The Paris Muslim killings

[aka]

Source:

http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/4-lessons-for-adventists-from-the-islamist-attack-in-paris    

 

(the following are SDA members comments to the main article)

James •

I need to make a stand here and comment. Whilst your article
addresses some good points it fundamentaly misses the mark as to what islam is.

It is easy to accept that islam is a religion, and they tell
us that it is a religion of peace, I stagger in amazement that many an article
and scholar miss the point that the very verses of the koran teach the believer
to take this course of action we have seen in recent times and furher back in
time.

 

We cannot for one minute draw parralels between the SDA
faith and islam. There are no parralels in the SDA faith to take such action
against unbelievers.

Whilst there are innocent people in islam and many are
seeking ways to exit this ideology many of these people neither have the means
or the security once they leave and so they are trapped.

Islam is not to be compared to any other religious system on
earth, it cannot be, by the very teachings written within, they cannot compare.

You can call Islam a religion of peace, as much as you can
call the KKK as a religion of peace. You will know them by their fruits and
their ideology. God may have people everywhere, but the islamic ideology is not
from God. Please dont confuse the two.

 

Why is it that this religion of peace has so many terrorists
embedded within.?

If the SDA religion taught to kill the jews and unbelievers
where ever they find them, they too would be under the spot light. There is
nothing comparable between the islamic faith and SDA faith.

Kai Mester   •

James, you are making a stand against something you don't
seem to know first hand. How would you like it if a member of another religion
made a stand against Christianity because of the medieval inquisition, the
cruel Christian slaughtering of natives in the Americas, various so called
Christian teachings of Rome or so called Christian modern just wars in the
Middle East? You would rather want him to judge Christianity by the teachings
of Christ.

 

We can judge the Quran or Islam neither by Muslim
anti-Biblical or anti-Christian tradition nor by modern-day Muslim terrorism.
Both are also products of the fact that Christians have not lived up to the
pure, non-violent and selfless gospel of Christ, but have practised idolatry,
immorality, and a Crusade mentality.

Those Christians who really and honestly study the Quran
realize that it is much more in line with the Biblical message than they
thought. Of course one can abuse certain Quran verses for modern day terrorist
purposes or to condemn Islam as a violent religion. But the same has been done
with the Bible.

Take Bible verses like:

“A blessing on anyone who seizes your babies and smashes them against a rock!” (Psalm 137:9)

or “It would be best for that person to be thrown into the sea with a large stone hung
around his neck.” (Luke 17:2) “

or "You shall strike every male in it with the edge
of the sword." (Deuteronomy 20:13) “

or "May all your enemies die like this [i.e.like Sisera], Lord!” (Judges 5:31)

I could continue. There is ample Biblical material
to build a violent religion.

It is not right to do the same with the Quran even though
there is a certain segment of Muslims who do so with their own book.

God loves Muslims and prophecy shows us that He has not
forgotten Ishmael and his brothers throughout history. Christians bickered
about Christological issues instead of translating the Bible into Arabic.
Christian legends were more known than the Bible when Muhammad called
polytheistic Arabs back to the God of Abraham.

Instead of joining the Evangelical and Western choir of
anti-Islamism we should reach out to Ishmael and support those Muslims who are
understanding the non-violent message of Islam. This would solve the
10/40-window problem and Christ could come again sooner.

 

Elijah Mvundura 

To say that the Quran is much more in line with the Biblical
message is grossly inaccurate. The Quran does have scattered sayings, allusions
and "quotations" from the bible, but its whole tenor, displaces and
supersedes biblical revelation. For example it mentions Jesus but denies his
divinity, acknowledges the one God, but Allah does not have the personal
attributes of Yahweh, the God of Israel, so that to call him 'Father" is
an anthropomorphic sacrilege. Again, although many pundits are fond of calling
Islam an "Abrahamic" faith, in the Quran it is Abraham who embraces
the faith of Muhammad by building the Ka'ba temple and instituting the
pilgrimage to Mecca.

While as Christians we must do all in power to make sure
innocent Muslims are not demonized and victimized because of radical elements
among them, we must not do so by conjecturing nonexistent analogies and
correspondences between the bible and the Quran, or playing down the wide chasm
that separates Islam from biblical faith.

 

Kai Mester 

Here are some of God's most beautiful Quranic names. You may
decide yourself whether they are so different from the Father depicted in the
Bible:

The Compassionate, the Merciful, the King, the Peace, the
Protector, the Forgiving, the Provider, the Giver, the Hearer, the Seer, the
Kind, the Likeable, the Mild, the Grateful, the Preserver, the Nourisher, the
Reckoner, the Watchful, the Reponsive, the Wise, the Lover, the Trustworthy,
the Praiseworthy, the Lifegiver, the One, the Able, the Patron, the Pardoner,
the Gatherer, the Enricher, the Shielder, the Benefactor, the Light, the Guide,
the Patient.

Elijah Mvundura T

The difference is that in the Bible God acquired his names
or attributes from His actions and encounter with flesh and blood humans
beings. Thus Hagar called him"the God who sees me." Similarly. the
descriptions of the prophets came from their personal encounters. In the Quran,
the names are "abstract" they are not linked or embedded in real life
situations. That is why I said, "Allah" lacks the personal attributes
of the biblical God.

James 

I dont ever recall meeting you so how do you know what i
know first hand ?? Let me help you. I have many ex muslim friends and family in
Europe and who have read your comments and have stated you are grossly
incorrect. Actually they were shocked that this view is being published, it is
the view of Chrislam.

To parallel the bible with the Quran is really taking it to
another level. The two are diametrically opposed. Chalk and cheese, if you
understand my meaning.

I would encourage you and some readers here to look at what
the terms mean between the two faiths, for example, Peace, in christianity is
living peacefully with others, weather a believer or not, BUT, in Islam peace
can only be obtained when all others are subjugated or submitted to Islam, the
same for the word democracy and almost every other term, are all diametrically
opposed to Christianity. Islam mean to submisson or conquer........ Sounds
like the first horseman in Revelation 6.....Conquering and to Conquer.

Context is the king in any given literature and this is no
exception. So i would encourage you to read all those texts you mention and
read them in context again. But I also encourage you read the same violent
passages in the the Quran and you will learn that the context is opposite to
the bible. And opposite to what your saying. As a hint, in Ps 137, the Psalmist
is asking for God to Intervene, and we know whos vengeance is metered out in
the last day, and its not the believer doing the vengeance, unlike in the
Quranic texts, where its the believers duty to chastise and
kill........Very Different.

And lastly, the God of the bible, Jehovah and His Son
Yeshua, are opposite in the Quran......Quran says God hath no son.......Hmmmm,
let me think, Yes, there it is, 1John 4:1-3 (KJV) 1 Beloved, believe not every
spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false
prophets are gone out into the world. 1John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of
God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of
God: 1John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come
in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye
have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Please, I urge you to start looking into this......because promoting Chrislam is not the way.

Kai Mester 

No, I don't know what you know first hand, I just said you
did not SEEM to know Islam first hand, at least that was the impression I got
Ex-Muslims naturally have a negative relation to Islam like ex-Christians
have to Christianity. Yet you will admit that those ex-Christians might have
left their faith because they never got to know genuine Biblical Christianity.
Mainstream traditional Islam has moved away from its original version as
traditional Christianity has. There are not too many bridges left between the
two traditions. Those who are willing to leave their tradition behind and
approach the Bible and the Quran without this cumbersome ballast, have an
inspiring experience.

Islam means surrender, making peace, and causing peace. The
Quran clearly confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, hence it loves
to call him "Son of Mary." At the same time, many Christians do
neither believe that Jesus was tempted in all points like as we are (yet
without sin), nor that he was touched with our feelings (Heb 4:15), nor that we
can overcome as he overcame (Rev 3:21). The antichrist is within the Christian
camp, not in the Muslim camp.

The Qur'anic teaching that God has no child or son refers to
His neither having had a sexual relationship with Mary, nor needing an heir to
His throne that would change His laws and ways. Muhammad dealt with Christians
who did not keep the Sabbath, ate pork, drank alcohol, and used Christ as a
pretext to sin. By stating that Christ is the word of God and the Messiah who
was annointed by the Holy Spirit, the Qur'an expresses the Biblical truth in a
terminology that does not need the word "son", which was differently
(i.e. highly sexually) connotated in the Arab culture. God's fatherly
characteristics can be seen in many of the Quranic names of God, but the aspect
of a sexual begetter is removed.

Chrislam is a pejorative word for merging Christianity and
Islam. I do not know if there is any sincere Christian or Muslim who can
identify with this term. But there definitely are thousands and thousands of
Muslims who consider themselves to be followers of Christ and there are also a
growing number of Muslims who keep the Sabbath and are waiting for Christ's
soon return.

I respect your position, which seems to reflect the
evangelical dispensationalist mainstream approach towards Islam. Yet I venture
to disagree because the Bible says much about Ishmael's blessing and Islam in
prophecy, which has helped me to my perspective, but this is another topic.

Tony 

Muhammad is the example for Muslims. Muhammad and his army
killed many in Mecca. Jesus is the example of Christians. Jesus never killed
anyone.

Kai Mester 
The Quran is clear on this: Muhammad sinned and Jesus never
sinned. And let us never forget that King David killed many more people than
Muhammad and was even praised for that by his people (1Sam 21:12), yet God did
not allow him to build the temple because of the blood on his hands (1Chr
22:8). Unfortunately, many Muslims focus more on Islamic traditions about the
life of Muhammad than on the message of the Quran who points Muslims to Jesus
and to the Bible.

Elijah Mvundura                                                                                                                        The Quran "mentions" Jesus and the Bible, but it
does not "point" them to Jesus and the Bible. We must not amputate
Quranic passages from their wider context. Muslims do not read the Quran
Christiologically or biblically as Kai regrets or wishes they would. We cannot
understand what drives Muslims if we blithely import into the Quran Western or
biblical hermeneutical methods.

Kai Mester 

By mentioning Jesus and other Biblical characters and
events, the Quran has created curiosity because it does not give the detailed
information that can be found in the Bible. This has turned many Muslims into
followers of Jesus within Islam. If we read the Quran through the eyes of the
Bible, we might not understand the majority of Muslims, but we will start to
appreciate their heritage. Sensing this they will open the doors of their
hearts wide.

 

Elijah Mvundura 

Kai your emphatic understanding of Islam is commendable and
I believe it is a good starting point for reaching Muslims. Still you must
appreciate that you are reading the Quran as a Christian and Westerner. If
Muslims read the Quran the way you do, they would be greater understanding
between Muslims and Christians, Unfortunately, they read it differently and we
must acknowledge that point,

Bill Sorensen

"Christ never asked us to tear down other religions but
simply that we lift Him up."

This is a "false dilemma". It is impossible to
lift up Christ without "tearing down" false religions. Christianity
has always historically been attack precisely because it is not a "tolerant"
religion as evaluated by any heathen idea of faith and spirituality. Every
confession of faith except true Protestantism as the bible being the final
authority, is a cult. There is no "radical" Muslim sect. The
so-called radicals are the true dynamic of the Muslim faith. Just like the
Jesuits are the true Catholic faith. True Christanity is radical. Bible
Adventism is radical. The devil wants to create a non-definitive eccumencial
spirituality that not only tolerates error and false teaching, but approves and
advocates it.

 

Only true bible Protestantism advocates seperation of church
and state. No other religion in the world advocates this concept. Catholicism
certainly does not. And modern America is rapidly abandoning the Constitution
and opting for the unity of church and state. While the violent Muslims who
attack society like the cowards they really are, they simply reflect the true
spirituality of their religion. And their spirituality in principle is exactly
like that of the Roman Catholic church and every other false religion. There is
no distinction between the "radicals" and the true faith of the
Muslim religion.

Courtney Edwards

While it is true that the Adventists have a responsibility
to be foremost in representing just laws...it is also true that we, in so
doing, do not represent just laws in a self serving way. It is certainly as
unjust to support legislation to keep the "ten commandments" whether
in a church, not in support of the ten commandments, or in a school, or a
courthouse. .As it is just as unjust to legislate that anyone must subscribe to
the religious belief of any other. The events in Paris makes for a reality
check. We certainly would not and cannot support any legislation that restricts
the free exercise of the Islamic religion; no matter how extreme any faction of
Islam might be.

 

And whether or not the religion is ruled by individuals or a
central authority; the reality is; the exercise of the religion, as long as it
conforms to the norms of religions as accepted by civil society, has to be
supported by Adventists. The mission to preempt the passing of any religious
laws will be better served by not supporting any group, no matter how well
meaning; that attempts by any public means to draw attention to serving God;
whether by drawing attention to the "commandments of God";
"homosexuality"; "abortion"; or any other religiously
driven agenda by those who proclaim to champion God in the society. If we must
speak against these evils, we speak against them to those who are willing to
listen; and not to those who we are trying to convince against their will or
their beliefs.

Dave

I've always wondered why there exists such radicalism in the
Islamic faith. The primary answer that keeps popping up in my head is that they
don't have the hierarchical system that other religions have. All other
denominations have someone to answer to. If an individual SDA church decided to
gun down people that disagreed with them, they would be denounced by the
conference structure, much the same as other Christian denominations, and
brought into line and promptly handed over to the authorities.

 

But each Islamic community is guided by it's local leadership, which doesn't seem to pay homage to a bigger system. So if a cleric becomes hateful toward others, he's got a
group of young radicals that will do his bidding. And no leadership to shut
them down, nor enough brave moderates to shut them down. In today's political
climate, the radicals have a lot of popular support, and the clerics to lead.
All this could be taken to mean that you aren't going to separate the peaceful
and radical elements very easily.

Elijah Mvundura 
Islam as part of RCC? I have heard that before and it's historically untrue. First
when Islam appeared around the 7th century AD, the Church (not yet called the
Roman Catholic) was not institutionally organized at all. It existed in
scattered cities and monasteries, because Europe was still rebuilding in the
wake of the collapse of the Roman Empire. Only after 1000 AD (with the recovery
of Europe) did the Church start to assume the institutional structure is has
now. Even then it so mixed with European state and society that is why the
whole European society was simply called Christian society, (societas
Christiana in Latin). Only after the collapse precipitated by the Protestant
Reformation did the Church come to be called the Roman Catholic Church.

That said, one does not even need all this historical
context to see that the Islam and Catholicism are lights apart. To cite one
salient example, Catholic veneration of images is the very antithesis of the
Islamic iconoclastic ire behind the Charlie Hebdo attack.

The cause of truth is not served by wild conspiracy
theories. We must never forget that the devil uses such theories to confuse
issues and divert us from the present truth that we need to know and preach.

 

 

 

 

Elijah Mvundura 

True there is a larger picture, but that does not warrant
stretching the smaller-picture to fit our hermeneutical fancies. Daniel 7 is
very clear: the "little horn" rises to power after the fourth beast
(that is after the Roman Empire, which collapsed in 476 AD). When Islam arose
around 620 century the pope (bishop of Rome) was still dependent on the
Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire). Only in 800 with the rise of Charlemagne in
the West did the Bishop of Rome gain the independence that allowed him to build
the papacy into the institution we know today. In short, it is a historical
travesty to say Islam is a branch of the Roman Catholic Church.

These facts or dates are not mere semanctics but historical
specifics that must be respected in order to accurately correlate prophecy with
history. If we don't get the small picture (history) right we can never
convince the skeptical world of the reality of the larger-picture (the great
controversy).

James 

Yes the Middeast Beast is in the last days.......... Now look
at Mecca, where its situated, Islam and its belief system, the Nations that
support Islam, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia......Hmmmm
if i wasnt mistaken, thats exactly the same geographical area that was
destroying gods people in Bible times and here it is again......this time they
are all united under islam to destroy first the sabbath keepers and then the
sunday keepers, its in their beliefs. Amazing, all happening in the span of one
generation, sounds like a 70 year period, Yes Jesus speaks about that in Matt
24......I wonder....I wonder......Islam is this whore riding the mid east
kingdoms going forth conquering and to conquer. WOW.....

Kai Mester 

The satanic ploy is to make us believe that the enemy is
located outside of our Western camp while he is in the midst of it.
Unfortunately, the majority of Christians do believe in this dispensationalist
theory and are in for a rude awakening.

 

Hammy

Let us first be clear about free speech. The media that we
all tend to follow is full of propaganda and lies, painting pictures in the
mind of the masses who follow it to believe what it reports is true.

What we have seen take place in USA, UK, Paris and other
countries in the name of terrorism is nothing but a smoke screen to what truly
is going on.

 

Let me first say that we wrestle not with flesh and blood
but with principalities and powers in high places; so let us never decide to
hate one another because of the evil that one might do to another.

 

If we just look at these foolish men who participated in
this hideous act in Paris, what is evident in my mind is how brainwashed and
simple they were in what they did. They were prepared to die, but did they
really want to die?

If these young men were true terrorists, would they not have
killed more people and in the middle of it, blow themselves up? Instead they
tried to run away and took hostages for protection.

Why was it that these brothers decided to commit suicide by
coming out with guns blazing, to an army of armed Police, after a so called
breakdown of communication?

Surely, if you were terrorists with grieviences against the
West, and are ready to die, you would kill as many people as you could before
killing yourself?

Maybe if these men were kept alive, they may have exposed
the real truth behind what they did and why they did it? I can not help but
think that it was imperative to have all these men killed so that they would
not expose those who put them up to this heinous act of evil.

All I am saying, do not believe the hyp...

Especially what you see and hear from the media. Remember who owns the
media and what their ultimate aim is. The one world government is to be
accepted by all to be the way to end all wars and terrorism, so by putting out
all these false flags only helps to herald in the new world order, where no man
can buy or sell unless they have the mark in their forehead or right hand.

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe_in_RP]

 

You can call Islam a religion of peace, as much as you can

call the KKK as a religion of peace. You will know them by their fruits and

their ideology. God may have people everywhere, but the islamic ideology is not

from God. Please dont confuse the two.

 

Longer exclude the violence in Islam claiming somehow that is a peaceful religion. I don't think the KKK was a good analogy.

 

When we look at the violence perpetrated towards women in Islamic countries, when we look at the extremism practice in the criminal system of Islamic countries, when we look at how violent leaders In the name of Islam continue to operate, we cannot call it peaceful.

 

Peaceful is not the right word. Yes I understand that there are many peaceful people in Islam, but that does not make it a peaceful religion.

 

We need to recognize this and deal with it accordingly.

[Gregory Matthews]

I disagree.   Islam as presented in the Quran is a religion of peace.

 

The problem is that Islam came into being is a culture of military combat.  In that context, the Quran teaches that military battles should be wages with vigor.  However, the Quran is also clear that those who cease to engage I military combat   should be dwelt with in a much more peaceful manner. 

 

Islam does have those who practice an extreme form of Islam.  But, that is true for Christianity also.

[Joe_in_RP]

Really. What form of Christianity beheads people?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

there are other ways, aside from decapitation, to kill people...one can maim, and even kill with words... Christians can excel at that...

[Tom Wetmore]

Sort of reminds me of Jesus' words to be more worried about those who kill the soul than those that kill the body... Or something like that.

[Gregory Matthews]

Joe, have you read the Quran, the entire book?   Do you understand the context in which its parts were written?

 

To answer your question:  Yes, I have.

 

The extreamists in Islam have often taken passages that in context applied to military combat, but not when combat operations ceased, to non combat situations.

 

In the history of Christianity we can see much of the same.

[CoAspen]

 

.....taken passages that in context......

...would say some different than what they were originally intended.

 

In the history of Christianity we can see much of the same.

 

But its' quite accepted for christians because they are all well meaning!!!

[Aliensanctuary]

Humanity always suffers when religions become political powers with armies and weapons at their disposal. Infected with satanic demons, fanatics care nothing for the rights, property, and lives of any who oppose their dogma or resist their oppressive, bloody rule of conquest and submission.

 

As agents of Satan, murderous fanatics would willingly bring a new Dark Age of terror, oppression, and bloodshed to this world, while the teachings of Christ, if followed by everyone, would create a world of peace, respect for life, and goodwill towards all.

[Joe_in_RP]

Gregory, the Quran is irrelevant.  There are many Muslim countries which are so intolerant, they will not allow people to bring in a Bible.

 

There are Muslim countries that kidnap women.

There are Muslim countries that mutilate women.

And let's not forget multiple wives. Child brides, the list goes on and on.

 

The violence and intolerance practiced by Muslim countries are clear evidence that it is not a religion of peace.

[Tom Wetmore]

Tell that that to the Muslims of Iraq besieged by multiple years of war inflicted on them by us.  It bears no more distinction than what you have given Islam for them to draw the very identical conclusion about the violence of this Christian nation waging war on them, killing tens of thousands of their people with great violence and just as vitriolic intolerance spewing forth from our borders against them as directed our way.

[Joe_in_RP]

Tom, I will not dispute your claims. However, even if there were no "great Satin" , they would still be violent.

 

The violence they perpetrate on the women of their society comes whether they are under attack or not. You picked one country however, there are many countries that are not under attack, and yet this terrible abuse of women is common in those societies. And to follow up on your example, Iraq when it was a Christian Integrated country, mostly Chaldean Catholics who represented almost 40% of the population, were highly tolerant of the women in their society. The women were far better off when Saddam was in power, and the Christians held a strong position in the government.

 

 

The point the original post made, and I agree with, is Islam is not a religion of peace. In countries like Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, and many other Islamic countries, there is no external enemy. Yet the brutality against the women of their society prove it is not a religion of peace.

[Joe_in_RP]

 

Then there is the whole idea of mut‘a marriage.  Often translated as “temporary” marriage, the word mut‘a simply means  “pleasure”—i.e., a marriage for the sole purpose of “pleasure.”  These “marriage” contracts are made between a Muslim man and woman for a temporary duration and often for the sole purpose of legitimizing otherwise banned sexual relations—basically a legalized form of prostitution.  Koran 4:24 exonerates pleasure marriage, as many Muslim doctrinaires hold:

And [also prohibited to you are all] married women

except those your right hands possess [sex slaves].

[This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse.

So whatever you enjoy of them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation

. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/raymond-ibrahim/how-islamic-doctrines-justify-sex-jihad/

 

No matter what the top PR agencies are telling you, this is not a religion of peace.

[Tom Wetmore]

 

The point the original post made, and I agree with, is Islam is not a religion of peace. In countries like Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, and many other Islamic countries, there is no external enemy. Yet the brutality against the women of their society prove it is not a religion of peace.

 

 

Maybe they need a feminist movement...  

[LifeHiscost]

  Islam as presented in the Quran is a religion of peace.

 

Islam does have those who practice an extreme form of Islam.  But, that is true for Christianity also.

However, Muslim leaders do not present failures of their followers to be absolved through the death of one or any of them that I'm aware of, whether their repentant or not.

 

əbˈsälv

verb

verb: absolve; 3rd person present: absolves; past tense: absolved; past participle: absolved; gerund or present participle: absolving

1. set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility.

   "the pardon absolved them of any crimes"

   synonyms: exonerate, discharge, acquit, vindicate; More

   release, relieve, liberate, free, deliver, clear, exempt, let off;

   formalexculpate

   "this fact does not absolve you from responsibility"

   forgive, pardon

   "I absolve you of your sins"

   antonyms: blame, condemn, punish

   • Christian Theology

     give absolution for (a sin).

      

     God is Love!  Jesus saves!