Item A: It has always been murder in any context to put someone to death for a belief. People may have thought they were correct to do it at the time but their stupidity is irrelevant to the fact it was still murder. I need not demonstrate this fact to any other human alive. I think we all agree that killing someone for a harmless fairy tale belief they were likely born into is murder....but you. Its like this...your beliefs are all wrong , but that is no good reason for me to justify killing you, right? That would be murder, correct? Its the same thing.
Item B: Noah is a fairy tale, but if God did something like it such as breaking the Bosporus peninsula 8000 years ago and flooding the Med valley (which happened and could be the folk lure responsible for this fairy tale), then he murdered people ....and surely not all of them were bad.
Noah is a fairy tale you say - are you saying that what Israel did when it destroyed the nations after crossing the Jordon is not a fairy tale? It has always been murder in any context to put someone to death for a belief.
You are saying it has always been murder, even when folks thought they were correct to do so. You are then saying that there is a moral principle that transcends the human race, that the human race is subject to? I am saying that putting someone to death for a harmless belief should certainly always be considered murder. And your objection to discussing Noah and the flood is that he is a fairy tale you say - are you saying that what Israel did when it destroyed the nations after crossing the Jordon is not a fairy tale, since you did not object to discussing that? |
|
|
|
|
And there are folks who consider abortion murder, and others who consider the death penalty murder, and others who consider the bombing of Hiroshima murder, and others who feel Bush is a murderer.
I understand your sentiment - but, you do make it sound like it is more than just your own personal view on murder.
|
|
|
|
I am saying in the Greater Middle East. Not necessarily per country, but have most countries as a whole represented by majorities and a few countries represented by minorities.
For example 3 Shia-led States, a Jewish State, and a bunch of Sunni States. And then India on the Eastern End.
Not have a bunch of Sunni States with India and an endangered Israel. Israel, the U.S., and Iran can work together against ISIS. I think negotiations can work here.
Right, so if you see it as a problem for the whole region, then why wouldn't it be a problem when it comes to a country by country basis? Shia states have been just as antagonistic towards Israel, not sure how promoting them is supposed to automatically keep Israel safer. |
|
|
|
|
Actually, the title just asks 'Does God judge the nations' - not did he long ago.
And, as far as the breakdown of the family, sure, what I would have in mind is what God intended. And everyone has morals, the question is - how do they square with the Creator (which would be what?).
I did mention Romans 1, which is the NT. And there are other verses in the NT regarding God's judgement on the nations. Revelation is a whole book on the subject, though reserved for a time in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
The foundations of law and order have collapsed. What can the righteous do?" Psalm 11:3
When the foundations of the country are destroyed, what's going to happen? The entire country is going to collapse and there will be an implosion. The enemy is within. When the moral fiber breaks down, the family breaks down. Once the family breaks down, we don't have a country anymore. We are at the point that is very much like when the Roman Empire was beginning to disintegrate. We are at the same point in history. I never dreamed this would happen in my lifetime, but we are there. Those who are younger than I will see the destruction and fall of this society.
Then, what will have to happen will be for a great one world government to try to salvage things as the moral fiber disintegrates. It's all preparing the way for the Lord's return.
"The nations have sunk down in the pit which they have made; In the net which they hid, their own foot has been caught. The Lord has made Himself known; He has executed judgment. In the work of his own hands the wicked is snared. . . . Even all the nations who forget God. . . . Let the nations know that they are but men." Psalm 9:15-20, NASB
|
|
|
|
That is all. Remember, I have been studying religion too. So I know how Jihadis think. I think more on the religious realm rather than the political realm. And we are in trouble if we let the majority not let the minority have rights. And that includes Israel not letting a Palestinian state be created, and that also includes the Arab world not recognizing Israel as a Jewish State. Both Jews and Palestinians are minority groups that need to be recognized in the Greater Middle East.
Edit: While I am secular, I feel that religion plays a lot of factors in the Greater Middle East.
Assad and Maliki's governments or the gulf states for that matter aren't built on the notion of equal representation. they are built on the notion of dictatorial control. This is exactly how Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc operate. I guess I am seeing some disconnect between your stated ideology and your policy suggestions. |
|
|
|
|
I don't see the ISIS as being a threat to India. It doesn't have the capabilities of extending itself that far. Likewise, it is too focused internally to be a huge threat to us in the States at the moment (which was always another criticism of Al Qaeda's), Iran's funding of Hamas weaponry has had a much larger impact to date on Israel than anything that AQI has ever been able to muster (though their threat there is growing in Syria), and Saudi Arabia would 100% disagree with you as Iran is there primarily military threat (though they are worried about radicalism now too).
|
|
|
|
I would rather have Assad in power in Syria rather than ISIS. I think Shias are more moderate than radical Sunnis; which I think is obvious.
the people living in rebel held towns in syria would disagree with you. the human rights abuses being committed by the Assad regime are almost as bad as ISIS. dropping barrels filled with explosives from helicopters into crowded civilian areas... is that so much less barbaric? There are some radical Muslims that believe that they have do destroy different Sects (Shia) first before they move on to the Christians and Jews and then Allah will reveal Himself. It keeps the balance when at least several Muslim countries have a Shia Prime Minister. If Iraq and Syria fall to Sunni insurgents, then the only Shia-led State left will be Iran. This would unite Islamic extremists against Christians and Jews next. Edit: There are even some Sunnis Muslims who believe that Shias are not even real Muslims. I don't think the argument here is that Iraq shouldn't have a majority shia representation. Side note: Azerbaijan is also predominately shia. They just aren't very close to Iran (politically) and side more with the US and Israel.Islamic extremists have never been united. That is how some Islamic extremists think. I have been to Kuwait, Qatar, and Israel and I have spoken to Muslims while studying Political Science in college. I also speak fluent Russian (being originally from Ukraine) and can tell you what Chechen militants are saying. From all this is how I conclude my thoughts when I write them down. This is from Political Science study and first hand experience, and not from reading news articles. Sorry to be so harsh, but that is just how I feel. No harshness received or intended on my part either. I was just asking you why you felt that way and pointing out some of the difficulties with being so generic. I have a degree in Political Science as well (not really sure why that matters), and am a prime target for many Jihadis too. That being said, there are real problems with ignoring the intricacies of realities on the ground as it relates to Iraq. It has cost us in the past during our initial invasion and it will again if we don't pay attention to them now. You were not being harsh. I just went overboard not caring about the influence of the Gulf States in places like Iraq and Syria. For that I apologize. I am just saying that I support negotiating with Iran and Syria. Although I am conservative, on the issue of Iran and Syria I am pretty liberal. I feel that ISIS is a greater threat to America, Saudi Arabia, India, and Israel than Assad and Iran can ever be. I don't think Iran is suicidal in building nukes and Assad is giving up his chemical weapons. We should work together to keep equal representation in the Middle East. A Jewish State, a Palestinian State, a Kurdish State, and Sunni and Shia States. I am sick and tired of how some of us here in the States support Al Nusra and Jihadis who behead people in Syria at the expense of Assad, who is more moderate in comparison. I would not have said that in the past, and I am actually shocked that I am saying it now. But we need balance. A balance in the Middle East is needed and not support for the rebels in Syria. I personally think this is in the best interest of both the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, and India. That is just my opinion. I don't want crazy religious prophecies to come true. Which is fairly surprising to me given your security concerns and given the fact that Iran and Syria have probably been the two largest net exporters of terrorism against the Israeli state (think Hamas and Hezbollah). |
|
|
|
Item A: It has always been murder in any context to put someone to death for a belief. People may have thought they were correct to do it at the time but their stupidity is irrelevant to the fact it was still murder. I need not demonstrate this fact to any other human alive. I think we all agree that killing someone for a harmless fairy tale belief they were likely born into is murder....but you. Its like this...your beliefs are all wrong , but that is no good reason for me to justify killing you, right? That would be murder, correct? Its the same thing.
Item B: Noah is a fairy tale, but if God did something like it such as breaking the Bosporus peninsula 8000 years ago and flooding the Med valley (which happened and could be the folk lure responsible for this fairy tale), then he murdered people ....and surely not all of them were bad.
Noah is a fairy tale you say - are you saying that what Israel did when it destroyed the nations after crossing the Jordon is not a fairy tale? It has always been murder in any context to put someone to death for a belief.
You are saying it has always been murder, even when folks thought they were correct to do so. You are then saying that there is a moral principle that transcends the human race, that the human race is subject to? |
|
|
|
To add, if it keeps a billion Hindus, two billion Christians, and 15 million Jews safe from terrorism and beheadings I would rather have the Middle East divided along Sunni-Shia religious lines. I don't want Shias to be oppressed to the point where they are no longer politically relevant and Sunni insurgent groups decide to focus their entire attention on Christians, Hindus, and Jews.
This edit doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You seem to be assigning Islamic terrorists MUCH more power than they have ever had. I also don't see how your concerns for safety are furthered by the stance of yours on Iraq that you proposed. Ignoring the Sunni population in Iraq is what created the viable space for the ISIS to grow and survive in the first place, I'm not sure why you would see the continuation of that failed approach in combating radicalism as a good option moving forward. |
|
|
|
I would rather have Assad in power in Syria rather than ISIS. I think Shias are more moderate than radical Sunnis; which I think is obvious.
the people living in rebel held towns in syria would disagree with you. the human rights abuses being committed by the Assad regime are almost as bad as ISIS. dropping barrels filled with explosives from helicopters into crowded civilian areas... is that so much less barbaric? There are some radical Muslims that believe that they have do destroy different Sects (Shia) first before they move on to the Christians and Jews and then Allah will reveal Himself. It keeps the balance when at least several Muslim countries have a Shia Prime Minister. If Iraq and Syria fall to Sunni insurgents, then the only Shia-led State left will be Iran. This would unite Islamic extremists against Christians and Jews next. Edit: There are even some Sunnis Muslims who believe that Shias are not even real Muslims. I don't think the argument here is that Iraq shouldn't have a majority shia representation. Side note: Azerbaijan is also predominately shia. They just aren't very close to Iran (politically) and side more with the US and Israel.Islamic extremists have never been united. That is how some Islamic extremists think. I have been to Kuwait, Qatar, and Israel and I have spoken to Muslims while studying Political Science in college. I also speak fluent Russian (being originally from Ukraine) and can tell you what Chechen militants are saying. From all this is how I conclude my thoughts when I write them down. This is from Political Science study and first hand experience, and not from reading news articles. Sorry to be so harsh, but that is just how I feel. No harshness received or intended on my part either. I was just asking you why you felt that way and pointing out some of the difficulties with being so generic. I have a degree in Political Science as well (not really sure why that matters), and am a prime target for many Jihadis too. That being said, there are real problems with ignoring the intricacies of realities on the ground as it relates to Iraq. It has cost us in the past during our initial invasion and it will again if we don't pay attention to them now. |
|
|
|
Does everyone agree about the death penalty and abortion?
Some say that doing those are murder, others do not. Please, knock off the silliness about me redefining anything as if this subject is so esoteric.
How can the state murdering people not be considered as murder? Ok, how about this? Are there folk who think Bush is a murderer regarding the Iraqi war? Are there folk who disagree?Are there folk who think that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was murder, and those who think not? "If your "god" commanded you to kill someone, would you kill them?" Of course you never answered the question, but it does cause one to ponder. The usual criteria for determining the definition of murder is understanding the difference between Right and Wrong. You are on-record for not knowing the difference between Right and Wrong, Truth or Lies. You have to draw a line somewhere, and basic understadning of Right and Wrong is a good place to draw the line. You can't even man-up and define The Golden Rule!!! That should be a clue. And that is just it - not everyone agrees with what constitutes murder. Your avoiding discussing these other examples just further underlines that. You have yet to demonstrate why you feel this one example is absolute (even assuming your understanding is correct). Let me ask you - given the story of Noah's flood, where God directly brings judgement - do you feel that is murder? |
|
|
|
I would rather have Assad in power in Syria rather than ISIS. I think Shias are more moderate than radical Sunnis; which I think is obvious.
the people living in rebel held towns in syria would disagree with you. the human rights abuses being committed by the Assad regime are almost as bad as ISIS. dropping barrels filled with explosives from helicopters into crowded civilian areas... is that so much less barbaric? There are some radical Muslims that believe that they have do destroy different Sects (Shia) first before they move on to the Christians and Jews and then Allah will reveal Himself. It keeps the balance when at least several Muslim countries have a Shia Prime Minister. If Iraq and Syria fall to Sunni insurgents, then the only Shia-led State left will be Iran. This would unite Islamic extremists against Christians and Jews next. Edit: There are even some Sunnis Muslims who believe that Shias are not even real Muslims. I don't think the argument here is that Iraq shouldn't have a majority shia representation. Side note: Azerbaijan is also predominately shia. They just aren't very close to Iran (politically) and side more with the US and Israel.Islamic extremists have never been united. |
|
|
|
That being said, not all Sunni tribes are complicit in ISIS activities. Particularly in Anbar, which is the entire reason why the ISIS had to approach Baghdad from the north through Mosul and Kurdish territory rather than straight from the West.
It doesn't help things that the Maliki government's response has been to shell Sunni areas pretty indiscriminately. It rather reinforces the ISIS' propaganda.
AQ/Jabhat Al Nusra disowned IS nobody likes them https://mobile.twitter.com/JihadNews2/status/498544254005022720Keeping up with IS twitter accounts is hard since they die so fast. Average shelf life of an IS jihadi is a few weeks until somebody claims they are dead. Baghdadi is claiming direct descendance from the prophet it's now officially a cult. Sectarianism goes in both directions. Shia militias in Iraq has been known to kill people simply for being Sunnis as well and some of these death checkpoints in Baghdad have been seen to operate with at least the tacit approval of the Maliki Administration. We've also seen anti-Sunni death squads in Syria, particularly in the coastal region where plenty of mass graves will attest to legitimate Sunni concerns of safety. |
|
|
|
Al Qaeda disagrees with the ISIS on a number of things. One of the big ones is sectarianism (which al Qaeda's ideological old guard is against). They also disagree with the formation of Islamic states, preferring instead to work towards a greater caliphate (through the establishment of emirates). It may sound like splitting hairs, but it has big theological implications as well. They also disagree strongly on who should lead a future Islamic caliphate with Al Qaeda supporting Muhammad Omar of the Taliban while the IS supports Baghdadi.
It is a big mistake for Iraqi Sunnis to support ISIS. They are supporting barbarians. Yes, Al Qaeda is against sectarianism. And yes, Al Qaeda wants a Caliphate from Morocco through Pakistan. Israel is interfering with that dream of a greater Caliphate. ISIS had better be careful not to tick off Israel because Israel may launch airstrikes against ISIS in Syria. The U.S. should continue airstrikes against ISIS. They should attack ISIS positions in Syria as well. I would rather have Assad in power in Syria rather than ISIS. I think Shias are more moderate than radical Sunnis; which I think is obvious. They are supporting their own protection (in their eyes). They actively fought AQI during the Awakening and were rewarded with a discriminatory state government. Many don't even like the ISIS but figure that they'll deal with Baghdadi after Maliki has been taken care of, others are coerced via threats to cooperate. I think it is best to keep a Shia Prime Minister in Iraq. That way, Iraq, Iran, and Syria will have Shia leaders. And the rest of the Muslim world will have Sunni leaders. This will keep things balanced. That's fine I suppose, but it doesn't really do anything to address the concerns of the Sunnis and Kurds. I'm not really sure what metrics you are basing this notion of balance on, but I don't think many Gulf States would agree with you. |
|
|
|
|
That being said, not all Sunni tribes are complicit in ISIS activities. Particularly in Anbar, which is the entire reason why the ISIS had to approach Baghdad from the north through Mosul and Kurdish territory rather than straight from the West.
It doesn't help things that the Maliki government's response has been to shell Sunni areas pretty indiscriminately. It rather reinforces the ISIS' propaganda.
|
|
|
|
Al Qaeda disagrees with the ISIS on a number of things. One of the big ones is sectarianism (which al Qaeda's ideological old guard is against). They also disagree with the formation of Islamic states, preferring instead to work towards a greater caliphate (through the establishment of emirates). It may sound like splitting hairs, but it has big theological implications as well. They also disagree strongly on who should lead a future Islamic caliphate with Al Qaeda supporting Muhammad Omar of the Taliban while the IS supports Baghdadi.
It is a big mistake for Iraqi Sunnis to support ISIS. They are supporting barbarians. Yes, Al Qaeda is against sectarianism. And yes, Al Qaeda wants a Caliphate from Morocco through Pakistan. Israel is interfering with that dream of a greater Caliphate. ISIS had better be careful not to tick off Israel because Israel may launch airstrikes against ISIS in Syria. The U.S. should continue airstrikes against ISIS. They should attack ISIS positions in Syria as well. I would rather have Assad in power in Syria rather than ISIS. I think Shias are more moderate than radical Sunnis; which I think is obvious. They are supporting their own protection (in their eyes). They actively fought AQI during the Awakening and were rewarded with a discriminatory state government. Many don't even like the ISIS but figure that they'll deal with Baghdadi after Maliki has been taken care of, others are coerced via threats to cooperate. |
|
|
|
Does everyone agree about the death penalty and abortion?
Some say that doing those are murder, others do not. Please, knock off the silliness about me redefining anything as if this subject is so esoteric.
How can the state murdering people not be considered as murder? Ok, how about this? Are there folk who think Bush is a murderer regarding the Iraqi war? Are there folk who disagree?Are there folk who think that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was murder, and those who think not? |
|
|
|
|
Does everyone agree about the death penalty and abortion?
Some say that doing those are murder, others do not. Please, knock off the silliness about me redefining anything as if this subject is so esoteric.
|
|
|
|
|
Al Qaeda disagrees with the ISIS on a number of things. One of the big ones is sectarianism (which al Qaeda's ideological old guard is against). They also disagree with the formation of Islamic states, preferring instead to work towards a greater caliphate (through the establishment of emirates). It may sound like splitting hairs, but it has big theological implications as well. They also disagree strongly on who should lead a future Islamic caliphate with Al Qaeda supporting Muhammad Omar of the Taliban while the IS supports Baghdadi.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
