Explosion hits Government Buldings in Oslo,Norway!

[The Ween]

People have said the same about the Boy Scouts of America for decades. BSA never taught politics though. I admit I'm weirded out by political summer camp.

https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/tea-party-group-offers-summer-camp/1175119

 

[devilof76]

https://www.glennbeck.com/

I couldn't find where it reported that his ratings have tanked. Last I knew they were Himalayan compared to anyone in the history of the format.

 

[devilof76]

https://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/tea-party-group-offers-summer-camp/1175119

Very creepy, but much more ironic than a camp for socialists.

 

[devilof76]

FYI: Islamists =/= Islamic Extremists

And what is the difference?

 

[thenammagazine]

And what is the difference?

Look it up.

So many people could easily stop being offensive to the undeserving if they just spent about 10 minutes on Wikipedia before posting.

 

[devilof76]

I have always taken 'Islamist' to mean the interpretation of Islam that follows from Sayyid Qutb's conclusion that all Muslims not living under Sharia are apostates. Is that incorrect?

 

[thenammagazine]

I have always taken 'Islamist' to mean the interpretation of Islam that follows from Said Qutb's conclusion that all Muslims not living under Sharia are apostates.

It's a believe similar to how the Papacy was when it governed Europe. Radical Islamist, or Islamic Extremist are more "PC." Personally, I'd just remove "Islam" and "Muslim" from it all together and site the group. This way you don't even offend those who're a bit sensitive because of all the bull____ profiling/stereotyping. I usually wait until someone claims responsibility before developing an opinion anyway.

 

[devilof76]

Nah, I'll just call it what it is. I don't see why anyone who does not believe in the politicized form of Islam should be offended when I have bad things to say about it. If I acknowledge that a terrorist was motivated by Islam when his understanding of Islam is exactly what motivated him to kill, I am in no way indicting those Muslims who do not believe Islam condones (nor outright demands) mass murder of non-Muslims.

 

[thenammagazine]

Nah, I'll just call it what it is. I don't see why anyone who does not believe in the politicized form of Islam should be offended when I have bad things to say about it. If I acknowledge that a terrorist was motivated by Islam when his understanding of Islam is exactly what motivated him to kill, I am in no way indicting those Muslims who do not believe Islam condones (nor outright demands) mass murder of non-Muslims.

But that's just it. You are, by generalizing the religion, unless you state that said terrorist's vision was a perverted and distorted version. Without doing so, you're implying that they all share the same belief.

 

[Jen]

Why can we never have threads that stay on track and why is it always the same handful of people who derail them?

 

[thenammagazine]

Why can we never have threads that stay on track and why is it always the same handful of people who derail them?

Actually, I think the current topic is not only relevant given this *******'s motives, but for a change is quite civil.

Admittedly, only because the Neanderthals aren't chiming in ATM.

 

[devilof76]

They all derive their beliefs from the same source. There is no gold standard for the true practice of any religion, and I'm not going to pretend that there is. Who is to say which version is true Islam? Is Allah coming down and sorting it out for anyone? I didn't think so.

Simply because good people follow a set of dogmas does not mean that the dogma is necessarily good. One may be consistent with the teachings of any holy book and still be a monster. That is the problem with philosophies that ground themselves in ultimate truths which cannot be objectively verified, i.e. must be taken on faith. The sky is literally the limit. In the end, what determines who the 'true' Christians' and the 'true' Muslims are, is which interpretation is able to claim the lion's share of political dominance.

 

[thenammagazine]

They all derive their beliefs from the same source. There is no gold standard for the true practice of any religion, and I'm not going to pretend that there is. Who is to say which version is true Islam? Is Allah coming down and sorting it out for anyone? I didn't think so.

Simply because good people follow a set of dogmas does not mean that the dogma is necessarily good. One may be consistent with the teachings of any holy book and still be a monster. That is the problem with philosophies that ground themselves in ultimate truths which cannot be objectively verified, i.e. must be taken on faith. The sky is literally the limit. In the end, what determines who the 'true' Christians' and the 'true' Muslims are, is which interpretation is able to claim the lion's share of political dominance.

So, by that theory, all white people should be condemned by blacks for those who owned slaves.

 

[Jen]

Actually, I think the current topic is not only relevant given this *******'s motives, but for a change is quite civil.

Admittedly, only because the Neanderthals aren't chiming in ATM.

It is civil AT THE MOMENT - but we all know that when religion creeps into a thread it never turns out well.

 

[thenammagazine]

It is civil AT THE MOMENT - but we all know that when religion creeps into a thread it never turns out well.

Which I did acknowledge.

 

[Spartan Rex]

Given the latitude available to anyone who wholly gives themself over to the cognitive state of pure faith, I'm pretty sure that there is no objective standard by which to determine whether the voice of one man's object of faith is any more right than the voice of another man's.

It's by faith, not works, that man enters the kingdom of heaven.

Given the criteria laid out for rejection by the Lord himself in the verse I quoted I dont believe a huge leap in faith or logic is needed to think our MW2 fan in Oslo isnt headed for the pearly gates.

Like this verse any better for identifying non believers?

Matthew 7:16-20
16“You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17“So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18“A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19“Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20“So then, you will know them by their fruits.

Sounds like Jesus really wanted his followers to know who was and wasnt in "the family of the faithful".
I'd say the guy in Oslo has born some pretty bad fruit.
Wouldnt you?

Either way I'll leave it to Jesus to make the final decision as he's immanently more qualified than I.

 

[pixletwin]

It is civil AT THE MOMENT - but we all know that when religion creeps into a thread it never turns out well.

That's not true. The "Do You Believe In God" thread cruised along for 2 years without incident.

 

[Jen]

That's not true. The "Do You Believe In God" thread cruised along for 2 years without incident.

That was a true anomaly for this board.

 

[pixletwin]

Perhaps. But you did say "never". :O

 

[devilof76]

So, by that theory, all white people should be condemned by blacks for those who owned slaves.

Absolutely not. Biology is not a factor in one's choice of ideology, and I'm not blaming moderates for the actions of fundamentalists. What I am saying is that moderates and fundamentalists follow the same religion. It does not mean that what they believe that religion to be is the same.

Given the criteria laid out for rejection by the Lord himself in the verse I quoted I dont believe a huge leap in faith or logic is needed to think our MW2 fan in Oslo isnt headed for the pearly gates.

I don't believe in the pearly gates, so that doesn't carry much weight for me. Do I think it's clear that the man is evil? Yes. Am I convinced that according to his understanding of Christ's teaching, the murders he committed are evil? No.

Like this verse any better for identifying non believers?

You're missing the point.

Sounds like Jesus really wanted his followers to know who was and wasnt in "the family of the faithful".
I'd say the guy in Oslo has born some pretty bad fruit.
Wouldnt you?

I don't think it's impossible to make a violent religion out of Christianity, and I wouldn't be the first.

(Incidentally, I don't think this man is a genuine example of a 'Christian conservative terrorist'.)

That's not true. The "Do You Believe In God" thread cruised along for 2 years without incident.

Until it got 'Lucased'.