Islam does not hate christianity

.......And yes, the same God motivated and empowered the enemies of his nation, Israel to execute equally as horrendous judgement on tens of thousands of his own nation when they turned from him to follow those false gods of pagan nations. This shows that the Biblical god, Jehovah is just, fair and balanced and true.

---

In Jehovah God's Universe; time, energy and boundless space had no beginning and will have no ending. The universe, by and through him, is, has always been and forever will be intelligently designed, changed and managed by his providence. buzsaw

quote:

---

Faith, that last comment was totally uncalled for. jazzns has not argued from emotion, but from personal experience.

---

He/she had repeatedly said he was offended. That's emotion and that kind of emotion has the effect of shutting up anyone who thinks that perhaps the person who is offended on account of personal experience is in fact in the wrong. And that certainly does happen as those with the experience naturally see things from their own or their family's point of view and have little sympathy with the enemy. The only "proof" that the Israelis are at fault is that they destroyed his family's olive trees. While that sounds very bad, its badness so far has no justification other than the family's loss of the olive trees and his feelings about that. He doesn't know why the Israelis destroyed them, he merely assumes there was no good reason because he believes his family had no part in terrorist action and misses the olive trees. That's arguing from emotion, not fact.

quote:

---

Now, that means that jazzns KNOWS what he/she is talking about. I've followed this thread because it looked interesting and so far you have provided very little support for your position other than biased opinion.

---

You'd say that about me and not about jazzns whose support is ONLY his biased opinion? (To this point in the thread anyway).

quote:

---

For what its worth, I started off with a position sympathetic to the Israelis, but the more I've learned of the situation and the events, the more I've come to realise that, while there may be wrongs on both sides, the Palestinians have been oppressed by the Israelis and their war machine. Now this is just unsubstantiated opinion based on news reports over the last 20 years or so, but my view is at least as valid as yours.

---

I'm sure they HAVE been oppressed by the Israelis. I have no doubt about that. The Israelis are always bulldozing houses and going after terrorists in their villages. That has to be incredibly oppressive. But it's just amazing how the REASONS the Israelis are doing this are always left out of the story. And I'll get to your BBC report which is a case in point in a minute. All we hear are the sufferings of the Palestinians. It's just very strange how motive and cause makes no difference to anybody. Israeli military operations to stop suicide bombers are treated as if they were merely acts of aggression. This is crazy crazy moral blindness.

quote:

---

On top of that, Israelis seem to have a reputation of shooting anything that moves and I can't find any excuses for this type of action

​

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Aid worker killed 'by Israeli soldier'

---

OK so I read this story. It's about Jenin which is a HOTBED of terrorist activity. So an Israeli soldier apparently lost his cool and shot the wrong person. That kind of thing happens a lot in all war, and this is certainly war. It ignores the context of the nervewracking tactics of the terrorists who pretend to be civilians, who hide in ambulances, who can appear in any guise whatever. I don't suppose you saw the video footage from a few years ago of a bunch of Palestinians carrying a dead comrade on a stretcher wrapped in cloth, when they dropped the stretcher, and the "dead" comrade got up off the ground and walked perfectly fine. The Israelis set up checkpoints and build a wall, bulldoze terrorist tunnels closed and try to kill terrorists without harming civilians, all to protect themselves, but the great media machine ALWAYS play up the inconveniences to the Palestinians caused by these operations [and] makes them [the Israelis] out to be the aggressors. What a set-up.And this BBC story IS an example of why I don't trust media accounts. The story tells only of a number of victims of Israeli action until in two small paragraphs it is mentioned that in reference to one Israeli action in Bethlehem it was reaction to a suicide bombing. NO coverage of the sufferings of those in the suicide bombing either. They say Israel "regards" Jenin as a hotbed of "militants" which puts Israeli judgment a bit in question, though Jenin is practically a terrorist town unto itself. Also, they use the word "militants" which is akin to "freedom fighters" which carries a pro-Palestinian spin, avoiding "terrorists," and NOTHING WHATEVER about the suicide bombing except this 13-word mention, while they spend more words on each of the Palestinian victims. I call this media bias.And we've discussed the rest of your post, about Shatila/Sabra.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-26-2005 19:02 AM

quote:

---

God ordered the legal just execution of the Amalekites. Of course only God can do this, human beings acting on their own would be simply guilty of murder.

​

.......And yes, the same God motivated and empowered the enemies of his nation, Israel to execute equally as horrendous judgement on tens of thousands of his own nation when they turned from him to follow those false gods of pagan nations. This shows that the Biblical god, Jehovah is just, fair and balanced and true.

---

You are right, Buz. And actually the author of the History of the Christian Religion I linked to early in this thread, Phillip Schaff, speculates that the reason Islam had the power to overrun Spain and the Eastern Church was punishment of His people the Church for their corruptions. I believe that's in his chapter on Mohammedanism. God isn't going to spare Christians His judgments either.

quote:

---

The "good stuff" is, of course, less than the full truth.
Israel has a policy of demolishing the houses where those accused of terrorist offences live - whether they are actually used for terrorist activity or not. That's pretty well-known to everyone who actually follows the news.

---

Following the news may not give the whole truth though as the media bias is really very thick. Do the Israelis THINK they were used for terrorist activity? How do you know for sure they weren't? And besides, why are they expected to be perfect in their judgments and condemned as evil if they make a mistake?

quote:

---

The intifada has also seen a renewal of Israel's policy of demolishing the homes of Palestinians suspected of carrying out attacks in Israel, rendering members of their families homeless.

​

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Q&A: Israel's house demolition policy

---

Yes, of course, it must be miserable for the Palestinians who are made homeless because of a family member's terrorism. But they probably share in the terrorist goal anyway. Why use the term "suspected" instead of finding out for sure whether the Israelis are right or not? In any case, at least they report that there are agencies taking care of these homeless.The Israeli viewpoint seems to be presented as flat official statements about self defense, no effort is made to clarify or justify, and there is certainly no sympathy hinted at, while the Palestinian viewpoint is presented full of purple passion and moral indignation, which carries a lot of weight in today's world. And the world viewpoint is as usual condemnatory of Israel, period. I can't call this balanced media coverage.

quote:

---

What's the point in demolishing the house where a suicide bomber lived ?
BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Israel vows 'global' war on Hamas

---

I don't know. Maybe they suspected other terrorist activity still went on in the places. Why do you trust these reports? There's usually more behind the story than the media pick up or choose to publish.

quote:

---

Human rights group B'Tselem says 34 Palestinian houses were demolished as punishment in November and a further 19 in December.

​

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Israel's military crackdown

---

I've noticed that along with the UN, "human rights groups" find fault with Israel all the time, and terrorists much less frequently. But hey, I don't know if razing terrorist's houses is a good policy or not for dealing with the terrorism problem, but that's what they're trying to do, deal with the terrorism problem. But this is in territory that was officially given to Israel anyway, part of which was won back fairly, so why are they having to fight for it at all?

quote:

---

and no other religion has prophets.

​

Surely you know that this is incorrect!

​

Judaism has prophets.

​

Christianity has prophets.

​

Muhammad, prophect of Islam.

​

Sikhism, Guru Nanak was a prophet.

​

Moronism, Joseph Smith was a prophet.

​

In fact, all theistic religions must have had prophets.

---

Perhaps I wasn't careful in how I worded things, I forget, but I meant BIBLICAL religion, which includes Old and New Testaments.The title Prophet is used for others but they are not prophets like the prophets of the Bible What did Joseph Smith prophesy? What did Mohammed prophesy? A website says that the coming of Guru Nanak was prophesied but doesn't mention any prophecies by him.But the OT prophets prophesied the Messiah in many many places for one thing and according to Christianity Jesus fulfilled those prophecies. Judaism denies of course that Jesus fulfilled them, but they are still expecting the Messiah because of those same prophecies.Daniel prophesied the rise of three kingdoms after Babylon and they all came about just as prophesied. He lived to experience the first one. He also prophesied the rise of an evil man, an enemy of God's people, after the splitting of Alexander the Great's empire, and that came true in the person of Antioches Epiphanes, the first Antichrist, who was defeated by the Maccabees, which event is now commemorated as Hannukah. Some Christians consider that prophecy to have more than one reference, and to refer to yet another Antichrist who has not yet come.Revisionist scholarship denies that Daniel could have lived when the Bible says he did because they don't believe in prophecy and refuse to admit that his prophecies came true, so they insist he actually lived later, which makes no sense from a reading of his book.{Edit because I always think of stuff after I post -- "Prophet" in the Bible doesn't only refer to prophecy of future events, but to those who hear directly from God, as in "The word of the LORD came to me." There is NOTHING like this in any other religion.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-26-2005 19:54 AM

Thank you Faith.You have just confirmed that Muhammad is a Prophet. LOL

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You say many somebodies is no better than one somebody. Multiple witnesses have historically been counted as evidence by courts, the more the better. Maybe no longer, maybe we've degenerated to the point that such standards are meaningless.

quote:

---

I notice that you have quotations around the word "witness" in regards to Mohammed but not to the "witnesses" of biblical events. Do you think if any person claimed, today, that God had spoken to them or an acquaintance (to order, for example, the destruction of a people), he or she would be believed? If a great number of people made the same claim, would they be believed? If not, why not, and why is such a standard not extended to the biblical "witnesses"?

---

The Bible is a collection of reports of thousands of witnesses to the miracles, the judgments, the character of God. Biblical law also prescribes that two or more witnesses are required to determine the truth about any event.Mohammed had only himself as witness to "Gabriel." Perhaps I wrongly put "witness" in quotes for Mohammed since he was at least one witness, but on the other hand what did he "witness?" He had some kind of experience with an "angel" he called "Gabriel." Well, this "Gabriel" bears no resemblance to the Gabriel of the Bible and teaches things contrary to the Bible so we know this messenger was not from God. So many things besides his being sole witness are in question about Mohammed. But his being the sole witness SHOULD raise doubts in any case.If thousands of witnesses mean nothing to you in comparison to one witness, obviously there's nothing I can say further.

Sorry wrong. The Bible is the word of God corrupted by man, it's depiction of Gabriel is not the same as that in the holy Koran. The Bible teaches things contrary to the holy Koran so we know its not from God.You see how fun duelling mythologies can be?

---

*not an actual doctor

quote:

---

Faith writes:
{Edit because I always think of stuff after I post -- "Prophet" in the Bible doesn't only refer to prophecy of future events, but to those who hear directly from God, as in "The word of the LORD came to me." There is NOTHING like this in any other religion.

​

Thank you Faith.

​

You have just confirmed that Muhammad is a Prophet. LOL

---

Oh how tiresome. Mohammed didn't even CLAIM to hear from God. He heard from this "angel" called "Gabriel." You will not find a single "Thus saith the LORD" or "The word of the LORD came to me" in ANY other religion.Actually Joseph Smith's utterly unBiblical vision of the two figures he called the Father and the Son may come closest to such a claim. But then he fails on the prophecy of future events account anyway.This message has been edited by Faith, 02-26-2005 22:23 AM

So prophecy only counts when it comes directly from GOD and not through an intermediary?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Well, this "Gabriel" bears no resemblance to the Gabriel of the Bible and teaches things contrary to the Bible so we know this messenger was not from God.

​

Sorry wrong. The Bible is the word of God corrupted by man, it's depiction of Gabriel is not the same as that in the holy Koran. The Bible teaches things contrary to the holy Koran so we know its not from God.*

​

You see how fun duelling mythologies can be?

---

Well, the Koran is supposed to follow from the Bible and Muslims claim to revere the Bible so judging the Koran by the Bible makes sense to me.---------
*The Bible is the word of God corrupted by man, it's [shouldn't have an apostrophe] depiction of Gabriel is not the same as that in the holy Koran. The Bible teaches things contrary to the holy Koran so we know its [needs an apostrophe] not from God. [Sorry, the apostrophe problem was getting to me].This message has been edited by Faith, 02-26-2005 22:56 AM

quote:

---

So prophecy only counts when it comes directly from GOD and not through an intermediary?

---

Well, let's see. "A man" appears in the OT sometimes who is understood to be God HImself or Jesus Christ in a preincarnate appearance, not an angel, and it is He who appears to Daniel in the 10th chapter. I'd have to review Daniel to know for sure if Gabriel might have actually shown Daniel some things that were to come, but I believe he was sent only to explain the visions and prophecies but Daniel got them direct from God. Same in the Book of Revelation, where angels explain visions, but the vision is given by God.HOWEVER, there is no "Thus saith the Lord" and "The word of the Lord came to me" elsewhere.AND, Mohammed got no revelations of anything future. Nor did any other "Prophet" outside the Bible.

So the question remains, "must a prophet get his revelation direct from GOD?"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Wrong again. How about a quote from the Venidad from Zorastrianism: Doesn't get much clearer than that.Fitting since Zorastrianism, the most popular religion in the Middle East during the time of Jesus, heavily influenced what Christianity became.

quote:

---

Doesn't get much clearer than that.

---

But it's not The word of the LORD came to me, and it's not Thus saith the LORD. It's hard to tell how the statement was arrived at.

quote:

---

Fitting since Zorastrianism, the most popular religion in the Middle East during the time of Jesus, heavily influenced what Christianity became.

---

Well the majority of the Thus saith the Lord prophecies were all in the Old Testament, not the New.And Christianity was not influenced by anything but the Old Testament. Everything in the New Testament follows from the Old.