Florida Church in Standoff Over Koran Burning

[Shogun]

What is so hateful about burning a book of lies that leads people away from Christ and the truth? I would think its just a symbolic gesture of rejecting Satan and his book of lies.

well, it's certainly par for the course with christians in America. Look at how well burning rock music in the 1980s turned out!








[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od6nMIVgeZ0]YouTube - Rock Music and the Occult[/ame]

 

[Metternich]

riiiiiight... remind me what happened to the artwork called Pissed Christ, again?

That's a facetious comparison, if only because he was comparing texts; you bring up an icon of Jesus.

As Leo III the Isaurian showed us, not all icons are created equal.

ahh yes.. it's ALWAYS "different" somehow, isn't it?











go tell it to exodus 20:4, fool.

I'm not following your point. According to modern theological thought; there is a difference between a representation of Christ, and the Book. I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

 

[Missourian]

consequently, do you see or can you name the proverbial ******* ARMY of liberals out trying to trade their dignity for keeping him from burning korans like we see conservatives reacting to that mosque?


please, link something if you don't mind.

I can and likely will see an army of Muslims...and I won't blame them one bit.

As for liberals...you and I both know EXACTLY how this thread would have played out had the Mosque hypocrisy not been highlighted in post #2.

bullshit. you and I BOTH do not see a siren of lefties out demanding this guy be restricted from burning korans because WE understand why it is important to let Lenny Bruce and Fred Phelps tie their own rope rather than wiping our asses with the bill of rights.

now, spare me the silly "would have" rebuttals and name some libs who are out demanding restrictions on this guy on par with what we see in NY.

Give be a break, Sho.

Junky posted this specifically to get the as a 'Beat up on the Christians" thread, because it is indefensible.

What reasonable argument could anyone make to rationalize this Koran burning action by a "church"?

The same can be said for the GZ Mosque.

What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

 

[Political Junky]

The Community Center, containing a place for prayer, is not visible from Ground Zero.

 

[Shogun]

That's a facetious comparison, if only because he was comparing texts; you bring up an icon of Jesus.

As Leo III the Isaurian showed us, not all icons are created equal.

ahh yes.. it's ALWAYS "different" somehow, isn't it?











go tell it to exodus 20:4, fool.

I'm not following your point. According to modern theological thought; there is a difference between an representation of Christ, and the Book. I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

I'm not the one misunderstanding something here, holmes. your appeal to authority with "according to modern theological thought" isn't nearly as insightful as you seem to think. That YOU see a difference (as always with your kind) between christians and everyone else isn't really a shocker.

 

[Shogun]

I can and likely will see an army of Muslims...and I won't blame them one bit.

As for liberals...you and I both know EXACTLY how this thread would have played out had the Mosque hypocrisy not been highlighted in post #2.

bullshit. you and I BOTH do not see a siren of lefties out demanding this guy be restricted from burning korans because WE understand why it is important to let Lenny Bruce and Fred Phelps tie their own rope rather than wiping our asses with the bill of rights.

now, spare me the silly "would have" rebuttals and name some libs who are out demanding restrictions on this guy on par with what we see in NY.

Give be a break, Sho.

Junky posted this specifically to get the as a 'Beat up on the Christians" thread, because it is indefensible.

What reasonable argument could anyone make to rationalize this Koran burning action by a "church"?

The same can be said for the GZ Mosque.

What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

by your own testament you are a fascist then. America is not about fascism. qualifiers about location is disingenuous as hell.

but I digress, tell me where you see lefties leaping out of windows and off of planes trying to restrict the liberty of this koran burning loser? I'll wait...

 

[Missourian]

The Community Center, containing a place for prayer, is not visible from Ground Zero.

Please...be intellectually honest.

Argue the merits of your case, don't try to fool people with semantics.

The "place for prayer" is a Mosque.

No credible source is denying it, so stop it, it's embarrassing.

 

[Missourian]

bullshit. you and I BOTH do not see a siren of lefties out demanding this guy be restricted from burning korans because WE understand why it is important to let Lenny Bruce and Fred Phelps tie their own rope rather than wiping our asses with the bill of rights.

now, spare me the silly "would have" rebuttals and name some libs who are out demanding restrictions on this guy on par with what we see in NY.

Give be a break, Sho.

Junky posted this specifically to get the as a 'Beat up on the Christians" thread, because it is indefensible.

What reasonable argument could anyone make to rationalize this Koran burning action by a "church"?

The same can be said for the GZ Mosque.

What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

by your own testament you are a fascist then. America is not about fascism. qualifiers about location is disingenuous as hell.

but I digress, tell me where you see lefties leaping out of windows and off of planes trying to restrict the liberty of this koran burning loser? I'll wait...

Please show me where you see any of those opposed to the GZ Mosque doing anything but expressing their opinions.

Do you have a problem with that?

I'll wait...

 

[Shogun]

The Community Center, containing a place for prayer, is not visible from Ground Zero.

Please...be intellectually honest.

Argue the merits of your case, don't try to fool people with semantics.

The "place for prayer" is a Mosque.

No credible source is denying it, so stop it, it's embarrassing.

why the hell would you demand such of anyone else when YOUR sole rebuttal amounts to "we are just too sensitive (until we can figure out a way to make the gov keep it from happening"?

 

[Shogun]

Give be a break, Sho.

Junky posted this specifically to get the as a 'Beat up on the Christians" thread, because it is indefensible.

What reasonable argument could anyone make to rationalize this Koran burning action by a "church"?

The same can be said for the GZ Mosque.

What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

by your own testament you are a fascist then. America is not about fascism. qualifiers about location is disingenuous as hell.

but I digress, tell me where you see lefties leaping out of windows and off of planes trying to restrict the liberty of this koran burning loser? I'll wait...

Please show me where you see any of those opposed to the GZ Mosque doing anything but expressing their opinions.

Do you have a problem with that?

I'll wait...

Are you serious? Not only have detractors hoped that the site would be declared historic in order to block this building but you people have been screaming for DAYS about how some gov agency should restrict this building. Hell, I've already seen right wingers promise to shrug their shoulders and look away WHEN IT GETS BURNED DOWN.


now, show me where the lefties are that are offering an OPINION that this pastor should not be allowed to burn korans...


don't have a lot in your quiver, do you?

 

[Metternich]

ahh yes.. it's ALWAYS "different" somehow, isn't it?











go tell it to exodus 20:4, fool.

I'm not following your point. According to modern theological thought; there is a difference between an representation of Christ, and the Book. I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

I'm not the one misunderstanding something here, holmes. your appeal to authority with "according to modern theological thought" isn't nearly as insightful as you seem to think. That YOU see a difference (as always with your kind) between christians and everyone else isn't really a shocker.

Persecution over symbols has been a reoccurring theme in both Muslim and Christian thought. The first act in the story is the persecution of the Khalifa at Damascus. Yezid I (680-683) and his successors, especially Yezid II (720-24), thinking, like good Moslems, that all pictures are idols, tried to prevent their use among even their Christian subjects.

This was mirrored by Leo the III, who (after deposing the Patriarchate of Constantinople) went on to destroy symbols in the East. An action that was then propagated into the West.

Yet, with the Council of Nicea, icons were restored.

Exodus 25:18-22; Numbers 7:89; Ezekiel 41:18-19; Hebrews 9:5

I suggest you also read up on:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Iconoclasm

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, something to read, is about the Paulikianois.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Paulicians

You should also read about veneration of images (as opposed to the Bible) in the Old Testament:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

There are differences, even if you don't acknowledge them.

 

[Missourian]

The Community Center, containing a place for prayer, is not visible from Ground Zero.

Please...be intellectually honest.

Argue the merits of your case, don't try to fool people with semantics.

The "place for prayer" is a Mosque.

No credible source is denying it, so stop it, it's embarrassing.

why the hell would you demand such of anyone else when YOUR sole rebuttal amounts to "we are just too sensitive (until we can figure out a way to make the gov keep it from happening"?

My argument is not a lie.

Does that make any difference to you?


Edit - You may not like it, you may not agree with it, but it's my honest assessment.

 

[Shogun]

I'm not following your point. According to modern theological thought; there is a difference between an representation of Christ, and the Book. I'm not sure what you're not understanding.

I'm not the one misunderstanding something here, holmes. your appeal to authority with "according to modern theological thought" isn't nearly as insightful as you seem to think. That YOU see a difference (as always with your kind) between christians and everyone else isn't really a shocker.

Persecution over symbols has been a reoccurring theme in both Muslim and Christian thought. The first act in the story is the persecution of the Khalifa at Damascus. Yezid I (680-683) and his successors, especially Yezid II (720-24), thinking, like good Moslems, that all pictures are idols, tried to prevent their use among even their Christian subjects.

This was mirrored by Leo the III, who (after deposing the Patriarchate of Constantinople) went on to destroy symbols in the East. An action that was then propagated into the West.

Yet, with the Council of Nicea, icons were restored.

Exodus 25:18-22; Numbers 7:89; Ezekiel 41:18-19; Hebrews 9:5

I suggest you also read up on:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Iconoclasm

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, something to read, is about the Paulikianois.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Paulicians

You should also read about veneration of images (as opposed to the Bible) in the Old Testament:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

There are differences, even if you don't acknowledge them.

ahhh.. you are catholic. well, that explains it then.

 

[Missourian]

Here it is again.


What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

 

[Shogun]

Please...be intellectually honest.

Argue the merits of your case, don't try to fool people with semantics.

The "place for prayer" is a Mosque.

No credible source is denying it, so stop it, it's embarrassing.

why the hell would you demand such of anyone else when YOUR sole rebuttal amounts to "we are just too sensitive (until we can figure out a way to make the gov keep it from happening"?

My argument is not a lie.

Does that make any difference to you?

you dont HAVE an argument. You are crying about sensitivity, selectively no less, while trying to validate your criticism of NY mosques while failing to cite anyone on the left giving a shit about koran burning pastors in florida.


regardless if it's a mosque or a prayer center, THE BOTTOM LINE, is that we on the left are not trying to be selective fascists regarding personal property.

 

[Metternich]

I'm not the one misunderstanding something here, holmes. your appeal to authority with "according to modern theological thought" isn't nearly as insightful as you seem to think. That YOU see a difference (as always with your kind) between christians and everyone else isn't really a shocker.

Persecution over symbols has been a reoccurring theme in both Muslim and Christian thought. The first act in the story is the persecution of the Khalifa at Damascus. Yezid I (680-683) and his successors, especially Yezid II (720-24), thinking, like good Moslems, that all pictures are idols, tried to prevent their use among even their Christian subjects.

This was mirrored by Leo the III, who (after deposing the Patriarchate of Constantinople) went on to destroy symbols in the East. An action that was then propagated into the West.

Yet, with the Council of Nicea, icons were restored.

Exodus 25:18-22; Numbers 7:89; Ezekiel 41:18-19; Hebrews 9:5

I suggest you also read up on:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Iconoclasm

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, something to read, is about the Paulikianois.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Paulicians

You should also read about veneration of images (as opposed to the Bible) in the Old Testament:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

There are differences, even if you don't acknowledge them.

ahhh.. you are catholic. well, that explains it then.

I was raised Seventh-Day Adventist, but haven't been to church in four years.

I'm not Catholic. I'm just not ignorant. You?

 

[Shogun]

Here it is again.


What rational argument can be make for erecting an Islamic Shrine next to the site of the American tragedy planned and executed by Islamic terrorists?

I would be opposed to a Ku Klux Klan Hall next to the Martin Luther King Memorial.

I would be opposed to a Japanese Imperial Navy Museum next to Pearl Harbor if we were still at war with Japan.

I would be opposed to a statue of Santa Anna next to the Alamo if we were at war with Mexico.

I am opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque...not because of Islam...but because of it's symbolism as a victory shrine.


I'm not opposed to the Mosque...like most Americans I'm opposed to it's location.


When we are not at war with Islamic terrorists, it may be a different story.

1. Personal property and the prerogative to build whatever the owner wants.


I'm QUITE SURE your tune would change if this were a democrat trying to take away the personal property rights of a christian. In Missouri, OUR OWN ******* STATE, we let the KKK adopt a highway. Did this kill us as a state? Did YOU cry when the road was renamed the Rosa Parks Highway despite sensitivity to the klan? NO? Then stop acting so ******* hypocritical about THIS situation just because muslims are trying to invest in our culture.

 

[Shogun]

Persecution over symbols has been a reoccurring theme in both Muslim and Christian thought. The first act in the story is the persecution of the Khalifa at Damascus. Yezid I (680-683) and his successors, especially Yezid II (720-24), thinking, like good Moslems, that all pictures are idols, tried to prevent their use among even their Christian subjects.

This was mirrored by Leo the III, who (after deposing the Patriarchate of Constantinople) went on to destroy symbols in the East. An action that was then propagated into the West.

Yet, with the Council of Nicea, icons were restored.

Exodus 25:18-22; Numbers 7:89; Ezekiel 41:18-19; Hebrews 9:5

I suggest you also read up on:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Iconoclasm

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, something to read, is about the Paulikianois.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Paulicians

You should also read about veneration of images (as opposed to the Bible) in the Old Testament:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Veneration of Images

There are differences, even if you don't acknowledge them.

ahhh.. you are catholic. well, that explains it then.

I was raised Seventh-Day Adventist, but haven't been to church in four years.

I'm not Catholic. I'm just not ignorant.

rather, you subscribe to a particular denomination of christian theology that, laughably, no more speaks for the rest of christianity's than your posts have spoken about your lack of ignorance. Perhaps, instead of believing that your childhood sunday school icon worship is an accepted, generalized aspect of christianity you can stop making retarded ******* excuses about common violent reactions to perceived blasphemy.

 

[Missourian]

why the hell would you demand such of anyone else when YOUR sole rebuttal amounts to "we are just too sensitive (until we can figure out a way to make the gov keep it from happening"?

My argument is not a lie.

Does that make any difference to you?

you dont HAVE an argument. You are crying about sensitivity, selectively no less, while trying to validate your criticism of NY mosques while failing to cite anyone on the left giving a shit about koran burning pastors in florida.


regardless if it's a mosque or a prayer center, THE BOTTOM LINE, is that we on the left are not trying to be selective fascists regarding personal property.

Right, Democrats never restrict liberty when it comes to private property, like building nuclear reactors, or power plants, or oil refineries or cutting lumber, or mining, or drilling for oil.

 

[Shogun]

My argument is not a lie.

Does that make any difference to you?

you dont HAVE an argument. You are crying about sensitivity, selectively no less, while trying to validate your criticism of NY mosques while failing to cite anyone on the left giving a shit about koran burning pastors in florida.


regardless if it's a mosque or a prayer center, THE BOTTOM LINE, is that we on the left are not trying to be selective fascists regarding personal property.

Right, Democrats never restrict liberty when it comes to private property, like building nuclear reactors, or power plants, or oil refineries or cutting lumber, or mining, or drilling for oil.

did you get the strawman out of your system now? Are you ever going to name the liberals demanding that this preacher not be allowed to burn korans or are we going to dance a little?

How many NUCLEAR REACTORS are here in Missouri, Missourian? I live less than a mile from one of them. Now, do you want to remember WHY Missouri didn't get that latest reactor or do I REALLY need to dig up the answer for you.

hint: had nothing to do with liberals restricting a goddamn thing.