The people have spoken...

[Stefan]

Yet according to Islam, Christians and Jews are heretics? I said in the positional sense, not the perceived or believed. When Muslims look for God, they look in the same direction Christians do. Muslims believe that their God is the same God of the Christians and Jews, yet the Christians and Jews managed to pervert God's will and so God came to them.

Therefore, Allah and God are the same. It's just the way in which God is worshipped that differs.


To some extent, but there are also differences in what each god commands/does. As mentioned God seeks a different sort of relationship with his people then Allah does. Judaism and christianity can not be compared in the same way as islam and judaism/christianity becusae christianity shares an identical God in every sense with the jews. They just do not believe the Son has yet come.

However, they are all monothestic relgions, if that is what you are trying to get at.

[Noldy]

Pffff, thx Stefan, at least someone is helping me... :D

[Stefan]

Pffff, thx Stefan, at least someone is helping me... :D


are you being sarcastic?

[Noldy]

No, fcourse not :)

Preparing reply... to Abeth & Sir Turylon...

[Sir Turylon]

I wasn't trying to simplify the situtation. In many regards it can be compared to the struggle between Native American tribes and the settlers who moved in. Since the British Mandate and the "control of territories" is pretty much the same thing. The other issue is wether or not the Palestinians ever were a recognized state... Since occupation implies the removal of a government's control over a region.... IE, the occupation of Germany after 1945, and occupation of Japan... etc. The link was meant for some factual history on the subject. I'd rather not read a fictional story based upon factual events...


@God and Allah

God wants to have a personal relationship with each of us... I have not heard any such thing about allah. Maybe Hector can shed some light on it.

[lurking horror]

Sir Turylon: "I'd rather not read a fictional story based upon factual events..."

The link I provided you does not point to a fictional story.

[Abeth]

The Israel-Palestine issue cannot be trivilized in to a massive hate-fest against either side. Both sides have erred, committed atrocities, done their own share of terrorism, and so on. Turylon, your site was 100% pro-Israel. It would be in your best interest to atleast look over the other side's point of view. After all, you can't understand why someone feels the way they do unless you take a walk in their shoes. ;)

And as I recall, I didn't say that Allah and God were viewed in the same way - merely that in the positional sense, they are the same deity. Muslims look to the same God that Christians do when they pray to God, they just don't expect the same things from him that Christians do, nor do they worship him in quite the same way.

[Noldy]

Do you exactly think that God and Allah are precisely the same? That they are only different in name? That they are only worshipped by different people?

[Sir Turylon]

I gotta :rofl: at Abeth's comments. sorry.

Yahweh, or YhWh, is not the same as Allah. I've never heard of Allah answering the prayers of his people or directly talking to them. Also, Allah never sent his spirit down to dwell in his people. He also said he does not have a son.

And yes, I know that site is 100% pro-Israel. BTW, so am I. But, the history behind it is factual. Did you know Palestinians never called themselves that until Mr Palestinian Terrorist himself began his PLO group. Before they always considered themselves Arabs...

[Cro_Knight]

how can you be pro isreal when the un just gave them a independant state because the holocaust victims needed a placce to stay i read about england france germany america they all didnt wnat them so the un agreed to send them back to there homeland which they took away from the palistineans and theve been oppressing them ever since and to add palitines leaders and actions couldnt benefit them even if they tried each country is and has to confess to their terrorist actions

[Noldy]

@Sir Turylon:

On the Salvation thing:
Saved not through works but through Christ's blood? Yes and no. Yes we are
saved by the Blood of the Lamb, and we cannot merit our salvation, BUT we
will not be saved without our own good-will and cooperation, which includes
good works. Our Lord emphasises that on almost every page of the gospel.
Also read the short epistle of St James, which Luther tried to do away with
(but wasn't able).

Ill react on the rest later. Im very busy now, im having exam week coming up.

[Sir Turylon]

Sorry Noldy, but that is a Catholic invention. Good works only has one purpose. That purpose is to give praise to God in what we do. If we do things here on earth which are pleasing to His eyes, we will be rewarded for them. One thing that we agree on is that faith without works is dead. This does not mean Salvation without works is dead.

@Cro
And where did you read this? A Pro-Palestinian history book? The British Empire began the "Jewish Homeland" way back before 1920. I think the year was 1918. They limited the number of Jews who could live there in an effort to appease the Arabs living around the area. After the Holocaust, European nations then realized the Jewish people needed their own state. This is what the UN did. They created a state which compromised between a Jewish section and Palestinian section. This did not hold well, for that state was brutally attacked by the Arab nations before the nation even had a government in place.

un agreed to send them back to there homeland which they took away from the palistineans and theve been oppressing them ever since
The palestinians never had their own homeland. That territory went from Egyptian, to Babylonian, to Persian, to Roman, to Turk, to Ottoman, to English control. Never once has there been a Palestinian homeland. Palestine is the region... much like the Alps are a mountain chain in Europe... or Siberia is a region in Russia. Please remember that there WAS a plestinian state free of "opression" before the Arab nations invaded and tried to destroy the fledgling nation of Israel. If you want to place blame for the strife, place it on Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia. If they had not attacked, there would be a Palestinian nation right now. (don't bother trying to rebuff this... the history of this is 100% accurate)

[lurking horror]

Sir Turylon: "And where did you read this? A Pro-Palestinian history book? The British Empire began the "Jewish Homeland" way back before 1920. I think the year was 1918."

1906.

Sir Turylon: "They limited the number of Jews who could live there in an effort to appease the Arabs living around the area. After the Holocaust, European nations then realized the Jewish people needed their own state. This is what the UN did. They created a state which compromised between a Jewish section and Palestinian section. This did not hold well, for that state was brutally attacked by the Arab nations before the nation even had a government in place."

You are still oversimplifying the facts on this matter. Why did this not hold well? Why did the Arab nations respond badly to the colonization efforts? Was it because they were evil men who hated everything non Arabian? Or was it perhaps because, in 1914 Britain had promised independence of Arab lands in return for support during World War 1?

And then in 1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

And then, in 1917 a third agreement was made (see: The Balfour Declaration) in which the English promised Palestine as a national home for the Jews. This flew in the face of two previous agreement with the Arab nations you so quickly accuse of treachery and hostility. You know what eveil and agressive thing those Arabs did next? In 1919 they held a confrence in opposition of Jewish settlement.

Did Arab nations "brutally" attack? Yes. Ten years later (In 1929) there was an uprising. After 10 years of peaceful protest and opposition that accomplished nothing, after being promised independence and then being betrayed, there was an attack. the attack resulted in 133 Jewish deaths and 116 Palestinian deaths.

Then in 1939 the British government published a White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years.

Now, bear in mind that none of this was done with the UN. This all revolves around the League of Nations. The UN did not become involved in this until 1947.

When the UN became involved they decided to partitian the land of Palestine between an Arab and Jewish state permanently. So much for the 1939 agreement.

May 15th, 1948. in response to the UN's decicision, Arab nations joined together in opposition of the declaration of the formation of Israel. The armies of Egypt, Transjordan (now Jordan), Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq joined Palestinian and other Arab guerrillas in a full-scale war (first Arab-Israeli War). The Arabs failed to prevent establishment of a Jewish state, and the war ended with four UN-arranged armistice agreements between Israel and Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria.

Of the more than 800,000 Arabs who lived in Israeli-held territory before 1948, only about 170,000 remained. The rest became refugees in the surrounding Arab countries.

How horrible of them. How dare they defend their homes.

See, it's not like this attack of the Arab nations was exactly out of the blue or unprovoked. You can agree or disagree with the decision to form a Jewish state as much as you like. But either your opinion or mine does not change the fact that creating this nation required the relocation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. You expect them to be happy about this? The Arab nations in question saw agreements broken, peaceful protest rendered useless and commitees left ineffectual. What then is left? Resignation or conflict.

And since you have failed to respond to my previous post, I repeat it here for you:

Sir Turylon: "I'd rather not read a fictional story based upon factual events..."

The link I provided you does not point to a fictional story.

[Cro_Knight]

no one will ever win this argue ment and you know why because you cant compermise eachother you dug your self in too deep with al these accusations and topics it will never end so come on!

[lurking horror]

Cro_Knight:

Who exactly is unwilling to compromise and how so?

[Stefan]

@Sir Turylon:

On the Salvation thing:
Saved not through works but through Christ's blood? Yes and no. Yes we are
saved by the Blood of the Lamb, and we cannot merit our salvation, BUT we
will not be saved without our own good-will and cooperation, which includes
good works. Our Lord emphasises that on almost every page of the gospel.
Also read the short epistle of St James, which Luther tried to do away with
(but wasn't able).

Ill react on the rest later. Im very busy now, im having exam week coming up.

SO what about the convict being executed with jesus? what good works might he have to save him?

[Sir Turylon]

Why does there need to be a compromise? This is not "diplomacy KoH style." We can keep on going, furthering the thread and debate with new discussion. :go:

@your cartoon interpretation of the conflict
I clicked, saw it was a cartoon... left. No thx.

Now now lurker, nobody is trying to denie the Palestinian debacle and say Israel is not to blame for some of it. Like I said, the problems there are in a remote way similair to the struggle of Native Americans against an expanding USA. It is indeed a shame that so many Palestinians have to suffer in those camps. Then again, it is also a crying shame that their Imams and leaders are encouraging them to strp TNT to their chests and running into the middle of a coffee house yelling Allah is great before they blow themselves up.... Perhaps now that the leader of terrorism against Israel is gone, some sort of arrangement can be developed.


When I meant attacked, I meant in 1948.
Of the more than 800,000 Arabs who lived in Israeli-held territory before 1948, only about 170,000 remained. The rest became refugees in the surrounding Arab countries.
^^^ mostly due to the invasion of the surrounding Arab nations. They fled towards the Arabian states since they thought Israel was doomed. (run towards a massacre, or run towards friendly people.. hmm...)

Although I agree that the people who lived in palestine have a right to defend their homes, they also HAD a section of Palestinian Mandate given to them by the UN!!!! Instead of living peacefully, they decided to attack and try to destroy the fledgling nation.

fast forward ~50 years... Israel is ravaged by terrorist attacks from Palestinian, Iranian, Syrian, Egyptian groups. It will always remain a thorn in the side of Arabian states until the Islamic fundementalistic culture stops teaching their young that Jews/Christians are to be hated. But, that won't happen for a bit... so... relax and have a few :cheers:

@Stefan
nailed it :cheers:
Also, remember the first Gentile convert was the Roman centurion who was standing there. *goes off and hums a few lines of Cross of Calvary hymn*

[Anguille2]

First: I don't question the existence of the state of Israel.

Israel citizens are now victims of palestinian terrorism. Before 1948, Arabs and British were victims of jewish terrorism (Jews wanted the british to go, the arabs didnt).

1948: Despite all the laws of self determination which are in the UN charta, arabs didn't have a chance to vote on the creation of an Israel state on their land. They attacked poorly armed to resist against a new betrayal by the western powers. They never had a chance to win that war. The Israelis hoped to make their part bigger as they've always dreamt to create a "Great" Israel. in Deir Yassine (9th april 1948), Israeli forces massacred all villagers. Palestinians HAD to flee otherwise they might have been killed by Israeli forces. Arab nation intervened later in the conflict in order to assist the Arabs of Palestine...without success. Israel is heavely supported (weapons...) by Soviets who don't want to see british influence in the region any more. At the end of the war, there is a bigger Israel then intended by the UN and no Arab state. Also, as said above, arount 800'000 refugees. Israel was not a poor victim, they had long planned to increase the size of their state, even before it existed.

Suez War (1957): was started by Israel with support of the british and french-> more refugees

6 days War (1967): was started by Israel. -> more refugees

Yom Kippour (1973): this time, Israel is attacked by Arab Nations. This war is the reaction to poor diplomatic results and was legitimate (which you cannot say about the 2 previous ones). Israel is still not willing to give in to the resolution 242 of the UN, which says that Israel has to give back territory taken during the 6 days war.

Libanon (1982): Resistance to Israel, who is still doing nothing for the palestinians or to apease the Arabs nations, and to the bad treatement of Arabs in Palestine by the Israeli army and settles is settled in Lebanon. Israel invades Lebanon and destroys Beyrouth....killing many many civilians. The city is a ruin. Again this is a war declared by Israel. After this war, hundreds and hundreds of refugees are murdered with the approval of Sharon. (THIS IS ONLY 20 YEARS AGO).

Israel only can end this war. It has to accept it's faults too, remove colonies, give the palestinians some justice.

[Noldy]

SO what about the convict being executed with jesus? what good works might he have to save him?

He had sorrow over his sins (one of them) thats why he was saved.

[lurking horror]

Sir Turylon: "@your cartoon interpretation of the conflict
I clicked, saw it was a cartoon... left. No thx."

It's very sad to see someone dismiss an award winning piece of journalism as "a cartoon" and "fiction". You did not read anything from it. You did not investigate. You merely make a prejudiced assumption of the merit of it's content based solely on it's appearance. Very narrow minded of you.

Sir Turylon: "Although I agree that the people who lived in palestine have a right to defend their homes, they also HAD a section of Palestinian Mandate given to them by the UN!!!! Instead of living peacefully, they decided to attack and try to destroy the fledgling nation."

They had also been promised independence years earlier on multiple occasions by the League of Nations. When viewed in the light of broken promises and decades of subjugation, the attack was very much provoked. Which was of course, my original point.