Posted on 11/23/2001 6:26:38 AM PST by wwjdn
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:21:43 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A sign outside a Wilder church stirred a flurry of controversy this week, causing passersby to complain about anti-Muslim sentiment.
The church
(Excerpt) Read more at idahostatesman.com ...
No, I guess not. I live in New York.
Roger that. I believe they wrote the book on being hyper sensitive. They come from third world cess pools, where there is no freedom of speech, and they think they can have it here too. Wrong anwer. They can't, and we can keep hammering away, as you mentioned. It is open season on Catholics, Baptists, Mormons etc. The Muslims best get used to it, because it may get worse before it gets better.
Regards.
I’m sorry you misunderstood my comments. It is my contention that prior to the 1960s, universities had standards that they enforced. That included not providing a forum for obscenity or discredited ideologies. Following the 1960s “free speech” movement, universities abdicated their responsibilities with the result that now the inmates are running the asylum.
I am aware that the same people who demanded free speech for themselves are now denying the same privileges for others. That is always the way with totalitarians. The Communists came to power in Russia not by promising misery, privation and death. They promised the people peace and the peasants their own farms. Very powerful stuff at a time when tens of thousands of Russians were being killed in WW1. The Nazis promised an end to the economic chaos of the 1930s, a renewed pride in country, and justice to the “backstabbers” who lost the World War for Germany.
If universities had reacted in the 1960s with a clear statement of principles: no obscene speech, no teaching of discredited social theories, a grounding in the great ideas of the West, we would today not be faced with the little Hitlers on college campuses who are stifling Conservative dissent. One assumes that students go to the University to learn what works, what is truth, and the difference between good and evil. While these subject have not been settled for many issues, experience has shown what works in economics and social organization, and more importantly, what does not.
I recognize that today, free speech is under assault by the left on campus. However, I contend that it is not free speech we should be defending, but valid truths as opposed to proven error. If we ever get our Universities back, I do not want to see a repeat of the 1960s, when “free speech” was a stalking horse that led to the erosion of both speech and the search for truth.
First, it's spelled "Imam," just FYI, unless you are speaking of the Somali supermodel married to David Bowie.
Second, why is it necessary to show "Islam for what it really is"? what are you afraid of? That people in your community are suddenly going to abandon their Christian churches wholesale to convert to Islam? IOW, what's your point?
Why not spend all this time spent "exposing Islam" on positive messages? Tell others what YOU believe, not what others believe.
What so many fail to realize is that love is more often tough than warm and fuzzy. The Bible never leads anyone to believe otherwise. While there is comfort and protection in love, there is also great sacrifice and suffering, commitment and choosing God's way over our own. Sometimes we fail, but we don't give up. These too are expressions of love. And it is love, not hate, that leads most of us to call out a warning; I will not say all because surely there are those who do act from hate and lack of understanding.
There have been many converts to Islam since 9/11, as there have been to Christianity, and many others have found themselves seeking God, having recognized that alone we are nothing. Every Christian and Jew trained in the Scriptures is familiar with God's pronouncement to Israel; I will bless those that bless you and curse those that curse you." I believe that is to this day the root of America's commitment to defend Israel, although I think many have lost sight of any of the spiritual foundation upon which this great nation was built. Carrying that just a step farthur, I would say that those who have made themselves the enemy of Israel have made themselves the enemy of God, and I believe that extends far beyond geographical boundaries. Yes God is love and He is not willing that any should perish, but neither is God mocked...."do not be deceived; whatsoever you sow that shall you reap." Galatians 6:7
"This is love, that we walk according to His commandments." 2 John 1:6a
"For those whom the Lord loves He disciplines; and He scourges every son whom He receives." Hebrews 12:6
The greatest definition of love is found is I Corinthians 13:4-7. This is a passage frequently read, but if some deep thought is given to just what the words mean it becomes evident that living a life of genuine love is not an easy thing. In Jesus' prayer to His Father just before He gave Himself to be crucified by evil men, in the greatest act of love the world has ever known, He asked not that we would have an easy life (some translations say " not that they be taken out of the world") but that we be kept from the evil one. (John 17:15)
I believe that this pastor and this church are acting in good faith, to warn us "not to be deceived."
Isn't it too bad that the PC crowd can't be as militant about preserving what is good as they are in promoting what is evil. Wonder if they'd feel the same if we fell under this kind of evil regime. Could you picture Katie Couric broadcating in a burqa or Peter Jennings in a turban and a full beard?
It is supposed to punish evildoers. Those agencies that most fundamentally carry out the authority God gives to the government are in the area of defense—the military and police. Reviewing the passages above reveals that the government has the right and the responsibility to impose capital punishment and wage war.
God clearly used and endorsed military force for the right reasons in the Bible. He even used pagan nations to punish His own people when they sinned. (Notice that God refers to the pagan world ruler Nebuchadnezzar as “My servant” in Jeremiah chapter 25 verse 9, chapter 27 verse 6, and chapter 43 verse 10.) Also, notice John the Baptist’s response to some soldiers in Luke chapter 3 verse 14. He did not tell them to “get out of the military,” but rather to justly perform their responsibilities. This would include waging war.
God protects us at every point that He can. We are made in His image and are to be like Him and live like Him. The Bible reveals that He champions the cause of the weak, hurt, poor, suffering, mistreated, and others while calling us to do the same. Many passages tell us we must not hurt the fatherless, widows, or poor, move boundary stones (to steal their property), and similar things. The opposite position is untenable and illogical. It would mean that if there were no authority around to help, you would have to let someone hurt, rape, kill, steal, or abuse yourself, those you love, the weak, and the defenseless. This makes no sense, and certainly does not fit into the love or justice of God. Further, every society (that we are aware of) has legal provisions established by the authorities for self-defense. It is expected and accepted that a human being would and should protect themselves, their loved ones, and even those in need of help or defense. Therefore, it follows from Romans 13:1-7 that the Bible allows the government to take actions against Usama bin Laden and any others.
I believe a Pastor has the right to agree with our military.
a sure sign of a false prohet.....
Sister. I was born with boobs AND brains! :-D
There is a difference in the spirit of antichrist and the person of the antichrist.
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.