Terrorism will not win

Posted on January 9, 2015 by bryanpattersonfaithworks

When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it–always.”

― Mahatma Gandhi

Throughout the world, people have gathered to proclaim love and freedom as stronger than terrorism

Beware the stereotyping at times like this

PROCLAIM PEACE

73 thoughts on “Terrorism will not win”

Kathleen on January 10, 2015 at 06:18 said:

When are terrorists going to learn that force is only a temporary change. To truly change a person you need to appeal to their hearts. If people are offended by the cartoons, and I can understand why they would be as I was with piss Christ. You shame them. You boycott them. You protest them. You help them to understand the error of their ways. You don’t kill them.

They will never be able to control the free spirit. It was given to us by God whether we are believers or not. You cannot control sin…. with sin.

I don’t believe in generalisations either, but the saying ‘judge them by their fruits’ does come to mind. If you have 100 apples in comparison to 2 pears that go rotten you have to ask what’s in the soil. When I see children who are out of control, I look to the parents.

In the US blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crimes and therefore are looked at more closely and then unfortunately other black people get painted with the same brush. They abort an astonishing number of their own children and those they don’t abort are born into something like 70% of unmarried, missing father situations. It’s a cultural problem, not a skin colour problem. Those children with missing fathers then get dragged into gangs, selling of drugs, crime. It’s a vicious cycle.

Same with quite a few Middle Eastern countries. They have high unemployment, poor schooling, a very macho culture. They don’t have freedom or democracy and then they hit out. Many men seem to be missing out on getting wives due to the fact that other men have multiple wives and men without women tend to be unstable (look at China). Muslims that live in countries where they have more freedom, like Turkey, don’t seem to be where the troubles come from. So it may not all Muslims that are the problem with Terrorism, but they seem to be representing a disproportionate number as compared to other faiths. So then you look at the why.

Thou shall not kill
Thou shall not commit adultery
Honour your father and your mother
Thou shall not steal
Thou shall not bear false witness against your neighbour
Thou shall not covet your neighbours goods
Thou shall not covet your neighbour’s wife
Remember to keep holy the Lord’s day
Thou shall not take the Lord’s name in vain
Thou shall not have any other gods before Me

I wonder how many of these commandments have been broken in this broken world.

LikeLike

Reply ↓
- Jason. on January 10, 2015 at 07:12 said:
  
  Hi Kathleen.
  If I had long enough to live I’d try to point out the errors of your comment.
  But will have to satisfy myself by pointing out that EVERY SINGLE ONE of those Ten Commandments (though there are all sorts of variations in the actual number ~ even your gods can’t make up their minds! 😉 ) flies directly in the face, and is a clear perversion, of the natural laws which brought us all to this point in time in the first place.
  ….and are, even as we speak, smashing holes in the hull of Lifeboat Earth.
  You post the perfect recipe for the building and maintenance of the sewer WE’VE MADE of ‘creation’.
  Satan’s small revolt is insignificant in comparison to the ongoing rape we’ve perpetrated on Mother Nature.
  
  The rest of sentient ‘Creation’ would utter only one prayer:-
  ‘Please let the berserk bastards drive themselves to extinction before they finally take the rest of us with them.’
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 08:39 said:
    
    That’s such a sad and miserable view of life. Thank God for those who see it differently.
    
    LikeLike
  - Jason. on January 10, 2015 at 10:18 said:
    
    Sad and miserable it is.
    And lethally accurate.
    
    But not as sad and miserable as looking forward with eager anticipation (as do “those who see it differently”!) to our last best hope:- The Second Coming ~ Armageddon.
    
    Nor nearly as lethal.
    
    Until that’s recognised and accepted ~ while-ever we “sit upon the ground and tell sad tales about the death of Kings” ~NOTHING can ever be done about it.
    Google up :- “If you don’t remember the past you’re condemned to repeat it.” for ample confirmation.
    
    Remember when mental and other diseases were certain signs of ‘demon-possession’ about which mere man could do nothing?
    “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.” Euripides (484 BC – 406 BC) …
    Look around you kiddo.
    
    ps. re. ‘Lifeboat Earth’; a convincing doco the other night reckoned 50% of the oceans’ fish stocks have disappeared, and will be entirely gone in another 50 years at the CURRENT rate….though that’s over-optimistic.
    The destruction of the the oceanic ecology ~ the turning of our major life-support facility into a sterile, polluted slush will spell the end of all life on our ark-earth
    
    Jesus better get his finger out!
    ….otherwise there’ll BE no goats and sheep to separate.
    And from where I sit it’s quite apparent that the United Godbotherers’ Union of Planet Earth is feverishly working at making it happen.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 15:10 said:
    
    No, just sad and miserable.
    
    LikeLike
  - Jason. on January 10, 2015 at 15:46 said:
    
    ???? Care to describe how the Great Flood wasn’t “sad and miserable”?
    Or “The Fire Next Time”.
    Aren’t YOU keenly awaiting the ‘Second Coming’ when the once-pristine world and all but a few of it’s inhabitants are tortured for a thousand years and then arbitrarily disposed of?
    
    Do you really think destruction of men, women and children by ‘god’ ~ a ‘loving’ god no less! ~ is in any way or measure more righteous or less cruel than anything man might stumble into ~ whether from ignorance, recklessness or even deliberate malice?
    For all the petty bickering over ‘Free Will’ you need to remember that NONE of us had any option about being here in the first place……or dying at the end of the period.
    
    Have the gods REALLY thrown us into a death-cell to await some some gruesome execution? (or worse: martyrdom and being inflicted with 72 Virgins for Eternity?!)
    I’d rather lay the whole fiasco at man’s feet: at least then we’d have the opportunity to do something useful about it……not that we’ve done too well since Eve couldn’t resist temptation.
    But at least she wasn’t omniscient and omnipotent. She was constructed with her flaws deliberately built in.
    Like the rest of us.
    
    But until we take responsibility for ourselves (or at the very least allow others to take responsibility for themselves) we have no hope.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 16:45 said:
    
    Against this pessimistic and fearful backdrop that dominates the thinking of the miserable, Jesus Christ offers real hope. He gives mankind the opportunity to become right with God and his fellow man.
    
    Don’t Give Up
    
    “Hope begins in the dark, the stubborn hope that if you just show up and try to do the right thing, the dawn will come. You wait and watch and work: You don’t give up.”
    Anne Lamott
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 16:48 said:
    
    “It’s never too late. You can’t screw up so badly that God can’t find something worth building in the wreckage, that life can’t assert its return when it is time.”
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 17:21 said:
    
    “Joy runs deeper than despair.”
    Corrie Ten Boom (who suffered more than most, and perhaps should have been miserable and bitter but wasn’t)
    
    Dabbles, I’d recommend you read The Hiding Place by Corrie Ten Bloom. It might teach something about hope in the midst of despair.
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 10, 2015 at 17:46 said:
    
    I just recently bought Corrie Ten Boom’s book, ‘The Hiding Place’ as a birthday gift to myself. I’d read her book decades ago and I can honestly say that her book helped to change my life/attitude. It would have to be one of my all time favourite books. She truly is a gift from God!
    
    But I doubt that Dabs would be interested Bryan. Unfortunately, ya can’t get through his fortifications.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 10, 2015 at 17:55 said:
    
    Maybe. But God’s love is greater than Dabbles’ self-imposed despair and sadness.
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 10, 2015 at 17:57 said:
    
    Fortifications of the Heart
    
    Petrified to let others in;
    building walls where necessary,
    fortifying those too weak.
    One always finds the cracks;
    often changing the heart within.
    Damage is done;
    another layer added and moving on.
    
    Krystina Walters
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 10, 2015 at 18:01 said:
    
    You bet!…… “God’s love is greater than Dabbles’ self-imposed despair and sadness.”
    
    I am seeing it unfold right here and now. 🙂
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 10, 2015 at 18:16 said:
    
    Ha, I felt the Lord tell me to read ‘Our Daily Bread’ word of the day (10/1/15):
    
    Too Late To Change?
    By David C. McCasland
    
    “There are sayings in many languages about the difficulty of changing long-established habits (mindsets). In English, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” In French, “Ce n’est pas à un vieux singe qu’on apprend à faire la grimace” (You can’t teach an old monkey how to pull a funny face). In Spanish, “El loro viejo no aprende a hablar” (An old parrot can’t learn to speak).
    
    When Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be “born again” to “see the kingdom of God,” he replied, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” (John 3:3-4). Professor and author Merrill Tenney suggests that Nicodemus was saying, in effect, “I acknowledge that a new birth is necessary, but I am too old to change. My pattern of life is set. Physical birth is out of the question and psychological rebirth seems even less probable . . . . Is not my case hopeless?”
    
    Jesus’ reply included these words, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (v.16). That is the offer of new life and a new beginning for anyone, young or old.
    
    Whatever our age or situation in life, with God’s power, it’s not too late to change.
    
    Because God is powerful, change is possible.”
    
    LikeLike
  - Kathleen on January 10, 2015 at 18:33 said:
    
    Hey Dabs, welcome back.
    
    Drone, drone, snigger, snigger – thought I’d talk your lingo for a bit, basically saying the same as above.
    
    LikeLike
  - Strewth on January 10, 2015 at 21:38 said:
    
    “Dabbles’ self-imposed despair and sadness.”
    
    Dabs, I feel it is self imposed. Are you fighting to retain despair? Perhaps you need it because you feel it identifies you. If you lost it you wouldn’t lose yourself, you might even find yourself. The closer you get to that loss, the harder you’ll fight it. So I will expect an angry backlash to this post, and be glad for what it heralds!
    
    LikeLike
  - Jason. on January 11, 2015 at 07:26 said:
    
    You miss the point entirely; and refuse to accept facts.
    The gods have HAD their chance to do something useful and decent since (supposedly) before Time began. ALL they’ve achieved is to make things worse and worse, more and more brutal, and more and more inescapable. Billions of species have gone extinct for whatever reason….but NONE has ever threatened the existence of every other species….or the very air we, and they, breathe.
    In the last decade or two more people have died gruesome deaths than the entire total population of the world up until that time…
    
    And the gods ~ and their publicity-machines ~ have been directly/indirectly responsible for the worst of it.
    
    That’s the bottom line.
    
    The FACT is that ~ unlike you who wait for some demonstrably incompetent and/or uncaring agency to ‘fix’ it all for you ~ I haven’t ‘given up’.
    I’m still in there fighting against all the odds thrown up by the quakers and whiners and do-nothings ~ and “despair and sadness” isn’t part of the armoury.
    Neither do I wail and gnash my teeth because Jesus hasn’t returned (as promised) to rescue ME, ME, ME! at the price of sending everybody else to hell….and good riddance: they should’ve made a wiser choice in gods.
    
    On the contrary, I DON’T care about myself/my future; I’m more concerned about the 50,000+ innocent kids who starved to death and died otherwise horrible deaths every day while YOU lot were feasting and singing and celebrating the birth of your god.
    
    On the evidence one supposes the admonition about ‘hypocrites and vipers’ doesn’t carry much weight, given the ineffectual source from whence it issued.
    
    You know:- The gutless god who talked up a storm,
    ….and then ducked out before he had to put his money on the table.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 08:21 said:
    
    Hey Dabbles, Despite what you say I’d think you are probably gnashing you teeth at God. I think you DO care about yourself. You are actually quite self-centered.
    BTW I sent you an email explaining why you couldn’t use an offensive word. Did you get it? If not, can you give me a legitimate email address that works.
    
    LikeLike
  - Rob on January 11, 2015 at 11:03 said:
    
    Jeez you’re a pathetic whinger Jason.
    What have you ever done for the 50,000+ innocent kids who starved to death and died otherwise horrible deaths every day while you whinged about the lack of charity of others?
    Welcome to the chardonnay socialist!
    
    LikeLike
  - dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 12:21 said:
    
    “Hey Dabbles, Despite what you say I’d think you are probably gnashing you teeth at God.”
    Hey Bryan….what you “think” is irrelevant; what you can ‘demonstrate’ is what matters.
    
    What I ‘gnash my teeth’ about is arrogance and ignorance that adversely impacts others,and the bigotry and censorship that rides with them.
    
    I won’t go on ~ seeing the censor is back at work.
    
    …but will make the point ~ again ~ that there are NO ‘offensive words’; only people who choose to take offence at some words ~ and that’s THEIR problem.
    
    (and no, I didn’t get any emails from you.)
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 15:04 said:
    
    The “censor” decided not to publish your posts that included offensive material, as I explained in more detail to you in two emails. If your email you use here is bs then send me your real one…unless you don’t wish to take any responsibility. Don’t whinge, as someone else said, unless you can be accountable.
    
    LikeLike
  - dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 12:54 said:
    
    Sorry, Strewth. (“Dabs, I feel it is self imposed.”) What you “feel” is about as relevant as what Bryan ‘thinks’…..without some basis to support it.
    
    Why do you lot think you know me better than I know myself?
    Why, when I tell you I don’t waste time or effort ‘despairing’ , do you insist that I do?
    Only once in my life did I despair to the point of considering (quite rationally) suicide. But I fought my own way out of it motivated by a refusal to let the bastards even THINK they’d beaten me.
    
    And ans for the tut-tut burbling about ‘fortifications’ let me assert that the individual who doesn’t build fortifications appropriate to his circumstances is an idiot…..
    
    Nobody else ~ including, demonstrably, the god’s will (or can) protect you.
    Even YOUR god hides behind his ‘Pearly Gates’, doesn’t he??
    
    I’ve been in places as deep and dark and unforgiving as those the celebrated Corrie Ten Boom has been (or worse: try sensory deprivation for weeks on end, among other things) and can tell you that there, beyond the scope of any ‘hope’ or devine reprieve, is where the test lies.
    I survived things you clever judgmentalists couldn’t even imagine.
    
    ….and am still intact in most ways that matter. A man worthy of the title doesn’t need a god. Least of all one who NEVER turns up when the shit’s flying.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 15:01 said:
    
    Ever read Corrie Ten Bloom? I would think not.
    Your time in a western jail is not the same as her time in Nazi concentration camp. Nothing near it.
    Read the book.
    
    LikeLike
- Jason. on January 10, 2015 at 10:30 said:
  
  Incidentally, I thought it amusing to notice how you’ve jiggled about the order of the ‘Ten Commandments’ to suit your own ‘message’.
  Not an uncommon practice at all, I know, though I sometimes wonder how our apparently illiterate (or at least unpoetic) gods feel about having their work ‘corrected’…..Particularly keeping in mind the importance placed on ‘context’ when yet other editors explain what the unpolished author REALLY intends to convey. 😉
  
  Perhaps that’s the kabbalistic meaning of:- “And the Last shall be First”??
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - Rob on January 11, 2015 at 10:24 said:
    
    Jeez you’re a pathetic whinger Jason.
    What have you ever done for the 50,000+ innocent kids who starved to death and died otherwise horrible deaths every day while you whinged about the lack of charity of others?
    Welcome to the chardonnay socialist!
    
    LikeLike
  - dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 12:00 said:
    
    Well, for one thing I gave them a thought….while you did WHAT on xmas day?
    And I don’t whinge about lack of ‘charity’; charity’s a cold cop-out for a gutless lack of action to fix the problems the gods have created.
    
    Neither do I indulge in chardonnay.
    It makes one as dopey and gutless as indulging the gods.
    ……and I’m about as far from being a socialist as it’s possible to get.
    Your ignorance is embarrassing you.
    
    But here’s a lesson:- Any man who behaved the way your gods do would be condemned for crimes against humanity.
    ….and the rest of existence too.
    If you want to discuss the ISSUE, I’m happy to oblige (but not here ~ the censorship is vicious….and biased) though I doubt you’re up to it.
    That’s why you stick to personal attack…….the godbotherer’s forte:- attack the sinner, never the sin.
    
    LikeLike
  - Rob on January 11, 2015 at 12:09 said:
    
    Again……..
    What have you ever done for the 50,000+ innocent kids who starved to death and died otherwise horrible deaths every day while you whinged about the lack of charity of others?
    On Xmas day I worked with disadvantaged kids. What did you do?
    I am happy to discuss the issue with you. I’m not perturbed by anonymous internet bullies,
    
    LikeLike
  - Strewth on January 11, 2015 at 22:27 said:
    
    Sorry, Dabs, but didn’t you yourself express feeling sad and miserable about the state of the world? I can understand that you don’t think it’s self imposed, that I was judging falsely. I apologise, I didn’t mean to be judgemental. I was a bit carried away with the glad thought that your vehemence might be the death throes of your negativity – not of your unhappiness, as that is easily justified in what we see around us.
    
    “Why do you lot think you know me better than I know myself?” I suppose I don’t, but perhaps you don’t know yourself all that well either.
    
    “Why, when I tell you I don’t waste time or effort ‘despairing’ , do you insist that I do?”
    Did I say that? If I did, further apology, because I know despairing and giving up aren’t part of your nature. And I certainly can’t recall tut-tut burbling about ‘fortifications’.
    
    “Nobody else ~ including, demonstrably, the god’s will (or can) protect you.
    Even YOUR god hides behind his ‘Pearly Gates’, doesn’t he??”
    No. I have always looked on angels as God’s servants, and perhaps they may – or may not – protect me. God I cannot envisage, and he/she/it/they definitely have nothing to do with Pearly Gates.
    
    See, you think you know me too. We can all be mistaken.
    
    LikeLike
- Monica on January 10, 2015 at 17:27 said:
  
  Yes, I agree with you Kathleen that force is not the answer and that you cannot control sin with sin.
  
  I think it all boils down to character. And from our first breath to our last, our character is being moulded by outside influences—both good and bad. But as you and I both know, there’s only ‘One’ who can actually change who we really are for the better. Only the overcoming power of Jesus Christ can truly transform our old sinful nature into virtue, honour, principle, true Godly love. But that means we have to be willing to submit to Love’s sovereign rule over our mind, will and emotions. Scary stuff!
  
  Until our hearts are changed and we are able to see the true worth and value of each other, we will go on having to fight ignorance and hatred. Unfortunately, it can be found hiding around every corner, both here and in third world countries and in every religion.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 11:44 said:
    
    Arrant nonsense, Mon. Even your own god depends on force/the threat of force to get his way.
    And punishes ‘sin’ with the ‘sin’ of hellish condemnation for all eternity.
    
    Terrorism not only WILL win. It already won when god was invented.
    Why else would you kowtow to a bully?
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 11, 2015 at 13:08 said:
    
    Me kowtow to a bully?
    
    Gosh Dabs, pull your head out and smell the roses for a change. Your world is very different to the rest of ours. Hasn’t anyone ever told you that? And what’s more, you judge everyone else by your standards/world! How can that be fair? It isn’t. Because you are so wrong about so many things, but in particular, about God and the nature of true love and devotion.
    
    You are at the centre of your world, and Jesus Christ is at the centre of ours. How can you compare your world to ours? You can’t, so stop doing it!
    
    LikeLike
- davinci on January 12, 2015 at 11:42 said:
  
  “I wonder how many of these commandments have been broken in this broken world.”
  
  Whomever you quoted has just done that Kathleen.
  
  The second commandment of the Decalogue forbids the manufacturing of images and worshipping them (including statutes of Mary, ikons, etc). To allow catholics to worship their images, this has been dropped from Catholic Bibles, Cathechisms, etc. This leaves 9 commandments.
  
  The tenth commandment has been split in two only to balance the number, and bring the commandments back to 10.
  
  The fourth commandment, the one about the Sabbath has been altered so that reference to Creation week has been left out. That allows anyone to worship on any day they choose (Sunday, Saturday), etc. It has been said that any deity other than the Judaeo-Christian God, can now claim to be the originator of the so called Decalogue.
  
  The prophet Daniel (Daniel 7:25) wrote about a power that shall:
  – persecute the saints. The religious authority that you have quoted did that, no better than the Muslims.
  – speak great words against the Most High – by presuming to have the power to change laws given by the Most High, without authority from the Most High to do so.
  – Change times and laws – Sabbath to Sunday – change in time. Laws – changes described above.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - Strewth on January 12, 2015 at 17:48 said:
    
    ” Change times and laws – Sabbath to Sunday – change in time. Laws – changes described above.”
    The Sabbath was never changed to Sunday. Sunday is the Lord’s Day, and both the Sabbath and the Lord’s Day were kept by the Jews who worshipped Jesus, early Christians.
    
    As far as keeping either day holy, that depends on your interpretation of holiness. Some people, I believe, keep the seven days of the week all holy.
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 12, 2015 at 18:25 said:
    
    Well said Strewth. The Pharisees in the days of Jesus had changed the Sabbath into something it was never meant to be. In their desire to protect and to uphold the law,, they built a hedge around the keeping of the Sabbath
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 12, 2015 at 19:59 said:
    
    One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. (Romans 14:5-6).
    
    LikeLike
  - davinci on January 13, 2015 at 11:17 said:
    
    Sorry Strewth, but what you are saying is utter nonsense. Notice that the comment I responded to, included the Sabbath in the commandments that Kathleen said that were broken in this broken world. By Sabbath, she means Sunday. Otherwise her comments are absolutely ridiculous. How can you say Sabbath then mean Sunday, if the definition has not been changed?
    
    Furthermore, Strewth, check your church history. Particularly the phrase “blue laws” which were enacted by certain “Christians” to enforce Sunday observance on the grounds of Sabbath breaking.
    
    LikeLike
  - davinci on January 13, 2015 at 11:24 said:
    
    Sorry Bryan, but the comment below indicates ignorance of the Scriptures:
    
    “The Pharisees in the days of Jesus had changed the Sabbath into something it was never meant to be. In their desire to protect and to uphold the law,, they built a hedge around the keeping of the Sabbath”
    
    Whilst I agree with what you said about the Pharisees, this does not abrogate the Sabbath. It does in fact enforce the view that the apostolic Christians kept the Sabbath day holy.
    
    If the early Christians, had broken it in any way, or taught so, one of the points in the controversy between Jew and Christian would have been explicitly about the Sabbath, and would have been stated clearly in the New Testament.
    
    If the Pharisees were able to pull Jesus up on what they perceived to be Sabbath breaking, you can bet your life they would have pulled up the Christians (Jew and Gentile) for Sabbath breaking. And this would have been recorded in the New Testament.
    
    LikeLike
  - davinci on January 13, 2015 at 11:28 said:
    
    “One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God. (Romans 14:5-6).”
    
    True. But notice that the passage talks about observing days and eating in the same breath. This indicates that it was not a Sabbath/Sunday controversy but a fasting one. Even Jesus mentioned that fasting was a scoring point with some Jews (in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican). What this passage talks about is fasting on certain days, and the manner of fasting. Some people were strict on fasting, others weren’t.
    
    LikeLike
  - Strewth on January 13, 2015 at 15:57 said:
    
    No Davinci, they didn’t neglect to keep the Sabbah, the 7th day. But they also met the following day, the day we call Sunday, then the first day of the working week, early in the morning before their worldly duties, in the name of Jesus.
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 13, 2015 at 16:00 said:
    
    “A religious cult is a major departure from historic and orthodox [fundamental] Christianity. A religious sect is a minor departure from historic and orthodox Christianity. Examples of these, respectively, may be found in the Seventh Day Adventist cult and the Seventh Day Baptist sect. In the former, we see a major departure from Christianity in an absolute, dogmatic belief in the keeping of the Sabbath Day as Sabbatarians of the actual seventh day of the week rather than the first of the week, Sunday, in commemoration of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. In the latter, on the other hand, the Seventh Day Baptist Church is endeavoring to keep and reverence the Lord’s Day in a respectful manner as a holy day. The Seventh Day Adventists are indeed Sabbatarians, and as historic Christians we would reject such a definition of Sabbath. The Seventh Day Baptists are simply desiring to avoid desecration of the Lord’s Day, and yet they are possibly too dogmatic and zealous for some of us.”………..STRAIGHTWAY
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 13, 2015 at 16:09 said:
    
    “What day is the Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday? Do Christians have to observe the Sabbath day?”
    
    “It is often claimed that “God instituted the Sabbath in Eden” because of the connection between the Sabbath and creation in Exodus 20:11. Although God’s rest on the seventh day (Genesis 2:3) did foreshadow a future Sabbath law, there is no biblical record of the Sabbath before the children of Israel left the land of Egypt. Nowhere in Scripture is there any hint that Sabbath-keeping was practiced from Adam to Moses.
    
    In Deuteronomy 5, Moses restates the Ten Commandments to the next generation of Israelites. Here, after commanding Sabbath observance in verses 12–14, Moses gives the reason the Sabbath was given to the nation Israel: “Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (Deuteronomy 5:15).
    
    God’s intent for giving the Sabbath to Israel was not that they would remember creation, but that they would remember their Egyptian slavery and the Lord’s deliverance. Note the requirements for Sabbath-keeping: A person placed under that Sabbath law could not leave his home on the Sabbath (Exodus 16:29), he could not build a fire (Exodus 35:3), and he could not cause anyone else to work (Deuteronomy 5:14). A person breaking the Sabbath law was to be put to death (Exodus 31:15; Numbers 15:32–35).”
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 13, 2015 at 16:14 said:
    
    — 2 —
    
    “An examination of New Testament passages shows us four important points:
    1) Whenever Christ appears in His resurrected form and the day is mentioned, it is always the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1, 9, 10; Mark 16:9; Luke 24:1, 13, 15; John 20:19, 26).
    
    2) The only time the Sabbath is mentioned from Acts through Revelation it is for evangelistic purposes to the Jews and the setting is usually in a synagogue (Acts chapters 13–18). Paul wrote, “to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews” (1 Corinthians 9:20). Paul did not go to the synagogue to fellowship with and edify the saints, but to convict and save the lost.
    
    3) Once Paul states “from now on I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:6), the Sabbath is never again mentioned.
    
    4) instead of suggesting adherence to the Sabbath day, the remainder of the New Testament implies the opposite (including the one exception to point 3 above, found in Colossians 2:16).
    
    Looking more closely at point 4 above will reveal that there is no obligation for the New Testament believer to keep the Sabbath, and will also show that the idea of a Sunday “Christian Sabbath” is also unscriptural. As discussed above, there is one time the Sabbath is mentioned after Paul began to focus on the Gentiles, “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.” (Colossians 2:16–17).
    
    The Jewish Sabbath was abolished at the cross where Christ “canceled the written code, with its regulations” (Colossians 2:14).
    
    This idea is repeated more than once in the New Testament: “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord” (Romans 14:5–6a). “But now that you know God — or rather are known by God — how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years” (Galatians 4:9–10).”
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 13, 2015 at 16:16 said:
    
    — 3 —
    
    “But some claim that a mandate by Constantine in A.D. 321 “changed” the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. On what day did the early church meet for worship? Scripture never mentions any Sabbath (Saturday) gatherings by believers for fellowship or worship. However, there are clear passages that mention the first day of the week. For instance, Acts 20:7 states that “on the first day of the week we came together to break bread.” In 1 Corinthians 16:2 Paul urges the Corinthian believers “on the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income.” Since Paul designates this offering as “service” in 2 Corinthians 9:12, this collection must have been linked with the Sunday worship service of the Christian assembly. Historically Sunday, not Saturday, was the normal meeting day for Christians in the church, and its practice dates back to the first century.
    
    The Sabbath was given to Israel, not the church. The Sabbath is still Saturday, not Sunday, and has never been changed. But the Sabbath is part of the Old Testament Law, and Christians are free from the bondage of the Law (Galatians 4:1-26; Romans 6:14). Sabbath keeping is not required of the Christian—be it Saturday or Sunday. The first day of the week, Sunday, the Lord’s Day (Revelation 1:10) celebrates the New Creation, with Christ as our resurrected Head. We are not obligated to follow the Mosaic Sabbath—resting, but are now free to follow the risen Christ—serving. The Apostle Paul said that each individual Christian should decide whether to observe a Sabbath rest, “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Romans 14:5).
    
    We are to worship God every day, not just on Saturday or Sunday.
    
    Got Questions Org
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 13, 2015 at 16:48 said:
    
    After being a member of a Pentecostal church for many years, things started to turn sour there and I sought the Lord for direction as to what I should do, remain or leave. After some time I felt the answer came through loud and clear….”leave!” And it wasn’t leave and go attend another church, no, it was “leave and stay put (at home) till such a time as I would be released to attend church again”. Well I thought that couldn’t be right because surely it’s a sin for me not to attend church? One only has to look up the numerous scriptures urging us not to forsake meeting with each other to worship the Lord.
    
    But the Lord settled it there and then with this comeback, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” Mark 2:27-28 Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. “So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
    
    In other words, the sabbath is subordinate to man.
    
    LikeLike
  - Jacob on January 13, 2015 at 18:00 said:
    
    Like the Church of God, Seventh Day, the Seventh Day Baptists number about 5,000 in the United States, and have many more members worldwide. They are loosely organized under a local church government structure, from their headquarters in Janesville, Wisconsin (formerly Plainfield, New Jersey). Their magazine, The Sabbath Recorder, has been published continually since 1844. Unlike most other Sabbath-keepers, SDB’s are Baptists first, Sabbath-keepers second. Many SDB’s feel more comfortable around Sunday Baptists then SDA’s or Church of God people.
    Like Seventh-day Adventists, SDB’s have over the years undergone doctrinal changes, from a non-trinitarian to a trinitarian position, and from eschewing Christmas and Easter to full participation in these holidays. Their observance of the Sabbath is similar to Sunday-keepers observance of Sunday: go to Church and then pursue one’s own interests.
    
    LikeLike
  - davinci on January 14, 2015 at 16:30 said:
    
    “It is often claimed that “God instituted the Sabbath in Eden” because of the connection between the Sabbath and creation in Exodus 20:11. Although God’s rest on the seventh day (Genesis 2:3) did foreshadow a future Sabbath law, there is no biblical record of the Sabbath before the children of Israel left the land of Egypt. Nowhere in Scripture is there any hint that Sabbath-keeping was practiced from Adam to Moses.
    
    Actually the same can be said of the rest of the ten commandments. There is no explicit law saying thou shalt not covet, thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbour, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not commit adultery.
    
    Yet Eve was condemned by God because she first lusted for the forbidden fruit (the word that is translated as to be “desired” in Gen. 3:6 is the same word that is used in Exodus 20 to mean covet).
    
    Eve was then condemned because, having knowledge that the fruit was forbidden, her actions were then an act of theft.
    
    Thus in that act she broke two of the commandments of the Decalogue, one against coveting, the other against theft.
    
    The snake was punished for lying. Remember that Paul the apostle mentions that Eve was deceived first.
    
    Now we come to adultery. There is no explicit commandment against adultery in Genesis either. Yet when Joseph was asked to sleep with his master’s wife, he asked how could he sin against God in this action?
    
    The point is Monica, that Genesis shows the law being in existence, not by what commandments the patriarchs kept, but what commandments they broke.
    
    Second point that your material source ignores Monica, is the fact that “where there is no law, there is no sin” (Rom. 5:13). If there was no law in force, then Eve and the Serpent would not have been punished. Joseph would not have considered it a sin to sleep with his master’s wife.
    
    Now we come to the time of the Exodus. The first person to mention “Sabbath” was not Moses but the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Exodus 5:5 records Pharaoh as accusing Moses of making the people rest from their burdens. The original Hebrew word that has been translated “rest” is Sabbath instead of the usual word for rest which is “nuach”. And when Pharaoh used this word, Moses knew what he was talking about.
    
    The next time we see Sabbath keeping mentioned before Sinai, is when it is broken by the Israelites in connection with manna gathering. Remember that the law had not been given yet, the Israelites had just gathered the manna, yet God said “how long do you refuse to keep my laws and my commandments?” Ex. 16:28. How long? What does that mean? According to your argument, the law had not been given yet, neither were the Israelites commanded to keep the Sabbath holy. So how can God accuse them of persistently breaking a law that has not been given yet? What laws? What commandments?
    
    Furthermore in the incident with the manna, a careful reading of the sequence of events indicate that many Israelites somehow knew that they were supposed to keep the Sabbath Holy by gathering double portions of Manna without being told to do so. Who told them? Why wasn’t it recorded?
    
    Maybe the laws which were codified at Sinai (with the Ten Commandments acting like the constitution upon which the rest of the Hebrew legal system was based) did exist prior to Sinai.
    
    In Genesis, we are told that Abraham kept God’s laws, statutes, commandments, etc (Gen. 26:5). What laws, statutes, commandments, etc. were these? According to Sunday worshippers, there is no proof of law being given in Genesis.
    
    Furthermore, Creationists (which Monica gives the impression of being) as well as the Jews continually tell us that when Moses wrote Genesis, he was merely recording the ancestral records of the Hebrew people. If the first 11 Chapters of Genesis were part and parcel of the ancestral records of the Hebrews, the Sabbath must have been known to their ancestors, together with the existence and purpose of the Sabbath.
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 14, 2015 at 18:41 said:
    
    Okay, thanks for your reply davinci.
    
    I’ll go study (for myself) what you said. Yes, I am a Creationist, but not the ‘Young Earth’ kind.
    
    Cheers
    
    LikeLike
  - davinci on January 15, 2015 at 16:21 said:
    
    Hassan has just asked me why I diverted the discussion from terrorism and its after effects to the Sabbath/sunday controversy.
    
    The reason is simple. As Christians we should have absolutely no fear of what Muslims might do to us. We should be like Job who said ‘though He slay me, yet will I trust Him”. That is because we have sufficient promises in the Bible that can assure us of eternal life should we lose our lives as collateral damage in a terrorist attack.
    
    Our fear at Christians should be lest we do, or adopt practices which cause us to come in direct rebellion to God. One of the ways of making us adopt practices that cause us to come in direct rebellion with God is to have Christians secretly undermining fundamental doctrines of the Bible.
    
    The Sabbath/Sunday issue is one of these examples. If you study carefully any Sunday/Sabbath debate you will soon see that one side will use Scripture to sustain their position. The other side will descend to appeals to church fathers and tradition to sustain their position. And Jesus said “In vain do they worship me, teaching the commandments of men”. I won’t mention the fact that Jesus had a low opinion of those who rejected Scripture in favour of the traditions of their fathers.
    
    But the Sabbath has a special bearing on the issue of terrorism. As Kathleen pointed out, a change of heart is needed, not terrorism, not coercion, and certainly not political manipulation.
    
    Ezekiel 20:12, 20 tells us that God has given us the Sabbath that it may be a sign between God and us that He sanctifies us. Sanctification is the process by which God puts His law into our heart (which is the basis of the new covenant). Paul builds up on this in Hebrews 4;1-8 and explains that what God did in Creation (take a chaotic, disorderly, dangerous location called earth and create a beautiful world) He is able to do in our lives (take a chaotic, rebellious, dangerous human being and re-create His character in us). And just as the 4th commandment was a memorial to God’s creative power in nature, it now becomes a memorial to God’s re-creative power in our redemption.
    
    By ignoring or undermining the observance of the Sabbath, the Christian community has also changed the Christian’s attitude to war and terrorism. Originally the Christians were conscientious objectors. But by the second century we have Justin Martyr, Barnabas and others who advocate Sabbath change to Sunday, whilst their anti-Semitist sentiments pave the way for Hitler, and some of the Popes, who had persecuted the Jews. Meanwhile St Augustine develops the concept of “just war” whereby Christians played the old “mine is bigger than yours…” game with other people’s lives.
    
    Thus the Christian world proved what the apostle James said “break one commandment, you break them all”.
    
    As a fellow Christian, instead of fearing Muslim terrorists, fear the monster you would become should you separate yourself from God.
    
    LikeLike
  - Rian on January 15, 2015 at 23:45 said:
    
    comment on davinci of 14th Jan at 16.30.
    
    Ah davinci, much as I would love to debate the Sabbath versus 1st day of the week, I’ll leave such a subject to others who may actually consider it important.
    Now your line – >>>The snake was punished for lying. Remember that Paul the apostle mentions that Eve was deceived first.>>>>
    
    Intriguing, davinci. But – but – you leave me with a couple of problems. I’ll gloss over the point that as it reads, the snake didnt lie at all. It may perhaps be said that he/she/it did some tempting of Eve, but did not actually get anything wrong in what he said.
    
    I’ll gloss as well over the curse that the God put on the earth. I cant for the life of me see just what the earth did wrong to get cursed. The earth/nature hadnt really offended, had it? Presumably all the animals birds insects, fish etc etc suffered as well. Sounds most unfair.
    
    No what I want to query is the nature and being of that famous snake. Now, since the time of Pope Gregory the Great, the Serpent has been identified with the Satan, although not a single word in Genesis makes such a point. Some have got around it by making the Serpent some sort of a dummy that the Satan spoke and acted through.
    
    Now if the Satan simply ‘used’ the Serpent in this fashion, then the poor snake wasn’t actually to blame, and therefore should surely not have deserved any sort of a curse. On the other hand, if the curse was intended to be some kind of a punishment for the Satan himself then it doesn’t appear to have worked. The Christian Devil doesn’t crawl along the ground and eat dirt, does he? (or is that some sort of secret information that is only conveyed to the twice born?)
    
    Oh and as I’ve quoted before in relation to that curse, it simply doesnt promise any sort of eventual victory over the Serpent. The verb is the same in both clauses. The Serpent will STRIKE at the heel. And the woman’s seed will similarly STRIKE at its head. No ‘crush’ or equivalent in the original language.
    
    Cheers, Rian.
    
    LikeLike
  - Monica on January 18, 2015 at 00:29 said:
    
    Romans 5:13:
    
    “Sin was in the world – People sinned. They did what was evil.
    
    But sin is not imputed – Is not charged against people, or they are not held guilty of it where there is no law. This is a self-evident proposition, for sin is a violation of law; and if there is no law, there can be no wrong. Assuming this as a self-evident proposition, the connection is, that there must have been a law of some kind; a “law written on their hearts,” since sin was in the world, and people could not be charged with sin, or treated as sinners, unless there was some law.”
    
    However, this does not prove that all laws given through Moses were in place prior to Moses, so your claim is basically saying that Moses made a mistake. “And Moses called all Israel, and said to them: “Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your hearing today, that you may learn them and be careful to observe them. The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The LORD did not make this covenant with our fathers , but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive.” (Deuteronomy 5:1-3) . “You are saying that this covenant had to have existed prior to Moses. Moses said no.
    
    Yes, there are aspects of the covenant at Mount Sinai that existed prior to the Exodus. It is the same with Christ’s Law, there are aspects of the New Testament that are similar to the Old Testament. But that is because they all have the same author. But similarity of some features does not imply that all features are the same. The Law Moses brought was new as a package. Some things are familiar but other things had changed.”
    
    I personally think it all boils down to conviction davinci.
    
    We can argue Scripture to our graves, but if you are convicted to adhere to Sabbath keeping, then good for you! I have prayed much and sought the Lord over this and am not convicted that I am in sin for not observing the Sabbath. And I don’t think it’s your place to condemn others for receiving their freedom in Christ. The Pharisees did that.
    
    One of the features of the new law is “I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people” (Jeremiah 31:33).
    
    2 Corinthians 3:2–3 You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 3 clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart.
    
    LikeLike
Kathleen on January 10, 2015 at 06:36 said:

I’ve noticed a pattern in that it seems quite a few of these terrorists are on the dole, have no real structure to their life. Are often mentally unwell and are often not religious early in their life but ‘recruited’. It’s like boys without fathers who are seduced into gangs because they want to be part of a family of sorts. To have male figureheads.

Of the two brothers from France. At least one of them was unemployed. The man in Sydney I think was on the dole for many years.

“Born in the 10th Arrondissement, they came from secular backgrounds and initially drifted into petty delinquencies, not religious fanaticism.”

Chérif Kouachi, left, 32, and his brother, Said Kouachi, 34, who are suspected in a deadly attack on a satirical newspaper in Paris. Credit French Police Libération, a French newspaper, described Chérif Kouachi as an orphan whose parents were Algerian immigrants. It said he was raised in foster care in Rennes, in western France, and trained as a fitness instructor before moving to Paris, where he lived with his brother Said in the home of a convert to Islam. He held menial jobs, working at times as a pizza delivery man, shop assistant and fishmonger”

LikeLike

Reply ↓
- Kathleen on January 10, 2015 at 06:39 said:
  
  – from the New York Times
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
Jason. on January 10, 2015 at 06:53 said:

Most ~ I’d go so far as to say ALL ~ our perceived problems are a direct consequence or our irrationally overblown, entirely unwarranted, assertions of superiority.
Why, even our DIY gods can be induced to do our bidding ~ including changing or eliminating the demonstrably immutable ‘laws of nature’ ~ if we entreat them to do so.
Even that might be workable except that, given our absurd sense of being “The Chosen” (Breed) we , in order to prove it, all make different demands, on (and IN) different ‘Terms and Conditions’.

― Mahatma Gandhi:
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it–always.”
Obviously he was talking about the gods ~ particularly the judaeo-christian-islamic one(s).

“Throughout the world, people have gathered to proclaim love and freedom as stronger than terrorism.”
…and WILL bomb the bejesus out of anyone who won’t accept that!
That ‘peace-symbol’ was a product of the womb of nuclear holocaust. Hiroshima and Nagasaki to begin with….. and has as much influence now as it did then.

LikeLike

Reply ↓
- Rob on January 10, 2015 at 21:34 said:
  
  Jason says “I’d go so far as to say ALL ~ our perceived problems are a direct consequence or our irrationally overblown, entirely unwarranted, assertions of superiority.”
  
  PROJECTION MATE
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 11:39 said:
    
    You ~ even more than the other clever pop-psychologists here ~ don’t know nearly enough to judge me or my motives.
    
    But you, as do all the other clever people, find personal comments to be a good way of avoiding the issues ~ and the clearly demonstrable facts.
    
    What gross arrogance convinces you lot that the god of all the universes (aka ‘voices in your head’) gives ashyte about YOU?
    
    What makes YOU ‘superior’ to an earthworm? Or demonstrably even half as intelligent?
    
    LikeLike
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 11:52 said:
    
    And your email is?
    
    LikeLike
Strewth on January 11, 2015 at 08:58 said:

Comedian Bill Maher

LikeLike

Reply ↓
- Kathleen on January 11, 2015 at 16:02 said:
  
  Is he saying that Christians perform genital mutilation to women?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - Kathleen on January 11, 2015 at 18:02 said:
    
    I’ve read on about it but it is not done in the name of Christianity. It not mentioned or supported in the Bible.
    
    LikeLike
  - Strewth on January 11, 2015 at 21:56 said:
    
    FGM was ling around before Islam. Animists groups in Africa practice female genital mutilation. Their religious views on female genital mutilation are undocumented.
    
    Qur’an verse opposing FGM
    
    Islamic religious views against FGM revolve around the precept that mutilation and alteration of human being are against the teachings of Qur’an. A sura cited as opposing FGM practices is:[26]
    
    “I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and to deface the (fair) nature created by Allah.” Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes satan for a friend, hath of a surety suffered a loss that is manifest.
    —Qur’an, [Quran 4:119]
    
    This sura has been interpreted to mean Qur’an forbids man to change nature or mutilate any creature. Islamic scholars against FGM claim that this verse from Qur’an forbids all things that change what nature has meant it to be, including female circumcision and birth control. Some scholars[26] find this religious view unpersuasive, because Muslim male circumcision also mutilates and changes nature, and male circumcision is a practice that is widely considered as obligatory to recommended under Islam.
    
    A Christian sect – the Russian Skoptsy – quoted passages from the Bible (Matthew, xix,12) to support the female circumcision ritual.] Nevertheless, many Christian women are circumcised in Egypt, Kenya, Nigeria and Tanzania believing it to be a religious requirement.
    
    In Africa, missionaries have tried to discourage the practice. However, in order to retain the growing number of converts from other religions, they have permitted the continuation of these practices. Mary Nyangweso states, “Christianity, it is important to stress, does not advocate the total eradication of the Nandi female initiation rite. Rather it advocates the need to eradicate the practice of circumcision that involves clitoridectomy and excision because it is physically unhealthy and does not conform to Christian teaching. The initiation rite can continue to be practiced and the actual circumcision can be replaced by some other symbolic acts not harmful to women’s bodies. This can be derived from the culture itself or Scripture that now forms part of the Nandi way of life.”
    
    Symbolic ‘snipping’ is, I’ve heard, practised in Australia by people from those cultures, Christian or Muslim.
    
    LikeLike
  - Kathleen on January 12, 2015 at 05:20 said:
    
    Historical religious views[edit]
    The historical religious view of Islam, on FGM, varies with the school of Islamic jurisprudence:[21]
    The Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence considers female circumcision to be wajib (obligatory).[22]
    The Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence considers female circumcision to be makrumah (honorable) and strongly encouraged, to obligatory.[23]
    The Maliki school of Islamic jurisprudence considers female circumcision to be sunnah (optional) and preferred.[23]
    The Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence considers female circumcision to be sunnah (preferred).[23] – Wikipedia
    
    LikeLike
  - Kathleen on January 12, 2015 at 05:25 said:
    
    “In 1874 the sect numbered at least 5444, including 1465 women. Of these 703 men and 100 women had partaken in bodily mutilation.
    
    The Skoptsy may have had as many as 100,000 followers in the early 20th century, although repression continued and members of the sect were put on trial (New York Times 1910). Increased repression and collectivization under the Soviet Union reduced the numbers to a reported few thousand in 1929, and the sect is believed to have nearly died out today (Lane 1978).”
    
    It’s not quite Protestantism or Catholicism.
    
    LikeLike
  - Kathleen on January 12, 2015 at 05:36 said:
    
    I found this link to the Muslim Women’s League very interesting.
    
    “Those who advocate for FGM from an Islamic perspective commonly quote the following hadith to argue that it is required as part of the Sunnah or Tradition of the Prophet:
    
    Um Atiyyat al-Ansariyyah said: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (pbuh) said to her: Do not cut too severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.
    
    This is known to be a “weak” hadith in that it does not meet the strict criteria to be considered unquestionable (classified as mursal, i.e. missing a link in the chain of transmitters in that none was among the original Companions of the Prophet.) In addtion, it is found in only one of the six undisputed, authentic hadith collections, that is in the Sunan of Abu Dawud (Chapter 1888). According to Sayyid Sabiq, renowned scholar and author of Fiqh-us-Sunnah, all hadiths concerning female circumcision are non-authentic.”
    
    and to make the point that women do not need to bear this responsibility –
    
    “Several sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) highlight the importance of giving and deriving pleasure from intimacy between a husband and wife. This is clear from sayings that informed the community regarding the types of sexual behavior that were considered lawful and from others that addressed the sexual needs of men and women. Clearly, any act that interferes with a fulfilling sexual relationship contradicts the essence of Islam based both on Qur’an and hadith.
    
    In addition, the argument for ensuring chastity with a physically debilitating procedure blatantly violates the premise of individual accountability exemplified in the Qur’an (17:15, see below). Sadly, the notion that honor and shame fall so heavily on the shoulders of the women of any given family is pervasive throughout the Muslim world, including those countries where FGM is not known. As a result of patriarchal influences, a woman’s sexuality is something that does not belong to her, but rather is ultimately controlled by the dominant male of her family (father, elder brother, husband, etc.) Yet, again, the Qur’an explicitly tells Muslims that no one can bear the burden of another with respect to sin, dishonor, or shame”
    
    It seems that there are some Muslim religious leaders who vocally support it which would cause the confusion. “In July, 1997 the Egyptian government overturned a ban on the practice of FGM. This event was celebrated by some Muslim figures, particularly Sheikh Youssef al-Badri, an outspoken proponent of the circumcision of Muslim women. Later the ban was reinstated, an act celebrated now by feminists and under assault by a few Muslim activists, again, led by Sheikh al-Badri.”
    
    LikeLike
Jimbo on January 11, 2015 at 12:38 said:

Your example of stereotyping at the beginning sums it up Bryan. Comedians and artists all agree but most media either ridicule them or attack them because they’re just ‘comedians’ Although Adam Hill referring to Murdoch as that yellow substance ‘pus’ on twitter does not seem funny. Or Russell Brand referring to Fox News as “More dangerous than ISIS” Bill Maher has a go too, but the under lying theme is the exactly the same … corporate greed…. NOT religion.

And corporations run countries….

There is now scientific proof that conservatives generally have no ethics morals empathy or remorse. They can’t help themselves apparently … isn’t that handy for them ?

Examples of this can be seen in most western conservative leaders.

Other examples are in the ‘Wolf Of Wall Street’ Jordan Belfort where money is the ultimate sexual turn on, then throw in the drugs and it all happens…. money and lots of it. And then some.
Jordan Belfort even admitted his ‘condition’ … he can’t help himself… I guess it’s difficult to relate to empathy, remorse, morals … if you don’t have any.

Climate change is denied… they attack the homeless, pensioners, veterans, our health, unemployed, the poor … so naturally the crime rate goes up…. they change the language so refugees become ‘people smuggling clients’ or ‘illegal immigrants’ etc … they put petty thieves in jail and do nothing about the grand thieves like fraudulent bankers and many of our financial institutions. They endorse fracking which has been linked to earthquakes and contaminated water. THEY are the ones doing the ‘radicalization’ …. governments have to ensure their citizens WANT to live in their society… not escape from it.

Do you really imagine some young Australian suddenly wakes up and decides… “Lovely day today, I think I’ll pop over to Syria and chop someone’s head off …” LOL

The government want us to believe that. The same as the want us to believe all the other lies.

Meanwhile they have us exactly where they want us : At each others throats.

So blame the Muslims, the Jews, ISIS, the Christians, socialism, the poor, the Pope …

Now you know….

It’s all their fault.

Personally I blame the carbon tax.

All grist for the mill… have a happy and hopefully thoughtful… new year.

LikeLike

Reply ↓
- dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 13:23 said:
  
  Interesting, Jimbo:- “conservatives generally have no ethics morals empathy or remorse. They can’t help themselves apparently … isn’t that handy for them ?”
  
  (and a kick in the balls for those who paint me as a bleeding-heart ‘socialist’!! )
  
  But think about it:- where lies the actual, dynamic, day-to-day benefit in those ‘qualities’.
  Are there not times when the restrictions of, say, ‘morality’ can inhibit ~ or even prevent ~ the doing of the ‘right’ thing? (eg. euthanasing someone in pain and beyond help?)
  Or even if one wasn’t prevented from acting due to ‘morals’, might not a sense of empathy, or fear of deep remorse, or simple ‘ethics’ get in the way of doing ‘good’?
  On the other hand (and as demonstrated by our clever godbothering friends) are there not situations where the exercise of those qualities can by employed to serve the ‘bad’. I can think of plenty: from forcible exorcism through to ‘creating evil’ in order to sadistically torment evil-doers (God:Isaiah).
  
  One might suggest the problem lies in the asserted ‘absoluteness’ of such qualities claimed by the clever people. And the obvious solution is to recognise the FACT that nothing is absolute.
  
  It’s the sort of argument that allows a ‘loving god’ to perform all sorts of bastardries.
  ….or at the very least not prevent them occurring.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 15:00 said:
    
    Nope, still trying too hard to convince yourself Dabs.
    And a kick in the balls? Yeah that’s brave from an anonymous perspective.
    
    LikeLike
- dabbles on January 11, 2015 at 13:28 said:
  
  ps…… Can anyone keep a straight face and declare that religion is NOT a corporation?? 😆
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - bryanpattersonfaithworks on January 11, 2015 at 14:58 said:
    
    Trying a little too hard there Dabs. What’s you email?
    
    LikeLike
- Kathleen on January 11, 2015 at 16:37 said:
  
  They don’t seem too grateful Jimbo….
  
  Welfare Terrorists:
  
  “The wife of a man who mentored the Kouachi brothers is living on state benefits in Leicester in the UK after deciding France was too strict on Muslims.” – Breitbart
  
  “ONE of Australia’s most-wanted terrorists and a suspected war criminal, Khaled Sharrouf continued to receive a taxpayer-funded disability pension months after arriving on the battlefields of Syria” – The Australian
  
  “Boston bombing suspects’ family ‘has received more than $100,000 in U.S. welfare benefits'” – Daily Mail
  
  I’m sure the list goes on.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply ↓
  - Dom on January 12, 2015 at 15:23 said:
    
    Khaled Sharrouf had mental issues. He was suffering depression, acute schizophrenia, paranoia and hallucinations for years. Not widely reported by the media. Got worse after 4 years in prison where it was not treated. Apparently it is disturbingly common in NSW jails.
    
    http://www.smh.com.au/national/khaled-sharrouf-mental-health-problems-left-untreated-in-prison-20140814-1044n7.html
    
    LikeLike
  - Kathleen on January 12, 2015 at 20:36 said:
    
    I just typed his name in with mental illness and there appeared The Age, The Australian, the ABC, the Sydney Morning Herald, the Washington Post.
    
    Yes, there seems to be a smart recruiter/s who use the mentally ill/unstable, the lost etc. to do their bidding. Someone was telling me it was the same with the IRA. They used to scout for vulnerable and easily malleable ‘fodder’.
    
    LikeLike
Jimbo on January 13, 2015 at 08:32 said:

2,000 people murdered by Islamic terrorists in Nigeria recently then the next day they strap bombs to a ten year old girl and blow up 50 more people. But what’s in the western news?

PARIS , 17 people dead. This will be in our faces for weeks !

When I mention this ‘selective outrage’ I’m told “Oh … but that happens over there all the time …”

Which either means black people don’t count, or 2 white people are the equivalent to about 600 black people.

Which makes sense given what’s happening in the US right now, and Vietnam in particular is a classic : White people sending black people to kill yellow people to defend a country they stole from red people.

What is it with white people? Australia went from the white Australia policy to deaths in custody.

200 years later and we still haven’t worked out deaths in custody.

Still … if we continue to deny climate change it makes sense that we’re just in denial … period.

LikeLike

Reply ↓
jasonjshaw on January 13, 2015 at 16:13 said:

Those who harm others for a cause only tarnish their own cause. People can only be afraid up to a point, and then they begin to learn how to better deal with the threat in order to neutralize it.

LikeLike

Reply ↓