Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Angry Ron Paul Defends Ground Zero Mosque


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Should a Christian support a man who is for building the mosque? People forget that we are Christians first and the final authority in our lives is not the Constitution but rather the Bible. Why do we find so many Christians defending the Muslims right to build the mosque? This is no better than wishing a false teacher or heretic godspeed. It seems that Christians have run to the defense of just about every crazy wickedness and "right" these days because the Constitution backs it. I betcha the Founding Father's wouldn't back the mosque being built at Ground Zero.

Oh, and by the way, any group that is anti-Israel you will find Ron Paul supporting.

Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Should a Christian support a man who is for building the mosque? People forget that we are Christians first and the final authority in our lives is not the Constitution but rather the Bible. Why do we find so many Christians defending the Muslims right to build the mosque? This is no better than wishing a false teacher or heretic godspeed. It seems that Christians have run to the defense of just about every crazy wickedness and "right" these days because the Constitution backs it. I betcha the Founding Father's wouldn't back the mosque being built at Ground Zero.

Oh, and by the way, any group that is anti-Israel you will find Ron Paul supporting.


:amen: The prOBlem is that so many professing Christians today have bought into liberalism and the idea of a liberal America. Rather than being true followers of Christ, they are followers of liberalism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Should a Christian support a man who is for building the mosque? People forget that we are Christians first and the final authority in our lives is not the Constitution but rather the Bible. Why do we find so many Christians defending the Muslims right to build the mosque? This is no better than wishing a false teacher or heretic godspeed. It seems that Christians have run to the defense of just about every crazy wickedness and "right" these days because the Constitution backs it. I betcha the Founding Father's wouldn't back the mosque being built at Ground Zero.

Oh, and by the way, any group that is anti-Israel you will find Ron Paul supporting.


No, but many professing Christians will support the ways of that old devil. And every Christian better understand that the old devil is behind this mosque.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



True, but again, many of them know no better.


Why don't they know better? Because they sit in unbiblical liberal churches listening to liberal pastors and don't bother to read and study the Word of God daily so they may know the truth.

Many should and could know better because true followers of Christ have pointed out to them the importance of personal Bible reading, leaving unbiblical liberal churches and getting into a proper biblical church where the pastor truly teaches the whole Word of God yet they refuse to be moved from their comfortable, unbiblical ways and choose to follow self and others rather than following Christ as Scripture commands.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Should a Christian support a man who is for building the mosque? People forget that we are Christians first and the final authority in our lives is not the Constitution but rather the Bible. Why do we find so many Christians defending the Muslims right to build the mosque? This is no better than wishing a false teacher or heretic godspeed. It seems that Christians have run to the defense of just about every crazy wickedness and "right" these days because the Constitution backs it. I betcha the Founding Father's wouldn't back the mosque being built at Ground Zero.

Oh, and by the way, any group that is anti-Israel you will find Ron Paul supporting.


There's a difference in matters of church and matters of state. If you can't tell the difference than there isn't much i can do to help you there.

I betcha the Founding Fathers would support the building of a mosque seeing as how they wrote the Constitution and found freedom of religion important enough to make it the first amendment.

P.S. The proposed mosque site isn't anymore at ground zero than my Manhattan apartment is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



There's a difference in matters of church and matters of state. If you can't tell the difference than there isn't much i can do to help you there.

I betcha the Founding Fathers would support the building of a mosque seeing as how they wrote the Constitution and found freedom of religion important enough to make it the first amendment.

P.S. The proposed mosque site isn't anymore at ground zero than my Manhattan apartment is.


Actually...BEFORE 9/11, our founding fathers may have considered it.

AFTER 9/11....nah. Our founding fathers would have kicked them all back home to the middle east, just like they did the British who were against our country. No room here for anti-American sentiment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Actually...BEFORE 9/11, our founding fathers may have considered it.

AFTER 9/11....nah. Our founding fathers would have kicked them all back home to the middle east, just like they did the British who were against our country. No room here for anti-American sentiment.


Well unless you want to turn this into China or the Soviet Union there is. People are free to criticize the government or the country here.

Kick them back to the middle east? Well, you can deport people who are here on visas. As far as people who are citizens and people who have always been Americans (many of whom are Muslim) you really can't kick them out. If anyone does, you and I better start getting nervous. As far as the example of the British during the American Revolution? That was before we ever had a Constitution.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



There's a difference in matters of church and matters of state. If you can't tell the difference than there isn't much i can do to help you there.

I betcha the Founding Fathers would support the building of a mosque seeing as how they wrote the Constitution and found freedom of religion important enough to make it the first amendment.

P.S. The proposed mosque site isn't anymore at ground zero than my Manhattan apartment is.


Read your KJB and you'll learn there is not a difference in matters of church and matters of state when it comes to being a Christian and living according to the Word of God.

Also, if you read the writings and speeches of the Founders you will learn their main purpose for the First Amendment was for the free excercise of Christianity without any denomination having dominion or government support over the others. In their writings they often used the term religion interchangably with Christianity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I betcha the Founding Fathers would support the building of a mosque seeing as how they wrote the Constitution and found freedom of religion important enough to make it the first amendment.Well, if it were the simple act of building a mosque, maybe so. But I do believe you'd lose your bet with this particular mosque. If these conditions (9-11) had existed back then, and this mosque were proposed, they would have looked into it a bit more deeply. Just the imam's assertion that he wouldn't turn down money from certain groups would have caused them to step in. You can assume all you want to that it is simply a matter of religous freedom, but it isn't. Islam doesn't work that way. And I guarantee our founders wouldn't use the imam as an "ambassador."

P.S. The proposed mosque site isn't anymore at ground zero than my Manhattan apartment is.Well, if your Manhattan apartment was hit by plane parts and subsequently closed because of it, then you are correct - it is no more "at" ground zero than the mosque site. The mosque site was originally a Burlington building that was hit by parts and the business closed...fallout from the 9-11 attack - so, it's close enough. Plus - there is debate over whether or not it is completely private property. At last look, it seems that the NY electric company owned part of it...


I would agree with Ron Paul - not voter for him, though - (stating they have a Constitutional right) if I didn't believe very strongly (based on muslim history and the imam's comments...) that this isn't a religious liberty issue. Islam is determined to bring Sharia law here to America, and has succeeded in some areas. That is a travesty, and it isn't religious liberty. It is a subversion of the US Constitution.

Eminent domain has been used throughout this country for purposes for which it was never intended. Such as strip malls...The idea is interesting, although I don't know that I would support it, because I'm not enamored with the idea of eminent domain at all.

BTW - there are a lot of non-Christians who support the Constitution. Just because loonies back someone who does doesn't make that person wrong...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Read your KJB and you'll learn there is not a difference in matters of church and matters of state when it comes to being a Christian and living according to the Word of God.

Also, if you read the writings and speeches of the Founders you will learn their main purpose for the First Amendment was for the free excercise of Christianity without any denomination having dominion or government support over the others. In their writings they often used the term religion interchangably with Christianity.


John, I've said it before, I'll say it again, many there be that feel the Christians behavior is different within the church than it is in the world, that is they walk by one set of rules in church, leaving them at the door as they exit church, them abide by a different set of rules.

That is much like a member of the churches of Christ stated, "The Bible is for church and home, we are to leave it in our church and home, and not carry its way into the world as we leave our church & or home. I have come to notice on thing about those who feel this way, they are real friendly with the world, that is seem more concerned about matters of the world than matter of God.

2Ti 2:4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

Lu 8:14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

Mt 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

Jas 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Yes, many there be that entangled them self in the cares of this world.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Read your KJB and you'll learn there is not a difference in matters of church and matters of state when it comes to being a Christian and living according to the Word of God.

Also, if you read the writings and speeches of the Founders you will learn their main purpose for the First Amendment was for the free excercise of Christianity without any denomination having dominion or government support over the others. In their writings they often used the term religion interchangably with Christianity.


I do read my Bible - a few versions actually.

And I've read and studied the writings of the founders. The thing is they were pretty smart and had a way with words. They knew how things were across the pond and if they had wanted to say Christianity they would have. If they had wanted to make this country a haven for Christians of different denominations they would have said that. But they didn't. They chose to advocate for religious freedom because they realized how terrible it is to be persecuted for a religious belief no matter what that belief is. This isn't a theocracy. Original intent won't hold water here.


John, I've said it before, I'll say it again, many there be that feel the Christians behavior is different within the church than it is in the world, that is they walk by one set of rules in church, leaving them at the door as they exit church, them abide by a different set of rules.

That is much like a member of the churches of Christ stated, "The Bible is for church and home, we are to leave it in our church and home, and not carry its way into the world as we leave our church & or home. I have come to notice on thing about those who feel this way, they are real friendly with the world, that is seem more concerned about matters of the world than matter of God.

2Ti 2:4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

Lu 8:14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.

2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

Mt 13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

Jas 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

Yes, many there be that entangled them self in the cares of this world.


My behavior isn't different in church than it is elsewhere. Also, I don't abide by a set of "rules" I abide by God's grace.

The reason I say that church and state are different is because they are. The government is not a church. I am not going to use the government to force my religion or my religious beliefs and preferences on people. That is neither biblical, reasonable, or acceptable. People who want to use the government to oppose the building of a mosque are doing just that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's a sad truth Jerry. I've heard many professing Christians say Christianity is for Sunday and church, not for the workplace or voting booth or when going out to have fun.

Scripture does indeed teach otherwise. We are to give up our whole lives to Christ. In fact, we are told to die to self.

American Christians especially seem to want to have everything their own way, including their religion. They don't want the Jesus of the Bible, they want a Jesus that will make sure they get to heaven but won't bother them with however they want to live their lives now.

We would do well to remember that Scripture says FEW will be saved while MANY will spend eternity in Hell.

If one is unwilling to truly make Christ Lord of their lives then they would be wise to study the Word to see if they are even saved or not.

The old words, "better safe than sorry", could apply no more importantly anywhere than here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



My behavior isn't different in church than it is elsewhere. Also, I don't abide by a set of "rules" I abide by God's grace.




We are saved by grace and the proof of our salvation is that we have accepted Christ as Lord and OBey His Word. We are commanded to abide in His Word. It's His Word that gives us the commands Christ says we are to keep and that if we do indeed love Him, we will keep His commandments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

CPR is correct, church and government are two different things. But this country has historically abided by Biblical principles...

Most people are not opposing the building of the mosque. They are opposed to the LOCATION. If the mosque were moved I doubt there would be any outcry (and that would be a shame considering that it will be funded by terrorists in large part...which removes any Constitutional protection). But they don't want to move it - they aren't truly interested in fosterting good will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...