Oh, the irony..

[Longhairedskinnywhiteboy]

Sorry I've been away. I know you all missed me. :bawl:

Isn't it funny (funny strange, not funny haha) that the terrorists in Iraq are kidnapping PEACE ACTIVISTS?!?!

(Ok, it's a bit funny haha, but only because of the irony)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/29/ap/world/mainD8E69AT81.shtml

Video Shows Activists Kidnapped in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 29, 2005
(AP)


(AP) Al-Jazeera broadcast an insurgent video Tuesday showing four peace activists taken hostage in Iraq, with a previously unknown group claiming responsibility for the kidnappings.

The Swords of Righteousness Brigade said the four were spies working undercover as Christian peace activists, Al-Jazeera said. The station said it could not verify any of the information on the tape.

[forrest]

If there was PEACE, not occupation, this would not be happening!




Peace & Love forrest

[Longhairedskinnywhiteboy]

If there was PEACE, not occupation, this would not be happening!




Peace & Love forrest

Yeah, sure kid.

The radical Islamic Muslims that are doing this only started doing it after we invaded Iraq.

Oh, wait, maybe it was just a tad bit sooner, but only by about a few thousand years...

[okiemama]

from the article in question:

Kember, a retired professor, is a longtime peace activist who once fretted publicly that he was taking the easy way out by protesting in safety at home while British soldiers risked their lives in Iraq.

The U.S. Embassy has confirmed that an American is missing in Iraq _ presumably one of the aid workers. A Canadian official has said two Canadians were in the group.

"The team's work has focused on documenting and focusing public attention on detainee abuses, connecting citizens of Iraq to local and international human rights organizations, and accompanying Iraqi civilians as they interact with multinational military personnel and Iraq's government officials," the group said.

The statement said those taken hostage knew the risks when they went to Iraq.

The organization said it "does not advocate the use of violent force to save our lives should we be kidnapped, held hostage, or caught in the middle of a conflict situation."

i doubt these people are using this situation as a call to continue the violence, even to the cost of their own lives.

[forrest]

Yeah, sure kid.

The radical Islamic Muslims that are doing this only started doing it after we invaded Iraq.

Oh, wait, maybe it was just a tad bit sooner, but only by about a few thousand years...


Why are we in Iraq? For Saddam or after radical Islamic Muslims or Osama or what???????????????
Thanks for the memories! (www.bushflash.com/thanks.html)

[hippie_chick666]

i agree with okiemama. these peace activists dont want their deaths to be the cause of more violence. violence begots violence, not peace...

[Dead Fan]

I do agree they probably dop not want violence to ensue for their rescue. I respect that, but it is kind of Ironic. I would also like to mention this did not begin when or after we attacked. This has been a big to do with radical muslims for decades.

[forrest]

I do agree they probably dop not want violence to ensue for their rescue. I respect that, but it is kind of Ironic. I would also like to mention this did not begin when or after we attacked. This has been a big to do with radical muslims for decades.


You forgot about radical christians, they've spilled thier share of blood over time!

Fundamentalism Sucks (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism)

[okiemama]

this is, unfortunately, very true. the thing that irritates me so very much is this current Crusades mentality among those who are shouting "for God and country!!" at us all. it is scripturally backwards, and too many of todays' American Christians follow not scripture, but man. therein lies the problem that has plagued us for centuries.

-----------------------------

i clicked your link after posting the above. interestingly enough, the definition posted there ("Fundamentalist" describes a movement to return to what is considered the defining or founding principles of the religion. It has especially come to refer to any religious enclave that intentionally resists identification with the larger religious group in which it originally arose, on the basis that fundamental principles upon which the larger religious group is supposedly founded have become corrupt or displaced by alternative principles hostile to its identity.) describes me beautifully, whereas what you are calling fundamentalists is the very group i refuse to be associated with. house churches were the norm for early Christianity, and still are in the parts of the world where Christianity is underground and persecuted. the giving away of our excess and sharing communally with our brethren was also a large point for the early church that is no longer practised here. there are many such points i could make but these two are the most easily identified to non-Christians, without getting into doctrine and dogma. what has happened to Christianity in the Western world is disgusting.

so the question remains...are these idiots really the fundamentalists? or am I? that definition threw it into a new light for me. Christ never preached for war against those who disagreed or even insulted, persecuted, maimed, or killed His followers. i would say that is a pretty fundamental issue of the faith, wouldn't you?

[forrest]

this is, unfortunately, very true. the thing that irritates me so very much is this current Crusades mentality among those who are shouting "for God and country!!" at us all. it is scripturally backwards, and too many of todays' American Christians follow not scripture, but man. therein lies the problem that has plagued us for centuries.

-----------------------------

i clicked your link after posting the above. interestingly enough, the definition posted there ("Fundamentalist" describes a movement to return to what is considered the defining or founding principles of the religion. It has especially come to refer to any religious enclave that intentionally resists identification with the larger religious group in which it originally arose, on the basis that fundamental principles upon which the larger religious group is supposedly founded have become corrupt or displaced by alternative principles hostile to its identity.) describes me beautifully, whereas what you are calling fundamentalists is the very group i refuse to be associated with. house churches were the norm for early Christianity, and still are in the parts of the world where Christianity is underground and persecuted. the giving away of our excess and sharing communally with our brethren was also a large point for the early church that is no longer practised here. there are many such points i could make but these two are the most easily identified to non-Christians, without getting into doctrine and dogma. what has happened to Christianity in the Western world is disgusting.

so the question remains...are these idiots really the fundamentalists? or am I? that definition threw it into a new light for me. Christ never preached for war against those who disagreed or even insulted, persecuted, maimed, or killed His followers. i would say that is a pretty fundamental issue of the faith, wouldn't you?

I'm not into the text, for me it's actually feeling Religion and Spirit! (www.jamesarthur.net/ja.html)

[Dead Fan]

I agree christian radicals do this quite a bit too. But im not looking at it from a christian point of view so dont try that bullshit with me. I think modern christians are just as fucked up in their religion (in general) as muslims. They need to stop killing and realize that as far as christians go Jesus said love thine enemies as far as muslims go im well aware that their religion is one of peace and compassion...for other muslims...and death and agony to infidels.

[okiemama]

forrest -- sorry, that was kind of a rhetorical question at the end, more poking at lhswb than at anyone else. i should have made that clearer. i was kind of rambling off my own thoughts that had struck me from reading that definition, kind of put things in a perspective i hadn't had before. oh, and interesting site by the way.

dead fan -- you make some very nice points. i like ya more all the time. :D I hope you didn't think i was trying to insist everyone look at it from my viewpoint. any comment i might make about Christianity is going to be pointed at lhswb, not any of the rest of you.

[Dead Fan]

Okiemama No problem anything you say about christianity i will respect and I have no problem with it but when somebody takes my point and makes it sound like a christian thing is a little annoying. :D :D

[okiemama]

:nature-sm no worries, m'dear. sorry the for misunderstanding!

[kermit]

DAMN! still got siemen on your lip from a hommies dick! :group_hug <= circle jerk

[kermit]

If there was PEACE, not occupation, this would not be happening!




Peace & Love forrest

STFU,

PEACE!!!!!!!!! LMAO

Get over it!
kill or be killed!

I am sick of all you hippeis!

STFU and fight before NIgeria P0wn3d'z u all!

[Dead Fan]

What the fuck Kirmit I thought you died.

[forrest]

forrest -- sorry, that was kind of a rhetorical question at the end, more poking at lhswb than at anyone else. i should have made that clearer. i was kind of rambling off my own thoughts that had struck me from reading that definition, kind of put things in a perspective i hadn't had before. oh, and interesting site by the way.

dead fan -- you make some very nice points. i like ya more all the time. :D I hope you didn't think i was trying to insist everyone look at it from my viewpoint. any comment i might make about Christianity is going to be pointed at lhswb, not any of the rest of you.

It's all good, just for fun take a bible quizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz (http://www.bettybowers.com/bible.html)

Then look it up it's there! Crazzzzy!

Church's are just bigger cults!

[okiemama]

i went and looked at your quiz. i even went all the way through it, and guess what? i didn't get any wrong. i knew what were the correct verses, though i would argue they were taken out of context and twisted to fit the purposes of those who created the quiz. forrest, i understand fully that you have a problem with Christianity. and that's fine with me.

again, the only person i was directing any of my comments to was the one who brought the subject up in the first place. you can poke away at me all you want, if it makes you feel better, but it will accomplish nothing.

[forrest]

i went and looked at your quiz. i even went all the way through it, and guess what? i didn't get any wrong. i knew what were the correct verses, though i would argue they were taken out of context and twisted to fit the purposes of those who created the quiz. forrest, i understand fully that you have a problem with Christianity. and that's fine with me.

again, the only person i was directing any of my comments to was the one who brought the subject up in the first place. you can poke away at me all you want, if it makes you feel better, but it will accomplish nothing.

I would never attack you or christianity! Unless you wrote the, King James Version A.D.1611 After all it is on the cover, VERSION!

In an antique store a few years ago, I found an 11th century Bible for $2000.00 didn't have the money. When I finally did, went back the, shop had folded! I've search everywhere for pre-kjv. They are unattainable, so far, but I will never give up!

An end to kings! specially king g.w. bush!

[okiemama]

pre-KJV is almost an exercise in futility, and if you can find one, its authenticity should be an object of scrutiny by someone who is knowledgable. however, you should easily be able to find a good portion of the uncanonized books, the apocrypha, and the other "lost" books, if that is what your interest is. i have collected them fairly easily over the years. but as far as canonized goes, i prefer to study my scripture from its original greek and hebrew texts. translation to english often causes it to lose meaning, intent, and flavor. interestingly, i have found a literal translation Bible that i chose for my personal Bible. it follows the original texts better than anything else i have had. should you be interested, they have it posted in full at this site: http://www.litvonline.com/


i apologize for snapping at you. i'm having a rather crappy morning. i am afraid you got the backlash from it. (not an excuse, just an explanation.)

[forrest]

pre-KJV is almost an exercise in futility, and if you can find one, its authenticity should be an object of scrutiny by someone who is knowledgable. however, you should easily be able to find a good portion of the uncanonized books, the apocrypha, and the other "lost" books, if that is what your interest is. i have collected them fairly easily over the years. but as far as canonized goes, i prefer to study my scripture from its original greek and hebrew texts. translation to english often causes it to lose meaning, intent, and flavor. interestingly, i have found a literal translation Bible that i chose for my personal Bible. it follows the original texts better than anything else i have had. should you be interested, they have it posted in full at this site: http://www.litvonline.com/


i apologize for snapping at you. i'm having a rather crappy morning. i am afraid you got the backlash from it. (not an excuse, just an explanation.)

It's o.k. I've been a whipping post before and probably will again! :bawl:

Just kidding, I'll get over it. :hippie:

P.S. Have a better everyday! :)

[treehugger]

I read some of the bible that okiemama linked...it seems to read much better than the bibles I've (been forced to) read in the past. Maybe because I'm not being forced.

Although I randomly clicked on Gen 6/7 and I don't get how those people could possibly have lived so long????? I mean Noah being over six hundred years old? Were years different back then?

Anyway, thank you to OkieMama for showing me a more palatable version of the bible. I tend to lean Pagan but I'm open to reading more things of ALL religions! :) I'm looking forward to reading more. :D

Kath

[okiemama]

i don't really have an answer for the age question. Maybe they calculated ages differently? maybe they really did live that long? i don't know.

i, too, like to read the writings of other beliefs, even now, and i have not always been a Christian. i used to be Pagan myself. :D