As opposed to roughly 247m christians in the USA... in both cases, I would think that for the majority, it is just a religion and nothing more.

yeah but only 67m are radicalised & dangerous

enough to fill casey many many times over

imagine if they all bought demon's membership's d-l

umh, yeah, nah.

Don't they all believe in the same god?

You just have to love Demonland and its lunatics.

Don't they all believe in the same god?

i think they do !

its just that they think there's is bigger & better than all the others. tall poppies of the faith world.

Don't normally get into off topic discussions but attitudes like Hanibal's etc are those of fools that play into the extremists hand. Aiding them to their nefarious goals. There has been a bitter struggle within Islam between moderate forces and a radicalised small minority who refuse to live in the modern world. There are many complex reasons why but colonial imperialism has been a major cause. They want to divide Islam and the rest and will use extreme violence not only against other faiths but mostly against their own to cower and intimidate. The strategy is to turn moderate Islam against Christians etc. So far they are struggling to turn the overwhelming majority of their own people hence the desperation of their actions to provoke loathing and revenge from others.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/us-intelligence-chief-james-clapper-fears-grow-for-homeland-attacks-20140131-31spj.html#ixzz2s1PUcNZo

US intelligence chief James Clapper: Fears grow for homeland attacks

Al-Qaeda-linked groups enticing dozens of Australians to join the bloody conflict in Syria have begun setting up camps to train foreign fighters to launch terrorist attacks when they return home.

The alarming change in operational focus, revealed by US intelligence chief James Clapper, comes as Australia's counter-terrorism ambassador, Bill Fisher, said the threat of an attack on a bar, mall or another ''soft'' target frequented by Westerners had ''worsened'' in recent times.

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies have been grappling with a surprising resurgence of al-Qaeda over the past year, as its affiliates capture major cities in western Iraq and assume control of the military resistance in Syria.

As many as 200 Australians are believed to have traveled to Syria to help rebels trying to topple dictator Bashar al-Assad. Of those, a ''few dozen'' are actively engaged in combat, although authorities don't know exactly how many.

Mr Clapper says US intelligence has evidence of "training complexes" in Syria "to train people to go back to their countries and conduct terrorist acts''.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/us-intelligence-chief-james-clapper-fears-grow-for-homeland-attacks-20140131-31spj.html#ixzz2s1QFwM8q

bump

Well I'm a "Christian" - someone who thinks about Jesus and reads his messages and tries to understand what I realise is a constant effort (if you choose to make an effort that is) to make a path in the world when my flaws are no doubt as significant and my selfishness no doubt as sincere as pretty much anyone else's.

Now given that my family has an Irish background and that the IRA waged a terrorist war over a long period I have no difficulty putting my metaphorical hand on my heart and saying that these people ( the IRA) were not acting as "Christians" but rather were attaching themselves to a pseudo-religious position to achieve ends that no doubt at the time they would have killed me or mine should public opposition to them have been expressed.

The argument seems to be being put in various quarters that these extremists in Islam who perpetrate these bombings and assassinations/murders are poor misguided brainwashed dupes and we need to protect the young ones from being seduced by the attraction of the messages projected to them drawing them toward this pathway which seems to me to have the end of achieving maximum infliction of death and suffering on the identified targets (and "collateral damage" is acceptable )

Now the point to this offering is this: I have zero difficulty in stating that the IRA actions were against Jesus' explicit directions and without doing any research whatsoever I give two examples : when Jesus was arrested, one of his followers used a sword (it is recorded) to defend him and was rebuked for his efforts by Jesus who told him to lay down the weapon.

Further, Jesus said that " no one takes my life from me - I lay it down freely"

These are just two examples of the nonviolent approach that the author of "Christianity " demonstrated and which if I was to engage in a public debate with "Christians " promoting violence I would refer to to demonstrate that their methodology was contrary to their alleged loyalty.

Not saying that would have changed anything in their actions - they ( IRA or similars) may well have been being deceitful about their motivations in any case and I may have been killed or kneecapped for my efforts.

Now it may be that in a similar way these murdering Islamists can be shown (by the majority of Muslims who are not treading this path) to be being untrue to the faith they claim to be following and that the majority's contrary approach demonstrated to have a sound philosophical underpinning given the presuppositions of Islam.

( and the bald statement that the majority do not ascribe to that approach will not suffice - that alone does not oppose the deeply held justification of the militants)

If it is the case that there are anti-militant arguments contained within Islamic scriptures, I for one would love to see that debate in the public arena because if counter-arguments to the Islamist position exist, I haven seen them yet - and I do mean from within the Islamic community.

And I have been looking.

If similar examples to the ones I quoted above from Christian writings ("scriptures ") exist within the Qur'an it is time they hit the naked light of day so that it may be clearly seen that the actions of these killers who claim to be true followers of the Prophet are not indicative of the core and nature of Islam.

It's time.

just one point crompton

the ira were undoubtedly catholic and the orange undoubtedly protestant. that just happened to be the demographics

but i don't remember the ira ever claiming to act in the name of their (catholic) god or vice a versa

likewise their actions in no way coincided (or followed) with any church dogma or doctrine

the issues were not religious nor claimed to be

so i don't think your analogy is apt

Well I'm a "Christian" - someone who thinks about Jesus and reads his messages and tries to understand what I realise is a constant effort (if you choose to make an effort that is) to make a path in the world when my flaws are no doubt as significant and my selfishness no doubt as sincere as pretty much anyone else's.

Now given that my family has an Irish background and that the IRA waged a terrorist war over a long period I have no difficulty putting my metaphorical hand on my heart and saying that these people ( the IRA) were not acting as "Christians" but rather were attaching themselves to a pseudo-religious position to achieve ends that no doubt at the time they would have killed me or mine should public opposition to them have been expressed.

The argument seems to be being put in various quarters that these extremists in Islam who perpetrate these bombings and assassinations/murders are poor misguided brainwashed dupes and we need to protect the young ones from being seduced by the attraction of the messages projected to them drawing them toward this pathway which seems to me to have the end of achieving maximum infliction of death and suffering on the identified targets (and "collateral damage" is acceptable )

Now the point to this offering is this: I have zero difficulty in stating that the IRA actions were against Jesus' explicit directions and without doing any research whatsoever I give two examples : when Jesus was arrested, one of his followers used a sword (it is recorded) to defend him and was rebuked for his efforts by Jesus who told him to lay down the weapon.

Further, Jesus said that " no one takes my life from me - I lay it down freely"

These are just two examples of the nonviolent approach that the author of "Christianity " demonstrated and which if I was to engage in a public debate with "Christians " promoting violence I would refer to to demonstrate that their methodology was contrary to their alleged loyalty.

Not saying that would have changed anything in their actions - they ( IRA or similars) may well have been being deceitful about their motivations in any case and I may have been killed or kneecapped for my efforts.

Now it may be that in a similar way these murdering Islamists can be shown (by the majority of Muslims who are not treading this path) to be being untrue to the faith they claim to be following and that the majority's contrary approach demonstrated to have a sound philosophical underpinning given the presuppositions of Islam.

( and the bald statement that the majority do not ascribe to that approach will not suffice - that alone does not oppose the deeply held justification of the militants)

If it is the case that there are anti-militant arguments contained within Islamic scriptures, I for one would love to see that debate in the public arena because if counter-arguments to the Islamist position exist, I haven seen them yet - and I do mean from within the Islamic community.

And I have been looking.

If similar examples to the ones I quoted above from Christian writings ("scriptures ") exist within the Qur'an it is time they hit the naked light of day so that it may be clearly seen that the actions of these killers who claim to be true followers of the Prophet are not indicative of the core and nature of Islam.

It's time.

You raise a lot of really useful points Crompton. As a godless heathen I wouldn't presume to offer an opinion on all of them, but I think raising the issue of the Irish 'troubles' (a nice example of understatement, while the 'war on terror' sometimes lurches into hyperbole) is important. We're inclined to forget that the last religious war in Europe only ground to a halt a few decades ago. The first time I went to Britain was in 1998 and in Manchester they still hadn't finished working on the facade to the last building bombed there by the IRA. For quite a while before then the Ra had recognised the political cost of bombing civilians and provided warnings so sites could be evacuated, and the bombings had become more a reminder of how many they could kill if they wanted to ... a subtlety that the jihadist idiots won't ever think of I suspect.

It might not answer your fundamental questions about Islam, but this is worth having a look at:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/charlie-hebdo-policeman-murder-ahmed-merabet

The only thing I'd add is that what's easy to forget at moments like this is that, like Christianity, there are many Islams. It cuts across too many geographical and ethnic and cultural boundaries to say it's a coherent set of beliefs/practices even if it's presented as such both by proponents and opponents ... then there's the whole Sunni/Shi'a thing. No amount of simplifying it is going to come up with a version that explains everything, or answers your question about whether it's a religion of peace. Like Christianity again, it probably both is and isn't.

just one point crompton

the ira were undoubtedly catholic and the orange undoubtedly protestant. that just happened to be the demographics

but i don't remember the ira ever claiming to act in the name of their (catholic) god or vice a versa

likewise their actions in no way coincided (or followed) with any church dogma or doctrine

the issues were not religious nor claimed to be

so i don't think your analogy is apt

Sorry DC, I'd have to disagree: religion wasn't just coincidental in the IRA/Loyalist struggles. The IRA's campaign was, of course, primarily political, but religion and politics had been bound up in Irish history from the moment the English started resettling Scots protestants in the country. And of course you'll find plenty of people who'll tell you something similar about Muslim terrorism, casting it as political and a response to historical injuries accumulated during the colonisation of the Middle East and/or its recolonisation in George W's invasion of Iraq.

That the Ra never bothered with theological niceties or proclaimed to be following any particular doctrine isn't all that relevant: what they relied on was catholic identity. Acting in the name of 'their (catholic) god' was implicit in acting in the name of catholics (they could leave it to the priests to tell everyone about their god anyway, since that was one of the key points on which the catholics resisted the Reformation) ... and even when there were plenty of catholics who objected to being invoked in the bombings, murders etc, just like Ahmed Merabet's brother's opinion of the jihadists* now.

Not sure I should be dignifying them with any word other than 'murderers' but that would only confuse things further in an already confused sentence.

lets agree to disagree then dr john

there has been more than enough arguments of the irish "troubles" and i don't feel inclined to add any more

except to add that the central issues imo are

irish nationalism

reunification of ireland

removal of the "hated" english hegemony

You raise a lot of really useful points Crompton. As a godless heathen I wouldn't presume to offer an opinion on all of them, but I think raising the issue of the Irish 'troubles' (a nice example of understatement, while the 'war on terror' sometimes lurches into hyperbole) is important. We're inclined to forget that the last religious war in Europe only ground to a halt a few decades ago. The first time I went to Britain was in 1998 and in Manchester they still hadn't finished working on the facade to the last building bombed there by the IRA. For quite a while before then the Ra had recognised the political cost of bombing civilians and provided warnings so sites could be evacuated, and the bombings had become more a reminder of how many they could kill if they wanted to ... a subtlety that the jihadist idiots won't ever think of I suspect.

It might not answer your fundamental questions about Islam, but this is worth having a look at:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/10/charlie-hebdo-policeman-murder-ahmed-merabet

The only thing I'd add is that what's easy to forget at moments like this is that, like Christianity, there are many Islams. It cuts across too many geographical and ethnic and cultural boundaries to say it's a coherent set of beliefs/practices even if it's presented as such both by proponents and opponents ... then there's the whole Sunni/Shi'a thing. No amount of simplifying it is going to come up with a version that explains everything, or answers your question about whether it's a religion of peace. Like Christianity again, it probably both is and isn't.

IMO when religion gets reinterpreted from its first interpretations, then it forms 'difference' from each interpretation, & it seems then that competition emerges about who is right & then we have religion in rivalry.

rivalry isn't healthy in such a deeply held conviction in peoples psyche, then the message is lost in the rivalry to be right...

You raise a lot of really useful points Crompton. As a godless heathen I wouldn't presume to offer an opinion on all of them, but I think raising the issue of the Irish 'troubles' (a nice example of understatement, while the 'war on terror' sometimes lurches into hyperbole) is important. We're inclined to forget that the last religious war in Europe only ground to a halt a few decades ago. The first time I went to Britain was in 1998 and in Manchester they still hadn't finished working on the facade to the last building bombed there by the IRA. For quite a while before then the Ra had recognised the political cost of bombing civilians and provided warnings so sites could be evacuated, and the bombings had become more a reminder of how many they could kill if they wanted to ... a subtlety that the jihadist idiots won't ever think of I suspect.

'heathen', a nice tolerant term to coax people into gods so called loving arms...

The only thing I'd add is that what's easy to forget at moments like this is that, like Christianity, there are many Islams. It cuts across too many geographical and ethnic and cultural boundaries to say it's a coherent set of beliefs/practices even if it's presented as such both by proponents and opponents ... then there's the whole Sunni/Shi'a thing. No amount of simplifying it is going to come up with a version that explains everything, or answers your question about whether it's a religion of peace. Like Christianity again, it probably both is and isn't.

Sorry DC, I'd have to disagree: religion wasn't just coincidental in the IRA/Loyalist struggles. The IRA's campaign was, of course, primarily political, but religion and politics had been bound up in Irish history from the moment the English started resettling Scots protestants in the country. And of course you'll find plenty of people who'll tell you something similar about Muslim terrorism, casting it as political and a response to historical injuries accumulated during the colonisation of the Middle East and/or its recolonisation in George W's invasion of Iraq.

That the Ra never bothered with theological niceties or proclaimed to be following any particular doctrine isn't all that relevant: what they relied on was catholic identity. Acting in the name of 'their (catholic) god' was implicit in acting in the name of catholics (they could leave it to the priests to tell everyone about their god anyway, since that was one of the key points on which the catholics resisted the Reformation) ... and even when there were plenty of catholics who objected to being invoked in the bombings, murders etc, just like Ahmed Merabet's brother's opinion of the jihadists* now.

Not sure I should be dignifying them with any word other than 'murderers' but that would only confuse things further in an already confused sentence.

'the' diluted message after a couple of millennia, divides instead of Unites... imo the creator isn't about a 'sense of duty', but rather acting from a 'sense of love' for all Life, & others well being, including the animal & flora we share our lives with.

I think this message is lost in all the writings.

... without the sense of love for ALL,

the duty angle can lead to missionaries mercenaries trying to force their ways at the point of weapons; & use of FEAR as a weapon... heathens???

.

'the' diluted message after a couple of millennia, divides instead of Unites... imo the creator isn't about a 'sense of duty', but rather acting from a 'sense of love' for all Life, & others well beings, including the animal & flora we share our lives with.

I think this message is lost in all the writings.

... without the sense of love for ALL, the duty angle can lead to missionaries mercinaries trying to force their ways at the point of weapons & FEAR.

.

There's a lot of truth in that. I think humans can distort the message of any faith over centuries.

Matthew 22:34-40 -

The Greatest Commandment

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

The difference between that key message, which can be embraced by any person, and the behaviour of humans attempting to live Christian lives since, can be huge.

lets agree to disagree then dr john

there has been more than enough arguments of the irish "troubles" and i don't feel inclined to add any more

except to add that the central issues imo are

irish nationalism

reunification of ireland

removal of the "hated" english hegemony

If you think these objectives existed in a vacuum, then fine, there's no point arguing with your reductive view of history.

There's a lot of truth in that. I think humans can distort the message of any faith over centuries.

Matthew 22:34-40 -

The Greatest Commandment

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

The difference between that key message, which can be embraced by any person, and the behaviour of humans attempting to live Christian lives since, can be huge.

imo; a confusing aspect of those writings is, that god created us in his image, & in bibles & other writings there are images/diagrams placed by other humans of 'Jesus', or 'God' in 'Human form' ,,,, who's to say that he, 'God',,, 'the creator' isn't actually in ALL our lifes image; that of a Double Helix

Or if you will,

I think you all can get the picture, for the creator created all life, including our flora. all so closely related to one another. In his image????

.

Diogenes would no doubt agree, dr john

isolationism can be attractive at times

Early on in the Iraq war, when the first IEDs were being used against the Americans, there was one particular incident where a crude but effective device killed 17 and wounded many others.

The following day, the New York Times wrote: "The good news is that it was a science project made in a garage. The bad news is that it was a science project made in a garage."

I think the same sentiment still applies today: The good news is that the Sydney siege gunman didn't have the backing of a co-ordinated militant organisation. The bad news is that he didn't have the backing of a co-ordinated militant organisation.

A lone wolf might not have the infrastructure and resources that come when you are supported by a larger network, but they are infinitely hard to detect and identify and stop.

On 1/2/2014 at 3:47 PM, Colin B. Flaubert said:

From the thread about Tony Abbott being an international embarassment and the consequent argument about asylum seekers (Sorry I can't use the quote button on this one)

4. I speak of determining "who enters our country and protecting our citizens" and you insinuate this is folly. You care not who comes here or how we can determine their background. You care not how they get here, or whether they die on the way. You care not how they'll assimilate into our society. There are many aspects as to who qualifies for refugee status and there are plenty of perils that we're currently facing with assimilation from a number of ethnic communities, not to mention the problems our and other countries are having with Muslim immigrants. But you dismiss these issues with a broad brush as though they're fabrications of an intolerant society.

You are aware that this stuff stays online after you say it right?

I agree with you CBF.

But In my mind we can accept some islamic refugees,  but at this point I would have them as temporary visa refugees, while we all try to sort out the conflicts in the middle east.

.... after all if we were being flooded & under invasion from radical right-wing zealots,  shooting & killing us all, shouldn't we fight back,  to save our homeland, rather than scurry away?

 

so the refugees could be trained here by our army,,  to then go back & defend their homelands,   men & women should do this,  fighting for their homes & their freedoms.

My goodness, I've not ventured off the football topics before! I naively thought that all Dees supporters were slightly troubled Tony Abbott hating types like myself. Feels like I've been re-routed to the comments section of Andrew Bolt's blog!

7 hours ago, WAClark said:

My goodness, I've not ventured off the football topics before! I naively thought that all Dees supporters were slightly troubled Tony Abbott hating types like myself. Feels like I've been re-routed to the comments section of Andrew Bolt's blog!

We are a broad church here at Demonland...

Heck..during the offseason and slow times I find that I argue with myself just for the sport.

On 13/1/2015 at 8:21 AM, Dr John Dee said:

yeah, this is it DrJD.... & the rumours that the 9/11 attacks were funded by Saudi's ???

..... this all makes me wonder about these issues in the Arabian peninsular & Northern Africa.  & the prophecy I read of the King of the North, fighting the King of the South... wondering how that could fit into world events...  seems more likely to be say,  Iran V Saudi Arabia (Sunni v Shia),   than Christians v Islamist's ????

12 hours ago, WAClark said:

My goodness, I've not ventured off the football topics before! I naively thought that all Dees supporters were slightly troubled Tony Abbott hating types like myself. Feels like I've been re-routed to the comments section of Andrew Bolt's blog!

its eye opening WAClark.  & to me hearing the recent talk in the US republican presidential candidate race,  its sounding like its moving over to far more right wing christian radical conservatives, in their talk.  at the moment towards the Iowa folk.  these right wings are more christian soldier, than meek & mild, imo.

 

 

5 hours ago, nutbean said:

We are a broad church here at Demonland...

Heck..during the offseason and slow times I find that I argue with myself just for the sport.

.....  as long as you don't attack yourself  'nut',  & beat yourself up.   I think you can consider yourself 'meek & mild'.   but if you start throwing punches at yourself,  or headbutting cars,  you maybe not,,, 'nut'  ???

 

3 hours ago, dee-luded said:

.....  as long as you don't attack yourself  'nut',  & beat yourself up.   I think you can consider yourself 'meek & mild'.   but if you start throwing punches at yourself,  or headbutting cars,  you maybe not,,, 'nut'  ???

 

self flagellation - it's all downhill from there