The world is changing...

---

Originally Posted By: unsupervisedthanks. I've only read the first article so far but it kind of helps explains how the seeds of thor's hatred are to be found in his bible. I myself do not hate the Muslims...but you cannot understand that because you yourself are so filled with hatred. If you want the real meat, skip down to the third link provided. You'll see there what Islam is really all about.With regard to the first link, it should be noted that all instructions God gave the people of Israel concerning killing were specific one-time events...and applied only to the children of Israel. There is no standing requirement for killing of non-believers in the Bible as there is in the Koran. There is no comparison between the two.

I know you are but what am I?you seriously need some new material dude

Originally Posted By: thor

There is no standing requirement for killing of non-believers in the Bible as there is in the Koran. There is no comparison between the two.

How about Luke 22:35-38 when Jesus tells the disciples to sell their possessions and buy swords? I know that he never says why they need the swords but it couldn't logically be for self-defence. They came back with just 2 swords and he said that it was enough. Jesus thought 2 swords was enough to defend 11 men? Its not rational. So if the swords weren't for defence, what were they for?

Two swords among 12 men (they were still 12 at that point) would not be much for offence, either.

This passage tends to be badly neglected in churches, but I think it is important. Jesus had sent out his disciples to preach, and specifically told them not to take any of the normal prudent precautions, such as carrying some money or spare food or a spare pair of sandals (Luke 9:3 and 10:4). It was important that the power of God to provide all was seen. But now, at the Last Supper, Jesus is telling his disciples that they are going back, including himself, into the ordinary fallen world that everyone else lives in, the world where you need to show prudence, a world of want and violence.

As usual, the disciples don't see the deeper principle, and only address the literal meaning. Jesus knows they will understand later - perhaps the "it is enough" meant "I have said enough". But it may also refer to what was to come: Luke 22:49-51 (Matt 26:51-52, Mark 14:47, John 18:10-11), where we note (a) that one sword was used, and (b) Jesus criticised its use.

Yeah, I still don't get it. Even using a sword as a form of defence, doesn't that go against the whole 'turn the other cheek' stuff?

Just to add insult to injury...
[No mosque at Ground Zero][0]
...and they're planning to open in on Sept. 11th, the ten-year anniversary. Condell is right on the money with this one.
[0]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjS0Novt3X4&feature=player_embedded

I'm quite a big fan of Condell but he has received quite a bit of criticism over this video.He says that they're building a Mosque just a few yards from Ground Zero They're actually building two blocks away and, most importantly, they're not building a Mosque. Its a Muslim funded Community Centre. I don't fully agree with it and would rather it wasn't built there, but I can't stand how the facts keep getting twisted to cause even more outrage.

I think the building is actually a community center, but there will also be a temple (mosque) in it. And the Sept. 11th opening of it (assuming it happens on schedule) makes the intent clear.

Originally Posted By: thor makes the intent clear. which is...

Originally Posted By: thorI think the building is actually a community center, but there will also be a temple (mosque) in it.Yeah, you're right there, it will have a prayer room in it. I'm just not sure if a prayer room deserves such outrage.  Originally Posted By: thorAnd the Sept. 11th opening of it (assuming it happens on schedule) makes the intent clear.I hadn't actually heard before this that it was being opened on Sept. 11th. This is either really poor judgement by them or a conscious effort to try contrast the attacks. Sort of saying "Years ago Muslims tried to destroy this community, now we're trying to help it." I will admit of course that its not in my nature to suppose malicious intent without good reason, and I personally don't see anything to suggest it here.

Originally Posted By: bobalicious
I will admit of course that its not in my nature to suppose malicious intent without good reason, and I personally don't see anything to suggest it here.
I don't think "malicious" would be the right word. By contrast, suppose the United States opened a new embassy at ground zero in Hiroshima, and opened it on the anniversary of the day the bomb dropped there.

Originally Posted By: unsupervised

Originally Posted By: thor

makes the intent clear.

which is...

Research the word "dhimmitude". Wiki it, for a start.

hilarious!You know, if you read the history of the dhimmis it tends to paint a much rosier picture of Muslim tolerance toward non Muslims than generally found in the history of Christian tolerance toward non Christians. It's a funny old world eh?

As I said, times are changing.

and your tolerance exemplifies the new world order?

Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: bobaliciousI will admit of course that its not in my nature to suppose malicious intent without good reason, and I personally don't see anything to suggest it here. I don't think "malicious" would be the right word. By contrast, suppose the United States opened a new embassy at ground zero in Hiroshima, and opened it on the anniversary of the day the bomb dropped there. Exactly. To one side its an act of change and good will while to the other its perceived as aggression and/or dishonour.

Originally Posted By: bobalicious Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: bobaliciousI will admit of course that its not in my nature to suppose malicious intent without good reason, and I personally don't see anything to suggest it here. I don't think "malicious" would be the right word. By contrast, suppose the United States opened a new embassy at ground zero in Hiroshima, and opened it on the anniversary of the day the bomb dropped there. Exactly. To one side its an act of change and good will while to the other its perceived as aggression and/or dishonour. But when on foreign soil, how the idea is perceived is what is important. When how the idea is perceived is not the main consideration, the intent can be nothing other than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

"But when on foreign soil"Is this center being built by illegal aliens or some foreign government?

Originally Posted By: OldFolks"But when on foreign soil"Is this center being built by illegal aliens or some foreign government? A foreign entity, in that it stems from a certain part of the world that is intent on "converting" the rest of the world by obviously (9/11) hostile means...which includes the US, Great Britain and France...just to name a few places. I wonder if Great Britain ever considered letting Hitler start up a Nazi party headquarters in London during WWII. Hey, it's just a political party...they can be peaceful, right?

ah, so Islam is a malicious political movement, bent on indoctrination. While Christianity is a beautiful system of belief that would not dirty it's hands with either politics nor evangelism.