fenwar Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 161 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/16/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted August 4, 2005 dglovach is using "Islamonut" to refer to the terrorists, not to all "Muslims." The fact that you automatically thought he was referring to Arabs shows how strong the connection betwen terrorism and Arab Muslims is. According to the opening post of this thread by dgolvach, and further contributions by yourself and others, you have already shown that you do not distinguish between terrorists and all Muslims. I can only understand these terms in the context of the thread and the views expressed thus far. Of course I believe there is a significant difference between "terrorists" and "all Muslims"; that is what I have been arguing all along. If dgolvach is happy to admit that there is a difference between his "Islamonuts" and mainstream Islam then my work here is done. None of which has any connection to that ridiculous song by John Lennon. What you are talking about and what the Scriptures are portraying here are two different things. For anyone to draw a connection between the wisdom of the Scriptures and that pagan performer are two different things. If John Lennon to speak to you now, he would tell you he was a fool. I know the lyrics to "Imagine" promote a very humanist ideal but is it really impossible for any secular ideology to resemble a Christian way of life in any way, shape or form? Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Aug 4 2005, 12:23 PM) dglovach is using "Islamonut" to refer to the terrorists, not to all "Muslims." The fact that you automatically thought he was referring to Arabs shows how strong the connection betwen terrorism and Arab Muslims is. According to the opening post of this thread by dgolvach, and further contributions by yourself and others, you have already shown that you do not distinguish between terrorists and all Muslims. I can only understand these terms in the context of the thread and the views expressed thus far. Of course I believe there is a significant difference between "terrorists" and "all Muslims"; that is what I have been arguing all along. If dgolvach is happy to admit that there is a difference between his "Islamonuts" and mainstream Islam then my work here is done. WE have never said that they are all the same. Rather that it is the terrorists who want to make themselves indistinguishable from the peaceful Muslims. Furthermore, I have made the point that one cannot look at history and claim it was just a few Musilms that have been responsible for the Millions who have died at the whims of Islamic regimes. History simply does not support that assertion. I have never said that all Muslims are terrorists, but I have asserted that it is more widespread in Islam than most are generally aware, and that Islam's history of bloodshed and oppression predates the "Policies" upon which it is blamed. The Muslim world has not risen up against Hamas, Hezbollah, or any other known group. They have been silent as thousands of Jews have been slaughtered for simply being born in Israel. Silence is usually indicative of approval. I know the lyrics to "Imagine" promote a very humanist ideal but is it really impossible for any secular ideology to resemble a Christian way of life in any way, shape or form? That is not the point. You seem to be trying to make theological connection where none exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgolvach Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 110 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,254 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 6 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Author Share Posted August 4, 2005 "All you need is love".....I believe this but in a time of war, sometimes you have only one choice and that is to "Live and Let Die" . We need to let the Islamonuts be the ones to die or they will see to it that we do. We keep allowing them to move in with us. Sure...90% might be peaceful but what about the other 10%. That would mean 600000 in the US and probably more in Europe. They are "Here There and Everywhere". We had better do "Something". As I mentioned earlier, we don't seem to be getting much "Help" from the Islamic community. We even know who some of the fire-brand Mullahs in this country who call for Jihad. Perhaps we should forse them to "Get Back to where they once belong" or just sit back and "Let it Be'' and just hope for the best. Sooner or later some of these nutcases with a bomb are gonna make the way over our open border and" Boom Boom out goes the Lights" (different band). We need to change our border policy now!. Our "Fools on the (capital) Hill" don't seem to get it. We (non-Islamonut community) had better " Come Together" and drive back the Extreme Islamist "Revolution" or the only good memories we will have will be "Yesterday". See ...even the Fabs agree with me. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgolvach Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 110 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,254 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 6 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Author Share Posted August 4, 2005 So the term "Islamonut" is not the slightest bit prejudicial, offensive or derogatory? Would you call a Muslim an "Islamonut" to his face? Two questions: If you are practicing Jihad and you worship Allah, wouldn't that kinda put you in the catagory of "Islamist"?, (Islamo-....) If you believe that by strapping on a bomb vest and getting on a bus in Israel or Europe or perhaps flying a jet-liner into buildings in NYC will get you 72 virgins in heaven, wouldn't that make a "nut". Hmmmm... lets see ...Islam o nut! Indeed! Islamonut...perfect description. Have a nice Islamonut-free day! Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 QUOTE(Most High @ Aug 3 2005, 09:24 AM) Imagine there's no heaven, It's easy if you try, Why would a Christian want to do that? Luke 17: 20Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." "It is no use looking for the Kingdom of God, or by wishing for it, or by anticipation of it. The Kingdom will never come. Rather, the Kingdom is spread out on earth before men, but they do not see it." -Jesus Now here is what Jesus REALLY said: And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see [it]. And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after [them], nor follow [them]. For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one [part] under heaven, shineth unto the other [part] under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. Luke 17:20-24 Jesus remarks bear no resemblance to John Lennon's lyrics which deny the existence of Heaven. Jesus was talking aboutt the Kingdom of God not not being seen in any visible location, but that they Kingdom of God is within the heart of every believer. God's Kingdom is in every heart that has made Jesus Lord. QUOTE Imagine all the people living for today... Wouldn't it be better if people lived for Jesus? Why do you assume the 2 are opposed? Because living for Jesus means a life of servitude. Living for today in the sense that John Lennon espoused was a completely self-centered concept. Christians live with an eternal perspective. We live our lives by what pleases God, not by what satisfies our natural whims. We do not merely live for the next moment, but rather we live for Jesus, and we have given today, tomorrow and all the days that follow into His hands. "Living for today" usurps His authority. QUOTE Imagine no possesions, I wonder if you can, I wonder if John Lennon could - with all the money he had! Is that humor or don't you understand it or is it humor because you don't understand it? No it just shows the hypocrisy of John Lennon. He was rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams. If he were alive today, he would be one of the richest men alive. None of the Beatles lived in their lives in grass huts and gave on their money to the poor. They live like Kings. It is utter hypocrisy to ask others to live by values and aspire to virtues that you don't reflect in your own life. QUOTE You may say Im a dreamer, but Im not the only one, I hope some day you'll join us, And the world will live as one. What Yod said about this! Which is what, death to anyone who doesn't believe as I do? Sounds like the Muslim extremeists to me. Here is what Yod said: Yes, the world will be One when Yeshua destroys His enemies and establishes His Throne in Jerusalem over all the nations. In that day, Israel will rejoice and be glad. Those who have wagged their tongue against them will be counted with the goats. Why don't you join the Living Messiah instead of a dead Lennon? One day God WILL destroy His enemies and those who have sought the destruction of His people, Israel. You need to be on God's side of the issue not on the terrorist's side. Those who defend the terrorists, will share their fate. God will bless those who bless Israel and He will curse those who curse Israel. Jesus is a Jew, and He is the King of the Jews. He will establish His throne in Jerusalem, and shall rule the world with a rod of iron from that city. That is how it is going to happen. You need to decide if you are going to join Lennon or Jesus. John Lennon is wishing he had chosen Jesus, I can guarantee that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eadora Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 226 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/24/1945 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Yoh Good People According to the opening post of this thread by dgolvach, and further contributions by yourself and others, you have already shown that you do not distinguish between terrorists and all Muslims. I can only understand these terms in the context of the thread and the views expressed thus far. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Fenwar hits the nail on the head! The title of the thread is: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrs Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 45 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,081 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 53 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/13/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted August 4, 2005 If the present hard line policies where going to bring peace and stability to Israel they would have done so by now. They have been in effect for decades. Israel would by now be the safest most peaceful place on earth. The Bible prophecies that Jerusalem will be the 'cup of trembling'.That a little tiny nation will be the focus of the world's attention.There will never be lasting peace in Isreal until the Second Coming of Christ - not the Rapture, the Second Coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgolvach Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 110 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,254 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 6 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Author Share Posted August 4, 2005 The slanted unbalanced view that dogolvach takes is obvious in the title he chooses. Errr...OK why don't you do a little reading on the life of Mohammed. You know...the founder and grand poobah of the "religion of peace" . You will discover that he was big on offence. I am not unbalanced in my views. I know the history of how Islam came to be and I know what the stated mandate in the Q'uran is. OFFENCE!!! Also I'm cute and you shouldn't say such mean-spirited things about me. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Yoh Good People According to the opening post of this thread by dgolvach, and further contributions by yourself and others, you have already shown that you do not distinguish between terrorists and all Muslims. I can only understand these terms in the context of the thread and the views expressed thus far. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Fenwar hits the nail on the head! The title of the thread is: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eadora Posted August 4, 2005 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 226 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/03/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/24/1945 Share Posted August 4, 2005 The Bible prophecies that Jerusalem will be the 'cup of trembling'.That a little tiny nation will be the focus of the world's attention.There will never be lasting peace in Isreal until the Second Coming of Christ - not the Rapture, the Second Coming. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> All the more reason to oppose unjust policy and terrorist acts, whenever and wherever they are found. And to stand against them when they are recognized as such, even if the perpetrators be ones we love. For: Matt 5: vs. 13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost this savor, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. ------ dgolvach - To say that I believe your views on Moslems to be unbalance is in no way to be mean spirited. It is simply to state that I believe that you are seeing the problem though a lens of bias rather than one of reason. It may be an admonishment, but it is definitely not meant to be mean spirited. I would offer you my apology if I have been so unclear as to make you believe such. It was not my intent I am somewhat informed as to the history of Mohammed and Islam and so do not ascribe to it. But neither am I ready to demonize all of humanity who do not ascribe to a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts