24 votes

He makes wars to cease unto the end of the earth! Psalm 46

PSALM 46

God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.

2 Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea;

3 Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah.

4 There is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most High.

5 God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved: God shall help her, and that right early.

6 The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

7 The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.

8 Come, behold the works of the Lord, what desolations he hath made in the earth.

9 He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire.

10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

11 The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It makes for beautiful poetry...

however at the end of the day the interpretation is left to the reader just as one might interpret the vast poetic insights of Dante's Inferno, Purgatorio and Paradiso.

The fact that people simply quote versus from a holy text, rather considered by many to be, doesn't make them anymore understandable to all else beyond mere rhetoric and methaphor.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

It would be nice if there was

It would be nice if there was a lot more Constitution quoting and less Bible quoting.

Bump for peace

.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Psalm 46

Psalm 46 is one of my favorite Psalms. Thank you for posting this.

Edgar Morgan

"Gott Mit Uns"

"God With Us" -- Nazi Army belt buckles. Yes, same Christian god.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Bill Mahar

Claims to be a libertarian too, same as us, but he obviously isn't. There are bad people in every religion and political group, doesn't mean it represents us. You obviously haven't read much of the Bible, or else you wouldn't say such things.

yeah he's just not christian enough!

f*k that! and btw he doesn't really claim to be libertarian any more. im pretty sure he's in the camp that im in now...where we want an efficient and limited government but one that still helps people and treats everyone equally. "libertarians" these days are too extreme and pretty crazy/scary to talk to and be around.

Exactly!

If there are bad people of every religion, how do we know who is who? Maybe your leaders are the bad ones? The standard "they aren't real Christians" is never a good argument because you would actually have to have evidence of the nature of your god. Because every Christian, born-again, Catholic, Nazi's, Satanists,...even Lutherans, has equal footing. All Christian cults claim to have the true interpretation.

If there are bad people, such as 90% of Christians in America that salivate over killing little brown children because their parents believe in a different magic sky daddy, then it is up to the 10% to change the rest. It is the American Christians that are blood-thirsty. The US is the most religious nation on the entire Earth, and overwhelmingly Christian (I know....I know....everyone but your cult is not a "true Christian")

As far as the Bible, I can almost guarantee I know the Bible better than you and most ministers. I've cross-referenced the Dead Sea Scrolls, read the Torah and many parts of the Koran. I'm no slouch in that area.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

It's Not Actually

...obvious how much of the bible s/he has read from what was written.

And the unholy mix of

And the unholy mix of religion and politics continues to this day: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_democracy

And don't get me started on the Taliban, what has happened in Iran and so much more.

Religion + Politics = Anything but "holy"

...

Those belt buckles did not originate with nazi's. German uniforms had the phrase on the helmet as an old tradition from long before the Nazi party took over Germany. The nazi's who were anti-christian wanted to phase out that tradition so they removed it from helmets and only left it on belt buckles of the regular army. It's notable that the SS didn't have that phrase on their stuff. If you look into what the Nazi's believed and what Christianity is, an unbiased mind will see there is no relation, similar to how there is no relation between Christianity and many non-Christians today who use American currency which says: "in God we trust". Nazi's beliefs were based on eugenics which had it's origin in Darwinism.

Yes, in an "unbiased mind"

But, that is not you. So the phrase was taken off the helmets, who cares? (Maybe it is because they stopped wearing those silly helmets?....) If you are denying that an overwhelming number of Germans (as in any not Jewish) were Christian then you are beyond reasoning with. The aggression and war was promoted in the Christian churches and the German people were Christian. That is undeniable.

I use American currency and I don't believe in any deity. It is embarrassing that phrase was added in the 50's.

No, Nazi belief was based on religion and nationalism and that they were god's chosen, not eugenics (although there is a tangential relationship). You claiming that eugenics has it's origin in Darwinism shows you have no concept of reality. Darwin's theory is an explanation of an observed phenomenon. Eugenics is selective breeding. There is a gigantic, mountain-sized difference.

Now...on with the old "but they are REAL Christians" defense.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

pfffft...

Re: "No, Nazi belief was based on religion and nationalism and that they were god's chosen, not eugenics"

Nonsense.
"Nazi eugenics were ... at the center of Nazis ideology."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics

Re:"You claiming that eugenics has it's origin in Darwinism shows you have no concept of reality. "

The following quote seems supportive of the connection:
"Eugenics, as a modern concept, was originally developed by Francis Galton. Galton had read his cousin Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which sought to explain the development of plant and animal species, and desired to apply it to humans. In 1883, one year after Darwin's death, Galton gave his research a name, Eugenics."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
also, check out this image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Eugenics...

It seems obvious to me that the Nazi's feigned a quasi-Christianity to deceive nominal Christians, just like many American politicians today, who pretend to be Christians yet consistently take stands against typical Christian views on things like abortion and pre-emptive combat. They get votes from nominal Christians who don't know their Bibles or their Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_Christianity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_aspects_of_Nazism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchenkampf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_occultism

I don't think that an overwhelming number of Germans really understood what was going on, with Christianity or the plans of their government, similar to Americans today. Nominalism has been a problem for a long time. Even today, there are many churches in Germany which are only attended on Christmas and Easter; They are closed the rest of the year. I made the mistake of going to one on a Sunday morning when I was visiting, but it was closed; not even a preacher was there. But on Christmas the same church was completely full. Christians who actually held Christian views and understood what was going on were persecuted by Nazi's, and many preachers were forcibly removed from their congregations and replaced by Nazi's to brainwash the undiscerning nominalists who remained in those churches obliviously. Consider Bonhoeffer who's Christianity led him to oppose the Nazi's, and ultimately led to his execution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj9jMSs5fQg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonh%C3%B6ffer

As I predicted

The "they are not real Christians" fallacy......every time, 100% predicable.

If a person believes in Jesus "Christ", that he is the son/sun of the deity of the Bible - they are a Christian. The Sunni and Shia Muslims strenuously, and sometimes violently, oppose each other in translations and focus, but they are all Muslims. That you belong to a different Christian cult from the Germans of the 1930's is of no consequence.

That Galton took the took the conclusions and observed results of Darwin's theory and applied it to a new concept, eugenics, does not mean that eugenics "came from" Darwin's theory. It is completely separate. It is like saying that Einstein's Theory of Relativity "came from" Newton's Theory of Gravity. Not true, he used the predictability and conclusions from Newton as a starting point, but it is a radically different approach to the relationship between energy and matter. "Social Darwinism" was a term from Christians as a way to distort Darwin's theories - as is the fallicious "survival of the fittest" - which has zero to do with Darwin's theory.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Mohusk = Granger?

Re: "The "they are not real Christians" fallacy......every time, 100% predicable."

That is similar to saying that The Granger is really you using a different alias. Let me guess, you would use the "The Granger is not the real Mohusk" fallacy. Now if the Granger agrees with me that they are you, it would be a decent parallel to your argument. Obviously, I'm not seriously suggesting that you and the Granger are the same person. But that suggestion would not be any less silly than your argument which considers anti-christian Jew-hating eugenicists to be Christians who worship a Jew and who love their enemies.

Re: "If a person believes in Jesus "Christ", that he is the son/sun of the deity of the Bible - they are a Christian."

If you get to define the scope of Christianity by equivocating Christianity with nominalism or false-Christianity, or a belief in the son of a German Panthera, why shouldn't someone else get to define the scope of you to include The Granger? Just be consistent. If Jesus makes a distinction between true and false Christians, why are you so opposed to Christians believing Jesus instead of you about what Christianity is?

Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'"

Your definition of Christianity is problematic, but even if one were to accept it, you haven't shown that nazi's who persecuted Christians and Jews actually believed in, or followed, or worshiped the Jewish carpenter you say they need to believe in to be Christians. You haven't offered a way to distinguish between a said-belief, and real belief, or a true Christ and a false Christ, both of which were distinctions made in the Bible when defining Christianity.

Sorry "b"

That actually doesn't equate at all. Believing I am someone else is your approach and yours alone. There isn't a defined "Mohusk". There is, however, a definition of a Christian. It is someone who believes Jesus of the Bible was the Christ, the sun/son of a deity.

You accuse me of defining the scope of Christianity, but I did no such thing, I merely pointed out the minimal necessity for the label. But, even if I had, why do you get to define it? The Germans of the 30's, as with the born-againers today, believed that they were true Christians and that committing genocide and atrocities was supported and justified by the Bible and their organized religions. I see no difference.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

I forgive you.

Re:"There isn't a defined "Mohusk"."

If I define Mohusk as "an alias shared by the same person who uses the alias Granger", then that is a definition even if it's a wrong definition.

Re:"There is, however, a definition of a Christian. It is someone who believes Jesus of the Bible was the Christ, the sun/son of a deity. ... You accuse me of defining the scope of Christianity, but I did no such thing..."

The fact that you offer a definition of "Christian" doesn't mean what you offered is correct. The scope of Christianity that you've defined can be seen in your definition, as well as in your attempts to correlate nazi-ism with Christianity. Your definition doesn't correspond to the definitions given by the early church or the Bible. It doesn't account for forms of false Christianity like antinomianism which embraces sin or arianism which denies the deity of Jesus. I'm also not sure why you mention a sun in your definition. I'm not sure what is more absurd, the fact that you correlate nazi-ism with Christianity, or the fact that you would consider antinomians to be Christians. Come to think of it, by your definition, you would even include a certain Satanist I knew as a Christian. He believed that Jesus of the bible was the son of God and the Christ, but he didn't want to have anything to do with him, as he hated him and by his own admission only wanted to serve his own pleasures.

Re:"I merely pointed out the minimal necessity for the label. But, even if I had, why do you get to define it?"

I look to Christianity to define itself. That means letting Jesus and scripture speak to the matter and allow them to exclude antinomians, antisemites, etc. (i.e. anyone who brings a different gospel than the one preached by the apostles):

Galatians 1:8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

The word 'accursed' is a translation of the word 'anathema'. For someone to be anathematized means that they are rejected by the Christians as non-christian.

Re:" The Germans of the 30's, as with the born-againers today, believed that they were true Christians and that committing genocide and atrocities was supported and justified by the Bible and their organized religions. "

The question is not whether or not people believe the Bible supports their views, but rather whether or not the Bible actually does support their views. Your thinking seems to be infected with some sort of relativism.

The nazi-minded anti-semitic racists I've heard about seemed to believe in a Jesus who was only great because he was the German son of a Roman soldier from Germany named Panthera(that is not the Jesus that true Christians believe in). Would you also consider them to be Christians? I do know of World war 2 era German soldiers who were Christians of some sort, but not necessarily supporting the nazi party or agreeing with or even knowing about it's evil practices. I assumed that you were not referring to those Germans who disagreed with nazi ideology when you are trying to say nazi's were Christian. They would consider themselves to be German soldiers rather than Nazi's, just as so many soldiers today support Ron Paul and consider themselves American soldiers wanting to defend the constitution despite being in the army of Bush and Obama fighting unjust wars.

OK.....you still don't get it

I wasn't giving the "scope" of Christianity. A scope is a measure, a definition of influences, etc... I did no such thing.

That's OK. It seem we are too far apart on language. You have shown, more than anyone so far in my life, how far a person can take the "not real Christian" fallacy.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

I understand completely.

Re: "I wasn't giving the "scope" of Christianity."

How can you offer your definition of "christian" and adamantly affirm that what ever falls into that definition is Christian(even if it is nazi-ism), and then say that you aren't defining the scope of what is considered Christian? That is complete nonsense, and is totally contradictory and self refuting. Your definition entails that a range of different philosophies would fall under that blanket definition. That is a scope. Just admit where you are wrong instead of bending over backwards to insult Christianity.

Re: "It seem we are too far apart on language."

It might help if you didn't just make up inadequate definitions and impose them beyond reason, in conflict with the traditional definitions.

Re: You have shown, more than anyone so far in my life, how far a person can take the "not real Christian" fallacy.

Another inadequate definition of yours. Rather than inventing a term like "the Mohusk fallacy", it makes more sense to use established terms when pointing out where your reasoning fails. There is nothing fallacious about observing what distinguishes categories rather than just conflating them with something like the fallacy of equivocation. I don't violate the law of identity when I distinguish things that have different attributes, but rather I honor the law of identity by pointing out the differences; differences which you seem to dismiss because you have an axe to grind. Your "not real christian" fallacy seems to boil down to the idea that if anyone doesn't submit to your personal unsupported view of what a Christian is, then they must be wrong. You haven't backed up your definition with anything, and haven't addressed the criticisms of it either.

Proverbs 26:16 "The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can render a reason."

Phxarcher87's picture

B got an A+

Your knowledge of writing has not got you far, how can you be so blind and deaf. Anyone who brings violence in the name of Christianity is going directly against what Jesus Christ taught!

Matthew 25:51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear.52Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.53“Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

This is what rogue Christians do who carry out violence in the name of Jesus Christ, they cut the ears of people and as a Christian saved by the blood of Christ, I denounce any form of violence in the name of Jesus Christ.

John18: 36
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

Let me show you how ridiculous you sound.

All atheist are the same by definition. They historically worship the state as the 20th century has showed us. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and many more have contributed to the worst human rights violations in the world. All atheist accept Darwinism and eugenics as their belief of life and if 130,000,000 million dead in a century doesn't prove how evil Atheist are i'm not to sure what would. All atheist are the same. They believe if there is no God then everything under the sun is ok, murder, rape, theft, and idolatry. Just study the lives of the atheist prophets. They clearly define all atheist.

How crazy, Huh?

Being a Christian does not make you irrational. Being an Atheist does not make you irrational. Failure to differentiate between individuals does.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain

why do that? why compare two DPers as an insult to both?

it's just so classless. and btw am I to suppose that you are one of the "true christians" as well?

Don't jump to conclusions.

I was not intending to insult either of them. In philosophy unrealistic examples can be used to make valid points. That's all I was doing. It seems obvious that they have completely different perspectives from each other on things, which is why the comparison fits. I don't know what you mean by "true christians"; In Mohusks view, that would seem to include nominalism. You seem equally anti-christian to him in your other posts, so I wouldn't expect your view to be much different than his. If you think Bush, Obama, and Hitler are true Christians, then you might as well suppose that everyone is a true Christian and not worry about what I think about it. I don't agree that Christianity is like that. Regarding what I think about my own Christianity, it seems like a logical necessity that people will always think that their own view is correct. Nobody says "I believe that my beliefs are the wrong ones", as that would be self refuting. The question you ask is often asked to try to point out some sort of arrogance in someone claiming to have correct beliefs when others disagree, but then everyone who believes they are correct despite opposing views would be in the same boat, even you. Do I believe that I'm correct in my view of Christianity? Sure, everyone does, even Mohusk thinks he's correct, Granger and you are not immune to this either. Do I think having my view of Christianity makes me better or smarter than anyone who disagrees with me? Of course not.

Oh Prophet Mohusk

I believe you are no slouch in the area of religion and I commend you for your studies. Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? I bet you will LOVE it if you have not.

the poster "b" is correct about the SS.. as you know, the anti-christ says many of the same things as Christ, but with a twist.

Example "God's Kingdom on Earth", you know God's Kingdom is Heaven, but some do not know, and they fall for the ILLUSION, which is what the SS did. Holocast survivors were asked, "Why didn't you run away?" And they respond, "We did not know".

They know some things, and may feel something is terribly wrong, but there is an illusion that keeps them like deer in headlights.

Oh Prophet Mohusk

I believe you are no slouch in the area of religion and I commend you for your studies. Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? I bet you will LOVE it if you have not.

the poster "b" is correct about the SS.. as you know, the anti-christ says many of the same things as Christ, but with a twist.

Example "God's Kingdom on Earth", you know God's Kingdom is Heaven, but some do not know, and they fall for the ILLUSION, which is what the SS did. Holocast survivors were asked, "Why didn't you run away?" And they respond, "We did not know".

They know some things, and may feel something is terribly wrong, but there is an illusion that keeps them like deer in headlights.

I think we agree

And...yes, I have read the Catechism. At least some of it. I was raised in a very traditional Eastern European Roman Catholic diocese. I have also read a good chunk of the Catholic Encyclopedia - many years ago.

As far as the "SS was following the anti-Christ" thing, I guess first you would need to establish that such a deity exists. And even if you could (which you can't), you would need to provide some evidence that the SS (and, everyone in the military, not just the SS), knew they were following someone other than Jesus of the Bible. That's a pretty tall order.

But, where we agree is that religious propaganda is used to make the "deer in headlights" situation. It is no different from 30's Germany to today - religious leaders justifying genocide and nationalism. German soldiers believed they were doing right by the god of the Bible - that is good enough for me. I have no way of knowing if they were lying or if they had been "brainwashed" by some anti-Christ, devil-thingy - but neither do you or "b".

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

But he does exist

He does not have to exist FOR YOU, but he exists to many, and since he exists to many, HE EXISTS whether YOU believe or not.

Sure this is YOUR movie, and he may not have a role in YOUR movie, but he exists in other's movies.

If a bear shits in the woods does his shit stink?

OK then.

First of all, I always thought it was "Does the Pope shit in the woods?"

It is true that belief causes 'personal' existence. But, belief doesn't cause existence in the physical world. People used to believe that the sun was a chariot crossing the sky - that doesn't make it exists. Santa Clause exists to many tens of millions of people too, it doesn't make him "real". Most people "believe" that Osama Bin Laden conducted 9/11 - that doesn't make it true.

That is a classic logical fallacy called Fallacy of the Majority or a Democratic Fallacy. Just because an overwhelming number of people believe something, doesn't make it true. An overwhelming majority of people think Ron Paul is a "kook" - that doesn't mean they are correct.

I have no problem with you or anyone else believing in magic sky-daddies, as long as it doesn't affect my life, my liberty. But, the fact that Christian Americans have destroyed my nation because of religious genocide and nationalistic empire does affect me. The US is the most religious nation on Earth, and the most anti-freedom with genocide, torture, etc....

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Visa Versa

And I have no problem with you or anyon else not believing in magic sky-daddies as long as it does not affect my life or liberty.

When you attack someone's belief system, or when someone attacks your (lack?)belief system, then we are affecting lives and liberty to speack and act freely.

I have always believed, one of the greatest gift's America's constitution and bill of rights gave me was freedom of religion, seperation of church and state. My parents were atheist, though I think my Mom had some belief, as she had me baptised to the surprize of my God Mother and rebuking by my father, who used his objectivism as a weapon. Ayn Rand was forced on me and no one on the face of this Earth can despise religion more than he in my world.

He made me very curious about religion and I have experienced many because of it. That's how I came to appreciate the freedom, because it gave me the opportunity to explore, to have a magic sky-daddy or mommy or not.

My upbringing by an objectivist has embedded in me that I am responsible for my actions. I am not a blamer, and when I see myself calling names, that's my cue to know that I have not thought things out. Ayn Rand, for example didn't call names and insult. She was very clear about her objection to religion.

One of my favorite lines is she said, that, "God is that which is beyond the ability to reason."

This is true, and for me, who has come to know that I am a believer, it continues to hold true. The reason is because there are some things that happen, that are beyond my reason, and I can not take credit (I'm not talking about blame, remember, I am not a blamer, rather asking what did I do to cause or create the siuation).

But there are things, some may call "luck", but to me, lick is opportunity meeting preparedness.. so it is beyond luck.. miracles is more appropriate. I have witnessed what I call miracles, events that are beyond reason, blessings that I can not take credit, nor do I know anyone who could or did.

I don't agree with you that Christian Americans have destroyed my nation. I find that they are very generous people and strive to be good people doing good works. As humans, they are going to have faults, make mistakes.. but to blame them, is failing to look at your own part of the failure YOU witness.

I don't find America the most religious nation. I believe Islam is the most religious nation, and Israel is the most religious country.

I THANK GOD I was not born into Islam.. I love life, and have no doubt I would have been killed before I turned 20. I am not happy about how America's freedom is being used as a weapon against nieve Americasn who do not understand Islam and how the believers use American freedoms, in the name of freedom, to destroy freedom. I have no appreciation for the deceptions, perpetual war and hate in the name of peace and love. I have yet to see a Budhist, Hindu or Christian suicide bomber.

If being an infidel works for you, by all means, enjoy, just don't forget, Christians may openly disagree, but they are not promising your death.

Are you drunk?

Granger...you are normally so well-written. You do realize that "Islam" is not a country.....Right?

But, first, you are using the Persecution Fallacy. Just because I find your belief a little silly, it doesn't mean I am "attacking" you. I find it absurd that the gigantic majority of Americans who are Christian claim they are being "attacked" every time a court rules in favor of the Constitution and not the Bible.

My entire family and most of my friends are Christian (mostly Catholic). I love them no less, nor do I ever "attack" them. I even go to church with them on holidays occasionally to experience celebrations with them. I'm sorry your father was, seemingly, unreasonable.

I agree that most Christians I know are kind and giving people, and strive to be "good" people. But, that doesn't mean they cannot be simultaneously supportive of murder, torture, and genocide. Americans are overwhelmingly Christian, and overwhelmingly supportive of the bankster takeover, the wars of aggression, and killing little brown children because their parents are Mooslems. You tell me?

No, the US is the most religious nation on earth, and most homogenius (mostly Christian, whereas nations like, say, Syria, have a large mix of many) Israel has many more atheists and non-religious people by percentage. Most European nations are triple the percentage of the US for non-religious and atheists. The only nation that comes close is Turkey.

"If being an infidel works for you, by all means, enjoy, just don't forget, Christians may openly disagree, but they are not promising your death."
Um....an "indidel" is not synonymous with "atheist". An infidel is someone with a different god belief. And, why the absurd "promising your death" thing? That's a bit odd, I would never make that claim.

Don't worry, I'm not going to attack you.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

No

I was not drunk. I rarely have a drink.

Islam is a religious nation.. not a country, not a political state, but a nation as it unites muslims politically that crosses ALL borders, with the intent to take the world.

I was using the term "attack", as you had used the term "attack". It wasn't personal, in was general.. having to do with freedom being under attack.

My father was very reasonable.. he felt that there was nothing reasonable about religion and everyone in a religion should be shot for being unreasonable.

I think when one is born in a religion, it's normal to rebel.

People are individuals and they have all kinds of reasons for going to chruch or claiming to be a believer.. my experience is most folks in church are want to be believers, they go because church is community.. thats why the church is packed at holidays.. they are there to be seen..

Non believers, and people who believe in anything besides Allah are infidels.

I am not worries about YOU attacking me, and I hope that would be visa versa. I have been a member of many religions.. just wriote my preist a long letter, three weeks ago.. no response.. that's OK.. I'm checking out the messianic Jews.. and I like them.. but this is opening my mind more to Judaism in general. And that's why I like America.. I can be anything I want to be religiously, or not.

Peace be with you!