text:
• 1.6 billion — World Muslim population.
• 2.2 billion — World Muslim population projected by 2030.
• 2.6 million — Muslim population in the United States.
• 6.2 million — Projected Muslim population in the United States by 2030.
• 93 — Percentage of Muslim Americans who believe other Muslims are loyal to the United States.
• 48 — Percentage of Muslims who believe they have experienced racial or religious discrimination in the past.
Source: Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life, Gallup poll
Today: How have Muslims and Iraqi refugees fared in the last decade?
Saturday: What are schools teaching about 9/11?
— Braves players remember playing the first sporting event in NYC after the attacks.
Sunday: Forever altered: How has 9/11 change our world 10 years later?
— Sept. 11 attacks drive young man to join the Marines.
— Q&A with Chattanooga resident Gen. (Ret.) B.B. Bell
— In Life, transplanted New Yorkers now living in Chattanooga talk about their memories of 9/11.
"Understanding Islam" is a weekly radio program that discusses Islamic topics. Hosted by Hammad El-Ameen, it airs from 10-11 a.m. Sundays on 104.5 FM in Dalton, Ga.; and 10-10:30 a.m. Sundays on 93.5 FM in Chattanooga.
For more information, call 706-459-1010.
"Muslims for Life" is a nationwide campaign of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community to honor the victims of 9/11 and uphold the message that Islam values the sanctity of life, according to its website.
This month, it will hold blood drives at all its mosques and prayer centers in collaboration with other community organizations. The goal is to collect 10,000 units of blood, which can help save 30,000 lives.
For more information, visit http://muslimsforlife.org.
• What: Local blood drive
• When: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. today
• Where: Blood Assurance, Bryman Plaza North, 100 West Walnut Avenue
• Information: To schedule an appointment, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.com or call 706-581-0741. Walk-ins welcome.
Islamic extremists. Muslim terrorists.
The name of a religion and its followers, followed by words used to describe the 19 hijackers who killed nearly 3,000 people in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.
One single event changed how Muslims are perceived, not only in America, but in the entire world.
"Muslims are 1.5 billion around the world, and they [the terrorists] were a handful of people. ... Look what it did," said Hammad El-Ameen, the prayer leader, or imam, at the Chattanooga Islamic Center on Central Avenue. "Our actions have to reflect what we believe in."
A decade after the terrorist attacks, local Muslim-Americans say outreach has never been more important to educate people about Muslims and what they believe.
"[9/11] brought all of the people together like one cemented wall with a plan, and that plan was that we had to make ourselves visible," El-Ameen said. "We have to be diligent in our effort in telling people who we are; we have to show a good example of a Muslim, have good behavior, good character; we are all ambassadors of Islam."
Still, for most Muslims, things will never be as they were before 9/11.
"It's just like ringing a bell. When you ring it, it's rung," said El-Ameen. "It will forever stay in the minds of people now."
Muslims can't be disengaged anymore, said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington, D.C.-based Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization founded in 1994.
"You have to be fully engaged in the society, otherwise you are going to get run over, I think," he said. "That's maybe the lesson for American-Muslims."
Naseer Humayun can clearly remember what he was doing on Sept. 11, 2001.
Humayun, now a pulmonary and critical care specialist, was doing his residency at St. Luke's Hospital in Bethlehem, Pa., making the rounds of his intensive care unit patients when he saw the World Trade Center's twin towers falling on television.
"It was just ... I was totally ..." Humayun stuttered, searching for the right words.
"I was just extremely sad and basically hurt that this had happened," he said in an interview from his home in Tunnel Hill, Ga.
"No. 1, America had been attacked and then by people who called themselves Muslims," said Humayun, a Pakistan native who moved to the United States 18 years ago, eight of those in the Dalton, Ga., area.
His daughter Najia doesn't remember 9/11. She was only 3 years old. But she does remember watching a video in school when she was in third or fourth grade that showed the devastation after the attacks.
"It was really sad watching what happened," she said.
But the awkward stares from her classmates and the tension that followed were, in some ways, just as disheartening.
"It makes the Muslim community feel sad that many people in America are biased now and think most Muslims are terrorists," she said.
Neither she nor her family have been personally attacked, but she said after 9/11 one of her cousins in Maryland was called a terrorist at school and was teased.
Her mother, Khola Humayun, said she also feels the stares when she goes shopping or to the bank and she's wearing her hijab — the scarf Muslim women use to cover their hair.
"I feel sometimes a resistance but it's from people who don't know me personally," she said. "I don't know what's in another person's heart."
Since 9/11, many Muslims face a constant challenge of defining who they are, what they believe in, to everyone else. They must prove to the world that Islam is not equivalent to terrorism, that most Muslims are peaceful, that being Muslim doesn't mean hating America.
And it's their responsibility to teach people, said El-Ameen, who was born and raised in Dalton, Ga., and converted from Christianity in 1979.
"It's your duty to explain what this religion is," El-Ameen tells other Muslims. "Don't let people who have an agenda against Islam, don't let them define what Islam is."
And Najia, now a ninth-grader at Girls Preparatory School, said she remains strong in her faith.
"What [the terrorists] did, I don't associate that with Islam whatsoever," she said.
Hooper, with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the level of anti-Muslim sentiment in society has risen in the last 18 months.
In New York, there was the controversy over building a an Islamic community center in Manhattan, a few blocks from Ground Zero. Closer to home, there's an ongoing battle in Murfreesboro, Tenn., to stop the building of a new mosque.
And this year, Tennessee lawmakers passed what the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugees Rights Coalition dubbed an "anti-Muslim" bill. It sought to criminalize what critics said were extreme aspects of Sharia, the individual and social duties prescribed by Islam. The law was later amended to remove any references to Sharia or religion.
Local and national Muslim groups agree that the majority of Americans are tolerant toward them and the bias comes from a small but very vocal minority.
"You've got two sets of people," El-Ameen said. "You've got those interested in Islam who will go open up a book and read, and then you've got a set of people who only listen to news propaganda. Those people deal more with emotions."
There was initial opposition to building a new mosque in Dalton in 2005, he said. Three years later, a house intended for the leader of the Dalton Islamic Center was burned. More recently, the door was knocked off the new mosque and some shrubs stolen.
"But what about all of the Americans who support mosques being built? You have a large number of Americans saying this is a country of freedom of religion," he said.
Perla Trevizo joined the Chattanooga Times Free Press in 2007 and covers immigration/diversity issues and higher education. She holds a master's degree in newswire journalism from Universidad Rey Juan Carlos in Madrid, Spain, and a bachelor's degree in political science from the University of Texas. In 2011 she participated in the Bringing Home the World international reporting fellowship program sponsored by the International Center for Journalists, producing a series on Guatemalan immigrants for which she ...
The Mohammedan religion is false religion, even an heresy of the Faith of the Apostles. While there can be found some authentic Truth in their religion, the goal of Christendom is to convert the people and eradicate the heresy.
Read the koran. Nothing the terrorists have done is against their religion. Everything they have done is encouraged in that book. Read it for yourself. Listen to their scholars in egypt. You will be enlightened. If the muslims here truly believe the terrorists did the wrong thing, they aren't following their religion. They must not have read the koran.
Veritas, you are right, of course.
But Ms Travizo does give us a heads up on what is happening on the other side of the street, and from their viewpoint. There is seldom "too much info".
I must admit she is a good reporter. Her stories -- much as I may disagree with the content -- are in depth, well written...the usual superlatives. Her stories are straight-forward and honest without too much misinformation or detracting info; she has high empathy and I think she is sincere in her efforts.
We could do a whole lot worse than Ms Travizo. A whole lot. We could end up with an outright bigot or unlicensed liar doing these features.
All in all, I must admire her sincerity. Not that she will change my mind on anything any time soon...but just perhaps.......who knows.
Good writing, Mz Travizo. Thank you.
Ah, yes, Charles, but "convert...and eradicate" in what way? Our plan 800 to 1000-odd years ago didn't work out too well -- so we stopped and went home. Problem is, they didn't...and still haven't. They are living in the once-was of that time...and not just in their religion, either.
VERITAS you should change your name. You're not interested in absolute truth, only blind speculation. Charles, as a Christian I can attest that Christendom's goal is not about converting the Mohammedan religion. Christendom's goal is to first serve God, and then present the gospel to all people. However, the praxis of Christendom is always rooted in love, patience, and forgiveness; this is just to name a few traits of the fruit of the spirit. We Christians seem to easily forget that we fall short of the glory of God and we were "running a hell bound race" before we received the grace of God. We Christians must understand we are no better than anyone and that includes Muslims. Just like there are Christians who represent Christianity wrongly and negatively there are also Muslims who represent their religion wrongly and negatively. This, I have concluded, is a major theme of this article. Also, just as a side note, we all might do well to practice epistemological humility.
It is true that the 9/11 hijackers were simply following the teachings of the Quran. Islam calls for believers to wage jihad against the munafiqin (hypocrites) and kuffar (disbelievers) in four ways: With the heart, the tongue, one's wealth and oneself. Jihad against the disbelievers is more along the lines of physical fighting, whereas jihad against the hypocrites is more along the lines of using words and ideas (taqiyya), which includes a sanctioned form of lying. It's all right there, for anyone to read. The clue is to get a Quran that has been arranged chronologically, with the abrogated verses marked. Mohammed used abrogation so that later teachings would replace earlier teachings that were different.
so that later teachings would replace earlier teachings that were different.
No different than the Christian teachings. When Christians want to wage war in the name of the Christian religion the Old Testament is used to justify war. When peace, charity, compassion for ones fellow man is the theme of the period {usually after all the ravishing and stealing of lands and brutality against people have taken place} then Chrisitans move forward to the New Testament.
Both Islam and Christianity were birthed from the same major religion. Get smart! Educate yourselves. Not one major religion is any better, just or more humane than the other. Horrible things continue to take place around the world in the name and honor of Christianity. Why do you think Bush and his administration tried to make the Iraq and Afhanistan wars about Christianity verses Islam?
I can't recall the last time we waged religious war against anyone, amnesti...not even Iraq or Afghanistan. Could you enlighten me? The closest I can think of is the Spanish wars of conquest in Mexico...but even those were for gold, silver, and slaves for the Priests. Come to think of it, the priests may have done that.
As to the Muslim religion being based on Judaism, thanks for the laugh. I guess that's why they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth...along with us, The Great Satan, of course.
Unfortunately, we have not yet recognized that Islam is fighting a religious war against us -- and intends to kill us because we are [still] a Christian country. We have not returned the favor but continue fighting as a normal, non-religious war. That's why they specifically target -- and kill or maim -- women and children first, men second, military as collateral damage.
Sure would be nice if all the racial bigots and intolorents came down to paper and did face to face with the Muslim's mentioned in story. Doubt they would as in time past the same ilk hid behind sheets and pointy hates, seems not much changes for some other then targets as seems the KKK hid behind "Saving our White Christian world etc.. yep only Muslims are bad folks, all others are doing the lords work, and if you do not agree we will run you out of area, as Christ wants us to do. Biggest issue is probably most Muslims smarter then most bigots. Yep call paper and ask for meeting, which paper will publish, if you have the nerve.
No one here has said we are better than the Muslims, jtennant.
It is our culture and our society that is better.
We don't kill women who are raped; we don't kill homosexuals; we don't kill our daughters because they become civilized, we don't restrict women to their homes unless accompanied by a family member and then only if they are covered from head to toe, we let our women drive -- by themselves, we don't allow [or force!] girls under 16 [in most states] to marry, etc etc etc.
That's just for how they treat women...the list goes on. Pederasty is common as it is in many Mid-Eastern cultures. This is not a culture or a society to be lauded.
You sure have a twisted view of Christianity there, nowfedup. When the Muslims leave us the H alone, then we can get along. Nothing prevents us from defending ourselves or our faith. After all, even Christ got violent when His Father's temple was violated...
Muslims in the US are not forced to obey -- or be prosecuted under -- Islam Sharia law. If they try to force that law on others here or act violently against us, they will be prosecuted under American law, just as we would if the situation were reversed.
I always find it laughable when I, a devout and anti-USofA Roman Catholic is compared to the pro-American, Nativist and anti-Catholic Ku Klux Klowns.
Jtennant, you spew the same heresy as any other liberal Protestant. You almost get it right; the Great Commission is to go out and make believers in the world. The saints give us great examples of that, from their martyrdom, piety, and especially evangelizing. One of the greats that we should look towards is Charlemagne, and his conquest and conversion of the Saxons. Also, to paraphrase St Louis, King of France, one of the most charitable things we can do to an unrepentant heretic is run him through with our sword.
As for religious wars, America has not fought a single one, and that is the problem. The USofA has removed itself from Christendom, and therein lies the problem. America has the potential to serve Rome more than any other country in the history of the world, but the people are obstinate heretics; instead of supporting the Empire, America wants to drag it back into paganism. Shame, shame.
Well now rolondo and all the other klanners, why don't you put up or shut, beg the paper to set up and publish a face to face with all the evil Muslims, an open discussion, but rule is not sheets and pointy hates, nor cross burnings. Doubt any of you have nerve to openly (moderated of course( to set an openly discuss you fables and hates. SOP of you and your types but great propaganda for the bad guys of how stupid and hateful some in USA proven to be, and how cowardly.
Rolando, I wasn't aiming the "better than" comment at anyone in particular. I was simply implying that we all should be careful when we comment about and approach Muslims or any other kinds of people, so that we don't come across as being better. However, perhaps you are correct to say that there is no need for my comment here in this context. Surely though you would agree that there are those, especially Christians, who promote themselves as being superior over Muslims. My main point I wanted to get across, is that we do not need to generalize all Muslims and understand that there are those who do believe in being peaceful. There may not be anyone who has commented in this forum asserting such generalizations, but I do know people who have. I was just stating a point. Also, even though as a culture we do not condone or participate in the activities you mentioned, there those individuals within our culture who do.
Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God...pure and simple. Christians should know that Jesus said that 'the only' way to God is thru Jesus Christ. Last time I checked...Muslims do not believe Christ died for our sins upon that cross. Oh..they believe in a prophet named Jesus...but that He never died for our sins. Besides...the Bible teaches that if an angel preached another gospel than Jesus & the Apostles...he was to be cursed. Gabriel was a dumb butt anyway...he didn't realize Mohammad couldn't read? Come on...!!!
Charles my doctrine is not heretical, it is Biblically correct. You may not like how I live out this doctrine, but the propositions I made were sound. I am not condoning the Muslim religion. Obviously as a Christian I believe anything that directs our attention away from a Biblical view of God is a problem, but there is no need to endorse a harsh approach toward people who believe differently. Remember, as regenerate sinners God shows us grace and forgiveness we should show others this as well. Citing the actions and comments of Charlemagne and St Louis, King of France isn't exactly proving how we are to live and treat others from a Biblical perspective. There are great lessons to be learned from great leaders of the past but they are just as fallible as we are.
And here we are 10 years later trying to protect ourselves from members of "the religion of peace" who wish to kill a few more of us in NY, DC or both to celebrate their anniversary. We are regularly told that only a small minority of Muslims wish us ill. There are 1.5 billion Muslims. Is 1% (10.5 million) the minority they speak of?
[T]here is no need to endorse a harsh approach toward people who believe differently.
Do you consider spreading the gospel of Our Lord an "harsh approach"? Or is it harsh that everyone should be under the temporal authority of Rome, with the government rewarding those that convert and punishing those that do not (even to the point of killing those that wish to spread false beliefs, e.g., Mohammedanism)?
Charles you're being a little ridiculous. Clearly spreading the gospel of Our Lord is not a harsh approach; it's how the gospel is being spread that can be harsh or not. Christians are never called to kill those who have false beliefs. If you want to imitate saints of old in combating false doctrine try practicing polemics or apologetics. I will admit, your comments are throwing me off a bit. Perhaps, I'll give you some credit, and assume that I am simply not understanding you properly.
I'll ask this simply: does the State (i.e., Rome) have the right to defend the Faith with lethal force? That is, do heretics have the right to spread a false religion with no lethal interference from the State (i.e., Rome)?
Charles I confess, I may not have enough knowledge and insight in this matter to make an accurate conclusion. I will however, take the position that the State should not use lethal force to eradicate false religion. Whatever the State does do, it should be done with the wisdom and guidance of God. I find no Biblical commands that would lead me to an opposing stance. Also, just in case you're asserting that Rome has some divine seat of authority in all things Christendom, I must make it clear I definitely do not agree with that position.
[If] you're asserting that Rome has some divine seat of authority in all things Christendom, I must make it clear I definitely do not agree with that position.
Yes, we've already established that you are an American liberal Protestant. Being ignorant of the history of Salvation, you disagree with the fact of both reason and faith that Rome has universal authority; the Emperor [of Rome] over all things secular, and the Bishop [of Rome] over all things spiritual.
All arguments about the nuances of different Christian religions aside, Islam and sharia are not compatible with the constitution, the bill of rights or any other religion. The archaic, abusive laws laid out by their holy books violate almost every tenant this country was founded upon. There is no other reason for true believers of islam to come to the U.S. other than to convert us or wage jihad against us. In the religion of "peace", the only acceptable ways we could live with them would be to either covert, or to submit them as a lesser/servant class, paying a tax to our muslim overlords. It's all in their religious texts and has been reinforced time and again by their clerics. We are under siege. The sappers are at the walls.
jtennant -- two things.
First, Charles is a dyed-in-the-wool Roman Catholic. He stands fast and evidently believes all the rest of us are going straight to Hell...evidently without stopping in Purgatory. But you have to give him one thing...he sincere in his beliefs.
Second thing: I certainly didn't mean to imply that you should not post anything you want on this forum. I am a very staunch believer in and a strong supporter of the Bill of Rights.
As for laws and religion, let me try a different tack. The Mormons recognized plural marriages for a while...until the American law caught up with them. They no longer condone or practice polygamy, although every so often some them crop up who do. Our law again slaps them down.
Islamic law does nothing of the sort. It not only encourages multiple wives, it almost demands it -- after all, their prophet had his harem. Further, Islamic law -- sharia law -- does not punish the men who abuse the women in their families...they evidently define "abuse" differently than we do.
For that reason alone, I condemn those who physically abuse, maim, or kill women and children, regardless of where they live. I will neither abide this nor remain silent about anyone who maims or kills their women and children simply because they do not like the way they look or think.
These are the pigs who want to celebrate their heinous, cowardly action 10 years ago by again attacking us.
Their religion didn't condemn one of those cowardly terrorists. Not a one. So I wouldn't expect it to condemn any of them in this country or this state for any terrorist act against us.
"religion and its adherents are more dangerous than H-BOMBS!!"
Famous last words. Iran is well on it's way to obtaining their very own "H-bomb". I guess only the nuclear tan that is in your future will convince you which is the more dangerous. At least the sand around your head will protect it from being evaporated and will create a nice glass helmet for it to rot in.
So what are you going to do, nowfedup? Wire up your seven-year-old with twenty or so sticks of dynamite and send him into any setup meeting? Or maybe drive a truck loaded with fertilizer and diesel oil in there and torch it off? Or are you just doing the Neanderthal thingee and hit the problem with a club?
The amount of moonbattery found in Trevizo's latest piece is hardly surprising, although quite prolific, nevertheless. This is a textbook example of an extremely dangerous Marxist subversive masquerading as an objective journalist, and it is also very interesting to live in an age where Pravda is now more objective than the Times Free Press. The editors that provide rubber-stamp approval to this flood of propaganda are a disgrace, and this newspaper's advertisers should be put on notice that their businesses will no longer be patronized if they continue to subsidize this anti-American rhetoric.
This thread has little if any relationship with a "new" mosque being built, Savarti. Or an old one, for that matter.
Nor does it have anything to do with those Muslims who obey American law and not sharia law [your dreaded theocracy, by the way. If we ever get a theocracy in the US, you can bet the rent it will be Muslim.]
It has everything to do with those who "religiously" follow sharia law [pun intended] and would force that supremely oppressive law upon the rest of us, killing women and children along the way by blowing them into little pieces. Nice religion, that.
Wasn't Moloch the god to whom the Phoenicians sacrificed babies by throwing them into fires in his belly, or something? An ancient god emulated by Islam and an antecedent for today's Muslim, perhaps?
Probably be a better USA if just the "chrisitans" (small c) followed USA law, more so the part about religious tolerance. Biggest bunch of GED hopefuls and zealot's pathetically presenting their amusing take on their new KKK religious cops. News flash fools, if only you were as tolerant and the "christians" following USA law, it would be much better USA. Biggest gathering of fools and bigots posting lately, and 99%of what they claim is not verifiable except in their twisted tiny little minds and some of them call themselves christians (very small c? Go burn a cross or some other example of you wisdom and tolerances, more fitting then trying to appear as intellectuals/
Hey cowards, still waiting for you folks of hate to ask paper to set and publish meeting with all you "good folks" and the evil ones. Have yet to see anyone ask for it, typical moral cowards, a disgrace to this nation with their hate and ignorance and intolorences, no wonder KKK was started and still active in TN, lots of fertile fields of fools to harvest. Care to comment on why the kkk uses a christian cross for it's icon and such, but noted now some of fools and cowards extended hate to Catholics, probably go at Mormons next, You are the lowest of life to attack religions and blame them and amusing "usa never had a religious war", believe bush called the killing of thousands in Mid East a "crusade" and we know what that butchery by the ignorant was all about. You zealots represent the worst of USA and most ignorant, a disgrace to decent folks
Sorry, Rolando, I guess that I was responding to what the entire article was actually saying. Like:
"One single event changed how Muslims are perceived, not only in America, but in the entire world."
"A decade after the terrorist attacks, local Muslim-Americans say outreach has never been more important to educate people about Muslims and what they believe."
"Since 9/11, many Muslims face a constant challenge of defining who they are, what they believe in, to everyone else. They must prove to the world that Islam is not equivalent to terrorism, that most Muslims are peaceful, that being Muslim doesn't mean hating America."
"In New York, there was the controversy over building a an Islamic community center in Manhattan, a few blocks from Ground Zero. Closer to home, there's an ongoing battle in Murfreesboro, Tenn., to stop the building of a new mosque."
"Local and national Muslim groups agree that the majority of Americans are tolerant toward them and the bias comes from a small but very vocal minority."
BUT, it seems that the thread is only following this one statement:
"You've got two sets of people," El-Ameen said. "You've got those interested in Islam who will go open up a book and read, and then you've got a set of people who only listen to news propaganda. Those people deal more with emotions."
Rolando, I don't think that Christianity has been much better on that killing thing. Here's just a very few known incidents. Notice that many of them were Christians against Christians.
-- The First Crusade was launched in 1095 with the battle cry "Deus Vult" (God wills it), a mandate to destroy infidels in the Holy Land. Gathering crusaders in Germany first fell upon "the infidel among us," Jews in the Rhine valley, thousands of whom were dragged from their homes or hiding places and hacked to death or burned alive.
--In the Third Crusade, after Richard the Lion-Hearted captured Acre in 1191, he ordered 3,000 captives -- many of them women and children -- taken outside the city and slaughtered. Some were disemboweled in a search for swallowed gems.
--In 1209, Pope Innocent III launched an armed crusade against Albigenses Christians in southern France. When the besieged city of Beziers fell, soldiers reportedly asked their papal adviser how to distinguish the faithful from the infidel among the captives. He commanded: "Kill them all. God will know his own." Nearly 20,000 were slaughtered -- many first blinded, mutilated, dragged behind horses, or used for target practice.
-- In the 1400s, the Inquisition shifted its focus to witchcraft. Priests tortured untold thousands of women into confessing that they were witches who flew through the sky and engaged in sex with the devil -- then they were burned or hanged for their confessions. Witch hysteria raged for three centuries in a dozen nations. Estimates of the number executed vary from 100,000 to 2 million. Whole villages were exterminated. In the first half of the 17th century, about 5,000 "witches" were put to death in the French province of Alsace, and 900 were burned in the Bavarian city of Bamberg.
-- The Thirty Years' War produced the largest religious death toll of all time. It began in 1618 when Protestant leaders threw two Catholic emissaries out of a Prague window into a dung heap. War flared between Catholic and Protestant princedoms, drawing in supportive religious armies from Germany, Spain, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, France and Italy. Sweden's Protestant soldiers sang Martin Luther's "Ein 'Feste Burg" in battle. Three decades of combat turned central Europe into a wasteland of misery. One estimate states that Germany's population dropped from 18 million to 4 million. In the end nothing was settled, and too few people remained to rebuild cities, plant fields, or conduct education.
And then there are the millions of Native Americans that were exterminated in the name of God just in the last 300 years in this country.
Nice religion, that.
Propaganda alert: Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike should not be deceived by the CAIR-funded propaganda bots that have infiltrated the comments section (in addition to publishing this article to begin with). The Klan is dead as a doornail, and has been for almost fifty years.
It is extremely important to remind everyone that radical terror cells such as Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, et al are indeed active worldwide, and they will not remain idle.
Do not let allow strutting, imbecilic third-rate clerics to distract you from the fact that the real enemy is persecuting and killing both Christians and Jews in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and in Asia on a daily basis.
No one should be surprised in the not too distant future when numerous American cities become better known for being the next Sarajevo or Srebrenica as the wonders of 'diversity' and 'tolerance' are put on display for all to see.
GreenKepi said... Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God...pure and simple
That's where you're wrong, greenkepi. You're actually no different than the brainwashed of other religions. You should really try reading up on other major religions before making ill informed statements against them.
FACT: Islam is rooted in three religions, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and CHRISTIANITY. FACT: Muslims DO believe Jesus was virgin born, peformed miracles, and ascended to heaven, but deny he'd been crucified in his own person.
FACT: Christianity emerged from Judaism but in the course of centuries has absorbed substantial elements of the Greek world-view and some doctrinal and cultic elements from the Romans. It shares with Judaism indebtedness to Canaanite, Babylonian, ZORASTRIAN, and Egyptian sources. It's central figure, Jesus, has been regarded as an incarnation of God the Father and the source therefore of a primary revelation.
Both, Islam and Christianity believe in the existence of Jesus. However, only in the Christian version is it believe that Jesus was God returned to earth in human form. Nor does Islam believe Jesus was the first and last Messiah(or prophet), I believe.
As I said earlier, savarti, we quit the Crusades 800 years ago because it didn't work.
The Muslims haven't quit to date but are still killing us, using their women and children now though...evidently they consider it "women's work" or something -- or maybe because it is so dangerous.
If you want to start counting the killings done by both Christians and Muslims since day one, the Muslims win hands down; they kill their own people wholesale with gas or anything at hand, including rocks.
As to the decline in AmerInd population since 1700, Wikipedia said this:
"Most mainstream scholars believe that, among the various contributing factors, epidemic disease was the overwhelming cause of the population decline of the American natives because of their lack of immunity to new diseases brought from Europe."
"Manifest Destiny" had little to do with religion -- it was a land grab on a continental scale. Greed did it.
miditek said...Propaganda alert: Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike should not be deceived blah...blah ...No one should be surprised in the not too distant future when numerous American cities become better known for being the next Sarajevo or Srebrenica.
The mere fact that you mention those cities tells me you know that it was Muslims that were at the receiving ends of the massacres there. In fact during the atrocities in Bosnia, it was the Jews who were supporting the Muslims. So, now who is doing the propaganda, mixing a little bit of fact with a lot of fiction. Are you also a diehard Palin supporter? Why did Paul Revere make his famous ride?
Yeah, Savarti, we agree once again. I got lazy. Apologies.
After a couple-three hours research online using a variety of search engines, I can find no cites supportive of your statement that in the last 300 years, American Christians waged religious war on the AmerInds. [I admit to being sidetracked many times because something looked "interesting"...had that problem for decades.] So, would you be so kind as to provide your cite?
Quote: "FACT: Islam is rooted in three religions, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and CHRISTIANITY."
That is a blatant lie- Jews and Christians worship the God of Israel, and as a nation is mentioned more times in the Torah (and the Bible) than any other. This is a nation that Muslims refuse to acknowledge the very existence of, although Hamas vows to destroy it in their charter. Imams indoctrinate their children with lies that Jews were descended from pigs and monkeys, and as such, are untermensch (sub-human).
Imams further propagate lies that Jews kill Christian children and drain their blood and use it as an ingredient in Matzah. This alone proves that the enemy has utterly no understanding at all about Jewish culture, and the fact that Jewish mothers place an extremely high value on human life- even the lives of the children of their enemies.
Quote: "BobAbe said...miditek said...Propaganda alert: Catholics, Protestants, and Jews alike should not be deceived blah...blah .."
Your blah-blahs reveal the fact that you can provide no defense regarding the atrocities committed worldwide on a daily basis by the groups mentioned. Did you learn the term "blah-blah" from that foul mouthpiece for Hamas that teaches poli-sci (and preaches hatred of the Jews) at UTC?
Quote. "BobAbe said...The mere fact that you mention those cities tells me you know that it was Muslims that were at the receiving ends of the massacres there. In fact during the atrocities in Bosnia, it was the Jews who were supporting the Muslims. So, now who is doing the propaganda, mixing a little bit of fact with a lot of fiction. Are you also a diehard Palin supporter? Why did Paul Revere make his famous ride?"
Muslims were hardly the only victims during the disintegration of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, and the cities mentioned were used to illustrate the dangers of the cult of multiculturalism, and what will eventually happen here in America once the process of Balkanization has been completed in this country.
Let's also not forget that the Muslims of Yugoslavia were hardly innocent. Have you -not- ever heard of the 13th SS Mountain Division, who had over 30,000 Bosniak Muslims recruited for service by none other than al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem?
It is apparent where your loyalties lie- you are far more concerned with the denigration of Palin than the condemnation of Muslim engineered atrocities. I personally could care less what Palin says or does, but the fact that you have brought her into an argument that has nothing to do with her proves to me that you are grasping at straws my radicalized friend.
miditek said... Quote: "FACT: Islam is rooted in three religions, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and CHRISTIANITY." That is a blatant lie- Jews and Christians worship the God of Israel, and as a nation is mentioned more times in the Torah (and the Bible) than any other
What are you so afraid of, miditek? The TRUTH?! Why does the truth so frighten you and your ilk? All major religions are nothing more than a break off from one once major religion.
Islam: **(1)The angel Gabriel possesing the highest rank(sounds familiar? (2) There is also a fallen angel, Iblis (from Greek meaning diabolos(devil/satan)--sounds even more familiar? (3)The scriptures are four: The Torah of (Moses), the Zabur (Psalms) of David, the Injil (Evangel) of Jesus, and the revelations to Muhammad, compiled after his death into the Quran (or Koran). (4)--Muhammad (considered a prophet) along with those before him, from Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Of Jesus, Muhammad had the highest opinion and respect for. He jusst didn't believe Jesus was GOD returned to earth in human form.
FOr the bigots and cowards of intolerance, sorry but the klan is very alive in TN, still lots of grand phoo pahs or whatever. Next for the cowards, STILL do not see ole rol and his buds posting they want to go to paper and have face to face with the various "evil ones" they have identified. What's the matter, cowards all as with any mob they talk big but not into a face to face, would show them the moral and ethical cowards they are, plus how their GED, maybe, is not exactly and education. So cowards, how come no offer of a face to face, noted you all dodged it, as expected from such low life. All hot air and no spine.
Quote: "Legend said...What are you so afraid of, miditek? The TRUTH?! Why does the truth so frighten you and your ilk? All major religions are nothing more than a break off from one once major religion. Islam: (1)The angel Gabriel possesing the highest rank(sounds familiar? (2) There is also a fallen angel, Iblis (from Greek meaning diabolos(devil/satan)--sounds even more familiar? (3)The scriptures are four: The Torah of (Moses), the Zabur (Psalms) of David, the Injil (Evangel) of Jesus, and the revelations to Muhammad, compiled after his death into the Quran (or Koran). (4)--Muhammad (considered a prophet) along with those before him, from Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Of Jesus, Muhammad had the highest opinion and respect for. He jusst didn't believe Jesus was GOD returned to earth in human form."
"What is truth?", Pilate cynically said to the Sanhedrin during the trial of Christ for blasphemy. Islam has absolutely nothing to do with the God of Judaism and Christianity. The devil himself is well-versed in the Scriptures, which was illustrated in the Gospels when Christ was tempted in the wilderness.
To say that Mohammed is of the same lineage as the Hebrew prophets is another blatant lie. To say that the Hebrew prophets, and not to mention the Messiah were prophets of Islam is still another lie. Christ's ministry was spent preaching the gift of salvation through Him. There is no guarantee of salvation for anyone in the Koran, and to deny Christ's message is to deny Him altogether.
If Mohammed actually respected Jesus, then why would he deny the central message of His ministry? Was he calling Christ a liar? Was he calling him a lunatic? He certainly was not calling him "Lord." What part of Christ's ministry then, did Mohammed actually "respect"? Moreover, if the Jews are, according to current Muslim propaganda, descended from pigs and monkeys, then that negates any claim that the Imams have to the fable of their "respect" for Jesus as a prophet, since He was born and raised as a Jew. Moreover, such notions would suggest that if the Jews were descended from pigs and monkeys (as the Muslims assert), then that brings Darwinism and evolution into the religion that purportedly believes in Creationism, and suggests that the Jews were created by a less than perfect God, which is also blasphemy.
Moreover, another theological error in Islam is the punishment of kaffirs for blasphemy against the prophet. If Mohammed was a man, as opposed to deity, then a fatwa death sentence for those that commit blasphemy against Mohammed in and of itself elevates him to the status of deity, which in and of itself is blasphemy.
miditek said... To say that Mohammed is of the same lineage as the Hebrew prophets is another blatant lie. To say that the Hebrew prophets, and not to mention the Messiah were prophets of Islam is still another lie. Christ's ministry was spent preaching the gift of salvation through Him. There is no guarantee of salvation for anyone in the Koran, and to deny Christ's message is to deny Him altogether.
You are so brainwashed. No different than those you're pointing a finger and bashing for being brainwashed.
Try reading up on religion, even western Christian religion from a historical point rather than fear.
Yes, all major religions: Christianity, Islam, Judaism etc. are the result and break off from one once major religion.
Still waiting for all you bigots and religious experts to post you want a face to face with local Muslim and other religious leaders to discuss what you bigot claim is your "truths". Rather sound like the ole kkk folks and their truths, what's a matter, afraid to debate with those you so cut down? Same ole same ole types, not a backbone among you.
Rolando, an interesting synopsis of Native American genocide here: http://www.religioustolerance.org/genocide5.htm
For a viewpoint of how "Americans" viewed the Natives right from the beginning, here, directly from the Declaration of Independence: "He (George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
An interesting booklet written a century ago that tells about General Rutherford's march through North Carolina to exterminate the Cherokee...both from the Americans and from the Cherokee. My ancestor is Chee-squi-ah who told the Cherokee side of it. http://toto.lib.unca.edu/booklets/indians_curse_legend_of_cherokee/default_indians_curse_sondley.htm
This article looks at genocide and disease as the cause. It seems that disease was often the result of genocidal intent but no one knows for sure the numbers. http://hnn.us/articles/7302.html: *"Sir Jeffrey Amherst, commander-in-chief of British forces in North America, wrote as follows to Colonel Henry Bouquet at Fort Pitt:"You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians [with smallpox] by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method, that can serve to extirpate this execrable race."
"A second, even less substantiated instance of alleged biological warfare concerns an incident that occurred on June 20, 1837. On that day, Churchill writes, the U.S. Army began to dispense"'trade blankets' to Mandans and other Indians gathered at Fort Clark on the Missouri River in present-day North Dakota." He continues: Far from being trade goods, the blankets had been taken from a military infirmary in St. Louis quarantined for smallpox..."
And I always thought that this was an interesting perspective of how Christians viewed the Native Americans. "In 1694, the General Court of Massachusetts ordered all friendly Indians confined to a small area. A bounty was then offered for the killing or capture of hostile Indians, and scalps were accepted as proof of a kill. In 1704, this was amended in the direction of"Christian practice" by means of a scale of rewards graduated by age and sex; bounty was proscribed in the case of children under the age of ten, subsequently raised to twelve (sixteen in Connecticut, fifteen in New Jersey). Here, too, genocidal intent was far from evident; the practices were justified on grounds of self-preservation and revenge..."
"Savage" is an interesting term.
As you can see, I didn't even get into the Mexican Native Americans genocide. It would be naive to think that Europeans were not the reason for Native American genocide whether it be through direct murder or by disease.
If Manifest Destiny is really the justification for the treatment of the Native Americans, then all in all, we cannot complain if the same is done to the current inhabitants of America. It would be, after all, the will of God, right?
We are arguing two different things, Savarti.
I agree with everything you posted...[haven't had a chance to review the cites yet. Thanks.] The deliberate genocide of the AmerInds was deplorable and inexcusable to say the least.
My only difficulty is in assigning Christianity as a driving force of the genocide. That would be to claim Manzanar was religion-based.
To oversimplify, they had what we wanted and we "invented" reasons to take it...but officially paying a bounty for them, especially one based on age/sex, is beyond the pale.
The methods we used were manifold, many of them would match later definitions of "war crimes". I would go further and say that religion was merely an excuse, and not a particularly good one, since it wasn't part of Christian dogma.
I do not defend the more onerous things our country has done in the past, quite the opposite. But to ascribe the AmerInd genocide to Christianity is a pretty far reach. "Manifest Destiny" was just an rhetorical excuse for a land grab on a massive scale.
Many here claim our Founders were not Christians, so that couldn't have been their excuse. Could it? [sarcasm, that].
On a related side note, I got sidetracked researching Manzanar. That act demonstrates the unlimited power one man can hold in this country. FDR, by the stroke of the Executive Order pen, ordered that infamous Japanese-American internment. Scary, that. Obama is emulating him in many ways...most of them the bad ways. But I digress...
Well rather obvious the religion 101 class will NOT dare to debate Muslim, Catholics and others as to the honesty of their childish remarks, kind of kkk type hate/intolerance used against blacks during Reconstruction by cowards pretending to be quasi-intellectuals. Yep rather obvious how deep your convictions are and your capabilities to defend them in open face to face. How sad such fools exist and must be tolerated in this nation as their hate, intolerance and ignorance simply recruits for other side, kind of like our own home grown El Q's as basically no moral, ethical or philosophical differences, just same old worn out "my religion is the only one and rest are all evil" El Q or here, the same cowards hiding behind ignorance and hate, trying desperately to pull of intellectualism while in mental sheet and pointy hats.
NFU has learned the ins and outs of leftist propaganda rather well. He blames the long defunct Klan for all of the world's evils, and yet embraces the very fascism that he claims to despise. To disprove his theories, consider the following:
How many crosses have been burned in the front yards of Muslim homes in this area? Any area?
How many Muslims have been lynched in this area?
How many Muslims have been threatened at the voting polls?
How many mosques have been bombed in this area?
To state but a few examples, and none of the Reconstruction-era tactics have been used against those people in this area, which proves NFU to be nothing more than a propagandist as opposed to a finder of actual facts.
America is far more tolerant of other religions than say, Saudi Arabia, where you will find not a single Christian church or Jewish synagogue in the entire country. Let's see some churches and synagogues being built there before wagging your finger at America.
Quote: "How sad such fools exist and must be tolerated in this nation as their hate, intolerance and ignorance simply recruits for other side."
The "tolerant" left lamenting the fact that they must "tolerate" the "intolerant" right. Yet another page from the moonbat manifesto.
To Savarti and Rolando,
Thanks for your informational and very civil debate. I have thoroughly enjoyed it today. This is the main reason I came to these sites to begin with. I enjoyed the IQ of the posters. Thanks again.
In my opinion, It is most important to remember is that Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship with Jesus. THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!
In regards to the Muslim community, I do not believe that all middle eastern people who claim to be Muslim are evil Jihadist. Just as I do not believe all who claim to be Christians are wonderful people going to Heaven. I work with many Muslims who are good folk and I don't know of one that is an extremist. By the same token I work with many who call themselves Christians that could easily be called evil extremist. Stereotyping is never correct.
The main problem facing the world is extremists who think that their way is the only right way, and anyone who disagrees with them is evil or is carrying out propaganda. This trait unites the Muslim extremists and our own homegrown Christian extremists.
Quote: "Stereotyping is never correct."
Really? Profiling is the cornerstone of security protocol implementation at Israel's El-Al airlines, which has the most successful safety record in the world. Guess how many American Christians (or Jews) get pulled aside by their agents for questioning?
You fools full of hate and trying to hide such behind some sort of "intellectual" BS need to read this and note the aid your are giving to those that are your mirror image on the other side of issue, the muslims that "hate" or "christians that hate", they feed the wars and pollute their home nations with same, So read and try to get some info into your tiny little hate filled minds. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/opinion/sunday/and-hate-begat-hate.html
Note that none of you giant intellectuals posted and asked paper to set up debate with other side and publish, cowards to the core.
(You fools full of hate and trying to hide such behind some sort of "intellectual" BS need to read this and note the aid your are giving to those that are your mirror image on the other side of issue, the muslims that "hate" or "christians that hate", they feed the wars and pollute their home nations with same, So read and try to get some info into your tiny little hate filled minds. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/opinion/sunday/and-hate-begat-hate.html Note that none of you giant intellectuals posted and asked paper to set up debate with other side and publish, cowards to the core.)
And you sound like you are just full of love and unicorns towards those that would dare to disagree with your lofty opinions.
Dhimmism may be a noble idea to some (particularly al-Qaeda and the imams), but there are tens of millions of others that simply are not going to buy into that notion no matter how many diatribes you post nor how many tantrums you throw.
You are welcome to post as many taunts and insults as you wish (as there is such a thing as free speech in this country), but it won't get you a single step closer to this mythical meeting that you keep ranting on about. Negotiations are over.
Quote: "Stereotyping is never correct."
Really? Profiling is the cornerstone of security protocol implementation at Israel's El-Al airlines, which has the most successful safety record in the world. Guess how many American Christians (or Jews) get pulled aside by their agents for questioning?
There is a fine line between Profiling and Stereotyping, but Stereotyping can be very detrimental in relationship building or sustaining. If you look at TV commercials and most comedy shows you would think that ALL men are wimps afraid of women with no backbone. They make men look absolutely stupid. Is that profiling or stereotyping?
If you don't know the difference then you should not be posting here.
Of course there is a difference, but let's not presume that you will tell me where, when, or how I should post anything. If you don't like what someone writes, then do what I do and either ignore it or respond to it.
P.S. You're not God's little earwig.
oh,seenms ole miditek is afraid to ask for meeting with those it is so quick to attack, but since simply a new type of KKK, hate and intolerance, not surprised at the cowards that would not meet and defend their idiocy, now go iron sheets for next "Club" meeting, sure seem afraid to ask paper to set up meeting to defend your cowardly ways face to face, and publish it. So just keep helping the bad guys with you hatreds, as they have one doing same on their side just as dumbed down.


text:
Services Dump
When someone asks you about what you do, your natural inclination is probably to respond by talking about yourself: "I'm a personal injury lawyer."
If the conversation continues, you'll be likely to conclude that you ought to persuade the person that you're an, "Excellent personal injury lawyer."
You will talk about how long you've been in practice, how many awards you have won and how hard you fight.
Depending on the nature of your practice, you might talk about how many lawyers your firm has and how many practice areas you have covered.
At best, you will come across as boring. More likely, you'll come across as pompous.
Instead, try to describe what you do in terms of the people you help and the problems you solve.
So, instead of describing yourself as a "Chicago personal injury lawyer," you might try something like:
"I help Chicago residents who have been injured pay for their medical bills."
And the more specific you can be, the better.
So, "I help Lincoln Park (Chicago neighborhood) residents who have been injured in car accidents recover money for their injuries."
Or, "I help Lincoln Park residents who have been injured in car accidents deal with legal and financial issues related to their accident."
Your Web Presence
Now, take this same approach online. Instead of plastering your website with self-promotional advertisements, communicate who you help and how you help them.
Instead of practice area page after practice area page, tell client stories.
Obviously, be conscientious of your ethical obligations. Frankly, you're probably more at risk with your self-promotional efforts.
Instead of dumping everything you can think of about your practice on your site, put the focus on the people you help, how you help them and why you are more equipped to help them than the lawyer down the street.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
reviews & comments (62)
One of my favorite recipes to make! Making these is a time commitment, but you will be rewarded! I usually get 5 dozen biscotti out of this, so I throw them in the freezer, pull one out as I want it, dip it in coffee and enjoy. I usually struggle with not breaking the biggest cookies as I cut before baking the second time, and mine usually don't get as hard as other biscotti I've had. But I've never had any complaints! This is a staple recipe in my kitchen, especially around Christmastime.
fabulous. used dark chocolate rather than semisweet and almonds instead of hazelnuts, but the result was spectacular. freezes well, too.
Wonderful recipe and will make again although it's not the easiest dough to work with. The dough is quite sticky and hard to work with. I found that if you refrigerate it for about 15 minutes, it's easier to work with. But it is definitely delicious. I also coated one side with melted chocolate.
pretty delicious. I ground up the hazelnuts almost all the way, and didn't bake the biscotti for the full amount of time. they were crumbly and hard to cut, but I wet the serrated knife before cutting, which seemed to help. They are probably the most delicious biscotti I have had.
This might be my new favorite biscotti recipe. A few changes I made that still resulted in delicious biscotti: Though I love hazelnuts, I hate husking them, so I used some raw almonds, all of which I pulsed in the food processor. (Toasting them would probably be even better.) I didn't have almond extract, so I just increased the vanilla extract. Also, I subbed wheat flour for half of the all-purpose flour. I found reviewers' comments about both the crumbliness of the biscotti and the spreading of the logs to be true, though I could still fit two logs onto one baking sheet. A bonus to these biscotti: They freeze really well.
Although not a traditional Italian biscotti, these are excellent *and* easy to make. In my oven, I needed about 10 extra minutes for the first baking and about five extra minutes for the second. These have been a huge hit.
I've made these many times...my husband LOVES them - SO good to dip in coffee on a cold day. I grind all of the nuts into fairly small pieces because the whole nuts tend to add a weak spot on the finished cookie and they fall apart. The do spread a great deal, but I still bake them as two logs on large rimmed sheet. Definitely a keeper!
Great recipe! The only things I did differently was to chop the nuts slightly and also let them cool longer than 15 minutes before I sliced them. They slice better that way. Getting ready to make them again today.
While these had a wonderful flavor, I had to make adjustments in the directions for baking. They really do spread, making for a long thin biscotti. So I put them in the refrigerator for a couple hours before baking, and would recommend, as have others, of dividing the dough into 3 or 4 logs. I also had trouble with them wanting to burn on the second baking, so I have backed off the temperature to 325. I will make these again as the flavor is very good and everyone really likes them.


text:
Q marks the spot – Treasure Map 72 (September 2014)
Sacred Treasure
- Cranmer has been on form: 1. None dare call it evil, except Justin Welby; 2. I have forgiven Islamic militants
- Interesting stuff here from Tyndale House on Simon Gathercole's work on the Gospel of Thomas
- "Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here…" from the Chaldean Catholic Archbishop of Mosul
- The stigma of being an atheist in the USA…
Q Conversations 5: Politician Elizabeth, Baroness Berridge
Elizabeth Berridge, until very recently, was the youngest woman in the House of Lords, the UK's upper house in Parliament. Raised to the peerage in the 2011, she was before that a barrister and then in 2006 became Executive Director of the Conservative Christian Fellowship which exists to bring together Conservative Party voting Christians of all denominations. She describes herself as a classic Tory 'wet', as opposed to the 'Dry' Thatcherite end of the party's spectrum. If that terminology is rather meaningless to you (or even sounds mildly offensive!) then listen in! Read more
Wartorn faith: a conversation from the Aleppo front line (1)
This is the first of what I hope will be a regular posting. Yesterday, I was able to chat on the phone with a pastor friend in Aleppo in Syria. He is the pastor of a community that has witnessed in the city for over 150 years. But Aleppo is on the front line of the appalling conflict in Syria (as this helpful, interactive map demonstrates).
It was remarkable to be able to chat with almost crystal clear clarity, even if for only a few minutes – despite the fact that he lives with his family right in the heart of a war zone. Read more
Let the meaning choose the word: Orwell on political language
It has its gainsayers (eg Steven Poole is pretty disparaging, though unfairly in my view) but George Orwell's Politics and the English Language (the whole essay is online), is prophetic. Of course some of his linguistic concerns are matters of taste and fashion (as Steven Poole rightly notes). But written at the close of the Second World War, this article exposes the sham sincerity and dissembling motivation behind so much political speech and writing. That is the essay's great virtue. And it has not gone out of date at all. Read more
Testifying to the Prince of Peace in today's Bethlehem
Many people wanted to know more about the short clip I played during my sermon this morning. So i'm posting it here. I only came across it this week, through twitter (needless to say), but it fitted perfectly with the passage I was speaking on: Luke 2:67-80 and Zechariah's song.
The five minute film was made by a bunch of New Zealanders, called St Paul's Arts & Media and is beautifully and powerfully made. Definitely worth making it go viral Read more
Jerusalem – the city with its very own book.
I really don't think this book lives up to its hype, but I did work my way through roughly 3/4 of Simon Sebag-Montefiore's epic Jerusalem, The Biography. It is a very uneven and, at times, curiously flat read. It is also (perhaps inevitably) littered with sweeping statements and an over-reliance on just a few partisan scholarly perspectives. This was especially frustrating when it came to plumbing the huge depths and breadths of biblical and archaeological scholarship. But there were clearly some gems and insights. And so thought I'd share just one or two. Read more
Q marks the spot – Treasure Map 27 (December 2010)
Sacred Treasure
- The dilemma for Iraqi Christians
- Charts showing the difference between NIV2011 and previous versions, and here. (HT Antony Billington)
- Full schedule of Lausanne III at Cape Town to see videos of main talks etc
- Bring Advent to life by following Natwivity on Twitter
- David Instone-Brewer at Tyndale House has very helpfully reviewed a variety of computer resources for the bible scholar – check them out at Tyndale Tech
Topical Treasure
- If you know anything about recent Balkan history, this news is an encouraging sign.
- Books vs eBooks – an interesting Newsweek chart
- Very interesting article about what Americans feel about their ex-Presidents.
- Scary infographic about internet porn. (HT Simple Pastor)
- The problem of contemporary parental discipline:
Quirky Treasure
- Ever been on an overnight flight? Well this sums up the experience perfectly.
- I love tilt-shift photos – clever focus manipulation that makes real life scenes look like models. Check these out.
- Some rather fun and quirky photographs from everyday London.
- I rather like these Ukrainian designs for playing cards
- 50 office jargon phrases we just totally hate
- Some fascinating cartographic futurology from the ever reliable Strange Maps
- People are awesome (not dumb… mostly) …!
- Rather fun reflection by Kevin Connolly on James Bond, America and post-war austerity
Beauty in the Business world: Andreas Gursky shows East meets West, Ancient meets (post)Modern
Was leafing through the Royal Academy of Art magazine this week – and encountered this photograph filling a whole page. Was blown away.
It's utterly mesmerising and bewildering all at the same time. Where are we? An airport? A fancy dress party? A film set? Who are all these people anyway? And what are they up to?
Without wanting to be patronising at all, it almost seems like a set up for a live-action Where's Wally competition…
It is in fact a photograph taken in 2007 by Andreas Gursky called Kuwait Stock Exchange I. And it manages to convey the incongruities of the modern world, with a forum equipped with the latest communications technology populated by hundreds of men (not a woman in sight), dressed in the formality and uniformity of classic Arab desert dress. It is a picture of anonymity – even those who knew them wouldn't really be able to tell them apart from this angle – it all looks beautifully stage-managed and set up. But i suspect it isn't.
There are all kinds of interesting contrasts with another of his images, this time from the Chicago Board of Trade:
This is equally mesmerising – but this time is a living fireworks display of colour. Half close your eyes, and it could almost be a Jackson Pollock. Wonderful.
Photography at its best should do this – show us the world in a new way. Here is beauty in the rawest of capitalist temples… Surprising really.
Lauren Booth's conversion to Islam: a symptomatically western testimony?
Lauren Booth is Cherie Blair's half-sister, and therefore Tony Blair's half-sister-in-law. She is a journalist – and in the last few years, she has become a Muslim.
So it was fascinating to read her account of her conversion to Islam in yesterday's Guardian.
She describes how her experience of meeting people in the Middle East punctured the 'swagger of condescension' of 'a western woman with all my freedoms'. Having expected only to engage professionally with men in positions of power, she found herself surprised by the wide diversity of women in a wide diversity of roles. She had succumbed to the prevailing prejudice and Islamophobia of which she claims now to be a victim.
But at one level there is nothing remarkable about this – my experience of working in various Muslim contexts has had a similar effect on me. These are real people, with real lives – and many are lovely people who have become good friends.
Yet it is interesting how Booth found that the removal of prejudices led to being further intrigued:
My own path to Islam began with an awakening to the gap between what had been drip-fed to me about all Muslim life – and the reality.
One of her big concerns is in what she sees as the disparity between the media's portrayal that obsesses with Islamic terrorism, and the experience of ordinary Muslims going about their everyday lives. And she has a very reasonable point. There are a billion or so Muslims – very few are terrorists, relatively speaking. And let's face it, out of the 2 billion or so Christians, there are going to be more than a few nutters. You can't tar the whole with an individual brush. Booth's article is certainly a helpful dispelling of myths (and I was struck by the last paragraph where she explains what is going on when people cry out "Allahu Akhbar!").
So one thing that this story does illustrate is how dangerous 'straw men' are – for reality is seldom even remotely connected with such caricatures. Encounters with genuine articles lead people up all kinds of paths. Any effective case against something must have worked doubly hard to present an acceptable and fair description of an opponent's position.
The Path to Conversion
But what led to her conversion? She seems to have become used to praying to Allah as opposed to God without really finding that strange (as she suggests other converts do). But the key seemed to have been her growing relationships with Muslims:
Then came the pull: a sort of emotional ebb and flow that responds to the company of other Muslims with a heightened feeling of openness and warmth. Well, that's how it was for me, anyway.
She seems then to have had a 'spiritual experience' while praying:
Finally, I felt what Muslims feel when they are in true prayer: a bolt of sweet harmony, a shudder of joy in which I was grateful for everything I have (my children) and secure in the certainty that I need nothing more (along with prayer) to be utterly content. I prayed in the Mesumeh shrine in Iran after ritually cleansing my forearms, face, head and feet with water. And nothing could be the same again. It was as simple as that.
There have been significant life changes too:
In the past my attempts to give up alcohol have come to nothing; since my conversion I can't even imagine drinking again. I have no doubt that this is for life: there is so much in Islam to learn and enjoy and admire; I'm overcome with the wonder of it. In the last few days I've heard from other women converts, and they have told me that this is just the start, that they are still loving it 10 or 20 years on.
Western Culture Exposed
But what interested me most of all was her realisation of what is really going on in western culture:
How hard and callous non-Muslim friends and colleagues began to seem. Why can't we cry in public, hug one another more, say "I love you" to a new friend, without facing suspicion or ridicule? I would watch emotions being shared in households along with trays of honeyed sweets and wondered, if Allah's law is simply based on fear why did the friends I loved and respected not turn their backs on their practices and start to drink, to have real "fun" as we in the west do? And we do, don't we? Don't we?
And so I now live in a reality that is not unlike that of Jim Carey's character in the Truman Show. I have glimpsed the great lie that is the facade of our modern lives; that materialism, consumerism, sex and drugs will give us lasting happiness. But I have also peeked behind the screens and seen an enchanting, enriched existence of love, peace and hope. In the meantime, I carry on with daily life, cooking dinners, making TV programmes about Palestine and yes, praying for around half an hour a day.
I want to say Amen to pretty much all of that. But still, I'm not propelled towards Allah.
Perhaps, one of the prevailing myths in the Islamic world is that the west is as it is because of, and not despite, the influence of Christianity. I can't remember where I discovered this, but it's said that TS Eliot's extraordinary modernist masterpiece The Wasteland was a major influence on Osama bin Laden, because of its brutal dissection of the lostness of the west. However, as a Christian, I would want to argue that it is by no means as simple as that. There are certainly unfortunate residues of Christian culture misapplied or twisted. But the cultural factors that leave people living the hollow lives Lauren Booth escapes from are as much the result of the Enlightenment and a de-Christianisation as anything else. This was something Eliot himself was on about.
Believing or Belonging?
All in all, there was one issue revealingly absent from this testimony: truth. Islam's beauty, compassion, community, new perspectives, cleansing etc. But not truth. Or an apologetic. Of course many other Muslims work hard to build an apologetic. But that's not what happened here. Lauren Booth found that reality confronted and dismantled her prejudices – which then led, in turn, to exploring being part of this faith community. Which resulted in deep spiritual experiences. She belonged and experienced, then gradually believed.
It's not hard to see this being paralleled by countless people coming to Christ in the west too. Of course, this path is not exclusively western or modern – but Booth's story is intriguing to me as a symptomatically western experience of religious conversion (whether Christian, Muslim or other). A need for community, a despair at the inability to change lifestyle, a sense of the hollowness of modern life, a longing to be spiritually connected.
The Christian community offers all of that. Or rather it should. Or rather it MUST. It is a scandal when it doesn't.
But it does have one asset that is lacking anywhere else. And that is a message of grace. And grace needs to be lived out; and grace needs to be spoken. For the combination of the two is the greatest apologetic: a community of grace and truth following a Lord who is the Truth and the embodiment of grace.
Which is where, for all my profound respect and love for my Muslim friends, I must differ from them.
Bernard Lewis' What Went Wrong: Reflections on Islam & The West (2)
Following on from yesterday's post, Lewis offers a very helpful articulation of how the Western and Islamic worlds diverged so drastically over the last 500 years. From a situation of great and proud cultural preeminence, the Middle East seems to have stagnated and even regressed. How did this happen?
Hermetically Sealed Isolation
One factor was the complacent assumption that there was nothing to learn from those who were different from themselves (always a dangerous step). One illustration of this was the culture of learning foreign languages.
A translation requires a translator, and a translator has to know both languages… such knowledge, strange as it may seem, was extremely rare in the Middle East until comparatively late. There were very few Muslims who knew any Christian language; it was considered unnecessary, even to some extent demeaning. (p147)
So as Europe emerged from the medieval world into the flowering of learning we call the Renaissance, with its rediscovery of the texts of the ancients and the cross-fertilisaztion as well as tensions that arose from Europe's different cultural identities, the Ottoman empire remained blissfully unaware. Very few European publications were ever translated, and the new-fangled printing press was largely absent, and in places even banned. Interestingly enough, this was not mutual. Various Arabic documents were translated into European languages by Renaissance scholars – including an important medical text about blood circulation that highly influenced one Dr Michael Servetus (yes, the very same person, familiar to those aware of some of the darker moments of Geneva's Reformation history).
But the other way around? There's hardly anything. And where there are translations into Middle Eastern languages, the reasoning is both obvious and revealing. For instance, medical treatises on the treatment of syphillis (called in the Ottoman world the 'Frankish pox') were fine for translation. (p39) After all 'a European' disease clearly requires European expertise! And then the only other major imports, acceptable for translation and assimilation, were European military strategy and the accompanying weaponry technology.
As time went on, then, the culture gap inevitably grew. There's surely a lesson for all those who self-consciously avoid learning foreign languages – and even if people are not linguistically-minded or -gifted, to avoid engaging with other cultures is dangerously narrow.
While on the subject of translation, another revealing moment comes in the underlying assumptions of the Ottoman Sultan, Murad III, as he wrote to his enemy's enemy, Queen Elizabeth I (a letter which bizarrely enough was the subject of very recent diplomatic niceties):
In the correspondence between the Sultan of Turkey and Queen Elizabeth of England at the end of the sixteenth century, the letters are mostly concerned with commerce, but they do occasionally refer to the common Spanish enemy, a shared concern of London and Istanbul at the time. It would be an exaggeration to call this an alliance, and it was certainly not on equal terms. In the documents, the sultan, addressing the queen, uses language indicating that he expects her to be "… loyal and firm-footed in the path of vassalage and obedience… and to manifest loyalty and subservience" to the Ottoman throne. The contemporary translation into Italian, which served as the medium of communication between Turks and Englishmen, simply renders this as sincera amicizia. This kind of diplomatic mistranslation was for centuries the norm. (p22)
Tolerance & Freedom
I'd often heard the Islamic claim to be a tolerant religion. And I confess that it had always been hard to see beyond the negative image painted by the Taliban, now, of course, a byword for profound intolerance. Yet the truth is that there is clearly some historical validity to this claim, as proven by the way people voted with their feet.
The confrontation between Ottoman Islam and European Christendom has often been likened to the Cold War of the second half of the twentieth century. There are indeed some similarities between the two confrontations, but also significant differences. Perhaps most notable among these is the movement of refugees. In the twentieth century this movement was, overwhelmingly, from East to West; in the fifteenth, sixteenth and even in the seventeenth centuries, it was primarily from West to East. Surely, the Ottomans did not offer equal rights to the subject – a meaningless anachronism in the context of that time and place. They did however offer a degree of tolerance without precedent and parallel in Christian Europe. Each religious community – the Ottoman term was millet – was allowed the free practice of its religion. More remarkably, they had their own communal organizations, subject to the authority of their own religious chiefs, controlling their own education and social life, and even enforcing their own laws, to the extent that they did not conflict with the basic laws of the Empire. While ultimate power – political and military – remained in Muslim hands, non-Muslims controlled much of the economy, and were even able to play a part of some importance in the political process. (p33)
I found this was very striking indeed.
Lewis does note, however, that many of the more aggressive propagators of Islam today would have little time for such attitudes. And furthermore, this tolerance and equality was by no means uniform (nor, to be fair, was it anywhere else). This is clear from the prevailing status of 3 groups of people, who, down the centuries, have suffered wherever they have lived: foreigners (or in an Islamic context, infidels), slaves and women. Lewis goes to some length to analyse their respective situations (and though he doesn't draw the parallel, it reminded me of that old Jewish, Pharisaic prayer "Lord I thank you that I was not born a Gentile, a slave and woman.") and makes this observation:
According to Islamic law and tradition, there were three groups of people who did not benefit from the general Muslim principle of legal and religious quality – unbelievers, slaves and women. The woman was obviously in one significant respect the worst-placed of the three. The slave could be freed by his master; the unbeliever could at any time become a believer by his own choice, and thus end his inferiority. Only the woman was doomed forever to remain what she was – or so it seemed at the time. (p67)
And therein lies a strange tension that is current in the Middle East. Lewis nicely articulates this as the difference between Westernisation and Modernisation. Thus:
[Western dress has] become powerful emotive symbols of cultural choice. They are especially so in Turkey and Iran, the two countries that most clearly formulate the alternative choices and alternative futures that confront the Muslim – and not only the Muslim – Middle East. For men to wear Western clothes, it would seem is modernisation; for women to wear them is Westernization, to be welcomed or punished accordingly. (p76)
But this is where the biggest difference with gospel equality truly lies. And for me, this was the most revealing thing of the book…
But no grace…
It is often said that Islam is an egalitarian religion. There is much truth in this assertion. If we compare Islam at the time of its advent with the societies that surrounded it – the stratified feudalism of Iran and the caste system of India to the east, the privileged aristocracies of both Byzantine and Latin Europe to the West – the Islamic dispensation does indeed bring a message of equality. Not only does Islam not endorse such systems of social differentiation; it explicitly and resolutely rejects them. The actions and utterances of the Prophet, the honoured precedents of the early rulers of Islam as preserved by tradition, are overwhelmingly against privilege by descent, by birth, by status, by wealth, or even by race, and insist that rank and honour are determined only by piety and merit in Islam. (my highlights)
The realities of conquest and empire, however, inevitably created new elites and in the natural course of events these sought to perpetuate for their descendants the advantages that they had gained. From early until modern times there has been a recurring tendency in Islamic states for aristocracies to emerge. These are differently defined and arise from varying circumstances at different times and in different places. What is significant is that the emergence of elites or casts or aristocracies happens in spite of Islam and not as part of it. Again and again through Islamic history the establishment of privilege was seen and denounced by both severely traditional conservatives and dubiously orthodox radicals as a non-Islamic or even an anti-Islamic innovation….
… none of these movements ever questioned the three sacrosanct distinctions establishing the subordinate status of the slave, the woman and the unbeliever. (p82)
So therein lies the problem. There will always be a clear set of distinctions in the community – and I don't just mean slaves, women and infidels. I mean an even more profound and alarming distinction. That formed by personal merit. For in the Christian gospel (as Galatians, for one, is at pains to make clear) the true reason why there is no status distinction whatsoever between Slave & Free, Jew & Gentile, Male & Female is the double whammy of our creation in the divine image, and the wonder of divine grace. (Galatians 3:28-29) In other words, a religion of grace alone can bring true equality, in a way that a religion of merit and works never can.
Not on our watch…
This is certainly a fascinating book and I learned much. I don't think I'm much the wiser in answering the specific question of the title, though. Perhaps the book is too short (at only 160 pp) and the issue is so deep and complex. Or perhaps the question is not quite the right one. As a description of how (as opposed to why) the shifts in balances of power happened, this is a helpful analysis. What's certainly clear is that history is messy, that the Christians in history certainly didn't get it all sorted, and that there were many aspects of Islamic culture and history from which there is much to learn. This thought did cross my mind though: 'Christian' societies fared little better, and were often much worse, than other cultures as soon as they lost their moorings in the gospel of grace.
Pray that we never allow that to happen under our watch.
Bernard Lewis' What Went Wrong: Reflections on Islam & The West (1)
I'd not really appreciated before quite how controversial Bernard Lewis (left) is seen in some circles (perhaps especially because he was regularly consulted by the Bush administration – though others had before him). But one of the foremost western scholars of Islam is a Jewish, British-born and now naturalised American, professor emeritus at Princeton. He has written many books and offered profoundly nuanced and scholarly reflections on the knotty issue of Islam's relationship with the wider world – which is of course perhaps the biggest unresolved question of our times. He is feted or reviled (depending on your perspective) as the originator of the phrase (so famously taken up by Samuel Huntington in his book of the same name) 'the clash of civilisations'.
I'm returning to Turkey next week for a few days and so wanted to read this book, on the recommendation of a friend I was with in Albania last month. It was written in 2000/2001 on the back of a series of lectures (and summarised in this 2002 article from Atlantic Monthly) – but then published very soon after 9/11. Pretty timely, then.
A very provocative question!
Lewis asks a provocative but very significant question. How did the centuries-old Islamic civilisation, which was by any measure, an extraordinary historical phenomenon – fall so behind the rest of the world? It's all the more surprising when it is recognised that they had been at the forefront of scientific, artistic and philosophical development, when the rest of Europe and many parts of Asia were in chaotic turmoil. Of course, the 'Dark Ages' is in many ways an unfair misnomer. But Europe wasn't a patch on the Ottoman and Persian empires for example. And then from, say, the 1450s onwards, the tables started turning. As Lewis says:
… the Renaissance, the Reformation, the technological revolution passed virtually unnoticed in the lands of Islam, where they were still inclined to dismiss the denizens of the lands beyond the Western frontier as benighted barbarians, much inferior even to the more sophisticated Asian infidels to the east. These had useful skills and devices to impart; the Europeans had neither. It was a judgement that had for long been reasonably accurate. It was becoming dangerously out of date. (p7)
One example, which seems to remain to this day, is the issue of economics and manufacturing.
Later attempts to catch up with the Industrial Revolution fared little better. Unlike the rising power of Asia, most of which started from a lower economic base than the Middle East, the countries in the region still lag behind in investment, job creation, productivity and therefore in exports and incomes. According to a World Bank estimate, the total exports of the Arab world other than fossil fuels amount to less than those of Finland, a country of five million inhabitants. Nor is much coming into the region by way of capital investment. On the contrary, wealthy Middle Easterners prefer to invest their capital abroad, in the developed world. (p47)
I suppose the one exception to this is investment in property (as opposed to Middle Eastern oil revenues). But as Dubai's recent meltdown has shown, this is built on sand (in more ways than one). To make matters worse, the cultural climate underpinning the business world leaves many things to be desired. Lewis offers this astute, if somewhat barbed, observation:
The difference between Middle Eastern and Western economic approaches can be seen even in their distinctive forms of corruption, from which neither society is exempt. In the West, one makes money in the market, and uses it buy or influence power. In the East, one seizes power, and uses it to make money. Morally there is no difference between the two, but their impact on the economy and on the polity is very different. (p63)
It's hard to deny the truth of either claim – though why restrict it to the Islamic Middle East? It could certainly be said to be true of many parts of so-called 'Christian' sub-Saharan Africa, as we discovered more than once when we lived in Uganda.
The problem with Islamic Secularism
The book's title question is certainly a loaded one, presupposing, for example, that the west went right. And towards the end of the book, it's clear from his perceptions of so-called fundamentalist Islam (a description he takes issue with) that there are many from Bin Laden down who feel that Islam failed precisely when it attempted to assimilate western development.
A good illustration of this problem is the wildly divergent attitudes to secularism, which was perceived by some in the Islamic world as (rightly or wrongly) being essential to European success. The problems were inherent at the start it seems:
Secularism in the modern political meaning – the idea that religion and political authority, church and state are different, and can or should be separated – is, in a profound sense, Christian. Its origins may be traced in the teachings of Christ, confirmed by the experience of the first Christians; its later development was shaped and, in a sense, imposed by the subsequent history of Christendom. The persecutions endured by the early church made it clear that a separation between the two was possible; the persecutions inflicted by the later churches persuaded many Christians that such a separation was necessary.
… in this, the practice of Christianity was in marked contrast with both its precursors and its competitors. (p96)
Of course, as a Christian, it is interesting to read this analysis. For many are alarmed about what is perceived as a creeping secularising agenda in European and American society, whereby religious faith (and Christian faith in particular) are being deliberately privatised and marginalised. But that's a whole other issue!
And yet, despite its Christian origins, I was very struck by the fact that one of the reasons why Muslims started taking secularism seriously was the 1789 French Revolution (which came at a time when Europe's social, political, economic and cultural development was far outstripping the Ottoman world). The urgency to catch up and not be left behind was growing – but the attraction for some in the revolution was that it wasn't Christian.
The first Muslim encounter with secularism was in the French Revolution, which they say, not as secular (a word and concept equally meaningless to them at the time), but as de-Christianised, and therefore deserving of some consideration. All previous movements of ideas in Europe had been, to a greater or lesser extent, Christian, at least in their expression, and were accordingly discounted in advance from a Muslim point of view. The French Revolution was the first movement of ideas in Europe that was seen as non-Christian or even anti-Christian, and some Muslims therefore looked to France in the hope of finding, in these ideas, the motors of Western science and progress, freed from Christian encumbrances. These ideas provided the main ideological inspiration of many of the modernising and reforming movements in the Islamic world in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. (p104)
Yet the problem with such secularising agendas is that they run completely counter to an Islamic worldview – where there is no dualism between civil and sacred, for example. The attempt to force the distinction is one reason why there has been such a strong reaction against it:
The arch-enemy for most of them is Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Turkish Republic and the first great secularising reformer in the Muslim world. Characters as diverse as King Faruq and Presidents Nasser and Sadat in Egypt, Hafiz al-Asad in Syria and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the Shah of Persia and the kings and princes of Arabia, were denounced as the most dangerous enemies of Islam, the enemies from within.
[Muhammad 'Abd al-Salam Faraj, the ideological guide of the group that murdered President Sadat of Egypt [wrote]:
Fighting the near enemy is more important than fighting the distant enemy. In jihad, the blood of the Muslims must flow until victory is achieved… There can be no doubt that the first battlefield of the jihad is the extirpation of these infidel leaderships and their replacement by a perfect Islamic order. From this will come release. (p107)
This culture clash (and I use the word only because Lewis does) over the appropriateness of secularism explains a great deal about the tensions we see around. I'll follow this up tomorrow with some other things i picked up from this fascinating book.
The fate of Christians in Iran
A friend, who is an Iranian Christian, sent this to me the other day, and was happy for me to post it – just as a way of increasing awareness… I've edited it down, but only a little bit.
The Islamic Republic of Iran in the previous year acted more harshly and severely than ever before to limit, through arrests and detentions, the existence and growth of Evangelical Christians.
Farsi Christian News Network ( FCNN) and the Committee of Human Rights Advocates Report
Last year, with the start of the year 2009, we reported that Mr. Carl Muller of the Open Door Ministries had stated that, "based on existing reports we predict that in 2009 the Christians around the world will be persecuted more than ever before". He added that, "we are not seers and can not see into the future, but we feel that brutality and persecution of Christians, especially in parts of the world like the Middle East, is on the rise." Moreover, in this report by the Open Door Ministries, the list of countries with the worst human rights records towards Christians is published annually. In 2009 passing the previously second ranked Saudi Arabia and only outpaced by North Korea, was the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The following summary analysis is based on the visible and official incidents of suppression against Christians in Iran that have been reported. The reality is much worse than what has appeared in the International media and based on these facts the international human rights advocacies have declared the Islamic Republic of Iran as one of the worst offenders and persecutors of Christians in 2009. The following summary only reflects those incidents that were committed by the judiciary and the public security organizations in Iran and were thus reported in the international media. A great part of the unreported persecutions continue to be the systematic oppression and discrimination against Christians at the work places, threats and humiliation by people in the community, which are cleverly manipulated and orchestrated against Christian believers. Many of these incidents have not been reported and verified due to the arrests and threats of retaliation against the persons and their families and have prevented them from speaking against their persecutors.
In reviewing the following survey one can see that fortunately in 2009 there were no incidents of mass killings, executions, or long term prison sentences handed to Christians. There were only 2 cases in which the judicial authorities passed verdicts or ordered punishments. But this is only one side of the coin. The other side consists of systematic arrests and detention of Evangelical Christians in order to, more than even before, reduce and limit the scope of their activities in Iran.
Many Evangelical Christians in Iran are mainly new converts who have left their previous religion of Islam and become Christians. In reviewing the following list one can easily notice that this particular group, namely the new Christian converts, is the primary target of the security forces and the judiciary authorities. One can attribute this to the rapid growth of this group in all the segments of the Iranian society that has puzzled the leadership of the Islamic Republic. At the start of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 there were an estimated 500 Farsi speaking Christians, out of a 35 million population, in Iran. Now, after the passage of almost 30 years and a population that has exceeds 70 million, there are estimates that the Farsi speaking Christians are in the tens of thousands who have abandoned their Islamic beliefs and have embraced Christianity as their faith. This shows, even in the worst case scenario, a growth of many thousand percents.


text:
- << Previous photo
- Next photo >>
Shop Our Store
More Ways To Shop
More Ways To Save
Select your preferred location and we'll note which parts are ready to be picked up TODAY.
Air Intake, Black Tube, Blue Filter, Chevy, GMC, Pickup, SUV, Kit
The part SLE-21051 will have additional shipping charges due to its size. These charges will be shown in the shopping cart and checkout.
Order this item and get free delivery and handling on your entire order! Offer excludes truck freight fees. Valid on orders shipped in the contiguous United States.
Estimated Ship Date: Tomorrow Would you rather pick it up? Select Location
View Similar Products
These SLP Performance cold air induction systems increase power by replacing your restrictive stock air box assembly. The systems include a composite air box, an oversized high-flow reusable air filter, an intake tube, and hardware.
Some parts are not legal for sale or use in California on any pollution-controlled motor vehiclesBack To Results