Evangelical Disconnect

[garage sale GT]

Flip on Faux News sometime and watch Bush and his crusade against Islam.

It is very much different. Evangelical christians define "achieving the lifestyle they want" as restricting the rights of others to achieve the lifestyles they want.

In the latest news, conservative loons in West Virginia are attempting to ban Pat Conroy's books.

Nope, still there. How coud I have quoted it otherwise? You can only delete posts for a few hours.

 

[limerickman]

Only if you tell me where I brought up the war.

If you insist :

13/5/08 10:11am

They are just invading other countries and killing hundreds of thousands of people. That is so much better.

No mention of Iraq.

13/5/08 5:48pm

Who would have thought you were referring to the Iraq war, instead of the noise some are making about ilsamo-fascism.

You know, Iraq was one of the most secular societies from the Muslim world. It is speculated that one of the reasons George H.W. Bush (Bush 1) left Saddam in power in 1991 was to counterbalance the power of Iran in the region.

Whatever you have to say about the current war, to say it's about fundamentalists persecuting muslims is a little ridiculous.

You know, we had Muqtada Al-Sadr and his Maahdi army trapped in a mosque at one point. If it's a holy war why didn't the Marines just obliterate it with artillery?

Is that crayon clear enough for you?




Now I suggest you starting answering some direct questions which the membership is putting to you - instead of scribbling your usual nonsense.

 

[limerickman]

I do not claim it was entirely secular or atheistic.

You claimed earlier that Iraq was secular.


Now you say it's not entirely secular.


So why claim that Iraq was secular (earlier)?

 

[Crankyfeet]

Nope, still there. How coud I have quoted it otherwise? You can only delete posts for a few hours.

Dude... "Bush and his crusade against Islam" on "Faux" news is not a direct mention of Iraq.

Don't Iran and Al Qaida... not to mention Hamas, also fall under the Islamic banner?


In some relation to the OP, the point, if I'm not mistaken, is the disconnect between the motives and actions of the so-called Christian right-wing in the USA (Evangelicals are a prominent subset) and the teachings of Christ. What happened to the peace, love for others, turn the other cheek, blessed are the meek, and a host of other teachings that seem to be lost in the nationalism and groupthink of militant reprisal?

The point is not the merits of military aggression as a tactic/strategy... but how it is consistent with the teachings of Christ.

 

[garage sale GT]

Dude... "Bush and his crusade against Islam" on "Faux" news is not a direct mention of Iraq.

Don't Iran and Al Qaida... not to mention Hamas, also fall under the Islamic banner?


In some relation to the OP, the point, if I'm not mistaken, is the disconnect between the motives and actions of the so-called Christian right-wing in the USA (Evangelicals are a prominent subset) and the teachings of Christ. What happened to the peace, love for others, turn the other cheek, blessed are the meek, and a host of other teachings that seem to be lost in the nationalism and groupthink of militant reprisal?

The point is not the merits of military aggression as a tactic/strategy... but how it is consistent with the teachings of Christ.

Dude, I didn't think so either!

But how did he react to it when I questioned him on it? Do you recall him bringing up an invasion in which hundreds of thousands died? Where else are we currently invading if not Iraq? Therefore, what was he referring to in the comment about Faux news & the crusade against Islam?

(except for Afghanistan, which actually held the terrorist organization who had killed 3000 civilians in lower Manhattan. Whether or not they had anything to do with Iraq, they were in Afghanistan, hence, it was not a war against Islam but a response to direct aggression.)

You all are playing with me, aren't you? You emailed one another and said "let's drive the guy nuts by pretending not to understand!"

Who's on first?

 

[garage sale GT]

You claimed earlier that Iraq was secular.


Now you say it's not entirely secular.


So why claim that Iraq was secular (earlier)?

I said it was more secular than societies which are run by clerics. Do you understand the subtle difference between more secular and completely secular?

 

[garage sale GT]

If you insist :

13/5/08 10:11am


No mention of Iraq.

13/5/08 5:48pm


Is that crayon clear enough for you?




Now I suggest you starting answering some direct questions which the membership is putting to you - instead of scribbling your usual nonsense.

So, what invasion was Bro Deal referring to? Where else have we invaded, where hundreds of thousands have died?

Besides Afghanistan, a country which housed the terrorist organization which killed 3000 New Yorkers, of course. Tell me, what country was he referring to?

 

[Crankyfeet]

So, what invasion was Bro Deal referring to? Where else have we invaded, where hundreds of thousands have died?

Besides Afghanistan, a country which housed the terrorist organization which killed 3000 New Yorkers, of course. Tell me, what country was he referring to?

**** you're right... now answer the question you keep ducking.

 

[TheDarkLord]

There seems to be a tendency among some people to speak confidently/assertively and keep ducking the question in hand. Sort of like the way Kevin James did in that video posted in FID. So, I'm quite skeptical that garage sale will ever answer the question.

 

[Crankyfeet]

After you've kindly answered Lim's question, Garage sale, can you take a stab at this one:

Since Christians believe that Christ is the way, the truth, and the light, and the path to Heaven... are all Islamic peoples going to Hell from a Christian perspective?

 

[garage sale GT]

**** you're right... now answer the question you keep ducking.

Actually, I simply did not allow Limerickman to misdirect the discussion; I didn't duck anything. Should we maybe go on to some new point anytime he raises an objection he doesn't want to stick by? I never claimed to be a Christian, though you all may be on to me by now. The positions I took could well have been taken by a member of a different faith or an atheist, who knew a bit about Christianity and took an interest in the discussion. Hence I want to point out that Lim's question was a fairly transparent misdirect.

Now then. The reason the Iraq war is a grave sin against humanity is because GWB's people botched the occupation planning.

I cannot comment on the Popes' objection, or the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Methodist church's objections because I don't have any idea what they are based on.

The morality of the war rests entirely upon whether or not Saddam's announcement that he would readmit inspectors was a ploy or not. I don't know if it was, so I have to say "I don't know". He would of course not only have to admit them but to give them enough freedom to do their job, which he did not fully do in the period from the first gulf war to 1998.

Is it a crime not to wait for the rest of the world, just because we had agreed to remain indefinitely "seized of the matter"? (UN 1441) Hell, no. The timeline was left open to interpretation.

Of course it would have been a justification to find an ongoing wmd program, but some online sources claim even the limited inspections Saddam allowed until 1998 knew of massive stocks of weapons-grade anthrax. Post-invasion inspections were unable to prove or disprove that they had been destroyed at the claimed site.

 

[garage sale GT]

After you've kindly answered Lim's question, Garage sale, can you take a stab at this one:

Since Christians believe that Christ is the way, the truth, and the light, and the path to Heaven... are all Islamic peoples going to Hell from a Christian perspective?

You may do your own theological research.

I don't intend to run myself ragged looking up answers to every one of your puerile objections.

 

[Crankyfeet]

Actually, I simply did not allow Limerickman to misdirect the discussion; I didn't duck anything. Should we maybe go on to some new point anytime he raises an objection he doesn't want to stick by?

Now then. The reason the Iraq war is a grave sin against humanity is because GWB's people botched the occupation planning.

I cannot comment on the Popes' objection, or the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Methodist church's objections because I don't have any idea what they are based on.

The morality of the war rests entirely upon whether or not Saddam's announcement that he would readmit inspectors was a ploy or not. I don't know if it was, so I have to say "I don't know". He would of course not only have to admit them but to give them enough freedom to do their job, which he did not fully do in the period from the first gulf war to 1998.

Is it a crime not to wait for the rest of the world, just because we had agreed to remain indefinitely "seized of the matter"? (UN 1441) Hell, no. The timeline was left open to interpretation.

Of course it would have been a justification to find an ongoing wmd program, but some online sources claim even the limited inspections Saddam allowed until 1998 knew of massive stocks of weapons-grade anthrax. Post-invasion inspections were unable to prove or disprove that they had been destroyed at the claimed site.

I like how the US quotes UN charters... then in the next sentence (metaphorically speaking)... totally de-legitimizes the organization. US does what it wants. The UN is a tool when it agrees with the US and ignored when it disagrees.

Can you imagine hypothetically if the UN decided that they had to do inspections of US facilities on it's own soil, because the UN thought that the US was persuing a Star Wars program against the will of the rest of the world? The US would give them the middle finger.

Read my reasons for the war. If Saddam had WMD, invading Iraq would be the worst strategy. It would be like finding out that a holed up criminal had AK47's on him and then deciding to knock down the front door of his house and storm in.

But you diverge from the point... Is invading another country and killing innocent people in the name of deposing a leader, a Christian thing to do?

 

[Crankyfeet]

You may do your own theological research.

I don't intend to run myself ragged looking up answers to every one of your puerile objections.

Oh how convenient. "Puerile"... . Straight out of the Karl Rove Strategy Book: When you can't debate the message... debase the messenger.

Pray tell me... what part of my conundrum question was immature/childish?

And you shouldn't need to study theology or spend hours finding an answer in the Bible... I gave you the Christain belief in any case. Jesus is the path to Heaven. Therefore those who don't acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God... shouldn't go to heaven right? That includes about 2 billion Chinese and Indians as well.

 

[garage sale GT]

Read my reasons for the war. If Saddam had WMD, invading Iraq would be the worst strategy. It would be like finding out that a holed up criminal had AK47's on him and then deciding to knock down the front door of his house and storm in.

Actually the US armed forces are well prepared for defense against NBC warfare (nuclear, biological, chemical). So much for your objection.

For pete's sake. Haven't you ever heard of gas masks?

 

[Crankyfeet]

Actually the US armed forces are well prepared for defense against NBC warfare (nuclear, biological, chemical). So much for your objection.

For pete's sake. Haven't you ever heard of gas masks?

Israel would have been wiped out in the time it takes a unit to dismount from their Humvees. Gas masks aren't much help against anthrax and many other WMDs.

But once again... back to Lim's question... Is invading another country and killing innocent victims (making the first strike) consistent with Christianity in your view?

 

[garage sale GT]

Oh how convenient. "Puerile"... . Straight out of the Karl Rove Strategy Book: When you can't debate the message... debase the messenger.

Pray tell me... what part of my conundrum question was immature/childish?

And you shouldn't need to study theology or spend hours finding an answer in the Bible... I gave you the Christain belief in any case. Jesus is the path to Heaven. Therefore those who don't acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God... shouldn't go to heaven right? That includes about 2 billion Chinese and Indians as well.

Whether or not you feel that's all there is to it, you may look up theological questions yourself.

 

[garage sale GT]

Israel would have been wiped out in the time it takes a unit to dismount from their Humvees. Gas masks aren't much help against anthrax and many other WMDs.

But once again... back to Lim's question... Is invading another country and killing innocent victims (making the first strike) consistent with Christianity?

If WMDs make you all-potent, why didn't Saddam conquer the world with the ones he had until at least 1998?

What qualifications do you base your assessment on? ( what the hell do you know about wmd's? )

 

[Crankyfeet]

If WMDs make you all-potent, why didn't Saddam conquer the world with the ones he had until at least 1998?

What qualifications do you base your assessment on? ( what the hell do you know about wmd's? )

Obviously a lot more than you if you think gas masks are adequate defence against them.

The point is that when you put a gun against someone's head... then using WMDs might make sense. Saddam knew he was doomed.

Taking out Israel with nuclear missiles, or exploding anthrax on the US troops, as a first strike, would be stupid normally. Can't you see that the US took away the one reason why nuclear armed countries don't use WMDs... by backing a psychopathic dictator into a "cannot escape death" predicament. That is, unless, they knew he didn't possess them...

 

[Crankyfeet]

Whether or not you feel that's all there is to it, you may look up theological questions yourself.

Well it's nice to know that the man so gracious to answer theological questions for umpteen posts previously.... is finally stumped for an answer. Maybe you should ponder it a while... rather than putting your head back in the comfortable warm sand of unreality.

I don't mean to be personal, despite you calling my question "puerile'. But once you invoke religion as a rationale for everything you want to do... all of a sudden logic goes out the window. Only religion could have been used as a reason to cut off the heads of innocent reporters in Iraq... and only religion could have inspired people to fly planes into buildings killing thousands of innocent people... and only religion could have been used as a rationale for nearly wiping out the entire indigenous population of North America. The list can go on.