[IamRose]

Allmost put this in the Attic. Put it here so more could see it.
Move it if you think best.


TOUGH QUESTIONS FOR ISLAM
The Challenge of Fr. Botros
By Chuck Colson

Zakaria Botros is a conservative television star with a huge audience. He is even more hated by his political enemies than Rush Limbaugh and Hillary Clinton put together, if you can believe that. At least one newspaper has labeled Botros: "Public Enemy Number One."

So why haven't you heard about this guy? It is probably because you do not watch Arab television. On channel al-Hayat, or "Life TV," you will find Father Botros, a Coptic priest, discussing theology in a way that embarrasses-and enrages-Muslim leaders. His television talks are leading not only to mass conversions, but to the disempowering of radical Islam.

Recently in National Review Online, Raymond Ibrahim described the work of Father Botros. He is a bearded, bespectacled cleric who sports a large wooden cross, and his specialty is examining "little-known but embarrassing aspects of Islamic law and tradition," Ibrahim writes. Because he speaks and reads classical Arabic, Botros can "report to the average Muslim on the discrepancies" and what Ibrahim calls "the affronts to moral common sense found" within Islamic teachings. Satellite TV and the Internet mean Butros can question Islam's teachings in Arabic-the language of 200 million Muslims-without fear of reprisal.

Drawing on the Socratic method, Botros will ask such questions as: "Are women inferior to men in Islam?" "Did Mohammed [really] say that adulterous female monkeys should be stoned?" And, "Does sharia really teach that women must breastfeed strange men?"

Botros cites chapter and verse, so to speak, of Islamic sources, and then politely invites Islamic scholars to respond. "More often than not," Ibrahim writes, "the response is deafening silence." Even worse, religious experts have at times been forced to agree with Botros-"which has led to some amusing (and embarrassing) moments on live Arabic TV."

Naturally, this drives the sheiks crazy-which is probably why there is a rumored $5 million price on his head.

Botros's ultimate goal is "to draw Muslims away from the dead legalism of sharia law to the spirituality of Christianity." In doing so, he is not only saving souls, but cutting at the very heart of radical Islam.

What Western critics fail to appreciate, Ibrahim says, is that the West will not disempower radical Islam by offering Muslims democracy, capitalism, secularism, materialism, feminism-or any other "ism." Instead, we must offer them "something theocentric and spiritually satisfying."

This is why, at the end of each program, Botros reads from the Bible and invites his listeners to follow Christ. That he is successful in this endeavor is acknowledged by none other than al-Jazeera, which complains of Botros's "unprecedented evangelical raid" on the Muslim world.

Botros offers a great example of why we Christians must learn our own doctrines, along with those of other religions: so that we can lovingly reason with people and draw them into the kingdom of God.

Tune in tomorrow for more on how you can witness to Muslims-even if you do not star in your own television show. And do not forget to pray for the safety of "Public Enemy Number One," who is doing a great work for the kingdom-in the heart of radical Islam.

This is part one of a two-part series

[Dave D.]

Good article. Thanks for posting it.

Botros's ultimate goal is "to draw Muslims away from the dead legalism of sharia law to the spirituality of Christianity." In doing so, he is not only saving souls, but cutting at the very heart of radical Islam.
Indeed.

To get a good idea of just how dead that "dead legalism of sharia law" is, just go to one of the "online fatwa" web sites like Ask The Imam (http://islam.tc/ask-imam/index.php) and check out some of the questions and answers. The "Manners" (http://www.islam.tc/cgi-bin/askimam/cat.pl?c=Manners%20(Aadaab)) section there, for instance, is a real riot, with such gems as "Is it permissible to install both the shower and the commode (toilet seat) in the same bathroom?", "Is it permissable to take a shower while standing, or is it only permissable to bath while sitting?", "How bad is it peeing while standing?" and much, much more.

Reading such stuff always gives me a creepy feeling that the main effect of Islamic devotion is to rob the individual of all moral sense; and that the more devout the Muslim, the less able he is to make even the simplest distinctions between right and wrong on his own except by consulting some canonical list of utterly arbitrary (and nonsensical) Islamic do's and don't's.

Christianity implants an inner sense of right and wrong, and lays down a foundation for moral and spiritual development. Islam does nothing more than manufacture mindless, amoral robots.

[Barkley]

Good article. Thanks for posting it.

Reading such stuff always gives me a creepy feeling that the main effect of Islamic devotion is to rob the individual of all moral sense; and that the more devout the Muslim, the less able he is to make even the simplest distinctions between right and wrong on his own except by consulting some canonical list of utterly arbitrary (and nonsensical) Islamic do's and don't's.

What it does is remove all thought. You can't decide anything for yourself, you're completely controlled in every facet of your life. It's called brain washing and they're better at it than Hitler and Stalin every dreamed of.

[tc556guy]

Good article. Thanks for posting it.


Christianity implants an inner sense of right and wrong, and lays down a foundation for moral and spiritual development. Islam does nothing more than manufacture mindless, amoral robots.
Christianity has its own share of morality police who try to control every aspect of private behavior when given the opportunity to do so. In the end I'm not sure theres much of a difference between the two.

[Saunders]

I think there is a great deal of truth in that but at least we are generally able to fend off much of the intrusiveness by our legal system.

Moslems use both the legal system and violence to achieve goals.

[OFallon]

As we have come to know it, fundamentalism is no good, in any religion, in my opinion.

[Saunders]

I think it all would be much less of a problem if we did not have active, big government.

[IamRose]

The difference in the two religions is in that christians can open our book and show where forcably converting someone is just wrong.

My personal view is that everyone has the opurtunity to hear the gospel, then what they do with it is thier business. (that whole personal responsability thing ya know?)
I consider my self a fundementalist, tho I am sure some consider me a heritic. That's ok.


Saunder, I belive you are right in that our laws here protect us, right now, from having anyones religion forced on us. Or from being forced to not pratice our personal faith.

I don't see that lasting tho.

[tc556guy]

Saunder, I belive you are right in that our laws here protect us, right now, from having anyones religion forced on us.

If that happens, it will because of the Fundamentalists who insist the country is a Christian nation.

Or from being forced to not pratice our personal faith.

I don't see that lasting tho.

I honestly don't see that ever happening, as long as the religious folks understand that their choice of religions is a personal matter best left for observing at home and in their place of worship. The public realm is by neccesity a secular environment because you have so many competing beliefs. You can't favor one over another.

[IamRose]

If that happens, it will because of the Fundamentalists who insist the country is a Christian nation.

Anyone can deny it all they want, but our nation was founded on Judeo Christian laws. We are however now a 'post Christian' scociety.


I honestly don't see that ever happening, as long as the religious folks understand that their choice of religions is a personal matter best left for observing at home and in their place of worship. The public realm is by neccesity a secular environment because you have so many competing beliefs. You can't favor one over another.

A fundementel part of being a Christian is telling the truth. When a believer tells someone that the result of thier actions is death, we are now threatend with prosecution of a hate crime. I'm sorry if it offends anyone, but telling someone the bridge is out on the road they are on is NOT an act of hate, it is loving them enough to want them to turn around, and live.


I'm sorry you seem to have not encounterd any real Christians, just those who want to use thier set of laws to push people around.

[Dave D.]

Christianity has its own share of morality police who try to control every aspect of private behavior when given the opportunity to do so. In the end I'm not sure theres much of a difference between the two.
That's true; no argument there. But it's been my experience that those Christian morality police are rather few in number. And as Saunders points out (#5), our legal system allows us to fend off much of their intrusiveness.

That intrusiveness is further blunted by Christianity's having accepted, over the course of the last few hundred years, that society can and will impose limits on that intrusiveness, and it has internalized the notion that those limits are be respected.

It has made a crucial transition, one in which "submission to the will of God" no longer means submission to the whim of Man. Islam, though, has made no such transition-- not even the bare beginnings of one-- and I doubt it ever will, because the notion of "believers" controlling "infidels" (ruling them with an iron fist, and slaughtering them at will) is intrinsic to it.

And finally, when it comes to people wanting to control every aspect of other people's behavior, religion scarcely has a monopoly; the desire to control seems universal and I reckon there's a long list of secular "-isms" afoot in our society that pose much, MUCH more danger to my freedom, my happiness and my sanity than Christians-- fundamentalists included-- ever will.

That's the way I see it, anyway.

[will46]

When Christianity had great secular power, that power was abused. We all know about the inquisition, witch trials, burning Joan of Arc, etc, etc.

But that was a long time ago. Practically speaking, Christians have given up that power. As much as the preachers may rant, they have no expectations of jailing or killing anyone who fails to heed their words. I'm not saying they might not be tempted to do so :D, but they have given up that power, and humanity is better off for it.

Not so Islam. Separation of church and state is expressly forbidden. Power, including the power of life and death, is expected to be wielded in support of the faith.

I think that's a pretty big difference. I am far from a religious fundamentalist, but I can never support anyone who says that fundamentalist Christians are "just like" fundamentalist Moslems. It just isn't true.

[Saunders]

It has not been that long...within my lifetime that a person could be jailed for breaking laws that were based upon the prevailing religious persuasion.

The Blue Laws are a prime example and they did not go away until the 1950. Same with the sale of liquor, sin tax concepts, gambling bans and the like. The practice of birth control between a married couple was illegal in a number of states until SCOTUS struck down such laws in 1967.

Similar modern efforts may be more dressed up today with secular arguments to justify laws, bans and regulation but the fact is their derivation was clearly driven by religion.

[will46]

It has not been that long...within my lifetime that a person could be jailed for breaking laws that were based upon the prevailing religious persuasion.

The Blue Laws are a prime example and they did not go away until the 1950. Same with the sale of liquor, sin tax concepts, gambling bans and the like. The practice of birth control between a married couple was illegal in a number of states until SCOTUS struck down such laws in 1967.

Similar modern efforts may be more dressed up today with secular arguments to justify laws, bans and regulation but the fact is their derivation was clearly driven by religion.
You have a point, but I'd counter with two observations.

First, just because a religion prohibits something does not mean that religion is the sole basis for a similar law. Robbery is prohibited by one of the 10 commandments, but it's against the law not for that reason alone. Certainly society has a legitimate reason to prohibit robbery independent of the commandments.

Second, I'd just repeat an earlier point. Similarity is not equivalence. Even in your best example of a law based almost solely in religion, the prohibition of birth control, as far as I know no one was ever stoned to death for using a condom.

Don't get me wrong, I think these semi-religious laws in the US are bad ideas. I just don't think the notion that somehow there is an equivalence between fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam can hold up.

IMHO.:)

[Saunders]

I think we know why many of those laws were passed and it was not similar to the widely held belief that killing or stealing is wrong.

No one pretended otherwise until those justifications no longer flew legally. Now they dress them up with other arguments about crime, traffic, stress on the local infrastructure and the like. The Moslems are either too arrogant to do this or not fully sophisticated in playing the game.

[stanmaxkolbe]

Well getting back to the OT. I usually hang out at forums at Catholic.com.

What I notice is the same thing Fr. Botros has experienced.

When people who are secular, atheists, liberal Catholics, or other Christians that hates the Catholic Church say some untrue stuff about the Catholic Church or Christianity. An example is lets say a liberal Catholic that is pro-death or a Christian that says Catholics worship Mary or statues once you give them the facts they usually don’t come back on the thread and respond to the facts.

Maybe the truth hurts.

Bishop Fulton Sheen said in the 1950’s, “There is not a hundred people out there that hates Catholics, But there are millions out there that hate what they think is Catholic.”

To be honest every time President Bush would say, “Islam is a peaceful religion.” I would turn off the TV.

As Americas we were taught in public school British Protestant history. We were never taught that Spain stopped the Muslims. If it weren’t for that Catholic country we would be bowing to Mecca right now.

Of course we were taught how the British defeated the Spanish armada.

We were never taught about the “Battle of Lepanto.” Check out the link:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0703fea2.asp (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0703fea2.asp)

[tc556guy]

A fundementel part of being a Christian is telling the truth. When a believer tells someone that the result of thier actions is death, we are now threatend with prosecution of a hate crime. I'm sorry if it offends anyone, but telling someone the bridge is out on the road they are on is NOT an act of hate, it is loving them enough to want them to turn around, and live.

Thats not a "truth",thats a religious BELIEF. There is a difference. Don't be surprised if people don't agree with your BELIEF, because theirs may differ from yours and be equally as legitimate in their mind.


I'm sorry you seem to have not encounterd any real Christians, just those who want to use thier set of laws to push people around.

Until I was 18 I grew up in about a fundamentalist Baptist church as you'll find anywhere. I consider them to be fairly representative of the Evangelical mindset, not an abnormality.

[tc556guy]

When Christianity had great secular power, that power was abused. We all know about the inquisition, witch trials, burning Joan of Arc, etc, etc.

But that was a long time ago. Practically speaking, Christians have given up that power. As much as the preachers may rant, they have no expectations of jailing or killing anyone who fails to heed their words. I'm not saying they might not be tempted to do so :D, but they have given up that power, and humanity is better off for it.

Not so Islam. Separation of church and state is expressly forbidden. Power, including the power of life and death, is expected to be wielded in support of the faith.

I think that's a pretty big difference. I am far from a religious fundamentalist, but I can never support anyone who says that fundamentalist Christians are "just like" fundamentalist Moslems. It just isn't true.
The Inquisition took place in the Christian religions timeline at about the same time period as the current Islamic fundamentalism is taking place in Islams timeline. I suspect that in another 500 years islam will have moderated itself, just as Christianity moderated itself given another given 500 years to do so. None of us will be around to see that day, however.

[Saunders]

Well getting back to the OT. I usually hang out at forums at Catholic.com.

What I notice is the same thing Fr. Botros has experienced.

When people who are secular, atheists, liberal Catholics, or other Christians that hates the Catholic Church say some untrue stuff about the Catholic Church or Christianity. An example is lets say a liberal Catholic that is pro-death or a Christian that says Catholics worship Mary or statues once you give them the facts they usually don’t come back on the thread and respond to the facts.

Maybe the truth hurts.

Bishop Fulton Sheen said in the 1950’s, “There is not a hundred people out there that hates Catholics, But there are millions out there that hate what they think is Catholic.”

To be honest every time President Bush would say, “Islam is a peaceful religion.” I would turn off the TV.

As Americas we were taught in public school British Protestant history. We were never taught that Spain stopped the Muslims. If it weren’t for that Catholic country we would be bowing to Mecca right now.

Of course we were taught how the British defeated the Spanish armada.

We were never taught about the “Battle of Lepanto.” Check out the link:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0703fea2.asp (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0703fea2.asp)


This post could explain why some non Catholics resent that church as opposed to individual practicioners.

[IamRose]

By tc556guy "
Thats not a "truth",thats a religious BELIEF. There is a difference. Don't be surprised if people don't agree with your BELIEF, because theirs may differ from yours and be equally as legitimate in their mind."

Like I stated in post #8, it is only my place to present the truth.
Anyone can do withit what they want. God dosn't do conscripts.

[stanmaxkolbe]

The Inquisition took place in the Christian religions timeline at about the same time period as the current Islamic fundamentalism is taking place in Islams timeline. I suspect that in another 500 years islam will have moderated itself, just as Christianity moderated itself given another given 500 years to do so. None of us will be around to see that day, however.

Inquisition it depends on what type of “Inquisition” your talking about. Every major city had a inquisition totally secular. There was also Christian [Catholic it was the only Church around back then] inquisitions what I have read was that some people in Spanish prisons would say something blasphemous so they would be transferred to a Christian prison because they were treated better than the regular Spanish prisons.

I will say I have served with Muslim American soldiers; Muslim soldiers from other countries armies and fought by their side. Not all Muslims are wacko’s.

I think the big problem we have in the U.S. is the PC wacko's I mean lets search the little old white lady at the airport but not look a Arab looking guy because it could hurt his feelings.

God Bless-Stan

[tc556guy]

By tc556guy "
Thats not a "truth",thats a religious BELIEF. There is a difference. Don't be surprised if people don't agree with your BELIEF, because theirs may differ from yours and be equally as legitimate in their mind."

Like I stated in post #8, it is only my place to present the truth.
Anyone can do withit what they want. God dosn't do conscripts.
Do you not understand that there is no way to determine the "truth, that what you take to be "the truth" is only your religious belief? There is no way to determine religious "truth" in our lifetimes. Everyone else will NOT share your version of "the truth".

[tc556guy]

Inquisition it depends on what type of “Inquisition” your talking about. Every major city had a inquisition totally secular. There was also Christian [Catholic it was the only Church around back then] inquisitions what I have read was that some people in Spanish prisons would say something blasphemous so they would be transferred to a Christian prison because they were treated better than the regular Spanish prisons.

When used today, the term "Inquisition" generally refers to the religion-based wrongs commited in the name of Christianity several centuries ago.

[stanmaxkolbe]

When used today, the term "Inquisition" generally refers to the religion-based wrongs commited in the name of Christianity several centuries ago.
I agree. It usually means Catholic inquisitions that’s where I go back to the British Protestant history that has been taught to us in our public school system. BTW:welcome: I'm new too.

[Saunders]

British Protestant history, huh? 2X.

Sheesh.

[stanmaxkolbe]

British Protestant history, huh? 2X.

Sheesh.
????

[Saunders]

Yep. I agree. Questionable.

[jamesa]

We are invited by God to pick up the bible and ask for help to learn about salvation, through Jesus Christ,His Holy Spirit will lead you to all truth.
We dont need legalistic lock step teaching by man.
Check out Acts 15, and Galations to begin with.
James.

[Mr T]

:up: Thanks Rose! Good idea putting it here. Maybe we can get more input in the attic now that there has been some outside exposure.

[IamRose]

Absolutly right Jamesa. And God dosen't force Himself on anyone. If those who have no respect for Him because of those who are legalistic, and controlling would just learn for themselves, they would see that even when God gave the law to the Children of Isreal, He gave them the choice to choose.

Thank you MrT. Father Botros is activly LIVING the gospel. He is showing the truth with logic and love, and changing minds one heart at a time.

[IamRose]

You know, I think it's kinda funny that the anti christians, who claim to be soooo tolerant, sure have touble accepting that thier own ideas may not be right, and are so condeming of christians who are, after all, still human, and just endevoring to get up, when we fall down.

[jamesa]

The problem is man does not allow the Holy Spirit to minister,then you get frustrated people or you have the plain unbelievers who only know how to argue.Salvation is a gift, not to be forced on people.
You are right IamRose
James

[tc556guy]

Tell me, do the hardcore Christians even consider that it is THEY who may not be right? There are no 'anti-Christians", there are those non-Christians who object to Christians feeling that they have to the right to impress their personal faith on everyone else. The sooner that Christians realize that they are but one religion among many on this planet, each with its followers and none of them having any absolute proof that they have any more validity than any of the other faiths, the better we'll all be in getting along with each other.

[kaleidescope]

There are no 'anti-Christians", there are those non-Christians who object to Christians feeling that they have to the right to impress their personal faith on everyone else.

Yes indeed. Those same non-Christians that insist on forcing their non-faith or alternate faith on Christians under the guise of 'diversity' and 'tolerance' and 'secularism'.

Tolerance is a two-way street. When non-Christians seek to remove from the public venue centuries of cultural emblems and activities because they are Christian-based (despite the fact that the nation's foundation and national heritage were primarily based on Protestant Christian principles) then the non-Christians are the intolerant party.

Anyone who finds Christianity in the public venue too offensive to tolerate should relocate themselves to a non-Christian country of their choice. This nation, because of it's unique perspective of individuals being 'endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights', has allowed each of us personal freedom and self-determination unequalled in the modern world. Without that distinction of a power greater than that of the State, men are but chattel to those humans currently running the State.

[Saunders]

For the most part, I happen to be in the category of thinking articulated by TC556 and don't particularly care for any religion, including Christianity, attempting to force core beliefs on me via legislation. And, that has been done throughout our history.

And, I ain't going anywhere. I will stay right here in the USA.

[tc556guy]

. Religion is a private matter and should be conducted accordingly. It doesn't matter what the colonial period of the nation consisted of; we have to look at what we are NOW, and thats a nation consisting of a thousand different faiths, none with any greater grasp of religious 'truth' than any other, except in the minds of its followers. That does not give one faith a greater right to public support in the public square which, by neccesity, MUST remain neutral to all faiths or support all faiths. it is far better to leave religion in the home and place of worship, places it rightfully belongs.

People in this nation won their liberties and have kept them without the intervention of some mythincal divinity.

[kaleidescope]

For the most part, I happen to be in the category of thinking articulated by TC556 and don't particularly care for any religion, including Christianity, attempting to force core beliefs on me via legislation. And, that has been done throughout our history.
.


Could you explain for me what 'core beliefs' you believe have been imposed 'via legislation'?

I find I am somewhat confused as to how legislation which restricts individual behaviour based on a secular argument of being for the 'common good' of a society differs in any manner from legislation based on Christian tenets that restricts individual behaviour for a 'moral society'.

Addtionally, I do not believe that any legislation can force core 'beliefs' on anyone. Laws can only attempt to limit behaviour in the public venue (attempt, I say, because the will to disobey the law is a choice each person makes). Core beliefs are intangible, held only in our minds, and not subject to public exposure unless we choose to speak of them or to behave publicly in a manner which suggests to observers what they may actually be.

Yes, our nation has had 'Blue Laws' on the books over the years as has every culture. Some were direct result of religious tenets, some were not. Most fell from enforcement rather quickly (historically speaking).

I believe the current secularism is far more offensive than any Blue Laws remaining on the books today. Today's secularism attempts to both eliminate the public expression of Christianity and to legislate that minority personal opinion be tolerated by the majority in public and private venues.

RE: 'relocating'

This was not directed at any individual in this discussion.

The majority of the people of this nation still define themselves as Christian. On the whole, they are quite tolerant of other religions up to the point where those other religions begin to demonstrate intolerance for the Christianity-based cultural traditions and norms of this nation.

I do not believe that any minority has any entitlement to alter the majoral culture of a pre-existing society through government mandate. If that minority finds life among the majority intolerable then that minority should seek out a more suitable community elsewhere. Free association should not be contravened by legislative fiat.

This applies to any religion or non-religion, any ethnic group, any sexual orientation, or any political group or any other form of minority group identity.

I hope that clarifies my position.

[kaleidescope]

. Religion is a private matter and should be conducted accordingly. It doesn't matter what the colonial period of the nation consisted of; we have to look at what we are NOW, and thats a nation consisting of a thousand different faiths, none with any greater grasp of religious 'truth' than any other, except in the minds of its followers. That does not give one faith a greater right to public support in the public square which, by neccesity, MUST remain neutral to all faiths or support all faiths. it is far better to leave religion in the home and place of worship, places it rightfully belongs.

People in this nation won their liberties and have kept them without the intervention of some mythincal divinity.


Christian principles were not the basis of law just during the colonial period. They were also a guiding basis of the foundation of this nation. This is clear in our founding documents that define both the form of society and the method of governance by which the ex-colonies became this nation. It is equally clear in the individual State founding documents. It was so intertwined in our founding that it was even immortalized in our government architecture, seals of state, coinage, etc.

That this nation now hosts “a thousand different faiths” is evidence of the tolerance of the Christian principles embraced by the majority of the nation.

If by “a greater right to public support in the public square” you mean that our Christian heritage must be cleansed from public life in the name of ‘neutrality’ then you are also inferring that our history and culture must be sanitized of the same.

If Christianity is eliminated from public acknowledgement an integral portion of American culture is erased. And if adherence to the Christianity-based founding tenets of our government and law is purged than our form of society and governance is materially altered. This nation would no longer be the United States of America; we would actually become the ‘baseless’ and ‘culturally bankrupt’ collective we are often depicted to be. We would indeed be a mere “tangle of squabbling nationalities”.

As to whether we have won and kept our liberty “without the intervention of some mythincal divinity”, that is a personal perspective for each individual to decide.

[tc556guy]

Christian principles were not the basis of law just during the colonial period. They were also a guiding basis of the foundation of this nation. This is clear in our founding documents that define both the form of society and the method of governance by which the ex-colonies became this nation. It is equally clear in the individual State founding documents. It was so intertwined in our founding that it was even immortalized in our government architecture, seals of state, coinage, etc.

Our system of laws owes more to the Romans than to Christianity. The morality present in Christian writing sis not unique to that faith; many many religions down through the ages, and predating Christianity, had some form of the same edicts presented in the Ten Commandments, for instance.

That this nation now hosts “a thousand different faiths” is evidence of the tolerance of the Christian principles embraced by the majority of the nation.
A matter of opinion , then, because I believe that if Christians, particularly Evangelicals, had their way, these other faiths would NOT be allowed to be practiced in this nation.

If by “a greater right to public support in the public square” you mean that our Christian heritage must be cleansed from public life in the name of ‘neutrality’ then you are also inferring that our history and culture must be sanitized of the same.

This nation would no longer be the United States of America; we would actually become the ‘baseless’ and ‘culturally bankrupt’ collective we are often depicted to be. We would indeed be a mere “tangle of squabbling nationalities”.If Christianity is eliminated from public acknowledgement an integral portion of American culture is erased. And if adherence to the Christianity-based founding tenets of our government and law is purged than our form of society and governance is materially altered



No, I am not. The religious leanings of the colonial era are a historical fact. You aren't going to change history and wipe out the reality that our colonies were largely created as a relief valve from the religious tyranny of Europe.That doesn't mean that modern civil society should give those beliefs any particular weight or importance in the public square today.

As to whether we have won and kept our liberty “without the intervention of some mythincal divinity”, that is a personal perspective for each individual to decide.

Which is why religion should be a PRIVATE matter. Not meant for public display or enshrinment into civil secular society.

I'm living right now in a nation that has embedded religion into its daily existence. I do not want the USA to ever become a Christian version of here.

[Shifty]

Which is why religion should be a PRIVATE matter. Not meant for public display or enshrinment into civil secular society."

Personal religion is a private matter, but it does have cultural influences on our choosen civil society. That is the way it is.

I'm living right now in a nation that has embedded religion into its daily existence

I dont know what country you think you are living in, but your idea of secularism has never existed in America.

In my opinion, Christianity has formed the very foundation of civil society in the Western Hemisphere, and it in large part, it still does.

I am not exactly a fan of evangelical christianity either, but that doesnt mean I am ready to throw out all of the influences the religion has had on our society, public or private.

Islam, on the other hand, is a threat to everything we stand for, and needs to destroyed, one way or another.

The two are not equal, and that has nothing to do with the fact that they refer to their god as Allah.

You don't see people arguing against the Jews, Hindus, Buddists, etc...etc...the dispute is directed against the muslims, and for good reason.

These people are militant, third world cave dwellers, that believe they have a right to influence world events, and they dont.

Whether they will catch up in 500 years or not is beside the point.

...I might add that you seem to be confusing secular government with secular society. The government is secular, while society is anything but. You have right to one, and not the other.

[kaleidescope]

Roman tenets were not acknowledged in our founding documents, Christianity was. I repeat:
Christian principles were not the basis of law just during the colonial period. They were also a guiding basis of the foundation of this nation. This is clear in our founding documents that define both the form of society and the method of governance by which the ex-colonies became this nation. It is equally clear in the individual State founding documents. It was so intertwined in our founding that it was even immortalized in our government architecture, seals of state, coinage, etc.

I understand from reading your posts in this thread that you have an embittered perspective of “Christians, particularly Evangelicals” that shapes your opinion. I am not debating your opinion. But historical and current fact should not be denied or revised because it contravenes a personal perspective. FACT: Our Constitution forbids our Federal legislative body from enacting laws that would allow the creation of a theocracy and for over 230 years our unique system has managed to abide by that restriction. FACT: Christianity in America is not monolithic in its practice and that in itself is a serious impediment to theocracy as well. OPINION: I have seen no evidence that suggests that We the People would suddenly accept a theocracy regardless of the zeal of its proponents.

Again, this nation’s ‘religious leanings’ were not restricted to the Colonial Era. Those ‘religious leanings’ are historical fact of this nations post-revolution founding and are current fact of the American culture up to the present.

Whether one believes that “Divine Intervention” won and maintains our liberty is a "personal perspective". Our founding ancestors did not create a ‘secular’ society (that was France). They established a nation based on Christian principles with full intention for those principles to be the governor over the baser aspects of human nature. They clearly expected those principles to be practiced in the public square and did enshrine them in our founding documents with the intent that those principles would be active guidance of our civil society. And that is not a personal perspective but historical fact.

[IamRose]

tc556guy, First off I'd like to say 'Thank you for your service in Afganistan.'

Now, while it is true that you are in a place where those who practice a religion are in control of every aspect of peoples lives, and to the detriment thereof, our nation was created by, and set into operation by christians, who set it up in such a way as no established religion could ever control it.

The christian faith is NOT one of forced rules and regulations. We live by a code because we choose to , and for reasons someone outside the faith will never comprehend, so I wont try to explain.

There are those, now, and allways have been, those who for reasons of manipulation, or fear, or just plain ignorance have chosen to try to force that code on others.

Sometimes they are really christians with a missguided way of doing things.
Sometimes they are only cultural christians who really don't know God at all.
Sometimes they are just plain evil people who just wanna run the show, for whatever reason.

They come, they go. They don't last because our nation was set up by wise men who set it up so no one could establish a national religion, or restrict the practice of anyones personal faith.

No REAL christain wants to run your life. We have our own plates full with whatever fight we have to fight within ourselves, making a living and teaching or children right and wrong, and trying to bear the fruit of the Spirit, which is love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, ans self control.

WE do however love the world enough to make sure you know there is a truth, and have the opurtunity to to accept it, or deny it.

[Barkley]

America was founded on the freedom OF religion, not the freedom FROM it. Throughout our history religion, usually Christian, has played a large role in public life. After the past 40 years of almost continuous attack on it can you say the country is better off?

PS: My wife is a tradionalist Wiccan. Although I do worry some about it I have no doubt that God knows her and loves her.

[tc556guy]

Now, while it is true that you are in a place where those who practice a religion are in control of every aspect of peoples lives, and to the detriment thereof, our nation was created by, and set into operation by christians, who set it up in such a way as no established religion could ever control it.

The christian faith is NOT one of forced rules and regulations. We live by a code because we choose to , and for reasons someone outside the faith will never comprehend, so I wont try to explain.

There are those, now, and allways have been, those who for reasons of manipulation, or fear, or just plain ignorance have chosen to try to force that code on others.

Sometimes they are really christians with a missguided way of doing things.
Sometimes they are only cultural christians who really don't know God at all.
Sometimes they are just plain evil people who just wanna run the show, for whatever reason.

They come, they go. They don't last because our nation was set up by wise men who set it up so no one could establish a national religion, or restrict the practice of anyones personal faith.

No REAL christain wants to run your life. We have our own plates full with whatever fight we have to fight within ourselves, making a living and teaching or children right and wrong, and trying to bear the fruit of the Spirit, which is love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, ans self control.

WE do however love the world enough to make sure you know there is a truth, and have the opurtunity to to accept it, or deny it.

As I said, its just so easy for Christians who want to distance themselves from the actions of other Christians that are being called to task to say 'those are not 'real' Christians.

If Christians did not want to run everyone slife, why are they not content to practice their religion privately?

I'm not someone outside the faith; i was raised in a conservative Baptist church til I was 18; I know exactly the mentality I am talking about. Others who are less conservative have, in my mind, watered down the faith so much that they are in fact not practicing Christians. Soooo..if the ones closest to the faith are intent on intruding on everyones life with their faith, then I hold the entire faith and its followers responsible.
Do you understand that your "truth" is merely an opinion, a matter of faith? There is NO "truth". A "truth" can be objectively studied and either proven or disproven. Matters of faith will NEVER be a "truth".

[tc556guy]

America was founded on the freedom OF religion, not the freedom FROM it. Throughout our history religion, usually Christian, has played a large role in public life. After the past 40 years of almost continuous attack on it can you say the country is better off?

PS: My wife is a tradionalist Wiccan. Although I do worry some about it I have no doubt that God knows her and loves her.

Our issues the past 40 years have more to do with our growing urban population than any religious issue.
Actually, according to Christianity, your wife will burn in a lake of fire for all eternity, begging for a drop of water on her lips. "God" as you see Him may know of her, but your religion says He will not give her any breaks come Judgement Day.

[IamRose]

.
People in this nation won their liberties and have kept them without the intervention of some mythincal divinity.

I'm sorry, but this is not the statement of someone who ever knew God as anything but a set of rules.


When I say 'real christians' I am not talking about any particulur denomination, or having your name on a membership role and following a set of rules and regulations. I am talking about a group of people who transcend all bounderies, be they economic, political, ethnic, or any other you can think of, who have come to be a part of the body of Christ.

If you really want to know what's true, just ask God to reveal himself to you.

If He dosen't exsist, what harm is there? You just might be surprised by a grace you havn't seen before.
The TRUTH is out there, and is not hiding from anyone who wants to find Him.

If you really are so offended when people speak respectfully of God, and the christian heritige of our nation, you can allways put us on ignore. I don't think any of us would be offended by it.

But before you do, please know that I pray you will come to know the love and compassion that God affords to all who would look for Him.

Please be carefull and come home safe.

[stanmaxkolbe]

WHOA! There are a lot of great points on this thread. Some of them over my head but I’m half Polish so I have an excuse. BTW if you PC I don’t give a rats-ass if don’t like that statement so don’t tell about it. I’m not a PC tolerant wimp, ok.

I just know on the deployments I’ve been on over the years when it got right down to it every soldier looked to God! That’s been my experience.

What’s great about our country is freedom. If you want to go out and worship a tree hey that’s your freedom.

Now if you want to worship a Moon god, hey that’s your freedom. Now if you want to force us to pray to your Moon god, and start killing Americans because we don’t want to pray to your Moon god.

This is when we start killing you *******s, it’s that simple, worship what you want but leave us alone.

I read a book one time where Gen Patton made a commit when he was flying over North Africa and said something like he was so amazed that the same foot trails have been there for thousands of years. NO PROGESS! :saddam:

[IamRose]

Drawn to the Light
By Chuck Colson
4/23/2008

http://www.breakpoint.org/listingarticle.asp?ID=7783

Why Muslims Convert to Christianity


A few days ago, Fox News ran a grim special titled “Jihad USA: Confronting the Threat of Homegrown Terror.” It was a warning of the continuing danger of Islamo-fascism.

The program probably deepened many Americans’ fear of and hostility toward Muslims. That is unfortunate, because most Muslims are not would-be jihadists. But we Christians especially need to guard our emotions so we can be a good witness to Muslims—a caution raised by Dr. Dudley Woodberry, professor of Islamic Studies at Fuller.

Woodberry, aware that throughout the world Muslims have been turning to Christ, was curious about the reasons why—especially in countries where the cost of converting is so high.

To find the answer, he created a detailed questionnaire. Over a 16-year period, some 750 Muslims from 30 countries filled it out—and the results are eye-opening. The number one reason Muslim converts listed for their decision to follow Christ was the lifestyle of the Christians among them.

As Woodberry, Russell Shubin, and G. Marks write in Christianity Today, Muslim converts noted that “there was no gap between the moral profession and the practice of Christians” they knew. An Egyptian convert contrasted the love shown by Christians “with the unloving treatment of Muslim students and faculty he encountered at a university in Medina.” Other converts were impressed that “Christians treat women as equals” and enjoy loving marriages. And poor Muslims observed that “the expatriate Christian workers they knew had adopted, contrary to their expectations, a simple lifestyle.” They wore locally made clothes and abstained from pork and alcohol, so as not to offend Muslim neighbors.

Second, converts identified “the power of God in answered prayers and healing.” For instance, in North Africa, a Muslim family asked Christian neighbors to pray for a sick daughter; and then the girl recovered. Some converts “noted deliverance from demonic power as another reason they were attracted to Jesus.”

Converts also mentioned unhappiness with Islam itself, especially the Koran’s emphasis on God’s punishment and the uncertainty of salvation. By contrast, Woodberry notes, the biblical teaching that God loved us so much that “He sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” is deeply attractive to Muslims.

Converts are also attracted to “the love expressed through the life and teachings of Christ.” Ironically, Muslims first learn about Christ through the Koran, but then read the Gospels to find out more about Him.

Finally—and this is the key—“When Christ’s love transforms committed Christians into a loving community, many Muslims [identified] a desire to join such a fellowship.”

Woodberry’s research shows that when the Church is being the Church—witnessing to the love of Christ and of His transforming power—Muslims are drawn both to us and to Him.

When is the last time you welcomed a Muslim family to the neighborhood, or invited a Muslim co-worker for a cup of coffee?

Even though we are in the midst of a worldwide war against Islamo-fascism, we must never forget Christ’s command to witness to our neighbors—to all of our neighbors—of His redeeming love.

This is part two of a two-part series