The Smoking Gun has posted a non-PDF copy of the Al Qaeda training manual. Read “Lesson Eighteen” on prisons and detention centers.
Also see lessons on kidnaping and assassinations and beating and killing hostages.
The Department of Justice has the training manual in PDF on its web site.
More later.
Extremely Interesting Update: Guantanamo Bay detainee retracts Koran-flushing accusation. Do you think this will deter liberal bloggers from their determination to invent a scandal? I wouldn’t hold your breath. (Hinderaker asks a similar question.)
(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin)
Also see Media Slander.
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 71 comments }
They have a training manual, we have lawyers who use our constitution against us. Between the both of them, we have our work cut out.
“Allah bless and keep him.”
“Allah bless and keep him.”
“Allah bless and keep him.”
Geez, and I thought “Lord, be with you” repeated every Sunday after every mass intentions was annoying!
Seriously, though, these documents are more chilling than I had ever imagined.
The brother should not accept any work that may belittle or demean him such as the cleaning of the prison bathrooms and hallways
That was on page 16 of 17 on:
http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/manualpart1_4.pdf
Without asking what is wrong with cleaning hallways, I’m thinking I deserve compensation from the government for cleaning bathrooms during my 6 years in the Navy. I’m mad now. I was demeaned and belittled and I’m joining up with Actup now to testify against the Bush administration if any of these types of things happened.
And I’m going on strike. I’m not cleaning the bathrooms in my own house now!!
Can you say “they have our number”?
“3. When the undercover brother is traveling with a certain identity card or passport, he should know all pertinent [information] such as the name, profession, and place of residence.”
Undercover Brother. Heh, heh.
“The brother should not accept any work that may belittle or demean him such as the cleaning of the prison bathrooms and hallways”
I guess that explains the septic conditions over yonder, when they get short on African slaves to do latrine patrol.
Note to Allah, who’s gonna do it when everyone’s a moslem?
I know I am going to be blasted for saying this, but here goes: too bad the Bush administration doesn’t have a plan for this nation. Seriously, the only thing worse than a madman is a prepared madman. This puts me in mind of the Anarchist’s Cookbook and the infamous How To Kill series, not to mention the Satanic Bible.
Baklava you were a sailor? THAT explains EVERYTHING! Heh heh heh.
Semper Fidelis, dude.
Untrue misinformed Accusation = “doesn’t have a plan”
Untrue misinformed accusation = “madman”
Try rhetoric with truth non-misinformation and way less accusations.
Just because you don’t like his plan or haven’t read it doesn’t mean you can characterize it untruthfully.
Again. I only agree with Bush 70% of the time. 30% of the time Bush is too left of center (where I am) and I disagree with him. I don’t go casting aspersions on Bush’s motives though.
Though, I am close to it sometimes with the illegal immigrant policy.
The one thing that remains constant is the liberals constant pattern of misinformation and accusations. Raf keeps it going….
” Guantanamo Bay detainee retracts Koran-flushing accusation.”
you really have to wonder why someone in US custody would do something that makes the US government look so good.
or why some folks that live under the shelter joe and tommy go out of the way to piss their eye, in order to aid other who would just as soon kill them….
Baklava, here is $1,000 USD. Go buy a sense of HUMOR. It is CLEAR that I was joking with you. True, I am no fan of GWBush, but I wasn’t expressing that seriously at the time. IT WAS A JOKE. Lighten up dude.
I was not calling GWBush a madman. The madman comment was in reference to the dudes that would be using the AQ training manual. Does context mean anything to you? Next time I’ll execute a paragraph break. Sailors!!!
You may have been joking but it was in line with all of your past accusations and set of misinformation. It wasn’t wildly different.
It would be way easier to tell if you were more informed on a usual basis. So keep the $1,000 to buy some truth.
Your madman comment followed the comment about no plan and had no distinction that you were talking about AQ folks. Thanks for the clarification though and I appreciate the military humor.
Some idiot probably thinks we have a civilian run military.
†Guantanamo Bay detainee retracts Koran-flushing accusation.â€
you really have to wonder why someone in US custody would do something that makes the US government look so good.
I wonder why he made the US government look so bad while in US custody. Clearly, he is not reliable, but let’s please jump to the conclusion that the US, especially when a Repub is the prez, is always evil. I suppose the mystery of how you can flush a book down a toilet is explained by the defense department’s famous$5000 toilets. I guess it was a legitimate expense after all.
We won’t quibble about paragraph structure Baklava. I admitted my faux pas. But misinformed? YOU guys are the ones that think God is spelled GOP.
Rafael-
Be nice to the sailor. Remember, they’re the nice guys in white suits that give you guys a lift when it’s time to go kick a–!!!
Plus, Mrs. Conservative Rant is a Naval Reservist.
Anchors Aweigh?
Actus: “you really have to wonder why someone in US custody would do something that makes the US government look so good.”
– Because back in 2002 he was so cocksure that AQ was going to win and that Iraq would be the death of USA.
–Because of millions of ink-stained fingers in Afghanistan & Iraq
–Because they don’t get to watch CNN or read MSM, but they have to watch FNC & read “Good News from Iraq” which only demoralizes them further
–Because 3 years later he realizes that he wasted a good portion of his life on a demonic jihad and just wants to go home.
–Because the US government is SO good compared to any other.
–Because he’s never seen a real flush toilet, let alone sit on one.
God is spelled G-O-D. You’ve got it confused with how we spell the word right, or correct.
MARINES=My Arse Rides In Navy Equipment, Sir!
Egads, I am surrounded!
Usually, Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children don’t take the misguided part to such exremes
What is this, the Chosin Resevior?
The Frozen Chosin.
I still get appalled by those who want to morally equivilate Al Qaeda with our own nation. It’s obvious through this, and the words and deeds of those fighting against us elsewhere, their goal is our destruction. For some reason, media types and sympathizers still believe that if we leave them alone, they will leave us alone.
Just by browsing through this document, it is easy to see that they will NEVER leave us alone.
This type of threat requires pre-emptive action. Identify and kill them first, before they have a chance to kill us. Any other policy is simply self defeating.
Sounds like you fear religious people………
I love how libs fear the religious and trust the detainees.
That’s humorous.
La Shawn:
Even when measured by the usual quirky standards of the MSM, the fake Koran-flushing story is just plain cracked (I wonder if these journalists are obsessed with bodily functions).
Let’s try an experiment and send a copy of this Al Qaeda training manual to, say, the NY Times. Any doubt that the story would be spiked or “flushed” (pun intended)?
Use a space before the smiley
> Guantanamo Bay detainee retracts Koran-flushing accusation. Do you think this will deter liberal bloggers from their determination to invent a scandal?
Even if this story is ultimately found to be without merit, which I hgihly doubt, there’s been plenty of other examples of prisoner abuse, koran mistreatment and general disrespect for Islam at Gitmo and elsewhere. If you think the civl unrest in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan etc. is just about an alleged “flushed koran” you’re just as clueless as the White House. At least the State Dept. kind of gets it, but it’s funny how the Pentagon never took issue with the “flushed Koran” claim to begin with when Newsweek went to them to FACT CHECK the story before publication.
I DO fear “religious” people. There is a MAJOR difference between religious folk and those that claim a living, loving relationship with Jesus the Messiah. Religion IS the opiate of the masses, meant to make folk docile in the face of reality. A relationship with God INFORMS the believer through communion with His Holy Spirit. So yes, I do fear religious folks, simply because they tend to be lazy about so many things that are right there in front of them. See Matthew chapter 23 to get an idea of what God actually thinks about religion and mankinds religious practices. RELATIONSHIP through RECONCILIATION is what He is after in regards to His creation. Warning: this stuff is ehtereal, so if you aren’t interested in gaining a truly deep understanding of it, don’t bother. Have a nice day.
In addition, remember how Jesus raked the Pharisees over the coals time and time again.
Ian,
Okay, you choose to believe in Koran flushing toilets in the face of denial on the part of the guy who claimed it and despite having never seen a toilet capable of accommodating a book. You want to believe “we (or rather Bush) bad.” And if it turns out it never happened, well it really wasn’t important after all. The clueful are now redirecting our attention at some badness. If the civil unrest is unrelated to Koran flushing why does it get reported? Could it be a cheap shot?
You the clueful would better maintain credibility by demanding more credibility and less cheap shots of your news sources rather than acceptingtheir nonsense because their misrepresentations hurt President Bush.
Rafael, if Baklava doesn’t want the $1,000, I’ll take it….
> You the clueful would better maintain credibility by demanding more credibility and less cheap shots of your news sources rather than acceptingtheir nonsense because their misrepresentations hurt President Bush.
Bush does a pretty good job of hurting himself, over and over again with his endless policy missteps.
Again, it’s not like insurgency in Iraq or anti-US deomstrations in the Middle East magically just began in the last month or so. What did you think, that it was love fest for the US over there until a one-line comment in Newsweek began to attract attention? C’mon, fam…
Again, this is not about whether that Koran was flushed or not because, whether you believe that case or not, this:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/26/quran/
just like the initial Abu Ghraib scandal, won’t be the only incidents to surface and be confirmed.
I only wish folks like you would demand the same level of accountability as you demand from CBS, Nwsweek etc. from the White House when stuff like that or this surfaces:
http://downingstreetmemo.com/
I HEARD IT THROUGH A FRIEND WHO—HEARD IT THROUGH A FRIEND WHO—HEARD IT FROM ANOTHER
According to the AP story in my local newspaper, the prisoner didn’t recant his statement. He was not asked directly about the incident. He was simply asked whether he had seen the Quran “defiled, desecrated, or mishandled.”
“He allowed as how he hadn’t, but he heard that guards at some other point in time had done this.”
He repeated scuttlebutt and it apparently didn’t have legs even in Gitmo, so he forgot about having mentioned it back in 2002. We’ve seen the reaction in the Muslim world. If there was any truth to this Gitmo would have rioted in 2002.
The prisoner also stated that he personally had not been mistreated but that he heard fellow inmates talk of being beaten or otherwise mistreated. Note that he doesn’t say he saw physical evidence (like bruising) just talk. This guy could be a character witness for Gitmo as he has no first hand information of any kind of mistreatment. Would it be against the Geneva Convention to use him as a poster boy? He’s probably gained a little weight and had dental and medical care the like of which he’d never seen and says he has not been mistreated.
“If there was any truth to this Gitmo would have rioted in 2002.”
I’ve heard reports that the current Koran handling policy came after a hunger strike by inmates to protest mishandling.
How anyone can imagine Gitmo rioting is beyond me.
What seems like a long time ago, I remember Andrea Mitchell, in that supremely condescending voice that the “senior” media-women have mastered so well, informing us that Americans [not her and her media cohorts, just us dumb voters] were ignorant of Muslim culture. Well, here the very senior people at Newsweek ran a story that was bound to inflame Muslims and they did it with ONE anonymous source. Newsweek has now retracted but those feathers are in the wind. The harm has been done. The US Military looks bad. Newsweek is happy. Mission accomplished!
Ian,
This (see link below) refers to accidental touchings of the Koran. That does not qualify as outrageous or even remarkable among the sane. President Bush didn’t hurt himself too badly. He garnered more votes in 2004 than he did in 2000 or anyone did ever. i don’t think anyone in Iraq is particularly enamored of foreigners on their soil. People who support the President’s actions there accept this as an unavoidable cost. I am sure we would all like to see that minimized, but through missteps and a hostile press we have not minimized that. It is a shame. I suspect that there is both lying on the part of detainees and some mistreatment on the part of authorities. I am more concerned with how the mistreatment affects the mission than I am about the mistreatment itself.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/26/quran/
Sorry, I should have said “one unnamed source.” The source is only anonymous to the readers of Newsweek.
Well, Ian, you are right in that it wasn’t a pro-American love fest over there before Newsweek printed their false koran story. And it wasn’t that way before Abu-Graihb. Or before the war. Or before Bush was elected. Or Clinton. Remember, when Carter sent helicopters to recuse the Iranian hostages and they crashed, there was dancing in the streets. Iran commemorated the crash on postage stamps…
Now, looking at the trivial abuses the enemy combatants and baathist have alleged (don’t forget their training manuals that says “lie about abuse”), rmember what happens to non-muslims that fall into their hands. You don’t even need to be a soldier to be killed, brutally, just for being an infidel. Or being a muslim that disagrees with them.
Want to talk desecration? Don’t forget the priceless, millenia old statues of Bhudda in Afghanistan. The Christian churches and Jewish Temples/Synagogues put to the torch or worse.
If we responded with one tenth of the righteos wrath they muster to be treated with less repect than a guest at high tea, when they treat anyone they dislike with utter barbarity… we’d have unleashed a Hell on Earth unlike anything that has been seen since Dresden or Hiroshima. But we don’t. But remember, if they had our capacity, THEY WOULD.
Ian, looking at your devastating CNN source I read the following:
““None of these five incidents was a result of a failure to follow standard operating procedures in place at the time the incident occurred,” Hood added.
In six of the 13 incidents, a guard “either accidentally touched a Quran, touched it within the scope of his duties, or did not actually touch the Quran at all,” he said. “We considered each of these incidents resolved.”
In the other two incidents — both involving interrogators — “we found that a Quran was either touched or stood over during an interrogation. The first incident does not appear to be mishandling, as it involved placing two Qurans on a television,” Hood said.
“The Quran was not touched during the second incident, and the interrogator’s action during the interrogation was accidental.””
I guess one way to ensure that the koran never ever gets “mishandled” is to remove all of them.
Get over your doom and gloom.
Here’s an irony. Did you know that the koran is defiled ummpteen times a day? Let me enumerate a few:
1) Everytime a bomb goes off destroying buildings allah literally falls on his butt when korans get buried in debris.
2) Everytime an infidel touches one: guilty! I’ve got a copy in my library.
3) When the online version shares screen space with infidelic content.
Stop the presses! If allah is IN each koran, does that mean allah is in the internet? Will the Mullahs demand that blue-eyed devils get off the net so as to not desecrate allah?
As for the Downing Street memo, isn’t hindsight grand for reading between the lines? Sort of like blaming Condi for not taking action on the Aug 01 memo. Simply put the memo is just a summary of possible actions and potential issues at that point in time (July 02) So what? There’s no there.
> I am more concerned with how the mistreatment affects the mission than I am about the mistreatment itself.
And therein lies the problem. If the mission in Iraq was switched to being about bringing “liberty, freedom and democracy” after the original premise of disarming Saddam of WMD’s was completely debunked and revealed to be a lie, having new examples of abuse and torture constantly being uncovered does more to undermine it, no?
Here’s another absurb thot. Anyone recall the incident where screeners found a gun inside of a “bible” at an airport a while back? Now that jihadiis know that we can’t even touch their koran, what’s to stop them from cutting out a place to stash a shiv or any other contraband?
Ian, you obviously didn’t read the preinvasion and SOTU transcripts in late 2002/early 2003.
Read up on them and La Shawn’s archives and report back.
Raf wrote, “I DO fear “religious†people.”
Interesting. I would’ve never suspected.
Though this is the point. I don’t know one Christian following the teachings of Christ who is someone to be feared. The fact that you and many libs FEAR religious people as opposed to people committing crimes or maybe not even committing crimes but leading lives with a) p*ssing on this and that Calvins on their back windshield b) jumping from one sexual partner to another c) cursing without regard for the fact that children might be around …. oh I could go on.
With all the time and energy that could be spent. I just don’t understand why you guys focus and obsess on religious people. The only thing you guys can try to do to make your argument is point to the non-religious non-Christinan non-Christ teaching follower Oklahoma City bomber.
You guys go out of your way with your focus and obsession to spend time against religious people with no regard for what problems are really important in America.
The last person I’m worried about is religious people.
I worry about people without regard for facts like liberals. They will get us killed in this world of fanatical Islamofacists and criminals and perpetuation of the America is bad line of reasoning (without basis in fact).
Ian wrote, “Bush does a pretty good job of hurting himself, over and over again with his endless policy missteps.”
If you disagree with someone’s policy it doesn’t make it a mistep. I’d say what has hurt us way more in this war on terror is Bush’s capitulation to liberals time and time again. I listed them in a previous post. He delayed the “rush” to war by 18 months to try to appease liberals. He delayed the battle in Fallujah allowing for negotiations with the head terrorist to appease liberals. He hamstrung our military when it came to mosques to appease liberals and islamofacists. Time and time again he actually went to the left to appease dissappointing conservatives who wanted a much harder faster tougher war on terror demoralizing and completely obliterating the will of the enemy.
Ian wrote, “I only wish folks like you would demand the same level of accountability as you demand from CBS, Nwsweek etc. from the White House when stuff like that or this surfaces:”
Really Ian, if that were true then people at CBS, Eason, Linda, and CBS would be in court right now and going to jail for a few years. The people responsible for doing wrong in Abu Graib are being prosecuted and you want US to demand the same level of accountability??????
Ian wrote in #44, “revealed to be a lie.
Yes Ian, Clinton, Kerry, Albright, Bush, German/French/Russian/British/American Intelligence and many Democrat and Republican Senators lied. They all lied about Saddam having WMD’s. Now what? Should we hold the world accountable for the lie? Or can we actually truthfully call it bad intelligence. Who was feeding the bad intelligence? How did every intelligence organization (before Bush even come into office) consistently have the same conclusions? Will you adopt logic?
Ian,
*yawn* Your pitiful attempts at sidestepping your own stupidity is tiring.
Tell the truth, or shut up.
Don’t lie to the face of people and then claim it was a mistake later.
*yawn* *yawn* and *YAWN*
Unlike the liberals you preach to, 99.9% of the Conservatives aren’t stupid.
Dan
Ian,
As the above commenters have amply demonstrated, there was no lie here. There was only disinformation spread by Democrats during a lengthy political campaign and a misreading of intelligence that many more than the Bush administration were guilty of.
Yes, abuse has some effect of undermining the mission. It may also have some effect, which we will never hear of, that supports the mission. As the DOD wants success, I trust they will act accordingly, however that may be.
It’s pointless for us to even go back and forth all day on this but in response to some of the points made above:
> if that were true then people at CBS, Eason, Linda, and CBS would be in court right now and going to jail for a few years.
OK, so questionable use of sources or poor fact-checking on the part of CBS or any media organization should be a jailable offense but Bush, Cheney and Powell doing the same (i.e. use of “intelligence” from Curveball or straight-up lies about aluminum tubing or yellowcake purchases from Niger) shouldn’t be?
> Should we hold the world accountable for the lie? Or can we actually truthfully call it bad intelligence?
You don’t think the way the White House parsed and presented intelligence, that was actually very inconclusive and questionable overall, to make it seem more definitive than it obviously was in order to justify the invasion had anything to do with their ability to sell many on the left and the right on backing their position? Bad intelligence? Or bad judgement on the part of the White House (and I’m being charitable in the use of that description).
> Time and time again he actually went to the left to appease dissappointing conservatives who wanted a much harder faster tougher war on terror demoralizing and completely obliterating the will of the enemy.
So the current lousy status of the war is actually now the fault of the liberals? Wow, I’ve heard it all now.
Nardo, we disagree but you argue with points and some sort of logic. Dan, I don’t know what the fcck you were talking about or what point you were trying to make or address in #49 but “lie to the face of people and then claim it was a mistake later” sounds like an apt description of how the White House got us all into this mess to me.
Flame away, I’m done.
Raf wrote, “I DO fear “religious†people.
Raf, didn’t you say at one point you were a minister?
Ian wrote, “OK, so questionable use of sources or poor fact-checking”
No. How about forgery and fraud in CBS’s case and slander and defamation of character in Linda, Eason and Newsweek’s case. Oh. That is what liberals do in general so that can’t be a crime?
Ian wrote, “You don’t think the way the White House parsed and presented intelligence, that was actually very inconclusive and questionable overall,”
Ian, the Bush administration was one of the first administrations to parse and present the most responsibly. IF YOU TOOK the time to look, Democrat senators and Albright and Clinton CONCLUDED and ASSERTED much harshly about Iraq and WMD’s than Powell and Bush. English matters fella and you libs seem to ALWAYS get it BACKWARDS. Every thing that Bush seems to do the more I look at is is left of center. He tries to appeas you lefties by moving left and trying to parse and present exactly what EVERY intelligence agency has come up with and the “rush” to war lasted 18 months and you guys STILL can’t get over it. You want to convince me of something but your logic is BACKWARDS so much that is laughable. And nobody is being convinced on this site with your backwards logic.
I like it that way.
Ian wrote, “Wow, I’ve heard it all now.”
Yes. That’s right. I haven’t seen you post before but you obviously haven’t been seeing the conservative point of view in the last 3 years if this is the first you are hearing discontent from conservatives that Bush has tried to appease the liberals and hasn’t been tough enough on the war on terror.
Ian wrote, ““lie to the face of people and then claim it was a mistake later—
Be responsible Ian and tell us all here what was the “lie” that Bush stated. Before you do so go to the dictionary and look up lie. Then state an actual statement that Bush stated that Clinton and Albright and Kerry never stated themselves.
This exercise will be met by laziness by you or a final understanding on your part about your inability to stop making false accusastions. Hopefully you’ll not be lazy and learn.
I invite everyone to read an article written by a Peter Fisher at;
http://www.therant.us/staff/guest/fisher/islam_and_the_quran.htm
Baklava, you didn’t read the rest of what I wrote or you simply chose to ignore it. I set the word “religious” in quotes on purpose. I even was careful to make the distinction between what a religious person is as opposed to what a person that is seeking and maintaining a living, loving relationship with God through His Son Jesus. It seems you only focused on the first sentence, which led to your response.
Please consider the WHOLE OF THE COMMENT. There is such a difference between being religious and being in a true relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ that space will not allow me to adequately address it.
Many people claim to be “religious” or “Christian”, yet there is absolutely NO LOVE displayed in their lives and in their dealings with people. Remember, the Christian Identity folks claim to be followers of Jesus, yet (I assume) you know of how incongruent their actions and statements are to the life giving, life changing Gospel of Jesus the Messiah.
I find this in “mainstream” American church life: the gospel has been shaped into something unrecognizable according to the scriptures. This has led to folks feeling comfortable enough to engage in all sort of sin and idolatrous practices and still identify themselves as “Christian”. These are the folks that I am referring to as “religious”. They are following a set of rules or a particular dogma/doctrine, but their heart is not with God. They speak of Him with their lips, but they deny, even outright REFUSE the power inherent in relationship WITH Him. 2Timothy3:5 speaks of those that have a FORM of godliness, but deny the power thereof. Please consider also the rest of the 3rd chapter, it is RICH. Unfortunately, it describes mainstream America’s religioui attitude. THAT is why I make the statement “I DO fear “religious” people.”
Be clear that they aren’t by me feared for real: I fear the effects that they will have on others. The simple fact that unsaved folks will see them in action and chooose not to have ANYTHING to do with the things of God, THAT frightens me. Folks have and will continue to go to Hell, because they don’t see Jesus in so-called “religious” people.
So, I encourage you to reconsider the rest of my statement and especially to read the 23rd chapter of Matthew. Perhaps then you will overstand what I meant when I said I do fear religious people.
SCSI, I am an ordained minister of the gospel of Jesus the Messiah. However, I do not subscribe to the mainstream rendition of religion in America, becaus it is woefully inadequate for preparing folks to live as God would have them live. I don’t live on the margins of the gospel. I endeavor to be TOTALLY CONSUMED by it.
This may sound radical to you, but the simple message of reconciliation to God through repentance and acceptance of the sacrifice that Jesus made has been HIGHJACKED from the people. The saddest part about this is people actually seem to LIKE it, therefore, their growth in the things of God is severely STUNTED. I would LOVE to see all that claim Christ Jesus THRIVE and FLOURISH in the liberty that Jesus died to give give them, rather than to be bound by the chains of what passes for religion in the Roman Catholic/Prostetant milieu.
I did read your whole quote. Consider this. My feeling is that you focus and obsess on religious people (however they are, whatever rituals they do) as opposed to what things you really should fear.
That’s my feeling (after reading your posts). I have a neighbor who resembles what you are talking about but guess what…. I don’t fear him like you do. I fear much more the people that do the things I stated above.
You wrote, “Folks have and will continue to go to Hell, because they don’t see Jesus in so-called “religious†people.”
People are smarter than you gave them credit for. They can recognize who is following the teachings of Christ or even practicing what they preach. People have free will and others around them can recognize who is using their free will in a manner that is consistent with the bible.
In the context of today, with liberals railing against, fearing, obsessing, and wishing the “religious right” have no say, I’ll say that I don’t understand your position. You can moderate your position quite a bit and I’d agree with you then that some people I have reservations about because they might influence others but I could say that about liberals also.
Remember, You should not bear false witness against your neighbor (a commandment that liberals tend to do all the time)
Agreed, Bakalava.
, it torques them off so much). The islamist sawing off heads or calling for holy war, I fear.
The abortion clinic bomber is a religious person I fear. The radical athiests on the left, I fear (and I do love pointing out that their strong lack of belief in a God is a religious belief
Actually, anytime religious expression and devotion is mingled with hate, I get that fearful fealing…
It’s a book! It’s printed on paper made from trees! It’s contents consist of shaped characters invented by men! It is not irreplaceable, another one can be gotten.
GET OVER IT!!!
And another thing…Abu Ghraib.
OK, so some fellers had panties put on their heads, were stacked naked on top of each other (some of ‘em probably enjoyed that), and were embarassed.
But you know what? Ask any of ‘em if they would rather have their fingers removed one-by-one by a bolt cutter or have a pair of panties, even dirty ones, slipped over their heads…well, I leave it to you. Even the dimmest lights among you can guess the obvious answer.
OK! It wasn’t nice, it wasn’t what soldiers should be doing to captives, but it wasn’t torture either. Let me repeat that in big print for the myopic: IT WASN’T TORTURE! Even the evil American military acknowledges that a line was crossed and has prosecuted some folks who were involved. You can whine all day about how they didn’t go far enough up the chain of command, but you got your pound of flesh. Take it and go away.
By the way, since the Koran also comes in paperback form, it is quite possible to flush one or part of one down a regular flush toilet one page at a time.
One more thing…Christians are not out to control the world, God will do that. They only want everyone in it to have an opportunity to hear what will someday occur.
Does that bother you? Why? Why is it offensive to be told that you should believe in Jesus, but not offensive to be told that you should believe in wisdom of the ACLU or People For The American Way? Who made them the ultimate court of right-and-wrong? I suspect the answer has something to do with fearing and therefore hating the truth.
The lawsuit is today’s version of stoning.
Amen SickAndTired and Rafael Daniel!
SickAndTired, I pray your health and strength. Jesus will work it out.
Baklava, your feeling is totally wrong. I PRAY you one day overstand the difference between a religious person and a DISCIPLE. One can be religious about ANYTHING. Anything! Religion can be “performed”. Please understand that God does not want a religious performance from ANYONE. I’ll let King David have his say on the subject: “For thou desireth not sacrifice; else I would give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” I just quoted Psalm 51 vv. 16 & 17. Why? To attempt to make clear the difference between how God looks at religious practice and genuine repentance and worship. THAT is what I was trying to get across to you. There is a difference between someone that follows rules and one that allows the life of Jesus to overtake their own. The difference is like life and death.
I stand on my statement regarding people being Hell-bound because they don’t see Jesus in so-called religious people. That doesn’t mean I think people are dumb, far from it. The fact of the matter is this: humanity LIKES sin and will do anything to stay in it. If they see someone who purports to be pious being a hateful jerk, why should they even consider changing their lifestyle? To them they are being perfectly logical and reasonable because it looks like the Christ Event had no bearing on the life of that pious one.
I don’t obsess about religious folk. Shoot, I used to BE one. I understand the emptiness inherent in going through the motions. I am grateful that my spiritual journey has taken me beyond that. I want to see all those that believe or want to believe get free of the shackles that man-made religion (as opposed to God centered relationship) has put on them. I do not take pleasure in seeing folk starve when they don’t have to.
Baklava, I should fear NOTHING. I am sorry you read the attention getter in the paragraph and failed to see big picture that was being painted. If I was unclear, I apologize.
I wish the religious right no ill will. I just wish their agenda was SPIRITUAL instead of political.
I wish they were more loving than legalistic. I wish they were more interested in healing divisions than their political agenda makes them appear to be. People DO look at them and use them for an excuse NOT to repent and believe the gospel.
And, I completely realize that you do not overstand my position. You would have to have had different experiences to even fathom what I am speaking of. That was the risk I knowingly took when I responded to your post. So I don’t hold your inability to overstand against you, I really don’t. I sincerely hope that one day you (and anyone else that needs to) will understand the difference between being a religious, legalistic drone and basking in the warm glow of the Light God has provided mankind through His Word.
You don’t know my experiences either. I’ve been in baptist, lutheran, presbeterian, catholic, non-denominational, and lds sunday masses. I’ve been in catholic school as a child and taken religion classes in college. I’ve been in the military with guys who cuss every other word and I’ve been a liberal who converted to common sensism (conservatism) laced with facts.
All I’m saying is every neighbor or coworker or fellow student or whoever that I’ve met that could be classified as religious has a certain amount of the following:
1) spiritual searching
2) hypocrasy
3) rituals they practice in church
Even though they are hypocritical and don’t live perfectly and practice ritualistic denominational specifics, they just aren’t they people I’m fearing or worrying about usually.
And maybe you don’t fear like the word fear means.
But you know what, this conversation started with the question and it gave a golden opportunity I think for those on the left who do fear religious people and how they vote and what not to see another point of view.
Mostly Christians are trying to do right no matter what they rituals they practice and/or how much of a hypocrate they are.
I truly belive that liberals who have a problem with the religious right are sort of obsessed and focused on the wrong set of people and behaviors that need to be worried about.
And for all of the hand ringing that goes on by the left calling conservatives mean-spirited and trying to help people understand that as Christians we are supposed to be generous and compassionate and trying to equate conservatism as being non-compassionate and therefore not very Christian…… it goes to show that liberals have been emersed in their liberalism so long and do not CARE to understand a conservatives position.
We actually believe that our position is more caring and will help the U.S. and it’s citizens prosper more which in turn helps us do things like focus on the environment and helping other countries. Liberals have it backwards. They look at the disparity in prosperity in the world and look at us as the perpetrators and the poor countries as the victims. When we give so much help and aid to hurting countries liberals don’t see us as being generous enough. One of the things that conservatives understand is that the free market is the answer to prosperity. Communism/Marxism/socialism/dictators are the key to enslavement, poverty, lack of infrastructure and a worse environment.
And to tie it all together…. We are free to worship and practice our faith. The debate in politics should be about issues and policy and what this country should do to protect itself (national security). Sometimes the debate deals with how we should handle criminals. Sometimes how we should change tax policy and/or what the government spends money on.
I just never seem to understand though why all the handwringing by liberals about the “religious right”. Keeping in mind that there are between 30% – 40% of religious people who attend church regularly that are to the left.
Dear Rafael Daniel,
If I understand you, you’re making the point that being saved and being “religious” aren’t the same, so that believers ought not to place their trust in people’s religiosity. Right?
It seems to me that your argument would be better served if you simply said that you distinguish between merely professing Christians and true ones, and that the simple fact of, say, church attendance, isn’t by itself sufficient to tell which is which.
I think that most believers would agree with you on that. But it doesn’t follow that, because mere church attendance isn’t enough, it has nothing to do with being a true Christian. If you take the New Testament as a whole, and not just isolated passages, the Church you see is one in which Christians gather for common worship, have an ecclesiastical authority structure, common beliefs, etc.—in short, are religious.
Christianity purifies religion, without doing away with it. Yes, there is no true religion without deeds of love. But there is also no true religion without common worship of the true God. There is no biblical reason to oppose the two things.
Of course, it may be that yo are using the word religion in a private, idiosyncratic sense to mean hypocritical going through the motions. But insofar as that is a private meaning, no one else is obliged to accept it on your authority alone.
Cheers.
Adrian
For the last time Baklava, I am not talking about politics. I am talking about something that it is obvious that you don’t quite grasp. It is spiritural, not political/ideological.
Adrian, you make an interesting point. I’d like you to consider this: in the whole of the accepted canon of scripture, where is the authority/biblical reason to create denominations? When you research the issue fully, you will see that the religious structure that is accepted by the public-at-large is a man-made thing that has the effect of seperating folks from God rather than brining them to Him. “Church” isn’t supposed to be so hierarchal. It is supposed to be one in unity (Hebrew “echad”) as God has revealed himself to be. A community of One, not a group of islands seperated by dogma/doctrine/ritual.
I am not against church attendance. I do find however that the ritual of church attendance and adherance to doctrines that supplant the counsel of scripture are troublesome. Yes, we live and move in a modern world, but we need to go down the ancient path if we are to hope to find redemption.
Dear Rafael,
Yes, the Lord has only one body, and there is no Scriptural basis for a multiplicity of denominations. But it does not follow that no ecclesial body today in existence has a right to claim to be, or to represent, the one body in a special way.
The Church is not just spirit. It’s also institution. The New Testament shows both sides: the freedom of the children of God, on the one hand, and a visible body, with authority, common worship, etc., on the other.
Yes, the institutional side can be abused. But so can the spiritual side. There is such a thing as spiritual phariseeism: “Oh God, I thank you that I don’t go in for instititutions and dogmas . . . like other men.”
I believe this is the ancient way. There is such a thing as historic Christianity, which has a better claim to be the Christianty o the N.T. than anything else.
Cheers.
Adrian
I have to disagree with you on one small point Adrian: the ecclesia (”church” is a pagan corruption) IS spiritual. It isn’t an institution or a building made with hands. it is you and I and everyone else that has accepted the call to worship God in SPIRIT and in TRUTH. If some evil genius hatched a plan to destroy all of the house of wordhip in the USA, what then? What is the individual truly wedded to?
I find spiritual phariseeism in the so-called religious right. By the way, I am going to plagiarize your phrase.
Jesus didn’t start a new religion, on that point I believe we agree. Messianic Judaism comes closer to the 1st century ecclesia than anything I have encountered.
Huh?
Unless you don’t believe in the bible Rafael, then you can’t legitimately make the claim that there is no institutionalization (even at the micro-level) in Christianity.
Paul laid out structure, and organizational politics. Yes, Christianity is organistic in nature, in terms of its not being ‘bound’ by walls, but the same way we are physical beings who operate in a physical reality but worship in spirit, so is the church a spiritual entity manifested in an organizational setting.
When you have polity, and a generally prescribed organizational structure as stated in the epistles, how can you legitimately claim that the church is not institutional in nature?
In terms of disagreement and denominations, the bible also states the differences in the ‘body’, and Paul and Barnabas had extreme disagreements on whether one of the younger brothers should accompany them. The disagreement was so severe it led them to split up.
As long as the foundation of grace, faith, and word are in place, there is a place for different perspectives which lead to different expressions in the ‘body’ of Christ.
Dell, I’d honestly like to discuss this with you further. The Temple of God, of the Holy Spirit, is the BODY of the individual. Not some beautiful cathedral or storefront or any other made made sanctuary. The problem is the Word has been manipulated to make folk believe that the hierarchal structure is what “church” is supposed to be.
Should there be leadership? Surely there should be. I will say again that I am not against church atendance. I am saying that the church is too invested in maintaining power over its subjects. The biggest and most evil example of this is Roman Catholicism. Roman Catholic, Jr., bka the Prostestant Movement, isn’t much better. I can’t see how denominations (which by their very nature DIVIDE the body) can get us all to speak the same thing (see Ephesians 4:1-17).
Polity makes me want to vomit sometimes. So do “disciplines”. Polity isn’t biblical, Dell. I found that too many folks actually put polity/discipline ahead of the Scriptures. That isn’t a good thing.
Do I believe the bible? I do, implicity and explicitly. I don’t know where your journey/studies have taken you, but I want to suggest that you begin to explore the original languages, if you haven’t done so already. I am by no means an expert, but I have been able to see how scripture has been manipulated to ensure that power was concentrated in the hands of a few. Others more learned than I have seen and reported on the same thing.
I don’t doubt your sincerity one bit, I just am coming from (I believe) a deeper place. Does that make you wrong? No, it doesn’t. I suspect I have been where you are. God is moving me in a different direction, towards COMPLETE liberty in Him. No need for the middle man, to borrow a phrase. THAT is where we all(hopefully) will be one day. I figure if it was good enough for Paul (Galatians), it is good enough for me.
Dear Rafael,
May I speak as a brother here?
On what basis do you claim superior insight into what Christianity is than Dell and I have? Isn’t there a danger od setting yourself up as a one man rule, authority, church, whatever—all the while saying you reject those things?
In HIM,
Adrian
Rafael, I don’t disagree that divisiveness in the church is a problem. However, you have to concede that even when, as I mentioned above, Barnabas and Paul:
Acts 15:37 -37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. 38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. 39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus; 40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God…
My point on denominations is that if Paul and Barnabas had such a dissention, but were still able to remain brothers and Christ and pursue the goal of Christ how can not ‘denominations’ do the same?
The only problem I have with denominations, is when one puts denominationalism above the love we are supposed to have for our brothers. Other than that, different perspectives on direction, as long as it isn’t basically heretical, are OK by me.
Again, in terms of church structure. Like I said, it is:
Organistic – We are the ‘church’ the eccelesia as you state. The composite body of Christ. This is evident to you already in the scripture so I won’t quote.
However…the church is also:
Organizational – Meaning it has a definitive structure as prescribed in the bible by Paul. This is different that what I think you are saying, which is that the church shouldn’t be ‘institutional’ or only ‘instuctional’ meaning that all church structures and processes should be the same.
By organization, I mean a structure of leadership, discipline, and conduct than can translate into many institutional settings, from house churches, to mega-churches to cyber-churches.
Like the bible says, obedience is better than sacrifice, and complete liberty in Christ is only liberty within his Word and will.
Last thing on this subject for me guys.
Adrian, no need to be the least bit defensive. I am not setting myself up as better than anyone. Peter had some challenges with some of the things Paul said, but he was able to accept that perhaps Paul had a piece of revelation that he didn’t (2nd Peter 3:15-16). He didn’t feel inferior about it or think that Paul was setting himself up as the better man.
Dell, forgive me for neglecting to address Paul and Barnabas’ little row involving John Mark. Barnabas was an encourager. He encouraged Paul, as I know you know. Their split wasn’t due to doctrine. It was because Paul didn’t feel like he could trust John Mark because he had gotten homesick on an earlier journey and left. Paul didn’t want the same thing to happen again, so they had to split. The result? Paul and Silas went on to do greater things and Barnabas, in his role of encourager, helped John Mark. John Mark, who wrote the brilliantly concise Gospel of Mark needed Barnabas’ nurturing and to bring out what he had in him.
Unless you think Paul and Barnabas were speaking different things, their split doesn’t support the notion of denominations. They needed to split to further the gospel in the ancient world. And, all too often denominations speak different things. They set one above the other. They set their polity/disciline/doctrine above the the others. The refuse others the sacraments–all kinds of silly garbage. Maybe denominations can further the gospel without creating a greater schism in the Body of Christ. I am not holding my breath that they will, simply because they are man-made organizations that subject the glory of God to the whims/attitudes/appetites of men.
The focus has to be on the sinner being reconciled to God though the atoning sacrifice of Jesus the Messiah. Not on an organization/social club. I am not the first one to feel like this, nor will I be the last. There are most assuredly others who can and still others that will be able to articulate this better than I ever could, to the glory of God. That is what it is all about anyway. Elohim baruch HaShem. Peace.
Comments on this entry are closed.