Posted on 12/04/2015 2:04:11 PM PST by DCdude
Together with a number of research assistants, the Danish linguist Tina Magaard spent three years examining the texts of the 10 largest religions. The purpose was to investigate whether any of the religions incite violence.
The conclusion was clear: “The texts of Islam is clearly distinct from the other religions texts as it to a higher degree call for violence and aggression against followers of other faiths. There are also direct incitement to terror. … Moreover, in the Qur’an hundreds of invitations to fight against people of other faiths.â€
The verses are in black and white and without mitigating context. One of the verses that deal with non-Muslims is: “So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks until you have inflicted slaughter upon them.†(Qur’an, 47: 4).
Violent in practice Islam is not only the world’s most violent religion in writing. A huge study, based on in-depth interviews with 45,000 subjects confirms that it is also the world’s most violent religion in practice.
The study shows that Islam is the only religion in the world where people become more violent, the stronger they believe in their religion.
Terror The fact that Islam is the world’s most violent religion is most likely the reason why Muslims since September 11, 2001, has committed more than 27,000 deadly terrorist attacks in the name of Islam. This corresponds to approximately 2000 a year or five a day.
Another fact is that the number of Muslims in the Western world is increasing dramatically and that they are becoming still more religious: 75 percent of Muslims inside Europe think that the texts of the world’s most violent religion must be taken literal.
This is probably why 80 percent of young Turks in Holland see “nothing wrong†in waging Jihad against non-Muslims. And that 27 percent of all young French and 14 percent of all young British under 25 sympathize with the genocidal terror organisation Islamic State. This includes most probably the vast majority of young Muslims in these two countries.
Europe is about to face its greatest challenge ever.
And anyhow that leaves the flaw that we can’t bridge over, technical arguments over it notwithstanding. Forever falling short of the glory of God.
What to do?
We must trust in Christ for salvation. You don’t have to be an anything-ist to acknowledge this.
There isn’t any natural state of man any more with such an inclination.
That statement of yours bleeds “predestination”.
There is clearly an indifference that you project.
definition of a Calminian:
Someone who is confused or can’t make up their mind
Someone who doesn’t understand the interplay between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility along with the mystery inherent in them existing side by side*
Someone who would leave classic Calvinists perplexed at their (the Calminian’s) understanding of Calvinism and classic Arminians perplexed at their understanding of Arminianism (sorry I felt a need to use the term classic)
Agreeing to disagree with yourself
Long ago I arrived at peace by realizing that a lot of the questions of destiny and of choice depend on perspectives that humans are not privy to.
We have paradox here, not the contradiction that you are reading into it. We are destined and we have choices. The choice to utterly reject salvation is also possible.
So I can bleed “predestination” and I can bleed “choice” and I can bleed “self consistency” too — because we haven’t nailed down all the variables.
You call it confused. I call it the peace of trusting God to do things God’s way.
I call it faith.
And no I don’t bow to your definitions. I freely agree Calminian is about as relative as cult. I hope it is understood that I see elements of the truth of both.
So why did you define yourself as a Calminian?
You can call it supercalifragilistic...
Well yes. We appear possibly to be coming at one common conclusion using different words, your nonsense accusations about me notwithstanding.
We believe God can infallibly destine AND furnish choice. We don’t presume to pontificate about how.
Poking fun at the idea of having to pledge an allegiance to either one of those.
I thought you owned something.
I thought you were real.
lol - yeah, it’s one of “those” studies :)
It’s like having a study to see if men like sex.
ROP bump
**** “This took research?” *****
Duh ... there is $ in Research ... Consensus ... and REALLY BIG BUCKS if you can get an article published that says “97% AGREE”
Sow ain’t dry yet, they will milk and milk and milk...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.