100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > Thomas3474
|
|
|
Our Government is out of control.The whole lot should be impeached and thrown into prison starting with Obama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Just like Al gore,look who is preaching to the public to buy hybrids and CFL light bulbs,all the while driving one of the least fuel efficient cars.
Add Jesse Jackson’s ride to prominent vehicles being stripped in Detroit. Following the embarrassing news that Mayor Dave Bing’s GMC Yukon was hijacked by criminals this week, Detroit’s Channel 7 reports that the Reverend’s Caddy Escalade SUV was stolen and stripped of its wheels while he was in town last weekend with the UAW’s militant President Bob King leading the “Jobs, Justice, and Peace” march promoting government-funded green jobs. Read that again: Jackson’s Caddy SUV was stripped while he was in town promoting green jobs. Add Jesse to the Al Gore-Tom Friedman-Barack Obama School of Environmental Hypocrisy. While preaching to Americans that they need to cram their families into hybrid Priuses to go shopping for compact fluorescent light bulbs to save the planet, they themselves continue to live large. “We need an economy that creates employment that can't be shipped overseas,” the Green Rev wrote for CNN about the march. “Home-grown American labor will be installing windmills and solar panels. A green economy is not an abstract concept.” Well, its certainly abstract to Jesse, but I digress. “Even now, the only sector of the economy that has seen job growth during the recession is the green job sector. Time is of the essence.” Actually, time long ago passed Detroit by because Jesse’ favored government mpg mandates and UAW wages stripped the Big Three’s ability to compete against non-union transplants. These jobs were real – unlike the artificial, government subsidized green jobs he shakes down the feds for today. Real jobs produced big, profitable SUVs like the one Jesse prefers to ride in. His SUV has been stripped by thugs – a fitting metaphor for what Jesse and his pals have done to the auto industry for the last 35 years. Henry Payne is editor of The Michigan View.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because our Government has been taken over by a bunch of deranged lunatics who don't have a clue what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure our Government and hundreds of other people have been logging every website we visit,everything we buy online,and watching everything we do on the computer.Even if they don't I always assume someone is watching everything I do.
In the early days of the internet you knew what folders and files were yours.I used to change all my folders to a certain icon so I knew which ones were mine.Now there is so many fricken folders it is impossible to know which ones are mine and someone elses.Even if you want to delete many of the folders there is a second hard drive which just puts them right back in there or wont allow you to delete them. I don't worry about it too much though.There will always be rogue programmers,pirates,and others who will make software and give instructions on how to block your computer from others. Or you can just do what I do and give them a bunch of useless information.Nothing from my computer registration,warranty information's,e-mail and other accounts is listed in my real name or address.When they ask I usually tell them my name is "Joe go blow yer self" at 1234 56th St,Texas city,Utah. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Thomas3474
on
Tue 09/07/10 09:02 PM
|
|
http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=13104666
TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - Letting illegal immigrants go free? Hard to believe but that could be the new federal mandate if a proposed ICE policy change is approved. Here's the idea: If authorities pull someone over for a traffic stop and discover they are in the country illegally, authorities would be forced to let the illegal immigrant go without calling federal agents unless the individual is a convicted felon. Even officers opposed to SB 1070 say this would set a bad precedent. Sheriff Tony Estrada of Santa Cruz County says nothing in southern Arizona would change if the detention policy changed. He says that's because his deputies turn these kinds of cases over to Border Patrol anyway. Just as some of the debate swirling around Arizona's new immigration law began to cool off, a possible new Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy has some mad hot. Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu is very upset about possible policy changes to ICE that read in part, "Immigration officers should not issue detainers against an alien charged only with a traffic-related misdemeanor unless or until the alien is convicted." Babeu said "now it appears what they have in some draft policies and their proposal is to water down any strength in the federal law whatsoever and this is clearly in direct opposition of what the people really want." Even Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada, who leaned strongly against SB 1070, thinks this sort of federal policy change is suspect. "It is surprising they would make that decision. I would suspect once an individual is identified as being here illegally, some process would kick in...that would deport that person," he said. Ariz. Sen. Jon Kyl weighed in, along with Texas Sen. John Cornyn, writing this to Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano: "Based on our review of these memos, we are concerned that these new policies would circumvent, rather than promote the enforcement of, immigration laws pertaining to illegal aliens." Laws these politicians and law enforcement officers fear are getting a little bit too lax. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You may be have the freedom to print these books and the people may have the freedom to buy them but you are just asking yourself to get arrested and thrown in jail.Many times when people are arrested on suspicion of terrorism the books,videos,and websites visited on their computer seals the case for probable cause and they are found guilty.
Likewise if a family was arrested for child abuse and this book was found in their house.The book when likely be used as evidence in court and the family found guilty. You have to assume someone is always watching what you are buying.Red flags go up all over the place when someone buys The anarchist cookbook or other related books. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
may the lord help us all, from what ive read in here we need it. #1 we all should care for one another.the bible says "to love one another" and that means everyone#2 it's not just pentecostal, u'll find that in every religion.#3if possession is not real then ur sayin the bible is a lie or better yet, jesus isnt the son of God.because he himself cast out demons.read ur bible people. and if that dont work for ya than ask God himself. "seek and you shall find", "knock and the door will open unto you".i know ill hear alotta flack about this, so ill pray for ya'll and ask the lord to open ur eyes.and while ur at it, look up the true meaning of a witch. i promise you . its not what most people think.thank you and God bless. your friend and mine .... ME lol Excellent point!Little know fact that even Mary Magdalene had demons inside her. Mark 16:9 "Now after he had risen early on the first day of the week, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons." Luke 8:2 "And also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and sicknesses: Mary who was called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
If...
|
|
Thomas3437 wrote:
People like yourself love to bring this stoning issue up time and time and time again over and over and over.Stoning may have been a law in the Old testament but it was rarely if ever enforced.If you would do some research you will find stoning someone to death was justified for many reasons including blasphemy.Yet where are all these reports of Jews stoning people to death?The only verse I remember anyone ever getting stoned to death was a man preaching Christianity by a angry mob of non believers. First off, it should be glaringly obvious that there WAS no _Christianity_ in the Old Testament. Further, Jews to this day don't accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour, so they are just as much 'unbelievers' as other non-Christians. Luckily, we live in a time when the Old Testament, with all its barbaric practices, has been rendered illegal by superior legal documents like the Constitution of the United States. That particular document doesn't allow religious maniacs to murder with impunity through the application of frontier justice those people whom they adjudicate as being guilty of thought crimes against their favorite conceit. Or to administer cruel and unusual punishments. Or any punishment, for that matter, without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. Besides, since it supposedly only takes one sin to prevent someone from getting into heaven, how many times did stoning have to happen in the Old Testament at the hands of the faithful before it became morally wrong? -Kerry O. Yes Kerry I realize there was no Christianity in the Old testament  The verse I spoke about is the only verse in either the Old or New testament with regard of someone actually being stoned to death.The verse I spoke about was written in the New testament about a man who was stoned to death because he spoke about Jesus.
I also realize that Jews reject Jesus and only believe in the Old testament.Jews should believe in Jesus because Jesus was spoken about in the Old testament including where he would be born,the life he would live,and how he would die and rise again.This is probably the reason you have Christians numbering in the billions and Jews only in a few million. Your rant on the Constitution and how it speaks of banning Old testament laws is one of the funniest things I have ever heard .If you would read the Constitution it doesn't even mention the bible,the Old testament,laws relating to the bible,or capital punishment dictated by the bible.It also doesn't mention Jews or Jesus.So where you are getting these ideas from is beyond me.
If you knew the slightest thing about the bible you would know all those laws haven't been practiced for at least 2,000 years.When Jesus died he paid for every death sentence for anyone who would break any of those laws from when he died until the end of earth. Sins can be forgiven.People sinned all the time including priests in the Old testament times.I have never read any bible verse in the Old testament times where someone was put to death by the church for his or her sins.They repentanted and were forgiven.People always had a choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
If...
|
|
Thomas3437 wrote:
Did Jesus ever has conflicts or disagreements with God or the Old testament? Oh absolutely. The Old Testament taught that people should judge others and stone sinners to death. But Jesus was in total conflict with that. Jesus taught not to judge others and only those who are without sin should cast the first stone. But that second part basically states not to ever stone anyone sinners because the assumption of this entire religion is that no mortal man can even be sin free. The Old Testament also taught that people should seek revenge via an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But Jesus was in total conflict with that. Jesus taught to turn the other cheek instead and to offer forgiveness rather than seeking revenge. So Jesus wasn't anyone near being in agreement with the teachings of the Old Testament. Was not everything Jesus spoke of coming from the Old testament? No not at all. If you look closely at the moral values that Jesus taught they are more in line with the teachings of Mahayana Buddhism and completely opposite of what had been taught in the Old Testament. Jesus didn't support the moral values of the Old Testament at all. But the things you've said here make no sense, and are indeed irrational. You say: What you are not understanding is that Jesus was not sent to condemn the world but to save it..."God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him".Jesus was sent so that people like this woman who was about to be stoned could be given a second chance through repentance of her sins.Jesus was sent by God because God would rather prefer people confess their sins,avoid sin,and be forgiven rather than die for their sins.God gave Jesus as a sacrifice so that any sin the people committed would no longer be punished by a death sentence no matter what the Old testament laws were. But I do understand it fully. From my perspective you're the one who seems to be misunderstanding things. Your interpretation here makes no sense, because you're implying that God was unhappy with his first directive to people and now he wants to chance his mind. That implies that God himself was either confused, had a change of heart, or is simply experimenting with different possible rules. You say, "Jesus was sent by God because God would rather prefer people confess their sins,avoid sin,and be forgiven rather than die for their sins." Well, if that were true then God would have already been an idiot for having established this practice in the first place. You say: People like yourself love to bring this stoning issue up time and time and time again over and over and over.Stoning may have been a law in the Old testament but it was rarely if ever enforced.If you would do some research you will find stoning someone to death was justified for many reasons including blasphemy.Yet where are all these reports of Jews stoning people to death? The only verse I remember anyone ever getting stoned to death was a man preaching Christianity by a angry mob of non believers. You don't need to have every stoning reported in the Bible. Clearly there could have been thousands or even millions of stonings that were never recorded. Do you realize that people are still being stoned to death to this very day because of these old myths? 
Moreover, it's crystal clear that the Jews were indeed still stoning people to death during the time Jesus lived. How else would that story of the woman who was about to be stoned to death at the well make any sense? The mere fact that Jesus just happened to randomly be a place where a person was about to be stoned to death suggests to me that it must have been a fairly common practice at in those days. Besides, it's totally irrelevant how many actual stoning took place. The only thing that is relevant is that fact that God supposedly condoned and even directed people to perform this practice. I personally don't believe that any all-wise God would have ever done such a thing. Understand that God would always forgive people who were sorry,who repented of their sins,and who tried to live a Godly life.If the church carried out all the Old testament laws concerning death for a certain sin there would be no Jews alive today since all of them would have been put to death for their sins since all were sinners.They were not put to death because they repented of their sins and tried to live a life closer to what God demanded. All you're saying here is that God was indeed utterly stupid to have even told people to stone sinners to death then. 
This is precisely why I'm convinced that this whole concept can be nothing more than a fabricated religion by men. No genuinely all-wise God would have ever told people to stone sinners to death. That also carries with it the automatic necessity that people would have also had to have judged other people to be sinners, for how can someone stone a sinner to death if they haven't first judged them to be a sinner? Jesus did not change any Old testament laws including stoning for adultry because he did not say "do not stone this woman".He did not say "this law is no longer valid or relevant".He said "he who is with out sin may cast the first stone". Meaning if someone was with out sin they may stone this woman for her sins.Obviously nobody was with out sin and nobody worthy to pick up a rock to stone this woman.This is not a conflict with Gods law nor did Jesus change Gods law.Jesus was simply saying everyone has sinned and everyone is guilty of judgment and all deserve to die.But under Gods grace everyone is also saved from death from those laws because God will forgive a person who confesses their sins.Jesus was also saying you have been forgiven for your sins which should have been punishable by death but were forgiven and allowed to live. But clearly that would have been a change in the law and a very drastic one indeed! Now you're trying to suggest that god only wants sinless people to stone sinners to death. But that wasn't the original directive. Moreover, if it was it would have been an oxymoron because, as you say, no man is without sin in this stupid mythology. So once again, if you try to wiggle around with these kinds of 'excuses' for God they just don't work. All these things do is suggest that God was stupid when he first invoked them and didn't make things crystal clear. A eye for a eye and tooth for a tooth in the Old testament and Jesus telling us to turn the other cheek was not in conflict with each other.Why?Because Jesus is telling us to not fight evil with evil.He is telling us it is better to just walk away then to start a fight. I disagree. Basically, the Old Testament was condoning revenge, and Jesus was renouncing. Is the Old testament law saying if someone takes your eye you should also take the others persons eye as well?No it is not.It is saying if someone puts out my eye I have the right under the law to take theirs as well for restitution.Or I can just walk away and leave the other person alone. This Old testament law is not commanding anyone to do anything.It is simply saying it is justified.Jesus is telling us instead of being justified turn the other cheek and do not seek restitution. And who's law might that be? God's Law? or Man's Law?
If God condones revenge and says it's alright to take revenge, then by golly it's alright! You can't have a God here who has double standards. A God who sends mixed signals and messages that mortal men are supposed to sort though to decide whether it's better to obey God's Law, or place their own moral values above God's laws? I don't buy it at all. Not one bit. Jesus saw that FLAWS in the teachings of the Old Testament and taught a higher level of morality and wisdom. A level of moral wisdom that is far more in harmony with the teachings of Buddhism than with the teachings of the Old Testament. For me to accept your interpretations I would need to assume that the God of the Old Testament was a bumbling idiot who couldn't even communicate properly and/or had a change of mind. Then he had to send Jesus down to straight up the mess that God himself created due to his unwise and poor instructions.
Then his Only Begotten Son who is trying to straighten this mess all out gets crucified for blaspheme as per God's very own instructions!?
I'd have to believe that God is a complete idiot to believe that. No way. If this God wanted to straighten things out and make his messages clear there would be no need to have his son brutally crucified for blaspheme as per his very own instructions! That makes absolutely no sense at all. A God who can't even save his only begotten Son from the fate of his very own instructions to mankind?
No. This story is simply absurd. That's all there is to it. There is nothing in this story that would even remotely make me want to believe in it. I'd have to believe that my creator is a complete bumbling fool who can't even straighten up his own miss-communication of important directives to mankind without ending up with having his own son crucified for it. That's just too crazy. It is wrong to say God doesn't know what he is talking about or doesn't know what he was doing.God sending Jesus as a prophet to speak the gospel and later die for the people was spoken about by God in the Old testament.There was no mystery to Gods thinking or what his plans were concerning Jesus.You can say he was changing his mind about sin but clearly we read that one would die for sin in the Old testament. If you read the New testament you will realize that one day God will destroy this earth and all the unbelievers all with it.Is God changing his mind regarding death for sins since Jesus died for our sins and we should not be put to death for it?No because he already told us what he is going to do and who will die. I have said this before.Stoning may have been a law in the bible but it was rarely if ever enforced.There is only one instance of stoning in the bible and that was for a man preaching Christianity. Saint Stephens(died c. AD 36, Jerusalem) First Christian martyr. As told in the Acts of the Apostles, he was a foreign-born Jew who lived in Jerusalem and joined the church at an early date. He was one of seven deacons appointed by the Apostles to care for elderly women, widows, and orphans. As a Hellenized Jew, he was strongly opposed to the Temple cult of Judaism. For expressing his opposition, he was brought before the Sanhedrin. His defense of Christianity so outraged his hearers that he was condemned to be stoned to death. One of those who assented to the execution was Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul). I also said this before if they would have carried out stoning for sins all the Jews would be dead.Here is a list of sins punishable for stoning in the Old testament.Keep in mind this is just related to stoning.There is many more laws punishable by death for other reasons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning Bestiality committed by man (Lev. xx. 15; Sanh. vii. 4, 54b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, x. 1; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17). Bestiality committed by woman (Lev. xx. 16: Sanh. vii. 4, 54b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, x. 3; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17). Blasphemy (Lev. xxiv. 16; Sanh. vii. 4, 43a; Sifra, Emor, xix.). Criminal conversation with a betrothed virgin (Deut. xxii. 23, 24; Sanh. vii. 4, 66b; Sifre, Deut. 242). Criminal conversation with one's own daughter-in-law (Lev. xx. 12; Sanh. vii. 4, 53a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 13). Criminal conversation with one's own mother (Lev. xviii. 7, xx. 11; Sanh. vii. 4, 53a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 12). Criminal conversation with one's own stepmother (Lev. xviii. 8, xx. 11; Sanh. vii. 4, 53a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 12). Cursing a parent (Lev. xx. 9; Sanh. vii. 4, 66a; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 7). Enticing individuals to idolatry: "Mesit" (Deut. xiii. 7–12 [A. V. 6–11]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Sifre, Deut. 90). Idolatry (Deut. xvii. 2–7; Sanh. vii. 4, 60b; Sifre, Deut. 149). Instigating communities to idolatry: "Maddiaḥ" (Deut. xiii. 2–6 [A. V. 1–5]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Sifre, Deut. 86). Necromancy (Lev. xx. 27; Sanh. vii. 4, 65a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, xi., end). Offering one's own children to Molech (Lev. xx. 2; Sanh. vii. 4, 64a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, viii., parashah 10, beginning). Pederasty (Lev. xx. 13; Sanh. vii. 4, 54a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 14), and sexual activity between men (Lev. iii, 18:22)[9]. Rebelling against parents (Deut. xxi. 18–21; Sanh. vii. 4, 68b; Sifre, Deut. 220). Shabbath-breaking (Num. xv. 32–36; Sanh. vii. 4; Sifre, Num. 114). Witchcraft (Ex. xxii. 17 [A. V. 18]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17). What you keep failing to realize time and time again is that much like today's justice system people were always given a second chance.If someone committed adultery they could repent their sins and promise to lead a better life and that person would be forgiven by both God and the church.That is why you will probably never read of any instances of capital punishment in either the Old or New testament by the church.I don't remember ever reading any. The woman sent to Jesus for adultery was a test.They were even breaking Gods laws as she would normally stand trial for her actions. In order to make this issue as simple as possible I will say this... Everything that was considered a sin in the Old testament is still just as relevant as it is today.Everything that offended God in the Old testament still offends him today. There has been some huge changes in the Old testament since the death of Jesus because nearly all the laws of the Old testament speak of punishment or death for sins.Since Jesus died for everyone's sins many of the Old testament laws died with him. Animal sacrifices were no longer necessary as a sacrifice for sins. You could eat all animals including hoofed animals. Death was no longer necessary in any form of punishment for any crime as the price was paid for sinful people and their actions. With that said it is stupid for Atheists to keep bringing up the punishment for Old testament laws including stoning and death since they have been irrelevant for over 2000 years and will never be used again for any reason. God sent Jesus as a sacrifice and a prophet to the people.It was Gods wishes for Jesus to die for the people.Jesus himself even said in Matthew 26:39 "And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. Jesus knew he was going to die.He spoke about it many many times long before he was crucified. Mark 10:32-34 Taking the twelve disciples aside, Jesus once more began to describe everything that was about to happen to him in Jerusalem. "When we get to Jerusalem," he told them, "the Son of Man will be betrayed to the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. They will sentence him to die and hand him over to the Romans. They will mock him, spit on him, beat him with their whips, and kill him, but after three days he will rise again." (NLT) Mark 10:43-45 Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be the slave of all. For even I, the Son of Man, came here not to be served but to serve others, and to give my life as a ransom for many." (NLT) You also fail to realize Jesus had all the power in the world to do anything he wanted.Jesus could have moved mountains if he wanted to.He raised dead people!He had so many people following him everywhere he went the witnesses say it would be impossible to count them all.People hated the Roman empire and Jesus could have easily formed a Army and overtaken the Roman empire with little ease.Nobody could stop him.One of his apostles even told Jesus he should take over the Roman empire for the way they treated Israel but Jesus rejected the idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well this is a debate.Are you going to post facts that claim World war one and two were started because of Religious reasons?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian terrorism - Definition Terrorism General Definition Conventions Counterterrorism Criticisms Lists Groups Incidents Types Nationalist Religious Left-wing Right-wing State Islamist Ethnic Narcoterrorism Domestic Anarchist Political Eco-terrorism Christian Tactics Hijacking Assassination Car bombing Suicide bombing Kidnapping Bioterrorism Nuclear terrorism Cyber-terrorism Internet Configurations Fronts Independent actors General Acts of Christian terrorism are terrorist acts carried out by self-professed Christian groups and individuals. Examples include the abortion clinic bombing by Eric Robert Rudolph, said to be a member of the extremist Christian Identity movement and murder of physicians who provide abortions, such as James Charles Kopp's shooting of Dr. Barnett Slepian. Christian terrorism differs significantly from Islamic terrorism and other forms of religious terrorism both in organization and popular appeal within the respective religious communities. Political and economic differences between countries with large Christian populations and those with large Islamic populations may explain the different faces of religious terrorism worldwide. As with most types of religious terrorism, mainstream believers typically consider acts by "Christian terrorists" to be egregious violations of Christian ethics. The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by non-members. Modern Christian leaders regularly condemn all acts of terrorism, including those perpetuated by self-professed Christian terrorists. Critics observe that this is a marked change from the often-bloody history of Christianity, which is laden with violent Crusades, inquisitions, and witchhunts. Past and present terrorism Because the definition of terrorism is controversial, any list of acts of Christian terrorism will necessarily be controversial. Some point to the Crusades as the first example of large-scale Christian terrorist acts, while others argue that they were military campaigns. Although their official primary function was to (re)capture the "Holy Land" from various Muslim princes, it is generally recognized that they had several secondary functions including spreading Christianity, in a form of violent missionary policy. Some argue that because the conversion of "unbelievers" was an important motivator behind the Crusades, the Crusades were religiously motivated terrorism. Today, groups that commit acts that can be called Christian terrorism are often not exclusively motivated by their beliefs about Christianity. Often, their activites are rooted in pre-existing mutual hatred, such as the case is with the conflict in Northern Ireland, which has roots traceable as far back as medieval England. While some of the Christian terrorist groups active today may be motivated by the prospect of converting subjects to join their faith, others have territorial/political motives for fighting. Still others have more in common with Nazi ideology than with religious ideology, and work primarily with racist ideals, such as white supremacy. The Christian Identity movement is an example. Some critics of the 2003 Invasion in Iraq claim that the United States, as a demographically Christian nation, is engaged in acts of state terrorism with a Christian bent. Reports of violence against non-combattants (which are often hotly disputed) are sometimes cited as evidence of this claim. In the United States, the most frequent examples of Christian terrorism include the bombing of abortion clinics and the murder of abortion providers by (ocasionally self-professed Christian) anti-abortion extremists. This is nothing but a bunch of nothing about nothing. You know why there is and never will be Christian terrorist groups in this world?Because anything these people do taking innocent lives is not backed up in the bible,supported by the bible,endorced by the bible,or justified in the bible.The bible specifically commands us "not to kill". Even if this fluff you posted had some value to it I could count on one had your supposed Christian terrorist. These people are no more of a danger then anyone else with mental problems. If you are going to die by someone in this world due to terrorism it will either be by a Muslim or a Atheist. where you getting atheist at? all terrorist are religious based... Wars start with acts of terrorism.I will gladly supply you with a body count of Wars started by atheist if you like. I also find it hard to believe you will find terrorism in Christianity,Hinduism,and Buddhism,which make up some of the biggest religions in the world. World war one,World war 2,Vietnam war,Korea war How do you see it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about that for a start? 1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million 2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million 3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million 4. Pol Pot – around 1 million i thought we were talking terroism? they were leaders, they fought in wars.. you do know what terrorism means right? just in case, here is the meaning: ter·ror·ism audio (tr-rzm) KEY NOUN: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. No we are talking about why people are getting killed for any reason due to what those people who are killing them believe. I also don't see how a Nazi pulling you out of your house and shooting you in your head is any different then a terrorist cutting a mans head off with a knife. i'm still trying to figure out what an atheist terrorist is... Moe your just acting dumb and wasting time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it is safe to say Atheist and other than Christian are responsible for the massive body count. http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html The worst genocides of the 20th Century Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,000 Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) 23,000,000 (the purges plus Ukraine's famine) Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) 12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians WWII) Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908) 8,000,000 Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44) 5,000,000 (civilians in WWII) Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-20) 1,200,000 Armenians (1915) + 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks (1916-22) + 500,000 Assyrians (1915-20) Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000 Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94) 1.6 million (purges and concentration camps) Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78) 1,500,000 Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970) 1,000,000 Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982) 900,000 Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994) 800,000 Suharto (East Timor, West Papua, Communists, 1966-98) 800,000 Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88) 600,000 Tito (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987) 570,000 Fumimaro Konoe (Japan, 1937-39) 500,000? (Chinese civilians) Jonas Savimbi (Angola, 1975-2002) 400,000 Mullah Omar - Taliban (Afghanistan, 1986-2001) 400,000 Idi Amin (Uganda, 1969-1979) 300,000 Yahya Khan (Pakistan, 1970-71) 300,000 (Bangladesh) Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Libya, 1934-45; Yugoslavia, WWII) 300,000 Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire, 1965-97) ? Charles Taylor (Liberia, 1989-1996) 220,000 Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000) 200,000 Michel Micombero (Burundi, 1972) 150,000 Slobodan Milosevic (Yugoslavia, 1992-99) 100,000 Hassan Turabi (Sudan, 1989-1999) 100,000 Jean-Bedel Bokassa (Centrafrica, 1966-79) ? Richard Nixon (Vietnam, 1969-1974) 70,000 (Vietnamese and Cambodian civilians) Efrain Rios Montt (Guatemala, 1982-83) 70,000 Papa Doc Duvalier (Haiti, 1957-71) 60,000 Hissene Habre (Chad, 1982-1990) 40,000 Chiang Kai-shek (Taiwan, 1947) 30,000 (popular uprising) Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 (dissidents executed) Francisco Franco (Spain) 30,000 (dissidents executed after the civil war) Fidel Castro (Cuba, 1959-1999) 30,000 Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam, 1963-1968) 30,000 Hafez Al-Assad (Syria, 1980-2000) 25,000 Khomeini (Iran, 1979-89) 20,000 Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe, 1982-87, Ndebele minority) 20,000 Rafael Videla (Argentina, 1976-83) 13,000 Guy Mollet (France, 1956-1957) 10,000 (war in Algeria) Harold McMillans (Britain, 1952-56, Kenya's Mau-Mau rebellion) 10,000 Paul Koroma (Sierra Leone, 1997) 6,000 Osama Bin Laden (worldwide, 1993-2001) 3,500 Augusto Pinochet (Chile, 1973) 3,000 Al Zarqawi (Iraq, 2004-06) 2,000 ( your just listing people that killed other people... show me where there are atheist terrorist... I am not going to hold your hald and explain to you that Stalin was a Atheist,Kim Il Sung was a Atheist,Pol pot,and the rest of the list. The bigger picture here is that they were not Christians starting Wars in the name of Christianity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian terrorism - Definition Terrorism General Definition Conventions Counterterrorism Criticisms Lists Groups Incidents Types Nationalist Religious Left-wing Right-wing State Islamist Ethnic Narcoterrorism Domestic Anarchist Political Eco-terrorism Christian Tactics Hijacking Assassination Car bombing Suicide bombing Kidnapping Bioterrorism Nuclear terrorism Cyber-terrorism Internet Configurations Fronts Independent actors General Acts of Christian terrorism are terrorist acts carried out by self-professed Christian groups and individuals. Examples include the abortion clinic bombing by Eric Robert Rudolph, said to be a member of the extremist Christian Identity movement and murder of physicians who provide abortions, such as James Charles Kopp's shooting of Dr. Barnett Slepian. Christian terrorism differs significantly from Islamic terrorism and other forms of religious terrorism both in organization and popular appeal within the respective religious communities. Political and economic differences between countries with large Christian populations and those with large Islamic populations may explain the different faces of religious terrorism worldwide. As with most types of religious terrorism, mainstream believers typically consider acts by "Christian terrorists" to be egregious violations of Christian ethics. The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by non-members. Modern Christian leaders regularly condemn all acts of terrorism, including those perpetuated by self-professed Christian terrorists. Critics observe that this is a marked change from the often-bloody history of Christianity, which is laden with violent Crusades, inquisitions, and witchhunts. Past and present terrorism Because the definition of terrorism is controversial, any list of acts of Christian terrorism will necessarily be controversial. Some point to the Crusades as the first example of large-scale Christian terrorist acts, while others argue that they were military campaigns. Although their official primary function was to (re)capture the "Holy Land" from various Muslim princes, it is generally recognized that they had several secondary functions including spreading Christianity, in a form of violent missionary policy. Some argue that because the conversion of "unbelievers" was an important motivator behind the Crusades, the Crusades were religiously motivated terrorism. Today, groups that commit acts that can be called Christian terrorism are often not exclusively motivated by their beliefs about Christianity. Often, their activites are rooted in pre-existing mutual hatred, such as the case is with the conflict in Northern Ireland, which has roots traceable as far back as medieval England. While some of the Christian terrorist groups active today may be motivated by the prospect of converting subjects to join their faith, others have territorial/political motives for fighting. Still others have more in common with Nazi ideology than with religious ideology, and work primarily with racist ideals, such as white supremacy. The Christian Identity movement is an example. Some critics of the 2003 Invasion in Iraq claim that the United States, as a demographically Christian nation, is engaged in acts of state terrorism with a Christian bent. Reports of violence against non-combattants (which are often hotly disputed) are sometimes cited as evidence of this claim. In the United States, the most frequent examples of Christian terrorism include the bombing of abortion clinics and the murder of abortion providers by (ocasionally self-professed Christian) anti-abortion extremists. This is nothing but a bunch of nothing about nothing. You know why there is and never will be Christian terrorist groups in this world?Because anything these people do taking innocent lives is not backed up in the bible,supported by the bible,endorced by the bible,or justified in the bible.The bible specifically commands us "not to kill". Even if this fluff you posted had some value to it I could count on one had your supposed Christian terrorist. These people are no more of a danger then anyone else with mental problems. If you are going to die by someone in this world due to terrorism it will either be by a Muslim or a Atheist. where you getting atheist at? all terrorist are religious based... Wars start with acts of terrorism.I will gladly supply you with a body count of Wars started by atheist if you like. I also find it hard to believe you will find terrorism in Christianity,Hinduism,and Buddhism,which make up some of the biggest religions in the world. World war one,World war 2,Vietnam war,Korea war |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about that for a start? 1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million 2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million 3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million 4. Pol Pot – around 1 million i thought we were talking terroism? they were leaders, they fought in wars.. you do know what terrorism means right? just in case, here is the meaning: ter·ror·ism audio (tr-rzm) KEY NOUN: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. No we are talking about why people are getting killed for any reason due to what those people who are killing them believe. I also don't see how a Nazi pulling you out of your house and shooting you in your head is any different then a terrorist cutting a mans head off with a knife. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it is safe to say Atheist and other than Christian are responsible for the massive body count.
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html The worst genocides of the 20th Century Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,000 Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) 23,000,000 (the purges plus Ukraine's famine) Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) 12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians WWII) Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908) 8,000,000 Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44) 5,000,000 (civilians in WWII) Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-20) 1,200,000 Armenians (1915) + 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks (1916-22) + 500,000 Assyrians (1915-20) Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000 Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94) 1.6 million (purges and concentration camps) Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78) 1,500,000 Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970) 1,000,000 Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982) 900,000 Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994) 800,000 Suharto (East Timor, West Papua, Communists, 1966-98) 800,000 Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88) 600,000 Tito (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987) 570,000 Fumimaro Konoe (Japan, 1937-39) 500,000? (Chinese civilians) Jonas Savimbi (Angola, 1975-2002) 400,000 Mullah Omar - Taliban (Afghanistan, 1986-2001) 400,000 Idi Amin (Uganda, 1969-1979) 300,000 Yahya Khan (Pakistan, 1970-71) 300,000 (Bangladesh) Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Libya, 1934-45; Yugoslavia, WWII) 300,000 Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire, 1965-97) ? Charles Taylor (Liberia, 1989-1996) 220,000 Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000) 200,000 Michel Micombero (Burundi, 1972) 150,000 Slobodan Milosevic (Yugoslavia, 1992-99) 100,000 Hassan Turabi (Sudan, 1989-1999) 100,000 Jean-Bedel Bokassa (Centrafrica, 1966-79) ? Richard Nixon (Vietnam, 1969-1974) 70,000 (Vietnamese and Cambodian civilians) Efrain Rios Montt (Guatemala, 1982-83) 70,000 Papa Doc Duvalier (Haiti, 1957-71) 60,000 Hissene Habre (Chad, 1982-1990) 40,000 Chiang Kai-shek (Taiwan, 1947) 30,000 (popular uprising) Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 (dissidents executed) Francisco Franco (Spain) 30,000 (dissidents executed after the civil war) Fidel Castro (Cuba, 1959-1999) 30,000 Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam, 1963-1968) 30,000 Hafez Al-Assad (Syria, 1980-2000) 25,000 Khomeini (Iran, 1979-89) 20,000 Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe, 1982-87, Ndebele minority) 20,000 Rafael Videla (Argentina, 1976-83) 13,000 Guy Mollet (France, 1956-1957) 10,000 (war in Algeria) Harold McMillans (Britain, 1952-56, Kenya's Mau-Mau rebellion) 10,000 Paul Koroma (Sierra Leone, 1997) 6,000 Osama Bin Laden (worldwide, 1993-2001) 3,500 Augusto Pinochet (Chile, 1973) 3,000 Al Zarqawi (Iraq, 2004-06) 2,000 ( |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about that for a start? 1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million 2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million 3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million 4. Pol Pot – around 1 million Nice copy and paste from a Christian site, I saw it myself. 
Hitler was raised Christian so you have to take him off the list. They are only terrorists if Bush was one too and every other war president we had. Leaders in war are terrorists by my estimation but I don't think they are officially considered terrorists. So you are telling me after Hitler blamed the Jews for all of Germanys problems,ordered all Jewish books burned,ordered all Jewish stores closed,and killed the Jews by the millions.Hitler is going to go to a Christian church and bow down and pray to the King of the Jews Jesus christ?Hitler is also going to listen to some pastor reading bible verses from the Old testament written by Jews for Jews? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about that for a start?
1. Adolf Hitler – around 11 million 2. Joseph Stalin – anywhere from 20 to 100 million 3. Chairman Mao Zedong – 50 to 70 million 4. Pol Pot – around 1 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is some information on one of your so called Christian terrorist groups.Funny how I didn't see a single word metioned about Jesus,or the bible or even Christianity for that matter.
http://www.answers.com/topic/irish-republican-army IRA (Irish Republican Army). The IRA emerged out of the Irish Volunteer organization established in 1913 to exert pressure on the British government to grant Home Rule for Ireland. After 1914 it was taken over by an older revolutionary nationalist organization, the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB), dedicated to the establishment of a unitary Irish republic by force of arms. In the 1916 Easter Rising the rebel forces were declared to be the Army of the Irish Republic, but the term IRA did not come into use until after the Declaration of Independence in 1919. Officially the organization remained Ogláich na hÉireann (Irish Volunteers). Under the leadership of Michael Collins, Richard Mulcahy, and Harry Boland, the traditional IRB policy of insurrection was replaced by a guerrilla strategy. The keystone of the organization was the local company or battalion; brigades (one to three per county) were shadowier formations, and the divisions introduced in 1921 existed mainly on paper. Local energy in pursuit of weapons, skill in the use of explosives, and determination to engage the British police and military forces, were indispensable. Despite chivvying from Headquarters in Dublin, many if not most areas of Ireland remained quiescent—usually pleading shortage of arms and ammunition—throughout the fighting that lasted from the ambush at Soloheadbeg in January 1919 to the Truce in July 1921. The most aggressive units were in the south-west (Cork, Kerry, Tipperary, Limerick, Clare) and in Dublin itself. The IRA campaign impelled the government to negotiate but could not compel it to concede Irish independence. When the Anglo-Irish Treaty was signed, accepting partition and non-republican status for the Irish Free State, a number of local IRA commanders believed that they could still fight on to achieve a unitary republic. The IRA split over the issue, and civil war followed. The IRA Council emerged as the ultimate republican authority. Defeat in the civil war reduced the IRA to sporadic attempts to restart its campaign in the 1930s and 1950s. The eruption of the conflict in Northern Ireland in 1969 caught it unprepared, and in 1971 a breakaway group—the Provisional IRA (PIRA) —returned to the traditional policy of force. In Belfast and Derry, rural-style guerrilla operations were difficult and the PIRA devoted much of its energy to urban bombing. Its old territorial organization was partly replaced with a cellular structure. After a campaign lasting over 25 years, it reversed its longstanding repudiation of politics, declaring a ‘cessation of operations’ to allow its political wing Sinn Fein, under the leadership of Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams, to participate in constitutional negotiations. At the time of writing the future of the peace process seems uncertain, with the issue of the ‘decommissioning’ of IRA weapons and explosives a stumbling block in negotiations. The process has emphasized the IRA's insistence that it is indeed an army whose campaign has been legitimate, and whose premature relinquishing of weapons would smack of surrender. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christian terrorism - Definition Terrorism General Definition Conventions Counterterrorism Criticisms Lists Groups Incidents Types Nationalist Religious Left-wing Right-wing State Islamist Ethnic Narcoterrorism Domestic Anarchist Political Eco-terrorism Christian Tactics Hijacking Assassination Car bombing Suicide bombing Kidnapping Bioterrorism Nuclear terrorism Cyber-terrorism Internet Configurations Fronts Independent actors General Acts of Christian terrorism are terrorist acts carried out by self-professed Christian groups and individuals. Examples include the abortion clinic bombing by Eric Robert Rudolph, said to be a member of the extremist Christian Identity movement and murder of physicians who provide abortions, such as James Charles Kopp's shooting of Dr. Barnett Slepian. Christian terrorism differs significantly from Islamic terrorism and other forms of religious terrorism both in organization and popular appeal within the respective religious communities. Political and economic differences between countries with large Christian populations and those with large Islamic populations may explain the different faces of religious terrorism worldwide. As with most types of religious terrorism, mainstream believers typically consider acts by "Christian terrorists" to be egregious violations of Christian ethics. The violent Christian Identity movement, for instance, is regarded as a highly un-Christian organization by non-members. Modern Christian leaders regularly condemn all acts of terrorism, including those perpetuated by self-professed Christian terrorists. Critics observe that this is a marked change from the often-bloody history of Christianity, which is laden with violent Crusades, inquisitions, and witchhunts. Past and present terrorism Because the definition of terrorism is controversial, any list of acts of Christian terrorism will necessarily be controversial. Some point to the Crusades as the first example of large-scale Christian terrorist acts, while others argue that they were military campaigns. Although their official primary function was to (re)capture the "Holy Land" from various Muslim princes, it is generally recognized that they had several secondary functions including spreading Christianity, in a form of violent missionary policy. Some argue that because the conversion of "unbelievers" was an important motivator behind the Crusades, the Crusades were religiously motivated terrorism. Today, groups that commit acts that can be called Christian terrorism are often not exclusively motivated by their beliefs about Christianity. Often, their activites are rooted in pre-existing mutual hatred, such as the case is with the conflict in Northern Ireland, which has roots traceable as far back as medieval England. While some of the Christian terrorist groups active today may be motivated by the prospect of converting subjects to join their faith, others have territorial/political motives for fighting. Still others have more in common with Nazi ideology than with religious ideology, and work primarily with racist ideals, such as white supremacy. The Christian Identity movement is an example. Some critics of the 2003 Invasion in Iraq claim that the United States, as a demographically Christian nation, is engaged in acts of state terrorism with a Christian bent. Reports of violence against non-combattants (which are often hotly disputed) are sometimes cited as evidence of this claim. In the United States, the most frequent examples of Christian terrorism include the bombing of abortion clinics and the murder of abortion providers by (ocasionally self-professed Christian) anti-abortion extremists. This is nothing but a bunch of nothing about nothing. You know why there is and never will be Christian terrorist groups in this world?Because anything these people do taking innocent lives is not backed up in the bible,supported by the bible,endorced by the bible,or justified in the bible.The bible specifically commands us "not to kill". Even if this fluff you posted had some value to it I could count on one had your supposed Christian terrorist. These people are no more of a danger then anyone else with mental problems. If you are going to die by someone in this world due to terrorism it will either be by a Muslim or a Atheist. where you getting atheist at? all terrorist are religious based... Wars start with acts of terrorism.I will gladly supply you with a body count of Wars started by atheist if you like. I also find it hard to believe you will find terrorism in Christianity,Hinduism,and Buddhism,which make up some of the biggest religions in the world. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
