The Mind of Mohammed is Islam and is Judged by Jesus's Eternal Standards. His Word is Not the Law, and He Was Not a Prophet of God.

A Facebook friend posted a video of Jimmy Carter:

Her post garnered a long comment thread that I am sharing here. I've reduced the names to initials.

Many of the comments came very quickly. The main meat comes in the longer comments, but the shorter ones do help with context.

For Christians and others, I want to say that I run into the same arguments by Muslims and Islam defenders/apologist and only with slight tweaks but as themes the gist of which appear deliberately shared to arm Muslims with half-truth propaganda against Christ.

  1. B. H. [wrote]

    Not sure I would tag along with what Jimmy says.
    Yesterday at 6:45am

  2. B. H. [wrote]

    Carter is very one sided and could NEVER see peace with his ideas and the way he feels about Israel.

    He makes some good points, but the way hr says it is wrong!

    I do not just support Israel.

    Be very fair, do you think if you gave Palestine everything they want Palestine would be a good neighbor??
    Yesterday at 6:48am

  3. B. H. [wrote]

    I like the debate and I AGREE the USA and the media should be debating this.
    Yesterday at 6:49am

  4. L. A. [wrote]

    I'm rendered speechless by your question "if you gave Palestine everything they want would they be a good neighbour?"... The Palestinian people have been trampled on, stolen from, abused, intimidated, ignored, imprisoned, dehumanised and murdered in their droves for decades... by their "neighbour" Israel. What they "want" is for this abuse to end and for the LAW to be obeyed, that is all. How dare anyone imply they might not be a good neighbour to the criminals who have been treating them like this? You know, the miracle is that the Palestinians still seek peace with Israel.. it stuns me every day that they can maintain such hope, patience and humanity.
    Yesterday at 6:56am

  5. B. H. [wrote]

    I just see to much one sided talk whenever this topic is debated, on both sides.

    If you follow my posts I have supported the Palestinian people numerous times, especially Palestinian Christians.

    I am curious how we ever solve this debate if both sides, as i have many times, think they are 100% correct??

    The average Israeli or Palestinian does NOT want all of this, they want to live in peace and safety and have opportunity for their families.

    I AM NOT saying Israel or Palestine is right, I will leave that to the one sided debaters.

    I also could care less who owns the land. What I care about is people living in peace. NO ONE is going to take that land with them when they die, but they might find an awful surprise after death if they spill innocent blood.
    Yesterday at 7:19am

  6. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "Carter is very one sided"? Hardly. He said there has been violence on both sides and that he deplores it regardless.

    Were the shoe on the other foot and the Jews suffering, he would be speaking out every bit as much on behalf of Jewish Palestinians.

    You are ignoring his heart. He's not a perfect person, but he tries in earnest and is light years ahead of say Avigdor Lieberman and the other, numerous and growing, fascists in Zionist Israel.

    By the way, I disagree with Jimmy that the official Israeli policy set down by the Likud is not racist or ethnically bigoted.

    He was, and may still be, unaware of the Ashkenazic-Zionist discrimination against non-Ashkenazi "Jews" right in Israel.
    Yesterday at 7:29am

  7. L. A. [wrote]

    I know Braheem, and I do follow your posts which help raise awareness about the situation, and fairly. However, too many people are afraid to take a stand here.. this situation does not have two equal sides.. it is simply a fact that Israel is the one who is occupying Palestinian land, who demolishes people's homes, who kills with impunity. It is Israel who must be made to comply with UN Resolutions and International Law before any kind of peace deal can be achieved.
    Yesterday at 7:29am

  8. B. H. [wrote]

    I think Carter's heart is right but he is still one sided here and does not see the side of Israel and there can never be peace that way.

    I think most folks that debate this have a good heart.

    I am NOT on either side. I love BOTH sides because they were both created by God.

    Many people are brain washed by governments and taught to hate, ON BOTH SIDES!! I care for each soul, I DO NOT care what race, or color they are!!
    Yesterday at 7:33am

  9. B. H. [wrote]

    Laura Israel has way more fire power and USA will NOT stop supporting Israel.

    These are two facts that Palestine must deal with and use different ways of getting what they want.

    one way is when there is any terror (killing of innocent life) it needs to be outright condemned by Homas, LOUDLY!! This will get the American people behind Palestine putting pressure on the leaders here.

    It is very difficult, I know, especially when Israeli settlers come in and steal Paestinian homes that are occupied. I posted a video of that the other day.
    Yesterday at 7:38am

  10. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "he is still one sided here and does not see the side of Israel" How so? Specifics please.
    Yesterday at 7:42am

  11. N. Q. [wrote]

    Braheem,

    There are no gray areas here. It's either black or white. You either support zionist colonization of Palestine or you support the right of the indigenous Palestinians to resist this colonization by all means necessary.

    It's not the fault of the Palestinian resistance that the zionists hide behind their families and use them as human shields while they steal Palestinian lands and resources. The blood of those is on the hands of their zionist leaders who send them to commit genocide against the Palestinians. It's indecent to blame the victim for fighting back.
    Yesterday at 7:49am

  12. B. H. [wrote]

    So you kill innocent Jewish women and children to make your point?

    Interesting.
    Yesterday at 7:53am

  13. B. H. [wrote]

    Don't fight back by saying Israel does this, that is NOT a good defense.
    Yesterday at 7:54am

  14. B. H. [wrote]

    This is a very good debate and i hope to draw more people in, unfortunately I seem to be one lone person here.
    Yesterday at 7:55am

  15. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "You either support zionist colonization of Palestine or you support the right of the indigenous Palestinians to resist this colonization by all means necessary." I don't.
    Yesterday at 7:55am

  16. B. H. [wrote]

    I know, because I am wrong.
    Yesterday at 7:56am

  17. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "he is still one sided here and does not see the side of Israel" How so? Specifics please. Still waiting.
    Yesterday at 7:56am

  18. B. H. [wrote]

    I would rather die then kill little kids and women on purpose, eternity is a long time!!
    Yesterday at 7:57am

  19. L. A. [wrote]

    Braheem, I know that you come from a position of love and care for all people because you see all people as equal under God.. and I totally respect that about you. I also agree that when any human life is taken, the act should be condemned, whoever commited it. However, there comes a problem when people put the onus on the Palestinian people to be "peaceful" before their cause will be addressed. This is like telling a rape victim that they must stop struggling before anyone will tell the rapist to stop raping them.
    Yesterday at 7:57am

  20. N. Q. [wrote]

    First of all, those who colonize Palestine are not Jews. zionists cannot be Jews. No one is specifically targeting them, but if they come to steal Palestinian lands and resources and drive my people out of their homeland, then they have no one but themselves to blame when my people fight back. To resist is to exist. My people's existence is constantly being threatened and if the zionists use their women and children as human shields, that is not the problem of the Palestinians. Don't expect the victims of inhumane crimes to rise above their humanity and bend over to let the colonizers steal what they want while using their own as human shields.
    Yesterday at 7:57am

  21. B. H. [wrote]

    No cause is good enough to kill innocent people on purpose!!!!
    Yesterday at 7:58am

  22. N. Q. [wrote]

    What do you mean, Tom?
    Yesterday at 7:59am

  23. N. Q. [wrote]

    Feel free to die Braheem, but my people are not going to sit idly and be slaughtered or ethnically cleansed because the zionists hide behind their women and children while they commit war crimes against my people.
    Yesterday at 8:00am

  24. B. H. [wrote]

    You missed my point!! If you are attacked you can defend yourself!! Not blow innocent people up with car bombs and bombs tied to themselves.
    Yesterday at 8:01am

  25. N. Q. [wrote]

    The zionists turned it into "either them or us," and better them than us.
    Yesterday at 8:02am

  26. L. A. [wrote]

    I wanted to clarify, Braheem, that I'm not condoning any violence when I say this.. I don't condone violence and agree all human life is sacred.. it's just that I do not think anyone has the right to lecture the Palestinians about violence, when they are suffering the most appalling violence against them and nobody is doing anything about it.
    Yesterday at 8:02am

  27. N. Q. [wrote]

    And the Palestinians are not being attacked on a daily basis?!!
    Yesterday at 8:02am

  28. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Nihaya,

    "all means necessary" Coming from a Palestinian, that usually, almost always means, killing if.... if the Israelis don't do this or that. Killing is not necessary, so I don't accept your statement. If you want to define what is necessary to exclude killing, then perhaps depending upon other of your positions, I might be able to accept your statement (highly qualified).
    Yesterday at 8:04am

  29. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Braheem

    Why are you ducking this?

    "he is still one sided here and does not see the side of Israel" How so? Specifics please. Still waiting.
    Yesterday at 8:07am

  30. L. A. [wrote]

    The number of Palestinians who take part in the sort of attacks you refer to Braheem is miniscule. The absolute overwhelming majority of Palestinian people simply try to live normal lives under oppressive conditions and whilst suffering daily attacks and humiliation. They do not desire for anyone to be killed, let alone women and children. Whilst we should condemn all loss of life, we should not put our focus on those incidents.. our focus has to be on the injustice that causes the anger and frustration that can lead to violence.
    Yesterday at 8:09am

  31. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Laura

    Right on!
    Yesterday at 8:10am

  32. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Braheem

    "USA will NOT stop supporting Israel." Don't bet on it. Once upon a time, the White Supremacists of Apartheid South Africa thought the same thing. Times change and people with them.
    Yesterday at 8:30am

  33. N. Q. [wrote]

    Braheem said, "If you follow my posts I have supported the Palestinian people numerous times, especially Palestinian Christians."

    Why especially, the Christians? Are the Muslims of Palestine lesser human beings than her Christian children?
    Yesterday at 8:32am

  34. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Supporting "especially Palestinian Christians" may mean supporting their approach, which is most often decidedly more peaceful than certain others of the Arab Palestinians.
    Yesterday at 8:35am

  35. N. Q. [wrote]

    By all means necessary doesn't always mean killing, but it includes killing. The killing of Kahana and his son is one of those killings. BTW, you stereotype the Palestinians with your statement. We don't all want to kill and Bil'in, Ni'lin and many other places in Palestine testify to that.
    Yesterday at 8:38am

  36. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "you stereotype the Palestinians with your statement." No, you just read that into my statement.
    Yesterday at 8:39am

  37. Tom Usher [wrote]

    I take people one at a time.
    Yesterday at 8:40am

  38. N. Q. [wrote]

    Not necessarily, Tom. George Habash was born Christian and after he was expelled from his town of Lydda after just burying his sister, formed The Arab Nationalists Movement, which later on became PFLP. Nabil Abu Rdeineh who was Arafat's spokesman for years and a member of the PLO that used violence to liberate Palestine is also Christian.
    Yesterday at 8:41am

  39. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "certain others" shows a lack of stereotyping.
    Yesterday at 8:42am

  40. N. Q. [wrote]

    This is your statement, Tom: ""all means necessary" Coming from a Palestinian, that usually, almost always means, killing.." I didn't read more than what you wrote.
    Yesterday at 8:43am

  41. N. Q. [wrote]

    Where did "certain others" come from? I don't see it.
    Yesterday at 8:45am

  42. Tom Usher [wrote]

    I stand by my statement, and it does not do what you claim of it. Someone "born Christian"? Jesus was born a Christian. He didn't form an army to kill.
    Yesterday at 8:45am

  43. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "Supporting "especially Palestinian Christians" may mean supporting their approach, which is most often decidedly more peaceful than certain others of the Arab Palestinians."
    Yesterday at 8:47am

  44. N. Q. [wrote]

    You said that my people almost always mean killing when they say by all means necessary and that is stereotyping.
    Yesterday at 8:47am

  45. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Read carefully.
    Yesterday at 8:47am

  46. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "stereotyping" is a loaded word. It is not confined to the connotation in which you are using it.
    Yesterday at 8:48am

  47. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image"
    Yesterday at 8:49am

  48. N. Q. [wrote]

    You claimed that the Christians in Palestine most often use peaceful means, which is not true. Many members of the Palestinian revolution who used/use violence to liberate Palestine happen to be Christians. I even met a Christian woman who supported Hamas because she was happy that they were giving the zionists a taste of their own medicine. Don't generalize and stereotype.
    Yesterday at 8:50am

  49. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You don't know a Christian when you meet one. No Christian is a member of any violent revolution and never has been.
    Yesterday at 8:52am

  50. N. Q. [wrote]

    I read carefully, but you need to express your opinions carefully. Generalizations hurt your argument. I see what you mean by "certain others." Does this mean those violent Muslims, i.e. the Muhammadans?
    Yesterday at 8:52am

  51. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Are you talking about Mohammed and that his mind is the mind of Islam, or are you talking about Muslims being whatever anyone claiming to be one wants to claim of Islam?
    Yesterday at 8:54am

  52. N. Q. [wrote]

    Oh, I see, you know Christians better than I do! Damn, I didn't know that George Habash was a Muslim name! Perhaps Suha Tawil, Arafat's wife and her mother Raymonda are Muslims too. Ramzi Khouri who was the director of Arafat's office might have been Muslim too!
    Yesterday at 8:55am

  53. Tom Usher [wrote]

    That's right. I know what Christianity is better than do you.
    Yesterday at 8:56am

  54. N. Q. [wrote]

    You know what I mean and your Islamophobia is evident in your statements.
    Yesterday at 8:56am

  55. Tom Usher [wrote]

    I know what you mean? Islamophobia? Answer the questions.
    Yesterday at 8:57am

  56. N. Q. [wrote]

    Trust me, if Jesus were alive now, he would be leading the Palestinian revolution.
    Yesterday at 8:58am

  57. N. Q. [wrote]

    Is that an order?
    Yesterday at 8:58am

  58. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Bull, and you show your profound ignorance of Christianity. Jesus is alive!
    Yesterday at 8:59am

  59. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You can duck them.
    Yesterday at 8:59am

  60. N. Q. [wrote]

    Jesus is alive? Don't make me laugh. And I'm not ducking your questions, you are the one who is ducking mine.
    Yesterday at 9:00am

  61. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You asked questions, I asked for clarification so I could answer, and you failed to answer but rather asked me if it's an order. That's playing games and a waste of my time other than that others might see through them too.
    Yesterday at 9:04am

  62. L. A. [wrote]

    Hmm. Well, Jesus most definitely is alive and I saw his eyes looking back at me when I sat on the Mount of Olives with a Palestinian friend who, despite having his life wrecked by the Israeli occupation, said he refused to hate and would never pick up a gun, although he resisted the injustice of his situation every day of his life. Oh btw, he was a Muslim.
    Yesterday at 9:06am

  63. N. Q. [wrote]

    My questions were clear and you ducked them. There was no need for a clarification.
    Yesterday at 9:08am

  64. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "he was a Muslim" He didn't share Mohammed's view concerning picking up a gun though, so was he really a Muslim? I say not.
    Yesterday at 9:08am

  65. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "There was no need for a clarification." Humor me.
    Yesterday at 9:09am

  66. N. Q. [wrote]

    Perhaps, spiritually, Laura!
    I refuse to pick up a gun too, but I will never denounce my people when they fight for their rights by all means necessary. That's their given right.
    Yesterday at 9:10am

  67. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Does the mind of Mohammed offend you, Nihaya?
    Yesterday at 9:13am

  68. L. A. [wrote]

    One further thought on the violence issue though.. I am a pacifist at heart but after sitting at an Israeli checkpoint for 4 hours, waiting for the 18 year old Israeli soldier sporting Armani shades and a large gun slung over his shoulder to decide whether or not I could move.. on an empty road.. with numerous Israeli tourist coaches freely passing by.. deep inside Palestinian territory in the scorching heat.. I am afraid to say I was ready to take a swing at somebody. None of us know how we would react if we lived with it day in, day out, witnessing family members destroyed by it in one way or another.. I pray to God I would remain peaceful, but I have a horrible feeling I might not.
    Yesterday at 9:13am

  69. L. A. [wrote]

    Tom, I mean he was brought up a Muslim, he would identify himself as a Muslim.. my point is that Jesus lives in every one of us if we allow him in, and thank God He lives inside most Palestinians, who miraculously continue to look for peace with their oppressors.
    Yesterday at 9:16am

  70. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Laura, if they came to drag you away to whip you and crucify you for speaking out, you might pray not to be led into temptation to call for the wrath. That's what we Christians are faced with.

    When the temple finally gets cleaned, everything evil goes into that proverbial lake of fire, which nevertheless is very real whether or not taken metaphorically.
    Yesterday at 9:19am

  71. N. Q. [wrote]

    You clearly know nothing about Muhammad, Tom and your views are those of Islamophobes. Muhammad's peaceful teachings were picked up by others such as Ghandi. When Ghandi sent his followers to re-open the salt factory, he was following Muhammad's steps when he marched with his followers from Medina to Mecca unarmed and with the intention to perform the pilgrimage. When they were not allowed in, he made a deal with the Meccans to have peace for 15 years and this peace agreement was violated by allies of the Meccans and not the Muslims. When Muhammad sent his army to confront the Romans, he gave his army commander specific teachings that governed Muslim behavior during war. He ordered his men not to cut or burn a tree, not to harm a civilian, if a soldier drops his weapon, he must not be harmed, women and children must be excluded, houses of worship must never be entered or harmed. It's interesting that those who claim to be Christian never behaved that way when they invaded Muslim lands!
    You need to educate yourself about Islam, the Muslims and Muhammad and his teachings.
    23 hours ago

  72. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Nihaya

    You are making unjustified, sweeping statements regarding what I do or do not know based upon some very short questions, which you have yet to answer.
    23 hours ago

  73. N. Q. [wrote]

    Stop playing games, Tom. You are ducking my questions, which expose your Islamophobia.
    23 hours ago

  74. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You are a dishonest person. I don't like that.
    23 hours ago

  75. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You failed to answer: "Are you talking about Mohammed and that his mind is the mind of Islam, or are you talking about Muslims being whatever anyone claiming to be one wants to claim of Islam?" I said I asked so that I could answer. It's called defining the terms. You are ducking doing that, and therefore, conversing with you is a waste.
    23 hours ago

  76. L. A. [wrote]

    It is very easy for words typed here to be misconstrued, especially when they refer to a subject so emotive as this.. Tom has been a fb friend for a long time Nihaya, and speaks out against injustice wherever it occurs, whoever against.. he is not Islamophobic, racist or prejudice in any way.
    23 hours ago

  77. N. Q. [wrote]

    Tom, My question was very clear and you are just ducking it.
    23 hours ago

  78. N. Q. [wrote]

    I'm sorry, Laura, but his generalizations about my people and referring to the Muslim part of my nation as "certain others" do not help me see what you see in him.
    23 hours ago

  79. Tom Usher [wrote]

    To further clarify Laura's point, I am not opposed to people simply because they may call themselves Muslims.

    There are people calling themselves Muslims who would refuse to do what Mohammed did. Laura, you brought up one such person. When I say what Mohammed did, I mean every last thing. Mohammed would fault them for that and say they were not following his words and deeds.

    This is regardless of however you, Nihaya, define or misdefine Islam.

    I have ducked nothing. I seek truth, which is clarity.

    Now, answer my questions, Nihaya.
    23 hours ago

  80. Tom Usher [wrote]

    "certain others of" doesn't mean all!
    23 hours ago

  81. N. Q. [wrote]

    As I said before, you don't know much about Muhammad and what he did. I used some examples of his peaceful approaches and yet, you come and claim that Muslims like the man Laura mentioned would be faulted by Muhammad! You are using stereotypes of Muslims and Muhammad that Islamophobes use.

    When Islam was declared to the world, Muhammad and his followers marched through the streets of Mecca unarmed and were violently attacked by the Meccans until Hamza, Muhammad's uncle arrived and stopped the violence against them. A year or so later, Muhammad and his followers were expelled from their homes and pushed into a valley where many of them died of hunger and disease. Muhammad didn't order his followers to fight back. The only solution he had was to migrate to Medina where Muslims would be safe from harm. He allowed his men to fight back only when their families back home in Mecca were violated and their property was destroyed or stolen. His followers begged him to let them fight. He didn't want to fight and only when he received the verse, "Fight those who expelled you from your homes..." he allowed his followers to fight back.

    You really need to educate yourself about Muhammad and Islam. You also need to stop judging Islam and Muhammad according to your beliefs or the standards of our modern times. What applied to them then might not apply to us now, but you have no right to judge them based on your belief because that is called intolerance of other people's beliefs and I doubt that Jesus would condone that.
    23 hours ago

  82. B. H. [wrote]

    I just want to say I love you all and think we have reached the point of not seeing each other in a right way.

    I go to daily mass and I always pray for peace in that area.

    Unfortunately I think Jesus is the one who will have to fix it.

    The only reason I say unfortunately is it shows how little humans have progressed.

    I just wish all this talk and all the money we spend trying to kill people to get something that is not eternal could be used to help people.
    23 hours ago

  83. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Nihaya, You assume way too much, which doesn't lend itself to truth. You have informed me of nothing that I didn't already know. You still have not answered my questions. You haven't done it appears, at this point, because you don't want to be put in the position of defending Mohammed in all (not some cherry picked aspects) of his words and actions.

    At the time in Mecca of which you just wrote, Mohammed lacked the resources to fight back. How did he obtain those resources that he used when he fought at Medina? He raided caravans. He killed and stole, which was pure evil. Is that Islamophobia, or just the truth? Maybe Islamophobia is the truth if Mohammed is Islam, unlike the Palestinian "Muslim" Laura met who said he would not follow Mohammed's commandment to kill.

    I've ask you another question and answered it before you've even answered my earlier question even though I am certain that you will do everything you can in your mind to dodge the obvious facts and only conclusions concerning Mohammed versus Jesus Christ as one worthy of being followed while the other is right there.

    If you think I'm ducking saying that Jesus is the one. You are wrong. Jesus is the one. Mohammed is not.

    Anyway, because you won't answer with any straight forward unambiguous answers, I will move on to getting my "day job" done.

    @ Braheem, I wish you would have answered me, but I detect that you thought you'd be engaging in spiritual battle with me. You want your heart in the right place. I can see that.

    I do hope you will not aid and abet the Zionist Regime in their efforts to cast doubt about Jimmy Carters even-handedness. Of all the Presidents my country has ever had, he has tried the most to be even-handed. He made some mistakes along the way and as President, but he has worked very hard to continue to correct things. The same cannot be said of many, if not most, Presidents.
    22 hours ago

  84. N. Q. [wrote]

    No Palestinian believes that s/he is taking Palestine with him/her to the grave. My people are not out to kill anyone, but they have the right to defend themselves and rid their homeland from invaders. That is a human right. My people are neither angels or demons; they are just human beings who have been denied their right to live in peace and security since even before the collapse of the Ottoman empire. No one has the right to judge them when they never lived in their shoes. My father was expelled at gun point from his home on the west side of Jerusalem. He ran all the way to Hebron with his elderly mother and aunt while bullets chased them all the way to Hebron. My father never carried a gun in his life and never participated in any violent action. He actually saved the life of a zionist that was about to be shot in Jerusalem. Yet, my father was never allowed to return to his home on the west side of Jerusalem. Fifty years after he was expelled, I was forced to leave my homeland because the zionists refuse to give residency rights to non-Palestinian husbands and children of Jerusalemite women. I couldn't stay there while my husband (my ex now) and my child couldn't live with me and thus, I had to leave. Jerusalemites like me are always forced to prove that Jerusalem is the "center of their life" or they would be expelled and lose their right to live in the city they were born and raised. I don't have to live in exile and pain in the name of "love thy enemy."
    22 hours ago

  85. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Meant: "Mohammed's commandment to kill."
    22 hours ago

  86. B. H. [wrote]

    Nihaya, you are right and wrong about the points you make.

    Do you justify suicide bombings when those that do it know they are killing innocent civilians??
    22 hours ago

  87. N. Q. [wrote]

    Muhammad didn't raid caravans before the Meccans raided Muslim homes in Mecca and stole everything that belonged to the Muslims and their families that stayed behind and were violated by the Meccans. You expect the Muslims to "turn the other cheek" as your Christian faith commands. You are judging Muslims according to your belief and that is called religious intolerance. Shall I judge you based on what Leviticus says? Do you have a daughter? How much are you asking for her? Muslims don't sell their daughters and the Qur'an specifically prohibited Muslims from harming their daughters, but in Leviticus the Bible says that you can sell your own daughter. Shall I judge you and all Christians based on that?

    There is no need to put Muslim in quotation marks since that guy is Muslim as per the teachings of Muhammad.

    "If you think I'm ducking saying that Jesus is the one. You are wrong. Jesus is the one. Mohammed is not."

    This just proves what I've been saying about you and you've been avoiding it.

    Thank you, Tom for proving me right. You are an Islamophobe and an intolerant person. I'm sure that Jesus would be ashamed to have you as a follower of his. Remember that he saved the prostitute from stoning? Did he condone prostitution because of what he did? Nope, but he was a tolerant man who refused to judge people based on his beliefs. As Jesus would say, "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

    BTW, I'm an atheist and I refuse to follow any religion or believe in a god, but at the same time, I refuse to judge people according to my beliefs and treat them as less than me. I live and let live, but if they attempt to impose their religion and faith on me, I shall fight back.
    22 hours ago

  88. N. Q. [wrote]

    I'm not sure what you mean by "innocent civilians" when all the zionists that colonize Palestine serve in the army as soon as they reach a certain age. All their adult population serves in the army and are soldiers who constantly serve in the occupation army that brutalizes my people on a daily basis. 99% of those zionists supported the massacre of Gaza, how innocent are those?

    BTW, the correct term is not "suicide bombings;" it's Human Bombs. If my people were allowed to have the same arsenal of the colonizing army, trust me, they would bomb military targets only. Since they don't have such weapons, they are forced to turn their bodies into bombs to give the zionists a taste of their bitter medicine. FYI, the ones that introduced such suicide to Palestine were the zionists. They colonized a land that didn't belong to them, ethnically cleansed more than 700,000 Palestinians, stole their property, treated the rest who managed to stay like trash and then expect to live in peace and not be harmed! That is called suicide.
    22 hours ago

  89. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Nihaya, You have a profound ignorance concerning Christianity. You point out your complete misunderstanding by citing stoning, which is Mosaic Law (Old Testament) that Jesus (New Testament) prevented them, without coercion but divine logic, from following.

    If you think that everyone saying Jesus is the one and that Mohammed is not is evil, then that's your problem.

    Tolerance is not agreement.

    Yes, you fight against God, who is truth.

    Now, I'm done here. Your last word here won't signify.

    Peace to all who will accept it.
    22 hours ago

  90. N. Q. [wrote]

    I see that you are running away from the words of the man you claim to follow, Tom!

    I don't believe in Muhammad or Jesus as I said earlier, but I'm telling you that you are no follower of Jesus because of your religious intolerance. Remove the plank from your eye before you criticize the Muslims or Muhammad.

    BTW, Jesus would have said "peace to all" and not "peace to all who will accept it." He always offered peace without conditions. See how far you are from his teachings? Muhammad said that a Muslim is the one that doesn't harm the others with his hand or tongue. I think that Jesus would have been a follower of Muhammad had he been alive when Muhammad received his message.
    22 hours ago

  91. B. H. [wrote]

    Looks like Tom and I are on the same side now. LOL

    You are right Tom.

    I do have some good Muslim friends and Christians sometimes make them look bad also.

    I can tell you this though many Muslims and many non-Christians do not understand Christianity at all.
    21 hours ago

  92. B. H. [wrote]

    Hey guys, this is an awesome Muslim friend I have in Pakistan. FRIEND HIM!! Reference me if you like.

    [URL deleted]
    21 hours ago

  93. B. H. [wrote]

    I'd like him in on our debates.
    21 hours ago

  94. N. Q. [wrote]

    Are you saying that you are an Islmophobe too, Braheem?
    21 hours ago

  95. B. H. [wrote]

    NO!!
    21 hours ago

  96. N. Q. [wrote]

    Then why do you say that Tom is right?
    21 hours ago

  97. B. H. [wrote]

    If you understood Christianity you might not say that.
    21 hours ago

  98. N. Q. [wrote]

    What is it that I don't understand about Christianity?
    21 hours ago

  99. B. H. [wrote]

    Friend Rehan, tell you are and I will tell him
    21 hours ago

  100. N. Q. [wrote]

    I'm very selective when it comes to adding friends on FB. Are you going to answer my question?
    21 hours ago

  101. B. H. [wrote]

    Christianity calls us to love our neighbor as ourselves.
    21 hours ago

  102. B. H. [wrote]

    I love people of all faiths and I think we all can learn from each other if we do not PROMOTE hate. Everyone has to give a little if we move forward.

    There are many obvious evils in front of our eyes and we need to unite against them.

    If you think I like the state of the Palestinian people you are wrong.

    I have said before there are many Palestinian Christians that are being thrown under the bus by Evangelical Christians and the USA.

    I just feel that combating evil with more evil is not the answer, BUT I fully understand your point.

    Remember my family is from Syria and I know much more then you hink I do and I have many family members over there.
    21 hours ago

  103. N. Q. [wrote]

    I knew that, but according to Tom, that is not extended to the Muslims and Muhammad. BTW, you didn't answer my question regarding your statement "If you follow my posts I have supported the Palestinian people numerous times, especially Palestinian Christians." Why especially the Palestinian Christians? Why not all Palestinians regardless of their religion?
    21 hours ago

  104. B. H. [wrote]

    Nihaya, good point, I just did not ad Muslims. You did not read what I said??

    Love your neighbor?

    Jesus does not say just love Christians.
    21 hours ago

  105. N. Q. [wrote]

    I didn't make any assumptions about you, Braheem. I just asked you to clarify what you said. BTW, the Palestinians can never come up with more evil than what the zionists inflict on them. They don't have the means to do so.
    21 hours ago

  106. B. H. [wrote]

    I agree, but more evil or a little evil is evil.
    21 hours ago

  107. N. Q. [wrote]

    Still debatable. No one has the right to define what "evil" is and then impose that definition on others. What you might consider "evil" can be seen as divine retribution by others.
    21 hours ago

  108. B. H. [wrote]

    I still think this debate is good, and I feel none of us would kill each other if we were together, we might even find we are closer to each other then we think.

    The problem is people love to use force to make their points.

    Human beings are way to immature, that is why we need God.

    I just feel we need to do much more loving and less killing.

    I have found in life that love tends to put a bright light on evil.
    21 hours ago

  109. B. H. [wrote]

    Nihaya, maybe that is all I can say to that.

    I can see evil pretty clearly I think.
    21 hours ago

  110. N. Q. [wrote]

    Here's what the Qur'an and Muhammad say about the Palestinians.

    Muhammad told his followers that the day will come when part of his people shall achieve martyrdom that is 40 times the martyrdom of his followers. They asked him, "even after what we went through?" He said, yes, they shall be oppressed and the whole world will be against them. They shall fight until god ordains an end to their oppression. His followers asked him, "who are those people?" He said that they would be living in Jerusalem and its surrounding areas.

    So, according to the Muslim Palestinians, fighting in Palestine is part of a divine destiny. They don't see what they do as evil. They also believe that Jesus will return and save them once he joins forces with Al-Mahdi.

    The Qur'an stated that the Jews would be brought to Palestine and they shall be mostly young and fully armed. They are told to not rebel against the word of god and they must not commit corruption. If they do, god would send mighty servants of his that shall tarnish their name on earth, enter the mosque like they did the first time (peacefully after laying a siege) and they shall destroy everything the Jews built.

    Destruction doesn't necessarily mean physical destruction since destroying a racist ideology and apartheid are also a form of destruction.

    As you can see, people can see things differently according to their beliefs. The Palestinians initially didn't mind Jews living with them and never used force against them. But they had to use force to defend themselves when those Jews decided to colonize their homeland and dispossess them. Self-defense is never evil.
    21 hours ago

  111. B. H. [wrote]

    COOL!! I like him a lot!!
    21 hours ago

  112. N. Q. [wrote]

    BTW, I just realized that y9our friend Rehan is also a friend of mine.
    21 hours ago

  113. N. Q. [wrote]

    Damn those typos! I'm hungry and haven't had any breakfast.

    I actually thought that Rehan was a woman. We became friend recently. Rehan is a woman's name in Palestine.
    21 hours ago

  114. Tom Usher [wrote]

    @ Braheem,

    "And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again." (Luke 10:5-6)

    Take care!

    Peace to all who will accept it. This is Jesus's teaching. It was, and shall always remain, fundamental to the faith.

    There will be separation.

    "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." (Luke 12:51)

    Don't be lulled by unbelievers, brother Braheem. Be steadfast in Jesus's doctrines.
    18 hours ago

  115. B. H. [wrote]

    I am ROCK solid Tom. You and I will disagree on politics but it sounds like we will be in heaven together.
    17 hours ago

  116. B. H. [wrote]

    Nihaya seems very nice, he friended me and we have been talking.
    17 hours ago

  117. L. A. [wrote]

    This Rehan person.. I am sure he was a friend of mine but is no longer, which means either he deleted me or I deleted him. I would only do that if he was really offensive in some way. I wish I could remember.
    17 hours ago

  118. B. H. [wrote]

    Laura it would surprise me if he was offensive. We is a Muslim and we have debated but he is a great guy and has even friended my daughter.
    17 hours ago

  119. B. H. [wrote]

    Send him an e-mail
    17 hours ago

  120. L. A. [wrote]

    I can't remember what happened.. I am just sure he was a friend and isn't now. Perhaps he got fed up with me and deleted me!
    17 hours ago

  121. B. H. [wrote]

    LOL! I will not get fed up with you.
    17 hours ago

  122. L. A. [wrote]

    Aha, very pleased to hear that my brother xx
    17 hours ago

  123. N. Q. [wrote]

    Braheem, I'm a woman. You referred to me as a "he." But thanks for the compliment though. You are awesome too.
    17 hours ago

  124. N. Q. [wrote]

    Laura dear,

    I hope that I did not offend you through this long debate we had today and I want to thank you for letting us have this debate on your wall. Great to have you as a friend, especially when your daughter becomes a famous singer and very important. ;-)

    I have to hit the road to SF now. Have a lovely one, guys.
    17 hours ago

  125. L. A. [wrote]

    Nihaya.. no, you have not offended me at all, none of you have. I don't think I have ever had so many comments on one post before, so that's a record for me! I like debate and never mind friends who have differing views to mine as we can all learn from one another, so long as we respect each other.
    I have to hit a different road now.. the one up to my bed! Have a safe trip. xx
    17 hours ago

  126. Tom Usher [wrote]

    May God bless everyone — yes, you too, Nihaya. You are part of everyone.

    I hate what the Zionists have done to Palestine. Even still, may God bless them too.

    Being truly blessed would include being shown the error of their ways so they would stop, turn, repent, and atone as much as possible. Pray for them. I mean that.
    13 hours ago

  127. N. Q. [wrote]

    Muhammad said the same thing, Tom. He told his follower: Support your brother whether he's the oppressed or the oppressor. They asked, we understand the oppressed part, but the oppressor? He said, "You support him by stopping him from committing his oppression." He didn't say "your Muslim brother," he just said "brother." At the time, Muslim families had family members that didn't join their faith and Muhammad didn't insist that this support is just for Muslims.
    11 hours ago

  128. N. Q. [wrote]

    One point that I forgot to mention during the debate is that Muhammad never really touched a caravan. His followers had the intention to rob a Meccan caravan to avenge what happened to their families and property in Mecca. The Meccans heard about it and prepared an army to confront the Muslim one and they sent a messenger to Abu Sufian who was heading the caravan to join them in an area called Badr. Abu Sufyan took another route to save the caravan, but the Meccan army went ahead with its plans to confront the Muslim army and it was defeated by the Muslims. The second battle was Uhod, named after a mountain where it took place. The Meccans wanted to avenge their defeat in Badr and they were almost defeated in this battle had the archers that Muhammad placed on the mountain not left their positions, which exposed the backs of the Muslims and they were sandwiched between the Meccans and suffered great losses. The third battle was called the Trench because the Meccans decided to gather their allies to destroy the Muslims once and for all in Medina. Muhammad was advised to dig trenches around the city to stop the advancing Meccan army.The Meccans couldn't cross into Medina and then a strong wind came and toppled everything on their heads and made them flee back to Mecca. After this battle, Muhammad attempted the pilgrimage that I mentioned earlier today. When the 15 year truce was violated by the allies of Mecca, he decided to march on Mecca and return home. Abu Sufyan who became the leader of Mecca negotiated a deal with Muhammad that anyone that enters his own home would be safe, anyone that enters Al-Ka'ba would be safe and anyone that enters the house of Abu Sufyan would be safe. Most Meccans didn't fight and the Muslim army headed by Muhammad entered Mecca. There were a few skirmishes, but nothing major.

    These were the battles that Muhammad took part in. The image that you have of Muhammad as a caravan bandit is totally false and is perpetuated by Islamophobes who want to turn the Muslims into the new enemy. You do realize that the zionists control the media in the US. Hollywood did its nasty share of demonizing the Muslims. Your view of Muhammad and the Muslims has been shaped by them. Had you done a little research, you would have known this history that I just shared with you. There is so much that is attributed to Muhammad that he never did or said.

    Furthermore, one cannot judge the people of the past according to our modern standards or what we believe is right or wrong. They had their different circumstances, ethos, standards and customs. If we are going to judge the people of the past according to our current standards, we would demonize all past cultures. They are part of our collective human history and they are the ones who shaped our modern world. We learned from their rights and wrongs and we improved ourselves. Before Muhammad, Meccan men buried their daughters alive to stop them from shaming them in the future. Muhammad banned that completely. He ended their form of slavery and ordered his followers to turn their slaves into their brothers and sisters and share their wealth with them.

    There is a movie called "The Message" that was directed by Mustapha Akkad. It tells the most accurate version of the beginnings of Islam that I have seen. Perhaps you can watch it and learn something from it.
    11 hours ago

  129. Tom Usher [wrote]

    I was done yesterday; and if Nihaya would have admitted her errors (such as Jesus does not leave the peace with rejecters for one), or had gone silent on the thread, it would have been enough; however, it is obvious that sufficient refutation hasn't corrected or silenced the refuted, and the attempt to leave off has been mischaracterized as concession to some supposed greater logic or knowledge. Nothing could be further from the truth. It will not stand.

    Things continued in this thread that should not have and that if left unattended, put souls in danger. The real Gospel must be preached everywhere.

    It is utterly disingenuous to say that Mohammed did not raid caravans. He ordered caravan raids that failed. Then the story is that the first "successful" raid was carried out during sacred months when killing wasn't supposed to occur and that Mohammed had only sent the raiding party to scout. The raiders did steal the contents of the caravan and did return to Mohammed with booty, loot, plunder. Mohammed was upset at the killing only because of the timing, not because he was against killing. It is recorded that he paid blood money. However, what he also did though was to extract ransom for those kidnapped during the raid. In addition, he did not require the Muslims to return the stolen property. Therefore, the Muslims were greatly enriched. This constitutes Mohammed as being at the very least, an accomplice after the fact. The only difference though between this caravan raid, other than that it succeeded, and the others before it, concerns the timing, not the intent. The intent of Mohammed concerning the earlier caravans was to plunder.

    In addition, such raids were never outlawed by Mohammed. Such raids are still authorized under Mohammed's Islamic law (sharia). Any caravan of any type ever raided in history under Islamic law is the mind of Mohammed still raiding caravans. It is Mohammed living on in the spirit of death and darkness relative to Jesus's life and light. Mohammed's followers are accordingly thus and whether knowledgeable or not concerning Jesus's real teachings. The ignorant are, however, according to Jesus, to receive fewer stripes from Satan.

    Mohammed also then conveniently changed his views concerning the sacred months when killing was not allowed so that his followers could attack and kill during even those months and still ostensibly only in revenge. Later though, he attacked and killed people way beyond what could even be considered revenge as he had been using the term earlier. However, under Christ, whom Mohammed rejected, all months are sacred months when such killing is not allowed. Those who attack others, whether out of revenge or not, are not following Jesus's teaching: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12)

    Mohammed did not follow or enhance that teaching, that Golden Rule. He rejected it. Therefore, he did not preach the law of God and neither was he a prophet of God after Jesus. If Muslims don't like that, let them convert.

    What Mohammed did was lie to his people as to the Gospel message. He twisted it to serve his ends and not Jesus's.

    There will be no merging of Islam with Christianity. There will be no Islamic Mahdi or Twelfth Imam partner of Jesus. There will only be Muslims converting to Christ as Jesus represented himself and as recorded in the canonical Gospels in the New Testament Bible that was before Mohammed.

    Also, the argument fails that this and other of Mohammed's teachings and ways may be excused by reason of the times and that it is wrong to judge Mohammed according to current understanding. It fails because Mohammed had the words of Jesus Christ. The Gospel story was not unknown, as the Book, both Old and New Testaments, was clearly known. Mohammed knew the statements of Christianity forbidding doing exactly what he went ahead and did.

    Jesus forbids Christians from taking revenge; fighting to regain possessions; enslaving people; demanding ransom; requiring jizya; raping captives; plundering (which Mohammed did); pedophilia (if the Hadith is to be believed concerning it; how many Muslims reject that Hadith?); and many other things Mohammed falsely claimed were authorized by the God of Jesus Christ.

    The idea that the reward of the righteous in Heaven is scores (72) of virgin sex slaves for each male is nothing short of disgusting and can and should be judged in light of Jesus's whole message to which Mohammed had been exposed else he would not have attempted to twist it to dupe people into following Mohammed rather than Jesus.

    Mohammed was a worldly imperialist and made himself a worldly emperor.

    According to Jesus's teaching, Mohammed was vile and an enemy of Jesus and God.

    Jesus is before Mohammed. Mohammed rejected Jesus's teachings that were known for hundreds of years before Mohammed. To say that Mohammed cannot and should not rightly be judged a rejecter of Jesus, Christianity, and Jesus's God (the one and only God) is completely false. He was not and is not a Christian. He was never a follower of Jesus Christ. Because he didn't understand, Mohammed could not bring his ego into such alignment.

    The prevailing arguments used by Muslims and others in support of Mohammed and Islam are specious. Jesus is better than Mohammed was. That's a fact. Given the choice of which teaching to follow between the two, the answer is obviously Jesus's teaching.

    Saying all of this in no way is a rejection of taking people one at a time concerning what they know and that to which they have been exposed concerning these issues.

    Mohammed is the mind of Islam. Anyone who claims to be a Muslim who does not follow Mohammed in everything he did and who does not say that the same law of Mohammed then, when he was alive, is the same Islamic law now, is not a Muslim except in name only.

    If pedophilia or rape or slavery or the other things mentioned above were authorized by Mohammed for Mohammed, then how can any of them be overturned for any Muslim now except that any law of Mohammed may therefore also be overturned even to the point of entirely wiping out Islamic law?

    This is how it is.

    Nevertheless, may God bless you, Nihaya. I hope my continued truth-telling here is just that.
    6 minutes ago

  130. B. H. [wrote]

    Very good Tom.

  131. Tom Usher [wrote]

    While I'm at it, let me further explain that by your standards, Nihaya, Jesus is condemned for being religiously intolerant. You said calling others to turn the other cheek as the Christian faith commands is judging Muslims according to my belief and that is religious intolerance. Then Jesus is evil for it according to you rather than calling people to the highest and best for all. Your position is awful. I call for the Zionists to turn to Jesus too, not to become Muslims.

    In addition, the Muslims were commanded to kill in the way of Allah, per Mohammed. Yet you say that a Muslim doesn't have to kill in that way while remaining a Muslim. So, you are claiming that Mohammed allowed for conscientious objectors who rejected Mohammed's teaching to kill. That's ridiculous on its face. Jesus has no such hypocritical standard. It's not easy for people to rise to it, and that's why Mohammed didn't.

    I don't admire him. I shouldn't admire him. I should not hold him out as some example to follow. His way is not the saving way, not here, and not hereafter.

    Also, you raised Mosaic Law to judge me, as if Jesus is for human-on-human slavery, yet you ignore that Mohammed was for such slavery. Muslims are forbidden from selling their daughters but not from enslaving mine and selling them to others. How wicked and hypocritical that is! Your defense of Mohammed is wildly hypocritical.

    You also claimed that Jesus was tolerant of the adulteress (not a prostitute contrary to your claim about her). The last thing he said to her was to go and sin no more. Just what do you think he would have said to Mohammed about all of his killing, etc.? He did say it, but Mohammed turned away from God.

    I also want to address your use of the term "Islamophobe." Fear of Islam is what that term means. What if anything is there to fear about Islam? Well, from a Christian standpoint, we are to fear Satan in the Hell that awaits the many because Satan kills souls. We are not to fear men who merely kill the flesh. However, we may fear people being led into apostasy and all that, that entails. It is that which concerns me. It is also true that Mohammed's dream was for Islam to take over the entire world and to place everyone under subjection to Mohammed's Islamic law. I don't want that. I'm against it. It would be terrible. I reject sharia. It is not good. It may be better than some other codes in history, but it stinks compare to Jesus's word. Why should I say otherwise? Why should I lie, to spare someone's mistaken sensibilities and watch people fall to Mohammed's falsehoods?

    Furthermore, you quote Jesus's saying to me: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" (Matthew 7:3) as if to say that, that means I am gagged against speaking the very words of Jesus.

    The saying means that one is to avoid hypocrisy. One is to consider whether or not one is doing the thing one is pointing out about others or that one is doing other things that would render one hypocritical upon raising lesser sins of others. If though I do consider whether I have a beam in my eye before I consider the mote in someone else's and if I refrain from speaking hypocritically, then I am not violating the commandment of Jesus to me. It does not mean that I must be perfected before I speak. I do not kill. I may say to others that they ought not kill. It is not hypocritical. You have not understood Jesus, or you have understood and still twist his words.

    Lastly, I do not impose my religion on anyone. I am anti-coercion. That's Christian. I speak out. I say things that would make many professing Muslims hysterical ready to call for my stoning even though the things I say are true. You know the blasphemy laws.

    You say you will fight having Islam imposed upon you, but if Islam takes over the world as Mohammed desired, you will be under Islam whether you like it or not. The same can never be said of Christianity.

    Don't judge Jesus by the Crusaders. He didn't send them to fight. Wrong-headed and wrong-hearted people did, not Christians.

  132. N. Q. [wrote]

    I didn't read the second post, but do you have any evidence to what you posted? Can you back up all that you said? In a debate, you need to back up what you say. People can say whatever they feel like, but without a proof, they are just statements and nothing else. They don't become facts just because you claim so. So, let's hear your proof!

  133. B. H. [wrote]

    Nihaya it seems you are defending Muslims much more then Christians, as an atheist aren't they both wrong?

  134. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Nihaya practices a double standard. Where's your proof, Nihaya, for the things you claimed about Jesus and me and for the things you claim about Islamic history?

    In a debate, it is necessary for you to refute anything I said that is incorrect. I have done that vis-a-vis you, but you have failed to acknowledge being corrected.

    Pretty soon it will come down to Nihaya appealing to the Qur'an and Hadith only as the infallible words.

    Nihaya, your beliefs are what you have your faith in. It's either that or you are a total existentialist and perhaps nihilist. I am neither of those things. I believe in Jesus. It's a circular argument, but there is no such thing that isn't on the worldly plane.

    Do you think you are dealing with the shallow here?

  135. N. Q. [wrote]

    Braheem, I didn't attack Christians and I didn't think that they were being attacked in this thread to be defended by me. Yes, I am an atheist, but as a political and social activist, I can't ignore the fact that Tom is demonizing 1.2 billion human beings just because they don't follow his faith. The notion that one's religion is better or that his/her god is better is the reason behind all religious wars that destroyed so much of humanity. The zionists use that argument to subjugate the Palestinians. They believe that their god is better and thus, they are better and deserve to have full human rights while the non-Jews are their slaves to serve them. We need to rise above that supremacist nonsense and respect the others for who they are. Who is Tom's next target? The Jews? The atheists? The gays?

    BTW, I never said that Christians and Muslims are wrong. They can believe whatever they want as long as they don't attempt to harm me or impose their religious belief on me. I don't agree with their belief, but who am I to condemn their belief and call them wrong?!

    Last night, I watched "Season of The Witch." The movie started with the Crusades and how they marched on every city in their path murdering people left and right. Their leader was constantly repeating words similar to Tom's. He justified the murders by telling his warriors that those they were murdering rejected Jesus and his teachings and thus, deserved to die.

  136. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Wow, what a completely dishonest reading of what I've written here that is. It's shameful.

  137. Tom Usher [wrote]

    How can I be anything of what you've alleged when I have said not to blame Jesus for the Crusaders?

  138. Tom Usher [wrote]

    How can I be anything of what you've alleged when I have said that I am anti-coercive?

    Trying to converse with you is as speaking to a brick wall.

  139. N. Q. [wrote]

    What claims did I make about Jesus? Quoting his words has become making claims about him?

    I suggested to you that you watch that movie because it's historically accurate save for minor things that were added such as giving certain characters in the Islamic history more presence because Muhammad and certain members of his family were not filmed and thus, others had to have a bigger role just for the movie.

    Go to Wikipedia and look up the three battles that I mentioned and you'll see that what I posted is historically accurate.

    Now show me the evidence to what you say!

  140. N. Q. [wrote]

    There is no need for personal insults, Tom. Civility is important in a debate. Now, show me your proof of what you claim about Muhammad's teachings and stop beating around the bush.

  141. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Now, I am really done here. Nihaya, you don't follow trains of thought worth a damn. As for the Wikipedia, I will find something and post it here, but then that's it for me with you. You are too thick. You are an extremely careless reader.

    Re-reading this entire thread will show you where you made completely wrong statements about Jesus's teachings. I pointed those out in no uncertain terms, but you act as if I've not done that even in the slightest.

    A quick reading of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakhla_Raid will substantiate much of what I've written.

    Try reading Jesus, Nihaya. He said to shake the dust from one's feet. Do you know what that means? You'll probably condemn him for it, which is par for the course for you.

  142. Tom Usher [wrote]

    Oh, and Jesus called the Pharisees serpents.

  143. N. Q. [wrote]

    Thank you for the link, Tom, which proves what I said. I told you that the Muslims didn't raid caravans until after the Meccans stole their possessions in Mecca. This is what your link states, "After Muslims were persecuted and driven out of Mecca, their goods were all seized and they were boycotted from trade, they began caravan raids to reclaim some of their wealth from the Quraysh." Muhammad didn't want to do that, but his followers urged him to let them go after the Meccan caravans. But of course, you refuse to accept Muhammad as a messenger sent from god and so he never had a divine message and therefore, he is not worthy of your respect. I'm sure that you know that Muslims respect Jesus and value him dearly as one of the prophets just like Moses, Abraham, Lott, Noah and the others. Too bad, that you can't afford to show the same respect for their prophet! That is the same religious intolerance that lead to so many destructive wars and destroyed so much of our humanity. Do you see why I chose to be an atheist?

    I never attacked Jesus and Laura knows that I refer to him as The Prince of Peace.

    You can run away if you want. I've seen that happen every time I asked people like you to back up their claims about Muhammad and Islam.

    Again, there is no need for personal insults. I just asked you to back your claims and you came back with personal insults.

  144. Tom Usher [wrote]

    You've written hogwash for a reply. You did not read the Wikipedia article looking for where it refutes anything I've written. All you've done is duck and dodge and change the subject.

    That article substantiates what I've said, if it is accurate. Even still, I've said that it is the story.

    I'm not running away from anything. You haven't substantiated any of your claims about me at all, not one.

    Did you defend against all the other charges against Mohammed? You have not.

    Defend against every single one of them.

    He was not better than Jesus. If you think so, what's the point in talking to you after everything I've written here?

    There is none.

    You are the one who has run away at every point. You have not refuted me point-by-point, whereas I have handled every single one of your charges against me while you have refused to acknowledge anything I've said.

    It's plain to see. You are dishonest.

    I shake the dust where you are concerned.

  145. Tom Usher [wrote]

    The Muslims do not respect Jesus. Mohammed twisted Jesus. The Pharisees felt insulted too. Plenty of people suffering under sharia feel personally insulted and violated too.

Other posts that should interest you:

Palestinian Muslim Says Kill Them All, Kill All the Zionists, Qualifies After Being Pressed, Fails

A Moment of Truth: A word of faith, hope, and love from the heart of Palestinian

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.