Jihad Means Struggle

Great site!
15c9e63bd798e8090cee5f68b27d5f02

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

Dear co-worker in Christ,

Greetings in the great and powerful name of Jesus Christ.

My name is Imran Bhatti and I am serving God since 1988. I belong to Christ Revival Church, which is situated in Lahore, Pakistan. There are three to five percent Christians in Pakistan. It means about 3 million people are Christians. There are four provinces in Pakistan and most of the Christians live in the province of Punjab. The literacy rate in Pakistan is very low and about 70 percent of the total population lives in villages. Therefore most of the illiterate persons are found in villages. In most of the areas, people are very poor so its very rare that you found a family where everyone have his/her own Bible. As there are millions of uneducated people in Pakistan, so they don’t know how to read or write. That’s why I have a vision to provide an audio Bible in Urdu language.

In previous years of my ministry, I have experienced the Biblical truth that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word Of God. There are many, many souls, millions of un reached people and I want to reach them by the grace of God to share the Gospel of Christ. Up till now significant work on audio Bible in Urdu (Pakistani) language, has not been done. As most of the people are illiterate so they can’t read or write and people can only grow spiritually, only by listening the word of God. So audio Bible is an effective mean to help them.

Even audio Bible is not available (in physical stores) in English language, in Pakistan. There are some people, including a few pastors and church leaders who can understand English and they are longing for audio Bible in English. As they couldn’t find it in Urdu. But they don’t have access to such a treasure.

My vision is that I may provide an audio Bible in Urdu and make it available for Pakistani nation. I know that I am not having a small vision. But I also know that our God can provide all our needs. As He provided everything needed for tabernacle and temple, He can provide all the resources to build His temple in the hearts of people through His word. I also know that He work through His people. So kindly let me know, that how you can be effective to fulfill this vision.

Yours in Christ,
Imran Bhatti
(Director Sunday School
&
Bible Teacher,
Christ Revival Church,
Lahore, Pakistan.)
heaven3_ct@yahoo.co.uk

To Ryan Haber: Actually I was not being caustic with you, you asked the questions and I answered them. What I am trying to get across is what I write so plainly, God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof, I feel that that statement should be self explanatory. Also God has a Plan and He has had that Plan before any of creation whether on the physical or spiritual plane, so many people try to tell God what He can and cannot do, who He can save and not save, if God's Plan isn't any better than a lot of the people calling themselves christians of any or none of the denominations are saying than God isn't much. God is Pure Love and His Plan is for ALL OF HUMANITY, I stake my everlasting destiny on that. I am a Catholic and I cherish my Catholic Faith and I also know that the Eucharist is Jesus, not that I believe it or even fervently believe it, the Holy Spirit revealed it to me because God in his Wisdom knew that I needed to know. The whole bible is true even though it has been distorted big time by lots of people but the bible is not God, God is God. A lot of people know the bible cover to cover but do not know God, it is that simple. I also repeat: God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Anonymous,

Your argumentation about the meaning of the word "generation" misses the mark. That all the references you site use the word "generation" in the same way does not demonstrate that the usage is in the way you argue. In point of fact, the English word "generation" is used to mean unequivocally something like its modern English usage only in Jude 1:14.

The point is salient because in the Greek original, the word generation is not actually used in that verse, but rather something like "the seventh [generation] from Abel," is written with the word "generation" implied.

In all the other verses you cite (I checked them - each and every one), one form or another of the Greek word "genea" is used. "Genea" is the ultimate root of our word "generation" but it does not mean that. Rather, it means something more akin to "family" or "stock" or "kin" or "nation" as in the words "gene", "genealogy", and "gentiles". Its Latin near-equivalent is "gens" which means "family, clan, or nation." Neither word connotes the modern usage of "generation".

At the insistence of some scholars "genea" is translated as "generation" in (and only in) New Testament work. While this translation introduces the understanding either of "people contemporary to each other," or of "a span of 30-40 years," the word "generation" is used and is preferable to terms such as "age" because it also has the connotation of "begetting" which recalls the abovementioned meanings, whereas "age" rules them out. In this case, though, the use of the word "generation" is misleading because of its modern connotation.

In point of fact, the early Christians did very much expect the Second Coming during their lifetime. Why shouldn't it happen then? The first coming had. Even St. Paul and St. Peter seems to have so hoped. That does not mean that their leader misled them. It CERTAINLY does not mean that they were misled by Sacred Scripture. The New Testament was only being penned during their lifetime (AD 40 to 100 or so). How could it have misled them? We do see, even in New Testament times, a reckoning by the early Christians that they may have misunderstood the meaning of their Lord's words in Peter's writings in particular. 2 Peter 3:8-9 reads, "But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance."

I will not quibble with C.S. Lewis because I have not read the essay you cite.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

I am not sure what you mean by "pretty wingie flying talking thingie" but hope you are not mocking the Holy Spirit. No, no three B's for me. When we run out of rational arguments, we mock: that's the method that Voltaire thought most effective for propagating the Enlightenment. Well, if you want to mock, that's fine. Even face-to-face it does little enough harm; over the anonymity of the web, it is just sad.

If you want to find out what reasons I have to believe, or where I really come from faith-wise, you can simply ask. In any event, I doubt that your expected response, "I don't care" is true. If you didn't care, you wouldn't bother to post so much.

If you are interested in doing so less publicly, my email address is withouthavingseen at gmail.

Thomas,

I am not sure why you feel the need to be so caustic with me. I agree with almost everything you have written and asked all those questions about dogma only to illustrate that dogma matters. I am a practicing Catholic and am doing all I can to make the Holy Eucharist the daily beginning, center, and end of my life.

God bless.

To Anonymous: Just because someone is a commentator doesn't mean they know what they are talking about. As far as being rejected, hasn't that been happening since the time that Jesus Himself walked physically on this earth. The early christians definitely thought that they would physically be here so they realized that they didn't really understand what Jesus said. Time will tell whether I am who I am, the New Testament Moses and if Jesus is "I AM WHO AM" God-Incarnate and that God is a Trinity and that God is Pure Love. Like I said: God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable; God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof; God's Plan is for ALL OF HIS CHILDREN, humanity, to be with Him in His Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth, exactly what that is, I don't know but it will be a KINGDOM OF LOVE since God is Pure Love. The book of revelations is True, misunderstood and distorted by many, but never the less True. Be Ready. Like Jesus said, "I would rather you be hot or cold rather then lukewarm because then I will have to vomit you out of my mouth". A little hint vomiting someone out of His mouth is not Jesus's decision, it is ours to make, think about it. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Thomas Baum,

Let’s read what C.S. Lewis said about the subject, "The apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, 'this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.' And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else. This is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible." (Essay "The World's Last Night" (1960), found in The Essential C.S. Lewis, p. 385)

When Jesus said ‘THIS generation’ he meant his contemporaries and not thousands if not millions of years from when he was speaking.

If you look at the way Jesus used the word "generation," it is abundantly clear that it always refers to His contemporaries, the Jewish people of His own time period. In Matthew 23:35-36, Jesus is in the temple speaking to the Jews, he says that all the judgment that he had spoken about would come upon them. There is no commentator who understands this as referring to any other than the existing generation.

Luke 17:25 says: “But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.” What generation did Christ suffer many things from, and what generation rejected Him? Could it be the one will come thousands or millions of years later? It is clear; he was speaking of his contemporaries. The meaning of the word was that of the "present" generation in the time of Christ; not to a future generation thousands of years away. So in etymology and usage, "generation" means those born at the same time, Contemporaries.

Every time "this generation" is mentioned in the New Testament, it is always spoken by Jesus (Mat.11:16; 12:41-42, Mark 8:12, Luke 7:31; 11:30-32, 50, 51; 17:25). In each and every verse, it refers to the generation that was alive during Jesus' time. Other verses Jesus used "generation" in are Mat.12:39, 45; 16:4; 17:17, Mark 8:38; 9:19, Luke 1:48, 50; 9:41; 11:29; 16:8. These all refer to an age of 30-40 years, and never as an age of 1000's of years.

It is certainly known that the early Christians thought that the second coming would occur before all the original Christians had died; they were certainly misled by the "inspired" scripture. If they were merely wrong in their interpretation, how can we know when any given interpretation is right?

I think the most sensible thing to do is to admit that someone was dead wrong and there is no explanation to make the problem go away no matter how hard you try to put a spin on the interpretation.

To Anonymous: I have never ever said on this or any other post that I converse with the Holy Spirit on a regular basis. I said that the Holy Spirit came into my body on 29 Jan 2000 and spoke to me by speaking thru me and also revealed to me that the Eucharist is Jesus. Actually the Holy Spirit speaks to me thru other people and somehow I know. Have you ever thought that maybe Jesus was speaking of the generation of mankind, sometimes we just think too small. As God said, "My Ways are not your ways and My Thoughts are not your thoughts. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Thomas Baum,

From Matthew we read that Jesus said:

“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors!

Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass away.” End of Quote.

Now, every Christian knows that the son of man term is synonymous with Jesus. So, since you claimed that you converse with the holy spirit on a regular basis, my request to you then is if you could ask him or her why couldn't Jesus make good on ‘his promise to come back’ in the lifetime of the apostles and promised ; and no sign of him as of today.

Thomas,

Time is getting short. I hear the Sun will envelope us in "hell fire" in two billion years.

To Concerned the Christian now liberated: Modern is modern, and Truth is Truth, time will tell. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

For Thomas only,

The modern definition of Satan is the demon of the brainwashed religious. The modern definition of a prophet is "fortune teller". And the modern definition of God is "The Singularity".

I would like to repost what I posted on 7-28-2007 at 10:26 AM with the names of the posters I commented to emphasized, thank you. TO ROB ADAMS: Thank you for your kind comment, we are all in this together and I do mean all and it is good to give encouragement, thanks again. TO RYAN HABER: Number 1: The Holy Trinity is God whether you refer to God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit or Dad, Brother and Knitting Buddy or Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, the Trinity is Pure Love and has a Plan. Number 2: The Second Person became a human being and is known as Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, a member of the chosen people, chosen and formed by God, He has always been the Second Person of the Trinity but for that period in human history, He became One of us, created and Uncreated at the same time. Number 3: Yes, just as human as every other human being that has ever been, is or will be. Number 4: Look at answer to 3. Number 5: No, He did not stop being God but He did give up His Omni's as I put it: Omnisience, Omnipresence and Omnipotence but He kept the Pure Essence of God which is Love, right before Jesus Ascended into Heaven He was asked when are You coming back, He said, "I do not know, the Angels in Heaven do not know, only the Father knows" so even then He still did not have His Omnisience. You can have all of the dogma right but God is a searcher of hearts and minds just like it says in the bible and it also refers to sounding like an empty gong. Think about it. The dogma of God becoming one of us is nothing short of mind-boggling and it is very true and God feeding us His very Self is also mind-boggling, I used to believe it even when I didn't go to church but now I know it. TO CONCERNED THE CHRISTIAN NOW LIBERATED: I was not under the influence of any medication when the Holy Spirit came into my body at a Mass at St. Luke's Church in Ocean City, Md. on 29 Jan 2000 and spoke to me by speaking thru me and also revealed to me that the Eucharist is Jesus. I have mentioned it before that a couple of hours later that God allowed satan to come down and battle me for 24 plus hours off and on that is one of the reasons that the book of Job means so much to me now because in it, satan went up to God and not once but twice got special permission to do what he did to Job. I repeat God is a searcher of hearts and minds not of religious affiliations or lack thereof and also that God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable, the captives will be released and the dead shall rise. God's Plan is His Plan and it is better than a lot of people think it is and it is better than, sorry to say, a lot of people want it to be. God's Will is for all to be saved, maybe we should try to align our will with God's Will rather than the other way around. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

May 10, 2007
More Beheadings from 'Peaceful' Muslims

This weeks main prayer request from VOM-USA concerns the comfort our brothers and sisters need in the Philippines. So much for the so-called "religion of peace".

PHILIPPINES Seven Christian Workers Beheaded - VOM Sources
The bodies of seven Christian workers were recovered in Parang town where they were kidnapped by Abu Sayyaf Muslim extremists. VOM sources report that the Christian workers' bodies were found in the jungles of Jolo by soldiers, days after they were seized while heading to a government road project. Pray for comfort for these families and ask God to use the testimony of the slain believers to bring non-believers into the knowledge of Him. 2 Corinthians 1:3-7

To Rob Adams: Thank you for your kind comment, we are all in this together and I do mean all and it is good to give encouragement, thanks again. To Ryan Haber: Number 1: The Holy Trinity is God whether you refer to God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit or Dad, Brother and Knitting Buddy or Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, the Trinity is Pure Love and has a Plan. Number 2: The Second Person became a human being and is known as Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, a member of the chosen people, chosen and formed by God, He has always been the Second Person of the Trinity but for that period in human history, He became One of us, created and Uncreated at the same time. Number 3: Yes, just as human as every other human being that has ever been, is or will be. Number 4: Look at answer to 3. Number 5: No, He did not stop being God but He did give up His Omni's as I put it: Omnisience, Omnipresence and Omnipotence but He kept the Pure Essence of God which is Love, right before Jesus Ascended into Heaven He was asked when are You coming back, He said, "I do not know, the Angels in Heaven do not know, only the Father knows" so even then He still did not have His Omnisience. You can have all of the dogma right but God is a searcher of hearts and minds just like it says in the bible and it also refers to sounding like an empty gong. Think about it. The dogma of God becoming one of us is nothing short of mind-boggling and it is very true and God feeding us His very Self is also mind-boggling, I used to believe it even when I didn't go to church but now I know it. To Concerned the Christian now liberated: I was not under the influence of any medication when the Holy Spirit came into my body at a Mass at St. Luke's Church in Ocean City, Md. on 29 Jan 2000 and spoke to me by speaking thru me and also revealed to me that the Eucharist is Jesus. I have mentioned it before that a couple of hours later that God allowed satan to come down and battle me for 24 plus hours off and on that is one of the reasons that the book of Job means so much to me now because in it, satan went up to God and not once but twice got special permission to do what he did to Job. I repeat God is a searcher of hearts and minds not of religious affiliations or lack thereof and also that God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable, the captives will be released and the dead shall rise. God's Plan is His Plan and it is better than a lot of people think it is and it is better than, sorry to say, a lot of people want it to be. God's Will is for all to be saved, maybe we should try to align our will with God's Will rather than the other way around. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Ryan,

Thomas, the Moses of the NT, Baum was under the influence of medication when the "holy ghost" visited/entered him. And how did your visit/entry come about?? A bit of the three B's i.e. Bred, Born and Brainwashed like many of us Catholics???

Shall we start the healing with a visit from your "pretty wingie flying talking thingie??? How about any encounters with that demon of the demented, Satan.

Additional recommended thinking can be found at

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
and http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

Thomas Baum,

You are absolutely right, except that the dogma is what makes the religion (really, living in general) possible. For instance, you wrote that if we get wrapped up in dogma, etc., that we can lose sight of the total awesomeness of what occured when the Second Person of the Holy Trinity became a human being. You are right that we can miss the forest for the trees; the problem is that the forest is made up of trees and we mustn't say, "Oh that particular tree doesn't matter." Then you've missed the forest in a different way. Taking your example to show what I mean:

1) What is the Holy Trinity?
2) Who is the Second Person of It?
3) Did he REALLY become a human being?
4) Did he become a REAL human being, or did he just fake it?
5) When he became a human being, did he stop being God?

Do you see how each of those questions makes a real difference in our faith and in our way of life? If he became a REAL human being, then humanity suddenly has been elevated by a new capacity to have divinity within itself. A man can have Christ alive in him, in a real way. But if Jesus only looked and acted like a human being, but wasn't really, then humanity has no such capacity, and we are little better than clever monkeys, and might be treated that way. That of course, is the consensus among most secularized thinkers, who thereby legitimate the worst possible treatment of human beings imaginable. If the Second Person became a human person, than a previously unimaginably wide chasm has been bridged in the person of a God-man. If he only acted like a human being, or stopped being God while becoming a human being, then the chasm is still as wide as ever and we have no way to connect with the Almighty Transcendent Creator.

Dogma makes a difference, brother.

You're right. Being ho-hum in the face of a mystery like the Incarnation of the Son of God is horrifying. This state of affairs arises not because we care too much about dogma, but too little.

Start asking people about the Incarnation, about the Second Person becoming a human person - you will see how many PRACTICING Christians have no clue what all Christian confessions have historically taught. They are not fixated on dogma, but bored with it.

Christian dogma, without intending as its main goal a revolution, is in fact the most revolutionary set of beliefs the world has ever seen. That is why ruling classes almost uniformly attempt to destroy it or to manipulate it to suit themselves.

Thomas, I agree with almost everything you wrote. The point or two where we may be disagreeing may in fact only be different definitions or experiences. You might not be in good company, bro, but you're in mine anyway, and for now, that'll have to be good enough for the both of us. God bless.

Rob,

You have just made my point. Have you ever read the Qur'an? People like you who cannot see that Islam is a militant from its inception. Do you know the history of Islam? Do you know that Muhammad murdered many and can be rightly called the warrior prophet? Do you know that the highest example for the Muslim to follow is the example of the prophet. Muslims who are not involved in the conversion of the world by any means possible are apostates in true Islam.

"fight and slay the infidels wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war" (Qur’an 9:5

Blind America.

Good and bad or good and evil are indeed relative terms. We end up with both sides in their own minds fighting a just war. That makes peace extremely difficult.

The problem is not a particular religion, but that people do not think for themselves. In a politically free country it is much easy to think for ones self. An oppressed or desperate people are not so fortunate. When we depend on someone else to define God for us we give up individual control and create the conditions for a religion to be hijacked for a different agenda.

I’m not sure that is we are blind to the ‘problems’ of the Qur’an for the ‘true’ believers of Islam. There are as you call them Muslim infidels who interpret the Qur’an in their own way. These ‘moderates’ are the ones we none Muslims are hoping can influence their faith.

We will not win this battle on the field. We will win it in the hearts and the minds of the people. True change almost always comes from within.

That does not mean we sit back and wait for the mushroom cloud. We denounce atrocities, we forge better relations with Muslims and we build allies.

I judge people on their actions. I will take a Muslim who promotes peace over a Christian who kills any day. In the end I don’t care what religion you belong to. I care what you demonstrate as a human being.

Political Correctness Blinds People to Truth.

The Qur'an is the problem.

When true believers follow it there are big problems because Muhammad commanded jihad on all infidels which includes all Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. All moderate Muslims are infidels according to the Qur’an and to true Muslims. The Politically Correct zealots in the media cannot see this though because they are living in a fantasy world of their own making. They bow their knees to the alter of relativism and will not realize how wrong they have been and how they have aided the enemies of the USA until a nuclear bomb is set off in one our cities by authentic Muslims or they are living under Sharia law.

God is in a relationship with us and I definitely do not think of it as manipulative, we do have free will, whether we like it or not. Remember when Jesus said, "Take My yoke upon you", well I am not a farmer and nowadays not many farmers use work animals but it is the contraption that binds the two animals together so they can work as a team, and that is what He meant by it, we are to do our part, whatever it is, but He will be with us so that we actually don't have to do it alone. Also He said that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide us into all Truth, the Holy Spirit's job, so to speak, is ongoing, it did not end with the original apostles. Like it says, "It's God's Will that all be saved", maybe we should be praying for God's Will rather than our own. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Nice post Thomas

To Ryan Haber and the rest of the world: When I wrote that I do not consider christianity a religion what I mean, sometimes, we can get all wrapped up in the rules, dogma, theology, whatever and lose sight of the total awesomeness of what occured when the second Person of the Trinity became a human being. It seems to me that with a lot of people that have been taught this since before they can remember, sometimes they seem so ho-hum about it. Take for instance John 3:16 that you see at so many sporting events, "God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son", I like to think of it this way, "God so loved us, that He became one of us to Save ALL OF US. If God's Plan and it is His Plan whether we like it or not for the time being is not for ALL OF US then it isn't much of a Plan considering that God knows everything, sometimes we try to make God so small it is sickinging. When Jesus said, "Come follow Me", well that actually makes us not only willing but active participants in God's Plan of Salvation for humanity. And as you put it, if to Love God is just for me to be saved, then that is to say the least selfish and not even close to being christian, it is like when I hear people say Jesus is my personal Saviour, well that might be okay for awhile but if it doesn't grow into Jesus is OUR Saviour, it kind of sounds like a 2 year old doesn't it. I may post more later but I am running out of time. Thank You. Take Care. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Ryan.

Thanks for the response. I wouldn’t say I dismiss just war, though that may be the impression I gave. I am familiar with the just war theories and discussions.

For those of us who believe in an afterlife and that supposedly the afterlife is more important that this one. How far are we willing to go to support what the great teachers like Jesus, Buddha and Gandhi have taught us about non violence. Do we only believe when it suits us to believe? If a person is willing to sacrifice their life in defense of a principal why not do it without harming another?

I don’t believe that the human race is wise enough to properly operate a just war theology. I think we have proven this to date. I believe our collective misunderstandings of God, each other and the fallacy of need must be reconciled before we should be deemed fit to operate under a just war theory.

Actually if we could reconcile these misunderstandings I don’t believe there would be a need for war.

Just war is a very long and complicated debate and war never has a happy ending.

As Gandhi said “there is no way to peace, peace is the way”.

Ryan Haber,

I just now read your earlier post that Christianity is not a religion of peace.

From Wikipedia on Just War, which you suggested we consult:

"Just War theory is a doctrine which holds that a conflict can meet the criteria of philosophical, religious or political justice, provided it follows certain conditions.

"The doctrine of the "just war" has its foundations in ancient Greek society and was first developed in the Christian tradition by Augustine in Civitas Dei, The City of God, in reaction to the absolutist pacifist strain of Christian ethics based on the doctrine of "Turn the other cheek" espoused by Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 5:38-48)."

"Christianity" by Augustine's time, was, in my judgment, no longer Christ's Christianity.

But, if it makes you happier, I'll revise my earlier post to read:

"I look at the "Just War" theory from a Buddhist perspective, with which I sympathize.

Regards.

Ryan Haber & Viejita,

I look at the "Just War" theory from a Christian perspective, though I am not a Christian.

What did Jesus say about a "Just War"?

When did he revise "Do not kill"?

When did he expunge "Turn the other cheek?"

Regards.

Rob Adams,

Of course nobody objects on principle to nonviolence. You are right that the use of violence for self-defense can become a slippery slope into the use of violence to defend one's interests, which is different than defending one's self.

You wrote that the "old" Just War Theory doesn't hold water if one is truly enlightened. You then follow with a set of example questions ("Was such-and-such a provocation justification for war?") and note that our government has behaved dishonestly and hypocritically. Finally, you correctly report that different people give different answers to different questions.

Most of what you wrote, except for the first statement, is correct in my opinion.

Your most salient point is that, "when we bring God into the picture to justify violence we have failed to understand God." I believe you are 100% correct on that one. Still, simply because God is not some kind of pawn to justify whatever we want doesn't mean that some things aren't actually just, and therefore approved of by God.

What kind of violence is justified? I sense that you (and many of the commentators) are not actually familiar with either the classical Just War theory or any of its more modern developments. There is probably a very nice article about it on Wikipedia.

For now, suffice it to say that if someone breaks into my house and seems intent on doing harm to my family; if somebody assaults my wife or children, and seems intent on raping them or doing them other serious violence - I will use violence to repell such an attacker; if need be I will use deadly violence to do my best to ensure that the assault fails. I have a duty to defend my wife and children, and a right to defend my property in a proportionate way. To stand by while your wife is raped is not peace-loving, but cowardice and dereliction of duty.

As a Christian, I have a duty to do what I can and to use reasonable and proportionate means to help my neighbor as well. If Canada were being plundered by some invader, and her women raped and children sold as slaves, it is not peace-loving to negotiate access for UN observers into the afflicted communities. It is cowardice.

Anyway, I've made my point - I'll discuss Just War theory all day, and then whether particular wars are justified or not; but I won't discuss either with someone who dismisses both.

Thomas Baum,

I think I agree with everything you wrote with regards to Christianity except your saying that Christianity is not a religion, but rather "it is a covenential relationship between God and man with the goal of the salvation of the entire human family." I am not sure that I disagree with you here, either; only it depends what you mean by 'religion'. I would define religion as something very much like, "a conventional relationship between God and man." I do disagree with the part that the relationship has a goal of salvation. Of course, God wants to save us and Christ is His means of saving us. Of course I want very much to be saved, and so I cling to Christ.

But if we are only in a relationship to accomplish some goal, then we are using or manipulating the other person(s) in the relationship - using them as tools. Such a relationship is not really a relationship in the sense that we mean it here, I think. God first loved me, and coming to see that, I want to love him back. I cannot though, because I am weak. So He dwells in me to enable me to love Him. He loves me and I love Him back. That IS salvation, and it begins here-and-now and lasts into eternity, when everything else falls away and we are safe with God forever. "Stronger than death is love," (Song 8:6). But to love God just so I can get saved, well, it's not really loving Him, is it? But at least it's a start...

someone has been in the koolaid.
look around you. jihad means killing non islamics.

If there is a Muslim who is reading these posts, I would like to hear an logical explanation on Luke 24:44-46 from an Islamic perspective.

44

He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

45

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.

46

He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day."

From what I understand, Islam purportedly accepts the first five book (Moses), the Prophets, and the Psalms, as accurate and inspired.

Yet, these books speak of Christ as the Messiah. Are these biblical texts accurate? Or, is the Koran a book fraught with error and inconsistency (which) causes some of its adherents to strive for certainty where none exists?

For if this books are accurate, does not God have a Son? Jesus. Jesus was the final prophet (and priest, and king). No adding or subtracting.

Revelation 22:18-19:

“For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and out of the holy city and from the things written in this book.”

The Koran was what, written five centuries later?

As for inter-faith dialogue, we should all strive for civility. But, please understand that jihadist will utilize this method as a tactical strategy until they get the upper hand. Then, once that happens, don't expect much dialogue any more.

Much better to be a Muslim in the U.S. (for all of our venality, people still have rights) than a true Christian in any Muslim society.

Well, theory is nice, but until you guys go to Baghdad as "human shields" to stop the Mullah led Iranian backed deaths squads or theocratic Saudi funded suicide bombers, I suspect you are talking nonsense. Words are cheap.

Oh yes: If you don't want to start a religious war to prove your pacifism, the Marxist FARC in Colombia have proved good Catholics and are just as bad as any jihadi groups.

And for those who blame all war on monotheistic religion, then maybe they should study the history of China.

Norrie Hoyt
I know you are familiar with the requirements of just war theory, and there is considerably more to it than thinking "G-d is on our side," as you seem to imply.

amillennenialist

you are not a salafist are you, with a literal view on koran and hadiths? a christian theologian? an inerrantist christian? give it up. moslems are not buying or care what we think on their religion, their god and prophet.

"I don't need the words of extremists on either side . . . ."

Extremists on one side slaughter non-Muslims as their god and prophet demand.

Extremists on the other side point out, "Hey! Those guys are slaughtering non-Muslims as their god and prophet demand!"

They're just as bad!

God lives in the supernatural world called the imagination.He gets in there through a process called belief,which means you close your eyes.cross your fingers and say I Believe!
And voila! there he is.How do you want your god?
Old and cuddly with a big white beard? Or Jesus like,with long golden brown hair? Or with a turban and black beard? Name it?
I've always fancied Aphrodite myself,but she was before my time.Pity she died and went to Mythologyland,where all the gods go to die.

jihadist: "Americans have heard so much from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie in books, articles and media interviews and profiles."

Yes, they're practically household names.

jihadist: "let them read what Muslims from around the world says for a change"

Let's do that. Let's see . . . hmmmm. Which Muslim? Oh, I know! The only one that matters, for Allah's revelations have come to the world through him, Allah calls him a "beautiful pattern of conduct," and he is considered by the faithful the "Ideal Man" -- Mohammed!

Here's some of what he had to say. This is what "jihadist" espouses and Thistlethwaite defends:

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers . . . " (Qur'an 9:14).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do" (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

"O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him" (Qur'an 9:123).

"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly" (Qur'an 8:60).

“Muhammad said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50).

"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home) . . . But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward . . . " (Qur'an 4:95).

“A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44).

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah?" (Qur'an 9:111).

"O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place . . . " (Qur'an 9:38, 39).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

Imagination is good, but not to the point of suicide.

You uncritically and enthusiastically retail the false conclusion that because "jihad" means "struggle," Muslims are not required to war offensively against non-Muslims to make the world Islam.

Neither is Islamic warfare limited to defensive purposes, as you suggest. To equate jihad with Just War demonstrates an embarrassing ignorance of nearly 1400 years of Islamic theology, jurisprudence, and history.

Mohammed said:

"fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers . . . " (Qur'an 9:14).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

Your mention of Islamic prohibitions against harming women, children, cultivated areas, etc., shows you've bought the propaganda fed to you by your colleagues hook, line, and sinker. You haven't done your homework:

"The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256).

"The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah: for (Allah) loveth not those who do wrong" (Qur'an 42:40).

It is permissible for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels if they are aiding the fighting in deed, word, opinion, or any other way. This is because of the Prophet's order to kill Duraid ibn Al-Simma, who was 120 years old and went with the Hawazin tribe [to fight against the Muslims] to give them counsel. Ibn Qudama notes that the Prophet ordered him killed in the Battle of Hunein because he knew military stratagems. See Al-Tamhid 16:142.

"It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah . . . ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse: "Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers"'" (Muslim, Book 019, Number 4324).

What will you do next, deny that Mohammed was a pedophile and that Allah required it?

“My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old” (Tabari 9:131).

“Allah’s Apostle told Aisha [his six-year-old bride and nine-year-old sexual "partner"], ‘You were shown to me twice in my dreams. I beheld a man or angel carrying you in a silken cloth. He said to me, “She is yours, so uncover her.” And behold, it was you. I would then say to myself, “If this is from Allah, then it must happen”’” (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 87, Number 139-140).

You are a theologian.

Susan B.T's contribution is very interesting and important--indeed, it seems that she is joining her colleagues in jihad against the spread and proliferation of nuclear weapons. She is indeed right about the often-debated meanings of "jihad"--certainly struggle for the cause of righteousness would be one way of putting it. Much like the phrase "war on drugs," it is possible to see violent action done when dangerous circumstances intervene, but the much more common aspect of it is summoning the moral suasion to convince others and onself that abusing drugs and medication is harmful to self, harmful to loved ones, and ultimately harmful to the society.

Islam is the religion of pieces.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/007428.php

Great article by Hassan Butt, former jihadist

Ryan you said "There are things more important than peace, and that means that there ARE things worth breaking the peace to protect. " I will agree with condition. The condition being the methods employed to break the peace or the methods in which you fight. If the methods are non violent then I can certainly agree with your statement. If at some point one must become violent to protect themselsves then this is the perverbial slippery slope and a concept that will likely perplex man for years to come. This is the old just war theory which to me doesn't hold water if one is truely enlightened. Was Pearl habor a good enough reason? Was defending Kuiwauit a good enough reason? Was genocide in Rawanda a good enough reason? (apparently not). Was the fact that Saddam had (we found out that was wrong) weapons of mass destrcution good enough? Is the fact that we support Isreal a good enough reason for other countries?

The answer to all of these questions is it depends on who you ask. When we are allowed to bring God into the picture to justify our actions who is there to object? And when we bring God into the picture to justify violence we have failed to understand God.

To Ryan Haber and the rest of the world: You brought up some very interesting points on your post of 7-26-2007 2:36PM. You are right that christianity is not a religion of peace, it is not even a religion, it is a covenential relationship between God and man with the goal of the salvation of the entire human family. Jesus was who He said that He is and that is God Incarnate, He said that in quite a few places whether we can see it with our hearts or not. Jesus also said, "My Kingdom is not of this world", we keep forgetting that, it also says in the bible that there will be new heavens and a new earth, considering that God, the True, Living, Triune, Triumphat God, created the entire universe that is something to look forward to. God is a Trinity, and like I said in quite a few places Jesus said He was God Incarnate, "I and the Father are One", "Phillip, how long have you been with Me, if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father", there are other places and probably plenty that I haven't noticed yet either. Since Jesus flat out said that He was God Incarnate, then it is either true or not. Well, it is true in case you were wondering and I stake my everlasting destiny on it. Since the god of islam has stated thru Mohammed that Jesus is merely a prophet and a second-rate prophet at that, then he, the god of islam is calling Jesus a liar and claiming a liar for a prophet, interesting I think. Actually the god of islam is satan but I do not hold it against Mohammed that he was deceived, do you? As I have stated many times, God is a searcher of hearts and minds not of religious affiliations or lack thereof. Like it says even the demons know who Jesus is, Jesus did say, "Come follow me", there are many ways to follow Him but watering down the message of christianity is not one of them. Like the angel or angels said at Jesus's birth, "This is GOOD NEWS for all people" and "Peace to whom God's favor rests" two completely different messages and both true, a lot of people seem to want to smash them together into one message which waters them both down. We are all judged, what is the big deal, we have free will and we are responsible for what we do or don't do along with our motives and also for what we know. We can ask for forgiveness for what we do wrong and then we are asked to pass this forgiveness along, for you people that call yourselves christians remember the Divine Equation in the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our trespasses, AS we forgive those who trespass against us" if you notice after His diciples ask Jesus to teach them how to pray, He offers some very important advice right after that, you can check it out if you want to. I happen to be the New Testament Moses and my message to humanity is: God wins, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable, the captives shall be freed, those in hell, the dead shall rise, those in spiritual death. Be ready, the chastisement, the tribulation, the wrath of God, whichever you wish to call it, is coming that is what is meant by "Night is coming when no man may work" but the dawning of the seventh day with the coming of the Kingdom of God will also get here in God's time. Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Ryan,

The division Jesus is talking about in the passage you cited is between believer and non-believer. That is that a mother may be against the idea of her son or daughter being a Christian. I am commanded to love my enemies and turn the other cheek. There is no contradiction. Islam on the other hand has been a religion of war since its inception.

Norrie Hoyt,

That's not true.

Paganplace,

As usual, your comments are thoughtful and moderately phrased.

You're right about the doublespeak, I think: very often people say things about their religion and mean actually very much the opposite. Such speech is duplicitous if deliberate, insensible if inadvertent.

You're also right about being warying of people who say they are doing something to you because they love you. They might be sincere, and maybe even correct; but just like the mantra, "Islam is a religion of peace," it would not need so much repetition if it were more self-evidently true. That was my main point.

I have just one point of yours to pick at, though, if you will bear with me.

You wrote that "it'd be nice if more monotheists actually stood by the peace parts of their religions" and I suspect that you believe, as most of Enlightenment thinking believes, that religions are all more or less equal, to the extent that they all serve more or less the same purpose: fostering goodwill among humanity, building a better society, etc. Those aims are certainly nice and all, but they are not at all the purpose of Christianity.

Christianity is not a religion of peace.

Well, I don't want to state them over-emphatically. The above, was stated so starkly for shock value. But I am serious in writing that we cannot consider peace to be either the goal or a condition of Christianity, not if its founder is to be taken at His word: "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household," (Mt 10:34-36). Luke records similar words, "I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled! I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am constrained until it is accomplished! Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division; for henceforth in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against her mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law," (Lk 12:49-53).

These are very hard sayings. When we recall that Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God," (Mt 5:9) we must recall it in light of the fact that just a few chapters later he says his purpose is NOT to bring peace. What could all this mean?

For traditional Christianity (I am not here interested in the ideas who make up their own religion and call it Christianity) it has meant this: peace between people and among nations is a good thing. It is not the HIGHEST good, though. There are things more important than peace, and that means that there ARE things worth breaking the peace to protect. Picking a fight, warmongering, bullying - all those things that modern American leaders seem to enjoy doing - are bad. That doesn't mean that every fight should be put aside, that every war is bad, and that bullies should be appeased. Quite to the contrary, when Jesus was giving advice out to people about how to be perfect, it is notable that he did not tell a particular soldier to put aside his soldiering - rather only to avoid using his strength and weapons to extort and bully ("Soldiers also asked him, 'And we, what shall we do?' And he said to them, 'Rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your wages,'" Lk 3:14).

So anyone who accuses Christians of violating Christianity's own strictures about peace probably does not understand the Christian scriptures and what they have to say about peace.

As for Islam, there is a somewhat different story. The Koran may or may not claim all day and on every page that its purpose is peace; but its writer's purpose was war. Mohammed was an Arab tribal warlord. He conquered Mecca - a very important date for Muslims. His immediate successors all fought real, bloody wars with each other and all the peoples around them. North Africa, Palestine, Syria, Persia, and Spain were all primarily Christian, and conquered by armed force by the year 711. If Islam is a religion of peace, its founder and the first 80 years of its leadership were apparently clueless to that fact.

Now, in point of fact, while peace is not the point of Christianity (so much so that to call it a "religion of peace" is misleading) it is a fact that neither its founder nor any of its leaders led a military campaign, a terrorist action, or even a nasty case of property destruction - for centuries. The first time period at which one can even claim Christianity caused bloodshed would be during the Arian controversy (at the earliest) in the 300s, unless of course, one blames the victims for crimes committed against them. Far from shedding blood, the Christians gave their blood, for generation upon generation after its founding, by tolerant pagans if I may so note (without intending to pick a fight).

And lately, really for the last two centuries at least, the Vatican has worked tirelessly for peace (though it is not her primary purpose) - up to and including with regard to the current war in the Middle East. That, while Muslims (aside from moderated and Westernized ones living away from the Middle East) have, to all appearances, done as little as possible to help.

Susan,

From the standpoint of religion (as opposed to politics) there's really no such thing as a "just war".

When a person says "that's a just war", he simply means he personally likes it or approves of it.

The operational utility of the "just war" concept is to allow members of a religion to kill others without being bothered by that religion's strictures against killing others.

That was a nice article reverend. It is the type of thinking and commentary that moves us forward.

AHMED FROM BAHRAIN: I agree with you whole heartedly.

Concerned The Christian Now Liberated. I agree that there may be “better” foundations out there but it really comes down to what a person takes away from that foundation. At the end of the day I care about a person’s actions not what foundation they start from.

To answer the original question of what do I think about the Muslims Speak Out dialogue.

We need to start somewhere. Without dialogue there is no understanding. Without understanding how can there be peace?

"Leave"
I suspect your posts may have been deleted because they were too long. I'm not sure, though, because I'm finding that my stuff disappears on this topic as well. And I'm pretty PC!

"I'd say about 40% to 50% of Muslims want all Jews and all Christians dead."

Dubiously based on what?

" Anonymous:

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." "

Well, if that means no killing till the 'stones shout' I can live with that. :)

This lady is sadly misinformed. Regardless of her arguments, we can see every day that any time a Jiahd is called, it means the killing of someone.

I can name 2 or 3 incidents by Christian terrorists in the last 10 years. I can name 2 or 3 incidents by Muslim terrorists in the last 2 days.

These people are extremists. I'd say about 40% to 50% of Muslims want all Jews and all Christians dead. They would kill the writer of this article without an ounce of remorse.
And sadly, the other 50% or so of so-called Muslim moderates still explain away why things are happening instead of outright condemning it.

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

I dunno, Ryan, it'd be nice if more monotheists actually stood by the peace parts of their religions...

Certainly, I share that skepticism, ...heck, when conservative Christian voices start talking about how what they're doing is 'love' I generally know to watch out.

But there really are better sides to Islam, and, yes, Christianity. The question of how to actually *engage* with people under various religions really does have to involve toning down the confrontational rhetoric... Pronouncing people intractably-aggressive is the surest way to bring about the very 'clash of cultures' that most would really prefer to avoid.

These exclusive truth claims and really a binary universe where there's good guys and bad guys, black and white, and no real accomodation for grey areas, friendly-but-different neighbors, well, it tends to create a situation that once there's conflict and hostility, ...well, the ideas linking 'error' to 'utter damnation and loss of value' tend to make it psychologically-unacceptable for some to realize they're hurting someone else over an abstraction:

So often one can hear, "We're not doing this thing we're doing cause we're not that kind of people." And, "We don't hate you, we hate your *sin,* which is why we don't make the distinction in the speech we use or our actions, we just make walking 'sins' of you, thus, this is OK hate, cause it's "good." This is OK *greed,* because not being greedy is socialist, and socialist is Communist, and communism is Godless, therefore greed is good."

I think both these religions of "peace and love" can use the reminders of what the effects of these religious beliefs are *supposed* to be in that regard.

I think each can see in the other what they won't see in themselves... Both kinda do want to take over the world, and both do in fact contain considerable incentive to treat the world like a war between 'good' and 'evil,' ...a central metaphor which can become all too real, once people feel threatened.

I think these religions of peace can use the reminder. Not to say actions are about peace and love when they aren't... but to remind folks that they say peace and love are supposed to be the *point.*

Personally, I so see some wishful thinking, either in terms of 'Oh, they really like us cause they worship the same God,' or in terms of, 'They must worship a different God cause they don't like us,' ...and I think there's a lot of indignance and finger pointing, because in their own spheres, both these religions seem to like to believe that everyone would want to be just like them, given the chance.

Or else be the 'bad guys.'

Frankly, I find the parallels quite interesting: both religions have a similar way of being rather insensitive to how threatening their own pronouncements can be to each other and everyone else around, while being indignant about the other doing basically the same darn thing.

I find it ironic that so many American Christians who are the ones most in a hurry to shed our secular heritage in favor of their own theocratic ambitions, really take from this heritage an idea they're supposed to be *safe* from aggressive religious elements, of the very sort they try to become.

I think the oft-quoted elements of the Koran and Islamic history which lead to panic about conversion pressures and coercions and holy wars are mirrored in Christian history and scripture as well...

Even 'Do unto others' doesn't end up meaning the obvious, "Well, I wouldn't want someone shoving their religion down my throat and using state power or violence to enforce their tabooes," ...but rather, "If I were different from me, I'd want someone to make me like me, whatever it took."

Likewise, I've heard a few Muslims take "There is no compulsion in religion" to mean, "Nothing that might be done counts as compulsion."

There are better instincts. And, really, plenty of good 'moderates' on both 'sides' who perhaps go under-represented and/or simply play along with those of aggressive religiosity.

"These are religions of peace and love" can serve either denial, or people's better wishes and ambitions, and these are things that I think both religions can share.

Even with the rest of the world.

As a Pagan, one pretty much has to get used to the idea that there are people in other religions who'll say you're an awful person and probably 'need killing.'

At the end of the day, you can't really tell others to stop this. What you can do, is take responsibility for what you allow this to make *you.*

The Qur'an is the problem. When true believers follow it there are big problems because Muhammad commanded jihad on all infidels which includes all Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. All moderate Muslims are infidels according to the Qur’an and to true Muslims. The Politically Correct zealots in the media cannot see this though because they are living in a fantasy world of their own making. They bow their knees to the alter of relativism and will not realize how wrong they have been and how they have aided the enemies of the USA until a nuclear bomb is set off in one our cities by authentic Muslims or they are living under Sharia law.

A Pluralistic Pipe Dream
The Muslim worldview does not comport with our worldview. Real Muslims cannot embrace pluralism because real Muslims believe that every people should be governed by an Islamic State. Therefore, it is a pipe dream to project a Western pluralistic worldview on people who believe that every nation should be under Islamic rule. Any Muslim who denies this is in conflict with the words of the Qur'an. Westerners who think that the worldview of Islam is compatible with the worldview of the USA simply do not understand the message of the Qur'an. I see these supposed Western experts all the time on CNN and the rest of the blinded media outlets. Muhammad said in his farewell address: "I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah.'" And in the Qur'an Muhammad was supposed to have received a revelation from God that said: "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah" (Qur'an 8:39). True Muslims everywhere including here in the USA are working hard to bring this vision to fruition while we here in the West blinded by the glasses of pluralism cannot see what is really going on.

You are right Ryan

Something that strikes me is that so many people - really almost the entire political, intellectual, and media establishment - spend so much time repeating the mantra, "Islam is a religion of peace." If the proposition were self-evident, I expect it would need saying less often. For instance, I have never heard anybody say, "Buddhism is a mystical philosophy of peace." That proposition is obvious: no holy war or terrorist act was ever, as far as I know, instigated in the name of Buddha.

The political, intellectual, and media elites can spend all the time they like chanting, "Islam is a religion of peace," in hopes that people will believe it, as according to Reichsminister Josef Goebbels' dictum. But regardless of whether people come to believe the mantra through repetition, the mantra is simply not true. At least, there is no evidence of it except in the mumbled mantras and mushy musings of the media.

Dear Susan,

My posts are being deleted here for being politically incorrect. But I refused to be silenced and so perhaps a softer and gentler approach will be permitted. I'll try.

You really need to get out more often. Well, come to think of it, you don't have to go out at all. There is plenty of good information just a click away and you won't have to get out of your chair!

You say:

In the last several years I have been working in both Muslim-Christian and now Muslim-Christian-Jewish dialogue on issues of war and peace. From this work I have learned that Jihad, both historically and for most Muslims today, does not mean "Holy War".

I don't know what networking crowd you are running with these days but there are some learned people who beg to differ. But who I am to tell you what is up, and what is down. There is no Theology Doctorate listed on my resume.

Do try out these folks. Tell them what you learned about the innocous "jihad". Most of them are ex-muslims who have lived jihad during their lifetimes. They would be quite surprised to hear about the part about inner struggle. I think they missed that memo.

http://islam-watch.org/articles.htm

Then hop over to these folks, ex-muslims again, who have a very different take on the definition too:

From their own discription of their website:

"Faith Freedom International is a grassroots movement of ex-Muslims. Its goals are to (a) unmask Islam and show that it is an imperialistic ideology akin to Nazism but disguised as religion and (b) to help Muslims leave it, end this culture of hate caused by their "us" vs. "them" ethos and embrace the human race in amity. We strive for the unity of Mankind through the elimination of Islam, the most insidious doctrine of hate. Islam can't be reformed, but it can be eradicated. It can't be molded, but it can be smashed. It is rigid but brittle. That is why Muslims do not tolerate criticism of it. To eradicate Islam, all we have to do is tell the truth. It's that simple. Truth about Islam is out. It's all here in this site. Now it is up to you to spread it. With truth, the decent Muslims will leave Islam and with each Muslim that leaves, we gain a new soldier in our fight against terrorism. We are growing exponentially. The days of Islam are numbered and world peace is around the corner. Many of us will see that day. We might have to go through very tough times meanwhile. The storm is approaching. "

go to:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/index.htm

Then try some books by persons who have also lived and experienced jihad real and close-up. They too would be amused at your discovery about the "inner struggle" of jihad. Try

My Life Inside Radical Islam- Daveed Gerenstien Ross

Now They Call Me Infidel- Nona Darwish

Future Jihad- Walid Phares

Why I Left Jihad- Walid Shoebat

just a click away www.amazon.com

There are 1 billion plus Muslims in the world because of "sword-forced" conversion and forced procreation. Considering the contemporary Islamic truth/death squads and "koranic" rules, things have not changed. Give freedom to the Muslim masses trapped under Islamic tyranny and watch what happens.

Any idea how many Muslims have access to this discussion??

And if I lived in Iran or other Islamic states and noted that Mohammed was an illiterate, hallucinating Arab who had contemporary or future scribal henchmen writing their own "koranic" militant agendas for plundering/looting the lands of non-believers, I would be beheaded. And you call that a "peaceful" religion??????

Jihad means 'struggle',and struggle means 'kampf',and 'my struggle' means 'mein kampf'.Ja,naturlich.
Deutschland uber alles.
Islam uber alles.
My struggle,'mein kampf'.Ja,ja,naturlich.

Ahhh, The Jihadist is still making the rounds again but still not addressing the root problem with Islam, i.e. its flawed foundations. But we must also consider The Jihadist's predicament being in a country about to convert to an Islamic state. I am sure her comments are already being monitored by the Islamic koranics in Malaysia. And almost a billion Muslims living in fear just like The Jihadist!!! How disturbing!!!!

Ali and Rushdie as you know were Muslims but had the fortitude to leave and as per the koran were both harrassed/threatened by koranic Muslims. I trust you condemned this "Mo driven" activity.

"When Ayatollah Khomeini called on all zealous Muslims to execute the writer and the publishers of the book, Rushdie was forced into hiding. Also an aide to Khomeini offered a million-dollar reward for Rushdie's death. In 1993 Rushdie's Norwegian publisher William Nygaard was wounded in an attack outside his house. In 1997 the reward was doubled, and the next year the highest Iranian state prosecutor Morteza Moqtadale renewed the death sentence. During this period of fatwa violent protest in India, Pakistan, and Egypt caused several deaths."

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/rushdie.htm

Hello Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:)

I can hardly wait for you to get in full swing on this topic. And others like Ross and Frank Collins.

Umm, if we get Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the Muslim panel, that would be a contraditions in terms no? as they are not Muslims.

Americans have heard so much from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie in books, articles and media interviews and profiles. So, why not let them read what Muslims from around the world says for a change, for a very brief time? You can argue against what those Muslims wrote in their respective threads.

Thank you Susan for your work in trying to unite us under One motto. I don't need the words of extremists on either side to convince me of what I have found to be the truth and that is we are indeed ALL ONE and equal in Creation.

The sooner we acknowledge this the sooner we can let go of the idea of exclusion and have a united faith of inclusion. Thus no need to hark on the stuff that separates us but rejoice is stuff that binds us as Human Beings or at least Being Human, which incidentally is the highest form of Creation since we have the potential for perfection. Thus the choice is ours: Weather we want to elevate ourselves to reach this challenge or remain slaves to our own lower selves and continue on the path of destruction.

Without Salman Rushdie and Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the Muslim panel, the panel was a "stacked pro-Islamic deck" with many "deck" members under the direct finacial influence of Iran's oil/blood profits.