Thats what the Bible says. When the rapture happenes the Jews who did not believe Jesus has came back yet will believe then. Later during the tribulation they will flee into a cave to run from the anti-christ.

It does not supply a date yano only that it will happen.

There will be another big battle. Its called the battle of Armageddon and the Bible says just where it will happen.
http://www.gotquestions.org/battle-Armageddon.html
and
http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Proph...Armageddon.html

Read some of the last days prophesies on this site:
http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/grap...hecy/index.html

I read two of your links. I would like to make an inference for the Battle of Armageddon. Since the administration is now spreading propaganda about how Iran is somehow involved in Iraq. Although, that is not true because Iraq Sunni's are the ones causing the most trouble. Since the Iraq constitution does not grant the Sunni's the same rights as Kurds and Shiites. Neocons want to attack Iran. If they do Russia and China will get involved; therefore, the conflict could lead to WW3, where nuclear weapons are used. Would this mean that Christians should be against Bush in every way?

P.S. I am not Christian so you can take what I said with a grain of salt.

how about less political bashing of our current president and more on topicness rsd79?

please keep in mind that the sunni malitias are being backed by primarily sunni groups/nations including but not limited too the militant group Hamas, Hezzboallah,Iran.

Except, for the last question in my post, where I mentioned Bush's name ( I should use Cheney's name since Bush has enough intelligence to be a puppet of Cheney's). But the rest of my post was geared toward anyone in the White House including Dems, Republicans, and Independants. Otherwise, I think I was on topic enough to address CGM's post.

Yano, the handy thing about the bible is that it can be interpreted in any way required to fit current events; yet from the perspective of the person who interpreted it, the bible is a singular truth. But of course, that’s where the faith part comes in.

Ever read your “horoscope?” Astrology is similarly written, albeit more extreme in the sense that it is always open-ended and vague in every aspect. Thus, anyone can apply their own situation to a horoscope.

Interestingly, speaking of biblical predictions, according to Huston Smith's book The World's Religions, Jesus believed that Armageddon would happen within his era, perhaps within his lifetime. Oops.




Come now, Seafox. I have heard people professing that the bible predicted 9-11! Again, it "predicts" things in our lives because we cross-examine it and apply it to current events, just like those in the past did with the events of their time.

Also, about our status as "g(G)od's children." How could g(G)od turn his back on his children for all eternity? It rarely happens between humans and their children...and if it does, the parent often has worse issues than the child. That and in the real world, parents and children can always reconcile their disputes as long as they are alive. Not so with g(G)od's punshment...eternal punishment with no hope of reconciliation. So how is that "the infinite one" lacks infinite patience? Or infitate compassion for that matter...knowing full well that his kids are suffering forever?




I think it does relate, ussr, if we have a political leader who’s so obsessed with his religion that he believes he is fulfilling bible prophecy, or believes that he is carrying out g(G)od’s work, or is spoken to by g(G)od, ect.

I am not suggesting that this is the main reason that Bush launched the war in Iraq, specifically. But Bush, and his leadership, serves to illustrate that radical religious beliefs can have an effect on political climate, which in turn effects us all, regardless of your religious persuasion. Therefore it is at the heart of religious tolerance.

i meant this administration, rather than lowering troop morale, and not offering anything in terms of something else we can do, and boosting enemy morale knowing their enemy is devided.

What about future events? Can you predict exactly how WW3 will start with the Bible? Can you prove WW3 will last x number of years? (Not the armagdeon war). (http://www.gotquestions.org/battle-Armageddon.html)

I read most of the links you posted CGM.

Thanks hope you learned something from them and that they were helpful to your questions.



Who knows if there will be a WW3 the last big battle may be Armageddon.

One of God's many attributes is the embodiment of absolute justice. He set the punishment of sin as death at the very beginning and left the choice to obey up to us because he wanted us to choose Him. He shows us mercy and compassion by giving us the opportunity to turn from our sins and repent. This allows us to be forgiven of our sins if we are sincere in our repentance. However Justice must be carried out and those who will not turn from their sins will receive the penalty for the choice they willingly made. This is the important part. People that choose to ignore God and do not turn from their sins choose hell. It all comes down to personal choice. Do you choose to listen to God and turn from sin, or do you choose to follow your own path and condemn yourself. the choice is yours.



Their will actually be 2 major wars. The first is described in Ezekiel. Several nations will come to wipe out Israel. These nations include most of the middle east and northern Africa as well as Russia. The next will actually be on the plains of Meggido in Israel. This is the one in Revelation When that armies of the world will be gathered together to fight against Jesus when he returns. no dates are given in the bible as to when this will exactly happen. The events that will herald this war is the rise of a one world govenment. The leader of that government making a treaty with Israel for 7 years. The treaty will only last for 3 1/2 years when the leader of the one world government will break the treaty and attack Israel.


Seafox14

Great here comes the Hitler (ver2).

Yano, when this world leader comes to power, Hitlers atrocities will seam like a school bully acting up.

Seafox14

And at what date does the Bible indicate this will happen? Should I sell off my stock soon?
Regards,
John

There is no specific date. Signs listed in the Bible show of the coming of the rapture.

Example: Earthquakes in diverse places

Then the Bible is not a very good source for predictions, is it?
Cheers,
John

Re: Example: Earthquakes in diverse places

Part of the difficulty of predicting must surely be that earthquakes have been happening constantly throughout recorded history. And every so often for many, many years people have been using the Bible as a reference when predicting the end of the world - over and over and over - and each date comes and goes.

It's interesting to hear eschatology interpretations spoken of as a matter-of-fact, and I'm sure CGM and seafox are very comfortable in their pre-tribulation and premillennial views of the end-times (which is fine!), but I think it's important to point out that even among Christian scholars there are massively different ranges of interpretation concerning Revelations and the rapture. There is of course the pre-trib rapture viewpoint which have spawned all of those poorly-written Left Behind novels and even an atrocious video game, but there are also the mid-trib and post-trib interpretations. Preterists, for example, believe the tribulation has already taken place.

Again, even among the Christian ranks, there is not agreement over who the Antichrist is, what his role will be, or even if he is defined as a single, real person.

Significant portions of Revelation are also in Isaiah and Ezekiel. Revelation itself was written when Jerusalem was besieged and anyone with the means and a sense of self-preservation was fleeing the city. Many if not all of Jesus' disciples had been certain that the 'new kingdom' or the 'end of the world' was going to happen soon after Jesus' resurrection. At the time Revelation was written, about 70 A.D. some 40-50 years had gone by without this occurence.
----------
The oldest known texts of the New Testament are written in Syrian.
----------
Genesis and likely a good portion of Exodus as well were an oral tradition long before they were written down. The oral tradition had been in Chaldean. The oral history was then written in Hebrew, and the Chaldean language had shifted in meaning and wasn't used as much by the people passing down the tradition.

At the time that it was written down, the Chaldean word for cycle was changing in meaning from 'moon' or month to 'year'; thus, both meanings were used. Anything spoken of before the time of transcription, the word meant moon which means that basically whenever we see 'year' in Genesis, think month. So, Methuselah was 75 years old.

From a book written by the father of Dr. Newman Powell. Somewhere in this house is the text. It was written in the early 1900's. The author was a Methodist minister and scholar.

Also, compare the headnotes in The Jerusalem Bible for Genesis.
---------
In the Greek translation of the Bible, there are two different words for the English 'time'. One of the words is the agreed-upon fiction of hours, minutes etc. For example, that here in Bloomington, Indiana at the moment I am typing this sentence it is 12:13 a.m. The other word for 'time' is different and is not easy to translate into English. The best I can do is that when you are in the other time, you have no idea what the fictional time is. Two analogies: Narnian time versus Earth time. Underhill - fairyland - time versus the world above. In short, the 'days' and 'years' in the creation story are in the equivalent of Narnian time. We don't know how that translates into our hours, minutes, or years.
------------
The word 'son' is used in two different ways. One sense is what we usually think of: my brother is my father's son. But the other is something else and is once again something that doesn't translate very well into English. The begats are like a listing of tribal or clan leaders that can be many generations apart. Note that Jesus is often referred to as the "son of David."
------------
As for when things happen, just before the ascension, Jesus said "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority." Acts 1:7. RSV. In short it isn't our concern. What is our concern is that we care for one another.
-----------
Nowhere do I see in the Bible that people will 'go to hell' if they do not believe in Jesus. What I do see - frequently - is that if people do not care for one another, if they do not clothe the naked, feed the hungry, visit the imprisoned etc. then look out. There are examples in both the old and the new testaments. One example is a parable from Luke 16 beginning at verse 19. To paraphrase: There was a very rich man. Outside his gate (modern equivalent front door) was a very poor man, homeless, hungry covered with sores who simply wished to have the scraps of food that fell off the rich man's table and were fed to the dogs. Both men died. The poor man went to heaven and was in the bosom of Abraham, and the rich man went to 'Hades' (RSV translation). The rich man saw the poor man and cried out for mercy, got none, then asked for a messenger for his brothers. Answer: They have Moses and the Prophets. An example from the old testament: "'It is you who have devoured the vineyard, the spoil of the poor is in your houses. What do you mean by crushing my people, by grinding the face of the poor?' says the Lord God of Hosts. Isaiah 3: 14-15 RSV.
-----------
The new covenent is a re-establishment of the old covenent. Everything Jesus preached came from the old testament. Biblical study will reveal this. A good thick concordance is very helpful in this as it cross-references passages that say the same thing.

Orange Blossom whose father has studied Latin, Greek, and Hebrew and has done a good deal of Biblical studies in his training to become a minister and continues that study.

And it shows, good sir!

Re: caring for one another
Absolutely true. I always liked James 1:27 (NLT)
"Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you."

I don't worry when the end will come,as long as I live a good and clean Christian life now,and always make sure I'm ready for when that day does finally arrive.
I found this site interesting.
http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/jesus.htm

"Nowhere do I see in the Bible that people will 'go to hell' if they do not believe in Jesus."

Those who do not ask Jesus for forgiveness and believe in him the Bible says will perish.



Not like they do now. And not on the bottom of oceans like they do now either.

Pre-tribulation:
http://www.gotquestions.org/rapture-tribulation.html


Its not going to tell you what your going to have for lunch tomorrow but it has predicted so many things that have came true many many years ago.

So let me get this straight:

The Bible can predict the future.

Cannot predict dates.

Predicts in chronological order.

Predictions are usually vague.

How is this much different than Nostradamus?

edit: No one really knows what the prediction meant until after the fact...

The problem with Biblical predictions, as I see it, is that they are always discovered after the fact, much like Nostradamus's curious poems. One could reasonably take any esoteric writing and find "predictions" any past event.
The same "prediction" in the Bible, moreover, has been used to predict more than ONE EVENT, depending on the interpretor and the time. The same "prediction" in the Bible, moreover, has been used over and over again to predict events that have not come to pass.


The more I read these threads, the more I am convinced that at bottom, they are all concerned with the status of the scriptures themselves: a cosmopolitan view from outside Christianity, and within Christianity, one literal and one spiritual/symbolic interpretation.
Cheers,
John

That's not true, CGM. Large geologic events go all they way back into Earth's history; our written records only document a tiny fraction of that history.

I can see how the world would appear to have an increase of such events in our time. There are two things different today that might account for this. One, the media; you hear about everything that happens anywhere in the world. This produces a sense that more of such events are occurring when in fact you are simply hearing about them more often than at any point in the past. The second reason is that enormous geologic upheaval happens relatively rarely in a geologic sense, which is extremely rare in a human historical sense; thus there aren't that many large eruptions and earthquakes to compare with the more common ones we observe regularly. After all, tiny earthquakes happen constantly across the globe; they are often just too small for us to notice.

Here's a chart comparing volcanic eruptions by size and frequency. Look at the largest eruptions; they occur no more often than every 10,000 years or so. Thus, recorded history (short of, perhaps, petroglyphs) doesn't come close to being contained in this interval.

CGM, contrary to your belief that geologic upheaval is on the rise, it is in fact decreasing over time. Volcanism on Earth is constantly winding it's way down, in the long-term (geologically speaking). You see, volcanism is driven by the Earth's molten core, which is kept molten by radioactive isotopes in the center of the core that were chemically separated via gravity (ie, the heaviest elements ended up in the center of the planet). Isotopes are atoms that have extra neutrons in their nuclei, and are unstable; they "decay" by releasing the extra particle to reach a stable form. The release of this particle, or decay, releases with it energy from the atom; this energy in turn heats the core. These isotopes will continue their radioactive decay until the they are gone and the core is radioactively neutral; thus, eventually the core's heat source will be gone and all volcanism on Earth will cease. Mars is a much less massive planet; it started off with a much smaller amount of radioactive isotopes in its core. This exact process has already taken place in it's core and because of this, Mars has no active volcanism.



Now that was a tangent! Starting with religious tolerance, ending with Martian volcanism!



Ok folks, quickly now, back to biblical predictions...

Tell that to the giant hump thats taking over the yellowstone national park.
The records also show we have had more tornadoes(and)hurricanes than before and they have been bigger. We have also had change in weather patterns. We had 70 degrees in December here in SC!



True I do see that too. Almost tired of turning the news on because all you hear about is the bad.

these events are due to atmospheric changes, weather patterns, and global climatography. very little of this can be attributed to an increase in volcanic/seismic activity on Earth. this year we have an El Nino system, which, combined with a general warming of the globe is contributing to these strange weather occurences.





if you are using this as a reference to the "End of Days" or some fruition of events in the Bible, then you should know that this has been documented for the past 30+ years. this is not some instantaneous and tumultuous event. as the tectonic plates shift, the hotspot that lead to geothermal activity in yellowstone incites different activity in different areas.

No its just you said it was slowing down when actually we are having worse bad weather and this volcano forming in yellowstone is real and all.



Yet we did not have this several years ago. According to my weather station we have been breaking records for the last couple of years and this year broke many more than previous years.

I am just saying we are having weather changes regardless of what causes them we have them.

But how do you know this weather wasn't the norm 1500 years ago? We do not know, simply because we have only be engaged in weather study for the last 300-some years.

CGM, my point was that if the bible predicts increased overall geological activity, it's wrong, because in the larger scheme of things the overall driving force of geologic activity is decreasing. There will still be localized changes in geologic behavior, there will still be earthquakes, ect, for hundreds of millions of years (or more).

An increase in activity in Yellowstone is simply a localized shift in seismic activity, not an increase in the driving mechanism behind geologic forces.

As for weather changes, like blueandgold pointed out, these are unrelated to geology, for the most part. Weather is driven by the interaction of our atmosphere and the Sun, while volcanism is driven by the Earth's core. Though there is a relation between volcanoes and atmospheric composition, which can effect climate...but overall decrease in volcanic activity over time would actually reduce greenhouse gasses.

The changes in climate are, as science continues to show, not due to natural processes.

Anyway, again, my point was that if the bible predicts that in the end times, sinful behavior and the evils of the world are tied to an increase in volcanoes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters...well, it's off the mark, at least when it comes to geology.

How come there's nothing really supercool in the bible? Something that would really convince you it was written or inspired by an all knowing being? Something that ancient men just couldn't have made up? Something easy like say mention of dinosaurs? Always wondered that.

What's this stuff about first covenant and second covenant? Sounds to me like God sort of changed his mind. Could the all knowing creator of the entire universe really change his mind?

Oh and BTW Why won't God heal amputees?

Here is an explanation that I have before:

The reason God cures thousands of cancers, infections, etc. each day but never intervenes with amputees is because it is not God's will to do that. It is not part of God's plan.

This explanation seems a little odd. Amputees really do seem to be getting the short end of God's plan if this is the case. If God answers prayers as promised in the Bible, and if God is performing all of the medical miracles that we read about in inspirational literature, then God should also be restoring amputated limbs. Why would God help cancer victims and people bitten by rabid bats, but discriminate against amputees like this?

If you can read all the 50 things on that site and not at least admit there are a lot of unanswered questions in the bible, you have really unshakable faith. I couldn't.

"
If you can read all the 50 things on that site and not at least admit there are a lot of unanswered questions in the bible, you have really unshakable faith. I couldn't."





The Bible talks of dinosaurs. It predicts the future and all the predictions it has made have been 100% accurate and their are many more predictions in the Bible that have not came true yet because it is not time.

You need to read the Bible for yourself instead of believing what some person said on a website like the one you posted above. He is sadly mistaken.

Read about the predictions that have came true and will come true.
http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/grap...hecy/index.html

Read about the dinosaurs:
http://www.gotquestions.org/dinosaurs-Bible.html

The Bible tells of snakes that used to have legs but were cursed.The were to crawl on the ground forever from that point. Not to long ago scientists found skeletal remains of a snake with legs under its body
for walking on.

About the snakes curse in the Bible:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/268.asp

Many other questions on that site:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp

I have heard of many cases of pastors praying for people in Jesus name and they grow arms. I have heard of praying in Jesus name and people coming back from the dead.

"You need to read the Bible for yourself instead of believing what some person said on a website like the one you posted above. He is sadly mistaken."

And this is followed by two links to interpretations!
TU QUOQUE!

John

Read both the links and the Bible and make your own thoughts is what I am saying.

When you listen to a pastor at church read with him. That way you can know what he is saying is what the Bible says. Thats what our pastor said today that if you dont believe him read the Bible yourself.

Absolutely. Always read any scriptural reference for your self. Don't just read the verses quoted but the whole passage. That way you will know if the verse is being used out of context to twist the meaning (one of Satan's favorite tactics). I also recommend using more that one translation because even though the wordings are different, the message is still the same.

I thought the same thing!



Well that narrows it down. For one thing, the term "dinosaur" typically refers to land creatures. For another, dinosaurs ranged in size from chickens to 80 feet long...so references to "giant lizards" can hardly be assumed to be references to dinosaurs.

"Dragon" and "sea serpent" can just as easily be attributed to invented, mythical creatures...the same sort that many cultures around the globe have also created in their own mythologies.



The largest creature ever to inhabit the Earth is still among us; it's not a dinosaur, or even a "sea surpent," but the blue whale.



Well, I will agree with them here.



Dinosaurs and humans coexisted? There is no evidence to support this.

I find these two disparate points interesting.

"I also recommend using more that one translation because even though the wordings are different, the message is still the same."

" Tanniyn is translated a few different ways in our English Bibles; sometimes it’s “sea monster,” sometimes it’s “serpent.” It is most commonly translated “dragon"."

Those with ears, let them hear.
Regards to all,
John

"Dinosaurs and humans coexisted? There is no evidence to support this. "

They have found human footprints next to dino prints in the rocks.

and have the prints been dated? what kind of dinosaur? what kind of rock? what continent? i ask because what you are suggesting contradicts most of the edification i have received on the subject.

it wasn't until the Cambrian Explosion that many mammals entered the food chain. these mammals do not include hominids. the most common depiction of early man (cave man) takes place well after the die-off of the dinosaurs.

in all of my studies i have yet to come across any evidence to support the claim that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.

Well I saw the picture of it in a magazine and no it wasnt a "tabloid"...
I will try and find it and post a link.

Just curious have you came across evidence of a world wide flood? I dont know what you study so I wondered.

EDIT

Here are the prints:
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks.htm

CGM, the site you linked was filled more with conjecture than anything tangible. it provides very little evidence showing that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. the pictures were inconclusive, and their was no scientific literature supporting their claim.

as far as the flood, yes, i have seen evidence of many floods throughout the world. i used to live in montana, where flood basins are everywhere. however, a 'world-wide flood' (like the movie waterworld) seems a bit far-fetched. this is a paper written to attempt to reconcile what is in Genesis and what is feasible by current scientific thinking.

"A real flood of global size is simply impossible, because the amount
of all water on the Earth is far not enough for a "global" flood..."

however, if you read further into the paper, the author does say that Noah may have perceived it as a global flood. the story in the Bible may be a representation of relatively local phenomena and not a description of world-wide inundation.

There is some dispute about whether the footprints, at least in one example of them, were actually human:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/mantrack.html

Certainly if there were undisputed evidence, the scientific community would have been the first to modify their views.
*******
There is a parallel story very similar to the Noah account, in the Epic of Gilgamesh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Gilgamesh). See the translation of Tablet XI here for those wishing to compare the similarities:
http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopo...amesh/tab11.htm

It seems there were many such flood stories in the ancient near east, probably from an earlier and unknown source:
http://www.noahs-ark-flood.com/parallels.htm

Regards,
John

I know that some people say that Christians can be intolerant ( this is true about certain things that god against God's word), but this is a bit much to claim.

The New Fascists?

Read for yourself.

Seafox14

Seafox, I knew it, I was afraid you were going to take over the country! I knew it all along!

On a serious note, the assertion that evangelicals are fascists is pretty ridiculous. Worse, it only serves to inflame the divisions in our country.

A while back, I was flipping channels in the wee hours of the morning. I came across an interview on PBS. I can't for the life of me remember his name, but the author being interviewed was an evangelical pastor. He'd had run a church for a good 25-30 years, if memory serves. I will admit I had assumptions about what he would say when he was asked various questions. But to my great interest and surprise, he had a very different take on many issues than I would have guessed.

He talked about the Protestant community of about a century ago. There were those in that community who thought that the focus of the church should be personal salvation, he said. But there were also those who believed that social justice was the task at hand. He explained that in his view, both groups were correct. To me this is an important point, because it often feels like many Christians care little for the pains of the world; they seem to have the idea that as long as they follow the rules of their religion and conduct their personal lives according to the bible, the rest of the world is of little concern; it’s all "in g(G)od's hands." Now, that is just a general observation I have made; it doesn't apply to all Christians, of course.

The pastor spoke of cooperation. For example, he said that even if he didn't agree with feminist groups on abortion, he would still be willing to work with them against issues such as pornography. He figured that if he was only going to work with people who thought exactly as he did, there'd be no one to work with since no two people are identical!

While many churches and organizations seem money-hungry, this individual, after "making it big" with his book, gave back the salary he had made in all his years as pastor. I was singularly impressed by that.

Anyway, the point of all this was that I was greatly heartened.

Back to the book for a moment: you see, when one feels threatened by any other person, group of people, or issue, one tends to "demonize" that which they feel threatened by. They tend to exaggerate the negative aspects of the person, event, or issue. That is, I suspect, the real reason for a book about "Christian fascism."

After all, Bush and his administration have been called "fascists." Liberals who believe in socialized medicine are called "communists." We throw these terms around so easily today, yet such terms are but hyperbole. After all, those who use the term "fascist" with such ease are no doubt fortunate individuals who have never actually lived under fascism and have no real understanding of the term they are using.

Granted, the term "fascist" does not apply to evangelical Christians. But if the author of that book feels threatened...what exactly is he/she afraid of? What is it about evangelicals that is so scary?

To be fair, there are religious individuals and organizations, many of which are evangelicals, that are trying to have an impact on political process. There is no doubt of this. But then, there are countless groups and individuals of countless causes doing the same. Are these groups a "threat" as well?

I will admit something else: I too feel threatened. Not directly, and no, not enough to start "fighting fascists in the streets." But there is something nagging about certain trends in the last few years.

I will use an example. A coworker of mine is a 20 year old self-professed evangelical Christian. He's the sort that wears his faith on his sleeve; he lays his bible on the break room table in plain view when he gets to work, makes a point to tell us about his church experiences, ect. Now, I have no problem with any of that. He has a right to believe what he wants and his bible isn't hurting anyone sitting on the break room table. My problem is that he takes strong political stands, yet knows little or nothing about that which he stands for. He supports Bush, but doesn't even pay attention to what Bush does. He votes, yet he doesn't take the time to understand the measures.

He knows so little about the things he defends; the worst part of all is that he doesn't understand why he should.

Now, he's a nice guy deep down. No fascism there. But this sort of apathy is a threat to democracy in the sense that it defeats the purpose of democracy. With people who behave like this, individuals so easily manipulated because of the ignorance they choose live in, democracy is defeated before it begins.

To be fair, the guy who only cares about his paycheck and his Xbox is bad for democracy also, but not to the same degree. Because guess what? People with that particular sort of apathy usually don't vote and thus have much less impact overall.

So I guess what I am getting at is that while I don't believe the deeply religious are fascists by any stretch of the imagination, I do think there is reason to be wary where ever apathy is exploited.

But this brings me back to my earlier statement; the interview, and why it left me in such a good mood.

You see, as many of you have no doubt noticed, I tend to lean to the left on many issues. But over the last few years I have come to the conclusion that trying to understand the differences between various ideological stances is infinitely more important than simply arguing for your own side; ie, "trying to win." I believe that for all of humanity, our similarities are far greater than our differences. I also believe that the differences that do exist are in fact due to failures in communication rather than inherent or insurmountable social/political obstacles.

So there it is.

And here is this evangelical pastor, describing observations on the world that I have made myself. Perhaps in the end, the "threat" people so often feel is really just the fear that is caused by a lack of understanding.

Before passing judgment on the book in question, it seems sensible to either read the book itself, or additional and more "neutral" reviews of it. But I must admit, the book title itself would indicate to reasonable people that its contents would not be anything but propaganda or exaggeration while its arguments would be biased, even if from a professional journalist.

Regards,
John

there was a documentary a few months ago about evangelical groups training their children in a boot camp environment, and trying to get ready supposedly for a way with non-believers. now i certainly want to point out to everyone this is no different than an a muslim extreamist that teaches his sons that it is what god wants us to do strap a bomb to ourselvs and kill non-believers. there is extreamists on both sides.

like i have said many times before, we are all so simmilar that our simmilarities outwiegh our differences, and this also includes beliefs such as christianity, islam, and judiasim.

The argument isn't without merit. I wouldn't call evangelicals "fascists", I don't think that's the best use of the term. But if he's making the point that the religious right can be dangerous to a free and equitable society, he definitely has a point. (Note I say "religious" and not necessarily "Christian".) A trend I notice in the extreme religious conservative is the heavy leaning toward legalism. They demand everyone conform to their own moral standard (whether it's in line with their religious texts or not), they take the groups of people that deviate from their code and use them as their scapegoats for social injustice. For right-wing Christians, it's the gays. For the Taliban, it's women. Granted the Taliban are far harsher, but that's what happens in a totalitarian system. I have no doubt that if pundits like Dobson, Robertson, and Falwell were to completely get their way in the political realm we would soon be seeing Jim-Crow style laws against homosexuals.

That isn't to say that it's fair to paint everyone who claims to be evangelical with this same brush, but the further they go toward the right-wing spectrum the more I see this kind of thing as relevant. Islam is a religion of peace, yet radicals proclaim that their followers must march to the tune of a political holy war. Christianity also teaches peace, yet if you've seen the "Bible Camp" movie then you recall that woman shouting "This is war!" to her child camp members. [I see here I am repeating what ussr has just posted, but I'll continue anyway!] She at one point stated that Muslims train their people to war from childhood, and implied that Christians ought to start taking cues from that! Honestly it frightens me to think of what would happen were our political and economic situation to become as desperate as it is in some of these Arab countries, because the disparities between the right wing nuts there and here are not so different. The people there are only strapping bombs to themselves because the place they live is just that much more desperate.

I Still Find It Somewhat Amusing That Even Though The Children In School/Homes Are Told To Be Tolerent Of Other Religons/Races etc. On Good Friday (I.E Yesterday) No Alcahol Was ALLOWED To Be Served On The Island Of Ireland Despite Muslems/Jews/Islamic People Living And Working Here. Seems Sorta Wrong Considering We Are Not Forced To Adhere To ANY Of Their Holy Or Special Days.

In many areas of the US, you cannot buy alcohol on Sunday. These local, archaic laws were passed at one time by a "Christian" majority of voters and never repealed- - -just one example of how religion can attempt to force itself and its law down one's throat. One can look at the Moslem Republics today for even more frightening instances.
Regards,
John

An open mind need to be kept before having tolerance first. That means an open mind to others beliefs and trying to understand the whys of the religion.

Ex. Salat (Muslim Daily Prayers, given 5 Times daily) people say why would they pray 5 times a day?! The Holy Prophet (peace be on him) asked to the companions, "if one of you had a stream running by his door and he takes a bath in it five times a day, would any dirt be left on him?." They replied! "No dirt would be left on him". The Holy Prophet said: "This is the case with Salat (the five daily prayers) Allah makes the Salat wipe out his sins"

and even if you don't agree with the above statement thats ok, just as long as you took the time to at least look at the other side's view.

USSR are you muslim?
It not maybe you could at least answer my question.

Isnt it in the koran that you should kill all who dont believe?

This is a very complex question, and by this I'm assuming you are meaning jihad.
this can be both violent and non-violent
It can refer to striving to live a moral and virtuous life, to spreading and defending Islam, and to fighting injustice and oppression, among other usages.

The word "jihad" is often wrongly translated as "Holy War." The primary aim of jihad is not the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam by force, but rather the expansion and defense of the Islamic state. Muslim scholars condemned secular wars as an evil rooted in humanity's vengeful nature.In the classical manuals of Islamic jurisprudence, the rules associated with armed warfare are covered at great length. Such rules include not killing women, children and non-combatants, as well as not damaging cultivated or residential areas. More recently, modern Muslims have tried to re-interpret the Islamic sources, stressing that Jihad is essentially defensive warfare aimed at protecting Muslims and Islam. Although some Islamic scholars have differered on the implementation of Jihad, there is consensus amongst them that the concept of jihad will always include armed struggle against persecution and oppression. Some Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarded the inner struggle for faith a greater Jihad than even fighting [by force] in the way of God.

most has been taken off wikipedia as this is extremely accurate and accepted by the general Muslim community! please , please I urge everyone to arm themselvs with knowledge and understanding. Muslims aren't terrorists , in fact muslims are at an outrage with terrorists for not following Islam (meaning peace, or surrendering strictly to god's will and pleasure). You must understand the Media and Terrorists work almost as one in spreading misconceptions.

-Ussr1943-