Evangelical Preacher on Trial After Branding Islam 'Satanic'

If you have to kill in the name of your Religion, then it is evil.

Religion is supposed to be about love, and peace, helping one another.

But if you have to kill, not only are you evil so is your religion that you represent.

So the Evangelical Preacher should not have a problem winning his case in court.

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: ngchunter

It's important to remember the context here though, in that Belfast has had decades of sectarian murder and what was essentially a war happening because of 'inflammatory' comments.

Nope. Wrong. War never happens because of inflammatory comments. You are allowing those who commit violence to blame the comments that offend them. That is precisely the kind of wrong thinking that leads to prosecuting a pastor because he offended muslims. It is wrong and it is shameful, it is against human rights to free speech. I know someone like you, someone who blames "islamophobia" every single time a terrorist attack occurs. "If people would just stop making inflammatory comments the terrorism would stop!" she exclaims. She's wrong. And so are you.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: beansidhe

I don't see anything more inflammatory than what the news and intelligence services are already telling us. He simply repeated the facts.

Hardly facts!

Islam is heathen, Islam is satanic, Islam is a doctrine spawned in hell.

How can 'spawned in hell' be a fact?

originally posted by: Informer1958
If you have to kill in the name of your Religion, then it is evil.

Religion is supposed to be about love, and peace, helping one another.

But if you have to kill, not only are you evil so is your religion that you represent.

So the Evangelical Preacher should not have a problem winning his case in court.

He might have a bit of difficulty convincing the court nobody ever killed for Christianity.

a reply to: ngchunter

I think you're completely missing my point, because you're looking at this from a US perspective.
It's not about 'offending muslims', I think it's possible that it's about a protestant minister upsetting a lot of people by likening Islam to the IRA which is deliberately meant to provoke Catholics.
Whether it's right or not to have free speech, or whether it's ethically wrong to offend people is irrelevant, because I'm wondering if this is actually a reaction to a protestant minister spouting bigotry, hence inciting more trouble in NI. I'm wondering if the whole Islam slant is a red herring in a sense, and it's not about that at all.

I know someone like you, someone who blames "islamophobia" every single time a terrorist attack occurs. "If people would just stop making inflammatory comments the terrorism would stop!" she exclaims. She's wrong. And so are you.

She is nothing like me.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: shooterbrody

Which is why having an enumerated right to free speech is important.

I do not agree with what this meathead said but he should have the right to his opinion.

What he said is 100 percent true however. It is easy to see how Islam is satanic when it utilizes insidious and false doctrine of a false prophet to openly call for the murder of others, and tell them God approves of that.

Only a complete and utter moron like president Obama would defend shet like that, and say "Nah, it's good man, they won't kill anybody or attempt to infiltrate every other infidel country and spread and increase Sharia law, or engage in mass killings like we see happening now, maybe that was all CGI hoaxes performed by racists and Donald Trump? so let them come in freely, and tell immigration to fast track them in without the customary requirements, because that would be racist and silly", wouldn't it?

and christian pastors have an obligation to preach the bible. a preacher that refrains because it might offend is not doing his job and his "credentials" ought to be questioned. you don't go to church for approval of sin. if your a sinner and it offends when the preachers says the wages of sin are death then you entered the wrong building by mistake. A christian knows or ought to know that every human is a sinner. if there were people who never sinned their entire life then Jesus would not have had to die for their sin. the penalty for every sin is death even jaywalking. so when a preacher says homosexual sex is a sin, or adultery is a sin or fornication is or whatever; he is doing his job and presumably also stating what he believes. But lest any man (or woman) boast (as some christians do: )

Romans 3:20

Therefore by the deeds of the law [of Moses] there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

No one is saved by the law. The law convicts us all. the sentence is death. and it was paid by Christ. There is no double jeopardy in old covenant law.

Romans 3:9

9 What then? are we better [than they]? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

...and other verses too numerous to cite.

We as Christians believe that (or should believe that) we are not better than sinners because we are also sinners. Reproach hurts but that is one of the functions of the Clergy.

So a preacher should say things that may hurt or inflame. He should not ignore sin but that is not to say he is condemning the sinners either.

a reply to: beansidhe

It's important to remember the context here though, in that Belfast has had decades of sectarian murder and what was essentially a war happening because of 'inflammatory' comments.

It doesn't matter, my dear. There are Americans who apparently believe we should be able to tell ALL countries how best to live; what laws to make, no matter their experiences, values, culture and histories that led them to make their laws. Remember, the U.S. knows what's best for everybody, no matter who ya are!

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
What he said is 100 percent true however. It is easy to see how Islam is satanic when it utilizes insidious and false doctrine of a false prophet to openly call for the murder of others, and tell them God approves of that.

It is all perspective, in your view Islam's god and prophet are 'false', and to them vice versa, so have fun killing each other over trying to figure out whose flavor of religion tastes better.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Aaah, I see where I'm confusing people now.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
This may be but it is irrelevant to the Christian use of the term "satanic."

Exactly, I agree, it is totally irrelevant.

The Bible openly calls for the murder and rape of the heathens

The Quran calls for self defense, not aggressive murder.


And the Medieval Pope said its allright for Christians to take the land of heathens, and they exactly did that to many of the Native Americans---massive genocide on the Popes orders

Same thing with the crusades

So who is satanic and who is just human?

originally posted by: Willtell
The Bible openly calls for the murder and rape of the heathens

The Quran calls for self defense, not aggressive murder.


And the Medieval Pope said its allright for Christians to take the land of heathens, and they exactly did that to many of the Native Americans---massive genocide on the Popes orders

Same thing with the crusades

So who is satanic and who is just human?

could you please point out where in the new covenant it calls for this? in Christianity the OT is for history and for proving that Yeshua is the messiah and the provenance of salvation through The law of Moses and the old covenant. The things that God commanded be done at times were to preserve the prophesies concerning the savior. they were commands that were only in force at their various occurrences in the timeline. The New covenant has none of that. Furthermore I know of no occasion where rape was commanded even in the OT.

I think you have fallen for bible hater's propaganda and invite you to read this WRT rape in the bible:

www.gotquestions.org...


EDIT: Take special note of the fact that in the case of rape the male was to be put to death but the woman was to be held innocent; unlike in islam where a woman needs 5 male witnesses to prove rape and escape execution.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Look, its Christians who packaged the OT with the NT suggesting they support it as God’s word.


And in that OT, are some rough things. Btw Muslims also believe in the OT and believe in Jesus as well.

They just claim some things have been distorted throughout time.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I guess there's no freedom of speech there. Regardless of what he said, he should be free to his opinion. He either pissed off the satanists or the muslims.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Look, its Christians who packaged the OT with the NT suggesting they support it as God’s word.


And in that OT, are some rough things. Btw Muslims also believe in the OT and believe in Jesus as well.

They just claim some things have been distorted throughout time.

It is God's word. Again point out where rape is commanded. explain how the death penalty prescription for rapists is inferior to say Sharia law where 5 male witnesses must testify for a woman or else she is charged and executed for adultery?

a reply to: stormbringer1701

I’m really not interested or into:

My religion is better than your religion


I believe there are great things in all religions and bad things that humans have ruined and distorted over time in ALL OF THEM.


My point is that if somebody wants to say this or that religion is evil they need to look at their own house.

We can find evil done by many people in all religions, maybe Buddhism less so, so my thing is to look at the good in them and not throw stones at each other.

When Muslims I know start talking crap about how glorified their past is, I agree, but remind them of the rape and murder and slavery some “Muslims” did in Africa.

And when Christians( talking about calling the kettle black) claim purity and criticize others I remind them of the foul deeds from their own religion.

Ill do this until people cease this stone throwing at others

When we can learn to love and respect each others unique experience with God, we'll have developed a great distance.

Their all valid in my opinion

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Satan has nothing to do with actual Satanists or their beliefs, they just use the name to upset uptight Christians.

This may be but it is irrelevant to the Christian use of the term "satanic." Satanists have no monopoly on the term. It's Christian usage predates the"satanist's" usage.

No, they do have it. Satan is a polytheistic heathen God which existed before Jesus and the bible's teachings of monotheism.

Theistic Satanists believe in Satan.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

In the Quran the penalty for adultery is to get whipped. Wahhabis and Taliban crazies and extremist in Islam do that crazy stoning stuff. They didn't get it from the Quran

ITS NOT IN THE QURAN TO STONE FOR THIS!

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, -
flog them each with a hundred stripes.
-- Sura 24:2

This was almost 1500 year ago to primitive Arabs.

The OT is worst! Its ALL pre-modern punishments that shouldn't apply to today, imo