Which would you prefer; A New World Order or a World Caliphate?

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Which would you prefer; A New World Order or a World Caliphate?


Or a perpetual insurgency war against civilians?


https://ca.video.search.yahoo.com/s...=77ea709dd407928cc813f5d0e6e9fb90&action=view


Islam’s hates democracy and the Western culture. Islam is determined to destroy the West and democracy so as to install a World Caliphate.


The West is beginning to hate Islam thanks to this hatred against them and Western ideas of a New World Order.


If we as a world cannot change our views and remove this hate from our hearts, we are bound to end in a larger numbers of small battles within a larger war.


We must find a better way to appease our objections to rapprochement. If we cannot dispel these irritants, a long and expanding jihad is inevitable. Because the jihad can only be an insurgency war, eventually the West will have to resort to the same techniques if the West is to win. This then would make the war against civilians instead against combatants. This is a coward’s war that Islam is forcing onto the world. Islam of course will blame the West for the war that the West will blame on Islam.


Both sides want to eventually have a one world government. I advocate for a one world government and think that the West and Islam should sit down and decide the rules of this one world government and to see if there is any rapprochement possible between what would be an Islamic theocracy or Caliphate, with an absentee God ruling through Sharia, and a freedom promoting Western system with a visible elected ruler.


If no rapprochement is possible then it is the Wests duty to declare a war against Islam and annihilate it if it will not reform into a peaceful world religion.


Many try to cut radical jihadists out of Islam’s general population and say they are hijacking Islam and are not really real Muslims. I suggest that Islam itself and their holy books are what are creating these extremists and that Islam has now produced a majority of extremists within its general population. If Islam does not reform its belief system and literature, the West will have no choice but to try to destroy Islam. The older world would have had to do the same with Christianity if it had maintained its own jihad that was called the Inquisition. Radical Islam is being seen as the mainstream Islam and the world cannot and will not live with such an Islam.


We are not creating any new conditions between Islam and the West. Attacks and the death of innocent non-combatants civilians in this cowardly jihad will continue if no new conditions are introduced. It is said that to continue to do the same thing and expect a different outcome, is insanity. We are at the point of insanity and that is why I suggest a new condition which would be peace negotiations that would produce a new order in the world that would embrace both Western ideologies as well as Muslim ideologies.


This may be the only way to rid the world of the hate and cowardly jihad against civilians. A form of insurgency fighting that the West would have to adopt against Islam to win the jihad.


If you do not agree, then what would you suggest to bring the West and Islam to a rapprochement?


Regards

DL

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Which would you prefer; A New World Order or a World Caliphate?
Or a perpetual insurgency war against civilians?

You seem to be quite the confused individual. "Gnosticism" is quite contradictory to Christianity, and the question is not one of a "New World Order", or a "World Caliphate". Both, of course, would be a "New World Order" since they would change the current global system. Then too, there is the difference in the meaning of the terms depending on your spiritual point of view. Contrary to your beliefs, either system would still be run by man even as hey are today.

And the battle is not against civilians. In this particular example you are using it is one of a spiritual nature, and a battle for "souls". The "civilian" is simply the carrier of that "soul", and most often "collateral" damage.

Both sides want to eventually have a one world government. I advocate for a one world government and think that the West and Islam should sit down and decide the rules of this one world government and to see if there is any rapprochement possible between what would be an Islamic theocracy or Caliphate, with an absentee God ruling through Sharia, and a freedom promoting Western system with a visible elected ruler.

If no rapprochement is possible then it is the Wests duty to declare a war against Islam and annihilate it if it will not reform into a peaceful world religion.

Regards

Again you post confusion. Sharia Law is administered by physical beings just as Christian Law, or "Western Law", is. Both sides have a visible leader, and both sides worship an "absentee God". And again there is a difference between the Christian view of a "New World Order" (Kingdom of God descending to Earth, or the "New Jerusalem" Revelation 21), one ruled over in the presence of God, and the Islamic view where the land is ruled over by man similar to a "theocracy". Not sure what "rapprochement" you would be seeking aside from maybe tolerance.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

You seem to be quite the confused individual. "Gnosticism" is quite contradictory to Christianity, and the question is not one of a "New World Order", or a "World Caliphate". Both, of course, would be a "New World Order" since they would change the current global system. Then too, there is the difference in the meaning of the terms depending on your spiritual point of view. Contrary to your beliefs, either system would still be run by man even as hey are today.

And the battle is not against civilians. In this particular example you are using it is one of a spiritual nature, and a battle for "souls". The "civilian" is simply the carrier of that "soul", and most often "collateral" damage.



Again you post confusion. Sharia Law is administered by physical beings just as Christian Law, or "Western Law", is. Both sides have a visible leader, and both sides worship an "absentee God". And again there is a difference between the Christian view of a "New World Order" (Kingdom of God descending to Earth, or the "New Jerusalem" Revelation 21), one ruled over in the presence of God, and the Islamic view where the land is ruled over by man similar to a "theocracy". Not sure what "rapprochement" you would be seeking aside from maybe tolerance.

You are the confused on thinking civilians being targeted directly are collateral damage.

Tolerance is what is required but Islam and Sharia do lot allow tolerance for those who are not Muslims.

And yes, I recognize that any system would be run by men as there are no supernatural Gods popping up to do the job.

Only fools expect that one will.

Regards
DL

 

[Old_Trapper70]

You are the confused on thinking civilians being targeted directly are collateral damage.

Tolerance is what is required but Islam and Sharia do lot allow tolerance for those who are not Muslims.

And yes, I recognize that any system would be run by men as there are no supernatural Gods popping up to do the job.

Only fools expect that one will.

Regards
DL

You can take notice that I put collateral in quotation marks symbolizing that it was sarcasm. However, the battle is still not against civilians, they are just tools for which ever side wants to use them as such.

If you understood the Koran, and obviously you know even less of that then you do of the Bible, or maybe your ignorance is equal of both, the Koran only allows for attacks on others if the Muslim is first attacked, and never on civilians. In fact, it is the perversion of the Koran by the likes of you that allows for the Islamic terrorist to proceed with his actions.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

You can take notice that I put collateral in quotation marks symbolizing that it was sarcasm. However, the battle is still not against civilians, they are just tools for which ever side wants to use them as such.

If you understood the Koran, and obviously you know even less of that then you do of the Bible, or maybe your ignorance is equal of both, the Koran only allows for attacks on others if the Muslim is first attacked, and never on civilians. In fact, it is the perversion of the Koran by the likes of you that allows for the Islamic terrorist to proceed with his actions.

Your knowledge of both religions is great so I do not understand how you can support either religion as both only serve to produce homophobic and misogynous men.

Neither religion is worthy of respect.

Your beliefs have corrupted your morals. You might want to wonder why.

Regards
DL

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Your knowledge of both religions is great so I do not understand how you can support either religion as both only serve to produce homophobic and misogynous men.

That too is a false statement. If you were to read scripture, such as Proverbs 31: 10-31, or Ephesians 5: 28 (also written by Paul) you would come to an understanding that the woman is to be revered, and loved. As to the homosexual, the Bible is a moral guide for what is termed "Natures God". Man was not created for perverse sexual pleasures, nor was the woman. And while some will make the claim that homosexuality is present in the animal kingdom, this is also false since it does not occur in all species. There are some primates that seem to engage in such for pleasure, or to demonstrate domination.

Neither religion is worthy of respect.

Both are. It is those who pervert the teachings that are not to be respected.

Your beliefs have corrupted your morals. You might want to wonder why.

Long ago your beliefs "corrupted" my morals. However, I finally grew up, and rejected such a sordid life.

 

[Cruella]

This country was formed in part by the desire to be free of both an authoritarian government and the freedom to worship as one pleases. Islam is an 8th century belief and form of government and doesn't fit with ours, nor does Islam believe in the rights of others to have their own religion.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

This country was formed in part by the desire to be free of both an authoritarian government and the freedom to worship as one pleases. Islam is an 8th century belief and form of government and doesn't fit with ours, nor does Islam believe in the rights of others to have their own religion.

You have never rad the Koran, now have you? Just as some have perverted the teachings of the scripture, so have many perverted the teachings of the Koran.

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/islam/tolerance.htm

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

That too is a false statement. If you were to read scripture, such as Proverbs 31: 10-31, or Ephesians 5: 28 (also written by Paul) you would come to an understanding that the woman is to be revered, and loved. As to the homosexual, the Bible is a moral guide for what is termed "Natures God". Man was not created for perverse sexual pleasures, nor was the woman. And while some will make the claim that homosexuality is present in the animal kingdom, this is also false since it does not occur in all species. There are some primates that seem to engage in such for pleasure, or to demonstrate domination.



Both are. It is those who pervert the teachings that are not to be respected.



Long ago your beliefs "corrupted" my morals. However, I finally grew up, and rejected such a sordid life.

Go away with your fears of being gay.

You do not do unto others and show your corrupted morals.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

This country was formed in part by the desire to be free of both an authoritarian government and the freedom to worship as one pleases. Islam is an 8th century belief and form of government and doesn't fit with ours, nor does Islam believe in the rights of others to have their own religion.

20/20

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

You have never rad the Koran, now have you? Just as some have perverted the teachings of the scripture, so have many perverted the teachings of the Koran.

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/islam/tolerance.htm

Both Christianity and Islam are corrupted as you say. Yet you say they deserve respect. Pffft.

Regards
DL

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Go away with your fears of being gay.

You do not do unto others and show your corrupted morals.

Regards
DL

LOL, you know so little I wonder how you know how to feed yourself.

Just exactly which of my morals is "corrupted"?

Not sure how you got an idea of how I "fear being gay", but I guess that is part of your delusion.

Both Christianity and Islam are corrupted as you say. Yet you say they deserve respect. Pffft.

Again you prove how little you understand, or can comprehend, the English language. I said the practitioners of the Christian, and Muslim, faiths have corrupted the teachings. Maybe I should use big letters for you blind ones.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Are you now saying you support gays?

Tell us then how you do unto others then where gays are at issue.

Regards
DL

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Are you now saying you support gays?

Tell us then how you do unto others then where gays are at issue.

Regards
DL

You have never heard of Matthew 7: 12 "All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets?

I do not support their lifestyle believing it is immoral, however, I do support their civil rights as human beings. And marriage is now a civil right since the Church's acquiesced their power over such to the State.

You do understand that we live in a secular society, not a theocracy, right?

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

You have never heard of Matthew 7: 12 "All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets?

I do not support their lifestyle believing it is immoral, however, I do support their civil rights as human beings. And marriage is now a civil right since the Church's acquiesced their power over such to the State.

You do understand that we live in a secular society, not a theocracy, right?

You discriminate without a just cause against gays.

While saying you do unto others as you would like done to you.

Seems you would like to be discriminated against without a just cause.

Regards
DL