying such behavior is also puzzling. If any Imam behaved in such a way, they would by punished by the Islamic laws. So why would we say it was impossible as our Imams are not divine? This seems similar to the previous argument where you said crimes appeared to be low because they were underreported. Which is an assumption, you need to provide more evidence for that. When you go to a place and observe a low level of crime what do we conclude? We would conclude crime is low, until we have more evidence to suggest otherwise.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 6:28 pm
Roger Knight said,
Because we cannot, as a practical matter, tolerate certain sins in our society, we have a secular judicial system aimed at punishing those sins we define as crimes, such as murdering people with a bomb on a train or hijacking an aircraft, or sexual relations with a child, and for redress for torts and debts in civil cases.
Therefore, if Tookie Williams indeed earned redemption for his murders under Christian doctrine, his soul is redeemed regardless of whether the secular criminal justice system executed him for these same crimes.
If he did not sufficiently confess and atone for his sins, then the wages of sin are death, so says Jesus, whether at the hands of an executioner, or by other means.
That is the essence of Christianity, that and that Jesus died on the cross for our sins.
Understand this, and you understand Christianity.
Continue to follow the Prophet Mohammed, well, that’s your problem.
November 13, 2006 at 6:30 pm
oneShef said,
You couldn’t stand to let the “haggard” news pass without a little backhand swipe, could you?! This just points out what I addressed with you before about provocking an arguement then fanning the flames! YOU LOVE IT!!!
Christianity is chock full of idiots, as is secularism and your little corner of the world. Secularists want a world that is relative to whatever suits their them,..better to have no moral inclinations than to have some that they must follow and then provide an answer to if they fail. Islam wants mindless adherence and intimidation for conversion and offers virgins after the fact. Interesting, strange but interesting. That one I just have never figured out…why would anyone want a bunch of virgins around them whining about being second in line and bleeding all over the place. Mmm, Mmmm, good! And then there are Christians. Well, the fastest growing religous/faith based belief IS evangelical christianity, not islam. The spirit of God you cannot stop! In His quest for hearts who are tired of corruption, murder and deceipt, the Holy Spirit knows no boundaries and no political affiliation. ..
While there is much to discuss about what is common in our faiths, you choose to create friction and division. That, and only that, is what the HOLY BIBLE(Christian version as opposed to your version) mentions about the enemy of men on this earth. Satan is a spirit and as such, reveals himself as a thief, murderer and destroyer. Those that yield to this then are sons and daughters of the same. Greed, glutony, et al, are further introductions of the same spirit. So, now that you’ve laid your cards on the table, I ask you, Are you prepared to love your enemy or act like him?
November 13, 2006 at 6:38 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
Hence this will be my last response to yourself, until I can see that you can be civil.
As mike said earlier: “Yamin’s article requires an intelligent response, not common insults.”
So you removed the insults but you could not generate an intelligent response as you say “Prophet Mohammed interested in little kids” referring to the marriage with Aysha (RA) which should be singular as she was the only virgin wife of the Prophet and not plural (Kids). Your rage has blinded you so much that you miss these elementary points. The Prophet never sought another wife as young as Aysha, hence the premise of your argument is false and the tone shows your venom and hate and you have no interest in engaging in an objective dialogue. I have answered this issue in great detail in one of the previous article here. I suggest you go and look at it.
Reference to rape and pillage also shows the size of your knowledge is inversely proportional to the level of hate and ignorance that you have.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 6:54 pm
Robert Paul Reyes said,
However the sins of Evangelicals and Catholics pale in comparison to the inherent wickedness of Islam.
Islamic clerics are just as fallible and sinful as Christian ministers. In America we have a free press that delights in uncovering the sins and scandals of evangelical ministers and Catholic priests.
If a journalist, say in Saudi Arabia, wrote a story exposing his local Imam as a child molester, how long do you think it would be before a fatwah was issued against him?
And even if Muslims clerics aren’t guilty of sexual sins or financial improprieties, they are certainly guilty of much greater sins: Calling for the death of non-Muslims, glorifying cowardly homicide bombers as martyrs, treating women like chattel, denying adherents of other religions the freedom to practice their faith…
Islam is a blight on humankind. The Koran has brought nothing but inequality, poverty and ignorance to its followers.
The Arab countries are ruled by despotic and decadent dictators. Israel on the other hand, produces many Nobel prize winners, its citizens live in comfort and affluence and they enjoy freedom of speech.
As a freethinker, I can be impartial and declare in no uncertain terms: Let me live in America, Israel or any Christian nation. But I sure as hell don’t want to live in any Muslim country.
To hell with Islam
November 13, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
Yamin: This is where I and many others would disagree with your fundamental premise that we are all born sinners due to the original sin of Adam and Eve, the latter being the primary culprit, I hope the women’s rights brigade is taking note here.
A child is innocent until he commits a crime. This is an axiom that nobody can deny! Hence your assertion is completely irrational, I would say ludicrous! You are not prepared to question this assumption that we are all sinners, because either you have been brainwashed to believe this or you do not have the courage to evaluate it objectively in your mind. Furthermore, this is not the message of Jesus, but of the late pagan influence that crept in through Constantine and the Council of Nicea, and Saul. Hence you are following Pauline Christianity and not the message of Jesus. There is not a single statement in the bible which you can attribute to Jesus saying that we are all born sinners.
You go on to say to repent, we need someone else to die for our sins is also a notion that goes against the concept of justice and basic human reason. First of all we can repent for our sins, as just as much we can do good deeds to earn reward. If someone has died for our sins than it means we have a perpetual license to commit sin. All we have to do is believe, regardless of how much sin we do with our deeds. This is what the preachers often use with their docile followers. When Jimmy Swaggart confessed he tried to mitigate his responsibility by referring to David’s alleged adultery. You see the corruption that has crept up in the Bible and the irrational concepts like crucifixion now becomes a point of justification for such crimes.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 7:20 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
I expected the usual rant about other issues and not the arguments put forward in the article. Some of them in their rage are not even getting the basic facts right. This type of response confirms once again that Americans are not used to genuine free speech, engaging in a discourse with an opposing viewpoint. This is why very few have been able to remain civil, and present real argument in relation to the actual article. As Cheryl said in the previous thread, most of these people as clowns and those who look at it objectively, tend to agree with a lot of what I have said.
If you want to refer to the political issues like the violence in Iraq, I have written about this in other articles, I suggest you go there and then make your point. Otherwise, I will only be repeating myself.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 7:36 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
I do not understand your points. For example you say: “If a journalist, say in Saudi Arabia, wrote a story exposing his local Imam as a child molester, how long do you think it would be before a fatwah was issued against him?
First of all, if the journalists have evidence that an Imam is molesting a child, he would bring it to the notice of the authorities first, to prevent the Imam from committing further acts and to print such a report without conviction would constitute defamation of character. I know you are used to such things as notion of privacy and public humiliatin has not meaning, but we consider such behaviour as uncivilised. Hence we are cautious and follow a certain guideline. If the Imam is convicted, only then the story would be written.
This has nothing to do with issuing a fatwa, which is an opinion of a scholar or a school of thought and not a decree or legislation to be acted upon. That is done through the courts via a QADEE (A judge). You see, you humbly calll yourself a freethinker but clearly, you do not posses much to think with and to thinkabout!
Then you say: “cowardly homicide bombers as martyrs” – I think you mean suicide bombers. But I fail to see how anyone could accuse one of being a coward for committing such acts. You may not agree with their views and action but most certainly they are not cowards. It is coward to drop bombs on houses and moques from high altitude. It is coward to gang-rape a 14 year old child and burn her body. It is coward to disarm a nation and then attack it. You say you are a freethinker but you cannot rationally and impartially evaluate what the word means.
Your response again proves what I have said about freethinkers in the article and I quote again: This negative attitude towards sex, I also find from secular sceptics, they criticise Islam for permitting too much sex in the way of polygamy, while at the same time they advocate and promote sexual freedom. How bizarre! Yet these people hilariously class themselves as ‘freethinkers’, when they have not yet reached mediocrity, which is evident from their statements.
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 7:59 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
I have not yet responded to your comments. I will do that tomorrow.
In the mean time, your useful posts and polite manner sounds to me like that you are either Mormorns or Jehovas witness. Am I correct?
Yamin
November 13, 2006 at 8:13 pm
Roger Knight said,
However, as most children in this modern age live much longer than necessary to learn to walk, everyone who survives early childhood commits sins. None of us are perfect, and I never said that atonement and redemption for sins and that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross being for our sins is any kind of justification or excuse for the sins.
Jesus was nailed to a cross for blasphemy. In essence for expressing a differing view on religion, God, and our relationship with God, for disagreeing with some of the rituals and practice in that such can work contrary to the love of our fellow man that Jesus preached was necessary to express our love of God.
It is what you and I do on this forum, and for that Jesus was crucified.
Those who framed the American First and Eighth Amendments were indeed inspired by the story of the crucifixion of Jesus.
The pain and agony suffered by Jesus, is metaphorical to the pain and agony we each inflict, when we sin.
Understand that, and you understand Christianity.
One need not be Christian to understand that, one only need to be a decent, though imperfect, human being.
November 13, 2006 at 8:13 pm
oneShef said,
The writings contained in the Bible are …1) historically accurate…2) Lessons are general in nature…3)lessons are specific in nature
As for the historical accuracy. All nations in the former Persian empire, Mesopotamian empire, Roman empire AND the list goes on, have writing by paid scribes of the then ruling body that corroborate the Bibles stories of conquest and defeats by both Israel and other rulers, as well as peronal stories of individuals. It is a well known piece of history in multiple cultures about BLOOD sacrifice, the AZTECS being one of the most recent. What they all have in commone and somewhere was lost in the verbal story telling of this practice, is the WHY? Atonement for sin was the answer and to be done before a Soverign God. The corrupting of the practice and thus the belief is what led to human sacrifice of the Aztecs. Not too different from a culture which chooses to publicly behead others and publicly display the remains, wouldn’t you agree?
As for the lessons being general in nature, they are quite easily, transferable to any culture that seeks peace, the cultivation of knowledge and wisdom, prosperity, etc. Again, the list goes on. What lessons are derived from the Bible generally, have been used in many cultures as the basis of rule of law. Take murder for example or stealing if you are of a mind to, even adultry. How can these lessons be taken literally if not put into some form of practice. And, depending on who you ask about the age of the earth, man has had a difficult time getting them correct, even having to finally going so far as to putting them into writing, and then being disciplined in the adherence to them. Generally, we as people have learned that barbarism has it’s limits and rule of law is helpful in setting up an organized society. But, even that is not enough, is it……
The lesson are also specific to individuals as well as social environs. Loving our neighbor as ourself…that gives most everyone I know fits in its application. Not looking on anothers property as a measurement to ones progress in life. And, again, the list is endless. Even, you and your culture, have lessons on diet. But, whether endless or limited, lessons by their very nature are easily memorized but more difficult in the mastery of them. Like the lesson on loving my neighbor, it is the maze of obstacles many see in the accomplishment of the task. Yet, the application of loving one’s neighbor,(not the Jimmy Swaggart version or Mr Haggards)is fraught with emotional challenges that once walked through, only provide a basis of doing it again at a later date. The practice today does not guaranty future success when faced with another obstinate or unpleansant individual. Why? The heart of man is corruptible when not steadfastly committed to love, and loving unconditionally! That is what our culture and your has the most difficulty with. That is why it most become personal..a personal choice that is not wavering. This is easiest for those who practice selfless giving and Jesus was one who many gentiles readly flock to, desire to emulate and in faith, believe His admonitions to look back to God. God provided a way through this one individual, in a practice that has in it’s roots, ages and ages of practice by many cultures before a devine God, yours included. Blood sacrifice is gruesome and proved to be a repetative habit that ultimatley had no affect on the conscience of the “collective” society. Surely that is why God brought it to a close in one lasting and much talked about end. When Jesus returns and your 12tht imman bows before Him, many on the earth will cry out in one lasting gasp for salvation AND the last of shed blood will have taken place.
As you desperately try to disprove the supremacy of God in your circle of rational thought and logical responses, please bear in mind God is not bound by your futile attempts to disprove His love for mankind. It is mans mind that cannot grasp and further articulate ALL the issues of moral degeneration in man…you and me…them…we all are pathetic in our actions of daily life..
November 13, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Robert Paul Reyes said,
“If the Imam is convicted, only then the story would be written.”
Yeah right, tell me another fairy tale. Journalists in Muslim countries put their lives in danger by writing anything critical of Islam, regardless of whether it is true or not.
Arab armies are nothing for their cowardice, witness the Iraquis surrendering by the tens of thousands in Iraq wars I and 2.
The world was shocked when Hezbollah stood up against the Israeli army. Here was something not witnessed before, a Muslim army of brave fighters.
It is cowardly for a man to dress like a woman, enter a nightclub and blow himself up, killing innocent civilians in the process. If you think otherwise, it’s only testament to the moral bankruptcy of your faith.
“I also find from secular sceptics, they criticise Islam for permitting too much sex in the way of polygamy, while at the same time they advocate and promote sexual freedom.”
I have never criticized Islam for practicing polygamy, although I do think it’s awfully sexist that women aren’t allowed to have multiple husbands. What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. I don’t think polygamy should be illegal in these country, what adults do in the privacy of their own homes, shouldnt be the business of the government.
“This has nothing to do with issuing a fatwa, which is an opinion of a scholar or a school of thought and not a decree or legislation to be acted upon. That is done through the courts via a QADEE (A judge).”
Not true, anyone with a rag on his head can issue a fatwa. Osama is not a cleric, yet he is issues fatwas at the drop of a hat.
“
November 13, 2006 at 8:21 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
If the individual commits sin later in life why he or she cannot repent directly? Why the need to murder/crucify someone else? I do not see how make the leap from one to the other.
You misunderstood about the argument on crucifixion. I said if you say (as other Christians have said to me), Jesus died for your sins and all you have to do is believe in him, and he will be your saviour. In that case, one is able to LEGITIMATELY ARGUE, that regardless of what sin he commits as long as he believes in Jesus, he can enter the heaven. This is the logical implication of your assertion. Hence it is not an excuse but a LEGITMATGE interpretation.
November 13, 2006 at 8:27 pm
oneShef said,
I’ve considered asking Mike for clearance to post an article such as yours. I’ve even considered a title for it, “The Pain in the ass and compounding of trouble Yamin, Muslims in East London, the Middle East and other locations that are soon to have relocated foreign trouble makers transplanted to set up a new absolute theocratic society”, but I passed as I felt the title would be my whole story.
You continue to prove that a systematic discourse is not to be held with “educated” muslims. Why? You project the appearance of wanting to have the final say on rational thought, being the judge, jury and executioner! You insult those that you say have no understanding!? Why do you choose to insult. What I seem to see in your “arguements” is that you most likely are being fed history from your madras, and as such, it shows to those of us here who are “Educated”. We recieve training in world history just as you have and as such, I’m sure there have been errors. However, we are of no illusion of it’s infallible accuracy, and neither are we sure of your infallible learning. What you may not realize, is how poorly your thinking is projected in your writing and even more glaring is the weakness of the training you appear to be trying to display. The english language is rife with multiple meanings in similar words and it is because of this, that it is hard for those not raised with english everyday to convey discussions clearly. It is even harder to master the language while living here and posting to article such as this one. So, do not be so hard on yourself, keep practicing your ABC’s..
November 13, 2006 at 8:45 pm
Will Malven said,
Hmmm, I guess we are human after all. If we can fail at that noble cause, then I guess a little moral turpitude among our flock once and a while might be expected.
You are absolutely clueless about Christianity when you state that murder lies at the center of our religion. It is not murder which lies at the center of our religion, but self-sacrifice. The surrender of life of God in his human form to purchase forgiveness for our sins.
The concept of “original sin” is not some aspect “of the late pagan influence that crept in through Constantine and the Council of Nicea, and Saul,” nor is it “Pauline Christianity,” it is Old Testament, and it is from the Bible which all early Christians read and learned from. Christ taught from the Old Testament and from his own knowledge. He was the fulfillment of the promise of the Old Testament. It is the basic tenet of Christianity that Christ sacrificed himself on the cross for our sins. The sins of all mankind, even you, and that he was resurrected from the dead giving us the promise of life ever-lasting.
His sacrifice did not give us “license to sin,” but granted us forgiveness for the sins we commit. We must still strive to live a sin-free life, because we are to come to God only through Christ. God expects us to sin, and he expects us to pay the price for those sins, most of which manifest themselves during life.
Forgiveness is there for us if and only if it is sought in earnest, i.e. if remorse is genuine and atonement is sought.
I am not a “freethinker” and I believe that you and your cursed religion are the greatest threat to mankind in history. Mohammed was a mass murderer who put whole villages to the torch and sword if they failed to submit.
I will willingly compare the central figure of our beliefs to the the central figure of your beliefs any day. Christ gave his live so that other might have life and have it abundantly. Mohammed took millions of lives because he was arrogant enough to believe his hallucinations of God speaking to him.
Our asylums are filled with people like Mohammed, some believe their Napoleon and others believe that they are talking to God.
November 13, 2006 at 8:48 pm
Vorpal said,
“You need to address some of the offensive language, insults used by some of your contributors.”
Mr. Zakaria, you possess a keen sense of irony don’t you?
Either that, or you are delusional. I think we all know which is the true case.
Perhaps the howling and yammering is merely a smokescreen to cover up your ignorance and blind hatred. Others here have pointed out that this is one of the things you do when you are cornered.
After observing for awhile, I agree. This, as well as loudly heaping “psuedo-ridicule” [psuedo, because it lacks a foundation]upon the readers, is merely a mechanism for avoidance.
If nothing else, you have become rather adept at it.
“For sure, the complex and contradictory notion of the Trinity”
Ah, as others here have pointed out, you should not be throwing the stones from within your own house of contradiction and metaphor.
I thank you for the comedic entertainment.
November 13, 2006 at 9:30 pm
nighthawk said,
“If an Imam were having sex with a homosexual prostitute, the prostitute would NEVER reveal this information to the press for fear of his life. This is the difference between a society where homosexuality is fairly open, as it is in the U.S., and the closed societies of the Islamic world.”
BReasonable,
Note also that in places like Iran there are actually two cultures struggling against each other. The “decadent reformers”, and the “righteous fundamentalists”.
The latter joins with the former to have their fun, and then goes back to vilifying the reformers.
I think Yamin would call this “hypocrisy”.
Well, he would if he were honest.
November 13, 2006 at 9:39 pm
Roger Knight said,
“His sacrifice did not give us “license to sin,” but granted us forgiveness for the sins we commit. We must still strive to live a sin-free life, because we are to come to God only through Christ. God expects us to sin, and he expects us to pay the price for those sins, most of which manifest themselves during life.
Forgiveness is there for us if and only if it is sought in earnest, i.e. if remorse is genuine and atonement is sought.”
Thanks, Will, for making the point that I attempted to make, and that Yamin will not admit to understanding. I believe Yamin is more than intelligent enough to understand our points about the essence of Christianity.
Yamin, you are right, that Christians believe that belief in Jesus is necessary for atonement of our sins. To DEMONSTRATE that belief in Jesus, requires confession and atonement for our sins. When we sin, we inflict on ourselves, and on others, pain and suffering. The pain and suffering Jesus experienced in the last 12 hours of his life is metaphorical to the pain and suffering we inflict when we sin.
When Nick Berg’s head was cut off, did he not suffer genuine pain? Does not his family and those who love continue to suffer? Does not Islam suffer? Because those who cut off his head screamed “Allahu-ackbar!” If Allah forgives, it is Nick Berg He forgives.
Do not the people of Iraq suffer grieviously due to the sins of those who refuse to negotiate a settlement and agree to participate in a government of any kind of format, with a rule of law, with sharia law perhaps, allowing for the differences of opinion that human beings will have, not the least of which are due to some being Shiites, some being Sunnis, and some being Christians? If we Americans choose to leave Iraq to the Iraqis, I believe it will be a grievious mistake, one that can lead to great additional suffering, for anyone to consider that a sign of weakness.
I will end with a question I pose to Yamin Zakaria. Feel free consult the Koran and the Hadiths, you may wish to consult with your Iman, and make a prayer to Allah, to generate an answer.
You are walking down a sidewalk and you find a man laying in the bushes. He is covered with feces and urine, but you also notice that he is grieviously injured, in pain, unable to move by himself, been there for hours, still alive, and asking in a wheezing, barely audible voice, for your help. You recognize him as a man you hate, and who has given you good reason to hate him. He has done you and your family terrible wrong. He is not a Muslim, indeed, he is an apostate from Islam, having been formerly a Muslim and has since insulted Mohammed and Islam. You feel he deserves what has happened to him, though you did not commit the violence of which he suffered.
Yet do you believe helping him in his time of need to be the right thing to do? Are you willing to put his arm around your shoulder, exposing yourself to filth you can wash off in a shower, to help him walk to where an ambulance or a police officer can render further assistance? Will you call for assistance on your cell phone? Will you summon a police officer you see passing by?
What do you believe, is the right thing to do?
To help him, or to stay more than four cubits from him?
November 13, 2006 at 10:06 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
You once again prove me right, a freethinker with not much assets to think with. You say: “Yeah right, tell me another fairy tale. Journalists in Muslim countries put their lives in danger by writing anything critical of Islam, regardless of whether it is true or not.” There is a distinction between Muslims and Islam, just as between Christians and Christianity and Jews and Judaism. So criticising an individual is not the same as criticism Islam.
Clearly you still do not understand the meaning of bravery and cowardice. You say: “Arab armies are nothing for their cowardice, witness the Iraqis surrendering by the tens of thousands in Iraq wars I and 2. “
Yes, so Arab armies were coward for surrendering against a ‘brave’ enemy with almost unlimited firepower, in the air they had no opposition. The ‘brave’ enemy was not content with its unlimited firepower but it gathered many other nations to attack it. Then over the next decade it stripped all the weapons from Iraq and then attacked it. Your example is like a feather weight surrounded by heavy weights and then you call the feather weight a coward for throwing in the towel. Again you have proven exactly what the freethinkers are made of!
To sacrifice ones life (human bombers) is not a cowardly act by any standards. We are not discussing if the act is right or wrong. We are discussing if the act is cowardice or does it require bravery. A coward by definition would not take any risk to himself; where as a brave person would do the opposite. So, clearly human bombers are not cowards but the opposite, any impartial person would agree with me. Examples of cowardly act are what I gave you earlier. Here is another one - when the F16 pilots were shooting at women and children on the Road to Basra in 1991 that is a cowardly act.
To end it you show your RACIST streak by using the pejorative term rag-head. Well I am sure others are dying to say things like that also, but painfully they are controllignthemselves, because they have the basic intelligence to recognise that more they bark in that manner, the less credible they will be, as few people have already pointed out.
Yamin
November 14, 2006 at 4:02 am
Yamin Zakaria said,
You said: The only real failures of the Christian movement occurred roughly 1000 years ago when they failed to hold Jeruselem and wipe the plague of Islam from the face of the Earth
Is this the ‘love’ that everyone is trying to lecture me about? You see, I only have to prod a little and the fake mask of your so-called ‘love’ falls of immediately. You are not much different to Ted Haggard are you? When the Christians took Jerusalem they murdered women, children, the old, indiscriminately. In contrast, real LOVE was shown by Salahuddin Ayubbi when he liberated Jerusalem (with his Christians and Muslims fighting side by side), the blood thirsty crusaders could not even look at Salahuddin in the face in shame! The prisoners were given the choice and the dignity.
You said: You are absolutely clueless about Christianity when you state that murder lies at the center of our religion. It is not murder which lies at the center of our religion, but self-sacrifice. The surrender of life of God in his human form to purchase forgiveness for our sins.
When a man is crucified on a cross by a group of people it is not called murder but GRUSOME MURDER, as he was tortured to death. Can you deny this? Even a person with a single digit IQ would recognise this act was the Murder (CRUCIFIXION) of Jesus. Yes, Jesus sacrificed himself (like Suicide bombers do) as he did not resist, but also he was murdered by those people. His sacrifice amounted to submitting himself willingly to an orgy of gruesome violence that led to his MURDER. Can you deny this? Is this not why you drink the BLOOD and eat the FLESH to remind you of this?
Then we hear the usual confusion of your central doctrine. If GOD died in human form, then who was maintaining the universe and who was Jesus allegedly shouting to in pain on the cross. Or was it the Holy GHOST and JESUS who died, or was it GOD and the HOLY GHOST or was it only Jesus the man or Jesus the GOD or Jesus the only BEGOTTEN son-of-god? This sort of confusion is for you to address who was being killed and who was God. BUT To answer these points you have to come off the irrational track and use reason!
How can an eternal GOD die? God cannot die - this is not limiting HIS capability but demonstrates HIS power. In the same way we say GOD cannot throw you out of HIS kingdom, because HE is the creator of everything. CANNOT here is an exaltation of HIS powers.
You said: “His sacrifice did not give us “license to sin,” but granted us forgiveness for the sins we commit. We must still strive to live a sin-free life, because we are to come to God only through Christ. God expects us to sin, and he expects us to pay the price for those sins, most of which manifest themselves during life.”
I have to laugh now. You are going in circles. When you are granted forgiveness for the sins that we commit (present and future), surely the granting of forgiveness in advance is the premium insurance here!! Do you not see that? Which you in fact endorse by saying that “God expects us to sin”, then surely if we commit sin then we would be complying with Gods’ expectation. I am sure Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swagart and their ilk also used this reason!
Now combine the two you have the lethal cocktail. GOD has granted forgiveness in advance, all you have to do is believe in Jesus, and GOD also expects you to commit sin. In short GOD says you will commit sins but don’t worry I have given you a permanent disclaimer! If this is not a license then what is? LOL :)) –
I don’t think you should attempt to argue about these theological issues as many enlightened Christians themselves are disputing these things. The Jehovas witnesses for example deny Trinity, the Mormons recognise polygamy, many Christian are even questioning the virgin birth etc.
Yamin
November 14, 2006 at 5:07 am
radio relay said,
Oh, and while you’re laughing, get a load of the old fart in the pointy hat speking some abcient, dead language, and wondering whi nobody care. Not to forget, the holy rolling fools playing with snakes, and drowning each other.
Or, how about the asian scarecrow in the safron robes.
But, my favorite, is the one that worships elephants, and monkey, and all kinds of bugga bugga, scarey people with lots of arms.
Religion is the bane of the human race. Islam is the worst of them all, and will succeed in either killing humanity, or breaking us of our addiction to fairy tales, and wishfull thinking.
November 14, 2006 at 7:08 am
radio relay said,
November 14, 2006 at 7:10 am
Elder George said,
You ended you article with the following:
“Instead of attacking Muslims and Islam, the Christians should seek a better alliance with the Muslims and help us to challenge the transitory and vague values of secularism.”
The vague values of secularism that the West has pioneered will prevail and Muslims are falling by the wayside rapidly. In the greater New York City area it is doubtful if even 5% of Muslims worship at a Mosque on Fridays. Muslimas on Long Island want to pray with the men and conduct prayers themselves.
Without patriarchy religion and tradition are weakened and a self-centered ME oriented lifestyle prevails. Korans, Bibles, and Torahs do not change the world. Men who read them and live their understanding to the best of their ability do.
November 14, 2006 at 7:17 am
bodisartha said,
I do NOT apologize for my words against you. However i will refrain from making them again. Why don’t you write an article condemning all that is wrong in your religion? Those that like to throw rocks shouldn’t live in a glass house…isn’t that the saying? I have never once read an article of your condemning the violent wing of your religion, therefore I must assume that you condone it. In fact here is an excerpt from one of your articles:
“If killing innocent people is wrong and heinous for the “terrorists” then surely it is also wrong for these governments to do exactly that, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Which is worse, killing innocent civilians without provocation or killing them in retaliation? Surely the former (aggression) is worse than the latter (revenge).
So condemn not the bombers first (terrorism as effect), but Blair who is the cause (state terrorism as cause).”
You miss the key point here…the coalition is not there to kill innocents…we are there to keep your beloved “freedom fighters” from causing more harm. Do you see the difference? Your fighters go into battle with the sole intention of killing as many innocents as possible..while our soldiers try to keep innocent casualties to a minimum. This is where your message falls apart to any decent human being. We hold ALL lives to be sacred…the radical wing of your religion holds no life sacred…not even their own.
So write an article pointing this out…then just maybe people might start respecting you. But as everyone else on here knows. If you did write such an article…your life would be in danger. And these are the FACTS.
November 14, 2006 at 9:04 am
Will Malven said,
Just because your Islam, Madrassa corrupted brain can’t comprehend the Trinity doesn’t negate its truth, only your claim as a knowledgeable authority on religion. Islam preaches Jihad against all “infidels.” It’s in the Koran. Please show me where Christians are told to do the same.
The difference between Christianity and Islam is that where Christ preached love and tolerance, Mohammed preached murder and intolerance. More revealing is the fact that both Christ and Mohammed “walked the walk” of their talk. Christ went around demonstrating love and tolerance, healing the sick and embracing the outcast. He decried the hypocrisy he saw. Mohammed went around putting “infidels” to death, indulging his earthly desires and preaching his delusions of God speaking to him and your people bought it.
In fact it has occurred to me more than once how similar Mohammed was in his delusions to Joseph Smith (founder of the Morman religion) in his. One major difference, Mormans don’t preach mass murder of all who don’t believe as they do.
You remain completely clueless. Of course God expects us to sin, he created us and he knows that we are imperfect. Only Christ was perfect, or perhaps you believe yourself to be perfect and without sin…interesting revelation about you if you do. God expects us to strive for perfection, but he knows that to be an impossibility. Therefore he provides us with Grace purchased with the Blood of Christ.
Your arrogance only demonstrates your ignorance of all things spiritual. It is the arrogance of the ignorant. You laugh at what you are incapable of understanding. So I will once more attempt to penetrate your Islam enfeebled mind.
God’s forgiveness is contingent on our belief in Jesus, yes, but true belief, not lip service. If you truly believe in Jesus, then you aspire to emmulate him, you live a life in which your sins offend you and you therefore attempt to lead a life which eschews sinful behavior.
You do know what sinful behavior is don’t you? You know things like beheading innocent people, stoning rape victims to death, murdering innocent civilians in an attempt to gain political (secular) power. In short, all of the things which you so resolutely defend. Oh yeah, I forgot one of the very worst sins, arrogating to your self the decision as to who is a “true believer” and who is an “infidel.” Arrogating to yourself the right to enforce Gods will by deciding for yourself what his will is.
You Mohammedans do that last exceedingly well. Only you are given the “true” knowledge of what God’s will is.
At least we Christian rely on the word of the true Son of God and not on the word of some self-deluded hallucinating merchant.
In truth there is much to be admired in the Islam faith, particularly in their devotion to their faith. It is unfortunate that your devotion is to a human and therefore false prophet rather than to God’s Incarnate Word, Christ. If you were devoted to His Word, then I would be much more impressed.
Now fess up Yamin, you are actually a British commedian spoofing a Muslim scholar. You have to be. No one could seriously put forward the garbage you are spewing, ergo you must be satirizing a real Muslim. I have to thank-you. You do it very well and are really very funny. You have a great future as a satirist.
November 14, 2006 at 10:01 am
NationalVoice said,
The blinding sword that prevents Adam and Eve from returning to the garden has a name. It is Religion.
Believe in God, not religion.
November 14, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
So you kept repeating like a parrot that I don’t understand, trinity etc, but you do not elaborate how it should be understood by addressing the points I made! You mention Jesus and GOD with respect to the crucifixion so what was the third part (the Ghost)doing? A spectator and yet part of the other two? Clearly anger will not help your case but it makes my case stronger. All the responses here has actually strengthen my case.
Ironically you use the term “infidel” which is a derogatory term used by the Christians and not the Muslims. Putting all infidels to death was practiced by the Church, in Spain against Jews and Muslims, and they used this in South American killing millions, as they had done in Africa and elsewhere. You want to criticize Muslims using your demons and monsters.
Likewise people are using the term “Islamo-fascists”, fascism which was invented and practice in Europe by Christian Europeans, has nothing to do with Islam or Muslims. So again, you use your demons to criticize us. Ironically such thing speaks more of you then of us! No sane person can deny what I am stating. Hence, as a start I would refrain from using such terms as you are scoring an own goal.
People have asked me to cite similar verses of Jihad (in the batlefiled) in the Bible – Bible does not endorse Jihad but genocide. Here is a clear verse, one of many: ““Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.” (Numbers 31:17-18)
This is a gruesome verse that advocates killing children, even new born male babies, after they had won the battle. What book is more blood thirsty than the Bible? No wonder genocide was a feature of the Church’s past track record, paying lip service to the notion of ‘love’. In contrast the verses in the Quran only pertain to the enemies being fought in the battlefields. Most occassion prisoners were freed and the old, women and young were not taken prisoners, unless they were invovled in the fight - even then they were freed
I see that some are comparing Muhammad and Jesus as if the two are to be seen through some kind of popularity contest. We respect all the Prophets and each one of them has their exalted state. To make such a comparison is a foolish act. So if I was a Jew would be a contest b/w Moses and Jesus?
What I also find peculiar with these Christians preaching to me is they are lecturing about love yet they gloat about killing Muslims (infidels). If you believe in love and forgiveness why is Ted Haggard forced to resign, you should reinstate him and show that you can forgive and love and that you not paying lip service to it. Likewise they seem obsessed with SIN. A very negative outlook indeed; and the emphasis is on SIN is more than the good works. Hence the religious philosophy is not uplifting but the reverse.
You are over emphasizing on SIN means you more or less legitimize it in the minds of many that you are sinner, you are going to sin, hence people will feel less guilty about committing sin and such a view motivates you to commit the sin in the first place. Add to this is the permanent disclaimer, as soon as you believe in Christ the slate is wiped clean.
So if I go to the hotel with my mistress and next day I go to the Church alter and ask Jesus for forgiveness, will I not go to heaven? Where is my crime here? Of course sin is wrong but YOU said I am sinner and I am going to commit sin. So I am going to do the wrong action, and as remedy you said I should accept Jesus as savior, well that is exactly I would be doing.
The only comedians here are those in agony, spitting anger, like some cavemen. :))
I suggest you take a back seat and let the more competent people come forward, who can defend their faith.
You have no idea how far you are behind me on the scoreboard!!! LOL
Yamin
November 14, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Yamin Zakaria said,
You cite my earlier quote that refers to the event in CHRONOLOGICAL manner:
“If killing innocent people is wrong and heinous for the “terrorists” then surely it is also wrong for these governments to do exactly that, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Which is worse, killing innocent civilians without provocation or killing them in retaliation? Surely the former (aggression) is worse than the latter (revenge).
So condemn not the bombers first (terrorism as effect), but Blair who is the cause (state terrorism as cause).”
You then say: You miss the key point here…the coalition is not there to kill innocents…we are there to keep your beloved “freedom fighters” from causing more harm. Do you see the difference? Your fighters go into battle with the sole intention of killing as many innocents as possible..while our soldiers try to keep innocent casualties to a minimum. This is where your message falls apart to any decent human being. We hold ALL lives to be sacred…the radical wing of your religion holds no life sacred…not even their own.
The above is a silly argument, and does not address the events chronologically. What are the coalition forces (criminal pirates) doing in Iraq in the first place? Of course you Americans have the right to go and invade any country and loot it! Right? Or is it that the US was responding to an earlier Iraqi invasion of the US? There would be no “freedom fighters” if there was no invasion by these Zionist-oil-pirates. So you are looking at freedom fighter bypassing the initial invasion and theft and rape of Iraq. This is literally a BACKWARD view of things!
LOL
So the issue of intention is irrelevant here as the initial crime you have not addressed in the first place.
In any case I will address your point about intention. If you drop 500 pound bomb in a city instead of sending your ‘brave’ ground troops first, you can’t claim innocence. Likewise those murdered in Abu-Ghraib, Fallujah, Anbar, the Girl gang-aped in Haditha etc have done NO HARM to your country, and they are really innocent, killed DELIBERATELY by oil-pirates and state terrorists. There are videos which show the US soldiers were hitting Iraqis on roads for fun; they did this on the road to Basra.
Where as the “freedom fighters” are only targeting US troops and the collaborators, the rest are GENUINE collateral damages, naturally as they are Iraqis/Arabs/Muslims.
I suggest you look at my other rticles it will give you all the answers. Once again repeating mysel