-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Winston Churchill on Politics, and Mohammedanism in 1899
- Thread starter carpro
- Start date
T
TisHerself
Guest
False religion is false religion. Much of the Bible is devoted to denouncing pagan religions and perversion of the true worship of God. </font>[/QUOTE]How would you like it if you were outnumbered by those of a different religion and they condemned your Christianity and made life hellish for you?
Again, their sins are between them and God. I say we should live and let live. Making sure our lives are a witness, of course. Being a bully does no one good. I'm sure they think their religion is the true religion and ours is a load of garbage. That is their right. We don't have to agree with them and they don't have to agree with us.
Don't be mean in the name of God!
False religion is false religion. Much of the Bible is devoted to denouncing pagan religions and perversion of the true worship of God. </font>[/QUOTE]How would you like it if you were outnumbered by those of a different religion and they condemned your Christianity and made life hellish for you?
Again, their sins are between them and God. I say we should live and let live. Making sure our lives are a witness, of course. Being a bully does no one good. I'm sure they think their religion is the true religion and ours is a load of garbage. That is their right. We don't have to agree with them and they don't have to agree with us.
Don't be mean in the name of God! </font>[/QUOTE]Perhaps it would help if you would explain in detail what liberals mean when they say "don't be mean in the name of God!" For one thing, which God are you talking about?
T
TisHerself
Guest
False religion is false religion. Much of the Bible is devoted to denouncing pagan religions and perversion of the true worship of God. </font>[/QUOTE]How would you like it if you were outnumbered by those of a different religion and they condemned your Christianity and made life hellish for you?
Again, their sins are between them and God. I say we should live and let live. Making sure our lives are a witness, of course. Being a bully does no one good. I'm sure they think their religion is the true religion and ours is a load of garbage. That is their right. We don't have to agree with them and they don't have to agree with us.
Don't be mean in the name of God! </font>[/QUOTE]Perhaps it would help if you would explain in detail what liberals mean when they say "don't be mean in the name of God!" For one thing, which God are you talking about? </font>[/QUOTE]I am seriously resenting being called a liberal as if it were a dirty name! I have resisted calling you a RightWingRadical, haven't I? Have you ever seen me call anyone here a name? Get over yourself and get serious, will you? This is so petty I can't believe I'm going to respond!
I'm talking about Our Heavenly Father who sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to walk amongst us for a short while. Who do you think I'm talking about!?!?!? You are right now being mean in a very self-righteous way, to me. If I were not a solid Christian, I would be forced to consider whether or not I want to associate with a group who behaves in such a manner!
And all liberals didn't say that! I said it! I am an individual made perfect and original and like no other, by God Almighty. I may not be perfect now, but that is how I started out. So back off!
T
TisHerself
Guest
Once right, always right, eh? Then I guess you believe that Bush was right to go to war and also right to have approved gay marriage and abortion in the past?
T
TisHerself
Guest
Once right, always right, eh? Then I guess you believe that Bush was right to go to war and also right to have approved gay marriage and abortion in the past? </font>[/QUOTE]Kind of a stretch for the subject at hand, don't you think?
</font>[/QUOTE]Nope! We are talking about Churchill and if he was always rightTry to keep up, carpro!
j/k!!!
Irrelevant, but thanks for the info. </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all irrelevant. It shows that Churchill was making a value judgment about another culture (with which he'd had sooo much contact) while his own government was countenancing death sentences upon thousands of women and children.
The Muslims shouldn't be too upset, though. Churchill thought pretty much the same about all wogs.
Churchhill would have been against Gay Marriage as Well.
Irrelevant, but thanks for the info. </font>[/QUOTE]Not at all irrelevant. It shows that Churchill was making a value judgment about another culture (with which he'd had sooo much contact) while his own government was countenancing death sentences upon thousands of women and children.
</font>[/QUOTE]Your correlation is still irrelevant. You guys do like to muddy the waters, don't you?
That doesn't change the fact that he was correct in his assessment?
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
1. Our religion is mocked all of the time already. Christianity has been mocked and persecuted since its earliest days.
2. Paul certainly mocked the false gods on Mars Hill. I believe it was Elijah who mocked the false gods before he called down fire from heaven from the one and only true God.
3. We not only have a right to tell others what to believe, but an obligation. It is called the Great Commission.
4. I do, however, agree with your last point.
Joseph Botwinick
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
It is one thing to tell them and quite another to earn the right to be heard. BTW that can be done in a few minutes of putting them first as Jesus did to those he sahaed with.
I am around Muslims and Hindus almost every day. We earn the right to tell them about our faith when they see our faith in action.
What they have seen on TV makes them wonder how Christian people could be so stupid to follow those charlatans. These people are well educated and companies have brought them here because the US cannot fill the present need.
As we share with people we must do as Jesus did when he made connections with them. As one will notice when Jesus spoke with the Sadducees he only shared with them from the Torah. When Jesus spoke with the Pharisees he used the entire OT. So must we do the same when we share with others. We must start with whatever they consider credible. Some people are open right away and others it takes a lot of time. William Carey took 11 years for his first convert. Gosd gives wisdom. There are times when we must shake the dust off our feet and other times we will be able to engage people.
In the last few years as I have listened more to people I have led many more to Christ than when I went about as a salesman telling them but listening little. </font>[/QUOTE]Nobody is talking about personal witnessing to individuals who are our neighbors, friends and coworkers. We're talking about a World Religion that is Wrong and a Worldview that is Tremendously Destructive when taken to the extreme as is often done in the Muslim World.
BTW, this is the Political Forum not the Evangelism Forum. </font>[/QUOTE]This is true. I would only add that any religion or worldview that is truly taken to the extreme can be tremendously destructive. I am thinking about the crusades, slavery, segregation, liberalism, conservativism, etc...
Joseph Botwinick
Joseph_Botwinick
<img src=/532.jpg>Banned
This is the politics forum.
Churchill's statement is about the effects of Islam on the population or "votaries" as he called it.
He penned this over 100 years ago and he was dead right. It's amazing how right he still is. </font>[/QUOTE]I think Churchill was a bigot.
Would Jesus have kept all the people of Islam from the temple or would he have invited them in? Perhaps he should have turned them away! Dirty heathens!
Bah! This is 2005, not 1905. </font>[/QUOTE]Did Churchill ban all the people of Islam from the temple? Why do you say he is a bigot?
Joseph Botwinick
Carpro
"That doesn't change the fact that he was correct in his assessment? "
"
First of all it's never truly was his own assessment and second only partly.
I have seen a huge and very ingenious system of irrigation* in Iran that proofs "slovenly systems of agriculture" isn't universally true.
And I've seen plenty of "grace and refinement" in various aspects of Islamic culture, from architecture to cuisine.
*yes it predates American involvement with Iran by centuries.
"That doesn't change the fact that he was correct in his assessment? "
"
First of all it's never truly was his own assessment and second only partly.
I have seen a huge and very ingenious system of irrigation* in Iran that proofs "slovenly systems of agriculture" isn't universally true.
And I've seen plenty of "grace and refinement" in various aspects of Islamic culture, from architecture to cuisine.
*yes it predates American involvement with Iran by centuries.
Wow, how did I use the word liberal except in a straight forward way when I wrote, "Perhaps it would help if you would explain in detail what liberals mean when they say "don't be mean in the name of God!" For one thing, which God are you talking about?"?
("I am seriously resenting being called a liberal as if it were a dirty name! I have resisted calling you a RightWingRadical, haven't I? Have you ever seen me call anyone here a name? Get over yourself and get serious, will you? This is so petty I can't believe I'm going to respond!
I'm talking about Our Heavenly Father who sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to walk amongst us for a short while. Who do you think I'm talking about!?!?!? You are right now being mean in a very self-righteous way, to me. If I were not a solid Christian, I would be forced to consider whether or not I want to associate with a group who behaves in such a manner!
And all liberals didn't say that! I said it! I am an individual made perfect and original and like no other, by God Almighty. I may not be perfect now, but that is how I started out. So back off!)
How should anyone know which God is being discussed without a definition? How am I being mean by asking a question about the definition of the terms being used? I thought that a person was always supposed to be ready to give an answer for the hope that is in him. You sure give a lot of advice--get over yourself, don't be mean, etc., etc., etc. Do you believe in matriarchy?
("I am seriously resenting being called a liberal as if it were a dirty name! I have resisted calling you a RightWingRadical, haven't I? Have you ever seen me call anyone here a name? Get over yourself and get serious, will you? This is so petty I can't believe I'm going to respond!
I'm talking about Our Heavenly Father who sent his only Son, Jesus Christ to walk amongst us for a short while. Who do you think I'm talking about!?!?!? You are right now being mean in a very self-righteous way, to me. If I were not a solid Christian, I would be forced to consider whether or not I want to associate with a group who behaves in such a manner!
And all liberals didn't say that! I said it! I am an individual made perfect and original and like no other, by God Almighty. I may not be perfect now, but that is how I started out. So back off!)
How should anyone know which God is being discussed without a definition? How am I being mean by asking a question about the definition of the terms being used? I thought that a person was always supposed to be ready to give an answer for the hope that is in him. You sure give a lot of advice--get over yourself, don't be mean, etc., etc., etc. Do you believe in matriarchy?
He wrote it. It's his. Others probably held the same view. It may have even been a broadly held view. That doesn't mean it's not his. No one, including Churchill, ever said he was the only one that felt that way. He could have arrived at this conclusion on his own after evaluating all available information.
You don't know any different, do you?