Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Religious Extremism

Here is another passage where the stone imagery is used. Most likely, the powder reference in Matthew probably refers to the destruction of the one whom the stone falls on.

- Davies
Daniel 2:44-45

King James Version (KJV)



44And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. 45Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.
 
42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: "'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'? 43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. 44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him." 45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. (ESV)

Since Jesus was speaking about the chief priests and Pharisees, perhaps you can now show me where any of them were actually "crushed" or ground to powder. If you can do that, you have a point. But since you can't, I suggest that you are taking Scripture out of context and trying to make it say something it clearly is not. So what did Jesus really mean?
Interesting, you become quite, can was say religiously extreme? , when it comes to taking Jesus as His word. Certainly you are carefully selective.

As I read history the Scribes and the Pharisees didnt fair too well a few decades on and I dont see any of then today, perhaps you know of a history more to your liking . But maybe you simply dont believe what Jesus said came true.
 
Interesting, you become quite, can was say religiously extreme? , when it comes to taking Jesus as His word. Certainly you are carefully selective.

As I read history the Scribes and the Pharisees didnt fair too well a few decades on and I dont see any of then today, perhaps you know of a history more to your liking .
What does this have to do with anything? Jesus never advocates violence. Anything otherwise has yet to be proven. The Bible cannot be used to justify any sort of religious extremism of a violent sort.

You cannot argue that Jesus does advocate violence and when proven wrong accuse me of believing something different about history.
 
You're treading on thin ice, Lance :nono2

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.


Christ has fulfilled the Law of Moses.

Matthew 5

21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

23Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

24Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

25Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

26Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

33Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

So you deny the validity of marriage vows?
 
What does this have to do with anything? Jesus never advocates violence.
Well then tell me how His enemies are ground into powder nonviolently
Anything otherwise has yet to be proven. The Bible cannot be used to justify any sort of religious extremism of a violent sort.
Really? Why are the accounts of Samson, Joshua and Dave included, assuming you recognize OT as Bible.
You cannot argue that Jesus does advocate violence and when proven wrong accuse me of believing something different about history.
As I read history the Scribes and the Pharisees didnt fair too well a few decades on and I dont see any of then today, perhaps you know of a history more to your liking .


Is that what you consider an accusation ?
 
Well then tell me how His enemies are ground into powder nonviolently
Already dealt with this error. Please address the response I've already given.

Hitch said:
Really? Why are the accounts of Samson, Joshua and Dave included, assuming you recognize OT as Bible.
Why do you think they are included? Do you really not understand the purpose of Scripture and it's many parts? You really shouldn't be debating this if you cannot understand that much, as someone who claims to be Christian.

Hitch said:
As I read history the Scribes and the Pharisees didnt fair too well a few decades on and I dont see any of then today, perhaps you know of a history more to your liking .

Is that what you consider an accusation ?
Yes. You are implicitly stating that I am rereading history or ignoring it, preferring something to my own liking.
 
TO ALL believers please try to read the ot from the actuall angle it was meant to be and then comment.

modern gentile preachers unles well verse are often., case in point.

christians pacifism. yes jesus commanded us not to by violence spread the kingdom or judge by violence but also he did slay and kill jews.

revalation contrary to the likes of the dispy is pretty much the destruction of isreal not some forth telling once again judgment of an isreal that comes back.

that said i will adress the ingorance of the banana

so i will go to the jews who are under the law and should be carrying out that acts of slavery.

Question:
My question is about slavery in the Torah. Why did the Torah allow it? It bothers me, though I know there must be some explanation.
Answer:
Once in a while a question comes along that gets to the core of everything. Then along comes some smart-aleck to provide an answer and wash the whole thing away.
Questions such as these are not just holes in the ground waiting to be plugged up. They are invitations to spelunk deep beneath the surface, traveling all the way to the bedrock of our beliefs, challenging basic assumptions and redefining the landscape.
Your question is one of those bedrock questions: After all, isn't slavery the antithesis of Torah?
Torah begins with the creation of Adam in the Divine Image. The central event of the Torah narrative is the liberation of an entire nation of slaves from a cruel oppressor. Torah is about liberty, human dignity and respect for our fellow citizens of this planet for which the Creator cares so much. More than Torah is Man's discovery of G-d, Torah is G-d's discovery of Man and his world.
How can that same Torah that makes us kind permit oppressive labor of a fellow Divine Image? You'll note, too, that as soon as the Ten Commandments are done with, where does the Torah begin legislating? "If you will have a maidservant..."--with the rights of the most easily oppressed citizen, a young girl working in your home.
Let me point out another powerful weapon of social upheaval that the Torah espouses, especially through the medium of King David's collection of psalms: The Divine CEO open-door policy. A.k.a. "personal prayer": Any individual, indeed, any living creature, can at any moment, for any complaint, cry out to the Master of the Universe and his/her/its petition will be heard and acted upon. Guaranteed. "This poor man cries out and G-d listens." You may not have thought about this, but those may just be the most radical, subversive and revolutionary words in history. Whereas the kings and priests of old would have their subjects believe that life is a grand chain of command with yours truly on top and you scum on the bottom, this idea of personal prayer flattened all hierarchies: Everyone is equally close to the top of the ladder.
Torah is not just about liberty, Torah liberates in a radical way. Yet here you have these laws about buying and selling slaves. What's going on?
Okay, they're not really slaves. Slaves are people owned by other people. In Torah law, you never have complete ownership over anything. These slaves rest on the seventh day and Jewish holidays, cannot be physically or sexually abused and are obligated in many mitzvot. So they are really more like indentured servants.
But that certainly does not answer our question: Why should any human being be deprived of rights and privileges that others have? Such as the right to live wherever they please, work for whoever they wish to work and quit whenever they want? How does this divvy up with the Torah's assertion that every human being bears the Divine Image?
Maimonides
Yes, there's tension here, and as every good dramatist and massage therapist knows, tension is a good point to play with.
The place we're going to start is Maimonides' Laws of Servants. Being the reckless, impatient souls that we are, we'll start from the very last words.
(You may ask, "Why the obsession with Maimonides? Is he the only authority on everything?"
No, he's not. But he's usually a great place to search for answers.
Maimonides wrote the only codification of the entire gamut of Jewish law-the Mishnah only includes those matters that were not common practice and could come to be forgotten. And the Shulchan Aruch includes only those matters that apply in the time of exile. And he wrote in a concise style with great precision.
Sure, he hit up against lots of controversy for a few hundred years. But eventually he was accepted as the foremost authority since the close of the Babylonian Talmud.)
So here goes:
It is permissible to work a non-Jewish servant harshly. Yet, although this is the law, the way of the pious and the wise is to be compassionate and to pursue justice, not to overburden or oppress a servant, and to provide them from every dish and every drink.
The early sages would give their servants from every dish on their table. They would feed their animals and their servants before sitting to their own meals. Does it not say (Psalms 123:2), "As the eyes of the servant to the hand of his master; as the eyes of the maid to her mistress [so our eyes are towards the L-rd our G-d...]"?
So, too, you should not denigrate a servant, neither physically nor verbally. The Torah made him your servant to do work, not to be disgraced. Do not treat him with constant screaming and anger, rather speak with him pleasantly and listen to his complaints. Such were the good ways in which Job took pride when he said, "Did I ever despise the judgment of my servant and my maid when they argued with me? Did not my Maker make him, too, in the belly; did not the same One form us both in the womb?"
For anger and cruelty are only found among other nations. The children of Abraham, our father--and they are Israel, to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has provided the goodness of Torah and commanded us righteous judgments and statutes--they are compassionate to all. This is one of the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, that we are commanded to emulate (Psalms 145:9): "And He has compassion for all He has made."
Furthermore, all who have compassion will be treated compassionately, as was stated (Deuteronomy 13:18), "He will give you compassion and He will have compassion upon you and multiply you."
(Mishneh Torah, Laws of Indentured Servants, 9:8)
Tightening the Screws
Reading superficially, you might imagine that Maimonides is presenting us with little more than apologetics. He seems to be saying, "The Torah says we can be real mean, but that's not nice, so we don't do that."
But I'm asking you to read his words a little more carefully. Look for the tension in those words. Tension is meaningful, tension indicates something deep going on: Here you have the Torah telling you to be kind and compassionate towards all G-d's creatures. And this is not just a polite suggestion--this is a command:
"And you shall go in His ways!" (Deuteronomy 28:9)
"Is it possible to say such a thing? Rather, it means that since He is compassionate, you too must be compassionate. Since He is kind, you must also be kind. Since He dresses the naked and feeds the hungry, so must you....." (Midrash Sifri; Talmud, Sotah 14a)
--which Maimonides himself counts as one of the 613 mitzvahs of the Torah (Book of Mitzvot, Positive Commandment #8).
And then the same Torah says, "But you're allowed to be nasty to your slaves"!
The tension screws tighter: Why are we kind and compassionate? Because "the Holy One, blessed be He, gave us His Torah." So how can that same Torah that makes us kind permit oppressive labor of a fellow Divine Image?
How about a little consistency over here? Why can't the Torah start outright with the laws of servants, "If you have people working for you, you must treat them as equals. You must talk to them in a pleasant voice, listen to their complaints, feed them the same food you eat, provide employee benefits, regular vacations, perks and incentives, great office parties, stock options in the company, in-house professional massage therapy at lunch break and a sushi bar on every floor. If you don't like it, do the work yourself."
Why not? Because that would undermine the purpose of Torah.
The Purpose
Let me explain: (Notice that now we're getting down to that which I first promised--the bedrock.)
saqe545812.jpg
As we discussed, Torah is a radical element in our world. Torah is that which says, "This is not the way things are supposed to be. Do like this. Not like that." That's why Torah had to be given--we couldn't just figure it out on our own. Because to effect real change it must come from "outside the system."
On the other hand, Torah is the essence of all things. As the sages called it, "the blueprint of the universe." So the Torah effects change not by imposing an exogenous order, but by revealing the inner, hidden order latent within all things. Torah is very much like a good teacher, one who shows you who you really are--which may be very different, even the opposite, of who you think you are.
The Torah effects change not by imposing an exogenous order, but by revealing the inner, hidden order latent within all things. So the Torah, of necessity, has two faces. Unlike human wisdom which has one face. Human wisdom must either reject or accept the status quo. But Torah is a voice heard from beyond--and so it may have two faces at once.
On the one hand, the Torah speaks from a future that has yet to occur, inspiring us with its vision, pulling us toward that time.
On the other hand, the Torah must deal with the world as it is, not artificially imposing upon it a foreign mold, but bringing it on its own from the place it stands by nature and circumstance to the place it truly belongs.
Let's start simple:
Take an agrarian society surrounded by hostile nations. Go in there and forcefully abolish slavery. The result? War, bloodshed, hatred, prejudice, poverty and eventually, a return to slavery until the underlying conditions change. Which is pretty much what happened in the American South when the semi-industrialized North imposed their laws upon the agrarian South. And in Texas when Mexico attempted to abolish slavery among the Anglophones there.
Not a good idea. Better idea: Place humane restrictions upon the institution of indentured servitude. Yes, it's still ugly, but in the meantime, you'll teach people compassion and kindness. Educate. Make workshops. Go white-water rafting together. (Hey, why didn't Abe Lincoln think of white-water rafting?) Eventually, things change and slavery becomes an anachronism for such a society.
Which is pretty much what happened to Jewish society. Note this: At a time when Romans had literally thousands of slaves per citizen, even the wealthiest Jews held very modest numbers of servants. And those servants, the Talmud tells us, were treated better by their masters than foreign kings would treat their own subjects.
Torah teaches us how to run a libertarian society--through education and participation. Elsewhere in the world, emperors and aristocracy knew only how to govern a mass of people through oppression. Look what happened to Rome: When Roman slaves began demanding a day of rest among other privileges, along with talk of a personal relationship directly to G-d, Emperor Constantine made sure to dismiss the whole concept of mitzvahs and human dignity by adopting a stripped-down, benign version of Judaism for his empire. That'll keep 'em quiet, he thought. (And it did, for about one thousand years.)
So the "conservative-radical" approach of Torah is this: Work with the status quo to get beyond it. Torah is more about process than about content.
Climbing Deeper
 
Are you satisfied with this answer? I'm not. I'm convinced there's a deeper effect that Torah is looking for. Call it "the participatory effect." A.k.a. nurture.
The Participatory Effect tells us that if you want people to follow rules, you put guns to their heads. But if you want them to learn, grow, internalize those rules and be able to teach them to others, you're going to have to involve them in the process of forming those rules.
School teachers do this when they work with their class on the first day to design rules that everyone will see as reasonable and useful. Parents do this when they allow their child to makes mistakes so that s/he will learn from them. A skilled wife is doing this when she gets her husband to believe that he came up with the idea of re-tiling the kitchen floor.
In general, this strategy comes more naturally to women than to men. Men find it much easier to shove their opinions down other people's throats and, if need be, argue the other into the ground until he surrenders. All variations of the old gun-to-the-head technique. Women are designed to nurture, physically and emotionally, so they take naturally to the participatory technique. To quote Gluckel of Hameln, "She was a true woman of valor. She knew how to control her husband's heart."
In Torah, both the masculine and the feminine approaches exist--they're called "The Written Torah" and "The Oral Torah." The Written Torah (principally, the Five Books of Moses, but also including all the Prophets and Scriptures) lays down the law in a fatherly, authoritarian voice. It says: "These are the rules. They are for you own good, whether you understand that or not. I only made them because I love you so much. If you don't like them, just remember that I'm a lot bigger than all of you put together."
Then along comes the mother of us all, the Oral Torah. Although the Oral Torah includes many fixed traditions--some originating from Moses and even earlier--the bulk of the Oral Torah is our own participation in the process of Torah. The Written Torah itself empowers us to discuss matters, expand on that which we have received, extrapolate and make decisions accordingly. It was concerning the Oral Torah that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chanania declared, "The Torah is not in heaven." It is here, within us, in our struggle to fathom the depths of our received tradition and in our ability to take Torah to the next step.
Of course, that doesn't mean we can make up whatever sounds nice to us and call it Torah. There are rigorous guidelines and a firm set of criteria for a novel idea to be considered Torah. We're dealing with a delicate ecology here--you have to understand the landscape very well before building a highway here and damming a river over there.
But what it does mean is that when you are working through a Torah idea, doing all that examining and letting the creative juices pour (within the guidelines mentioned above), those ideas within your brain and those words that you are speaking are no different than G-d declaring, "I am the L-rd your G-d, etc." at Mount Sinai.
When you are working through a Torah idea, those ideas within your brain and those words that you are speaking are no different than the words of the written Torah themselves. As those Talmudic sages put it, "Any new idea a qualified Torah student comes up with was already given to Moses at Sinai." The idea is new, but it's still Torah. It's new, because until now it was hidden deep within the folds and creases of the package Moses delivered. It's Torah, because all the qualified student did was unfold the package and smooth out the creases.
So if I come up with one of those bright Torah ideas one day, is it my idea or is it Torah? It's both. In the Oral Torah, we and G-d become one.
Getting Real Change
So you can see where I'm getting to with the slavery thing. If G-d would simply and explicitly declare all the rules, precisely as He wants His world to look and what we need to do about it, the Torah would never become real to us. No matter how much we would do and how good we would be, we would remain aliens to the process.
So, too, with slavery (and there are many other examples): In the beginning, the world starts off as a place where oppressing others is a no-qualms, perfectly acceptable practice. It's not just the practice Torah needs to deal with, it's the attitude. So Torah involves us in arriving at that attitude. To the point that we will say, "Even though the Torah lets us, we don't do things that way."
Which means that we've really learnt something. And now, we can teach it to others. Because those things you're just told, those you cannot teach. You can only teach that which you have discovered on your own.
History bears this out. Historically, it has been the Oral Torah, rather than the Written Torah, that has had the greatest impact on civilization. As much as Rome ruled over Judea, Jewish values deeply transformed Rome. One of the results was the legal privileges eventually granted to slaves and the gradual recognition of the value of human life.
Torah involves us in arriving at the right attitude. And now, we can teach it to others. Because you can only teach that which you have discovered on your own. For over a thousand years, the Church managed to subvert the message of Imagio Deo--that every human being is G-dly--despite the repetition of the concept in the Genesis narrative five times. It wasn't until the Italian Renaissance that a new Humanist spirit dawned and the idea could no longer be repressed. "The Oratory on the Dignity of Man" is often touted as the manifesto of the Renaissance and early Humanism. It was composed by Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. It's no secret that Pico studied under the greatest rabbis of his time and was obsessed with the Zohar and Kabbalah. There are many more such examples.
The greatest force in the emancipation of slavery in colonial times were the "Society of Friends," also known as the "Quakers." Historians discuss the phenomena of the Quakers in the context of the "Hebraizing of Christianity." Again, their leaders were deeply influenced by readings of the Kabbalah in translation and by humanists who had learned their ideas from rabbinic sources.
The history of emancipation is complex and long--and viciously controversial. In truth, Jews took roles on both sides of the prickly fence. Aaron Lopez, a convert to Judaism, brought slaves on some of his ships to America. On the other hand, Baron Nathan de Rothschild and Sir Moses Montefiore made possible the great Slave Emancipation Act of 1835 by granting 20,000,000 pounds sterling in loan subsidies. In the struggle, eventually the true Jewish spirit prevailed and it is those values that Maimonides espouses that eventually became dominant in our society.
I'll end off with a juicy biographical vignette of one Jew who struggled for the freedom of slaves:
August (Anshel) Bondi was born in Vienna, Austria July 21, 1833. He was the son of Jews who wanted him to have both a religious and a secular education. Caught up as a participant in the failed liberal revolution of 1848, the Bondi family fled to New Orleans and settled in St. Louis, Missouri. Young Bondi encountered, first hand, the horrors of slavery and was deeply disgusted.
In 1855 a New York Tribune editorial urged freedom-loving Americans to "hurry out to Kansas to help save the state from the curse of slavery." Bondi responded immediately. He moved to Kansas and along with two other Jews, Theodore Weiner from Poland and Jacob Benjamin from Bohemia, established a trading post in Ossa-watomie. Their abolitionist sentiments very soon brought pro-slavery terrorists upon them. Their cabin was burned, their livestock stolen. Their trading post was destroyed in the presence of Federal troops who did nothing. The three courageous Jews joined a rabid local abolitionist, to defend their rights as citizens and to help rid Kansas of the horrors of slavery. The Jews joined the Kansas Regulars under the leadership of John Brown.
In a famous battle between the Regulars and the pro-slavery forces at Black Jack Creek, with the bullets whistling viciously above their heads, 23-year-old Bondi turned to his 57-year-old friend Weiner and asked in Yiddish, "Nu, was meinen Sie jetzt?" (Well, what do you think of this now?) He answered, "Was soll ich meinen? Sof odem moves." (What should I think? Man's life ends in death.)
Kansas joined the union as a Free State. Bondi married Henrietta Einstein of Louisville, Kentucky in 1860. Their home became a way station for the underground railroad smuggling slaves to the North and freedom. The Civil War began in 1861, and Bondi enlisted in the Union army, encouraged by the words of his mother. He later wrote in his autobiography, "as a Jew I am obliged to protect institutions that guarantee freedom for all faiths." August Bondi died in 1907, a respected judge and member of his Kansas community​
 
Already dealt with this error. Please address the response I've already given.
And so poorly as to not count.
Why do you think they are included? Do you really not understand the purpose of Scripture and it's many parts?
Hmmm this is what Free would call an accusation . Realisticly though its just a doge.
You really shouldn't be debating this if you cannot understand that much, as someone who claims to be Christian.
You are implicitly stating that since I dont agree with you , and likely that goes for anyone else who dares to fail to agree with you, that I cant possibly understand the Scriptures and you have gone so far, cast doubt on my salvation. Poor tactic Free. I wont return the favor .
Yes. You are implicitly stating that I am rereading history or ignoring it, preferring something to my own liking.
Well you have yet to offer anything save

Since Jesus was speaking about the chief priests and Pharisees, perhaps you can now show me where any of them were actually "crushed" or ground to powder. If you can do that, you have a point. But since you can't, I suggest that you are taking Scripture out of context and trying to make it say something it clearly is not


Its plain you have no interest in a direct answer to the question. You did however imply that Christ's enemies were not dealt with in a manner according to this passage, and are yet to take up that challenge, preferring to make personal complaints.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
now then while i dont agree with the jews leading to the ban of slavery as wilberforce but they cant be denied that they were in the north fighting it.

wow how far off we were.

this is why i now go to them for the right perspective on the ot. theirs and they had it first.
 
misleading

i was in afghanistan and under orders not to prosyltise! general order number one and we had muslim men who wanted bibles and told us that if they openly confessed conversion they would be beaten and in kabol or other areas they would die!

thats a well known fact.
Imagine if tomorrow Afghanistan Invaded America and took over the government. And let's say there were a large group of American insurgents resisting the invasion. On top of that Americans in general obviously would not like the invaders and they are not too fond of Islam any way. Don't you think that it would be smart for the Afghanistan commanders to tell their soldiers not to proselytize? I mean, how many Americans would be in the mind frame to accept Islam in that scenario?

And on top of that would you be surprised if, while America is being invaded by Muslims, some Americans might get killed if they converted to Islam?

Can any of you look past your emotions and think rationally?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Imagine if tomorrow Afghanistan Invaded America and took over the government. And let's say there were a large group of American insurgents resisting the invasion. On top of that Americans in general obviously would not like the invaders and they are not to fond of Islam. Don't you think that it would be smart for the Afghanistan commanders to tell their soldiers not to proselytize? I mean how many Americans would be in the mind frame to accept Islam in that scenario?

And on top of that would you be surprised if, while America is being invaded by Muslims, some Americans might get killed if they converted to Islam?

Can any of you look past your emotions and think rationally?

uh,lol many of the muslims there did like us, its the FOREIGNERS THAT attacked us.

let me post a quote from a muslim man that was with me in country, and its not just in afghanistan, the same is in saudi arabia(chaplain told me that the muslims that converted were in fear and did worship in secret)

we didnt invade them
I strongly condemn the suicide bombing that killed dozens of worshippers, my thoughts, prayers and condolences are with those affected by this act of terror.

now then the dead he refers too are shia muslims murdered by sunnis. and also let me say that he also knew i was a christian and his friend and he also did listen to my christian music.


i didnt make them do that and they asked. we shared.
 
where i was the taliban werent in power and not well liked.

the muslim i mentioned was well educated and not stupid. he spoke his mind on things when he didnt like it.
 
and you misquote synthesis , he didnt say bush or we should have but that god judged hussein for what he did
I did not "quote" synthesis in the first place. I interpreted and then explained his post. I knew he would deny my interpretation, but that doesn't matter. It is obvious to me, as can be deduced from his post, that there are portions of the Bible that an "Extreme" Christian can misinterpret, in order to promote violence.


is it in the quran to gas women and children who are muslims? is it in the quran to kill ****ties?
to commit crimes against humanity?

no.......

.........
And that's the point. You are not able to understand that Muslims are regular people just like you. You have been tricked into thinking that for some unatural reason, all Muslims are programmed to be strict adherents to Islam. Even though you know that in America there are so many Christians and many of them have never even opened a Bible. In addition you have been tricked into thinking that Muslims are forced to practice Islam in their countries and therefore you think that anything they do must be allowed by Islam. The reality is Muslims in Muslim countries are not that restricted in their thoughts and in their actions.

And so I will illustrate the same example. If America fell into a civil war don't you think that many people that say they are Christians would kill other people that say they are Christians (oh I forgot, that already happened)? And do you think that crimes against humanity would occur (oh I forgot that already happened in the Congo; a majority Christian Nation)?

And yet you still can't understand that all Muslims are not one monolithic group in terms of their thinking and behavior.

Yeah a Christian Congolese soldier can rape 50 women and of course he is just a bad person. But if a Muslim Afghan Soldier rapes 50 women, well then of course that's what Muslims do.

Give me a brake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And also let me say that he also knew i was a christian and his friend and he also did listen to my christian music.


i didnt make them do that and they asked. we shared.

It seems as though you are surprised that he was not a blood thirsty, intolerant killer. It surprised you that he was a regular rational human being didn't it.

Maybe you assumed that he would be an animal. I know that many American soldiers assume that, and that's what makes it easy for them to destroy villages and kill people.

Oh I forgot, the Muslims that are defending their country, those are the crazy animals.
 
I did not "quote" synthesis in the first place. I interpreted and then explained his post. I knew he would deny my interpretation, but that doesn't matter. It is obvious to me, as can be deduced from his post, that there are portions of the Bible that an "Extreme" Christian can misinterpret, in order to promote violence.




no.......

And that's the point. You are not able to understand that Muslims are regular people just like you. You have been tricked into thinking that for unatural reason, all Muslims are programmed to be strict adherents to Islam. Even though you know that in America there are so many Christians and many of them have never even opened a Bible. In addition you have been tricked into thinking that Muslims are forced to practice Islam in their countries and therefore you think that anything they do must be allowed by Islam. The reality is Muslims in Muslim countries are not that restricted.

And so I will illustrate the same example. If America went into a civil war don't you think that many people who say they are Christians would kill other people who say they are Christians (oh I forgot, that already happened)? And do you think that crimes against humanity will occur (oh I forgot that already happened in the Congo; a majority Christian Nation)?

And yet you still can't understand that all Muslims are not one monolithic group.

Yeah a Christian Congolese soldier can rape 50 women and of course he is just a bad person. But if a Muslim Afghan Soldier rapes 50 women, that's what Muslims do.



Give me a brake.


duh, i just made that point.

see my quote of merhullah shirzad,

i helped a lot of muslims overseas.

i dont pile up muslims in one boat.

you assume much. i know them well, i ate with them in country., i understand them alot.

i know men in my unit who thought they knew alot of pashto and found out that i know more. i was told that they chain thought i would convert to islam. i didnt , i wanted to understand them.

its you who err. you assume that we are ingorant of things.

let me ask you this can i be jew, hindu and christian openly in egypt, saudi arabia?

i say no sharia law wont let it.

the taliban destroyed three old buddhist statues in bamian afghanistan.

in turkey where the govt is secular i can.

there are muslims in our army and they went to iraq and afghanistian then theres these guys who serve in the idf

but are hated for doing so by the palenstinians.

Muslim Arab Officer Proudly Serving IDF07 October 2010 , 14:29
_YRS0020small.jpg
''War does not differentiate between Jew and Muslim; we all live in Israel''. Photo: Iris Lainer
geresh.jpg
Share|http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/Up_Close/10/10/1102.htm#http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php...df&fr=mcsaoff&tt=0&captcha_provider=recaptchahttp://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php...df&fr=mcsaoff&tt=0&captcha_provider=recaptchahttp://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/Up_Close/10/10/1102.htm#

geresh2.jpg





More Articles
A Different Type of MissionTrading in Uniforms: From European Football to CombatBoot Camp: Take TwoPreventing Attacks is All in a Day’s WorkAll Articles

Lt. Hesham Aborea enlisted in the IDF as a way to help his own Arab community. "The IDF is a strong, challenging, non-discriminatory army, and is a great supporter of human rights."

Tammy Habteyes

Lt. Hesham Aborea is a Muslim Arab officer in the IDF. His journey began in 2006 when he joined the army and it has not stopped since. He is currently serving in the IDF as the Community Relations Officer to the Arab Sector, speaking to the Arab community in times of emergency. His path to this very important and challenging role was not handed to him on a silver platter, but he appreciates his significant work. "Every morning I think of ways to help the community".
"It was very important for me to reach my community through education"
At a young age, Hesham Aborea began thinking about what he wanted to do in life, and how to get out of his village in Northern Israel. He graduated from Ben Gurion University with an Bachelor’s degree in Hebrew and began working, but observing the lifestyle of young men in his community made him want to join the army to better the Arab world. "It's very hard to grow up for a young man where I am from. You finish high school, some continue studying, and others work manual labor jobs. For example, if I had a degree in social work, at an interview they'll ask me if I served in the army. If not, my chances would plummet, and then I would have to go back to my village and do manual labor. It's a cycle that a lot of young Arab men are stuck in so they turn to alcohol, drugs and violence. I saw this cycle and I decided to join the army." Lt. Aborea enlisted in his late 20s to the IDF's Southern Command as a Youth Counselor for Bedouin high school students. He would speak to these students about various subjects like nonviolence, abstaining from drugs, being better acquainted with the land and country, and also about the Army. "It was very important for me to reach my community through education. We had teachers, school principles, and different chairmen come in and talk to the kids. My point wasn't to push them to serve in the army, it was more to educate and inspire the students to serve their community." Aborea says that 10 to 35 high school graduates would join the army.
After 6 months serving the IDF as a youth counselor, Aborea was sent to Commanders Course and was promoted to be a commander for a course which aided older teachers and other educational figures from within the Arab community in becoming youth counselors. "I never thought that a 56 year old would have the drive to complete the course. We don't let just anyone pass, it's difficult and demanding."
Due to his clear ambition to succeed and desire to help his community, Aborea's commanders recommended him for Officer's Training Course. On Israel's National Independence Day in 2007, less than a year into his service, Aborea became an IDF officer. He described his experience at the Bahd 1 Officer’s Training School as follows: "We were all separated into different platoons and crews. The crew that I was in was made up of one Muslim Arab, me, and the rest were all orthodox men!" Lt. Aborea laughs, adding that "they were the nicest group of people, they welcomed me with open arms and it did not make a difference to them what religion I was in. I joined them for Shabbat dinners and Jewish holidays." Upon graduating the Officer's Training Course, Lt. Aborea was recognized as a Soldier of Excellence, and soon became a Platoon Commander in the Sde Boker base.
Sde Boker is an IDF base in southern Israel specifically intended for immigrants who wish to join the army. Lt. Hesham spent 12 training cycles in Sde Boker and then was offered another promotion, this time as an Enlistment Officer for southern Israel and east Jerusalem. "I am never upset or sad when I get promoted and move on to a different job. I like to look forward. I am glad that I've helped my community in my previous job and I am continuing to serve the community in this new one."
War does not differentiate between Jew and Muslim; we all live in Israel
"My job is to prepare the Arab community to handle any type of emergency. Whether it's an earthquake, a flood or a war, the community must be prepared with the same level of readiness as the Jewish community." Lt. Aborea explains that, “A missile or a war does not differentiate between Jew and Muslim. We all live in this country, thus we are all under the same threat together. Therefore, we all need to be able to protect ourselves." Lt. Aborea has been serving in the Home Front Command as the Community Relations Officer to the Arab Sector for two months. He is the first Muslim Arab officer in the history of the IDF.
Currently, Lt. Aborea and his soldiers are gathering information about how the Arab community performs during an emergency. He meets with different community leaders and educators to study more about how to help the most. "The fact that we are the IDF bothers the sector. As an Arab man, I understand the fears and doubts the community has. They see people in uniform coming into their area and they rebel, they think we want to take their land, but we just want to help them, train them and prepare them so that ultimately they will fend for themselves and be able to help themselves the same way the Jewish community can at a time of emergency, whatever it may be."
Lt. Aborea describes how the Home Front Command trained Arab women in Search and Rescue emergency response. "It's not an easy training course; it takes effort to be in the Search and Rescue teams. We have several personnel, however, it's not enough, not enough by a long shot, and we need more people." Lt. Aborea says that an assortment of Arab organizations support these Search and Rescue teams, and also try to spread the message of the importance of these teams. "I have a long list of different organizations that help us. But sometimes, some Arab organizations don't want to be associated with something that is related to the IDF."
“Some people may disagree with the fact that I am wearing an IDF uniform, but I am here to serve youâ€
Lt. Aborea’s rank may not seem to be at a matching level to his task. He explains, "I am supposed to be a Captain, and I will be soon. But it doesn't have to do with the ranking. Even a Colonel couldn't do my job, because I am Arab, I know the sector, I grew up in an Arab village, I am familiar with the community and the lifestyle. I know what most of the Arabs in Israel watch, and how they feel about things. It's about understanding and having the full motivation to want to help your community. It may seem that because I am an Arab Muslim the sector would be more prone to trust me. However, some people may disagree with the fact that I am wearing an IDF uniform, but I stand on my own, I am here to serve you- take it or leave it."
Lt. Aborea explains that in order to get to where he is now he had to work tirelessly for five years. "I wasn't always like this. Before army life, I was a student. I would wake up late, just do my own thing. But being in the army makes me wake up early and I know I am going to do something greater than myself. I have always been motivated, but in the army I learned that failure to be something is a challenge and success is the motivation. I don't wonder to myself why I failed, I try to figure out how I can do better and move on from there."
Final Say…
Lt. Hesham Aborea is very happy to be serving his community and is happy to belong to an organization like the IDF. He concludes, “I want to emphasize that the IDF helps any soldier, and it will gladly accept Arab soldiers as long as they are skilled in their task. The IDF is a strong, challenging, non-discriminatory army, and is a great supporter of human rights. This is the first step to bringing both the Jewish and Muslim nations together. I hope that we may live in peace and equality for both nations."

from here.

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/Up_Close/10/10/1102.htm

oh thats right isreal is the bad guy.

hmm how odd that they hate you guys.
 
So you admit that a verse instructing Christians to invade Muslim countries was divinely inspired by the Son of God, not corrupted by anti-Islamists?

Yes i freely admit that there are millions of Christians that believe this.
 
It seems as though you are surprised that he was not a blood thirsty, intolerant killer. It surprised you that he was a regular rational human being didn't it.

Maybe you assumed that he would be an animal. I know that many American soldiers assume that, and that's what makes it easy for them to destroy villages and kill people.

Oh I forgot, the Muslims that are defending their country, those are the crazy animals.


nope., not at all. and uh he doesnt like the taliban nor bin laden, called him not a good muslim.

muslims dont kill kids

and no i didnt.. i WANST SUPRISED. the locals loved me once they got to know me as I treated them with respect.

but i never lowered by guard

and since when does killing kids a valid means of self-defense?
 
let me ask you this can i be jew, hindu and christian openly in egypt, saudi arabia?
Of course you can. Whoever told you you can't lied. In Egypt there are Christians and Jews and I believe the Coptic Christians are the largest Christian group. In Saudi Arabia there are Christians, however I think they are not allowed to build any Churches. But it is against the law to chastise them in any way.

i say no sharia law wont let it.
You said "no", because you don't know sharia law.

the taliban destroyed three old buddhist statues in bamian afghanistan.
How many Masjids were destroyed in Palestine? Iraq? Afghanistan.

If your point is that Muslims are more violent then every one else, I don't agree.
 
View attachment 2204

these muslims all loved me and i treated them well and none of them would dare say what you just did about us all.sure some would say that we did them wrong but compared to what the taliban offered them or life before they like us much better.
 
Back
Top