OneLight Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.22 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 RG -Daniel knew the law of that land and the consequences...so he was breaking the law... yes, but he never agreed to those laws in the first place, so he while he was breaking the law, he was not breaking his word. this solider agreed to the rule, so when he broke it he not only broke the rule, he broke his word. you do see the difference dont you? What rule are you referring to? I don't see it in the article. Can you tell us what this rule is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 it was illegal and punishable by death to pray in that same area during Daniel's time. but Daniel never agreed not to and then went back on his word. That's a ridiculous distinction. Daniel wasn't a volunteer sent there to defend a foreign nation either...so what? Are you saying that the christians involved should submit to a military policy that forces them to deny God? I don't think they had a voice or choice in the matter, much like Daniel under Darius. There was a law imposed upon Daniel and these modern soldiers. Who should we obey when civic law contradicts the law of the Lord? Daniel 6: Finally these men said, "We will never find any basis for charges against this man Daniel unless it has something to do with the law of his God." 6 So the administrators and the satraps went as a group to the king and said: "O King Darius, live forever! 7 The royal administrators, prefects, satraps, advisers and governors have all agreed that the king should issue an edict and enforce the decree that anyone who prays to any god or man during the next thirty days, except to you, O king, shall be thrown into the lions' den. 8 Now, O king, issue the decree and put it in writing so that it cannot be altered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.22 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 What rule are you referring to? I don't see it in the article. Can you tell us what this rule is? The U.S. military is confirming that it has destroyed some Bibles belonging to an American soldier serving in Afghanistan. Reuters News says the Bibles were confiscated and destroyed after Qatar-based Al Jazeer television showed soldiers at a Bible class on a base with a stack of Bibles translated into the local Pashto and Dari languages. The U.S. military forbids its members on active duty -- including those based in places like Afghanistan -- from trying to convert people to another religion. Reuters quotes Maj. Jennifer Willis at the Bagram Air Base, north of Kabul, who said "I can now confirm that the Bibles shown on Al Jazeera's clip were, in fact, collected by the chaplains and later destroyed. They were never distributed." According to the military officials, the Bibles were sent through private mail to an evangelical Christian soldier by his church back home. Reuters says the soldier brought them to the Bible study class where they were filmed. The Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, told a Pentagon briefing Monday that the military's position is that it will never "push any specific religion." Funny, I read that already. You didn't have to shout back what I had already posted. Still, you have not given us any specific rule, just repeated what was printed. As asked, where does it say that they were trying to convert or push their religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.22 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 Funny, I read that already. You didn't have to shout back what I had already posted. Still, you have not given us any specific rule, just repeated what was printed. As asked, where does it say that they were trying to convert or push their religion? Wow, I must have left that manual in my other pants. I am sure if you really care that much you can find it on google. What? Asking you to provide information to back your statement is now our job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.27 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 How far this Nation has fallen is truly sad. The Military may forbid it but that doesn't make it right. Then there's my Grandfathers Bible, that was given to him by the U.S. Army upon his deployment to Italy in WW2, (subsequent to his death) now in my Dad's posession after his Mother passed away. In the foreward of the Bible is the inscription, printed, from the U.S. Army imploring these men to read the Bible and to put their Faith in God because of the inherint dangers of War. Of course, General George Washington urging his Military of Colonials to attend Christian Church and to have faith in the One True God has no foundational basis that we should pay any attention to, at all, today. There is no Peace aside from God and making the mistake of not allowing our boys to carry Bibles or agreeing with Muslim Nations in refusing to allow them to evangelize while in Muslim Nations has only served to widen this War. Peace, Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.27 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 How far this Nation has fallen is truly sad. The Military may forbid it but that doesn't make it right. while we have fallen, this is not a new thing, this rule is more than 20 years old. Then there's my Grandfathers Bible, that was given to him by the U.S. Army upon his deployment to Italy in WW2, (subsequent to his death) now in my Dad's posession after his Mother passed away. In the foreward of the Bible is the inscription, printed, from the U.S. Army imploring these men to read the Bible and to put their Faith in God because of the inherint dangers of War. and they still do this, every one leaving for recruiting training is given a Bible if they want it when the leave the MEPS. Of course, General George Washington urging his Military of Colonials to attend Christian Church and to have faith in the One True God has no foundational basis that we should pay any attention to, at all, today. times have changed. We now have all sorts of people in the military, and they have every right to be there, and not be forced in to faking a religion. There is no Peace aside from God and making the mistake of not allowing our boys to carry Bibles or agreeing with Muslim Nations in refusing to allow them to evangelize while in Muslim Nations has only served to widen this War. Peace, Dave they can carry a bible, that is not what this story is about. do you even read the article The soldier claims he asked for the Bibles for a Bible study, then the Military meat grindered them . I have read the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.27 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 times have changed. We now have all sorts of people in the military, and they have every right to be there, and not be forced in to faking a religion. Morally Relativistic viewpoint? Times have not changed; Heb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 683 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 11,128 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 1,352 Days Won: 54 Joined: 02/03/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/07/1952 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Hard topic this, with no clear answer, because individual moral and christian values are involved, as well as straight forward military policy. But I ask you this, if a muslim had found one of the bibles, and had started reading it, would it still be ok to shoot him in a firefight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axxman Posted May 7, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 24 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 3,292 Content Per Day: 0.52 Reputation: 11 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/21/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 7, 2009 The US Military destroying Holy Bibles???? Never in my life did I ever imagine we would sink this low. People can make all the arguments in the world about whether this man was wrong, or right. But for them to destroy copies of God's word is just un-real to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 You are defending satan on this one, bro. no, I am defending a rule that has been in place since I was a Pvt in the Corps 20 plus years ago. No, you are not. According to what you posted, there is no rule against possessing a bible at a bible study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts