Saturday, May 9, 2009

Terrorists: Live and let live?

Terrorists: Can't we just live and let live?

To put it simply, NO.

Aren't people basically good deep down?

To put it simply, NO.

I think people are born good to some extent. I mean, we all have a sinful nature and everything, but I don't think anyone is *born* evil. However, people CAN become evil, and once they are, no, they are not "basically good deep down".

Now, some people say that we should stop fighting the terrorists. Leave them alone, they say. Live and let live.

I'm fine with that. You're probably fine with that. Most people (serial killers not included) are good with that!

Except the terrorists.THEY WANT TO KILL US. It's part of their religion. Their Bible says "KILL ALL THE NON-MUSLIMS!"

Ohhhhh but we can't fight back! That's inhumane! They believe they're doing good! LIVE AND LET LIVE!! PEACE!

Yay, peace. Peace is good. But I think for peace to work, both sides have to agree to NOT KILL EACH OTHER.


I am all for peace. Really. As much as I enjoy stirring up trouble and debating, world peace is a wonderful that I want us to have! I think it would be WONDERFUL if we could live in harmoney with the Muslims. Some of them are probably really great people.But as long as they are bombing America, it is America's job to fight back.

America is not "attacking" the terrorists. It is purely self-defense.

What kind of country would we be if we just sat here and let the terrorists kill millions of innocent people just because it's in their religion to do so?

We'd be a wussy country that no one felt safe in, that's what we'd be.

I want peace. But it's not up to us anymore. We HAVE tried to be friends with the terrorists. Didn't work. If we're going to have world peace, it's up to them now. We're fighting in self-defense. Any time they want to come over and have a nice PEACEFUL cup of coffee with us, I say go for it.

But until then, America, keep on fighting. Because we are not a country to be pushed around destroyed just to prove we're "nice guys". We have to fight to be safe. To be free. And that's what America is all about.

26 comments:

  1. I have to go to bed right about now, so I'll just point out one thing for the moment.

    It's not all Muslims, nor the majority, so I wouldn't really just say "Muslims". I always end up calling them extremists. They just use religion as an excuse, in my opinion.

    But to each his own.

    ReplyDelete
  2. your blog is amazingly thought provoking and intelligent. Not to mean offence, but I am absolutly amazed that I'm reading this from a 15 year old!

    <3

    ReplyDelete
  3. No offense taken! This is the kind of stuff I love to write, and the classes I took this year have helped me become a better critical thinker (I hope). I'm so glad you enjoyed reading this!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Woah. Steph... This is great. Seriously! :O

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting philosophy and I agree that it is impressive coming from a 15-year-old. Two things I might point out: not only are all Muslims not terrorists, but not all terrorists are Muslims. The Koran certainly does not promote violence. I believe that as of the moment, Islam dominates that group, but Christians--those we are familiar with--are often extremists as well. Second thing: Why fight violence with violence? I agree we can't sit around. But what world leader is America if we represent violence like the rest of the world? We can't say, "If you aren't peaceful, we'll blow you up." Sorry, I'm practically writing a novel here. Delete this comment if you wish. Keep writing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I completely agree. War is horrible. But we need not forget all who have died. Sometimes we get so wrapped up in "world peace" that we forget about September 11th. We want peace, as humans in general, but I want to keep my freedom more. And sometimes the fight to gain or keep freedom is ugly, but it is worth it. I HATE that our troops are dying, but they are also heroes. I wish there was another way but there...just...isn't. We need to keep fighting so we can keep our country free...and also so we can honor those who have already died, by finishing what they couldn't.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Christopher: Thank you!

    Yes, I know I may have streamlined a little, but I do understand that not *all* Muslims are terrorists.

    The Koran actually does say that you should hunt down non-Muslims and kill them. And it says that it's okay to be violent and go to war but for religious purposes only.

    Christians can be very extreme, too, but never violent (at least not to that level). If they are extreme in the right ways, the good they can do is amazing.

    We *have* tried having a little sit-down. The radical Islams don't want to hear it. I agree that violence with violence is not the best way to handle things. People should use it only as a last resort, but that's what we're doing. We've tried other things, and they didn't work. Now, it's down to either kill or be killed.

    Ellie B: I agree. I completely agree.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, I am commenting on an old post. I only just now spotted your response. Yes, it is true that the Koran calls for the conversion of the whole world for Islam, but definitely not the extermination of the other population. Does the Bible taken completely literally not say that the world population should be converted as well? I think Islam and Christianity are actually preaching a relatively similar message. We both have our extremists who take that message incorrectly. Might Bible-thumpers on the streets or dangerously conservative preachers not try to destroy the other world population IF THEY HAD ACCESS TO SUCH WEAPONS?!?

    I also think that there IS a way to fight violence with peace. Did Muhatma Gandhi not win indepence for India through peaceful protest and civil disobedience? Yes, I do think that things will EVENTUALLY settle in the Middle East. And if we destroy those countries with nuclear weapons or maybe just armed forces, will we not look like we did after we used nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What will America look like after thousands of innocent Muslims and Iraqis have been killed and America is standing behind the wreckage and smoke with confused faces with dawning horror? That's my opinion and you are entitled to yours. I'm looking forward to more posts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have never read in the Koran that they should hunt down and kill non-muslims. The koran advises them to convert people, but extremeist twist this and say that it means kill. It doesn't, and unfortunately you have made the word terrorist a synonyms for someone who is muslim. Do you realize that we Americans were the first terrorists when we rebelled against the British? We comitted horribel acts to rebell and twisted things that the British did out of proportion. And I'm sorry, but NO ONE is truly bad deep down. Sure they may be some exceptions, but seriously, NOT ALL OF THESE PEOPLE ARE TRULY EVIL!! That's like saying every single person who was a Nazi in Germany was totally evil, but you would probably agree with that too. And lets not forget the things we Christians have done! Ever heard of the Crusades? Just because it happened a while ago doesn't mean it didn't happen. And Christopher's right about Christians today and what some of our extremeists would do if they got WMDs which by the way is something the muslims do not. That whole scenario was basically an excuse to invade. And I'm not saying that there are not places where we should have used force, we just didn't in those places.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Christopher: It's fine! I love comments, and better late than never :)

    I think the Koran does say that if someone won't be converted, they should be killed. Maybe not, though. I could be wrong. I DO know that it says that it's okay to go to war for religous perposes.

    The Bible does say to "go and make disciples of every nation". But it doesn't mean to force anyone, just to bring the word of God to other people.

    Islam and Christianity do have their similarities, but on the very important levels, the messages are pretty different. And the ways the two beliefs go about things are very different.

    I honestly highly doubt that even the most radical preacher would use WMD to wipe out non-believers. If they are that radical, they would know that that isn't what God wants at all.

    This is just a little bit different from what Gandhi did. The terrorists are trying to kill us, not repress us. If we don't do something to prevent the terrorists from anihilating us, America will most likely be destroyed.

    What do you mean how we looked after bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki? We looked like we had done the only thing we could do and ended a terrible war. My goodness, what would you have suggested they do?? Japan was going to destroy us, and possibly the whole world. We warned them that we would take action against them if they didn’t stop, but they didn’t listen. We tried to reason with them, we tried to stay peaceful, but they would not listen. Dropping the atomic bombs was a last resort; the only thing left to do. I don’t think we looked bad at all after that. How do *you* think we looked?

    It is terrible that so many innocent people have to die, but sometimes there aren’t any options left. If we could figure out a way to end the war without harming all the innocents, I would be thrilled! But until that way is discovered, we can’t let the terrorists destroy America. We have to preserve our freedom.

    Violence is never a good first response, but often it’s the only possible second or third.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Alex: First of all, thanks for commenting! I love getting comments and hearing new opinions.

    You might be right about the extremists just twisting the Koran. For whatever reason, though, they *are* killing innocent Americans. At this point, the reason almost does not matter.

    Sorry if it seems like I’ve made “terrorist” and “Muslim” synonymous. It’s just easier to stick to one set of terms instead of narrowing down so much. But you’re right, I should be careful not to lump people in together like that.

    Whoa, hold up! Hold up! We were the first terrorists?? Maybe we should define terrorist first:

    Definition 1: a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.

    Definition 2: a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

    Definition 3: (formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.

    Definition 4: an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.

    Definition 5: One who governs by terrorism or intimidation; specifically, an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.

    We were most certainly NOT terrorists when we broke away from England. It’s actually amazing to me that you could say that. We calmly told the King that we wished to become an independent nation. But parliament acted unjustly and England taxed us. We tried to live with that and just wait things out. We tried the Gandhi approach, but it didn’t work. Finally, when things got to be too much, we decided to take our freedom. We did not start the war, England did. We were not fighting to control other people, we were fighting for the right to control ourselves. We were not trying to convert, enslave, or in any other way manipulate a population. We were fighting for freedom.

    People are not born evil, but they can become that way. People *can* be evil deep down. Although, that’s really an opinion, and there isn’t anything I can do to prove that exactly, so we might as well just leave that argument where it is.

    I don’t believe that all Nazis were evil. They were deceived by Hitler, who I think might have been really evil. It’s hard for me to say, though, because I think he honestly believed he was doing good. I think he might have been a little bit crazy, but I’m not sure if he was really evil. What he did, however, I believe was extremely cruel and evil. No one deserves to die because they are different.

    During the Crusades, the Christians tried to regain control of the Holy Land. I don’t really have a lot to say about that one way or another. In some lights, they were doing the right thing, and in some ways they were a little over-excited and needed to chill. But either way, they were not charging in with the sole intent of murdering all the Muslims. They were trying to retake a great part of their religions history.

    America is NOT invading the Middle East! Oh my goodness! We have no wish to control those lands at all! What we want is to enable the people of the Middle East to have a good, strong government for themselves. We went in and took the evil people out of power, and tried to help the people get back on their feet and on the way toward a healthy society. Taking over has nothing to do with it.

    Which places do you think we should have used force and didn’t?

    Thank you both for commenting! I am looking forward to reading your replies.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I wish I could use an e-mail to respond instead of publishing a near sequel to Gone With the Wind. But that's probably too personal. So I'm going to respond even if this IS a stale debate because this is one of the subjects I feel most passionate about. Behind this subject lies countless other values that I believe in strongly.

    I agree with my friend Alex on many subjects--not all: many. And I do agree that people are people. Being baptised does not actually rid one of all sin. Christians across history have sometimes been monsters. Hitler claimed to be a Christian! Napoleon! Constantine! People are people, no matter what holy book you claim to follow. In ancient history, you'll find that Christians called for war to convert the world while Muslims were amazingly tolerant. At some points, they didn't even force non-believers to pay taxes--while Christians raided villages and burned other religions at the stake! I don't mean to offend my own religion. But just like some Christians are benevolent leaders and some Muslims are terrorists, some Muslims are leaders of world peace and some Christians are greedy murderers.

    Moving on to the next point, about fighting back, are you not aware that Pearl Harbor was a desperation attack that should have been Japan's last? I'm going to use Alex's favorite metaphor and say, "We were beating down a dead horse." Not only that, the bombing of Pearl Harbor took 4,000 lives, while the bombing of Japan took 200,000 lives in all. We resorted to hurting the innocent ones instead of removing the ones at fault. We turned it from a military performance to a crime. In conclusion to this lengthy paragraph, it was unnecessary.

    Even if Japan planned to hurt us more, I don't think we should have used nuclear power. First of all, we are humans and definitely not worthy to harness it. No matter how good-hearted America is supposed to be, we're just humans. Some say that more US lives would have been lost than Japanese lives in the bombing. But why move in? We have allies. We have defense. We should have defended ourselves instead of moving in. This situation will return in the future. What will we do next? Do you know that even Truman regretted the bombing of Japan?

    I am going to wrap up my case. America is not perfect--not at all. Muslims are not devil-worshipers, though they have their issues. No matter how many differeneces we share between us, we both worship God. Their God might be harsher, more distant. But he has the same intentions and the same love. The Middle East is controlled by many corrupt governments. But that is not their all of their faults. We are just stirring more hate by staying there. Yes, we attack those who make a violent move. But what effect will this have on the longrun? Maybe I don't know what I'm saying and maybe you're right. But right now I feel strongly about this. Thanks for replying.

    ReplyDelete
  13. OK, coming in late (of course), but so what.

    I would like to point out that- the war we are currently fighting is not about terrorism. It isn't even about Islam! It's about...well, no one's really sure what it's about anymore beyond:
    "Oh, there mightpossiblyperhaps be WMDs!!"
    "Saddam was horrible!"
    "The poor, beleaguered Iraqis who..were living under Saddam...and not doing anything...we must help them!!!"

    Yeah. That's what the Iraq War was/is about.

    Now, don't get me wrong; I'm all for peace, and getting rid of evil dictators, but is that even our business?! Is the fact that any country in the world has nukes any of our business?!

    So, just throwing that out there, since no one else seems to have brought it up in my 'skim' of the former comments. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  14. "We were most certainly NOT terrorists when we broke away from England. It’s actually amazing to me that you could say that. We calmly told the King that we wished to become an independent nation. But parliament acted unjustly and England taxed us. We tried to live with that and just wait things out. We tried the Gandhi approach, but it didn’t work. Finally, when things got to be too much, we decided to take our freedom. We did not start the war, England did. We were not fighting to control other people, we were fighting for the right to control ourselves. We were not trying to convert, enslave, or in any other way manipulate a population. We were fighting for freedom."

    What is the difference between a TERRORIST and a PATRIOT? To the British, we were the terrorists. To us, those 'terrorists' were patriots.

    It is much the same with current terrorists. Many people view the current terrorists as patriots. However, we view them as terrorists. Why?

    It is our perspective. They are committing acts of terrorism against us, so we think they are terrorists. However, to someone else, they are upholding their values, hence they are patriots.

    There is no difference, there is only a difference in perspective.

    More 2 cents. :P

    ReplyDelete
  15. Christopher: I wouldn’t mind emailing, but I do like to have the discussions on the blog. I like to be able to look back at all the comments and stuff, and it seems like other people enjoy being able to read up on the comments and add to the discussion that way.

    People *are* people, I agree with you there, and whether they are Christian or non-Christian, they can still do good or bad things. Lots of Christians, as you pointed out, have made bad decisions and done very wrong things. However, I’m not sure that Hitler could even be called a Christian, considering the Jews were supposed to be the chosen people. And being baptized most certainly does not take away sins. It doesn’t even make you a Christian. It’s just an outward symbol of an inward change and commitment.

    Muslims have done good things in the past, and some of them are still that way. But the same goes for Christians. I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make by saying that the Muslims weren’t unkind to nonbelievers once upon a time. That’s true, but we aren’t talking about that. This isn’t about how Christians made mistakes in the past, or how Muslims didn’t. It’s about the war going on *right now*.

    Some Muslims just might be leaders of world peace, but it’s a pity they aren’t succeeding. When you look at the big picture, it’s almost a moot point. Yes, there are some “good” Muslims, but we aren’t talking about them either. And keep in mind, this war is not Christian vs. Muslim by any stretch of the imagination. It’s America vs. Terrorism. It’s America’s job to keep her citizens safe, and the only way to do that is to prevent disaster. The only way to do that now is to fight back. We aren’t attacking, we’re using self-defense. As soon as the terrorists are ready to quiet down, we will be, too.

    Pearl Harbor a desperation attack? It definitely wasn’t. America wasn’t even involved in the war until Pearl Harbor. It was obviously an attack, and not one of desperation. We were not involved in the war. It wasn’t our war until Japan decided to attack Pearl Harbor. Desperation attack?? How do you see that?

    How were we supposed to remove just the ones at fault? I’m sure we would have if we could have. Sometimes, all that’s left is to end it however you can. If we hadn’t bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even more lives would have been lost. We ended a war in the only way we could.

    I agree, America is not perfect—no one is. And the Muslims are not devil-worshipers. They’re just worshiping the wrong God.

    Yes, Christians and Muslims both worship God, but it isn’t the same God! You can’t “get into” Heaven just by believing in and God. The only way to Heaven is through Jesus, and the Muslims don’t believe that. Their God and the God of Christians *do not* have the same intentions.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Liberty: Thanks for commenting! And better late than never :)

    The war actually *is* about terrorism. The terrorists want to destroy America because they hate us. We’re trying to help the people in the Middle East get rid of their bad governments and give them the power to create better, stronger ones.

    Yes, we are worried that there might be WMD, but that’s not the main focus at this point.

    Saddam was horrible, yes, but he’s dead now, so it isn’t about that any longer.

    Yes, we are trying to help the Iraqis among others.

    If the Middle Easterners were just over in their part of the world suffering under terrible governments and getting killed for not following the orders of evil dictators, you’re right; that wouldn’t be our business at all, although it might be nice for us to help them. But unfortunately that isn’t the case. The terrorists *made* it our business on September 11th. America cannot just stand by and let them destroy our freedom.

    Thanks for bringing up this approach! You’re right, none of us seem to have considered that in the comments yet :)

    Liberty again (;) ): Good point. While I believe the door can swing one way, not quite the other. (I think that was a weird analogy I just made, but hopefully you get what I mean…lol) I think you’re right that the people in the Middle East that support the terrorists see them as patriots. That’s true. In the eyes of their people, the terrorists are patriots. But, that doesn’t make us terrorists when we broke away from England. While I guess terrorist can mean patriot, patriot *does not* mean terrorist. Does that make sense?

    The real difference between terrorism and patriotism is how it’s handled. We were calm and firm and gentle with the British as long as we could be. We didn’t want to start a war, and we only did when it was our last and only option. The terrorists did not come to America and try to convert us. They did not even tell us that if we didn’t convert (or whatever it is that they want), they would kill us. The terrorists struck violently and cruelly without warning. Their first reaction was violence. Instead of being a last resort, it was their first response.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry to disagree with you Kendra, but no, the Iraq war is NOT about terrorism. None of the 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq.

    They were nearly all from Saudi Arabia, one from Lebanon, one from Egypt, one from the United Arab Emirates, and a few unknown. So...why are we attacking (unconstitutionally attacking) a sovereign country because of terrorism? Why don't we go attack Saudi Arabia?

    I think there's a flaw in your logic as well in point 2. Yes, patriot can mean terrorist. Let's think about this. If America were to devolve into another civil war over the unconstitutionality of our government, their acts over the past 50 years, and our rights, who would be the patriots? Who would be the terrorists?

    According to ME, the people who are standing up for the Constitution would be the patriots. (Of course, I'd probably be right out there with them, or at least cheering from the sidelines, so I'm biased. XD) According to the government, the people fighting on their side would be the patriots, and the others the terrorists.

    Do you see what I mean now? It's all about your perspective. Patriot can mean terrorist, just as terrorist can mean patriot! It's only about your viewpoint.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I've taken a long time to respond. Maybe that's best. What I was trying to accomplish, Kendra, by defending Muslims, was to separate the word "Islam" from evil and the word "Christianity" from perfection. It seemed through your text, though I may be wrong, that you thought that Muslims were evil and worshipped an evil God. I suppose that matter is closed because neither of us is going to change our minds. I also don't think that the only way to heaven is by officially becoming Christian. I know that infuriates you, so I won't get into that.

    You were right about Pearl Harbor. I was getting my history mixed up and I realized right afterwards that Pearl Harbor started the war for America. I was wrong and you were right. But what I stay strong about is that the bombing was unnecessary. Both bombs were dropped in 1945--4 years after Pearl Harbor. We WERE negotiating with Japanese officials and Japan WAS losing the war. And you MUST admit that OUR atomic bombs took tens of thousands of more lives. That is a lesson in history that we should learn from.

    Yes, we must learn from the past. That's why we should remember 9/11. But do you realize that you're speaking of revenge?!? No, not justice, revenge. Because, I will repeat, what is the use of fighting violence with violence? It doesn't matter who started it and who "has the right to violence."

    I'm going to conclude my whole debate, and just add I THINK before each sentence, because I know I'm no philosopher. Muslims are not evil and they don't worship an evil god. Christianity is simply a counterpart religion for Islam. Yes, I know that too infuriates you. Though I disagree with Liberty on many grounds, I do agree that it's all about perspective. We have our patriots, and our extremists. So do they. We may find that more Christians are peaceful, but many, many Muslims are just as wise and tranquil. And my most important point is that maybe America needs to draw the line between "revenge" and "justice." We need to lead as a role model by fighting with non-violence--just like our good friend Gandhi. And, most of all, we need to put aside our differences, grudges, and indignant demands for justice, and find peace. I look forward to your response, but I think this is the last of mine.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Probably not all Muslims are evil, and I KNOW that there are no perfect Christians. We agree there, but unfortunately, that might be the end of our agreement :) I’m not infuriated, but I do disagree. I’m also wondering how you got the impression that Jesus is not the only way to Heaven. He spells it out in John 14: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. *No one comes to the Father except through me*.” Of course, to non-Christians, this is kind of circular reasoning, but since you are a Christian, I’m confused as to how you can believe that Muslims can still go to Heaven. I don’t WANT anyone to go to Hell, but as harsh, cruel, unfair, etc. as it may seem, it is hard and undisputable fact: if you don't choose Jesus, you will not go to Heaven.

    Yes, we did kill thousands with the atomic bombs, but I do still believe that we saved even more lives by doing so. Of course, we’ll never really know, so we might as well drop this subject, too :)

    I really don’t want revenge. I don’t necessarily want us to attack the terrorists, but I do think we should do what is reasonably necessary in order to keep Americans (and the Middle Eastern terror victims) safe. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: violence is never a good first reaction, but sometimes it’s the only practical last resort.

    Not all Muslims are “evil”, and their god is not necessarily “evil”, however he is wrong.

    I do agree somewhat with Liberty that perspective has a lot to do with this, but there is no way that I will ever see our patriots are terrorists. The hard and true definitions will not match up however one tries to twist them.

    If I ever feel Americans have cross the line between “justice” and “revenge”, I will most certainly agree with you, but right now in my opinion, they haven’t.

    Thank you for commenting and providing an interesting and enlightening point of view! I know we disagree on a lot of things, but I don’t think we disagree on as many things as when we started, which is always a good thing :) I hope I haven’t ever come across as offensive or angry, and if I have, I apologize.

    If you do post another comment, I’ll gladly read it and respond, but don’t feel obligated. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I am going to post a response, but in a different respect. I'm not going to bring up any debates--like I said, neither of us will soon change our minds, but correct your understanding on one of my sentences. Yes, I am a Christian. I believe Jesus Christ is the son of God. He came down from heaven and sacrificed himself on the cross to save mankind. That's a very brief and overused version, but yes. What I do believe is that not all of the Bible is absolutely literal. And neither did it float down from heaven into the hands of some prophet. I think the verse that you recited can refer to a different Jesus.

    Say there are an unknown people on an isolated island. None of them can know the Jesus we know. Does that mean all of those innocent souls will "burn in the eternal and torchurous fires of hell" as so many conservative preachers have so bluntly repeated? No, it doesn't. Can't there be a Jesus for those people--if not an actual Christ or part of the Holy Trinity nor the God we know from scripture. What about just trying hard in life, being a loving and generous person, or the desire for goodness, positivity, and love? The only hell that I think is real is the refusal to turn to God, and the terrible loneliness that comes with it. No, I don't think so many of those extremist Muslims or EVEN the extremist Christians will get a free ticket to heaven.

    They have to try. But neither does life on earth count for everything. Somewhere in the Bible--I hate to say it, but don't ask me where--it says that God does not forgive seven times, but seventy times seven, which is a simple way of saying it's never too late to turn to God. No, I haven't completely worked out my ideas. You might look over this and think, "WHAT is he trying to say?" But from the loving Jesus that is spoken about in the Bible, do you really believe he would torture innocent souls just because Western religion has not reached them? That's all.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Christopher- I'd like to clear something up about what you said about Pearl Harbor/World War 2. As far as I know, Japan was NOT listening to us. There were no peace overtures until after. No, they were not losing. WE were losing! And even if they WERE losing, they wouldn't have stopped fighting. The Japanese revered their Emperor as a god. They would have kept fighting until he said stop- and he wouldn't have.

    Another thing you said, about salvation- there is a passage in Acts about how Paul came to Rome, and there was an altar to an 'unknown God'. There are instances where a completely isolated people- a couple in Africa and the like- knew Someone. They didn't who it was, but they believed. I think those people were truly saved. I think that Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven, period.

    Kendra, I'd like to get your thoughts on the issue of how we're NOT fighting about terrorism, whether it's revenge or justice. I agree with Christopher that we've passed beyond 'justice' (And since the war isn't 'justice', we weren't there in the first place), and gone to 'revenge'. Just my thoughts. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  22. My last comment didn't follow through AGAIN. That may be a good thing. I don't have much time and maybe it's best if I keep things a LITTLE shorter. First of all, judging by the loving and gentle Jesus that we know in the Bible--and therefore the loving and gentle God--I don't at all think he would throw anyone into such a terrible, torturous, and physical punishment such as hell. I ESPECIALLY don't think he would put anyone in this hell simply because no one has ever given them a Bible, or they are isolated from Western society, or even because they were taught otherwise. It may be hard to admit, but I don't think I would be a Christian if my parents were Muslim. I'm not going to talk for you, but judging by the little I know about you, I don't think you would be Christian either if you were born Muslim, Hindu, or anything else. That's why I think there is a more metaphoric version of Jesus that is STILL everything that the real Jesus represented.

    Another thing: God didn't write the Bible directly. It didn't descend from heaven. I do think it was written by prophets who were very inspired by God. It is INDIRECTLY from God. The people who wrote the Bible wrote it according to their understanding and according to their time. That's why we shouldn't follow it so literally, and so obediently. The Bible isn't nearly as valuable if none of the Christians reading it are paying attention to reason. I rest my case. I'm actually thinking about posting about this subject, so yeah. Keep posting!

    ReplyDelete