"Pope Benedict XVI has said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behavior is just as important as saving the rain forest from destruction."
It looks the Pope will be the next target of the insatiable gay agenda and their vicious hate. He spoke out against the homosexual life style and behavior which will surely incur their pitiful scorn.
Calling homosexuality 'self-destruct[ive]' behavior, the Pope's comments will certainly get these little rosebuds up in arms.
God forbid if anyone might actually think that homosexuality is sin. No, we should all agree that evil is good and good evil to satisfy these whiners.
Ain't gonna happen.
Read the full story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7796663.stm
22 comments:
.
Stop calling for Gays/Libs to hate the Pope.
Aren't you the sanctimonious one?! Telling every one just who can decide what a evil and sin are.
So tell us all oh great self appointed judge, "Is there any difference between your jihad against 'evil' and the actions of other extreme types who use their religion to condemn others?" It is hard to tell the difference.
(I know, your bible tells you can do it. So it is ok to hate.)
You seem to be hung upon the weird concept of 'evil.' When USA attacks a village with high explosives and kill non combatant innocent bystanders this is not 'evil.' When the family members of the dead villagers fight back in revenge, then you call them 'evil terrorists.'
Is torture evil when USA does it?
Try living your life without sin and let the world move forward.
Perhaps you could re-read the bible and learn, "judge not lest ye be judged." Matthew 7
BTW - homosexuality is NOT a sin, homosexual life style is not a sin. The sin is in the act (if one believes such drivel).
If you see homosexuality as a sin, then don't do it.
.
i am honestly wondering why the pope hasn't blasted red lobster or joe's crab shack yet.
Ema - Am I calling for homosexuals to hate the Pope? No, they don't need me to mobilize them, they are doing plenty of hating these days all by themselves (because they hate God).
Am I deciding what is evil and what is sin? No, the Creator already did.
Me on a jihad? Am I sawing off heads? But I see that you have nicely packaged me as an 'extremist' and lumped Christianity into one-of-those-extremist-type categories in your mind. Which is convenient, isn't it? That way you can continue on believing that there IS no evil and that you are not accountable to your Creator.
Of course, evil is now just a 'weird concept' for you, it doesn't really exist, does it? Yet you call the USA 'evil' for fighting a war against an enemy whose leader VIOLATED the CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT of the Gulf War...he could have prevented his people from all the suffering that would happen when he called down the wrath of the US military, and he had plenty of time to do so, but he chose to be selfish instead and his people have suffered. I call that evil.
And now you want to deny that there are terrorists and then call the USA evil for extracting intelligence from people who are KILLING AMERICANS? Dude, that's treasonous.
Am I the judge? Heck no. I am just the one yelling from the rooftop that there is accountability, which is something you don't seem to be too receptive to.
I do try to live my life without sin, but I fail like everybody else. But failing to live righteously and denying that there is such a thing as righteousness are two different things completely. Please understand the difference.
Homosexuality not a sin? Then, Ema, what is sin? And what is the standard that sin deviates from?
PW - No, you HONESTLY aren't.
i honestly am. where in the bible does it say that homosexuality is more of an abomination than eating shellfish?
PW- see comments on the discussion we are having on the other post concerning Jesus calling all things clean to eat in His visions to Peter...
.
Nonsense. Cowards make statements and then deny making them.
Sin is your concept, not mine. So I am not going to judge other people by your weird standards of right, wrong, sin and evil.
You want to live life by _ALL_ rules of Leviticus and other backward old testament people who lived thousands of years ago? Go for it, join the Taliban and turn the clocks back.
Me? I rather live life by the enlightened teachings and messages of love and giving of Mohammad and Jesus.
When did I call USA evil? Evil is your arcane term.
So tell me, "Is torture evil when USA does it?"
Yes or no?
.
Ema,
Living life by Leviticus is not necessary since Jesus fulfilled the law, considering everyone guilty of violating it. He paid the price for those transgressions with His own life-blood spilled on the ground outside of Jerusalem. But with that, He opened the way of righteousness, not by following the Law [of Leviticus] but by faith in His sacrifice for our individual sins. In other words, He did for us what none of us were able to do on our own, and that is to abide by God's standard of righteousness: the Law. We all fail.
I am no more righteous than the homosexual; we are both considered by God to be completely sinful, worthy of death. I do not deny that. But we must agree with God as to our present condition before we can be redeemed from it!
As for the 'enlightened teachings of Mohammed,' which ones of these are enlightened?...
Surah 2:190-195
And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you...
And kill them wherever you find them...
And fight them until there is no more Fitnah and worship is for Allâh...
And spend in the Cause of Allâh and do not throw yourselves into destruction
or this?...
[فَاقْتُلُواْ الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ]
(then kill them wherever you find them) (9:5)
the key phrase in that surah is "those who fight you..."
in some translations it is "those who transgress upon you." either way, it is talking about defensive war.
the idea of an offensive war in the name of islam didn't really arise until sayyid qutb used the islamic concept of abrogation to decide that certain verses of the qur'an had been canceled by Muhammad. so, violence in islam to this day remains a matter of major theological dispute.
.
""Pope Benedict XVI has said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behavior ..." Remember this comes from a individual surrounded by men who wear long robes and dresses. Perhaps transsexual dressing is now acceptable.----
"... Living life by Leviticus is not necessary since Jesus fulfilled the law, ..."
Then why do you keep harking back to what some "old testament" backward man with serious hang-ups has to say?
Is it too much to suggest one live by the Beatitudes and allow one's god to judge the lives of others?
________
In case you missed my question, I'll restate it, "Is torture evil when USA does it?"
Yes or no?
.
packerwatch said...
the key phrase in that surah is "those who fight you..."
in some translations it is "those who transgress upon you." either way, it is talking about defensive war.
the idea of an offensive war in the name of islam didn't really arise until sayyid qutb used the islamic concept of abrogation to decide that certain verses of the qur'an had been canceled by Muhammad. so, violence in islam to this day remains a matter of major theological dispute.
December 24, 2008 10:37 AM
Feces!!! Islam existed under three dispensations regarding Jihad. The first, the early Mekkan period, was one of weakness. Moe and his followers had no military capacity, so he preached tolerance and restraint.
The second dispensation was permission to defend themselves against the Mekkans. This came in the early Medinan period when Moe first accrued a fighting force.
The third dispensation was the order to fight: aggressive Jihad; taking the offense against Kuffar. This came after Moe's first successful razzia against camel caravans, when he was able to attract more fighters with the spoils. Read The Sealed Nectar, or Ibn Ishak's Sira if you can find it.
Surah Al-Anfal & Al-Taubah, among the last to be revealed, are offensive,not defensive. I direct your attention to 8:39, 8:67, 9:29 & 9:123. These find ample confirmation in Sahih Bukhari 1.8.387 and 1.8.386.
Further confirmation is available in Ibn Kathir's Tafsir. My blog post titled "ROPMA" contains a list of links to them.
Cretins & LibTurds will dance about the bush chanting "mis-translation","mis-interpretation","twisting" & "perversion'; "out of context". The tafsir are the best disproof of that idiotic mantra.
The ultimate refutation of the LibTurds is contained in Islam's law: Sharia. I direct your attention to Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9. He who hath a brain, let him read & comprehend, the LibTurds can't.
I can't furnish a direct link because there are no named anchors in the 1250 page book. Scribid.com has a scanned image with a search engine; search for O9 [first char. is a letter, not a numeral.]
O9.0: Jihad O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion.
O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad.... As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.
The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, "Jihad is a communal obligation," meaning upon the Muslims each year.
O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad
The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),
the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),
"I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,"
this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).
O9.9
The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) (n: though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (al-Hidaya sharh Bidaya al-mubtadi' (y21), 6.48-49) ).
That's the law! Notice its foundation on 9:29. I now redirect yer attention to Rodwell's translation.
Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.
This url will display ten translations including Rodwell's.
http://qb.gomen.org/QuranBrowser/cgi/bin/retrieve.cgi?version=rodwell&layout=auto&searchstring=009:29
"Fight those who" or "make war upon"; the wording makes no difference to the obvious clear meaning of the eyeh. Ibn Kathir's exegesis of this ayeh is titled:
"The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah". Its url is:
http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid= 9&tid= 29
Here is a relevant quote therefrom:
"Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to Jihad announcing his intent and destination. "
Need more proof? Then pay a visit to Riyad-us-Salaheen Book 11, Ch. 234 and read the whole thing including numerous confirming ahadith with commentary:
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/hadeeth/riyad/11/chap234.htm
Need more? Need a good whipping?? I am the Anti-Muhammad and I take no prisoners! My three part series on Islamic Supremicism begins here:
http://snooper.wordpress.com/2008/12/22/islamic-supremacism-1/ .
"LibTurds????"
Grow up.
Its what they are, Packerwatch. A sad commentary on the fate of modern human society; that our educational system has been undermined and subverted by Communists so that a major faction of our population has had their grey matter supplanted by brown matter.
I notice that you did not attempt to refute the substance of my post. Could that be because what I posted was true, and well substantiated?
Islam's own canon of scripture, tradition & jurisprudence proves it to be mercenary, martial & predatory, not pacific & benign. Conflicts in the recitation are resolved by order of revelation. Al-Taubah, which commands eternal war against Jews & Christians, was among the last to be revealed; it trumps earlier, more tolerant verses.
Which of the references I cited are you able to disprove?
Holy cow! Ben, I don't know where you got your education, but I'd say that you pretty much schooled packerwatch to the point that all he could mutter was, "Lib Turd."
Thank you for revealing the truth that Islam is indeed an offensive, aggressive, murderous cult. I think that you removed any doubts with your thorough and comprehensive information. Also, I LOVED the part about being the 'Anti-Mohammed'!!! ROFL.
If you ever want to write posts for this site, let me know and it's a done deal. Merry Christmas.
pw-Merry Christmas
ema-Merry Christmas
merry christmas.
i'll be working on a response to ben's post, but i'm in chicago about to board a flight to get home for christmas. my earlier flight got cancelled because we had to turn around after an engine blew out. i probably won't be back on here for a few days. it's been a long day...
I'm glad you enjoyed it, PackSmack. Just imagine a #16EEEE New Balance BB850 pinning his ear back.
The Myth vs Fact series of 490 daily installments is at your disposal. I think you know where to go to download it. Open with Kompozer or Nvu, copy & paste. I am slowly editing them with minor improvements. Check it out here: http://moesmurdermult.wordpress.com/
Winnow your way down to #1, copy & paste. The muz will go nutz 'cuz they can't refute the facts.
Visit http://snooper.wordpress.com
anything posted by Dajjal is fair game.
If you like, I am willing to contribute directly, I contribute to three blogspots; adding one more won't hurt.
Lousy weather for flying out of Chicago! I didn't know broom sticks had engines.
.
Ben,
"... I notice that you did not attempt to refute the substance of my post. ..."
The substance of your post is that you can point to some RW extremist from the Muslim community trying to twist the teachings of a religious leader for some warped purpose. Wow.
So when a person points to the deranged rantings of "...the Anti-Muhammad..." to say _all_ westerners, Christians, Jews and liberals should be destroyed because they are coming to (As another _REAL_ nutbag Ann coulter said) invade them, kill them, convert them to Christianity, - what is the difference??
Your fear of 'them' has help "
undermined and subvert (your) grey matter supplanted by brown matter."
You and PackSmack can hold hands in your fear all you want. You'll feel better.
Happy Winter Solstice to all.
.
Ema,
Fear? You wish. I am ready to die in a heartbeat to stand up against the bane and scourge of the murderous cult that is Islam. If you want to be a hero for Islam, I will give you my name and address and let you come and do it yourself. Fear? Not an ounce. Muslims would love to think we are shuddering in our boots here because of their self-described heroic actions (read: evil, murder, wickedness)but we are not afraid; far, far from it... we are just hoping that it breaks out in our streets so we can go and wipe it out of this country ourselves to protect our own families. And I didn't notice where you mentioned that what Ben said was wrong...because you can't, so all you can do is insult.
Ben, I have tried to add you as an admin here so you can post. Not sure if it will work out the way I did it, but we'll see.
PW: Safe travels.
Get a clue, Ema. Islam is a standardized product. Its doctrines were defined in the 7th century by its founder. They were exemplified on the battle field by its founder. They are preserved in the Qur'an, confirmed by the hadith (Islamic oral tradition) and reflected in Sharia.
8:39 fight them
9:29 fight those
Bukhari 1.8.387 ordered to fight
Reliance O9.8 The Caliph makes war upon...
O9.9 The Caliph fights all other people until they become Muslim.
That is the standard, set by Allah & his Messenger, not the depraved ranting of some latter day 'extremist'.
Its what Islam is; what Islam does. Its Moe's idea, not mine.
Your inability or unwillingness to perceive the congruent pattern formed by Islam's scripture, tradition & law reflects poorly on your intelligence and rationality.
You can't refute the facts. Distraction & diversion don't cut the mustard.
Argumentum Tu quoque does not cut the mustard. Only Allah issued unlimited, open ended, outcome oriented imperatives to conquer and subjugate the entire world.
Yahweh's imperative to conquer was limited to Canaan. The rest of the Jewish conquests were defensive, not offensive.
Jesus Christ did not issue any commands to conquer.
Allah did. They are recorded in Surah Al-Anfal & Surah Al-Taubah, confirmed by Moe in hadith and codified in Islamic law.
Only an arrogant damn fool will argue otherwise in the face of relevant, verifiable facts.
The Surah:ayeh and Volume:Book:Number citations are named anchors in the Compendium of Islamic Texts. The major search engines can find them.
Ema,
Earlier you said, "
"... Living life by Leviticus is not necessary since Jesus fulfilled the law, ..."
Then why do you keep harking back to what some "old testament" backward man with serious hang-ups has to say?
Is it too much to suggest one live by the Beatitudes and allow one's god to judge the lives of others? "
...You do not understand how Jesus fulfilled the law...He did not abolish it. And unless one believes in His work of redemption, that man still has the Law to condemn him.
As for the idea that one live by the Beatitudes, why them? Are they inspired? And if they are, then why limit directing one's life by those and not the rest of the message Jesus preached? Do you get to select which passages of the Bible you get to obey? That certainly must be convenient, to be able to individually select which parts of God's Word are authoritative and which are not; getting to pick and choose which to live by and obey and then to reject the rest. Who, then is God, if YOU get to decide which parts of the Bible is God's Word: the One Who wrote it, or you?
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You are not God, therefore you don't get to choose which parts of the Bible are worthy to be a guide for one's life.
Ben,
It worked! You are now an admin...post at will. Post on whatever topic you would like. :)
Thanks for bringing your expertise to the discussion and to the blog.
.
PackSmack,
FYI -
the books of the bible were written by 'man.'
"... As for the idea that one live by the Beatitudes, why them? Are they inspired? ..." The Beatitudes were spoken by none other than Jesus Christ (as documented by your books in the bible)!!
________
Do you not say you choose to read, interpret and follow only the parts of Leviticus that are convenient to you and your views?
To borrow your own words, "... Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You are not God, therefore you don't get to choose which parts of the Bible are worthy to be a guide for one's life." By your own absolutes, it is all or nothing.
Be careful, Ben may well be a Muslim.
________
Ben,
"... Yahweh's imperative to conquer was limited to Canaan. The rest of the Jewish conquests were defensive, not offensive. ..." (Love your spin on this one.)
The land of Canaan was home to people _before_ Yahweh issued the fatwa to the people of Israel to kill those living there in peace and prosperity. While Yahweh was at it, the people of Israel were allowed to enslave the women of Canaan by the same commands.
So to the people living in Canaan was this Jewish conquests defensive or offensive?
And that some how makes the war of aggression somehow different?
"... Jesus Christ did not issue any commands to conquer. ..." but oh so many 'Christians' have twisted his messages to do just that. (The Crusades during the 'Middle Ages' and the invasion of Iraq by USA under the current president are two.)
"Only an arrogant damn fool will argue otherwise in the face of relevant, verifiable facts."
.
Ema, the conquest of Canaan was a singular event. Hebrews were not mandated to any further conquest. Their aggression was limited to one specific time and place.
Islam is a mandate to conquer without chronological or geographic limits. Allahs imperatives to conquer are outcome oriented; fight until loops.
Rational evaluation of any system requires primary attention to its doctrines, not actions which deviate from its doctrines.
The Crusades were not aggression; they were a defensive counter action to centuries of Islamic assaults on pilgrims and invasions of Europe.
Shrub's idiotic invasion of Iraq was political, not religious. It is based on false assumptions about Islam, Muslims Arabs and the tribal culture of the region. He sent the army where he should have sent tactical nukes.
Shrub's stated strategic objective is an impossibility. He wasted lives and treasure chasing a mirage.
Post a Comment