One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Oliver
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26 next>>
Nov 1, 2015 11:02:50   #
AuntiE wrote:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/atheist-okay-disparage-christians-islam-limits-because-fear

Atheist: Okay to Disparage Christians, But Islam Off-Limits Because of ‘Fear’

(CNSNews.com) – An atheist professor said Tuesday that it’s acceptable to criticize Christians but not Muslims, because he does not “fear” retaliation from Christians.

“I know what keeps me from critiquing Islam on my blog is just fear,” Phil Zuckerman said at a discussion on religious liberty at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. “I’ve got three kids.

“So I know I can say anything about Christianity or Mormonism, and I’m not living in fear, which is a testament to Christianity and Mormonism, and that’s wonderful. Thank you,” said Zuckerman, who is a self-described atheist and professor of secular studies at Pitzer College in Claremont, Calif.

Zuckerman was a panelist at the discussion as part of Georgetown University’s Religious Freedom Project at its Berkley Center.

Kirsten Powers, a Democratic pundit, recent convert to Catholicism and author of the book “How the Left Is K*****g Free Speech,” said at the event that she does not understand why Muslims can oppose same-sex marriage and not be targeted by the Left for it, but calling out Christians for their beliefs is acceptable.

Powers cited the hidden video recordings made earlier this year by Steven Crowder, who asked Muslim bakers in Michigan if they would bake a cake for a same-sex wedding and they refused.

“If these had been Christian bakeries, it would have been on the front page of the New York Times, so I’m wondering why we’re able to have this amicable, disagreement with Muslims for having this view,” Powers said. “Why are we not able to do that with Christians?

“I absolutely agree with you,” Zuckerman said.

“I absolutely agree that it is okay for those on the left to critique, mock, deride Christianity, but Islam gets a free pass, which is so strange, because if you care about women’s rights, if you care about human rights, if you care about gay rights, then really Islam is much more problematic – sorry to paint Islam with a huge brush – and much more devastating,” he said.

“As an atheist – where on planet Earth is the death penalty meted out to atheists?” Zuckerman said. “It’s only in, I think, 24 Muslim countries.

“Where have human rights flourished the most? In Christian nations,” he said.

“I see Christianity as a great friend of secular culture,” Zuckerman said. “I see Islam as much more of a threat, much more debilitating. I’m not talking about Muslim individuals that I happen to sit next to on an airplane or are my neighbors. I’m talking about doctrines and those that have the power to enforce those doctrines in the form of Sharia law.”

Zuckerman mentioned comedian Bill Maher, actor Ben Affleck and atheist and author Sam Harris and the reaction to their remarks about Islam.

“I would say two things,” Zuckerman said. “I know what keeps me from critiquing Islam on my blog is just fear.

“I’ve got three kids,” he said. “So I know I can say anything about Christianity or Mormonism, and I’m not living in fear, which is a testament to Christianity and Mormonism, and that’s wonderful. Thank you.

“I would never write the same kind of stuff that I do about certain religions – Judaism, Christianity, LDS, wh**ever – as I would about Islam – just straight up fear,” Zuckerman said.



Can we give a loud and resounding A M E N for his honesty? Our coterie of OPP atheists would never (even though they declare themselves ethically wondrous) be this honest!
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/at... (show quote)


Such honesty is just as rare as a few evolutionists who have admitted that scientifically their "faith" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But wherever we find such honesty it is quite refreshing.
Go to
Nov 1, 2015 10:49:09   #
eagleye13 wrote:
"Secondly, before saying or agreeing to anything called a "waste" consider the source: those for legalizing pot (etc.) jump on the "waste" bandwagon, whether true or not. Those against legalizing pot say otherwise and do not consider it a waste (even IF true) any more than all the millions used to combat murder, rape, etc.

What we need is to bring back prohibition!
Yah; that worked out real well.
Same logic.
BTW; Jesus made wine.

Oh, by the way, Jesus the pre-incarnate Creator also made people and gave them the choice of obedience or disobedience; and with the choice, irrevocable consequences for good or evil were attached. It is no secret as to what choice we the people selected.


BS.
Same for our BS "Wars" in the Middle East.

God made marijuana and he did not make pharmaceuticals.
Most of the mass murderers were on Big Pharma medications.
To many people have lost their lively hoods by getting busted for toking. Some end up on welfare after losing their jobs.
BUT;
Those on welfare get a pass. How ludicrous is this?
"Secondly, before saying or agreeing to anyth... (show quote)
Go to
Oct 29, 2015 15:18:10   #
MrEd wrote:
Subject: Preamble to the Constitution
(The following has been attributed to Lewis Napper, a Jackson,
Mississippi computer programmer)
'We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more r**ts, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden and delusional. We hold these t***hs to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights.'



ARTICLE I:

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.



ARTICLE II:

You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of dummies, and probably always will be.



ARTICLE III:

You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.



ARTICLE IV:

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch
potatoes.



ARTICLE V:

You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.



ARTICLE VI:

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or k**l someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you get the blue juice.



ARTICLE VII:

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, c***t, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.



ARTICLE VIII:

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.



ARTICLE IX:

You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of i***tic laws
created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.



ARTICLE X:

This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you came from, English is our language. Learn it!



Lastly



ARTICLE XI:

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all, with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, sorry if you are uncomfortable with it.
Subject: Preamble to the Constitution br ... (show quote)


Let me add an ARTICLE XII:
The so-called "wall between church and state" works BOTH ways and if you do not like it, you have the right to leave and go to any Muslim nation you desire as no such wall exits with them as church and state are the same thing. Good luck.
Go to
Oct 29, 2015 15:03:01   #
Bad Bob wrote:
JMHO, how much money do you think we have wasted on "the war on drugs"?


How much money do you think we have wasted on the war against murder, against theft, against pillaging, for political candidates and favors? Then, too, consider the billions $$$ more than "wasted" that the USA gives to many of the Muslim nations in the Middle East!

First, If just one person has been prevented from becoming a drug-head addict, has that been a financial "waste"? Society says "yes" as it puts $$$ above people. However, the individuals saved say "no" as it puts their wellbeing above $$$.

Secondly, before saying or agreeing to anything called a "waste" consider the source: those for legalizing pot (etc.) jump on the "waste" bandwagon, whether true or not. Those against legalizing pot say otherwise and do not consider it a waste (even IF true) any more than all the millions used to combat murder, rape, etc.
Go to
Oct 29, 2015 14:29:33   #
Don G. Dinsdale wrote:
From Sandy M. Thanks Girl... Don D.

ALL Muslim Stories!

Flood U.S. & Canada With The T***h!


This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish:

The k*****g of Kayla Mueller was a Muslim;

The burning of the Jordanian pilot was a Muslim;

The Tel Aviv bus attack:was a Muslim;

The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim (Incompetent, but still a Muslim!);

The Beltway Snipers were Muslims;

The beheading of two Japanese hostages was a Muslim;

The Paris and Australia shooting was a Muslim;

The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim;

The underwear Bomber was a Muslim (Incompetent, but still a Muslim!);

The U.S.S. Cole Bombers were Muslims;

The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims;

The Bafi Nightclub Bombers were Muslims;

The London Subway Bombers were Muslims;

The Moscow Theatre Attackers were Muslims;

The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims;

The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims;

The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims;

The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims;

The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims;

The B******i U.S. Embassy Attack was by Muslims;

The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims;

The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims;

The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims;

The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims;

The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims;

The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims;

The First World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims;

The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims;

The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims;

The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims;

The assassin of Robert Kennedy was a Muslim;

Philippines – Moro Islamic Liberation Front guerrillas were involved in the k*****g of 49 Special Action Force;

Think of it the Religion of Peace did All This:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem

Hindus living with Christians = No Problem

Hindus living with Jews = No Problem

Christians living with Shintos = No Problem

Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem

Confucians living with Baha'is = No Problem

Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem

Jews living with Atheists = No Problem

Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem

Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem

Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem

Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem

Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem

Christians living with Jews = No Problem

Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem

Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem

Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem

Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem

Confucians living with Hindus = No Problem

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Muslims living with Hindus = Problem

Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem

Muslims living with Christians = Problem

Muslims living with Jews = Problem

Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem

Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem

Muslims living with Shintos = Problem

Muslims living with Atheists = Problem

MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM

**********SO THIS LEADS TO *****************

They’re not happy in Gaza

They're not happy in Egypt

They're not happy in Libya

They're not happy in Morocco

They're not happy in Iran

They're not happy in Iraq

They're not happy in Yemen

They're not happy in Afghanistan

They're not happy in Pakistan

They're not happy in Syria

They're not happy in Lebanon

They're not happy in Nigeria

They're not happy in Kenya

They're not happy in Sudan

******** So, Where Are They Happy?? **********

They're happy in Australia

They're happy in England

They're happy in Belgium

They're happy in France

They're happy in Italy

They're happy in Germany

They're happy in Sweden & Norway

They're happy in the USA & Canada

They're happy in India

They're happy in almost every country that is not Islamic! And who do they blame? Not Islam... Not their leadership... Not themselves... THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!! And they want to change the countries they're happy in, to be like the countries they came from where they were unhappy and finally they will be get hammered!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Islamic Jihad: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

ISIS: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Al-Qaeda: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Taliban: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Hamas: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Hezbollah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Boko Haram: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Al-Nusra: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Abu Sayyaf: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Al-Badr: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Muslim Brotherhood: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Lashkar-e-Taiba: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Palestine Liberation Front: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Ansaru: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Jemaah Islamiyah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

Abdullah Azzam Brigades: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION

AND A LOT MORE!!!!!!!

I am sure with these SAVAGES there will be more to come

Think About THIS....

Can a Good Muslim be a Good American or Canadian?

This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. ... Because his allegiance is to Allah.

Religiously - no.. . .. Because no other religion is accepted by His
Allah except Islam ... (Quran, 2:256) (Koran)

Scripturally - no. .. .. Because his allegiance is to the five
Pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically - no .. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day..

Socially - no. . . Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to
make friends with Christians or Jews ...

Politically - no... Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically - no. .. . Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34 )

Intellectually - no... Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. . . Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran does not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist.

Every Muslim Government is Either Dictatorial or Autocratic.

Spiritually - no... Because when we declare 'One Nation Under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in the Quran's 99 excellent names.

Therefore, after much study and deliberation....perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans/Canadians. Call it what you wish, it's still the t***h.

You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our countries and our future.

The religious war is bigger than we know or understand.

Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within.

SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

THE Armed Forces WANT THIS EMAIL TO ROLL ALL OVER THE U.S. & CANADA.

Please don't delete this until you send it on.
From Sandy M. Thanks Girl... Don D. br br ALL Mus... (show quote)


I had come across something similar to this earlier. This time I printed it off. Thanks. sounds pretty straight-forward to me...but then, who am I to say?
Go to
Oct 29, 2015 14:05:58   #
Richard94611 wrote:
Here is your final question in your post, Oliver: "Why should anyone be forced by any government (state or national) to serve their dictates at the sacrifice of other's personal freedoms? Why should any government (state or federal) force you to believe or do what I believe and do or to force you to go against your own moral cord?"

Is it not obvious that all governments do this, and that this is why we have governments. Otherwise we would have anarchy, and criminal elements would run even more rampant than they now do.

Think a bit. If you live in a society, you MUST compromise with others.
Here is your final question in your post, Oliver: ... (show quote)


Yes, there are many times when compromise (give and take) is part of everyday living and one needs to be able to do this with grace; but compromise my faith in Jesus Christ, His governance, and His morality, never. And our local, state, or federal governing bodies can never "Constitutionally" dictate to me or anyone else regardless of one's faith's persuasion (that does NOT do any physical or psychological harm to another) what to do or not do. The so-called "wall of separation between church and state" must work BOTH ways otherwise it is a complete sham.
Go to
Oct 26, 2015 13:19:09   #
moldyoldy wrote:
Christian Fundamentalists’ Plot Against the Constitution: What Kim Davis’s Newly Unearthed Emails reveal

Kim Davis may be a footnote to history. But new revelations offer a frightening glimpse into fundamentalists' minds.

By Sean Illing / Salon

October 23, 2015

Thanks to Kentucky’s open records law, the Associated Press has obtained the emails county clerk Kim Davis sent just before she went to jail late this summer. And yes, they are every bit as unhinged as you imagined they’d be. In case you forgot, Davis is the God-loving homophobe who courageously denied marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Kentucky two months ago.

The emails are interesting if only because they show just how crazy (and dangerous) fanatics like Davis are, particularly if they happen to work as public servants. Here’s Davis in her own words:


The battle has just begun…It has truly been a firestorm here and the days are pretty much a blur, but I am confident that God is in control of all of this!! I desire your prayers, I will need strength that only God can supply and I need a backbone like a saw log!!…They are going to try and make a whipping post out of me!! I know it, but God is still alive and on the throne!!! He IS in control and knows exactly where I am!!…September 1 will be the day to prepare for, if the Lord doesn’t return before then. I have weighted the cost, and will stay the course.


Apart from her apparent love of exclamation points, this message is truly disturbing. As Mark Joseph Stern observed, “These are not the words of a rational public servant attempting to do her taxpayer-funded job to the best of her abilities…These are the words of a religious fanatic who views herself as the protagonist in an epic, possibly biblical battle between good and evil – a millennialist zealot who hopes the rapture, rather than mere earthly courts, will intervene to save her."

It’s easy to dismiss all of this as the fevered ramblings of an obscure county clerk – and clearly that’s what they are.

Davis, after all, doesn’t really matter. She’s a thrice-married legacy hire in Kentucky who won a few minutes of fame but accomplished nothing in the long run.

What’s scary, however, is that Davis isn’t alone.

Since the 1970s, when conservative Protestants became politically active, Christians have sought to blue the boundary between secular law and religious doctrine. The idea, as evangelical scholar Lynn Buzzard wrote, was to “reject the division of human affairs into the secular and the sacred and insist, instead, that there is no arena of human activity, including law and politics, which is outside of God’s lordship."

There’s also the Christian d******nist movement, the primary goal of which is to implant religious zealots in public office in order to Christianize the laws, the courts and all public institutions. D******nists are operative today across the country and in the South particularly, and their theo-political philosophy animates political figures like Ted Cruz and Bobby Jindal.

I’ve no idea if Davis self-identifies as a Christian d******nist, but her belief that religious laws trump secular laws in the public space is consistent with d******nist thinking. Davis may be a footnote to a news cycle, but there are plenty of people with more influence who share her worldview, and they’re a legitimate threat insofar as they actively seek to undermine the Constitution.

Davis is likely more deranged than your average d******nist, and her persecution mania was surely amplified by all the attention she received, but she’s a product of an ascendant and genuinely theocratic movement. I doubt Ben Carson thinks Jesus will return next Tuesday, as Davis evidently does, but, like Huckabee and Jindal and Cruz, he’s fighting the same battle as Davis.

Carson has said, in effect, that America is a Christian nation and that we should have something like a religious test for office. What Carson and other Republicans defend under the guise of “religious liberty” is often just an attempt to elevate God’s law over secular law. This is what Davis tried to do in Kentucky, and it’s what Hobby Lobby more or less did in 2014.

So sure, Davis is an afterthought, but the religious fanaticism she represents isn’t. There will be more Kim Davises. The difference is that they won’t all be so obviously insane, and that’s what makes them so dangerous.
Christian Fundamentalists’ Plot Against the Consti... (show quote)


Religious fanaticism? What about secular fanaticism? What about Muslim (secular, political, and religious are all the same to them) fanaticism?

The main difference between the top two fanaticisms (religious or secular) is relative to who is to be control: God or man? Each individual is free to choose. Those who choose man see all the religious as fanatics and vice versa.

But unfortunately for the secular fanatics, their whole philosophy and set of values is built on the sands of time which come and go depending upon the prevailing opinions of those who are in authority.

Unfortunately, also, are all the religious fanatics who use God as their reason to perpetrate acts of inhumanity upon humanity as their "fruit" betrays their very premise.

On the other hand, the religious fanatics who put their faith and trust in the living God of scripture are on solid footings as:
1. When Christ does return, the whole earth will be filled with His knowledge as the waters cover the seas.
2. When Christ does return, the nations of the world will flow to Him to walk in His light and commandments.
3. At this time, every knee (including your own knees) and every tongue (including your own tongue) will confess, "Jesus, you are Lord."
4. Even when this present earth and heavens pass away His word shall remain throughout eternity.

Yes, call me a religious fanatic; and if it is related to the personhood/Godhood of Jesus Christ then I rejoice at this tag.

But concerning Davis, if there is a so-called "wall between church and state" (such a term is not even mentioned once in the whole of the Constitution), then why is the state penetrating this "wall" and forcing Davis to go against her religious faith. This wall, if it is a reality (which it is not) must work both ways otherwise it is a farce. The beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that if someone refuses to serve you, you have the freedom of going elsewhere to be served.

Why should anyone be forced by any government (state or national) to serve their dictates at the sacrifice of other's personal freedoms? Why should any government (state or federal) force you to believe or do what I believe and do or to force you to go against your own moral cord?
Go to
Oct 23, 2015 10:48:47   #
teaman wrote:
Mankind’s enduring “culture war” is nothing new. It first began in a garden long ago and today has reached a fever pitch worldwide. The battle lines are drawn, not so much between conservative vs. liberal, as many presume, but, rather, between biblical vs. unbiblical, t***h vs. deception. In its most distilled form the culture war signifies the worldly manifestation of an otherworldy spiritual battle between good and evil.

African Cardinal Robert Sarah, a man many view as a potential future pope, recently made news by boldly drilling down into this reality. During the Vatican’s ongoing Synod of Bishops, Sarah noted that the “idolatry of Western freedom,” which he described as “atheistic secularism” (aka modern liberalism), and “Islamic fundamentalism” represent twin threats to the world, not unlike N**ism and c*******m. Atheistic secularism and Islam, he observed, are “almost like the Beasts of the Apocalypse.”

“What N**ism-f*****m and c*******m were to the 20th century, Western ideologies on homosexuality and a******n and Islamic fanaticism are to today,” noted Sarah. “Certain keys allow us to discern the same demonic origin of these two movements: they both advocate a universal and totalitarian law, they’re both violently intolerant, destroyers of families and the Church, and openly anti-Christian,” he concluded.

Indeed, while there are exceptions, the “progressive” left is overwhelmingly anti-Semitic, anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. Liberals and Islamists, such as those belonging to the American-Islamic terrorist group CAIR, as well as Obama’s pals in the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran, have forged a bizarre and notably incongruous sociopolitical partnership I call the “Islamo-’progressive’ axis of evil.” The only explanation for this, as far as I can tell, is best illustrated by the maxim: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The common enemy, of course, is Christ Jesus, who is T***h.

Whereas Cardinal Sarah clearly recognizes the existence of this “demonic” Islamo-“progressive” axis, it seems, and distressingly so, that the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Catholicism’s official doctrine, does not. While, on the issues of a******n, sexual sin and natural marriage, the Catechism is deeply rooted in Scripture and, as such, taps the living waters of T***h, on the problem of Islam, it has, conversely, tapped the fiery pits of hell.

On, “The Church’s relationship with the Muslims,” the Catechism states: “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Where to begin. Rarely does one find so many mist***hs packed into a single sentence.

First is the troubling assertion that, “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator.” Wrong. Even the demons “believe there is one God” (James 2:19). The plan of salvation includes, exclusively, those who at once acknowledge the Creator and have faith in His only begotten Son, Christ Jesus. Says He: “I am the way and the t***h and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

Islam expressly denies both the deity of Christ and that He is the Son of God. Any religion that denies Christ, the Messiah, as the Son of God, is a false religion. Any false religion that worships a god without the Son worships a false god – an idol of its own making.

Islam is idolatry. It is a false religion.

And Allah, a false god.

While, as the Catechism suggests, Muslims “profess to hold the faith of Abraham” and “adore the one, merciful God,” the fact remains that they do neither. The “faith of Abraham” foretold the coming of Christ, the Messiah, who is, in fact, the “one, merciful God” incarnate. Not only do Muslims deny Christ, they persecute, under flame and sword, His very body – the Christian faithful.

A central tenet of Islam is to convert, ens***e or k**l the infidel. An infidel is anyone who is not Muslim or, depending on who’s doing the k*****g, belongs to a different sect of Islam. Those who fall into that minority category tagged “moderate Muslim” are also infidels or “idolaters.” “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them,” commands Surah 9:5 of the Quran. “Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.”

Islam is about control. The word itself means “submission.” It is a socio-political pseudo-religion based upon the incoherent scribblings of one man – the “prophet” Muhammad, a warring tyrant who, as even the Quran concedes, was a murderous misogynist and p*******e. This unholy book is loosely plagiarized from the Bible’s Old and New Testaments – scriptures that, by contrast, were seamlessly t***scribed over centuries by roughly 40 men under the direct and divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Islam is Christianity’s photo-negative. While Christianity brings eternal life to those choosing to surrender to Jesus, who alone is “the Way, the T***h and the Life,” Islam brings eternal death to those who surrender to Allah, who is “the best of deceivers” (“[A]nd Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers.” [see Surah 3:54]).

It’s worth mentioning here that the Bible similarly calls Satan a deceiver. Revelation 12:9, for instance, explains that he “deceives the whole world.” Even though it is often claimed that Muslims, Christians and Jews “worship the same God,” nothing could be further from the t***h. Allah is not God. Allah is the deceiver, and insofar as Christianity, true Christianity, spreads peace, love and t***h – Islam, true Islam, spreads violence, h**e and deception. Allah is definitely real. He’s just not God. Though he wanted to “ascend above the tops of the clouds” and “make [himself] like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:14), Allah, most assuredly, is not God.

And so, the “best of deceivers” cares not whether we worship the idol of self, as do the secular-”progressives,” the deceiver himself, as do the Muslims, or some other false god. The deceptive one cares only that we deny God the Father, Christ His Son and the Holy Spirit, three in one.

Those who refuse will face persecution, even unto temporal death.

But those who refuse will likewise face salvation, even unto eternal Life.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/25870/islam-and-liberalism-twin-beasts-of-the-apocalypse/#mDvH8pttrsH4kmv2.99
Mankind’s enduring “culture war” is nothing new. I... (show quote)


Well said. It's great to know that there is more than once voice "crying in the wilderness." May the Lord bless and keep you.
Go to
Oct 23, 2015 10:12:56   #
PeterS wrote:
The thing that has always bothered me about religion and god is the illogic. For example. God supposedly created the universe so that we would have a home from which we could prove ourselves worthy to either be accepted into heaven or to be deemed unworthy and be sent to hell. That's all well and good but why did he need to create a universe to do that? I mean, after all, all we need is a planet, a moon, and a sun--throw in some planets just to keep us entertained. All the rest is useless add ons that do nothing with respect to heaven or hell. Now I know god is suppose to be mysterious and all that crap but I don't think he is stupid so why create a universe where none was needed.

Like I say, my problem with god is the logic--there isn't any--and personally, I think if a god did exist he wouldn't be illogical. Cuz that just wouldn't make any sense would it...
The thing that has always bothered me about religi... (show quote)


Who in the world believes, "All the rest is useless add ons.."?

First it shows God's knowledge, His power, and His authority.

Secondly, it gives us the beauty of a starlight night.

Thirdly, "Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end...from henceforth even forever." Isaiah 9:7 When God's kingdom (where there is no death or sickness), arrives here on earth it will be forever increasing throughout eternity. So, just to where do you think it will expand?
Go to
Oct 20, 2015 21:50:07   #
Kevyn wrote:
A Christian couple in the US enforces Gods law on their heathen progeny.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/17/new-york-church-beating-teen-whipped-word-of-life


In this age of the counterfeit, we all have been forewarned by Christ Himself: "Watch out for false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. You will recognize them by their fruit." Matthew 7:15

A lemon may counterfeit itself and say that it is an orange but all it takes is one taste.

A skunk can paint his white stripe black, but all it takes is one whiff.
Go to
Oct 10, 2015 12:50:08   #
solarkin wrote:
Faith is my guide.
His love is my inspirstion.
My words may fall short, but I know my heart is true.


Right on!
Go to
Oct 10, 2015 12:18:45   #
solarkin wrote:
Subjective observation, and insight give light to
Everything we see, as observations, changes with time.
This is Why we choose our destiny.
Our future is in our hand every moment.


"Subjective observation"? Yes, observation is largely subjective due to its numerous interpretive factors.
"...insight give[s] light to everything we see,..."? Actually it is light that if accepted can increase our insight or if rejected can decrease our insight.
"...we choose our destiny."? In one sense, yes we do "choose" our own destiny; however, "The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord like channels of water, He turns it wherever He wants." Proverbs 21:1
"Our future is in our hand every moment."? See again Proverbs 21:1.
Go to
Oct 10, 2015 11:36:27   #
PeterS wrote:
It isn't a question of two faiths but what you base your faith on. Faith based on rationalism has the foundation of Science and Logic to support it. However, when our beliefs are in the irrational, faith is necessary as there is no logical mechanism to support it...


So very true when you say that it isn't "a question of two faiths but what you base your faith on."
1. You apparently, by your own confession, BASE your faith on the "foundation of Science and Logic..." but most all science is not absolute as it continues to discover and rediscover itself almost on a daily basis and Logic, as we should all know, is always subject to error.
2. Christians, on the other hand BASE their faith on the never changing Rock, Jesus Christ Who not only was there at the CREATION of the universe (and everything in it) but was Himself that very CREATOR. He, Himself, is the very AUTHOR of all science. Like everything good which He instituted, like sex within the confines of marriage between one man and one woman, man has used his LOGIC to discount and to malign. While science testifies of its own Creator, man's logic of science discounts it as pure myth.
Go to
Oct 5, 2015 10:45:46   #
Wolf counselor wrote:
I can remember from bible lessons that my mom gave us, that these days would come.

We are warned, in the bible, that the days would come when the faithful would be k**led and the k**lers would believe themselves to be doing God a favor.


These very words of Christ Himself are in John 16:2: "...yes, the time comes that whoever k**ls you will think that he does God service."
Go to
Oct 3, 2015 13:34:59   #
fiatlux wrote:
How do you guys keep parroting this crap over and over. Factoid: most violent crimes by guns is in the loosest gun law states. Look it up (But not by asking Fox News).


Please look this up:
"Car crashes k**led 33,561 people in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Firearms k**led 32,251 people in the United States in 2011, the most recent year for which the Centers for disease Control has data."

How come isn't anyone advocating the removal of all privately owned vehicles? After all, it is the "car" that has been k*****g more people than the "gun" (so I am told). Just think of how many deaths could be prevented if our government took every privately owned gun and vehicle from its citizens across the nation!

Oh, excuse me as I just had a lapse of sanity there for a moment. Wouldn't the underground terrorists simply love it if no American citizen had either a car or a gun?!
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.