Iran to strike enrichment deal with Russia

...and this 'joint venture' will be IN ADDITION TO the nuclear refining facilities Iran already is or has built and are waiting to go on line? Just askin...

This is the kind of insanity from Russia I'm coming to expect.

The sides are being drawn.

OT OT OT Alert:

Fellow Jihadwatchers, I need some input. I'm trying to collect a compendium of Web Articles on Islam from various writers. I plan on distributing this massive collection to some of the leading bloggers in the right blogosphere (unaltered in Word format) in order to help people get more informed about the theory and practice of Islam. I will plan to add the foundational texts as well (MB permitting of course). I just need some of your opinions on who I should include in this list, here is my list thus far:

Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Rebecca Bynum
Ibn Warraq
Ali Sina
Bat Ye'or
Andrew Bostom
Wolfgang Bruno
Fjordman
Srdja Trifkovic
Diana West

I'm only including authors that MOSTLY focus on Islam and who are very familiar with the topic and have written quite a few articles on the topic as well. I am not including people who occassionally write about Islam (the sole exception being Bruno since his articles are so important). I didn't include Orianna Fallaci because I know a lot of people don't like her style, and if they are interested in what she has to say, then they can buy her books. I did not include Daniel Pipes because he CONSTANTLY contradicts himself and I think that would just end up confusing the readers. Plus, I hold him responsible for the "Moderate Islam is the solution" mantra which has caused mainstream liberals and conservatives to depend on moderate Muslims to fix the inherent problems with Islam. Who else should I include in my list? They just need plenty of articles or blog posts to be readily available online. Or is my list sufficient?

For what it's worth, the Soviets also were directly responsible for militarizing Nazi Germany durign the 1920s. History certainly repeats itself...

Hey, that's pretty good Charlie! LOL Can I put it on my blog?

Igor, I think your list is damn fine as it stands. Too much information is not always a good thing.

Good luck with that endeavor!

Igor, be sure to not include Daniel Pipes in that list. Pipes is an islamic apologist.

"It's a mistake to blame Islam, a religion 14 centuries old, for the evil that should be ascribed to militant Islam, a totalitarian ideology less than a century old. Militant Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution."

~Daniel Pipes

Pipes doesn't understand that the only difference between Islam in the last 100 years and Islam for the last 1400, is the creation of Israel and the oil money to prod them to take jihad to the world. He is another fool who makes a distinction between Islam and "radical" Islam. He doesn't get it yet.

foreign devil

You hit the nail on the head !

Iran is being very clever, by agreeing to this enrichment program with the Russians they hope to mislead the IAEA into thinking that all is well.

ALL previous domestic enrichmenet is now being moved underground.

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11165

It should be noted that the IAEA have never uncovered any clandestine Nuclear Program, this is in part because they are prevented from inspecting military installations.

This agreement is like locking the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Russia and China are triangulating against the US. One is a former superpower that would like to be one again, and the other wishes to be a superpower. To do that, in their eyes, the US must be diminished.

Both of those countries would like to see the US hit and harmed. They figure they will gain from it. They calculate that they might be around to pick up the pieces of a shattered West.

Who else should I include in my list?

Marshall McLuahan. The tremendous blitzkrieg-like success of bin Laden's 1998 call for global jihad is largely impelled by how useful mass communications are to a victimist takeover movement (i.e., to Islam).

The only thing that disheartens me about this website is its ignorance of this subsuming reality. Intellectual books are near useless. Books take 10 years to make a tiny imprint on the public consciousness. Grad school treatises are awesome, in grad school.

The simple fact that almost nobody reads substantive books anymore makes necessary pursuit of an altnerative self-preservation action path, which is blatantly obvious.

At this late juncture, more intellectual books on Islam are not only useless, they're directly harmful to the survival of freedom.

Arab-fluent intellectuals who write books are near useless for the political role, we need a financier and an ad agency art director to politicize Islam mass murdre.

Is that asking too much to save civilization?

APF, you do have a point, but the authors of these Web Articles aren't appealling only to intellectuals, they are appealling to the layman. The trickle down effect of memes does take a long time to set in but people have to become informed somehow. The media certainly isn't helping inform the public. We have to do something. We have to break the habit of relying on these dangerous memes like "moderate Islam is the solution", "it's a tiny minority of extremists", "the faults with Islam can be blamed on poverty and the legacy of Western colonialism", and "Islam means peace". This is dangerous. People need to talk about what Islam really is and they need to read. Then we can talk about our media alternatives.

Remember Beslan. Russia stop aiding Muslims!

Perhaps they do remember Beslan. Making a deal is probably why there is not a repeat?

The trickle down effect of memes does take a long time to set in but people have to become informed somehow...

Here's how: Give me $10 milllion and I'll run a series of explicative prime time TV ads quoting from the Koran, Hadiths, Sirat, Tabari, and the various Sharia codes.

It's all sacralized, and it all would be severely shocking to the infidel masses. The course of world history would be changed by such an ad campaign.

Are we precluded from quoting Islam's scriptures? Are we consigned to grad school RealClearPolitics circle-jerk land?

Hmmmm...in the context of nuclear blackmail, maybe Russia's eventual unilateral and apparently unprovoked attack against Isreal, is not as far fetched as I first thought.

I wonder just how far Russia is willing to deal just to save Russian children?

Perhaps, Iran is wondering about the same thing?

Maybe Iran has some leverage that could be applied?

igor-

Don't forget historical quotes from famous figures.

People may not read a long article or entire book, but a pithy quip sticks, like a song lyric that your can't get out of your noggin.

Voltaire's play "Mohammad- or Fanaticism" can provide some, as well as President Adams' understanding of the threat we face[d] from the Mohammedans, Churchill's thoughts on Islam, etc.

And throw in some of the oddest Hadiths. (Bukhari, volume 2, book 26, line 666, -for instance)

And the most violent Suras from the Koran (9:29-30, ad nauseam.)

You can cull many from JW/DW, or at:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/

Slogans are also good anti-jihad psy ops.

Rhyme survives the test of time.

In the fast culture we inhabit, use every tool to impress the message.

Jihad is Bad. Terror, an error.

Alarmed Porcine Farmer-

I agree completely!

Quote the Motherforker!

Use his own vile bile to baste his sorry ass.

Exigetical excercises and long-winded analyses of the simple fact that maniacs quote a pedophile's warbook in order to conquer our lands, kill us, and obliterate our civilization, is a little too much too late. Like debating the number of rivets in the Titanic as it sinks.

Cut to the godammned chase, as they say in La-La Land.

In this case: Mohammad- the child-molester "prophet".

Demented plagiarist, assassin/murderer, rapist, thief and paragon of putrescence.

Stop with the "noble" and "holy" crap!

It demeans the words for when we need to use them for the truly noble and actually holy.

If I hit the Lotto, I'll send you the 10 VERY big ones for just such a EXPOSE ISLAM NOW! campaign.

But you may have to start a t.v. station first to broadcast it.

The existing ones are electromagnetic/digital capons.

I like the historical quotes idea. I'm always on the lookout for those...

Russia, Perhaps they do remember Beslan. Making a deal is probably why there is not a repeat?
Posted by: witness at April 22, 2006 07:05 PM
==============

The mo's do too and will remember the weakness and forget old treaties with Russia just before they attack Russia.

++++++++++++++++

Russia making nuke material for iran will just make nukes sooner for iran.

Israel needs to be sweating missiles and nukes over this one.

Mushroom clouds over the middle east and America are going to be coming sooner instead of later.

Prepare.
Be armed.
Be ready.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Here is my solution to the world's problems.

Actually solutions are simple if you have the cajones to implement them.

All Islamics in the west are deported back to the Middle East. All mosques are closed. That solves the domestic problem.

America and Russia make a pact. A draft is instituted. America puts 10 million men in uniform. They both invade the Middle Eastern oil countries. They share the spoils. Saudia Arabia and Iran, Qatar, UAE, the whole lot of them, are now under join US/Russian control. The price of oil plummets. That stabilizes the price of oil at $25 a barrel while the hydrogen economy is brought online. Hybrid electric cars are mandated by congress.

China is frozen out. They have to buy their oil from us at inflated prices. We then control the speed of their economy and the degree of their military threat.

The practice of islam is outlawed in public throughout the Middle East. Madrasses are outlawed. All children are enrolled in western, Christian schools. The hateful indoctrination stops.

Problem solved. In two generations, terrorism is a thing of the past.

That is what I would do. The west has the power to solve its problems, just not the will.

So Russia arms Iran to be their proxy truncheons against Israel and the West. If the Iranians succeed, Russia wins. If Iran gets nuked, the Russians still win. In either scenario they can feign ignorance, or else crank up the cold war again. Tick-Tock

In either scenario they can feign ignorance, or else crank up the cold war again. Tick-Tock

"check!" Chess is an interesting game -- let US not get snookered into a "fools mate" in four moves.

No worries if iran can build a nuke so can most any US boy scout. Neighborhood nuclear superiority, now that should put fear in a few imams. I can’t wait to see the merit badge for this.

Read this and see what happens to American kids with too much time on thier hands. Compare this to irans best minds and you will see why we will win.

http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html

To Foehammer & others
Are you aware America helped Saddam to stay in power even to the extent of sending him info from
American spy planes to pinpoint targets in the Iraq/Iran war? There are rumours CIA provided 'biological nasties' for Saddam to gas the Kurds although American Intelligence was well aware of who 'human guinea pigs' would be.
Also on the day of 9/11, one of Bin Laden's brothers was sitting in conference at the Ritz Carlton Hotel chaired by Carlye Group as planes exploded into Twin Towers! The only jet allowed into airspace the next day was the one carrying the Bin Laden family to safety...Can anyone explain why members of this family were not detained and questioned?
The naivety of some posters is apalling :rather like American foreign policy. Who has got rich from the Iraq War?? Certainly not the poor buggers who come back in body bags; the permanently
maimed and injured,those lacking eyes,limbs and
who are soon forgotten. Whilst those around Bush,the Dick Cheneys,Rumsfelt,Condi Rice,even Colin Powell[presented as a man of integrity] have become richer & richer-bet the President himself has too.Not surprisingly these 'patriotic' darlings all have ties to weapons and oil-just a coincidence I'm sure.
Iraq has proved to have no weapons of mass destruction. Whilst Saudi Arabia daily funds terrorism and huge mosques around the world-have one of the latter in my own backyard. If America wanted to win 'the war on terror', it would have gone for the Head of the Snake-Saudi Arabia- instead of going in after Saddam when he had served America's purpose.
We NEED ALL THE ALLIES WE CAN GET NOT MAKE NEW ENEMIES. America cannot claim 'holier than thou'
policies after prostituting themselves to the Saudis for decades.

igor: "I did not include Daniel Pipes because he CONSTANTLY contradicts himself and I think that would just end up confusing the readers. Plus, I hold him responsible for the "Moderate Islam is the solution" mantra which has caused mainstream liberals and conservatives to depend on moderate Muslims to fix the inherent problems with Islam."

Along those lines, and if you're looking for specific articles, I think this one by Laurence Auster (2 parts), directed at Daniel Pipes, is one of the best:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16798

I've been watching some debates on the 'net lately... and curious as to what you all think. Do Muslims and Christians worship the same "god?" Is the Muslim "Allah" the same diety as the Christian "God?" I say no. You?

Morgane:

Are you actually implying that I'm the naive one after that post of yours?

(chuckles)

Here's a little fact for you, since you're so anti-war: Republics play chess games with world powers to stay OUT of violent conflict. Of course I know that we manipulated Saddam, just like we've done with a dozen other thugs around the world during the two centuries this nation has been in existence.

Morgane, people like you will find someone to blame no matter what and you never have a solution that doesn't require clouds, silver-lining and plenty of fluff.

New enemies? The Muhammadans (Muslims, Islamists, Jihadists, etc) have been enemies to the entire world since that maniac first formed his cult and lured Bedouin tribesman with offers of plenty of carnal knowledge both here on Earth and in Heaven.

Amazingly, that little offer hasn't changed an iota in over 1300 years. Ever stop to ask yourself how it's possible that so many (and there have been dozens if not hundreds by now) Muslim devotees willingly BLOW THEMSELVES TO KINGDOM-COME?! It's because they BELIEVE the lies!

Islam should be and will be erradicated from this planet. It's the worst crime put upon us as a species and it demands a reckoning.

Do not come to me with pity for our enemies. Tell it to the families of the 9/11 victims and the soldiers that have died overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq.

More fighting is yet to come. Do you seriously think that your freedoms are given to you by wordsmiths? Soldiers give you the air to breathe and the water to drink while you sit back and play armchair quarterback with World Politics.

Give me a break!

OT: Inspired by Hugh's comments on another thread -- http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/011130.php -- I worked hard today and tonight and got a good start on a new little something to add to my blog (and this conflict). It's far from complete but I think you'll like the idea. Feel free to email me any links to valid wikipedia entries or otherwise that relate stories of Muslim's conquering cities, destroying temples, churches, monuments, cemetaries, statues, holy places, etc. or anything else you think might fit the bill, and I'll add what I can and deem fitting.

After I get a good deal further into this current map, I'll probably use the same flash system to create different variations. I think my next project will be marking all documented Muslim suicide bombings, murders, beheadings, etc. in the past 100 years. That should be a real eye-opener.

Oh, and I created the little animated Black Flag of Jihad myself. I thought it was appropriate.

Here's the link to what I've mapped/linked so far:

http://www.foehammer.net/map/world/whatwaslost.html

Now, I'm off to get some sleep.

Igor

You may want to include two important writers. They don't exclusively deal with Islam, but they deal with it very often. And where they do, they have proven a profound understanding of the matter and they can properly place it in geo-political context.

These two scholars are The Complete Spengler from Asia Times (atimes.com) and Francesco Gil-White from hirhome.com.

You perhaps ought to to add Ephraim Karsh to your list even if he is not above reproach. Then maybe Joseph Farah. Admittedly, he has a messianic agenda which in itself can put people off. But he stands a valiant guard, and his worldnetdaily.com continuosly provides a source of invaluable information.

Forget the Hamas Are Us Kids!

Civil war, not the trumped up media event in Iraq, is about to erupt in the Palestinian Terrortories.

The most ruthless group will prevail.

That's bad news for the Middle East.

Check the news at The Dumb Ox, and come back to Jihad Watch for the details. Period.

D. Ox
http://thomistic.blogspot.com

We love Jihad Watch! Read it every day. For you morning coffee, we have all the headlines: UPI, AP, AFP, Reuters, duh. Then come back here to Jihad Watch for the tough news you need.

D. Ox
http: thomistic.blogspot.com

Dear igor,

I'm very flattered you would include my work on your list. It is archived here:
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm?frm=1641&sec_id=1641

Bless you in your efforts,
Rebecca

Just wanted to add a name to Igor's list:
Irshad Manji.
I heard her speak at the TED Global conference in Oxford. Exceptional speaker and a quite a character. Canadian, lesbian and she has quite a set of balls. I saw her interview the head of Islamic Jihad in Gaza, she made him look like an idiot when she asked him where exactly does it say in the Koran that blowing yourself up is O.K? she asked for the quote itself. He couldnt find it....
here is a link to some stuff she has published (including a best-seller)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Irshad%20Manji%20on%20%20islam%20&hl=en&lr=&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2004-47,RNWE:en&oi=scholart

Peace.

I've been watching some debates on the 'net lately... and curious as to what you all think. Do Muslims and Christians worship the same "god?" Is the Muslim "Allah" the same diety as the Christian "God?" I say no. You

Look at the activites of the respective dieties.

A sick or dead person:

Jesus: heals the first, raises the second

Mohammand: does nothing and attributes it to allah's will.

People who needed food

Jesus: feeds 5000 with a couple of fish and a few loaves of bread; turns water into wine.

Mohammad: commands the starving inhabitants of Mecca and Medinah to rob and kill the passing caravan drivers, take their food -- then blame "allah's will" instead of taking ownership of their crimes.

Visions and such

Jesus: Appeared with long dead prophets in the presence of skeptical followers;

walked on water (or ice if you choose the prof at Flordia U -- my what careful balance he must have had in that case!)

seen by at least 500 people (some of whom were enemies) after he was publicly executed.

Mohammad: nothing -- no one ever saw him do anything out of the ordinary

regarding skeptics and disblievers

Jesus: leave them and shake of the dust from your sandles

Mohammad: lop off their noggens -- then split

Now, if you were inclined to pick one of these two characters to be your god -- which would you choose?

(I recommend NOT going with Mohammad)

Therefore, could Christians and islamics possibly worship the same god?

It is logically impossible!

Witness
With all respect, I don't care who or what muslims worship. Had mo been a wonderful charming person who was good to small animals and children, it would make no matter. The problem with islam is that it is violent, aggressive and intolerant. Were it only triumphalist, I would have no problem. If mo was right and Jesus was not who I think He is, there would still be a very bad problem here.

The Russians really are playing a dangerous game. Perhaps they ought to realise that if Iran gets nukes and carries out Ahmadinejad's promise of unleashing them on Israel, not only are the Israelis likely to respond by nuking Iran, they're also very likely to nuke those countries which helped Iran to get their bombs - namely Russia, China, North Korea and Pakistan, to give their populations a very hefty dose of what they put Israel through. In other words, we'll get a nuclear World War.

Morganne,

don't lump me into the naive pile ether,already know the government is crooked.

With all respect, I don't care who or what muslims worship.

It sounds to me like you do care.

Had mo been a wonderful charming person who was good to small animals and children, it would make no matter.

Okay.

The problem with islam is that it is violent, aggressive and intolerant.

So then, you do care.

Were it only triumphalist, I would have no problem.

But you obviously believe it isn't.

If mo was right and Jesus was not who I think He is, there would still be a very bad problem here.

True. Their respective claims are mutually exclusive and therefore can't simultaneously be true.

If "Mo" is right you obviously are concerned and do care. Tred carefully or "off with your head!"

If Jesus is right, you are in good hands and needn't fear losing your head over the issue.

Witness -

Good post! Islam can have my head, because Jesus has my heart!!!

The primary difference between Christianity and Islam is this:

Christ was a moral absolutist. He believed that it was always good to do good, always bad to do bad--which is why he could not bring himself to kill in the name of God. He belived there was a moral imperitive, that evil begets evil, while good begets good. The primary example he provided was showing what Christians OUGHT to do (that Christians have done differently shows our lack of divinity). Therefore Christ taught that God's will is that mankind do good, not bad...any time man does bad, he is doing so because he is allowing his history and situation dictate his course of action. Christ believed that to enact God's will is to disallow the nature of your enemy or the world to be a reason to do evil. That is why Christians who kill in the name of God are not truly Christians (defense is seen as noble because of the alternative--but it's still because we are human, not because it is God's will).

Muhammad, on the other hand, was a moral relativist. He taught that in some instances God directs people to do bad, provided the outcome is good. This is what makes nearly all strict Muslims, by extension, fascists. If you are hungry, steal; if you are threatened, kill; if you are tempted by unpious women, rape...Muhammad did this, and taught that it was God's will.

So, when asking the question if they are following the same God--who knows? But no matter if they are following the same God, they interepreted God's will differently. Whether or not you are a Muslim or Christian should depend on which interpretation of God's will you agree with. Does God want us to do good? Does He loath war? Does He love peace? Does God ever promote sin, even in dire circumstances? If you answer yes, or at least probably, to the first three questions, and either no, or probably not, to the last question, then you are Christian. If you answered differently, then you are a Muslim or a Jew (there's a reason the Jews rejected Christ's message).

Christ was more than a "absolutist", He was God in the flesh, my friend. Jesus Christ is the second member of the Trinity. Father/Son/Holy Spirit

Jesus said, "I and my Father are One"

Whether or not I believe Christ was God is beside my point. Could it be that the primary proof that Christ was divine was that he was without sin? Could it be that the primary proof that we are mortal is that we are not without sin?

You do not have to necessarily believe that Christ was a deity to understand what his message truly means for mankind. He was stating what he believed God's will truly was--the reason he was killed is because mankind allows the ways of the world to be a rationale for sinning. I think the resurrection and divinity story clouds his message--people get lost in it and think that we can be forgiven for sinning, provided we ask for it. This is fine and dandy, but it only highlights man's shortcomings and failure to enact God's will.

But, in fact, Christ was teaching that if you want to do God's will, you must not sin regardless of the circumstances. The manifestation of the entire world enacting God's will, therefore, would be world peace and charity (according to Christ). Though Christ new very well that peace is for the individual--that even as you do good, there will always be people to do bad. But the goal and intention pervades Christianity, this is why the West is so charitable even to our enemies. This is why the West believes that war is bad, even as we are fighting in the Middle East. This is why we protected the Muslims in Bosnia, even as they were plotting against us in other areas. This is why we protected the Kurds and Shia in Iraq, while now the Shia are enacting revenge against their oppressors--though the West is trying to stop the revenge, because we understand that it is not God's will.

This goes back to the difference between the interpretation of God's will...and is why peace is elusive in the Muslim world.

If you truly know yourself, then you already know you have nothing to fear from Jesus or Muhammad.

Beware to think that only a man (or woman) behind a pulpit holds the truth for you. God would never be so uncreative as to make it all so easy to define in 'human' terms.

We're here to learn from this life.

Eudaemon -

I'm heading for church in a few minutes, but if you're open, I would like to share why I think it IS important to believe in Christs' deity - but only with your permission. I'll check back with you in a few hours.

If you truly know yourself, then you already know you have nothing to fear from Jesus or Muhammad.

Nothing? It's either your head, or your soul. Either way, there's something.

Champ -

You may do whatever you like--you need no permission from me.

Before you post, however, I should let you know that I personally believe what turns people off to Christianity is the "mystery" part of it. I think that the majority of the "mysteries" were introducted by the gnostics during the first hundred years after Christ's death. There are many logical leaps that people must make in order to believe those mysteries--and I think they cloud what Christ's message truly was.

I do not begrudge you your opinions, though. If you feel that it is an important aspect of the faith and it promotes your ability to enact the Christian view of God's will--I'm fine with it. You see, aspects of the Christian faith that don't manifest themeselves as bad acts do not concern me. In fact, that Christianity is so good is probably the major draw in the first place. It is also very comforting to know that Christians who do bad cannot look to Christ for justification.

That it is so easy for Muslims to find justification for their wrongdoing should make the faith all the more unbelievable. This is the most troublesome aspect of the religion and why I believe it is such a threat to peace.

If people are going to leave Islam, it will likely be because of the relativist aspect of it. If people turn to Christianity, it is most likely because of the absolutist aspect of it. This is the difference I sought to highlight in my original post.

witness:

I shouldn't really have mentioned Muhammad. I meant no disrespect for Jesus. I was just trying to be clear in the context of the ongoing thread, but in truth, anything fabricated by Muhammad is truly nothing to fear in the next life.

Judgement meets us all at some point, but in what shape that takes and how we greet it, that's for each individual to know. Personally, my own spiritual knowledge and beliefs grow with each passing day. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Personally, my own spiritual knowledge and beliefs grow with each passing day. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Nor would God apparently.

In peace.

Before you post, however, I should let you know that I personally believe what turns people off to Christianity is the "mystery" part of it.

Actually, the mysteries are the major draw to Christianity; meaning no disrepect they are in a word "pretty-cool."

I think that the majority of the "mysteries" were introducted by the gnostics during the first hundred years after Christ's death

Actually, according to most reputable scholars the mysteries in fact pre-date the gnostics.

There are many logical leaps that people must make in order to believe those mysteries--and I think they cloud what Christ's message truly was.

I'm trying to believe in evolution and the idea that all things spontaneously came to be without antecedent causes.

Then, I get to calculating the probability that a sequence of ammino acids "pop into existence" and magically align themselves in exactly the right order (i.e. 1/23 for the first ammino acid; times 1/23 for the second; times 1/23 for the third; etc) -- so for the simpliest protien, ribonucleis there are something like 125 ammino acids that must line up exactly or the protien doesn't work.

In other words the probability of even the simpliest protein forming from the correct ammino acids in the correct order is 1 chance in 23 raised to the 125 power.

Then after the correct arrangement, the molecule MUST have the correct geometric shape -- or it doesn't work at all.

Talk about "faith!"

To force myself to keep believing in the mystery of evolution, I have to believe that the laws of mathematics and science were suspended so that evolution could somehow start from nothing and without any cause; and suddenly emerge from nothing without cause, and make everything reasonable again.

Truely a mystery and a logical leap in my point of view. Why? Because the numbers don't add up and I believe the numbers.

The creation story and the whole Christian world view is looking like it requires a bit less faith then a strong secularist humanistic view to me.

I was afraid that this would devolve into a discussion about whether or not Christ was divine. You are not going to convince the Muslims that Christ was divine. They think, and they might be right for all I know, that Christ was a prophet. Fine, if you accept that he was a prophet--what was his message? What was his central theme? This is what I'm reflecting on in my post.

Why do you think that people feel bad when they do bad? What is it that our conscience actually provides for us? If that voice in our heads is not God's then whose is it? Nearly everyone knows what is good and what is bad, but people continue to do bad. That evil is perpetrated by those who think they are acting as God commanded should tell us something. That Christ understood that evil is not God's will should also tell us something.

There are two wants/needs that people have--the desire to do good and the desire for justice. If I do good to you, I expect you to do good to me. If I do bad to you, I expect you to do bad to me. Christ was saying that even if people do bad to you, your moral obligation is to do good (or to at least not do bad).

This is contrary to our sense of justice. Justice served is that those who do bad are treated badly and those who do good are treated well or blessed. The Jews struggled with how they thought God interacted with them and with mankind. You see, they think/thought that God is/was not very just. The bad actions of a few could mean turmoil for everyone. In some instances the good person is constantly confronted with trouble (Job).

Don't you think it was difficult for the Jews to reconcile their desire to understand God's will with their desire for justice? Christ's message was one that God's will is separate from what we perceive as just. He taught that what causes man to do evil is his rationalization and distorted sense of justice. Man wants what he can't have and feels it's not right. Christ told us that our sense of justice is secondary to God's will. That God wants us to be good, no matter the cost.

Why do you think that early Christian followers often went to their death in martyrdom but refused to wage war against their oppressors? Do you think they were misguided in their beliefs? Do you think Christians who are persecuted today, but who don't fight back are cowards--or are they bravely following God's will that they do good, no matter the cost?

When we were struck by terrorism enacted by zealots who thought they were enacting God's will--we all seemed to know that it wasn't God's will at all. Why did we think that? The sympathizers want to point to "valid" reasons for the Muslims doing evil. Meanwhile, there were calls for retribution in order for us to placate our sense of justice--despite our knowing that this also is not God's will (due to our sense of justice). There were also peaceniks--some who are Christians, who think that no matter what our enemies do, we should not do bad in return. If you ask yourself what Christ would have done, he would not have sought retribution--because he strictly adhered to God's will, despite his desire for justice.

These two forces that motivate action in people are constantly fighting against each other--the desire to do good and the desire for justice. Peace for the self and for the world demands that there be a balance of both--because as long as mankind feels that God does not provide for his sense of justice, he will seek it on his own terms. But we must not lose sight of God's will--or the will for people to be good, no matter the cost or benefit. Love your enemy...turn the other cheek...even as they do wrong against you.

Foehammer
'Not to make new enemies'-was actually referring to Russia. Also wanted to point out how hypocritical America is on foreign policy. Blaming Russia for what America does all the time is a case of the pot calling the kettle black...
In your fervour to believe everything your government tells you,take a look at the money trail & you may open those blinkered eyes.

In your fervour to believe everything your government tells you,take a look at the money trail & you may open those blinkered eyes.

what makes you think we beleive what the government says?Our government says islam is a religion of peace,we obviosly dont beleive that,or we wouldnt post here.

Rebecca,

Thanks for the link. I archived all of them.

UberDork,

I acutally have Irshad Manji's book and I was very disappointed with it. She thinks an Islamic Reformation is possible and she didn't even touch the ahadith, sira, tafsir, or sharia in her book. She says some nice things but I'm afriad she's really just a benevolent version of Reza Aslan. The fact that she is a lesbian discredits her to the overwhelming majority of Muslims. I know she's trying to reach out to the more young, Western oriented Muslims, but that won't be enough and even at my school, most of the Western oriented Muslims do not like here very much as it is.

Hi Eudaemon -

I wasn't trying to be mysterious, but I did want to give your excellent question some careful thought; and unfortunately, my answer may not be as good as your question - but here goes....

I believe it's important to believe in Christs' deity for one simple reason - this was His claim to mankind about himself. If Jesus had not said He was God in the flesh, then there would be no reason for me to believe it either; and Jesus would either be a lunatic, or a liar. I choose to believe neither.

Also, scripture supports that He was God in the flesh in many passages, but I'm only going to include one in this post:

John 1:14

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Take care!

Its time to dust off the old Hal Lindsey Planet Earth books . The Gog and Magog guys are reconfiguring themselves. And in these uncertain times Hal is as good a guide as any :-)

There are two wants/needs that people have--the desire to do good and the desire for justice. If I do good to you, I expect you to do good to me. If I do bad to you, I expect you to do bad to me.

So who decides what is "good" and "bad"; or what exactly constitues "justice?"

There is the problem. That's why we will always have wars as long as there is more than one person on this planet.

Divinity is a separate issue.

If Jesus is or is not divine then Jesus' condition in this regard is out of my personal control despite my wants/needs on the matter.

They think, and they might be right for all I know, that Christ was a prophet.

Prophet is another name for teacher really, Mohammad was therefore a prophet too.

Meanwhile, there were calls for retribution in order for us to placate our sense of justice--despite our knowing that this also is not God's will (due to our sense of justice).

My inclination is to remove the danger who is going to kill you or your family. It's practicality rather than justice.

On the respective theologies as I understand them -- islamics are rewarded in the hereafter based on their merits -- works -- in this life; Christians see their works as insufficient and under God's justice -- worthy of death in all circumstances.

The Christian view is the less optomistic actually. The apparent caveat is atonement is mere acceptance of Jesus as God.

No works. No higher consciousness. Little if any effort -- simply acceptance.

The consequences and "call to action" of these respective view points is frankly, astonishing.