Posted on 08/23/2010 2:09:27 PM PDT by dselig
A Gainesville church plans to go ahead with the burning of the Muslim holy book on Sept. 11, despite threats of bombings and the lack of a permit.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Terry Jones, pastor at the Dove World Outreach Center will call for Sept. 11 to be an "International Burn a Koran Day."
One jihadist website vowed to conduct suicide bombings in Florida to avenge the Koran burning, while others predicted an increase in terrorist recruits as a result of such actions.
"By Allah, the wars are heated and you Americans are the ones who...enflamed it," says one such posting. "By Allah you will be the first to taste its flames."
Jones said the radical threats confirmed his views of Muslims. "I can understand that they would be offended. I think their reactions--violence, threats, murders terrorist attacks--that only reveals the true nature of Islam which needs to be revealed," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at wokv.com ...
yes, Lord Jesus commanded us to walk out into the 'world' and round up scattered sheep, of which there are few, says the Lord...
in the same exchange we have Luke 22:36 which is a command to arm yerself vs the many evil predators in the world...muzzies are that kind of evil, kinda like terminators w/o the combat chassis and ability to learn or reason...
`Indeed some parts of the body of the church are destined to be martyrs, others are called to fight as well as witness...
good answer as well...
Yes, Luke 22:36 does state that Jesus command His disciples to buy swords, but later on in the same chapter, Peter is rebuked by Christ for brandishing his blade.
Context is key.
Shaking the dust off one’s feet is a different gesture than burning books. Shaking the dust off one’s feet is to be done after one has made a sincere effort to witness to a particular group, and the gospel has been rejected.
Unless you have evidence that this has occurred with the church in question, there is no reason to believe that principle applies in this particular case.
wrong answer...you cannot expect me to believe that the Lord would specify the importance of arming themselves, before clothing, with the whole intent to never use em...
Peter wasnt rebuked for 'brandishing his blade'...he was instructed that the timing and Will of the Father for the crucifixtion couldnt be changed...
the 'context' in 22:36 is their journeys into the world, formerly with Divine protection and provision, but when Jesus is no longer in the flesh, their witnessing will be handled in their human capacity...
the Lord will grace those who will hear...jihadis have been preached to for a couple thousand years, hence i think this particular church has a bit of evidence that they should shake some dust off and move on...
any current muzzies that are chosen cant be taken from the Fathers hand, by myself or a mo-ham-head-ean book burning...
how many deciples of all men will be called by the Truth of unmasking the evil of izlam ???
Peter brandished his blade for the purpose of killing the high priest’s servant (he was apparently not skilled in the use of the sword, and thus missed the skull, striking off a piece of the ear); he was rebuked for brandishing his blade for that purpose. “Those who live by the sword, die by the sword”, as Christ says in Matthew, prophesying both Peter’s death, and chastising him for his decision.
Were the disciples to arm themselves while traveling on the road to complete their task (missions and discipleship)? Yes. Is that analogous to the present scenario? No.
You have provided no evidence that this particular church has preached to any Muslim groups; the principle of shaking dust off of their feet does not apply.
Let us suppose that an atheist (such as myself) were to announce that they were going to hold a public Bible burning. I don't think that all Christians would have an entirely peaceful response.
I probably wouldn't have to worry about suicide bombings, but maybe I would have to worry about a bombing.
My comment was that it seems we are fast approaching a time...
I do not know the history of this church. I also want to be slow to condemn the actions of a fellow Christian if they are following the will of God. Is there a biblical mandate not to antagonize the pagans?
It seems that most of Paul's writings in regards to the pagan cultures and religions were quite hostile by today's standards. They would surely have been considered inflammatory at the time.
Islam is a religion of peace...
And DEATH to anyone who says otherwise...
Doesn't have to. He is from there.
Speaking as a Christian...
It’s a book. I can buy another at Wal-Mart.
More to your point, there are some people who would over react. My thought would be that they were not acting in obedience to God, which means their actions would be sin by our standards as there is no Biblical mandate for such action.
The difference being that any Christian who acted in violence to a Bible burning would likely be committing sin, while a Muslim who acted similarly would likely be considered obedient by the standards of their faith.
“I do not know the history of this church. I also want to be slow to condemn the actions of a fellow Christian if they are following the will of God.”
No where does Scripture command book-burning; however, Scripture does make clear that we must be willing to even give up our own rights for the sake of the furtherance of the gospel. (1 Corinthians 9) That should be the degree of our fervor for the lost.
Do they have the legal right to burn any books they own? Yes. Does 1 Corinthians 9 make it clear that Paul did not claim certain of his own rights for the sake of furtherance of the gospel? Yes.
I think it is clear that the pastor and church are not concerned with converting the Muslims, and I believe that God will judge them for having hardened their hearts against an unregenerate people.
Since their current public stance is one that is against a clear teaching of Scripture, it is my hope that they will stop the church’s promotion of this act, repent, and witness to Muslims to bring them into the body of Christ.
At present, their actions reflect very badly on their church, the Church, and Christ Himself. Their actions do not show love for their enemies, nor a willingness to pray for them even if they are being persecuted by Muslims.
again, the command was to arm themselves, for defense, ie two swords 'is enough'...Peters lack of proficiency notwithstanding, if he wasnt meant to use it, why did he have it in the garden, where they were all simpy going to pray ??? Peters was on the verge of going 'offensive' against overwhelming numbers and getting killed w/o fulfilling his future dscipleship...the Lord showed him the difference between Gods Will and human will...
Gods words, Gods Will, cant be altered, only misunderstood and contorted...
likewise, i dont have a need to prove that this particular church has done outreach to every muzzie in the world, you seem to think that *if* theyve done so, it would then be ok for them to turn their backs on the muzzies...
the history of the entire CHRISTian world shows outreach has been tried, and for the most part failed...rabid animals that would blow themselves up over someone elses book are beyond human aid...
The Lord puts the people in place[s] to witness and to receive the call...any muzzies that are on the fence may finally realize that their death cult is evil and finally be enlightened, as well as CHRISTian like yerself that seem to believe that the *religion* of pieces is basically *good*...
blindly walking into a den of wolves and being eaten isnt required by scripture, Lord Jesus repeats the fact over and over again, that 'the world' is dominated by evil...that there are indeed few who are called...we are surrounded and outnumbered, being easy targets aint healthy...
Peter’s actions were not a defensive use of arms, but an uncommanded attack. Yes, Jesus makes it clear that he does not intend to fight, and nowhere in Scripture does He command any of his disciples to take up swords for the purpose of battling unbelievers.
“the history of the entire CHRISTian world shows outreach has been tried, and for the most part failed...”
Actually, in much of the history of Christianity, where witnessing has occurred, it has produced a harvest. There is a reason that Christianity was the fastest growing religion in the first few centuries, when the early Christians were passionate about evangelism, and the lack of any current American revivals (very few American Christians take the commandment to make disciples seriously).
If you do not witness, you cannot have a harvest. We are commanded to make disciples. How many disciples do you suppose will be made as a result of this church’s decision to make a political statement?
“Peters lack of proficiency notwithstanding, if he wasnt meant to use it, why did he have it in the garden, where they were all simpy going to pray ???”
He had it in the garden because most people in that time carried some sort of weapon wherever they went for defense against robbers, etc; that does not mean that he was meant to use it against the servant.
As mentioned, there is NO scriptural basis for Christians to take up a sword and smite unbelievers. We are to pray for them, witness to them and disciple them when they convert. They are to know us by our love-—and love for sinners is certainly not the message that this particular church is sending.
“Here’s another thought. How ‘bout a koranic “doomsday device,” like the one the Russians built in Dr. Strangelove. Here’s how it would work: the US Government, or even a private foundation, sets up thousands, maybe millions, of “burn boxes” all over the country. Each contains a pyrotechnic device and a koran. They are wired together via the internet.”
Great Idea!!! Only instead of burning korans I would point nukes at mecca and medina and let it be known that after the next islam based attack on the United States, the nukes would be released.
good luck with that as the animals begin sawing off yer head...
This is an interesting discussion. Thank you for participating with me.
I do think we should point out that to be literal about our application of this verse to this situation, Paul said, “to the Jew I became a Jew..to those not having the law, I became as one not having the law..”
I cannot imagine conceding to Sharia law in order to win over the Muslims to Christ.
Regarding the motives of this church...anything not of the Spirit is of Satan. I will be very slow to attribute something that could be of the Spirit to Satan. This constitutes blasphemy of the Spirit and I will refrain from that unless we know without a doubt that it is so.
If their actions were expressly forbidden, I would be more comfortable agreeing with your assessment.
One last thing to consider- if the Muslim extremist react violently, perhaps that will affect the conscience of the Muslims that may be open to Christ. They realize the true intent of their religion and choose Christ. It could happen.
Religion of Pieces alert.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.