Florida church's 'Burn a Koran Day' brings Islamist threats

reply to post by ~Lucidity


WTF is a church burning anything other then wood for? And just to clearify this UNIVERSALLY I aint part of that type of church and I am a follower of CHRIST THE LAMB the SON of the ALPHA/ OMEGA the creator of all. But them folks smh what an example of showing your people how to forgive and move on, keep reminding them of the hatred spawned from a terriost attack.... great job

reply to post by LarryLove

Yes, reaching out and taking a softer approach is one thing, but if your church leader is publicly promoting an extreme and fundamentalist form of protest, then he must take accountability for his actions,

Accountable?

Extreme?

Has he broken any laws?

I could go out in the back yard and burn books all day long if I wanted to.

So he burns books and they want to spill rivers of blood?

Whats wrong with this picture, and which is the more extreme?





[edit on 123131p://bMonday2010 by Stormdancer777]

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Okay, this is where we agree to differ because burning books belongs in the Middle Ages and in no way should it be suggested let alone performed. The Nazis did it and Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 comes to mind. If he did this in the UK, he would most likely be questioned and possibly charged under this Act.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


This isn't hard to understand. Those wanting the mosque built at ground zero are doing the same thing the church burning Koran's is doing - they are instigating behavior. It doesn't matter what the intentions are with regard to the mosque - the fact is many people are dead set against it and for that reason the mosque is a bad idea. The same can be said with burning the Koran. Neither event, the mosque or the Koran burning, should take place.

reply to post by LarryLove


I am not suggesting burning books, but I can if I want to, if I own them, and what about the rivers of blood?

so, since a threat was received does that mean all this nonsense is over?

I mean that is all this church wanted anyway, to be threatened and show the world how evil Islam is.

Assuming this group really wanted to mark the anniversary of 9/11 by burning a Koran on 9/11 why are they having a huge announcement in July? Other than to allow time to let the "threats" roll in.

This whole thing is utter nonsense.

reply to post by searching4truth

I mean that is all this church wanted anyway, to be threatened and show the world how evil Islam is.

And some group proved them right, didn't they?

This is why nothing will ever change.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by LarryLove

 

I am not suggesting burning books, but I can if I want to, if I own them, and what about the rivers of blood?

Free will grants us permission to do all that we want, whenever and to whomever. But to perform an act that will knowingly incite religious hatred is not in keeping with the basic tenants of Christianity and an abuse of free will.

I am sure there would be a few strong words if we reversed the situation and Bibles start getting burnt.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Did they? This is the same thing I've seen reported everywhere, a jihadist group. It is ridiculously vague, no mention of what the threat is, no group or individual who is making the threat, nothing.

I could say I just received a threat the first thing law enforcement does is verify said threat.

Muslims and Christians (evangelicals included) have expressed their verbal outrage over what this church intends to do. As well they should, this is nothing but a ploy and it is completely ridiculous.

reply to post by searching4truth


So of course now there were no threats.?!

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't,

Now assume something nice about the evil Christians.



[edit on 123131p://bMonday2010 by Stormdancer777]

reply to post by LarryLove

But to perform an act that will knowingly incite religious hatred is not in keeping with the basic tenants of Christianity and an abuse of free will.

Well of course it is inappropriate.

reply to post by zcflint05


The point being that Bill O'Rielly and Glenn Beck, would state that they may disagree with the burning of the bible, and making fun of Christianity in general, and that a lack of faith in the country has been leading to its downfall, however, they would support, even though it is distatefull, and they have stated such, that it is an issue of freedom of speech. They do not call for the death, nor make threats. The media has made fun of just about every religion out there, and at times seems to go too far. Those who would complain about things of a religious nature, the question should be why, if after years and years of such being present does it matter today? The last time I heard of such was the Mount Solidad Cross. Out in California, there is a cross, on Mount Solidad, in the middle of a national park. It was put there, as was decided by the vetrans of World War I, as a monument to their sacrife. The contriversy started when those who objected tried to get it removed from the national park land. The real shame of it all is that it was a war monument to the World War I vetrans. But no one got killed over it, and the courts over the years have been accomidating in that aspect. Even popular TV shows push the envelope when it comes to making fun of religion in general. A well known comedian, who died recently turned around and was known for making fun of the Catholic church, but the catholic church did not persecute him, or even threaten to have him killed.

"I like your Christ, but I do not like your christians. Your christians are so unlike your Christ." - Gandhi

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Lol, I am a Christian I don't have to imagine something nice about them.

I also have a lot of friends that are Muslim, and I do not have imagine anything nice about them either.

I prefer to take a person at their own merit as opposed to being a bigot.

I don't know that they were threatened or not, but as I said the article is extremely vague. What I do know is that it is very odd for an unknown group to publicize a controversial event they are planning three months in advance. Are they selling tickets? Do they expect for people to travel from across the country to come to a good old fashioned book burning? No, they wanted press.
The only question is for what purpose. Most likely because the "minister" just wrote a book on the evils of Islam, and now he can go on press tour for how he was threatened, but really he can promote his book , t shirts, etc. on the national stage.

It is also interesting to note this same church is under investigation because it abuses its tax exempt status and supposedly is more in the business of making a profit for the couple that runs it, rather than pleasing the Lord.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by LarryLove

 

Yes, reaching out and taking a softer approach is one thing, but if your church leader is publicly promoting an extreme and fundamentalist form of protest, then he must take accountability for his actions,

Accountable?

Extreme?

Has he broken any laws?

I could go out in the back yard and burn books all day long if I wanted to.

So he burns books and they want to spill rivers of blood?

Whats wrong with this picture, and which is the more extreme?





[edit on 123131p://bMonday2010 by Stormdancer777]

I like you Stormdancer777, so I will keep it clean and simple. Imagine if book burning didnt occure with many crusades in past. And to go deeper imagine if the MAYAN BOOKS/CODEXES WERENT DESTROYED BY spanish who didnt like their views.

I make it a point that shedding blood is violent but a church should be positive and for a church to be burning anything especially another religious book I say it sends a bad message to its followers... PEACE AND LOVES THE 777 FRIEND LATER

[edit on 8/2/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

Originally posted by LarryLove

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by LarryLove

 

I am not suggesting burning books, but I can if I want to, if I own them, and what about the rivers of blood?

Free will grants us permission to do all that we want, whenever and to whomever. But to perform an act that will knowingly incite religious hatred is not in keeping with the basic tenants of Christianity and an abuse of free will.

Building that mosque near ground zero is also an act that will incite religious hatred - hatred of Christianity toward Muslims for doing it. Does that make building the mosque a bad idea? And you can't say "No, because it's mostly the Christians who have a problem with it" because the same can be said for the Koran burning - the Muslims are mostly the ones who think burning the Koran is a bad idea. So shouldn't that not take place? Why is one permissible but not the other?

reply to post by black cat


I don't understand the correlation between building the mosque where they want to and burning the Qu'ran with the exception that the mosque thing is pissing off Christians. So please explain why that is such a bad thing.

reply to post by black cat


I am sure there are churches over in the mid east that are Christian in nature and are built in warzone areas previously not war zones. Lets play fair childrens so you can get good grades on you test as the test are almost due to be turned in

[edit on 8/2/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

reply to post by black cat


Apparently Jews now have a problem with it too Clickie.

Guess this is the new round of firestorm of opinion and emotion on the Islamic community center in lower Manhattan. The ADL weighs in....


[edit on 8/2/2010 by ~Lucidity]

Originally posted by black cat
Building that mosque near ground zero is also an act that will incite religious hatred - hatred of Christianity toward Muslims for doing it. Does that make building the mosque a bad idea? And you can't say "No, because it's mostly the Christians who have a problem with it" because the same can be said for the Koran burning - the Muslims are mostly the ones who think burning the Koran is a bad idea. So shouldn't that not take place? Why is one permissible but not the other?

I think if you were to poll most Christians, they would be against the idea of burning a Koran. To suggest Muslims are the ones mostly against this doesn't make sense. If correct, then the consensus of Christian opinion would be okay with the idea. The intent to build a Muslim Community Center near Ground Zero is not designed to aggressively incite religious hatred. It is not being directly used as a weapon in a propaganda war. The intent here is more along the lines of unification, not ideological separation.