• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

The Burning of the Koran Debate

Dr. K.R. Allen

Dr. K.R. Allen

Member
Real Person
What do you think? Suppose a Muslim were to announce a burning of the Holy Bible. I wonder what the response would be from around the world? Would there be this type of response as there is over this man's plan to burn the Koran? Would national leaders around the nation and globe respond in an effort to protect the Holy Bible? Or should government leaders be involved in a statement one way or the other on this matter, especially here in America with the 1st Amendment rights.

One statement from the Taliban was very troubling to me: "A spokesman for the Taliban in Afghanistan told CNN, "If in Florida they were to burn the Quran, we will target any Christians, even if they are innocent, because the Quran is our holy book and we do not want someone to burn our holy book." So much for peaceful co-existence!

Now I agree that to burn the Koran is not in line with the teachings of Christ and the apostles, as they taught we should try and live at peace with all people if possible. I think the pastor is decreasing his ability to build relationships and speak the truth of Christ's love into the hearts of the Muslims if he goes through with this unwise act.

But, I'm curious as to what would occur if this was another religion burning the Christian Holy Bible? I would hope that all Christians would show a spirit of kindness and not one of hatred over it if someone were to do that.

Is it possible that the reaction around the globe over this is because of how many see Islam? Could it be that Islam is certainly not recognized by most as a peaceful religion? In other words, is the strong reaction from leaders around the world because the masses of leaders really see Islam as a "kill and conquer by the sword religion" and thus they speak against this due to a legitimate fear of Islamic assaults?

See article below.

Dr. Allen

PS: If you respond to this article please do so with an extra dose of kindness; I don't want this article to become an ugly debate. I'm just curious for thoughts on this subject.

(CNN) -- Governments, world leaders, and others were responding Friday to a Florida pastor's plans to burn copies of the Quran, the Muslim holy book, even amid confusion over whether it would go ahead. The Rev. Terry Jones, the head of a small church in Gainesville, called off the burning Thursday but later said he would "rethink" his position after a meeting with a local imam. Some of the statements in reaction received so far are as follows:

Hamas leader Ismail Haniya called Jones a "religious criminal" and a "retard that expresses a Western-retarded mentality" that targets the Quran, Islam, and Muslims. Speaking in Gaza at the start of the Eid holiday, Haniya said, "I call upon God the merciful, if they want to rip the Quran, for God to rip them apart and their state and make them an example for the believers."

Sporadic protests against the burning happened Friday in Afghanistan. The largest was in the northern province of Badakhshan where about 500 Afghans protested outside of a NATO base in the area, ISAF said. ISAF said two people were hurt in the protests, but the deputy governor of the province said thousands turned out, one protester was killed, and three were wounded.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the burning of the Quran is wrong and undermines religious tolerance and peace. "The prime minister urges that such irresponsible actions not be taken," read a statement from his office.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the plans to burn the Qurans, but said it would not damage the Muslim holy book because it "is in the hearts and minds of every Muslim."

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said, "I continue to urge the government and the people of the United States to ensure the prevention of such an incomprehensible, irrational and immoral act. ... The value of the American nation, which emphasizes tolerance, freedom of religion and common sense, is being tested. Hence, once again, the government and the Americans must continue to take serious action to prevent and stop such uncivilized acts."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said, "While I will defend any American's First Amendment rights, our generals in the field tell us that the men and women defending those rights would be endangered as a result of this stunt. If this group insists on going forward, I would hope that members of the media will not reward them with what they crave most: news coverage."

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who said he has been in touch with the church, said, "I think common decency would dictate that this would not occur and that we would be respectful and are a respectful people of all religions." He said there was little he could do to stop the burning because of the First Amendment.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Thursday he was "deeply disturbed" by reports about the plan. "Such actions cannot be condoned by any religion," he said. "They contradict the efforts of the United Nations, and many people around the world, to promote tolerance, intercultural understanding and mutual respect between cultures and religions. ... I sincerely hope that they will not take such unacceptable actions."

A spokesman for the Taliban in Afghanistan told CNN, "If in Florida they were to burn the Quran, we will target any Christians, even if they are innocent, because the Quran is our holy book and we do not want someone to burn our holy book."

A senior Iranian Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani, condemned the plan to burn the Quran and called for the arrest of Jones, head of the Dove World Outreach Center, according to Iran's semi-official Fars news agency. Should such an "inhumane incident take place in America, the U.S. government and President Obama will be held responsible," he said, according to the report.

Interpol, the international police organization, warned of "tragic consequences" that "may well claim the lives of many innocent people" if the burning goes ahead. Secretary General Ronald Noble said September 11 should be a day to fight terrorism, not a day to "engage in provocative acts that will give terrorists propaganda" to recruit others to their cause.

Sajjad Karim, a Muslim and member of the European Parliament for Britain, told the chamber Thursday that the Quran burning "is the act of one man and his followers alone. His actions should not be identified with the West or Christianity. Muslims globally must know that, through this Quran burning, this man will achieve nothing. He has been isolated in his country and his religion. It is only through a reaction that any perverse sense of achievement can be earned."

U.S. Sen. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, urged Jones against the burning in a posting on his Twitter page Thursday. "Pastor Jones' threats to burn the Quran will put American service men/women in danger - for their sake please don't do it!"

Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Paris Grand Mosque and France's most important spokesman for the Muslim community, urged Muslims to respond "wisely" to the burning and "not to fall into the trap of provocation." He told French radio station RMC on Wednesday that Muslims should also not be stigmatized or targeted for the "terrorists, despicable people" who carried out the September 11 attacks.

The U.S. Embassy in London said Washington is "deeply concerned about all deliberate attempts to offend members of any religious or ethnic group" and condemned such acts as "unrepresentative of American values." While the embassy said it believes firmly in freedom of religion and freedom of expression, "we reaffirm our position that the deliberate destruction of any holy book is an abhorrent act."

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said everything possible should be done to ban the Quran burning. "If it does take place, it will inflict the most severe damage to inter-faith relations and human and cultural dialogue and will be used as a pretext by extremists for more killings and retaliatory killing," he said.

Bernard Valero, the spokesman for France's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Thursday that France condemns "in the strongest terms the vicious and irresponsible statements of Pastor Terry Jones. This incitement to hatred is unacceptable and can only reinforce all forms of extremism. It is also an insult to the memory of the victims of September 11 and also to all the other victims of terrorist acts motivated by intolerance and the abuse of religion."

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has expressed grave concern over the threats to burn copies of the Quran. According to spokesman Farhatullah Babar, Zardari said anyone who even thought of such a despicable act must be suffering from a diseased mind and a sickly soul. He said it will inflame sentiments among Muslims throughout the world and cause irreparable damage to interfaith harmony and world peace. Zardari called for doing all it takes to stop such a "senseless and outrageous act."

A hard-line Indonesian Muslim group, the Islamic Defenders Front, told CNN it will protest the planned burning and will issue a death sentence on Rev. Terry Jones if he carries out his plan. "This is not a problem between Muslims and Christians but rather between Terry Jones and mankind," said Sabri Lubis, a secretary general with the group.

The Vatican implored the church Wednesday not to burn the Quran, saying it would be an "outrageous and grave gesture."

The top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus, warned earlier this week that the plan "could cause significant problems" for American troops overseas.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil liberties and advocacy group, plans to hold a news conference in Washington on Thursday to address the issue. The group's "Learn, Don't Burn" initiative includes the distribution of 200,000 Qurans and other activities planned for Friday and Saturday, the planned date of the burning.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has defended the right of the Rev. Terry Jones to go ahead with the plan, even though he condemns the idea as "distasteful." "The First Amendment protects everybody, and you can't say that we are going to apply the First Amendment to only those cases where we are in agreement," Bloomberg said this week, citing the section of the Constitution that promises freedom of speech.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which is dedicated to protecting U.S. troops from religious intolerance, has promised to buy one new Quran and donate it to the Afghan National Army for each one burned in Florida.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the Quran burning would be a "disrespectful, disgraceful act."

Former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin urged Jones on Wednesday to halt his plans, saying the burning "will feed the fire of caustic rhetoric and appear as nothing more than mean-spirited religious intolerance. Don't feed that fire."

The U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Tuesday issued a statement saying the U.S. government "in no way condones such acts of disrespect against the religion of Islam, and is deeply concerned about deliberate attempts to offend members of religious or ethnic groups." It said it condemned the "offensive initiative" by the Florida church.

Lebanese President Michel Suleiman denounced the Quran burning as "contrary to the teachings of tolerant divine religions and totally incompatible with the logic of dialogue among civilizations, religions and cultures." He noted that a United Nations conference on religious tolerance two years ago called on people "to renounce hatred and intolerance and terrorism," and "to reflect on the Christian teachings and concepts of humanity that emphasizes the love and respect for the other."

Muhammad Ismail, a spokesman for the hard-line Indonesian Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir, said earlier this week, "The burning is not only an insult to the holy Quran, but an insult to Islam and Muslims around the world."
 
I a just amused by the irony of battling religious fundamentalism by burning a holy book!
 
i propose a compromise;
that they only burn half of it, and furthermore, that they allow the muslims to choose which half!
who says that we are so intolerant that we will not compromise?

our president will not comment on the mosque at ground zero because it is legal, so i am sure that his opinion about the burning will be also that it is legal.

in summation;
i agree with isabella
 
For a hardline muslim group I thought this quote made sense:
A hard-line Indonesian Muslim group, the Islamic Defenders Front, told CNN it will protest the planned burning and will issue a death sentence on Rev. Terry Jones if he carries out his plan. "This is not a problem between Muslims and Christians but rather between Terry Jones and mankind," said Sabri Lubis, a secretary general with the group.
Thats basically what we do. We didn't kill all muslims for 9/11, we just passed death sentence on osama. For those groups that want to harm the west/america/christians for what terry does, the obvious conclusion is they want to be punished for osama.
Now I suppose the above only makes sense if you consider the murder of 3000 civilians equivalent to the burning of a book. If you in fact find such a comparison fictitious and wonder how it is that islam has fallen prey to such idolatry that the image of mohammed or printed words take precendence over their duty to God, then you may join me with a dunce cap, since this world often confuses me :) But then I get confused about the reverence christians place on books, buildings, and bishops.
 
But then I get confused about the reverence christians place on books, buildings, and bishops.
Click to expand...
and elders, pastors, prophets, teachers, professors, etc. including putting the alphabet before or after their name

do not get all feffered up now, the context is "reverence"
 
My opinion on the matter is this.... while the church has every right to burn the Koran or any other books they want, their actions do not speak Christ's love to the people they're supposedly trying to reach. This church claims that they want to teach people the truth, and yet they're spitting in their faces instead. This whole thing is, in my opinion, idiotic, dangerous, and a whole host of other words.... but the main point is it will only make the situation worse, not better.

In the reverse, if a Muslim group wanted to burn the Bible, I would feel exactly the same. It is their legal right to do it, but it's not smart.
 
Let em burn. It is legal, it hurts nobody, and if someone wants to burn bibles or the flag or the koran, then go for it.


why would anyone get so bothered about something someone else is doing that does not harm you in any way? let the idiots show themselves and stay out of the way.
 
The difficult part, as with any of these obnoxious groups, is that people think they speak for all of us, and convincing the sheople otherwise can prove.... frustrating.
 
I think that burning the Koran is counter-productive - a cage rattled is a cage re-inforced.

HOWEVER

The negative reaction from Muslim leaders is understandable, but what I don't like is the appeasing, apologetic, crawling responses from so many Western leaders. It is symptomatic of how weak our leadership is against the number one threat to Western civilisation - Islam - not radical Islam, just Islam. Our situation is like Neville Chamberlain in 1938, popularly received by the rulers and masses for his promise of peace in our time. There will be no peace. Islam will never be appeased, it is a religion of conquest and submission. Our submission to their sword. And Christians having only one or two children while Muslims breed like blazes just hastens our demise. A strong patriarchal religious and social system will defeat a confused and politically correct feminised west. But I will not let this pass without a comment or struggle. ylop
 
Ylop,

Very interesting comments.

I think there is a twofold issue going on here. (1) How do we as Christians act and display our love of Christ while going forth in the Great Commission, which includes reaching those in Islam as well as any other religion. So I agree with you it is indeed a violation of the clear and plain biblical precedent to burn one of their pieces of literature. That is in NO way following the character of Christ who said his children are to be "peacemakers."

Yet (2) is the issue you have properly noted. The political issue. Legal for the person to do this? Yes. So all of the clout against him from a legal stance is something I think is off base. I too struggle with why so many people in government leadership positions are bending over backwards on this issue. To me the leaders ought to say something like this: "Our personal views are different than our public leadership positions. The man has the right to buy a piece of property and dispose of it as he wishes. But no one and no organization or people have the right to attack or injure a man for disposing of the property however he sees fit."

In other words, they ought to defend the right of the person to be stupid if he wants to while maintaining a strong stance against any non-peaceable religion, no matter what religion it is, Islam, distorted versions of Christianity, or any other faith group that believes violence is the way to control.

Seems like to me some misplaced emotions and ideas going on among many caught up in this debate. We ought to stand together in the civil area that a person can dispose of any property they have so long as it is done in a safe and responsible way. Yet we on the Christian side ought to speak against inciting others to anger by irresponsible, immature, and antagonistic acts towards others. We are called to speak truth in grace, seasoned with salt, not in a spirit of bitterness, violence, or animosity towards anyone or any religion.
 
When people talk about showing the love of God and tolerance in such situations, I find it incredibly naive.

This is not a religion that knows love. This is a religion that twists humanity.
This is not a religion that deserves respect. This is a religion that DEMANDS respect.
This is not a religion that understands tolerance. This is a religion that PLAYS ON and TAKES ADVANTAGE of tolerance.

The country I am currently in bought lots and lots of Bibles at one point, specifically to burn them. And they DID burn them. And yet if someone does ANYTHING to a single Quran they are, worldwide, in an uproar. So let them be in an uproar. Provoke them. Push them, don't bow to them. Do you not understand that that book they are protecting commands them to kill us? Do you not understand that by respecting such a book more than the Bible you are not being tolerant but instead BOWING to them? Are they your masters? That's what their nations have always made of us.

This is what they do. When they kill you, tax you for your beliefs, force you and your children to be like them... few even take notice. It's in the news and gone in an instant. But if you act against them by DRAWING A CARTOON they riot, they kill, they destroy. They pronounce death sentences.

When people talk about tolerance and love to those in Islam, I understand where they are coming from. I really do. But that's like the Jews tolerating Nazis. In your tolerance you will destroy yourselves.

If this burning where to take place, there would be riots, death sentences, killing, destruction, all such evils. But who is doing the wrong? The ones burning the book that commands that we become Muslim or die, or the ones that will kill because it is burned? Provoke them. If war results let there be war. Let everyone see the truth of who and what we are dealing with. Tolerance only masks who they really are. They are a people that bite the hand that feeds them. Stop feeding them respect. Then maybe they won't take over and your granddaughters won't have to be covered up, hidden away, and treated like vermin. It's only when Islam puts up a western, secular front that anything else is so.

Know who you are dealing with. They treat even their own "peaceful" actions as part of their holy war against us. Their goal is conquest! Even their own religion dictates that they can say or do ANYTHING THEY WANT as long as it is for the benefit of Islam. One can't even tell if a "secular" Muslim is really secular or if they are putting up a temporary front for the benefit and spread of Islam. They have used this method to conquer nations again and again. And keep in mind, that when the hammer of true extreme Islam comes down, secular Muslims never fight it. Never have, never will. Those "peaceful" Muslims that call you brother and treat you so well, will not help you when the tide changes... and many will spit on you and throw the first stone.

This is a religion of falsehood. All they know is twisted and fake. Their love is twisted and fake. I live surrounded by Arabs. Half of what they say is lies, the other half is half-truths... and the OTHER half is just confusion. Win them with love THROUGH truth... with harsh actions OF truth while bearing said truth to them. You will not win them by bowing to them.
 
sadanyagci said:
This is not a religion that knows love. This is a religion that twists humanity.
This is not a religion that deserves respect. This is a religion that DEMANDS respect.
This is not a religion that understands tolerance. This is a religion that PLAYS ON and TAKES ADVANTAGE of tolerance.
Click to expand...

Well said !
I know a young man who is in the army and stationed in Iraq right now. He had his picture taken while sitting in Sadam Hussein's throne chair in the Palace. At the top of Sadam's chair there is an inscription in Arabic. Translated into English it says "Israel is ours".
Islam is not a peaceful and loving religion !
Blessings,
Fairlight
 
We must not confuse Christian grace with social pacifism. Yes, we are instructed to love our enemies and turn the other cheek, but that is on a personal level as it relates to our personal testimony for Christ. Such cannot be a national policy. As a national or secular policy, turning your back on an enemy is suicidal. It would be tantamount to stirring the Kool-Aid at Jonestown. Yes, treat individual Muslims as Christ treats any sinner, lost and needy, but do not give recognition or tolerance to Islam anymore than we would embrace sin and Satan with tolerance and recognition.
 
Ok some questions here:

do not give recognition or tolerance to Islam anymore than we would embrace sin and Satan with tolerance and recognition
Click to expand...
.
John, are you saying that as citizens here in America we should not tolerate this religion? Or are you saying that we as Christians here in America should be in personal opposition to it because it conflicts with Christ's gospel? I certainly agree with the idea as Christians that we must evangelize people of other faiths but if by that you mean we should not tolerate them as citizens with the God-given natural inalienable right to worship as their conscience guides then I would find that hard to accept. I imagine you mean the Christian faith cannot accept it but that we can tolerate it as a religion (so long as it is practiced in peace), correct?


Do you not understand that that book they are protecting commands them to kill us? Do you not understand that by respecting such a book more than the Bible you are not being tolerant but instead BOWING to. ....Provoke them. If war results let there be war. Let everyone see the truth of who and what we are dealing with. Tolerance only masks who they really are. They are a people that bite the hand that feeds them. Stop feeding them respect
Click to expand...
Sadanyagci, a question here. Do you think then we should refuse to give them the right to worship here in America? Secondly, do you see a difference in belief and acts upon a belief? In other words, do you think the government ought to punish people for what they believe or punish people for what they do?

I have no doubts that the Islam faith has a means unto the end to try and conquer. Even some Christian versions of theology do the same thing. One might even argue that all Christians have the same idea because of the Great Commission. For example reconstructionists believe in rebuilding the theocracy here in America. Other types of Christian theology seeks to win over the world and government to rule, for example postmillennial theologies. It seems to me all religions and all forms of Christianity would seek the same end, conversion of the world to their view. The real question then seems to be not does the religion seek to convert to the world but does the religion seek to convert the world through peaceful means. So I agree they would like to rule the world and would have a means unto that end. But should we not focus on fighting against the militant acts instead of the beliefs?

Granted, if their faith and holy book does teach violence, which I can see that, then would it not be better to prohibit the acts of violence through criminal laws and civil laws that demand voluntary association than through a punishment of their beliefs and free speech? I'm not suggesting that is what you desire but I'm asking to see if I understand your view.

I know you called tolerance naive, but I'm not ready to suggest that the forefathers of our land were naive. In reality it looks like to me they were brilliant thinkers, maybe some of the most brilliant men and leaders in the entire history of civilization. Granted, not without some error, but still brilliant thinkers. It appears to me that they made the precise and very keen division of where to properly separate law from tolerance. It appears to me they opted to allow free speech and free thoughts in ORDER to preserve the truth as they believed the truth could win in the sphere of public debate. In other words, it seems to me those founders understood this truth: Allow all to be free in thought and speech so that all can see the true colors of the faith. A true faith will be one of peace and one of non-force. Yet by this very act of tolerance it gave Christianity the greatest room to spread because Christianity spreads NOT through the sword but through the inner convictions of the heart and mind that yield a peaceful and voluntary association that likewise leads others to the same faith through the same peaceful means. As some legal scholars and historians have said: "The First Amendment is one of the greatest ideas ever known to the Civilization of mankind and to any established government."

Does it not make us just like Islam if we in turn reject tolerance of their beliefs (not actions if their actions are non-peaceable) and embrace an effort to non-peacefully stamp out the faith/beliefs? Maybe that is not what you are suggesting, or is it? The way I see it is if we tolerate all faiths to be open and to speak freely about their ideas then we can then see if their ideas lead to violence or peace. A peaceful religion should be therefore tolerated and a violent religion should not be allowed to be carried out in act and deed, which is where criminal law has its basis. The same theory would apply to Satanism. Should we not allow Satanists to have their beliefs so long as they do not carry out any violent belief? Should we not allow people of any faith (Judaism, Scientology, Islam, Humanism, etc.) the right (and thus by implication our tolerance) to exist in speech and thought so long as it is peaceful and non-violent in the acts? If not then what prevents the outlawing of even Christianity or any religion of true good-will and peace if we do not exercise tolerance of belief but then regulate the acts?

It seems to me the idea of tolerance is also our greatest way to get the gospel to them. If we repress any view and that group goes into hiding how do we know who to target with the gospel if they are in hiding? It is harder to share with someone who will not be open about their views than it is to share with those who speak freely about their views. Thus, it seems to me tolerance on the citizenship level is a means unto the end of getting the uncompromised and pure gospel to them which does not tolerate anything less than a complete submission to Jesus Christ as Lord by grace through faith alone.

Your thoughts?
 
Fairlight said:
sadanyagci said:
This is not a religion that knows love. This is a religion that twists humanity.
This is not a religion that deserves respect. This is a religion that DEMANDS respect.
This is not a religion that understands tolerance. This is a religion that PLAYS ON and TAKES ADVANTAGE of tolerance.
Click to expand...

Well said !
I know a young man who is in the army and stationed in Iraq right now. He had his picture taken while sitting in Sadam Hussein's throne chair in the Palace. At the top of Sadam's chair there is an inscription in Arabic. Translated into English it says "Israel is ours".
Islam is not a peaceful and loving religion !
Blessings,
Fairlight
Click to expand...


So because a Muslim despot did not support the nation of Israel ALL Muslims are hateful?? Riiiiiiiight....
 
I did not mean we should drive Muslims from the USA or prevent them from practicing their religion in-so-far-as it remains within the bounds of the freedoms of our nation. However, there are things we can't close our eyes to. They are doing militant training on our land for the purpose of moving against us. They are buying lots and lots of our land. They are building mosques where they shouldn't, and preaching against our nation from within our nation. Should nothing be done about this? Should an army of terrorists be allowed to form within the USA for the purpose of taking our freedoms away? They aren't trying to defend themselves. If they were, I would have no issue. But it's not about defense, it's about attack.

But my point was that they should practice their religion, as long as it respects the freedoms of our country. Part of respecting that freedom is respecting the freedom to burn what ever we own. But they don't honor that freedom, and acting in such a way would cause their lack of tolerance to come out of hiding long before they want it to; before they have the strength they desire to put the western world under their boots. No freedom of our world would be broken by such actions... and they would be shown for who they really are.

As it is, all we are doing is letting them lie through their teeth and get what they want. In such a case, I believe Christians should be the exposers of truth. Words aren't cutting it. Actions are needed. Freedom of speech and freedom of action have one power in common... freedom of exposing the truth. We need to use that freedom while we still have it.
 
Isabella said:
Fairlight said:
sadanyagci said:
This is not a religion that knows love. This is a religion that twists humanity.
This is not a religion that deserves respect. This is a religion that DEMANDS respect.
This is not a religion that understands tolerance. This is a religion that PLAYS ON and TAKES ADVANTAGE of tolerance.
Click to expand...
Well said !
I know a young man who is in the army and stationed in Iraq right now. He had his picture taken while sitting in Sadam Hussein's throne chair in the Palace. At the top of Sadam's chair there is an inscription in Arabic. Translated into English it says "Israel is ours".
Islam is not a peaceful and loving religion !
Blessings,
Fairlight
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
So because a Muslim despot did not support the nation of Israel ALL Muslims are hateful?? Riiiiiiiight....
No one said all Muslims are hateful. Islam is hateful. Christianity is loving. Not all Christians are loving. Not all Muslims are hateful. My father is a very secular Muslim. He is not hateful. That doesn't change the facts of Islam.
 
sadanyagci said:
I did not mean we should drive Muslims from the USA or prevent them from practicing their religion in-so-far-as it remains within the bounds of the freedoms of our nation. However, there are things we can't close our eyes to. They are doing militant training on our land for the purpose of moving against us. They are buying lots and lots of our land. They are building mosques where they shouldn't, and preaching against our nation from within our nation. Should nothing be done about this? Should an army of terrorists be allowed to form within the USA for the purpose of taking our freedoms away? They aren't trying to defend themselves. If they were, I would have no issue. But it's not about defense, it's about attack.
Click to expand...

Ok, I gotcha. The FBI and military is certainly aware of any training in our lands whereby the training is formed for the purpose of any revolution. As for those buying lands, building mosques, and for those preaching against us as a nation then this is in reality a good thing because it does give us a true sign of their hatred.

As you asked: "Should nothing be done about that?" OF COURSE SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE. It is what we should already be doing and what we must continue to do. We should in turn preach the gospel, and as you correctly suggested, we too should expose the error of their thinking and the logical errors of their religion (but burning a book of theirs? How is that anything but a disrespectful act? But I too agree it shows their hearts when they scream violence in response. When someone burns a Bible of our faith a Christian, if truly following Christ, would not react in such a way). YET we should PREACH AND TEACH AGAINST THEM as we stand along side of their freedom of speech. In other words, I should be mature enough as a believer in Christ to speak against the errors of their beliefs yet at the same time walk with them to the State House and Halls of Congress to defend the right of both of us to preach and teach freely.

And in doing so we shall see who truly is the more mature person. If we can preach and teach against them, and still support their right to teach against us, yet in turn if they preach and teach against us but will not also support our right to preach and teach against them then the testimony is open to everyone to see who is the more mature person. A mature person and a mature faith is not threatened by another faith that is against it. Take for example God. God is the truth and he is not fearful or threatened by Satan and all of Satan's religions. neither should we be either. And that is my point! By giving them the freedom and tolerance that freedom and tolerance will be their achiles heel. They will indeed show that they are not mature enough to let others oppose them and thus in that process they will show that their religion is not truly a peaceful, non-coercive, voluntary religion.

As for their training to attack, YES we should do something against any non-peaceful plot. This is exactly what the FBI and CIA and military is for, to keep peace among the land, to keep civility. It is there where I would stand with you in saying that ought to be the focus. Whoever in whatever religion begins to seek the power of the Sword to advance its cause through the sword then the power of the government should be used to prevent that! It does not matter if it Roman Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Christianity in whole or part, etc, if the sword is needed to promote the faith then that faith is not a peaceable faith and thus it should be opposed at that level. Islam though is not alone in this. They certainly do seem to be the most current version of a promote by the sword type of faith. Roman Catholics under the banner of Christ have done this in the past through the crusades.

What I am suggesting is that it is not naive to allow for tolerance; rather it is the brilliant idea of through tolerance that true peaceable faiths can be recognized and then the ones that are not should be opposed at the physical acts level, not at the ideas and beliefs level.

But my point was that they should practice their religion, as long as it respects the freedoms of our country. Part of respecting that freedom is respecting the freedom to burn what ever we own. But they don't honor that freedom, and acting in such a way would cause their lack of tolerance to come out of hiding long before they want it to; before they have the strength they desire to put the western world under their boots. No freedom of our world would be broken by such actions... and they would be shown for who they really are.
Click to expand...

Hummm....very interesting here brother. Now I don't think this pastor's actions are Christ-like, but I can certainly see how God is using a sinful act of someone to further a higher cause. God is just that sovereign and wise to do that very thing. He is a master at using evil for the good. He used the evil acts of Satan and men in the acts of killing Christ to bring salvation to the world. So I can certainly see how a sin on this man's part brings out the sin of those who want to react with violence. And I can see how such a scenario occurs whereby is draws out the people who have violent attitudes and hearts, which could very well fit into the sovereign plan of God to expose ideas and hearts. If this is what is happening then God is using a man who properly exercises his civil citizenship rights (though not rightfully with Chrisat's approval in regard to the heart purpose of causing of trouble, i.e. a violation of seeking to live at peace with all people if possible), his freedom to dispose of property he rightfully owns in a lawful and peaceful manner, which is in turn drawing out the anger and hatred of the hearts of many in Islam. And since God is omniscient then this could be taking place now so as to expose some groups before they get a stronger foothold in other places. Hummmm....it might just be what God is doing here behind the scenes as he providentially moves the universe according to his plan. Maybe this is what we are seeing.
 
sadanyagci said:
No one said all Muslims are hateful. Islam is hateful. Christianity is loving. Not all Christians are loving. Not all Muslims are hateful. My father is a very secular Muslim. He is not hateful. That doesn't change the facts of Islam.
Click to expand...


I am referring to the logic in associating Saddam (despotic military dictator) and his dislike of Israel (not unique amongst Muslims it has to be said) with a claim that Islam is NOT a peaceful and loving religion!!!! etc etc

It was a completely spurious connection, what Saddam believed has nothing to do with Islam Saddam believed in Saddam more than anything) it has everything to do with Middle Eastern politics. I have no problem with anyone saying they don't think Islam is peaceful because they converted populations by the sword (fair enough), It is understandable if people think Muslims have a tendancy towards extremism, I understand when people mix up cultural practises with Islam and therefore say it is a misogynist religion (most of the worst practises associated with women in islamic nations are actually pre-Islam) but I DO question the logic of saying 'Saddam said 'This' in Arabic so Islam is evil waaaaaah' It just doesn't make sense.
 
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
sadanyagci said:
I did not mean we should drive Muslims from the USA or prevent them from practicing their religion in-so-far-as it remains within the bounds of the freedoms of our nation. However, there are things we can't close our eyes to. They are doing militant training on our land for the purpose of moving against us. They are buying lots and lots of our land. They are building mosques where they shouldn't, and preaching against our nation from within our nation. Should nothing be done about this? Should an army of terrorists be allowed to form within the USA for the purpose of taking our freedoms away? They aren't trying to defend themselves. If they were, I would have no issue. But it's not about defense, it's about attack.
Click to expand...

Ok, I gotcha. The FBI and military is certainly aware of any training in our lands whereby the training is formed for the purpose of any revolution. As for those buying lands, building mosques, and for those preaching against us as a nation then this is in reality a good thing because it does give us a true sign of their hatred.

As you asked: "Should nothing be done about that?" OF COURSE SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE. It is what we should already be doing and what we must continue to do. We should in turn preach the gospel, and as you correctly suggested, we too should expose the error of their thinking and the logical errors of their religion (but burning a book of theirs? How is that anything but a disrespectful act? But I too agree it shows their hearts when they scream violence in response. When someone burns a Bible of our faith a Christian, if truly following Christ, would not react in such a way). YET we should PREACH AND TEACH AGAINST THEM as we stand along side of their freedom of speech. In other words, I should be mature enough as a believer in Christ to speak against the errors of their beliefs yet at the same time walk with them to the State House and Halls of Congress to defend the right of both of us to preach and teach freely.

And in doing so we shall see who truly is the more mature person. If we can preach and teach against them, and still support their right to teach against us, yet in turn if they preach and teach against us but will not also support our right to preach and teach against them then the testimony is open to everyone to see who is the more mature person. A mature person and a mature faith is not threatened by another faith that is against it. Take for example God. God is the truth and he is not fearful or threatened by Satan and all of Satan's religions. neither should we be either. And that is my point! By giving them the freedom and tolerance that freedom and tolerance will be their achiles heel. They will indeed show that they are not mature enough to let others oppose them and thus in that process they will show that their religion is not truly a peaceful, non-coercive, voluntary religion.

As for their training to attack, YES we should do something against any non-peaceful plot. This is exactly what the FBI and CIA and military is for, to keep peace among the land, to keep civility. It is there where I would stand with you in saying that ought to be the focus. Whoever in whatever religion begins to seek the power of the Sword to advance its cause through the sword then the power of the government should be used to prevent that! It does not matter if it Roman Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Christianity in whole or part, etc, if the sword is needed to promote the faith then that faith is not a peaceable faith and thus it should be opposed at that level. Islam though is not alone in this. They certainly do seem to be the most current version of a promote by the sword type of faith. Roman Catholics under the banner of Christ have done this in the past through the crusades.

What I am suggesting is that it is not naive to allow for tolerance; rather it is the brilliant idea of through tolerance that true peaceable faiths can be recognized and then the ones that are not should be opposed at the physical acts level, not at the ideas and beliefs level.

But my point was that they should practice their religion, as long as it respects the freedoms of our country. Part of respecting that freedom is respecting the freedom to burn what ever we own. But they don't honor that freedom, and acting in such a way would cause their lack of tolerance to come out of hiding long before they want it to; before they have the strength they desire to put the western world under their boots. No freedom of our world would be broken by such actions... and they would be shown for who they really are.
Click to expand...

Hummm....very interesting here brother. Now I don't think this pastor's actions are Christ-like, but I can certainly see how God is using a sinful act of someone to further a higher cause. God is just that sovereign and wise to do that very thing. He is a master at using evil for the good. He used the evil acts of Satan and men in the acts of killing Christ to bring salvation to the world. So I can certainly see how a sin on this man's part brings out the sin of those who want to react with violence. And I can see how such a scenario occurs whereby is draws out the people who have violent attitudes and hearts, which could very well fit into the sovereign plan of God to expose ideas and hearts. If this is what is happening then God is using a man who properly exercises his civil citizenship rights (though not rightfully with Chrisat's approval in regard to the heart purpose of causing of trouble, i.e. a violation of seeking to live at peace with all people if possible), his freedom to dispose of property he rightfully owns in a lawful and peaceful manner, which is in turn drawing out the anger and hatred of the hearts of many in Islam. And since God is omniscient then this could be taking place now so as to expose some groups before they get a stronger foothold in other places. Hummmm....it might just be what God is doing here behind the scenes as he providentially moves the universe according to his plan. Maybe this is what we are seeing.
Click to expand...
Christ turned over the tables of money changers in the temple, released the animals, and used a whip during all this that he made himself. He healed on the Sabbath specifically to antagonize the Jews to point out their evil ways. He said things in crowds that made people want to stone him, or throw him off a cliff. He called Himself by the name of YHWH, in front of people, knowing they would just want to kill Him.

Burning it is within rightful actions of believers. It is a book that is full of sick things and also commands our giving up salvation or being killed. It contradicts the Bible, twisting the truth. There is no wrong in doing such a thing with it. It is like destroying the idols of Canaan. The antagonizing effect of it would have the same effect as Jesus healing on the Sabbath or calling Himself by the name of God. They would want us killed just as they wanted Jesus killed. From what I can tell, the only difference between this and His actions were that He knew whether He would be killed immediately or not.

You call it sinful and unchristlike. I'd be careful with such terms. I'm pretty sure this would be right up Christ's ally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top