Military confiscates, destroys Pashto-language Bibles on Afghan base
posted at 3:16 pm on May 19, 2009 by Allahpundit
Tapper did the heavy lifting on this, including digging up the clips, so read him for full background. After the story broke, the Pentagon was quick to emphasize that none of the Bibles shown were actually distributed to the locals, but pay attention to the sergeant in the second clip describing his time in Iraq. Evidently, the controls aren’t quite as tight there. I’m curious to see what sort of inevitable pushback there’ll be in the comments as the law on this pretty clear, but one thing we might all agree on: Why’d they destroy the books instead of donating them to libraries or ministries in the United States? Surely there must be a few Pashto- or Dari-speaking Christians here who wouldn’t have minded a free Bible in their native tongue. Exit question via David Brody: Would they have burned Korans if Muslim soldiers were caught trying to hand those out?
Update: Changed the headline from “burns” to “destroys” because Brody’s the only source I’ve seen for the manner in which they destroyed.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Lol.
You just voided the tiny credibility you managed to cling to.
Can’t argue with someone who doesn’t know what they’re defending.
You-Eh-Vee on May 19, 2009 at 4:31 PM
squid Shark?
blatantblue on May 19, 2009 at 4:31 PM
We commit cultural pornographic imperialism every day with our government promoting abortion and other cultural ideas they simply are not ready for yet (and may never be ready for). We (and our NGOs) give them abortion info, tell women who cherish their place about their ‘rights’, erode their parental authority, promote gay marriage, and give them Baywatch and Dallas.
When there is a chance they may learn that some of us hold some values similar to theirs, why that must be quashed!
No wonder they call us the Great Satan. That is all they see. Want them to ease off on the accusations of cultural imperialism? Let them know some of us share some o0f their values, like a respect for life and a respect for a similar God.
ElRonaldo on May 19, 2009 at 4:32 PM
whatevs.
you don’t really have a point with all of this.
(p.s. I don’t care if you do/don’t, either, so you can save it.)
bluelightbrigade on May 19, 2009 at 4:33 PM
The books should not have been destroyed. It is a vile act, to destroy a book to prevent others from reading it. Don’t think the military members should be handing out religious texts, though, unless they’re on their own time/dime (on leave, not utilizing military resources). Our servicemembers are representatives of the entire country, not just a certain faction, and using the military to distribute Bibles is improper. I understand that Christians are compelled to spread their faith, but servicemembers should also be aware that they do not have the same rights as civilians, and that the military may restrict certain actions as they see fit.
It’s really a shame, though, it’s not exactly like Pashtu is a common language – those Bibles were probably a bit rare.
Anna on May 19, 2009 at 4:33 PM
In light of the Great Commission, and your admission that it wasn’t limited to preaching to the Jews, please show me where it is, thereafter, specified that Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, et al., did NOT preach to the Gentiles?
Does the fact that there might be no specific mention of it … discount it? Or, are you saying that the Great Commission, which, once again, you have admitted is not limited to preaching to the Jews … was, in fact, limited by the Apostles, to the Jews, thereby circumventing a specific command of Jesus Christ?
Are you saying that the Apostles circumvented the specific, Great Commission of Jesus Christ?
OhEssYouCowboys on May 19, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Gal 2:
11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
Akzed on May 19, 2009 at 4:34 PM
I know!
blatantblue on May 19, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Jesus spoke with the Samaritan woman at the well before taking on the hosts at synagogues and on hillsides and at the Temple. The Good Samaritan is Jesus’ most famous parables. In private, he allowed the non-Jewish woman the word when she reminded him that even the dogs are allowed the crumbs that fall on the floor at dinner. He answered the prayers of Romans asking for miracles. After the resurrection of Jesus, Peter’s revelation to serve all people, not only the Jews, opened the door to the world’s ministry.
I’d turn to the ancient patriarchs for records on which disciple went where, later being sainted; such interesting tales in Medieval Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 4:34 PM
I think the gays aren’t doing so well in Iraq either. The point is that these countries that we are sending our men and women to are far from liberalized. What’s the point if they are going to keep enforcing their tyranny?
Upstater85 on May 19, 2009 at 4:35 PM
All religions have laws, when they are applied in a theocracy is when it fails.
All religions can become human rights traps, when poorly managed or merged with preexisting prejeduces.
Some pretty horrible things have been done if the name of G-d, that does not mean it is what G-d wanted.
The best thing for the ME is for them to run out of oil.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Heb 2:8 states that the condition for Matthew 28 was not yet met… and the 12 simply did not “make disciples of ALL nations” they went to Jews only. Paul and Peter did not come to the conclusion that there was no difference in the message…
Paul had “the gospel to the Uncircumcision” while Peter, John, etc. had “the gospel to the Circumcision.” In Acts 15 and in Acts 21, Paul and James instruct Jews and Gentiles SEPARATELY. The point is CONTEXT. My Matthew 10 example shows that we can’t just rip “the words of Jesus” and assume them as TO us… we must also be careful with the instructions Paul gives inthe Acts Age (in the Book and in his Acts epistles).
Do you live communally? Have you “sold all”? Should Widows marry or not? Etc.
mankai on May 19, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Nice to see the Al-Jazeera bug… an islamist mouthpiece that will report this any way it can to make it look like US troops are crusaders.
That, I think, is why the command would like to make sure to curb any attempts at conversion or even acknowledging local Christian. In a part of the world such as this, you might give someone a bible and it marks them for death.
krl on May 19, 2009 at 4:36 PM
I have no clue what that is supposed to mean, I dont have to defend Islam, it is not my faith to defend. Neither is Christianity.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:37 PM
I’m gonna try again
Explain to me why Islam is just as good as any other religion
blatantblue on May 19, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Not so much that, it just plays right into UBL’s narrative. Good on us.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:38 PM
You’re really good at misinterpreting things.
That Great Commission thingy…it say’s all the world…
…the fact that the Apostles weren’t too hip on it at first has nothing to do with the fact that their leader still told them to do it.
Peter ignored the vision he had…he ignored a lot of stuff…like the entire gospel…remember that part where he goes fishing after the execution? Wasn’t like he was all that fired up to preach to anyone…even though he was told to do it…
But your Jews-only version of the Apostles and the gospel really has no factual merit.
If you’re running a bible study somewhere…dude…let it go.
You can’t read.
bluelightbrigade on May 19, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Jesus isn’t one of the 12. He dealt with Gentiles as their God.
After Peter was given his vision and Gentiles were allowed into the Kingdom (not given eternal life, we saw faith in the gospels), the 12 STILL go to Jews only (as I quoted).
After the end of the Acts Age, there was no longer a “gospel to the circumcision” nor a “gospel to the uncircumcision.” The distinctions were gone… but ALL through the Acts Age (as they anticipated the Kingdom coming in Israel – “at hand” “time is short” etc.) there was a distinction made between Jewish and Gentile believers. They were treated differently (Acts 15, Acts 21, Acts 26, Acts 28, Romans 11, etc.).
mankai on May 19, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Okay, folks…I’m out.
Have a great night. :)
bluelightbrigade on May 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Islam is not mine to defend, but it has high points. It turned a bunch of ragtag bedouins into a major world power for 1000 years. It teaches a submission to the G-d that some crave, when properly applied, I apprectiate the Muslim concept of chairity.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Maybe he means “low grade” as in “pot is low grade hallucinogen.”
Count to 10 on May 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM
psychologically inbred to disdain Gentiles, themselves being “chosen”? Is that what you’re trying to drive at?
As if there’s some point you’re making. The cat got out of the bag. Get over it.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM
At first? After Peter’s vision and trip to Cornelius, they STILL go to Jews only. Paul treats Gentiles differently in Acts 15 (approved by the Holy Spirit, by the way) and in Acts 21.
No factual merit? Show me where the 12 (save once) ever go to Gentiles? The fact is, they did not for they were commissioned with “the gospel of the circumcision” as “Apostles to the Circumcision” … and Paul agrees.
mankai on May 19, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Israel’s pretty prosperous on all levels.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Hey, even if you meant that Islam and Christianity are more extreme, you clearly felt comfortable making this ranking even though they weren’t yours to rank.
Upstater85 on May 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM
I also have my quibbles, but I have plenty with your faith too.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM
There’s no need to insult Shinto or Buddhism. They have their purpose.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Reasonable — I suppose.
The only reason Islam ruled for so long is because it spread by death, rape, and destruction at the hands of Molester Muhammad and his minions of hate.
Zakat, and all the other pillars of Islam are fine, but their goodness is nullified by the violence the Qur’an, Sira, and Ahadith promote.
blatantblue on May 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Except for the birthrate thingy…
Upstater85 on May 19, 2009 at 4:45 PM
Utterly and absolutely NO!
I am not accusing them of some inbred racism. Quite the opposite. They were obedient to their calling. They had “the gospel to the circumcision” and they faithfully followed their calling as “Apostles to the Circumcision.”
It is those who refuse to see the distinctions that accuse Peter and the 12 of racism.
mankai on May 19, 2009 at 4:45 PM
Thats fine, I do too.
Ain’t my faith no more tho — dropped it a while back, but I still respect it, and would choose it over Islami Salami any day
blatantblue on May 19, 2009 at 4:45 PM
I wansnt “ranking” them. I was comparing them in terms of evangelism and strict adherence.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Religion is inconsequential to reasons for war (you don’t go to war with someone because his religion is different than yours, you do it because he has something you want), though it may be easy to get things confused, because religion has often prevented war (because it is prohibited to go to war against someone of the same religion).
Count to 10 on May 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM
comparing is essentially ranking no matter what you were comparing them on… You still felt as though you could. Hey, I’m not trying to be a stickler here (OK, maybe I am a little), but it’s easy to make some remarks and then later say, “Oh, I don’t want to say what I think because it’s not my religion…”
Upstater85 on May 19, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Maybe you missed my question -
OhEssYouCowboys on May 19, 2009 at 4:48 PM
P.S. Is John’s Revelation, limited to the Jews?
OhEssYouCowboys on May 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Not what I meant. I was kind of snarking on the “opiate of the people” thing — Shinto and Buddhism being low grade because they don’t send worshipers into psychotic episodes.
Not that I really have a dog in the argument. Atheist and all.
Count to 10 on May 19, 2009 at 4:50 PM
This is the US Government interferring with the Religious Liberty of United States Citizens. a violation of the First Amendment
jp on May 19, 2009 at 4:51 PM
I dont have to defend a religion that is not mine, that is all I am trying to say. There are religions I take seriously as a matter of course, I consider Christians and Muslims to be family. I respect Hinduism because of some of the time I spent in India. I was underwhelmed with SHinto, but growing up in the West will likely do that to you.
I can make observations without “ranking or defending”
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:52 PM
When you wear the uniform, you do not have that liberty to speak you mind because you speak for the government of the US not yourself.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Wow, the one person in the world with the power to change the human heart and bring peace to men and nations is Jesus Christ, and we just destroyed the Bibles that could introduce Him to our enemies. Wow.
jimmy2shoes on May 19, 2009 at 4:56 PM
No blood for arugula!
Dhuka on May 19, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Eh, I have to get going… this sucks. Maybe we can finish this later.
Look, I don’t expect you to defend anyone’s religion – not even how someone else might practice your belief system.
I guess the point was that you don’t need to defend the religion as much as maybe give your opinion, since you felt free to give your opinion earlier. Clearly you don’t have to, but then we might get the whole picture and not just bits of the puzzle.
Upstater85 on May 19, 2009 at 4:56 PM
The British announcer intones that the soldiers may have been violating the Constitution. There’s an ancient Biblical word for that: baloney!
jgapinoy on May 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Islam is not mine to defend. You give it high points for slaughtering the peaceful Christians in the Middle East. There’s no need to attribute virtue to Islam that it pirated from other religions to frost over its murderous ur-cell, assuming enough virtue to fool the naive. To assume that only Islam would enable Arabs to become civil is fatalistic. That it occurred is history. However, to project any primitive moment in time as static for infinity is too much to expect the world to bear. I reject Islam for its lack of grace. Too much behavioral science inhibits goals of maturity and wisdom. Compassion does not require spiteful beheadings, but eschews them.
Christianity has been abused also by Rome, Monarchies, priests and politicians for power. Nonetheless, it teaches a submission to the G-d that some crave, when properly applied; I appreciate the Christian concept of caritas.”
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM
And if I don’t, do I get thrown out of the tent?
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Count to 10 on May 19, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Sorry, the joke’s still down south.
Shinto and Buddha don’t believe in “god” so the opiate Marx analogy doesn’t apply.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:02 PM
That is a good question that I think we know the answer to.
jeffn21 on May 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM
I think that plenty of peaceful Muslims have died at the hands of Christian Marauders in their time as well.
And it is funny for a Christian to talk about Cribbing from other religions….
Just to be fair, I am under no illusions that my faith was not once a polytheistic one too. One day, a guy just decided his sky god was THE G-d.
And I am glad he was right and that G-d blessed him greatly for it.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:04 PM
I guess that mankai isn’t going to answer my questions.
C’est la vie.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 19, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Time for me to bail.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 19, 2009 at 5:05 PM
It’s been going up and if I recall correctly, is now higher than America’s.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM
Acknowledging all the wax that people apply to the word through time, take simply what Jesus said and meditate on your own reception.
Jesus advised people to consider the little children, lilies of the field, and the sparrows.
Dogma is for the dogmatic. What will be may as well be conjecture, as with what has been. History has its own meaning, but is not the subject here.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:08 PM
There you go, attacking the mi….
nevermind.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:09 PM
As I recall, the claim that US soldiers are trying to convert Muslims to Christianity inflames anger against the United States and is used by al-Qaida to recruit terrorists. I want the US to destroy radical Islamic terror groups, not encourage their recruitment efforts.
According to Tapper: Central Command General Order No. 1 specifically forbids “proselytizing of any faith, religion or practice.”
Those who want to proselytize to the Muslims, should volunteer to be a missionaries, not members of the US armed forces.
If you have volunteered to be a member of the US armed forces, then do your duty and obey orders.
Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Stop playing dumb.
Alluding that Islam and Christianity are in the same vein in terms of how it governs, instructs and molds it’s people is not only completely and utterly incorrect, but incredibly ignorant – even more so with the knowledge of modern events.
You-Eh-Vee on May 19, 2009 at 5:13 PM
That’s it
DarkCurrent on May 19, 2009 at 5:16 PM
I dont have a qualitative judgement on either of them except they are both not correct and both cribbed hard off my religion.
I do ackknowledge the roles that each played in history, Islam had its golden age, so did Christianity, maybe someday one or the other will have another acendancy. In the mean time, we will continue along as always.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Well. No.
The reason why the Western societies are so much more humane is because they are largely secular. When people took Bible seriously, Europe had the Inquisition.
radiofreevillage on May 19, 2009 at 5:19 PM
I’m not a reader of the new testament (my Bible is the earlier version). No offense, but I find attempts to ‘save me’ from my own religion offensive.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:20 PM
So far as Jesus was concerned, he came to fulfill the covenant with Abraham and the Law of Moses and bring new and everlasting life to those who love God, themselves and everyone else.
What people subsequently made of it was their own work. All of the infighting is its own to blame. All of the massacres of primitive peoples in the name of God is its own to blame. And Christians have been repenting for centuries and decades, seeking divine forgiveness for past wrongs.
What Mohammed made of divine scripture is disgusting, as deceit manifests today if not yesterday.
As per the Crusades, don’t gloss over the chronology; the Christians in Jerusalem were there all along, before Mohammed was born. The marauding Arabs began the warfare, and Muslims pirated along the European coast kidnapping European slaves, motivating the responses.
I would never renounce Jesus as I’ve experienced divine love. But I see Myth as Joseph Campbell showed, and agree with Hermann Hesse’s findings. Organized religions have their place in the world, whether or not I have my place in them.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Amazing, Muhammed said the same thing.
Muslims gave full right of visitation and worship when they took Jerusalem the first time. The Crusades began when the viking wars ended and you had a bunch of nights getting around killing each other. The pope had a ready made excuse when the Muslims took Anatolia.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:27 PM
We are only useful when the goyim need to show how much they care about Israel.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:29 PM
I agree. I don’t exactly think that dogmas are as helpful as the human motivations behind their making “meant” to be.
The spirit is the most personal of all matter, our essence, and whatever experience a person has is that person’s.
There are things all people share in common. That’s good enough for civilization so long as each person values virtue.
Deceit destroys. And the powerful use it in order to gain more power. It can not be ignored.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:29 PM
I don’t obey orders from you, especially when you don’t even know what the orders are.
Let’s take the ACLU standpoint on this. If they had their way, since locals and military personnel regularly intermingle, the military personnel would be prohibited from having religious services, walking around with their own english bibles, etc as the locals could be “impressed upon” that they should be interested in this religion, made to feel like an outsider because they don’t subscribe to the religion that the soldiers do, etc.
This is what happens with PC run amok.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Half true. The crusades were in good part a response to Islamic incursions into western Europe.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Tacky
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Someone’s been drinking the takiyyah/dhimmi kool-aide.
Muhammad himself threatened to kill those who did not convert to Islam. You can find writings by him to the leaders of present day Turkey on the matter.
Of course, there are writings everywhere of Christ saying his followers should kill those who don’t convert, der.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Professor,
They had not moved north of Spain since Poitiers, and Al andalus was a far sight better than most of Europe. And until the first reconquista efforts, Christians were free to live and practice freely in spain.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Oh, I don’t know about that. But some of these discussions give me a glimmer of understanding why so many Jews vote Democrat.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Of course, the deceiver. By his fruits will he be known.
Like him all you want; birds of a feather.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Squid, you seem to think you’re knowledgeable on Islam.
Can you tell me why in every single muslim country it’s understood that if you leave Islam you must be put to death, and what the source of that rule is?
Can you also tell me why we regularly grant asylum to muslims in the U.S. who leave Islam?
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Sometimes I feel like a stranger in a stange land, particularly in Jacksonville. Our local party is controlled by the First Baptist Church (the same one Ed blogged about that outed the Critical blogger with the Sherrifs Dept). We have a few thousand jews here, but none of them show up at the Republican parties.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Nonetheless, many of his followers did just that (i.e., the Inquisition).
I’m fuzzy on Islam, but Mohammed never claimed to be the son of G-d, did he? Isn’t he considered merely to be a prophet?
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Man, this thread has brought out some weird stuff.
I’m an evangelical Christian who believes in the Great Commission — but that doesn’t mean I think the US government is obliged to facilitate it.
I believe it’s true that many Afghans (and others in Muslim countries) are interested rather than offended when offered the opportunity to read the Bible. It’s not inherently an offense to offer a Bible to an Afghan, nor should our government see it that way. Indeed, what our government stands for is the proposition that the free expression of religious ideas is not just tolerable, but just and right — and rejection of them is a legitimate choice, one that all of us enjoy equally.
But the policy prohibiting soldiers in an army of occupation from proselytizing isn’t at odds with that principle. I have no problem with it.
If a soldier took leave and joined a two-week Christian mission to Afghanistan, then in his capacity as a civilian representing his faith, he should proselytize as far as the local government will let him.
When he is wearing the uniform, carrying a rifle, and prepared at any time to use force against anyone in his AO, the government that commissioned him has the right to enforce a policy that he will NOT proselytize for a religion from that posture.
I’ve had friends who decided to leave uniformed service because the call they felt on their lives was to go out and serve as missionaries. That’s the way to do it. Jesus himself approached no one with a sword drawn, or a threatening posture of any kind. He came to an occupied people and witnessed through words of truth and acts of love and compassion. Politically, and in terms of the force equation of the Roman Empire, he left everything as he found it. The worst damage done to the reputation of Jesus Christ has been done by Christians wielding the sword in his name. In this age of grace, the sword is Caesar’s — the Kingdom of Heaven, God’s domain, lies within us.
We can all witness 24/7, even when we aren’t allowed to hand out Bibles for a time, or in certain places. As St. Francis urged us, we should preach the Word of God at all times — using words, if necessary.
J.E. Dyer on May 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM
They didn’t do that on anything Christ said nor anything in the bible, God’s word… that’s a massive difference.
Muhammad did not claim to be the son of God, he just claimed that Jesus was not the son of God, not crucified, and he should be believed over jesus. I’d say that’s a pretty high place.
Besides, why does the shahid require you to mention Muhammad’s name? You have to mention it to convert to Islam. He was obviously pretty big on himself.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:39 PM
The dialogue between Christians and Jews has not always been mutually respectful. At it’s worst, it’s not been a dialogue at all, but horrific intolerance.
Yet today, even when many of us have a strong desire to demonstrate respect, it’s not always easy. So, I pray that we can find ways to be good brothers to one another, acknowledging our differences and respecting one another.
Mazel tov. Pax vobiscum.
Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Becuase a bunch of tribalistic tools and Tafsir heretics run most of the muslim countries now.
Next.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:40 PM
You also need to acknowledge that most Christians are in fact protestants, so the idea that the catholic church speaks for Christianity is pretty far fetched. I definitely am not willing to be blamed for their insanity throughout the ages with the inquisition, burning at the stake, etc
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Wow, you’re not only ignorant about Islam, you seem to be relishing in it. You really need to read more of what muhammad actually said, wrote and did and stop quoting from “democracy now” network.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Professor, in response to the need to hear the gospel followed by your question, I answered that people should be aware of what Jesus said, just as they should be aware of what all the major prophets have said, as a matter of civilized education. What to make of Jesus or anyone is a matter of thoughtful personal choice.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:42 PM
But they had conquered 40 percent of the Christian world. I read an excellent, lengthy review of a book on this subject last year, but darned if I can remember who wrote the book, the review, or where I saw it.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:43 PM
You certainly don’t get beheaded, like some other religion.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Well you had to get distinction from the Jews and Christians, that would be the whole “and Muhammed is his prophet”
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:45 PM
Yeah, so the only reason that he set himself up above christ and all other prophets(moses, etc), is just to make sure a distinction was drawn, not for any personal gain.
unbelievable. The useful idiots have come out in force.
TTheoLogan on May 19, 2009 at 5:47 PM
The quaran says Allah hates apostates and unbelivers but is pretty clear (in multiple locations) that if you turn away from Islam, you fate is in the afterlife.
Now if you are a Tafsir heretic, you use some pretty shoddy scholarly work to justify it. But the only apostates who Allah tells them to kill in the Quaran are those who “strive” against Islam.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM
Indeed, but it is difficult to feel respected when we are told that we need to acknowledge that Jesus was the son of G-d or be damned (I’m assuming that’s what happens if we aren’t ‘saved’).
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM
A prophet, yes. Merely…not so much.
Disturb the Universe on May 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM
So Jesus wasnt doing it for the Glory, he only said he was the SON OF G-d.
But muhammed was arrogant…
Got it..
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM
And in claiming that Jesus was not divine, Muhammad also projected Muhammad upon the apex of all prophets, HIMSELF the only true prophet, fulfilling whatever law he borrowed, and making up a lot of retrograde perverted scripture to coerce all into his subjugation for power on earth with promises for paradise to boot.
There is no love and charity in Muhammad’s words for women who remain property, or for non-Muslims. “Merciful” is used to cover cruelty, not to practice patience.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:51 PM
To me, he was no a prophet. I don’t consider the new testament to be necessary to a good education any more than, I would expect, you would consider the Talmud to be.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM
Jesus, who referenced himself the Son of Man, always said for God’s glory, as in prayer before his trial and crucifixion.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Talmud is rough.
Midrash is just fun though.
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:55 PM
All of us are told during our pre-deployment briefings that we cannot proselytize the local communities. While we’re there, we are representatives of the US and our service, and that is just not something we are allowed to do. Hell, we can’t do that in the states, either.
I do think the Bibles should have been donated to Pashto and Dari communities here or in the Commonwealth.
mjtyson on May 19, 2009 at 5:55 PM
I don’t think that’s really fair, if you think about where Sharky is coming from. Jesus is no more significant in Judaism than Mohammed is in Christianity. At least, I think that is the point he was trying to make.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:55 PM
I think they should have been sent to Christian groups in the United States for them to donate to whichever communities they choose.
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:57 PM
ProfessorMiao on May 19, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Actually I do enjoy learning from the Talmud. You had no intention to actually converse, then. Fine. No problem. People are all human.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 5:57 PM
That is about
Squid Shark on May 19, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Not everyone here, nor are all Christians, telling you that you are damned for being Jewish.
Loxodonta on May 19, 2009 at 5:58 PM
mjtyson on May 19, 2009 at 5:55 PM
If there isn’t a proper library over there, then there should be.
maverick muse on May 19, 2009 at 6:01 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »