Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 02/10/07 03:15:25 PM |
Age 59, GA |
David Barton should not be considered an historical revisionist unless his footnoted assertions are first determined and proven to be false. He is acting as the messenger. Attack the message and its source if error is asserted.
I do not know whether Randolph was a true convert to Islam but by his own words he was highly favored toward it and very much inclined against Christianity;
"Very early in life I imbibed an absurd prejudice in favor of Mahomedanism and its votaries. The crescent had a tailsmanic effect on my imagination, and I rejoiced in all its triumphs over the cross (which I despised) as I mourned over its defeats; and Mahomet II himself did not more exult than I did, when the crescent was planted on the dome of St. Sophia, and the cathedral of the Constantines was converted into a Turkish mosque."
His later conversion to Christianity could be considered a defining move away from Islam and into Christ. To claim he was a "lifelong" Christian is flatly not true as Randolph asserted on many occasions.
As for the declaration that "many" of the Founders were deists, the use of the word "many" leads one to believe most were deists and that is false. Only a few were so inclined. Most were practicing Christians believing God to be actively involved in the affairs of men.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 02/08/07 01:21:29 PM |
Age 27, MD |
Dan,
Today, in my daily Bible reading, I came across something that reminded me of this conversation. Just wanted to share it here.
"I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you."-Ge.17:6
The following is from the 'Life in the Spirit Study Bible' (NIV):
1Sam.8:5 appoint a king. Kingship was part of God's promise in his covenant with Abraham (Ge 17:6); in Jacob's blessing of his sons, he assigned the kingship to the tribe of Judah (Ge 49:10). Moses foretold of the day when Israel would no longer be content with God's direct rule (Dt 17:14-15; 28:36); that prophecy came to pass here through Israel's demand for a human king. God saw their request as a rejection of himself as King of Israel (v.7) and as a demonstration of their eagerness to compromise their role as God's special people. (1) The people asked for a human king so that they would "be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and go out before us and fight our battles" (v.20). They mistakenly believed the reason for their troubles and defeats was inadequate government, when in reality it was their sin. Consequently, they conformed to the ways of the pagan societies around them instead of trusting God. (2) Although this was not the time God had chosen for them to have a king, and although their motivation was wrong, the Lord gave them what they asked for. Afterward, he purposed to guide his people in spite of the flawed government of Israel's monarchy (12:14-15,19-25), pointing to God's love and patience with human weakness.
|
Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 02/08/07 08:19:07 AM |
Age 41, VA |
David Barton is nothing more than a historical revisionist when he claims that U.S. Representative Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) is not the first Muslim elected to Congress. According to Barton, John Randolph (1773-1833) of Roanoke, Virginia was a Muslim before Francis Scott Key befriended him and "faithfully shared Christ with him." Barton says Randolph eventually converted from Islam to Christianity.
The story, however, is completely bogus. Randolph, for whom the Methodist school Randolph-Macon College in Virginia is named, was a lifelong Christian. Randollph, like many of the founding fathers, was a deist.
Barton's motive in minimizing Ellison's historical importance is unclear, but it is likely part of an effort to demonize Ellison in general and Islam specifically. Randolph served in Congress for thirty years in the House and Senate during the time of the Barbary Wars. Barton refers to America's fight in the 1800's against the Barbary pirates as a "war on terror against Islamic terrorists." He ends his diatribe by declaring that there is an "understandable element of concern with Ellisons election" because he holds the same religion as America's enemies. Barton declares that "intolerance and tyranny are general traits of Islam." To confront this "negative manifestations and characteristics of Islam" Barton urges citizens, "particularly Christians," to pray and "share your Christian faith with [Ellison] and see if he will convert to Christianity!"
Barton's bigotry and the complacency of those who unknowningly repeat it are part of a larger growing problem in America. When considered in conjunction with the smear campaign being waged against Barack H. Obama, the false accusations that he was educated in a Madrassah, and oft repeated anti-Islamic jokes, such as Seth Myers' on SNL, we see a pattern of fear mongering, both overtly and covertly, linking ALL Muslims and ALL things Islamic with violence and terrorism.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 02/01/07 03:05:32 PM |
Age 27, MD |
Dan, you said: "However, when it comes to politics, you should ban them if they have and OBVIOUS detriment to society, which i believe abortion but homosexuality not so much." (direct quote, copied and pasted)
May I ask you, why do you think that God hates the sin of homosexuality? If you asked God that question (why He hates it), and whether or not He thinks that homosexuality would be an obvious detriment to society, what do you think His answer would be? Do you think that right now He is watching us and wondering why so many people are making such a fuss? Do you think that He would give it the go ahead? As a Christian, shouldn't our convictions and actions be consistent with what God says?
|
Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 02/01/07 02:29:32 PM |
Age 27, MD |
No Christian's position on homosexual marriage and abortion should be "complicated." Obviously the best thing for *every* nation is God's position, and His position is laid out clearly for us in the Bible. God says NO to both abortion and homosexuality (let alone homosexual "marriage"); I'm hoping that you know that. So why is your position "complicated?"
Of course we cannot force anyone to accept Christianity. God didn't tell us to do that either. (We are not, after all, muslims...) However, as Christians, Christ is supposed to be at the forefront of everything in our lives. Separation of church and state in that the state does not dictate religion to the people and the people are not forced to support a 'state religion': Yes! But separation of church and state in that a Christian must discard his faith to serve our nation: Never may that be!
If WE don't follow the Holy Spirit's leading, if WE don't be the salt and light in this darkened nation of ours and show them Christ, then the people of this nation have no hope. Each time our Christian values and morals are chipped away at in this country, it allows that much more lawlessness and confusion into our society. I don't say this to be mean, but to allow this to happen just because you don't want to force your beliefs on someone else seems to be a cop-out. Just the mention of God is often enought to make someone say you're being intolerant and judgmental. If you don't stand up for Godly morals and values, if you don't speak up about them and strive to have them put in place and maintained, then you are allowing them to force their beliefs upon not only you, but society as a whole.
God is patient, yes. But He is not tolerant.
|
Re: Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/29/07 01:52:22 PM |
Age 63, OH |
Allah was not originally Arabic for God; but was the proper name of an idol that Muhammad found at the rock in Mecca. Someone had left it there with the many other idols that had been put there; and Muhammad simply choose that name for god. Over time after Muhammad had defeated the whole of Saudi Arabia in battle then the victors name for god was accepted by the people.
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/28/07 12:25:23 AM |
Age 63, OH |
The Bible has always supported a government.Back in Abrahams time it was father as head. God set up a government under Moses. He set up a government under the judges. The government that God did not want was for Israel to have a man for a king. Even then no one man was king, priest, and prophet. But these positions were held by three different men. That is why god took the kingdom away from Saul; because Saul tried to also be priest. In the Koran Muhammad is prophet,priest,and king which is the same as making him god Lou
|
Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/28/07 12:13:09 AM |
Age 63, OH |
God made it pretty clear by His judgment on Sodom and the four other cities that He destroyed, what He thinks of Homosexuality. You can choose to agree with God or not. This story also makes it clear that homosexuals end up wanting to force they ways on others. Studies say that 97 to 98% of homosexuals have oral anal sex. Do you mean to tell me that you think the oral intake of human fecal matter is OK.
|
Re: Re: Well then...
| Posted On: 01/28/07 12:03:33 AM |
Age 63, OH |
Alan Fine was "stooping" as you say to tell the truth. The Koran DOES teach the Muslims to kill Jews. The Muslim nations have tried to drive the Jews "into the sea"( the Muslims words) a number of times. this happened before you was born and if you would make a search of recent history you would see why Alan Fine fears anyone who says they believe in the Koran. If you want Biblical evidence of who God supports look at numbers 24:9 "May those who bless you be blessed and those who curse you be cursed". God is talking to Israel. The Bible also says anyone who blesses your(Israel) enemies will be cursed. This is why I encouraged you to seek God and repent. THE KORAN SUPPORTS THE MURDER OF ABRAHAMS DECEDENTS THE JEWS. Lou
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/27/07 11:45:29 PM |
Age 63, OH |
Dan if you are unaware of where the Bible supports our type of government then let me point but a couple out to you to consider. 2 Cor 3 : 17 "Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty". In the 1st and 2nd chapter of Job the Lord invites Satan to SPEAK his opinion in the throne room and then records it ,without mocking Satan, for all to read for all eternity. This is freedom of speech that our forefathers followed and the Koran teaches against this which is treason. Lou
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/27/07 11:33:10 PM |
Age 63, OH |
Young man,you accuse me of insulting your character; which I did not do. Then you continue on and call me names. You do what you accuse me of. I did not insult you but simply said you are wrong by a matter of fact not opinion. OUR GOVERNMENT WAS BASED ON CHRISTIANITY BY CHRISTIANS WHO FOUGHT AND DIED FOR THIS LAND. IT IS BASED ON CHRISTIANITY BY THE LAW OF OUR DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND THE STATE CONSTITUTIONS. I did not call you ignorant but simply pointed this out because your argument to make sense would make you appear to be ignorant of this fact. The Koran if you would read it is against freedom of the individual to decide for himself. But states that anyone who stands against Muhammad should die. The Koran establishes a dictator which is directly opposed to our constitution. If you can not answer my arguments point by point then I think you would be better served to not reply. If you can not offer point by point evidence then getting angry is no way to make your point. Lou
|
Cool...
| Posted On: 01/27/07 11:07:41 PM |
Age 18, MN |
Well, I'm glad we do agree on that things such as homosexuality and abortion are wrong. As well as that God's commands trump any govt. commands. The question is now, how should Christians act in terms of dealing with govt.? I would argue, of course, that we need to obey govt. officials (providing it doesn't contradict God's commands). I'm sure you would agree. Now, I do disagree that God doesn't like government (consider the fact that Deuteronomy-I think that's how it's spelled- was written before 1 Samuel). I do know somewhere in either Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy that God commands Moses to tell the people to choose leaders of 50's and hundreds (when I find it, I'll post it on). That sounds similar to what we do today, we vote who we want in our govt. Now, I do agree that we need more govt. since we have a sin nature. But God still has some things to say about govt., primarily that He's in charge (something that you and I strongly agree upon). Now, the question we have is, what does God say that the role of govt. should be? Anyway, I do enjoy our discussions and hope that you're having a good time at the U of M. God Bless you and have a great day!
|
Re: Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/27/07 04:08:41 PM |
Age 20, MN |
Well, here's the thing. I feel that our government and tje Kingdom of God are NOT mixable. Government and the Kingdom have never been mixable. God insisted to the israelites that they didnt need government and were making a mistake by wanting one. Yes, God did say several times in the bible to obey government officials, but that was to create an environment where obediance to authority is taught and cherished, thus making us more likely to obey Him. We must follow His commands before our government's commands, but that is not a statement about how politics should happen. The farthest the bible reaches into the realm of politics (which is usually bad because it deals with people having power over others, and only God can handle that responsibility well) is that politicians should be putting the people they serve first. They shouldnt cheat or be doing shady business, but their legislation is a way different cookie. My point is this: politics is something that God had not originally wanted. It deals with power, which deals with pride and i believe that there are no clear cut answers in the bible when it comes to specific political beliefs. it does however talk about the general behavior of a leader. Abortion is morally wrong and i will never support the decision of any woman (which will be my wife of course) i get pregnant that wants an abortion. I believe homosexuality is wrong and will never practice it and will call out anyone close to me who practices it. However, when it comes to politics, you should ban them if they have and OBVIOUS detriment to society, which i believe abortion but homosexuality not so much. I know those are bold positions top have but i need a nap and thus wont explain them now. Maybe later. -Dan Smith
|
Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/27/07 01:00:54 PM |
Age 18, MN |
Well, first of all, you will end up forcing your morality on someone else, even if you're a moderate. Second, while I do agree with you that God wants us to follow His commands because of our hearts, this doesn't mean that we must throw out Christian morality out of politics because whenever one set of morals is evacuated, another replaces it. In other words, seperation of church and state cannot apply to seperation of Christian morality, because another set of morals (Marxist, Muslim, New Age, Hindu, etc.) simply will fill in the vacuum. And, as far as what is the best for society, you should read Coach Dave's report on the average life of a homosexual, how many partners they have, etc. (statistics from countries that have legalized same-sex marriage). What does the Bible say what is best for society? By the way, it's not necessarily a matter of forcing your morality just to make your life easier. Right now in Canada, there was a case that made it a hate crime to say that homosexuality is wrong! And there is threat of that here too. Now, if you don't believe it's wrong, then this shouldn't bother you. If you do believe it's morally wrong, then it better. By the way, if you're voting for something over your own beliefs or belief system, then really, why should anyone take the Bible seriously at all? I mean, seriously, if your voting based on what man says over what God says, then why should I even believe the Bible? Just food for thought, I'm sorry if it's salty, but there it is. I don't mean to be harsh, and I know that the elections are a thing of the past, but it does concern me. Now, does this mean that I'm perfect? Nope, far from it. Does this mean I am way smarter than you? Nope. What am I saying? I'm saying that no matter who we are, we need to live as consistantly to what God says is true in the Bible as we can. This a challenge to all the readers who see this and who are Christians. Have a great day and God Bless!
|
Re: Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/27/07 08:32:58 AM |
Age 31, ON |
Thank you for your honesty and candor Dan. It is not easy (and can be dangerous) to admit being a political moderate on this site. I am with you on the separation of church and state and the rest. It is believers that have been called to obey the life and teachings of Christ, not unbelievers. It is much more effective to make disciples and teach them how to live than to force unbelievers to act like believers in the vain hope that forcing them to act like Christians will somehow make them into Christians.
|
Re: OK....
| Posted On: 01/25/07 11:13:40 PM |
Age 20, MN |
You are correct in your point that there were other candidates to vote for. However, like i said, i felt Keith Ellison showed a lot of character that you normally don't see with most politicians, even during campaigning time when they try to b.s. everyone. As for him being liberal, i am gonna be upfront about this.....i am politically moderate, and i believe in separation of church and state, so my positions on homosexual marriage and abortion are, shall i say, complicated. I look at what position would be best for society and not necessarily what is most beneficial to my particular belief system. I am not gonna force my beliefs onto someone just to make my life easier. Our job is to teach and change the hearts of the people, not force them believe and act in a certain way. God wants us to follow His commands because our heart is behind it, not because the government says so. I have so much more t say about this, so if you have more questions, you can wait a day or two for me to finish, or email me. I now must go play battleship. -Dan Smith smit3618@umn.edu
|
Re: Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/25/07 08:23:15 PM |
Age 20, MN |
Well Lou, that is quite the synopsis of my character and biblical knowledge. I appreciate you automatically creating sides and throwing me on the one that isnt God'e, the side that doesnt blindly support democracy as the only potential form of government that the bible would support. In fact, i would argue that God preferred there to be NO government. At all. No democracy, communism, totalitarianism, etc etc. So don't go using the bible to justify your political agenda. That is a bold accusation to make on my part, but, so was your accusation that i have no knowledge of the bible or the constitution, and also your call for me to repent. I would be careful making judgements on the state of someone's soul, for you knw what not of what of you speak. You have no idea what kind of faith i have. I talk to God, i seek Him in everything i do. i read the bible, i discuss theology, politics, culture, etc etc, with my friends and peers. You know what's interesting? The 18 year old that often times disagrees with me.....i have huge respect for him. This person has different ideas thn i do, but they are respectful about it. I am much much more inclined to discuss issues with that person than i am with someone like you who is just plain ignorant and insulting. I am entirely ok to discuss and disagree and talk about stuff, but please be nice. When you start with the ignorance and hostility, i have no reason not to assume that are you doing this just to make yourself feel better. -Dan Smith
|
Re: Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/25/07 12:55:49 PM |
Age 31, ON |
Matthew 5:33ff does not refer only to false oaths. Jesus says, "You have heard it said, 'You shall not make false vows, but shall fulfill your vows to the Lord.' But I say to you, make no oath at all... but let your statement be 'yes, yes' or 'no, no'; anthing beyond these is evil." The point is not that we should keep our oaths (the old law already said that) but that Christians are called to be so honest in everything we say that we do not need to swear oaths to guarantee that we speak the truth. And in recognition of this, Christians can be "sworn in" to public office or as a witness in court through a simple affirmation rather than an oath.
|
Re: Re: A Historical Perspective on a Muslim Being Sworn into Congress on a Koran
| Posted On: 01/25/07 12:50:16 PM |
Age 31, ON |
Allahu akbar! is Arabic. It translates as "God is great!" "Allah" is simply Arabic for "God," not a proper name. It does not mean that God is greater than God but that God is great.
|
OK....
| Posted On: 01/24/07 09:17:04 AM |
Age 18, MN |
I'll give you that, but that doesn't mean voting for Ellison, since there are other parties. Plus, you have to also look at how they vote, and that's what bothers me. I'm more concerned on how Ellison will vote on issues such as abortion or homosexuality than him being a Muslim (that said though, keep in mind that how we will deal the War and Terror, Afghanistan, and Iraq may be treated differently by Ellison than even some fellow Democrats would). Now, as far as the Jews vs. Muslims situation, I will point out that Muslims aren't exactly happy with Israel's existence in the Middle East...and I doubt they'll ever get used to it (unless they can wipe Israel off the map, which I don't think will happen either). Anyway, have a great day and God Bless!
|
|
|
|
|
