Think about how often you see world leaders and media talking heads denouncing “Islamophobia.” Then think about how often you see world leaders and media talking heads denouncing the Sunni-Shi’ite jihad. Then compare the body counts: how many have been killed by “Islamophobes”? None. How many by Sunni or Shi’ite jihadists? Thousands.
“Isil-linked terrorists bomb Pakistan mosque, killing at least 60,” by Javed Siddiq and Dean Nelson, the Telegraph, January 30, 2015:
More than 60 members of Pakistan’s Shia minority were killed when a young suicide bomber blew himself as they worshipped at a mosque on Friday.
The bomber approached the Imambargah, a mosque for Shia muslims, in Shikarpur, Sindh, shortly after Friday prayers, and complained that he was sick.
Shortly after he was given medicine from a dispensary inside the mosque he blew himself, turning a place of worship into a scene of carnage.
The dead and more than 50 seriously wounded were carried out by their arms and legs and put into rickshaws to be taken to local hospitals. Some were taken as far away as Sukkur, more than 20 miles away, as Shikarpur’s main hospital was overwhelmed. Many of the wounded were trapped under rubble which smashed to the ground after the roof collapsed.
The bombing is the worst attack on Pakistan’s religious minorities since May 2010 when 100 Ahmadiya Muslims were killed as they prayed in Lahore.
Jundullah, a Sunni terrorist group which does not accept Shias as Muslim, claimed responsibility for the attack. The group is based in nearby Balochistan and has carried out a number of terrorist attacks in Iran, Pakistan’s Shia-majority neighbour.
Another Shia mosque was attacked earlier this month in Chittian Hattian in Rawalpindi, killing eight and wounding 25.
Shikarpur’s Inspector General of Police, Sain Rakhio Mirani, said the bomber had exploited the kindness of his targets to get inside the mosque and kill them.
“He was a young man of 20 or 21 and he pretended he was ill and was looking for medicine. He approached the Imambargah for treatment and then blew himself up. We’ve not been able to trace his origins”, he said….
Charli Main says
Classic Muslim tactic. Ask for help and then turn on and kill the folk trying to help you.
Just like the tens of millions of Muslim vermin that are turning on and killing all those stupid kaffirs that took them in as ” refugees” and “asylum” seekers.
Feed them, clothe them, house them, give them bags full of benefits and they will stab you in the back every chance they get. ISLAM 101 as preached in the Koran, hadiths and suras.
Renee says
Terrible attack.
mariam rove says
Muslims on Muslims. Nothing new. M
Angry says
The religion of peace at it yet again, sunni’s and shi’ite’s peacefully living side by side. Isn’t islam, the ‘religion of peace’ very peaceful indeed (Sarc!)
JOSEPH says
Sure this is a religion of piece. There is a piece of a guy here, another piece over their, in fact there are pieces everywhere. The ceiling too..
JOSEPH says
Sure this is a religion of piece. There is a piece of a guy here, another piece over there, in fact there are pieces everywhere. The ceiling too..
JOSEPH says
Sorry I meant to say “another piece over THERE”
Angemon says
I wonder if he’d made it inside the mosque had he claimed to be a christian in need of help…
Rezali Mehil says
This murder of Shia is absolutely sick and needs a comment or two….
Article – Shortly after he was given medicine from a dispensary inside the mosque he blew himself, turning a place of worship into a scene of carnage
He went into the dispensary because he did not want anyone to be treated immediately …that is how ghastly this attack was.
Article – Jundullah, a Sunni terrorist group which does not accept Shias as Muslim.
Peoples, it is exactly the reason that your conversion should be to shia …if/when it happens We all know that sunni find it hard to remain peaceful… but “asian” shia do not get press …it is just another attack. …but western shia – well at least there would be a price to pay for jundullah ..pankawalla or whatever fancy name they choose for themselves next.
There is press and the attackers will get tracked to their base and where possible made to pay …so please …it is a small price to pay for this tracking.
Article – He was a young man of 20 or 21 and he pretended he was ill …. We’ve not been able to trace his origins or organs…”
Too right …lets hope this little f**k , gets karted straight to hell….
More Later …
Rezali
More Later …
Rezali
Myxlplik says
It is sick, we try to help the Shia sometimes, but what can we do…
http://youtu.be/ZGisVaH4DLs
Champ says
RM wrote:
“Peoples, it is exactly the reason that your conversion should be to shia …if/when it happens” …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No, thank you. But I have been praying that RM will leave islam and consider converting to Christianity …
Question: “I am a Muslim. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?”
Answer: http://www.gotquestions.org/Muslim-Christian.html
Rezali Mehil says
NO not you champ…
You do not even deserve the conversion to sunni…you are to remain a dhimmi …pay the taxes and take on the hellfire of kuffar in the afterllife.
Note that within Islam…as there is no compulsion in conversion…your grandchildren can readily convert ….there is no bias here …and indeed one can only hope their conversion happens in your lifetime…so you see and *know* it happened …a double whammy so to speak.
It would be ironic if you own grandchild came to collect taxes from you …”aw come on grandmow…pay up”…boy would I love to be a fly on that conversation.
More Later ….
Rezali
Champ says
RM wrote:
“…pay the taxes and take on the hellfire of kuffar in the afterllife.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nope.
Question: “Do you have eternal life?”
Answer: http://www.gotquestions.org/eternal-life.html
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast” –Ephesians 2:8-9
Yep! I’m goin’ to heaven!
Jen says
It bothers me when Protestants repeatedly present Protestanism as the ‘face’ or ‘true’ face of Christianity because many people from Catholicism, disagree. It’s just that there are very many Catholics today who don’t know the differences and confuse their understanding with that of Protestanism which allows Protestants to do this without hindrance.
Religious pluralism contributed to Protestants being allowed to say they were equals; and beyond equals, to say often that they are superior, despite its incompleteness in some areas which can be found; even in the Bible and in the parts they agreed to keep.
I like the idea of jumping through a few hoops before I ‘decide’ I’m worthy of going to heaven. The idea that I would be ‘saved’ so easily is unappealing to me, because I don’t like easy sell packages or the idea that I could say to someone ‘I’m going to heaven, yay!’ and feel good about saying it; as is rather more common at Protestant churches because of their beliefs.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/assurance-of-salvation
Oliver says
And the Catholic practice (in the past) os elling indulgences-as a path to heaven was/is better?
And the confession, saying some Hail Mary’s or other prayer, and dropping some money?
Those are superior?
(I am not Protestant, nor Catholic).
Jen says
Oliver, you might need to do some reading of your own before you understand what I’m referring to here. Or at least attend these Protestant churches which have very many inconsistent ways of looking at things, often in accordance with the people running the church and which leads to confusion because people have interpreted scriptures on their own or with the help of a ‘pastor,’ many of whom aren’t particularly knowledgeable of the differences and pass this confusion onto people who attend their churches. People who are outsiders to religion or especially the secularized Christians get all these types of things muddled up with one another. I’m talking about confusing doctrines here. It all becomes one big soup with bits and bobs tacked on, from all over the place because of things they’ve heard; here and there. Do you know the significance of the Rosary to Catholicism? Lepanto? You don’t have to comment. It’s a rhetorical question. I don’t feel like having a long and drawn out discussion about it; other than to provide the links. The Catholic bridge website I found recently is an interesting one.
And to answer your question in simple terms; yes. I do believe their way of doing things is incomplete. But I’m not saying this as someone who sits on the fence as neither here, nor there about Christianity or religion.
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_rosary.php
http://www.maronite-heritage.com/Rosary.php
Champ says
Question: “Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?”
Answer: This is perhaps the most important question in all of Christian theology. This question is the cause of the Reformation, the split between the Protestant churches and Catholic Church. This question is a key difference between biblical Christianity and most of the “Christian” cults. Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works? Am I saved just by believing in Jesus, or do I have to believe in Jesus and do certain things?
The question of faith alone or faith plus works is made difficult by some hard-to-reconcile Bible passages. Compare Romans 3:28, 5:1 and Galatians 3:24 with James 2:24. Some see a difference between Paul (salvation is by faith alone) and James (salvation is by faith plus works). Paul dogmatically says that justification is by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), while James appears to be saying that justification is by faith plus works. This apparent problem is answered by examining what exactly James is talking about. James is refuting the belief that a person can have faith without producing any good works (James 2:17-18). James is emphasizing the point that genuine faith in Christ will produce a changed life and good works (James 2:20-26). James is not saying that justification is by faith plus works, but rather that a person who is truly justified by faith will have good works in his/her life. If a person claims to be a believer, but has no good works in his/her life, then he/she likely does not have genuine faith in Christ (James 2:14, 17, 20, 26).
Paul says the same thing in his writings. The good fruit believers should have in their lives is listed in Galatians 5:22-23. Immediately after telling us that we are saved by faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8-9), Paul informs us that we were created to do good works (Ephesians 2:10). Paul expects just as much of a changed life as James does: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). James and Paul do not disagree in their teaching regarding salvation. They approach the same subject from different perspectives. Paul simply emphasized that justification is by faith alone while James put emphasis on the fact that genuine faith in Christ produces good works.
http://www.gotquestions.org/salvation-faith-alone.html
And this is equally worth reading …
Are we saved by faith alone, or do we need works, too?
by Matt Slick
Roman Catholics often mention that the Bible never says we are saved by faith alone, and that the phrase “faith alone” occurs only once in James where it says that we are not saved by faith alone. If this is so, then why do the Protestants say we are justified by faith alone and not by works? Because the Bible teaches that we are justified by faith alone–and not by works.
The following is a list of verses about being saved by faith. Please take note that faith and works are contrasted. In other words, we are saved by faith “not by works” and “apart from works,” etc. The point is that there are only two options. We are saved by faith alone, or we are not. Since we have faith and works (both conceptually and in practice), then we are either saved by faith alone or by faith and works. There is no other option.
If we see that the scriptures exclude works in any form as a means of our salvation, then logically, we are saved by faith alone. Let’s take a look at what the Bible says about faith and works. Then, afterwards, we will tackle James’ statement about “faith alone”.
More here: https://carm.org/are-we-saved-faith-alone-or-do-we-need-works-too
Jen says
I’ve been to that website before and I saw things on there which I didn’t agree with. I don’t recall the website writer going further back in history to discuss these matters at length but only to discuss it to the extent that it was in keeping with his personal views. Anyway, it would be a long discussion; as it usually is when you talk to Protestants who only look at the Bible alone, whereas you say ‘no’ just wait a minute…And that backwards and forwarding goes round in circles because you’re not operating from the same paradigm anyway. If I were to read a book, in this case the Bible; and trust in it alone, I would want to dig deeper and go right the way back. Anyway, that Catholic Bridge website; I think was written by a former Protestant if I remember correctly and that’s why they address these matters in more depth than some other blogs.
From Catholic Bridge about indulgences:
“This 500 year old incident has become a theme that some Evangelicals pastors have repeatedly preached to their congregations about Catholics. This has caused much disdain for the Catholic Church in some Evangelical circles. One of the drawbacks of being a 2000 year old denomination is that there are incidents throughout history that people can point at and hold against the Catholic Church.”
“Two thousand years from now, if the Evangelical Church remains (and if the Lord hasn’t come back yet) I expect there would be plenty of colourful bits of history that people who want to criticize the Evangelical Church would be able to seize upon. Even now there is financial scandal in some Evangelical ministries, including some TV Evangelists. So let’s go easy on each other. I think each of our denominations should pull the planks from our own eyes before criticizing the speck in the eye of another. The Church is for saints and sinners and it is not surprising that some Church people have done sinful things. “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.” (Jn 8:7) “All have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23).”
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/indulgences.php
Jen says
Or also
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/faith_vs_works.php
http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/once_saved_always_saved.php
What does the bible teach about private interpretation of the Scriptures?
Matthew 18 speaks, at least indirectly to the matter of who has the authority to interpret what the Bible contains. In taking the above, very short overview of verses from the Bible, we have to look at other passages that expressly address private interpretation of the Bible and the consequences of doing so.
“We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain. Moreover, we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable. You will do well to be attentive to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.” (2 Peter 1:18-21 NAB)
St. Peter states that “we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable”. But how is it reliable given that he also says that “there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation”?
How can so many well-meaning Christians – of our day and days past – whose hearts are aflame in their love for Christ; whose lives are devoted to the service of their fellow-man because of that love; how can these good people disagree with such certainty on doctrines that are central to our salvation, if this message is reliable? The answer is that their very belief in and exercise of private interpretation has torn the unity of the Church and resulted in the very uncertainty of their many differing beliefs.
St. Peter speaks to this as well.
“And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.” (2 Peter 3:15-17)
Very clearly, St. Peter warns against private interpretation of the Bible and even cites examples of people who practice it to their own destruction. What stronger warning could we need? Some might say that the oral teaching of the Apostles is of higher standing than that of their successors. But this is untenable and contrary to the practice recorded in the Pastoral Epistles of the New Testament which instructs bishops, such as Timothy, to teach others what they have received from the Apostles.
What was the experience of Early Christians – and Later Christians Too?
Consider the following points often overlooked by many today.
The first book of the New Testament was not written until the late 40’s A.D. at the earliest.
St. John’s Gospel was not written until the 90’s A.D. or later.
The bible itself records that the official teaching of the Church, exercised in the form of a Church Council, and not the private interpretation of individual Christians, answers questions of faith. (cf. the Jerusalem Council; Acts of the Apostles, Chapter 15)
There was not a definitive list (or canon) of books accepted as Sacred Scripture until the late 300’s A.D. and later. (Local Council of Hippo in 393; Local Council of Carthage in 397; Letter of Pope Innocent I in 405)
Protestant reformers removed portions of the Old Testament that had been held by the Catholic Church to be a part of the canon of scripture for centuries. Where did they receive that authority? They relied upon the “authority” of Jewish rabbis exercised 60+ years after the Crucifixion and Pentecost; 60+ years after when Jesus had established His Church and authorized it to teach. Martin Luther even wanted to remove the Epistle of James and the Apocalypse (Book of Revelation). He was prevented from doing so by the other reformers.
It is estimated that fewer than 10% of those who lived in the Roman Empire could read. Even if the people had been more literate, there was no printing press, and therefore, no easy or affordable access to the written word prior to the invention of the printing press in the 15th Century.
So, the earliest Christians lived before there was a New Testament. And it was 300+ years after the writing of the New Testament before Christians had a definitive witness of the Catholic Church regarding the list of books that were a part of the Bible. Who decided which of the hundreds of writings by the apostles and their successors would form that canon of Scripture? It was the Catholic Church, in the decisions of its councils and the teaching of its Popes that gave witness to what books should be considered a part of the Bible. And it was not until the 15th Century that the printing press made it possible to own a copy of the Bible, even if the owner could not read. How could the Bible be the sole rule of faith during all that time?
It has already been mentioned that the private interpretation of the Bible that came from the Reformation in the 1500’s A.D. has resulted not in unity of faith and belief, but just the opposite; non-Catholic Christianity is comprised of more than 30,000 denominations by Protestant’s own counts.
The apostles established local churches; they formed them and taught them, they appointed bishops to continue their work once they were gone. For centuries, it was the handing down of the Word of God in oral form – Sacred Tradition – that was the manner in which these Christians received the Word of God. This is simply a historical fact. It is also supported by St. Paul writing in the bible:
“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
St. Paul also writes, “So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ.” (Romans 10:17)
Protestants might object that Jesus warned not to follow tradition.
“You have nullified the word of God for the sake of your tradition. Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy about you when he said: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines human precepts.’” (Matthew 15:6-9)
However, the traditions that Jesus condemns are those that “nullify” the Word of God. Sacred Tradition does not nullify the Word of God; it is a part of the Word of God as demonstrated by the Jerusalem Council recorded in Acts 15.
From http://www.integratedcatholiclife.org/2013/06/deacon-bickerstaff-why-the-protestant-approach-to-scripture-cannot-be-right/
Jen says
Great, delete our comments talking about the differences. Maybe this website should talk about what Protestant leaders do about Islam as well, instead of always the Catholic ones! It’s becoming irritating. You don’t need to give these people anymore reasons to talk about Catholics in a negative way. At least make it balanced. Talk about them as well. Not just the Catholics. Personally, I’m tired of reading about their comments on these blogs- so why allow these misunderstanding of your own religion to be perpetuated and by making it one sided?
Myxlplik says
Rezali,
In all seriousness though Sunnis seriously give me the willies on some sort of instinctual level, I don’t get that same vibe with Persians, and what most of the stuff this website addresses, it’s about Sunni scum. You aren’t seeing Shia murder in the West the way the Sunni are ie: Charlie Hebdo. I’m sorry Arabs conquered Persia. What they did and continue to do in the name of Islam to Persians is despicable. They gave you a mind virus though…. a really, really bad one.
Angemon says
Rezali Mehil posted:
“This murder of Shia is absolutely sick ”
Not murder, but murder of shia. That tells us all we need to know about you.
“Article – Jundullah, a Sunni terrorist group which does not accept Shias as Muslim.
Peoples, it is exactly the reason that your conversion should be to shia”
Statistically, conversion to sunni islam would be a much safer better, given the overall percentage of sunnis. They’re what, 80-90% of the world’s muslims?
On a side note, I find shia muslims to be absolutely hilarious. Look it up on youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsSngs2UnyY
JOSEPH says
I would not convert to save my head. I will die with Christ in my heart. You can not threaten a Christian with death, you only can threaten him with eternal life.
Myxlplik says
Yeah, it’s sort of like having to choose between Autism (Shia) or full blown Down Syndrome (Sunni).
Champ says
You can not threaten a Christian with death, you only can threaten him with eternal life.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly!
vlparker says
What a lovely religion.
Oliver says
The bomber was correct-in his statement- quotesd as saying ” I AM SICK”.
Definitely.
All Muslims are.
Oliver says
Now, in my opinion, if the Shia’s attack and kill 100 or more Sunnis, -well the world will be a little better.
Then, the Sunnis can kill more Shias.
Just keep it in Pakistan and Iran. (And Somalia; Iraq and Syria).
Away from civilized people.
Jay Boo says
Oliver said
“Now, in my opinion, if the Shia’s attack and kill 100 or more Sunnis, -well the world will be a little better.”
—————————
While I will agree that it is better over there than to have it over here, all this senseless killing would be better not to occur at all.
Often times children are caught in the crossfire of lose parents and relatives to this vile disease that poses as a religion.
Oliver says
Jay B–as i write this, i have just read the post of the 8 year old in France, who said that he is with the terrorists.
In my view, the Muslim children are as evil as their parents. (Or, are being brainwashed to be as evil as their parents).
One of, IF THE NOT GREATEST MASS PSYCHOLOGIST OF THE 20TH CENTURY (Adolph Hitler) (I am NOT SAYING THAT HE WAS GOOD, HE WAS PRUE EVIL) said (or wrote) ( loose English translation) ” give me a child from birth to 6, and I will have a NAZI for life”.
He succeeded. 60 or so years after his death, he still has adherents (including some in the US and Canada) and deniers of his atrocities.
So, in my OPINION ( AND ONLY MY OPINION) I don’t see these as being innocent people; I see future terrorists. Look at some of the videos around (don’t have any links handy) of the Hamas schools in Gaza; and I am sure the Hezbollah ones in Lebanon are the same- with their treatment of hatred Israel and Jews ( and all those not like them). And the brainwashing in the madrassas, mosques, etc.
My views.
pongidae rex says
Exploiting the kindness and charity of people to kill them is subhuman. There is no other way to spin it. The ideology that motivates this is a scourge on the human spirit. Our leaders are naive babes in the face of this Thing. They do not comprehend its depths.
BC says
I wish Cameron, Merkel, Obama and other ‘leaders’; would explain to us how Islam can be a religion of peace when they have been killing each other for 1400 years?
duh_swami says
Shia lite? Really?…Never trust anyone who believes Allah is God…
Read Ali Khomeini’s ‘Little Green Book’…
jay says
So if you’re a muslim and you die in someone else’s jihad who is now guaranteed heaven for killing you, do you get canceled out of your own? Or is there some kind of loop hole? How come Obama and Co. never answer the real questions?
duh_swami says
What’s going on with JW…Stale articles and nearly 1/4th of my posts disappear…
Oliver says
Same with me- except my comments aren’t even put on; nor my requests to be notified (like 6 or so times -for requests; more for posts) in the last few days.
duh_swami says
I can’t get a current version of JW…and I know there is one…I’m not sure this will go anywhere either;..