First they came for gays, throwing them from high buildings, burning them alive and filling America with brutal executions, but government media blamed guns.
Next they came for Christians, burning their churches, executing families with suffering slow death, but government media blamed intolerance toward Muslims.
Then they came for young girls, mutilating their genitals, selling them into cruel marriage filling their young lives with savage rape and sodomy, when the young girls refused their faces were burned off with acid, but government media blamed conservatives for provoking the Prophets of Islam.
Finally, they came for our flag but who was left to resist?
And some of it managed by Obama directly.
Put them ALL in FEMA camps, Prepare them for deportation to their country of origin .... If they find their way back, exterminate them on the spot.......
JJ , while they are in FEMA camps; don't forget that they must be responsible for raising fat hogs and butchering them so they will have life sustaining meat= "if they desire to live"...!
HONESTLY. They should be executed, Then... pour PIGS BLOOD all over their body. This would terrify them beyond belief. If this WAS done, "none" of them would go to their heaven with 35 virgins! I can not go into details... but when I was stationed over there, I VERY quickly learned this act of PIGS BLOOD would cause them to nearly turn white with FEAR ! Please...Don't think I am kidding..I AM NOT. PIGS BLOOD puts the fear of God into them more than you can ever imagine.
Deport them, every last one.
Let’s us not depart from the love of God for the children here should be our first concern.
And if we disallow anyone and from coming to our shores legally for help and the invitation is legal, the little young children will pay the price from those who would do them harm. Some are coming in as orphans and we will have to deal with the fathers and mothers as best we can in due time.
America has always extended its love to everyone.
I’ll leave “What Should America do with Muslim Terrorist” to the newly elected officials in November and let’s hope and pray it will not be the same party that is now in power and then we won’t have to ask that same question again.
Are you a graduate of the common core system? America has NOT always extended it's love to everyone. Clearly you've either forgotten American History or flunked. AND God does NOT expect us to extend love to an enemy who's intent is to do us harm. And that's not MY word...that's His Word.
The First Barbary War (1801–1805) also known as the Tripolitan War or the Barbary Coast War, was the first of two wars fought between the United States and the Northwest African Berber Muslim states known collectively as the Barbary States. These were the Ottoman provinces of Tripoli, Algiers, and Tunis, which were enjoying a large autonomy, as well as the independent Sultanate of Morocco. The war was fought because U.S. President Thomas Jefferson refused to pay the high tributes demanded by the Barbary states and because they were seizing American merchant ships and enslaving the crews for high ransoms. It was the first declared war the United States fought on foreign land and seas.
In 1786, Jefferson and John Adams met with Tripoli’s ambassador to Great Britain. They asked this ‘diplomat’ by what right his nation attacked American ships and enslaved her citizens and why the Muslims held such hostility toward this new nation, with which neither Tripoli nor any of the other Barbary Coast nations had any previous contact. The answer was quite revealing. Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja (the ambassador) replied that Islam:
“Was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
That is indeed quite revealing. Yet, America continued paying ransoms to these terrorists for the next fifteen years or so. Until Jefferson became President. Then, the Pasha (leader) of Tripoli sent a demand to the new leader for an immediate payment of $225,000 and $25,000 per year on an ongoing basis. Jefferson flatly refused, leading the Pasha to cut down the flagpole of the American consulate and declaring war on the United States. The rest of the terrorist states followed suit.
Jefferson had formerly been against raising a navy, but this soon changed as he was determined to meet force with force. A squadron of vessels was sent to the area and Congress authorized Jefferson to have the US ships seize all vessels and goods that belonged to the Pasha and anything else deemed necessary. As they saw the US was actually committed to the fight, Algiers and Tunis quickly abandoned the war and allegiance to Tripoli. Obviously, the US won the war. In fact, this was the reason why the line “to the shores of Tripoli” was added to the Marine Corps hymn.
You have listed a few baddies and I know that it would take a very long time to point out all the wrongs of America and the rest of the world as well. God destroyed the world because of evil continually. But we must choose a different route.
Jesus did say “I give you a new command: Love one another. Just as I have loved you, you must love one another. By this they will all know that you are my disciples—by your love for one another." John 13: 34, 35 And He also said, “How many times am I to forgive my brother when he wrongs me? Seven times over?" Jesus said to him, "Not seven times over, I tell you, but seventy-seven times over!” Matthew 18: 21, 22 (Basically He is saying don’t count, just forgive)
We have two different America; I choose the one of love though others may choose the one of hate.
And what if we could all choose to love one another why we would be in heaven for that is truly the only place that this will ever happen.
Love includes being tough when necessary to protect those in danger from hate and the evil of this world.... love doesn't permit evil to murder the innocent and love... will consign evil to the lake of fire. Love has Armies in Heaven ready to restore order in the Earth... Love is not always peaceful.
Best remark yet Col Nelson.
What la-la land have you been living in all your life? This isn't about forgiving some minor non-life threatening interaction. We're talking about people who ENJOY torturing, enslaving, raping, and MURDERING people, INCLUDING their own. And God gives a whole 'nother set of rules for that. Jesus specifically admonishes us to be prepared at all times to protect ourselves, family, disabled and community. You need to choose the right scripture, in the right context for each situation. God knows full-well there are circumstances where you can NOT just turn the other cheek, and you need to learn it too...
Not only are we to take care of our bodies and the life contained. We have an obligation to preserve the body and life of other people. Psalm 82:4 even cites an obligation to protect those who are in danger:
Psalm 82:4 Rescue the weak and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.
Consider also Proverbs 24:11, which indicates we have a duty to preserve the lives of those who are harming themselves:
Proverbs 24:11 Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter.
Ezekiel 33 is a well-known passage:
'But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and a sword comes and takes a person from them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require from the watchman's hand.'
If you know danger is coming to others, and you deliberately fail to warn the others of the danger, you are guilty of harming the victims. This is not to say that you can make people heed your warning. The surrounding verses also say that if the people refuse to heed the warning of the watchmen, the watchman is not guilty if they are harmed.
We also see principles in Mosaic law teaching that if we fail to guard the lives of others, we are guilty. In Deuteronomy 22:8, if someone falls from your roof, and you failed to install a safety fence around the edge, you would be held liable for the death of that person. Likewise, in Exodus 21:29-31, if a man has an ox which is prone to harm people, the owner is held liable if he fails to confine it and the ox harms or kills others. If the ox harms someone, the negligent owner is fined. If the ox kills someone, the negligent owner is to be put to death.
The principle could hardly be stated more forcefully: you must protect your life and the lives of others.
In Nehemiah 4, Israelites have been sent back from captivity to rebuild Jerusalem. They were rebuilding their lives with the sanction of the civil ruler, King Artaxerxes. This was not a wartime scenario. It was closer to a racial integration scenario where racists wanted to kill them. Think of the KKK threatening black homeowners and students. They are surrounded by people who hate them and want to kill them.
These were citizens, not soldiers. Nehemiah 4:13 says that people stationed "people by families" around the city. These were not trained soldiers or law enforcement officers. They were merely concerned residents and settlers—citizens, not professional soldiers or law enforcement agents.
Note that these families were armed, with "their swords, their spears, and their bows." This is a situation where they are willing to apply lethal force to defend themselves.
Let's briefly discuss swords, spears, and bows. Swords and daggers killed Ehud, Amasa, and eighty priests. At longer ranges, we know bows and slings killed men like Goliath, King Joram, and King Ahab. Spears killed men like Asahel, Absaolm, the Israelite man and the Midianitish woman, and many others. These are handguns, shotguns, and rifles. These are implements of lethal force. In fact, at close range, a sword is more deadly than a handgun. These ancient weapons are as deadly as their modern counterparts.
Note that they are carrying these weapons for personal defense and civil defense, and that these are "assault weapons", namely, the same types of weapons that armies would use for offensive purposes. And why wouldn't they want assault weapons (for those weapons are the most effective weapons for defending oneself)? Why would you not want to use the best tools available for the task at hand?
Against what are they defending themselves? The crime of unlawful, racist murder. Hate crimes. They are defending their lives and their homes. Nehemiah 4:14 specifically says, "...fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your houses." It is good and right to defend your family, even using lethal force weapons.
One final observation: In self-defense, these citizens did not merely own weapons. Rather, where they perceived a risk of harm to their persons, they carried their weapons with them, as many people legally carry weapons with them today, for the purpose of self-protection:
Nehemiah 4 17 Those who were rebuilding the wall and those who carried burdens took their load with one hand doing the work and the other holding a weapon. 18 As for the builders, each wore his sword girded at his side as he built, while the trumpeter stood near me. ... 21 So we carried on the work with half of them holding spears from dawn until the stars appeared. .... 23 So neither I, my brothers, my servants, nor the men of the guard who followed me, none of us removed our clothes, each took his weapon even to the water.
If you live somewhere where you have reason to be concerned about crime, this would be similar to legally carrying a weapon to defend your family, even when running daily errands to the store.
The final Old Testament passage we examine is in the book of Esther. Here we have a historical example arranged by Divine Providence. In this account, the Jews are under threat of racial violence. The civil authority, King Ahasuerus, grants them legal permission to use lethal force in self-defense:
Esther 8:11-12 11 By these letters the king permitted the Jews who were in every city to gather together and protect their lives -- to destroy, kill, and annihilate all the forces of any people or province that would assault them, both little children and women, and to plunder their possessions...
So they have legal sanction to "protect their lives" using ultimate force, much as we do in most parts of this country. They are allowed to "kill and annihilate" in order to "protect their lives." Now, as people under obligation to obey God, not just stay within the civil laws of Ahasuerus, what do the Jews do with this legal freedom?
Esther 9:1-5 ...the Jews themselves overpowered those who hated them. 2 The Jews gathered together in their cities throughout all the provinces of King Ahasuerus to lay hands on those who sought their harm. And no one could withstand them, because fear of them fell upon all people.... 5 Thus the Jews defeated all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, with slaughter and destruction,
We see that given legal sanction to defend their lives with lethal force, they do not choose non-violence. Rather, as it says in verse 11, to "protect their lives", they use the "sword" (verse 5). Here is another example of widespread use of weapons in self-defense—a non-wartime, non-law enforcement scenario.
Luke 22:35-39 And He said to them, "When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?" So they said, "Nothing." 36Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. 37 "For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end." 38 So they said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." And He said to them, "It is enough." 39 Coming out, He went to the Mount of Olives, as He was accustomed, and His disciples also followed Him.
Here's the context. Picture this. Jesus and his disciples have just had communion. They are about to go to a time of prayer in the garden. Jesus says these words to His disciples, and it's as if they are saying, "Look what we have with us, Lord. Two guns!" Jesus responds, "It is enough."
If you read commentaries on this passage, there are a number of questions which are not clearly answered. There are questions about the applicability of this passage, of the intent of Jesus, of the meaning of His response.
Whatever your interpretation of this passage, there are a few broad-stroke observations we can make about this passage.
It is difficult to make absolute claims beyond these observations, but the observations themselves have significance. Namely, among those closest to Jesus, some carried personal weapons in His presence with His consent to communion and to prayer meetings. We cannot make absolute claims as to the reasons, right or, wrong, for the carriage of these weapons. Perhaps it was in anticipation of trouble from the Jewish leadership. Perhaps it was protection against mere robbers. Paul in 2 Cor. 11:26 cites the "perils of robbers". Though there are questions we can't answer, we do know they possessed these weapons, that they carried these weapons, and that Jesus knew and consented. Furthermore, Jesus spoke of some time, present or future, when disciples would need to acquire personal weapons, even more urgently than garments.
Great work Marilyn...
I would like to add that during the time of Jesus... in Luke 22:35-39 it was ILLEGAL For Jews to have swords, the Roman's forbid them to be armed. Yet, Jesus tells them: "... he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."
Not only did Jesus approve of being armed... he told his disciples to violate the Caesars law, regarding being armed. What does that tell us today... concerning a government that would disarm us?