Thursday, June 19, 2014

Brigitte Gabriel’s Answer to a Muslim Woman

The Muslim woman's question is at the beginning. Gabriel's answer begins at about 4:10 into the video.



Frank Gaffney's response at the beginning set the stage well.

I recommend that you watch the whole thing, but if you don't have time, at least listen to the question and to Gabriel's answer.

Please confine your comments to the questioner, the question and Gabriel's answer.

82 comments:

Z said...

WOW. I'm not a Gaffney fan, but I LOVE Brigitte and have never been as impressed with her as I was hearing her on that panel.
But, you know, I give a LOT of credit to the muslim girl, too. She was articulate in her answer to Brigitte and we must ENCOURAGE her type, not insult her. And she stood up to her. "I guess I'm the only one." was brilliant.
I wish there were a million like her.
EXCELLENT post, Joe...thanks for that.

Z said...

by the way; I think I'm going to use your post as MY post tomorrow, giving FULL and deserved credit, of course.

MORE PEOPLE NEED TO SEE THAT than there are on OUR blogs...all bloggers should blog it!

Lisa said...

Excellent exchange on both sides. I always admired Brigette Gabriel for her knowledge and courage .
I agree with Z about the muslim girl,I wish there were more like her.

Lisa said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

Z: Spread the news!

Lisa: For the most part, Muslim moderates are afraid to speak out against radicals. They are afraid of what the radicals might do to them and they are afraid of what their local Muslim leaders might do to them.

Dave Miller said...

Not even close to an exchange. The woman asked how we can counter an ideology that undergirds the Middle East struggle and she gets chastised for not focusing on Benghazi.

I noticed not one panelist dared a response to her response to her question.

The first respondent, and even Gabriel spoke of peaceful Muslims. I've seen others, like Z of Geez also speak of peaceful Muslims, saying conservatives have no issue with the peace loving ones in the world.

But then I have to balance that with a view like Glenn's, which is by no means a little held view, that you can only be a good Muslim if you are committed to Sharia and the destruction of the west.

That view, taken to its logical conclusion says that in fact, the radicals are the only true Muslims and as such, all Muslims are radicals and terrorists.

The woman with the question, could only be a good Muslim if she was being dishonest in what she represented in the video.

Was I fair in my representation of your views Glenn?

Duckys here said...

It reminds me of Edward R. Murrow and the quality of reportage we had during the McCarthy era.
"Land of the free and the home of the brave", remember that one, Joe?
Murrow and others had the honesty and insight to remind us that they went together and those that would have us fearful would also not have us free.

So I ask why you post two obvious operatives like Gabriel and Gaffney who quite frankly are more likely to subvert the Republic than any Muslim horde.

@Z -- I wish there were a million like her.
---
You ever take the time to look around you?

Joe said...

DM "I noticed not one panelist dared a response to her response to her question."

Time to change your light bulb. Yours is getting dim.

"But then I have to balance that with a view like Glenn's..."

Speak for yourself, not for Glenn.

Duckys here said...

I have a question for Gabriel (and z):

I saw a Muslim woman veiled and texting on the subway today. I got a photo but it's a little shaky. Interesting that she was doing the same thing most everyone does on the T.

z, should I have:

1. Asked her if she is a "good" Muslim.

2. Roughed her up.

3. Seized her phone and scanned it for terrorist plans.

4. Zip stripped her and held her until the police came and decided.


I figure you talk a good game but in the face of doubt and a scary niqab you are going to yield to fear.

Duckys here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duckys here said...

Call Brigitt Gabriel

Duckys here said...

Thanks Joe, I almost gave up on that shot.
Then I looked at the headline. Kinda amusing.

Just a bit of straightening and some cropping on the left and it turned into a pretty good shot.

I owe it all to Brigitte Gabriel and z.

Lisa said...

She was probably answering a text from her husband,brother,uncle or father telling her she better get home now.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Sorry, I posted this originally on the wrong comment string, but it needs to be published everywhere.

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. The real face of Islam is that which is practice by what the media and politicians deceitfully claim are "radicals" who "hijacked" Islam:

http://barbwire.com/2014/06/20/myth-moderate-muslims/

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

In answer to Dave,

The FACTS are that the only true Muslims are those who are the "radicals" - they are the ones who are following the teachings of the Qur'an and the Hadith. They are the ones who actually follow the teachings of Mohammed.

Dave Miller said...

Thank you Glenn, so since this woman is self id'ing as a moderate, by your reasoning, she is not a moderate.

So Joe, she has no standing according to Glenn, because she's not a Muslim, nor are any if the other 1. whatever Muslims who don't advocate death to infidels.

That makes it very easy to indiscrimately lump them all in one large terrorist basket...

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

One of the teachings of Islam is to lie to your enemy as to your intentions and beliefs until such time you are in a position of power.

The woman certainly seemed to fit in this regard.

There is no such thing as a "moderate" Muslim. Most of the world's Muslims are secular Muslims who have no clue about their teachings, but are Muslim to avoid death.

Try actually studying Islam.

Lisa said...

This woman and Brigitte Gabriel were on Hannity last night and when Hannity questioned her on the treatment of women in the Muslim culture she would not respond directly you can tell she was afraid to comment on it,she avoided replying to it because she probably knows they would come looking for her.Didn't seem moderate to me. I find it amazing how liberals would defend such an oppresive culture that kills women for sport

Dave Miller said...

Lisa, I don't defend Islam at all. I don't defend Judaism either, or Mormonism...

I do defend Christianity... and when Jesus was here, he had the chance to come in power and kill those that made it their life to kill him. And he chose not to. He stood up to power with uncompromising love.

A belief that we should not, as a country, kill 'em all, as some conservatives in the bomb them back to the stone age comments advocate, should not be seen as a defense of their culture.

It is a belief in self determination and a following of the Constitutional belief of freedom of religion.

What I find interesting is that many people from Christian cultures think Islam is of the devil, and as such, should be eradicated.

Is the philosophy behind that universal? By that I mean, is the belief that if you believe you are right with your God, does it give you the right to dictate that to others and kill them if they do not convert?

Our wariness, indeed hate, that people have for Islam is matched by the hate and wariness that many Muslims have for Christianity.

If we feel justified in killing them because of their hate for us and our religion, are they justified in killing us for hating them and their religion?

Dave Miller said...

Glenn, I'm not arguing your point at all... I am highlighting your views to support my point that while some conservatives will say we need more people like this "moderate" woman to speak up, there are indeed many like you, who believe there are no moderates in Islam.

There is a disconnect on the conservative/libertarian side of the political aisle.

The moderates in the GOP and Libertarian places want to pretend voices like yours, which i think are a majority view in these circles, do not represent their parties.

Yet they do, for better, or worse...

No judgement here here at all... just an observation...

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

I just want to make a point that the vast majority of Christians I know and know of have have for Islam, not the people who follow it. Just like I hate all cults, but not the people following those cultic systems.

We do hate them because they are of the devil. But it is not our duty to eradicate them. We, as citizens of the USA, have the duty to prevent from entering the country all followers of any philosophy which is hostile to the USA - such as Islam!

Duckys here said...

Remember Dave, Glenn also considers Roman Catholics like myself to be cult members.

Duckys here said...

Something happened recently which is not gaining the attention it should and I feel is fundamentally linked to this thread although not in an obvious way.

The falsely accused and imprisoned men in the Central Park jogger case have finally reached a settlement with NYC for their false imprisonment.
Most hear remember the case and how the press went into a frenzy and started reporting on "wilding" packs of roving black teens much as they developed the recent lie about the knockout game.
So from there NYC went to stop and frisk, draconian drug arrests and a general war on any black youth that threatened polite society.

The damage to black and Hispanic teens has been extensive.

Stinking stooges like Brigitte Gabriel or Ayaan Hirsi Ali (who has called for the complete destruction of the Muslim religion) serve the same purpose that the fear mongers in the Central Park case served.
Keep the peeps frightened and pound the message that Islam is evil and must be suppressed militarily.
It's okay to join z in expressing tokenism but we all know that the number of decent Muslims is small.
And be sure to mention Christian persecution without every really trying to understand the history of the Middle East.

The fringe right is powered by fear and hate, the cornerstone of Glenn's deluded witness and it causes great harm.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - "We, as citizens of the USA, have the duty to prevent from entering the country all followers of any philosophy which is hostile to the USA - such as Islam!"

Perhaps you can point to the particular part of the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights, or any book written by any of our Founding Fathers that establishes this cuntry as a xenophobic fortress of hate and intolerance.

Please. Educate us.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Ducky,

Roman Catholicism IS cultic, and is not a Christian organization. They are corrupt, have much heresy including idolatry.

As for you personally, I have no idea what you believe other than what you have provided us in your comments. Your personal ideology matches a lot of Romanist ideology, which is more social gospel rather than the gospel of salvation.

If I recall correctly, you find nothing wrong with homosexual behavior, are pro-Same-sex fake marriage, and pro abortion. just these three things are totally anti-God.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

It is NOT "xenophobic" to say enemies of the state should not be allowed in the state. I suppose you would find nothing Constitutional about preventing Nazis from entering the USA during WWII?

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - We were at war with Nazi Germany during WWII. There was a Congressional Declaration of War against the soverign state of Germany as called for in the Constitution.

As much as you would like it to be otherwise, we are not now, nor will we ever be, in a state of war against the religion of Islam.

What we DO have is people like you, whose only knowledge about Islam is what you have cherry picked to confirm your own paranoia and bigotry, attempting to whip people into a rabid frenzy because some people in the world choose to worship god differently than you do.

Duckys here said...

Glenn, the fact that the Roman Catholic church does not conform to your Calvinist construction of Christianity does not make it a cult.

Please remember, the left is here to help you live the life of the mind.

Duckys here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. -
CULT noun, often attributive \ˈkəlt\

: a small religious group that is not part of a larger and more accepted religion and that has beliefs regarded by many people as extreme or dangerous

: a situation in which people admire and care about something or someone very much or too much

: a small group of very devoted supporters or fans

Sounds like a dead-on perfect description of Jesus and his desciples to me.

He has a lot more followers now, but Chriistianity still fits the description of a cult.

Duckys here said...

As for you personally, I have no idea what you believe other than what you have provided us in your comments. Your personal ideology matches a lot of Romanist ideology, which is more social gospel rather than the gospel of salvation.

Got that straight

If I recall correctly, you find nothing wrong with homosexual behavior, are pro-Same-sex fake marriage, and pro abortion. just these three things are totally anti-God.

I find the idea of trying to control human sexuality rather bizarre and a waste of time, yes.
I support same sex marriage, yes.
I am not pro abortion but I accept that in a secular nation choice better than forced pregnancy.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

we are not now, nor will we ever be, in a state of war against the religion of Islam

First, Islam isn't just a religion - it is a religious/political system. Secondly, THEY are at war with us whether or not we want to acknowledge it. Their stated intent is world dominion. Which is why Islam is the problem world-wide.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Oh, and X.O.

I don't "cherry-pick" anything. It is ignorant people like you who refuse to accept the truth about Islam.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Ducky,

Your ignorance of Christianity is astounding. Your ignorance of my beliefs is even more astounding. If you knew anything about my Christian beliefs, you would know I have NO Calvinist thoughts - I am 100% opposed to Calvinism.

It is from my decades of study of Romanism compared to the Bible that I can say Romanism is corrupt, apostate, and heretical.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Ducky,

I find the idea of trying to control human sexuality rather bizarre and a waste of time, yes.

I don't know of anyone trying to control human sexuality. What we defend against is being required to give personal sanction to perversion.

I support same sex marriage, yes.
So you are against Christ. Because Christ - as God - declared homosexual behavior to be an abomination. He declared marriage as the union of opposite-sex people. Therefore, you prove yourself not only against Christ, but against the Romanist Church in which you claim membership.

I am not pro abortion but I accept that in a secular nation choice better than forced pregnancy

You promote "choice" to murder the child. And no one is forcing pregnancy on anyone. Even a rapist isn't forcing pregnancy, because they can't control whether the raped person will conceive. But excepting rape, one must accept the responsibility for the possibility of conceiving or else don't have sex. you promote sex without responsibility, which is typical of the left.

Lisa said...

Ducky injustice is bad . remember the Memphis 3? They weren't black. Remember the Duke Lacrosse case that caused divide and the Tawana Brawley case.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

In your very limited and ignorant definition of "cult," yes Christianity fits. But in theological parlance, a cult is a sect deriving from a parent religion, and denies fundamental tenets of the parent religion. There are cults of all parent religions.

Also, as to sociological cults, they have a charismatic leader who exercises immense control over his followers, often by way of threats or even brainwashing.

Some cults are theological as well as sociological.

That's just a nutshell; explaining the whole definitions is something I don't have time for at the moment.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. -"Also, as to sociological cults, they have a charismatic leader who exercises immense control over his followers..."

Yep. There's your Jesus right there!

Cult!

Duckys here said...

Yeah, Lisa, I remember the Memphis 3, I believe. They were part of the ginned up hysteria over satanic cults. Another example of how the fringe right wing is led by the nose.

Nice try.

I don't remember anyone arrested in the Tawana Brawley case. Was there?

I do not believe "Duke Lacrosse" led to a wider criminalization of college athletes. Stop me if I'm wrong. Wrongful conviction does happen. Do you think anyone is so foolish to deny that.

However, the Central Park case led to hysteria that smeared a whole class of people.
Pitch till you win.

Duckys here said...

@Glenn --- a cult is a sect deriving from a parent religion, and denies fundamental tenets of the parent religion
-----------
So the Roman Catholic church is a cult of Roman Catholicism?

Islam is a cult of Islam?

Calvanism is the only true religion?

You have me confused, Glenn.

Dave Miller said...

Lisa, no stabs at my questions, or is it easier to just make obtuse comments and not engage directly?

Duckys here said...

But z, still loves Brigitte

Same old smear tactics.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

Yep. There's your Jesus right there!

You just keep demonstrating more and more your complete ignorance of the Christian faith.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


Ducky<

So the Roman Catholic church is a cult of Roman Catholicism?
Not, it is a cult of Christianity. The RCC is a man-made organization.

Islam is a cult of Islam?
I never called it a cult. It is a religious/political system. But there are cults of Islam, an example being “Nation of Islam”

Calvanism is the only true religion?
I never stated as much, nor have I even implied as much. Do you even have a clue what Calvinism is?!?

You have me confused, Glenn.
No I don’t. You are confused because of your abject ignorance of the subject.

Lisa said...

Dave you asked me is it ok to kill people if they don't convert?
Of course not. So apparently you are against the elevated killing of Christians by Islamics? The killing of women and homosexuals by Islamics?
They are the ones who make it diffucult to believe they are not of the devil.
And please do not bring up the Crusades,Christianity has evolved since then.Unfortunately Islam hasn't,it is turning even more radical

Dave Miller said...

Lisa, like Glenn, you've set up a polemic where there is no way the two religions can live peacefully on the same planet.

That, by definition means one of us will have to go.

I choose to disagree with that.

As for where I stand regarding "elevated" killings [whatever elevated means] of Christians, women and homosexuals, I am firmly against all killings of others.

As for the evolution of Christianity since the Crusades, I doubt gays in Uganda think we have evolved much since the Christian majority is now giving out life terms in prison for the "crime" of just being gay.

The world, with all its good and bad, is not nearly as neat as some might think. Nor are Christians, Muslims, Jews or adherents to any other religion.

And yes Glenn, I am calling Islam a religion using the classic Paul Tillich understanding that any belief system that we are willing to die for, is our religion.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Lisa,

The Crusades weren't done by Christians anyway - they were organized and initiated by the Roman Catholic Church.

And, if it wasn't for the Crusades (even with some of the horrendous crimes committed), you'd all be speaking Arabic!

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

I'm not denying that Islam is a religion, so I'm not sure what your point is.

My point is that it is MORE than a religion - it is a religious/political system

Joe said...

DM: "That, by definition means one of us will have to go."

I know of no Christian who says Islam must go. Some may, but I know nothing of them.

Glenn and I are NOT saying Islam must go. We are saying a very large number (many more than reported) are barbarians, terrorists and uncivilized proponents of a religious/political ideology. And that they CANNOT be reasoned with. They do not live by reason.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C - "The Crusades weren't done by Christians anyway - they were organized and initiated by the Roman Catholic Church."

Ask those militant Muslims you are constantly trembling in your boots over if they make that canonical distinction. I believe you will find that they do not. In fact, in 58 years on this planet, you are virtually THE ONLY person I've ever encountered who don't think Catholics are Christians.

"And, if it wasn't for the Crusades (even with some of the horrendous crimes committed), you'd all be speaking Arabic!"

That is just stupid, ill-informed statement that cannot be backed up by any facts.

However, you should be falling over backwards and thanking the Arabic culture for creating the system of numbers and mathematics that we use today. Our modern civilization would be impossible without Arabic numerals. Did you know they were the first to come up with the zero? That's huge! That's right up there with fire and the wheel.

And lets not forget their contributions to astronomy and navigation and geometry.

Also, much of what we know about our own ancient history is only possible because the Arabs saved and translated as many of our ancient manuscripts as they could find after our Dark Ages following the fall of Rome.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "We are saying a very large number (many more than reported)..."

If the number is "many more than reported" how could you possibly know that unless you are just making things up in your head?

If they are "unreported" then you have no basis in fact for that statement other than your own paranoid supposition.

Kind of like in King Kong where they have a map to an "uncharted island". If they have a map, it isn't uncharted! Ya know, because of how words work.

Dave Miller said...

Joe, are you not reading the comments on blogs, by people claiming Christ, saying we must bomb them all back to the stone age?

These are the same people, like Glenn, who claim all good Muslim are evil and of Satan.

Seriously, there are plenty of Christians saying this... even Z has been astounded by the views of some of her regulars saying they are all bad must go...

Dave Miller said...

XO... I've run across Glenn's view fairly often.

While few if amy serious scholars ascribe to this view, it is a strong virulent strain within Christianity...

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

Firstly, the ignorant Muslims see the whole western world as “Christian.” Secondly, I didn’t say Catholics weren’t Christians - some may very well be. I said the Catholic Church was NOT a Christian organization. And if you actually got around a bit, you’d know that is the position of probably 90% of non-Catholics, and certainly every single apologetics ministry.

The Islamic religion includes much, much more than Arabic people, and the Islamic religion has given this world nothing but grief. From the beginning their goal has been world domination. Try reading a history book sometime.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

While few if amy serious scholars ascribe to this view, it is a strong virulent strain within Christianity..

Nice assertion, but false nevertheless

Joe said...

XO: "If they are "unreported" then you have no basis in fact for that statement other than your own paranoid supposition."

That is not a true statement. However, for a person incapable of straight line logic it might seem to make sense.

Dave Miller said...

Glenn, can you cite a few scholars or theologians who support your claim that the Crusades were not carried out by Christians?

The numbers on the other side are legion, so since you are questioning my assertion, perhaps you could provide some backup, apart from just your opinion.

Thanks...

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

There were Christians in the Crusades, but they were ordered by, and organized by the Romanist Church. Many of the troops were non-Christian mercenaries. Most were Catholics who were taught anti-semitism from the papacy.

But the main point is that Islam has no right to complain about the Crusades, since it was Islam who ravished all the lands before them, and murdered anyone who didn't convert or pay the "tax" to remain alive. If there are scholars who do NOT teach this, then they are revising history.

Islam is a plague on the world.

Lisa said...

I guess we should be thankful for Israel being most medical breakthroughs come from there

Dave Miller said...

Glenn, I guess that if you remove CHristianity from the Crusades, which you did in your comments, then Christians have no responsibility for the actions of the faithful during that time.

You did say the Crusades were not done by Christians. I disagreed, stating that scholarship was pretty clear on this. You denied that, saying my assertion was false.

All I am asking for is some scholarship that buttresses your point. Can you provide it?

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

How about reading history. WHO started the Crusades? The Roman Catholic Church.

Who marched in the Crusades? Roman Catholics, some Christians, some mercenaries.

Any history of the Crusades will tell you that with one exception - they consider Roman Catholicism to be a Christian organization and assume all members of that organization are Christians. That just demonstrates the theological ignorance of the historians. (after all, most historians which I've read also include Mormons as Christians!)

Dave Miller said...

Glenn, I'll take that as a no from you... For centuries, Catholics were considered Christians, and you want to discount, or change the terms by which they were defined.

Your reluctance to provide any evidence, and you can even use reputable Christian historians, says a lot about your desire to draw a definition of Christianity so right ad to make it very exclusive.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

What am I supposed to do - list every single history book which says who participated in the Crusades? They all say the same thing. They say that Rome initiated and organized them, that Catholics marched in them as well as mercenaries. They think that the Catholics were Christians, yet most Catholics weren't and aren't - they are Catholics.

What you want are historians who say that the Catholic Church isn't Christian. You won't get that because the whole stupid world thinks the RCC is a Christian organization.

It is only non-Catholics, especially those who are scholars and apologists, who demonstrate theologically that the RCC is NOT a Christian organization, but a man made organization which corrupted the Christian faith such that a reformation was began centuries ago to break out of that apostate and heretical organization.

The point is that the Crusades, no matter how you want to describe the participants, saved the world from being overrun by Islam. They fought against the oppression of Islam. And Islam was finally stopped by Charles Martel at Tours.

Again, the Muslims have no right to complain about the Crusades, since they were a direct response to the Muslim aggression.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - "What you want are historians who say that the Catholic Church isn't Christian. You won't get that because the whole stupid world thinks the RCC is a Christian organization."

Hmmm. You know, when a person holds something to be true that "the whole stupid world" disagrees with, there is a word for that.

It's called "delusional".

Glenn, I've tried to explain this to you before. You are insane. You have no grip on reality. You live in a fantasy world of your own creation and it is time to get some help before you hurt someone.

Dave Miller said...

Actually Glenn, getting past who started it, many Muslims are very proud of Saladin, who could've just killed everyone in jerusalem, rather than giving them a way out, albeit, with a paid ransom.

It was mercy, something not shown by the Christian/Catholic/Whatever side when they were in the same controlling position.

I did not expect you to cite a source, because the great majority of seminaries, [whom i'm sure also fit into your apostate def] religious scholars and theologians all hold views that do not support your point of view.

You come across as dogmatically closed as my Baptist friends who claim that only baptists are Christians and all true Christians are baptist because of "John the Baptist."

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

Historians are not theologians.

Any non-Romanist theologian will admit that Rome is apostate and heretical. Why do you think there was a reformation?!?!?

Your final paragraph was just stupidity.

Dave Miller said...

It might be Glenn, except it's true... I could introduce to plenty of fundamentalist baptist who hold to that view...

And Glenn, we were discussing the Crusades, which you said were not Christian...

Interesting I looked up Romanist Church looking for scholarship on that term... Suffice to say, only a link to your site came up. Is that because every historian is in league with the Catholics?

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

You are being intentionally obtuse. I stated that the Crusades were not Christian because they were Catholic. I have also stated that there are Christians in the Romanist church in spite of the Romanist teachings.

You will not find in Scripture anything which gives support for Christians to call a crusade, ergo the Crusades were not Christian. Christians participating in something does not make it Christian.

Every non-theologian historian, as well as all people ignorant of Catholic doctrine compared to Scripture, assume that Romanism is Christian. IT is not - it is an apostate, heretical, cultic development off of Christianity. Again, do you have the vaguest idea what the Reformation was about?!?!?!

Historians and most Christians think the Mormon church is Christian, they think JWs are Christian, etc. Just because people think a group is Christian, that doesn't make it so. There are non-negotiable doctrines which define what Christianity is.

All your side comments about whether or not Papism is Christian has nothing to do with whether or not Islam has a reason to hold the Crusades against ANYONE - they are just red herrings. Islam started the war! HELLO!!! Do you not understand that historical significance, or do you just side with and defend the satanic religion of Islam?

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - If everyone in the world agrees that 2+2=4 and you are the lone voice insisting that 2+2=3, who is the crazy person?

Everybody but you?

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - "...the satanic religion of Islam"

Pretty sure Muslims don't worship Satan. You might want to recheck some of those scholarly sources you are always trotting out to prove how much you know about Islam. Because apparently you knoow nothing.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

The crazy persons are those who say 2+2=5. Those who say a tail is a leg, or a dandelion is a rose, or a queer union is a marriage.,

It doesn't matter how many people agree on something - what matters is the truth. Millions of people can agree on a lie, but that doesn't make it true.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

I never said or intimated that Islam worships Satan. I said it was a satanic religion - i.e. it comes from Satan.

You need to learn to comprehend what you read.

Dave Miller said...

You are 100% correct Glenn, I've never considered the Reformation and know absolutely nothing about it.

Thanks for setting me straight.

All of this started at your essential point that anyone who claims to be a Muslim, but is peaceful, is either a liar, bent on deceiving people, or not a "real" muslim.

To put it your terms, guess that I will choose to live in my ignorance, because I can't accept that. People can be wrong about Jesus and still be peace loving people.

Speaking of love, Glenn, you show none. Your attitude, shown here when you mock those who do not believe as you, call people names, and insult publicly both believers and non-believers, reflects badly on the CHrist you choose to serve.

Your justification of this behavior does accept that any of this is unChristian, or as some might say, sinful.

I cannot imagine a world where people like Ducky, Craig and XO would want to spend even a few moments with you, and it is not about your conservative beliefs... it's about how you express them.

Think about it...

Xavier Onassis said...

Dave - Your are correct. I don't think I could tolerate being around G.E.C. I would want to call in the mental health professionals and have him retained for evaluation. I know they don't actually do that anymore, but they should.

Joe, on the other hand, I wouldn't mind hanging out with. He has earned my respect over the years. He might not want to hang out with me, but I would certainly hang out with him.

G.E.C., not so much really.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Dave,

I assumed you knew about the Reformation, but your comments do not demonstrate what your understanding about it is, since you continue to maintain the the Papist organization is Christian.

I stand by my claims about the Muslim faith, and anyone who has actually studied that faith will agree with me. I didn’t make it all up out of thin air.

And then you imply that I am not a peace-loving person! Sigh.

My attitude is indeed loving. It is because if one loves people he will want them to know the truth. If I didn’t care about people then I wouldn’t try to educate them. It is people like YOU who disgrace the Christian faith by claiming apostates and heretics represent the Christian faith.

As for name-calling, the majority of my so-called name-calling is very much in line with Scripture. I call people names identifying their behavior and ideology, etc.
Here’s my defense:
http://watchmansbagpipes.blogspot.com/2013/12/name-calling.html

You have yourself called me names, as has every liberal who follow Joe’s blog. But that’s okay with you because you and your ilk are permitted to be intolerant and bigoted while decrying intolerance and bigotry.

Yeah, I express my conservative beliefs as truth claims - sort of like Ducky, Craig, and X.O. express theirs. AH, but that’s okay because they are liberals and I am not. You sure have a hypocritical judgmental system.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

Dave - Your are correct. I don't think I could tolerate being around G.E.C. I would want to call in the mental health professionals and have him retained for evaluation. I know they don't actually do that anymore, but they should.

Joe, on the other hand, I wouldn't mind hanging out with. He has earned my respect over the years. He might not want to hang out with me, but I would certainly hang out with him.

G.E.C., not so much really.


That’s okay, X.O. I have a habit of not hanging around ignorant liberals who are not teachable. There is no point. (I just love how liberals are always quick to call conservatives “mentally ill.”)

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - "(I just love how liberals are always quick to call conservatives “mentally ill.”)"

Actually (and not surprisingly) you are mistaken once again.

I do not refer to conservatives as mentally ill.

I refer to them as homophobic idiots, racists and bigots, because that is what their words and actions prove them to be.

But I do not call them mentally ill. It is only YOU I call mentally ill and that has little or nothing to do with the fact that you are conservative.

It is because you completely insane.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

So, you being the Christophobe that you are, call people “homophobes” because they believe homosexuality is perverse, and you call them racists because they disagree with a half-white/half-black president’s policies, and you call them bigots because they disagree with the lack of tolerance from people like you. Lots of nice name-calling but they are all nothing but arguments lacking arguments. Typical ad hominem attacks when you have no logical or rational response to their arguments.

And then because I prove what a fool you are you call me insane. So, do you have a medical degree that gives you the knowledge to make such a diagnosis? And is it a proper diagnosis to label someone as “insane” or “mentally ill” just because they refuse to accept liberal, atheistic, Darwinian ideology, sexual perversion, or socialism as rational? Because the individual makes truth claims about things you refuse to accept? (of course you make illogical and irrational truth claims but that’s okay because you are you).

Again, you are identified in Scripture as being a fool - because you say there is no God. So how can a fool like you have the mental ability to make a diagnosis of someone else being insane?

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - Actually, "insane" is too generic.

What you are, is INCREDIBLY delusional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusions

"A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary."

Definition

Although non-specific concepts of madness have been around for several thousand years, the psychiatrist and philosopher Karl Jaspers was the first to define the three main criteria for a belief to be considered delusional in his 1913 book General Psychopathology.[2] These criteria are:

certainty (held with absolute conviction)

incorrigibility (not changeable by compelling counterargument or proof to the contrary)

impossibility or falsity of content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

Furthermore, when a false belief involves a value judgment, it is only considered as a delusion if it is so extreme that it cannot be, or never can be proven true.

For example: a man claiming that he flew into the sun and flew back home. This would be considered a delusion,unless he was speaking figuratively.

You, sir, are the single most delusional person I have ever encountered.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

You, the super deluded man, can call someone else “delusional”?!?!?

"A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.”

You hold a lot of these: evolution, atheism, homosexualism, socialism, abortionism, and you even believe in man-caused global warming!

You, sir, are the single most delusional person I have ever encountered.

You should be saying that while looking in the mirror, fool.

Xavier Onassis said...

G.E.C. - I have scientific evidence and the overwhelming mass of thousands of years of human knowledge on my side.

You have nothing but bronze-age fairy tales told to frighten illiterate goat herders.

I can prove I'm right.

You can't prove anything at all.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

X.O.

You actually have nothing but speculations, assumptions and assertions on your side.