ISIS

This depends on what one considers a "militant."
The first four Caliphs (called "Rightly Guided Caliphs")
certainly did wage Wars Of Conquest against all around them.

But also note that the Caliph who captured Jerusalem *refused*
to go into the Cathedral On Temple Mount (**formerly** the
Jewish Temple), lest future Moslems use that visit as an
excuse for turning that Christian Cathedral into a Mosque.

Note that the Rightly Guided Caliphs, and their Omarid and
Abasyd successors, did *not* destroy the ruins of Palmyra,
and other sites.
They did *not* slaughter the (pagan) Yazidis, or other groups.
They did *not* look for "lawbreakers" to murder.
They did *not* interfere in people's marriage.

The Al-Baghdadi Group is doing **many** things that no Caliph
ever did. That is one of the reasons why so many Moslem
scholars have denounced ISIS-Daesh as Heretics!

Howard T. Map-addict, Pointy-Headed Liberal, Jew.

PS Note that for fully a thousand years (632-1632) it was
safer for Jews to live in Moslem countries than Christian ones.
For the next two centuries, it was about even. HTM

DDHvi wrote:
Check on what percentage of the leaders in the first 50 years of Islam's history were militants. Then consider that ISIS' goal is to replicate the policies and standards of that time.

Where are the people that called me a bigot, a racist, and islamaphobic. I wanted to halt all immigration from Syria and Iraq because they could make completely real passports with stolen computers, software, and stamps. These subhuman people (the radical islamists) have no compssion or sense of remorse of killing people in Brussels. I notice that ones that are so free to attack people about Muslims are completely silent. Some of these cretins said that they believe Christians were more dangerous than the radical muslims. Yeah...Yeah...I know some these people were just baiting me rather than really defending their points. Well these type of people are worst than the radical islamists. The radicals will at least die for their beliefs and I can respect that part of their cause. However, we have some people here that smells the first shot of gunpowder their running for mommy and daddy (translation: their cowards!). These are same people that think the American law abiding public should be disarmed.

Wow talk about grabbing the wrong end of an arguement.

Why yes, you are racist. Just as racist as the dicks who perform such attacks as Brussels and Paris.
I don't believe anyone here has said that law abiding Americans, merely that you should have decent gun laws and that non-law abiding Americans should be disarmed if the laws they broke warrant it.

I don't remember calls to halt all immigration from Ireland when the IRA and the Ulsters were blowing the crap out of each other, nor do I recall such claims when the Italians were running their Mafia wars and massive crime syndicates.
Nor Yugoslavs when that country went to shit.

Christianity has been a religion of hate for over a thousand years from the early days of 'join the crusades, kill heretics, and get into heaven earlier'

Oh wait, those were radicals weren't they. Hardly representitive of the Irish, the Italians, the Slavs, Dark Age Christians.

Just like the current Cystitus dicks are radical fucks who don't really represent Muslims.

https://youtu.be/2DQDwVjP1HM


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Fully agree with Annachie.
While I hate to use the NAZI angle the last person to talk about subhumans was Goebbles.
Over the centuries many millions of people have died because of leaders using the christian religion as an excuse, this doesn't excuse these shits, wrong is wrong no matter who does it.
In Australia there has been much more harm done to young people by catholic priests thsn by muslim radicals.

Just incidentally I believe you keep getting they're mixed up with their?

The problem is not race, it's culture.
Race is merely minor genetic drift primarily caused by environmental factors. It's also overblown since people from two different races can interbreed and produce fertile offspring, thus proving that all races are still the same species.

Culture is completely different. It is culture that dictates how people interact with the world and all others within it. Culture can be thought of as a kind of programming that limits (or expands) the worldview of the people in question.

Of course, the problems arise when two differing cultures meet.
Some cultures get along fantastically. The Nepalese, for instance, respect and are (very) respected by the English. In the past, the British Empire went head to head with the Nepalese and by god, were we glad when they agreed to join our side. Conversely, the North Koreans have a culture which has been artificially engineered to the point where they are virtually incapable of understanding anything outside their borders.

Culture can also affect genetics. It is worth noting that in the UK, people from Pakistani backgrounds are responsible for a disproportionately large number of genetically damaged offspring due to their culture of cousin marriage stretching back centuries, a tradition that has reduced genetic diversity to the point that some cousins are almost as genetically close as siblings (or sometimes closer).

Culture is also very difficult to modify externally. When Scotland was finally absorbed into the UK, kilts and bagpipes were banned for a long time due to their roles in fomenting revolution. Scotland is currently the country that everyone thinks of when they hear the words Kilt or Bagpipe, so yeah. It didn't take.

Of course, multiculturalism was intended to allow differing cultures to flourish without being impacted by other cultures (such as western society). As you can see, it didn't work. Multicultural areas actually have higher levels of racism because the cultures involved are encouraged to not make adjustments to help them interact with others, but to become less tolerant and more self-centered.

In a very real sense, many of the current problems can be traced to culture and cultural incompatibilities.
It is the denial of this that makes things so much worse.

Final comment. This year Cystitis have killed almost 3 times as many muslims as christians/others.
2015, more muslims than christians.
It goes on like that.

So just remember, when you talk of stopping muslim refugees, many of them are fleeing the very organisation you're crying out against.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Now from my years in a church boarding school - Do unto others as you would that they would do unto you - Love thy neighbour. Cthia you simultaneously espouse to be a member of the church of peace and love, yet also demand to own lethal weapons. Worse, you then try to use the horror in Belgium to push that contradictory philosophy.
From initial reports the two airport bombers pushed luggage carts into the terminal, fired a clip of AK47 ammo off in about 5 seconds then pressed the button. How would an armed citizen have changed anything in that scenario?

I see two problems here:

1. Religion. Not a problem as an individual matter of faith, but a big problem when used as a tool to power. Whenever religion mixes with politics, someone gets shafted. The counter to this is education, so that people can see religion in the proper perspective to the rest of the world. Religious totalitarian regimes suppress and control education, so we should encourage it.

2. Economics. In the case of the Middle East, specifically oil, the reason why Western countries have meddled with Middle East politics for decades. If we can find alternatives to oil consumption, we can isolate the Middle East and deprive their governments of funds used to support groups like ISIS. Of course, we have so many vested interests in petrobusiness that alternate energy research gets marginalized.

1) they don't believe Jesus Christ was killed, let alone resurrected because they ignore the testimony of the eyewitnesses.

http://credohouse.org/blog/what-happene ... ove-easter

grades known evidence on the deaths of the apostles, and points out:

At this point, there are only three options for explaining the apostles’ belief:

They died for something they knew to be a lie.
They were delusional or crazy.
They were right; Christ did rise from the grave.

Many think the whole thing was made up, but then they must, like ISIS, ignore historical evidence.

2) they ignore prophetic scriptural evidence. The Dead Sea Scrolls give us pre-Christ examples of all the Old Testament books, except Esther (IIRC). So they ignore Genesis 3:3:15, 49:9>12, Psalm 2, Psalm 22, Isaiah 53:6>11, Daniel 9:25>26, and many other things we know were written BC.

Many other also ignore these things, of course, but their theory states that Jews and Christians colluded to modify the original scriptures.


In general, I think the following is right

I see two problems here:

1. Religion. Not a problem as an individual matter of faith, but a big problem when used as a tool to power. Whenever religion mixes with politics, someone gets shafted. The counter to this is education, so that people can see religion in the proper perspective to the rest of the world. Religious totalitarian regimes suppress and control education, so we should encourage it.

2. Economics. In the case of the Middle East, specifically oil, the reason why Western countries have meddled with Middle East politics for decades. If we can find alternatives to oil consumption, we can isolate the Middle East and deprive their governments of funds used to support groups like ISIS. Of course, we have so many vested interests in petrobusiness that alternate energy research gets marginalized.

with the caveat that atheism should also be ranked as a religion. It certainly has many of the true believer type and the power seeker type in practice.

Far too often, people insist on following some theory or other without using known test methods.

This whole thing reminds me of:

"Christ at the Round Table" by E. Stanley Jones.

People may argue with his conclusions, but they should start by evaluating his method of gathering evidence first. He had people of different religions NOT discuss their theories about God, but instead describe their experiences, if any.

[quote="Annachie"]

snip

Christianity has been a religion of hate for over a thousand years from the early days of 'join the crusades, kill heretics, and get into heaven earlier'

snip

/quote]

IIRC, in a discussion, Abraham Lincoln pointed out that if you call a dog's tail a leg, the dog still doesn't have an extra leg.

What people really believe is not shown by what they say, but by what they do (the fruit of their lives).

In "Christ at the Round Table." E. Stanley Jones noted that even among Christians, only about a fourth reported actual experience of God.

At age nineteen, I was hitchhiking with the intent of circling through the west coast. During a prayer meeting, the man in the row ahead of me, got up and said to me "I don't know what you are going to think of this, but God just told me to buy you a bus ticket back home." When I got home, I found that the youngster who had been hired to take my place on the ranch had quit. Perhaps more important, during that summer at home, I did some much needed maturing. There have been other experiences also.