Questions for fellow Christians to answer

Sure, read what you wrote. You certainly are not linking back to anything for clarification nor will you. Having been through this nonsense with dozens of atheists before you, I already know it pointless to go back. Its just like quoting the Bible for you, you see ONLY what you want too.

Take a look around, the enemy was in the pew (which of course you have never said now) and all the Christians around you that you have to attack with fruit of the spirit attacks (which of course you have never said now) and your friends are overt Jesus Mythers. Men who will lie at the drop of hat if it injures someone with faith.

Borther, your road is open before you and you know where you are headed. Just remember as you venture down the road away from God he reached out, and you swatted his hand away. You know.

 

I Never Denied I Said Those Things!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What In God's Name Is Wrong With You???????

 

Ignore him if he's upsetting you.
I made the mistake of letting him get under my skin and provoke into untowards behavior.

He makes all kinds of outrageous claims, he is supposedly a serious practicing student of Islam, a soldier fighting alongside Muslims, a Middle East History scholar and personally knows Iraqi Federal Police Commander, staff Lt. Gen. Hussein Jassem Mohammed Al Awadi who is like a brother to him.

I also lean agnostic.
I do believe in a higher power, but get fairly disgusted with much of the petty antics in organized religion.

 

Agh, so who I am gets under your skin?

Yes, I am an officer, a rather senior one, which is why I was assigned as an embedded advisor to sLTG Hussein Jassim al Awadi and his staff, my performance earned me the honor of visiting him and his family inside the Green Zone. At no point have I ever claimed to be a practicing student of Islam, I am Christian, but I have read the Koran and great many of the hadith, and, as you know, spent a great deal of time in the Middle East where, learning about history, culture, and their religion in order to SERVE them rather than just myself - in accordance with MY religious principles. I am not Middle Eastern Historian, my specialty is actually diplomatic and military history - but the principles apply, and have been used for ecclesastical history and Middle Eastern History, and now Af-Pak history.

BTW - they are the Iraqi National Police (not federal Police) and though he currently still hold the top job, the day to day operation sfall on the CoS MG Adnon, whose son is a tremendous fan of one Miley Cirus. His daughter likes horses. LTG Hussein is currently the defacto commander of the Baghdad Operations Center. I am sure you knew all this though, which is why you felt it necessary to publically call me a liar?

BTW - the last thing I did in Iraq was have a private session with LTG Hussein, he asked me what I learned during my time there and we talked about coming from the US, seeing the INP as over run with Shia malitia, and then finding almost rediculously honorable men instead. Finding brave men who wished to serve their country, venturing into the remote corners of Iraq to find genuine bad guys, a brotherhood, a goodness that I did not expect to find. His last words to me were, "Promise me that you will remember what you learned here." I gave my word to a man I repsect more than almost any other. You know what honor is do you not?

That is why I have such a low tolerance for bogots who target Islam in ignorance, and who think their ignorance is a good thing. Their bigotry sound. I do inded hope that being called out for such antics got under your skin - it should.

These things, which I and my peers do with regularity given our ten years history of war, is outrageous to you? It is outrangeous to you that other people are brave, honorable, and intellectual?

What is it with atheists and the need to knock others down? What is about success that gets under the skin of atheists?

Because, apparently, the very fact that I have achieved something bothers you, but people misquoting the Bible, denying history (even overtly lying about it), accusing people of all manner of short comings, sits just fine with you?

It does not sit fine with me.

The outrageous lies and shortcomings, the abuse, and fruit of spirit attacks that pass as atheist intellectualism these days are disgusting. The fact that someone is clearly struggling with their faith and all you can say is, "Heh, its fine, organized religion disgusts me! Don't let their defenders bother you, its natural to lose you faith!"

No, its not. There are many reasons to lose faith, but th elose of genuine faith is a tremendously painful thing. Someone losing their faith is ceryainly not a excuse for a jealous tirade of lashing out.

Of course, that is pretty much all modern atheists can do - oh pardon me, you believe in a vauge higher power that you do nothing to discern and are metrely digusted by those of us who move beyond vaugeness.

 

Thanks kshRox01. I'll try to ignore him, but I have to laugh when he considers himself an intellectual and then isn't able to parse the very words written on a screen, transforming them into all kinds of strange accusations.
I feel kind of sorry for him, as he is trapped into seeing all kinds of things that are not there because of the doctrinal cloud he peers through.
Anyway, thanks for the support.

 

You may be telling the absolute truth, but I doubt it.

Your temperament here looks to be someone who is angry, petty and arrogant. I hope out military has a larger pool of qualified people to promote to leadership positions.

Why don't you bring things down a notch and talk to people instead of calling names, insulting and bridging absolutely no room for disagreement?

 

Oh look, ANOTHER personalized attack - all because someone noticed that you have not read the Koran, have no interaction with Muslims, have never been to middle east, and have no academic qualification or even a studious back ground upon which to base an entire series of bigoted claims about over a billion people.

Somehow though, noticing this is simply emotional anger? Its petty to actually study to the point where you realize straight away when someone is pulling something out of the arse? It is extremely arrogant to stop someone dismissing people, based on the religion alone, as a malicious and evil person?

Yes, I am clearly the bad one here?

There is a simple method os resolution without abridging privacy. Makedde is one of the mods, and quite frankly she is of sound character. Should she agree, I will happily send her pictures of me with LTG Hussien (and indeed other National Policeman). My name and rank are displayed in the photos, and that aspect should remain private. However, if you continue to question the honor of those who have accomplished in general, and me specifically - if you need that route, then it will become a challenge. If I am wrong, if Mak says there is no such thing, I will be permabanned from this site. If I am right, YOU will be permabanned.

So, you can either apologize for yet another malicious smear fest, or you can accept my challenge and await your permabanning.

Its up to you.

By the way, when you run around calling people outrageous liars, well, that is not debate and there is no room for anything but disagreement. It ieither is or it is not.

Now back up your stupid claims with something besides your temper and incomprehension that someone would dare to stand up to you.

 

Wow! Were you looking in the mirror when you asked that question? Remember also, that the 'supporting' "evidence" has to be empirical evidence.. Not the opinions of other people.

 

Tone it down and we could have a conversation.
Yes, you are acting badly here.

As for my comment about your professionalism and the military, you can take it as an insult if you wish, but think about it. If you were somebody else reading your posts, would you believe it? Fair Question.

PS: Yes, your claims (I did not use the term lie here) do seem a bit outlandish. If you were a bit more humble rather than the self-proclaimed expert you would probably get more people willing to listen to your arguments. Frankly, you seem too young to me to have accomplished all you claim (jmho). I would believe you are working towards expertise in these issues, and as far as studying Islam as a practitioner makes you an expert on the religion - by that logic I would be an expert on Christianity, Mormonism and Buddhism (which I am not).

 

Tone it down? Are you serious? Who are you to judge?

Let me answer your question, other than petulant mewling, how do you think people view wanton bigotry toward Muslims? How do they think they view your anger and derision, indeed bullying toward others?

I do not have to justify myself to you stud. Are we clear?

Let me post some of your highlights:

Who the hell are you again?

Oh, but you are not calling me a liar, just a person who makes outrageous claims?

Best that others tone it down and maintain a cool head, eh? Others decidedly lack professionalism but not you! No sir, atheists can indeed ONLY find fault in others.

So, factually wrong and full of contradictions.

And of course, everyone who disagrees with you is a liar and an idiot. Their expertis an extension of that dishonesty, yours .... based on ignorance, must be valid.

Save your hypocrisy, any more posts aimed at me will simply be reported at this point. The idea that your silliness should not be stood up to is simply assinine.

There is no discussion with bigotry, it isn't reasonable. It can, and indeed should, be exposed for what it is.

So either apologize, or take my challenge slick.

 

Exactly what I'm talking about.
Tone it down, stop the insults and attacks.
I'm not judging, just saying look at it for what it is.
I do have some questions for you, but I'm not sure you can calm down and have a discussion.

I'll even apologize to you.
I'm sorry for getting carried away and engaging in trading insults.

How about we try again, and both act reasonable and respectful to eachother?

What do you say? Cease fire? Truce?

 

Okay, here goes.

You are embedded with Islamic Troops to fight Islamic Troops.

You make the point that Hekmatyar ruthlessly bombed Kabul in violation of human rights.
You criticize me for stating Hekmatyar represented Pakistan interests.
You state that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with Hekmatyar and his ability to destoy Kabul.

>>>>>

My point is you despise Hekmatyar and extoll the virtues of your Muslim brothers in arms -
your freedom fighters today are likely our mess tomorrow.

Hekmatyar did represent not only Pakistan interests as that is where he went after being banished from Afghanistan
and they financed and supported his campaign against his nation of birth.

But here's the kicker, the United States also supported and financed Hekmatyar.
He was 'our' guy as well as Bin Laden.

I state Hekmatyar could not have smashed Kabul if the Soviets had not already bombed the rest of Afghanistan to rubble.

You state Kabul is a city, not a nation .... (non-sequitor?)

Today we support the Muslims you fight for, against the Muslims you say are the violent rogue minority.
You also state this rogue minority is 50 people.

My point is no, the Muslims we supported yesterday are the ones we fight today.
The Muslims we support today are very likely to be the ones we fight tomorrow.
It was already in the news how 2000 US Stinger Missiles in Libya have gone missing,
very likely to the 'good Muslims' we were fighting for and will undoubtedly fall into the hands
of the 'bad Muslims' you are fighting against(probably all 50 of them).
It's like Democrats and Republicans - it's just labels and propoganda, they both belong to the same team.

We play one faction against the other for our interests, not humanitarian reasons.
There is no oil in Rawanda which is why we let them pretty much exterminate eachother.
There is oil in the Middle East which is why we have 14 permanent bases there,
while our politicians blandly lie through their teeth when they tell us we're bringing the troops home anytime soon.

I'm not insulting you, I'm not calling you names.

I'm stating the positions you've claimed and my opposition.
I find it 'outlandish' which is perhaps a bad word so let's say -
I find it impossibly hard to believe that we need 45K+ troops in multiple countries to fight 50 bad Muslims.

No, Muslims are not entirely to blame for our current situation.
We have positively exploited, murdered and robbed them in their own lands.
(and we continue to do so)
No, I'm not saying we are entirely to blame for our current situation.

I'm saying we need to quit playing politics with Muslims and we need to quit making excuses for them as well.

We are Invaders in the Middle East NOT [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DboMAghWcA"]War Hero's[/ame]

Cynical politicians who are interested in strategic resources, not any particular group of Muslims over another are using you - [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiF6l-LCLm8"]politicians are using you[/ame].

 

No, I was embedded with the Iraqi National Police, and indeed the Iraqi Army, the legal and military wings of the lawful Iraqi government, most of whom were Muslims. Together we fought against men who employed terrorism and criminality, often for local political purposes or to settle old tribal disputes and occassionally to simply engage in wanton criminality. THey were also often supported by foreign governments, armed and trained them and then sent them not to help the people but to exploit them. They too claimed to be Muslims, but their tactics were largely rejected by the people, and their ideology was soundly rebuffed - which is why you see the awakening movement in Iraq.

Most of the Islamic world was no engaged in the fight, and the larger ideological construct of deobandi and Whabbist thought against more tolerant sufism and mainstream Islam is akin to the debate between Pentacoastalism and other more liberal Christian denominations.

You point, as I have long stated, is simply not accurate and proned to gross over simplification and generalization.

No, I criticized you because you claimed it was the Russians and Americans who destroyed Kabul. It was Hekmatyar who launched the initial desruction of Kabul, for reasons that have nothing to do with Pakistan. Indeed Masood and the Taliban later would launch similiarly and equally devetating assaults on Kabul in their drives to unify Afghnaistan by force.

I criticize Pakistan because it constantly plays a double game. It claims no support, but beyond the denials it supports everyone. It supported both Hekmatyar and the Taliban even as they were at cross purposes, while telling the other, and indeed its own people, that it supported neither. It continues this behavior, as you see in the news, by supporting Hekmatyar, the Haqqani network, and the Quetta Shura - openly destabiling Afghanistan and, due the to corruption and illegal smuggling networks it has set up through the ISI, itself.

The biggest casualty of Pakistan's two facedness is itself, it is a pariah in the region trusted by no one, and ties are maintained solely out of calculated interest - even the Taliban, as we saw in Swat, do not appreciate that kind of dishonor.

Hekmatyar is not an Iraqi National POliceman is he? And indeed, if we are fighting and killing his foot Soldiers, how exactly would this be a 'brother in arms?'

My borthers in arms in Afghanistan would be the Afghan National Army, the Afghan National Police, the Tribal Defense Network, and the provincial and district governors who risk their lives to bring legitimate government to the people - to serve others.

Once again, whose fault is it that you attempt to make our enemies our friends?

Hekmatyar is an Afghan tribal leader. He'll get support from anywhere that he can get it to advance his own interests.

Tell me, how does this make anyone other than the Pakistani government complicit? The billion plus Muslims who live outside Pakistan and have no ability to influence this - who have repeatedly expressed disgust with Hekmatyar are what to you?

They were never 'our' guy. THey were the guys that Pakistan insisted the majority of funds, from both us and the Middle East, were funneled to seven groups, of which Hekmatyar is was one - for the same reasons he gets funding today - like it or not, he's the man in southeast Afghanistan.

Bin Laden's financial expertise was fromo the Middle East, and any ties with the CIA were at best ancillary, as his network was not one favored by Pakistan. Bin Laden was immersed in the murky network of transnational smuggling - which continues to be a regional problem. The claim that the US supported Bin Laden is nothing more than exaggeration.

Once there was a power vaccum, yes he could. The Russians are not to blame for Afghans communists overthrowing the Kingdom.

No, I said AQ is at most 5,000 operatives, and that 50 agents were all the was necessary to conduct 9-11.

Please get your facts straight, I have corrected that deliberate mis-statement three times now. ANyone can rebut their own strawmen.

Like the Germans? The Vietnamese? THe British?

I did not realize that atheists have the gift of prophecy. I would point in the opposite historical direction. The wars we have fought are regional, and after the wars we fight, there is greater cooperation not wars. See Europe, Asia, and now the Middle East.

We have never sold Stringer Missiles to Lybia. SA-7's which are readily available, work just as well. Stingers are 1980's technology.

Additionally, I will again point out that we fight not just Al Qaeda, but the Taliban and its various manifestations in Afghanistan. Why you insist on deliberately misquoting things, I have no idea.

Oil drives the world economy. We have a right to defend our interests.

Rawanda is a land locked country with poor infastructure, do you have any idea how difficult it would be to send and sustain forces there? And which country would allow bases for the US to conduct military operations in a neighboring country? Again, you do not understand war as much as you think you do.

Well, such a statement is only possible when you deliberately misquote someone. 9-11 is not the entirety of the Islamic extremist movement.

How do we exploit them by purchasing oil from them? Which Muslim lands did we occupy before 9-11?

Well, if WE are to blame, best these men that are first dishonorable but now completely honorable defeat us then?

Again, you contradict yourself to basically blame everyone. SOlutions? They ellude you.

Politics is necessary. How else do nations discuss their interests?

No one watches you-tube videos BTW, they are not arguementation.

 

Thank you for your polite and informative response.
If I misquoted you I will correct it.
I will look carefully at what you have written to understand correctly and reply when I have time.

 

Neutral does not have much material so he often makes things up.

 

Oh lok more flame bait.

 

Could you show this to be fact ? (bold)

 

The Church of Rome represented a large segment of Christianity, Others were Gnostic.

Name one other church group(s) that does not fit into either of these catagories that represents a significant segment of Christianity ?

 

Others were Gnostic,sure I can accept that but you said the Gnostics made up "most" of the early Christians unless I misunderstood what you wrote.

 

Ever heard of Arianism? It was even more of a big deal than Gnosticism and caused the Church much greater problems.

 

Arianism did not exist in the first century. It was a teaching attributed to Arius who was not even born until 250 AD.

Arius, and the many sects that followed Arianism, did not believe in the doctrine created by Constantine that Christians recite every Sunday in church known as the Nicene Creed.

The issue in dispute was the doctrine of the trinity. The key phrase was the term homoousios meaning (one substance) as in "One substance with the Father"

To the Greeks there were two types of matter - one which God was made of and the other which everything else was made of .. plants, animals, humans, air, earth, wind, fire, and even angels.

Claiming Jesus was homoousious meant that Jesus "was" God and this was not well accepted at first, not even Eusebius.

Constantine however insisted, and it was not wise to disagree with the Emperor.

Arius found this out the hard way as did many others who did not fall in line with Constantines new religious edict.

Constantine made Jesus God. He did this because he wanted only one religion with one God. Some centuries earlier the Persians had been successfully unified under monotheistic Zoroastrianism. This historical lesson was not lost on Constantine.

With one religion and only one God, Constantine declared himself "Pontifex Maxximus" .. Bishop of Bishops.

Absolute power that no one could contest and the ability to speak for God.

If there are multiple Gods and multiple religions, speaking for God does not carry much weight.

With only one religion and only one God, speaking for God is the ultimate authority. This authority is unchallengeable.

 

Name specifically what Christian Church recites every Sunday the Nicene Creed. How do you KNOW that these people are Christians? What test was performed to make such a determination?

 

LOL It is recited every Sunday at the Lutheran Church I attended, and every other Church I have ever attended.

Apparently it is included in the Sunday services of a few other Churches as well.

What kind of Church do you attend ?

 

That is amazing. I used to attend church on a regular basis, but have never been asked to recite anything with regard to any 'creed'. I guess that is what I get for not going to those 501c3 churches. Even in my youth, I was in attendance at a Baptist church and was never asked to recite anything. You must have been in attendance in one of those churches that enjoy brainwashing people instead of teaching the people how to commune with God from the spirit as opposed to communing through an automated script written by who knows.

 

What test could be performed to determine if one is a Christian, by your standards?