• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
JackieO

At least 6 dead after suicide bomb attacks on churches in Indonesia

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

I would like to see the Pope speak out against the underlying motivation for these and similar crimes: the ideology of sunni islam.

But he won't.

Too many people view islam as another religion. To talk of it as an ideology makes people dismiss its principles as academic and too serious to try and understand. Far better in my view to call it a cult:

Quote

The third, and most commonly used definition, refers to a religious group that is:

1) Exclusive. They may say, "We're the only ones with the truth; everyone else is wrong; and if you leave our group your salvation is in danger."

2) Secretive. Certain teachings are not available to outsiders or they're presented only to certain members, sometimes after taking vows of confidentiality.

3) Authoritarian. A human leader expects total loyalty and unquestioned obedience.

By calling it a cult it immediately gives it a negative connotation from our Western European perspective, and calls into question the stupidity and naivety of its adherents. After all does anyone with any intelligence seriously believe that a violent fool who murders and injures innocent people going about their everyday activities is a martyr who will be rewarded in the after life? 

While I'm ranting how often have you heard Islamic apologists make the claim that there are terrible writings of violence in The Bible to divert from the inherent aggressiveness of islam.

Well to start with The Biblical stories set the scene for the qu'ran, which is a sequel to The Bible in any case, written hundreds of years after it.

The New Testament contains the teachings of Jesus, a peaceful man who did not commit any acts of violence in contrast to mo the warlord. 

Then the violence in the Old Testament is descriptive, whereas the qu'ran is prescriptive. The Old Testament describes what happened, the qu'ran instructs followers to commit violent acts. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Then the violence in the Old Testament is descriptive, whereas the qu'ran is prescriptive. The Old Testament describes what happened, the qu'ran instructs followers to commit violent acts. 

I had the same argument on facebook with some knob-end that was threatening to report someone else for moaning about islamic bombs going off, as hate speech to the police. He used that argument violence in the Bible = violence in the quran. He could understand the Bible and the quran totally but couldn't understand the above sentence!  :wanker:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

While I'm ranting how often have you heard Islamic apologists make the claim that there are terrible writings of violence in The Bible to divert from the inherent aggressiveness of islam.

In than situation I normally point out that Harry Potter books contain a lot of violence as well and not many use them as an inspiration to kill...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

1) Exclusive. They may say, "We're the only ones with the truth; everyone else is wrong; and if you leave our group your salvation is in danger."

2) Secretive. Certain teachings are not available to outsiders or they're presented only to certain members, sometimes after taking vows of confidentiality.

3) Authoritarian. A human leader expects total loyalty and unquestioned obedience.

 Does anyone know if there is any secretive shiyte in islam that is not generally known to outsiders, or to most insiders

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Too many people view islam as another religion. To talk of it as an ideology makes people dismiss its principles as academic and too serious to try and understand. Far better in my view to call it a cult:

By calling it a cult it immediately gives it a negative connotation from our Western European perspective, and calls into question the stupidity and naivety of its adherents. After all does anyone with any intelligence seriously believe that a violent fool who murders and injures innocent people going about their everyday activities is a martyr who will be rewarded in the after life? 

While I'm ranting how often have you heard Islamic apologists make the claim that there are terrible writings of violence in The Bible to divert from the inherent aggressiveness of islam.

Well to start with The Biblical stories set the scene for the qu'ran, which is a sequel to The Bible in any case, written hundreds of years after it.

The New Testament contains the teachings of Jesus, a peaceful man who did not commit any acts of violence in contrast to mo the warlord. 

Then the violence in the Old Testament is descriptive, whereas the qu'ran is prescriptive. The Old Testament describes what happened, the qu'ran instructs followers to commit violent acts. 

 

 

 

Is it also that the modern day leaders are different.  It still needs leaders to interpret.

I don't think any modern christian leaders would encourage and endorse violence and favour and approve violent people because of "the book" but can that be said for some other religions.

The christian book is also backed up by the christian law which emphasises the good and decries the bad.  Can that be said for some other religions.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Talking Monkey said:

Does anyone know if there is any secretive shiyte in islam that is not generally known to outsiders, or to most insiders

 

From what I've read the qu'ran, the unexpurgated perfect and final word of god, is written in a language that is not now spoken. It is subject to many interpretations, each of which is the true interpretation and the other false interpretations are done so with the intent of deceiving. The schisms in islam started on the death of mo, ironically he eat poison knowing that god would not let him, the perfect man, die.

This is a list of the mainstream Islamic sects: https://www.culteducation.com/group/994-islamic-fundamentalists/10466-a-guide-to-islamic-sects.html

There are many secret Islamic sects. Most of them are not known of because, err, they're secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Members of one family were behind a wave of blasts targeting three churches in the Indonesian city of Surabaya, police say.

At least 11 people were killed and dozens others injured in the attacks on Sunday.

A mother and two children blew herself up at one church, while the father and three sons targeted the other churches, police chief Tito Karnavian said.

The attack is the deadliest in Indonesia since 2005.

Indonesia's new breed of militantsSo-called Islamic State's influence in IndonesiaInside the home of Indonesia's most notorious IS militant

The Islamic State group (IS) has claimed responsibility for the bombings.

Earlier in the day, Wawan Purwanto, of Indonesia's intelligence agency, said an IS-inspired group, Jemaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD), was suspected to be behind them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44100278

Edited by WorkingPoor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sleepwello'nights said:

From what I've read the qu'ran, the unexpurgated perfect and final word of god, is written in a language that is not now spoken. It is subject to many interpretations, each of which is the true interpretation and the other false interpretations are done so with the intent of deceiving. The schisms in islam started on the death of mo, ironically he eat poison knowing that god would not let him, the perfect man, die.

This is a list of the mainstream Islamic sects: https://www.culteducation.com/group/994-islamic-fundamentalists/10466-a-guide-to-islamic-sects.html

There are many secret Islamic sects. Most of them are not known of because, err, they're secret.

Having access to secret texts even indirectly or just claiming you do is as good as being able to hear the word of god for some people - or whatever word you choose to use for your god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, WorkingPoor said:

Members of one family were behind a wave of blasts targeting three churches in the Indonesian city of Surabaya, police say.

At least 11 people were killed and dozens others injured in the attacks on Sunday.

A mother and two children blew herself up at one church, while the father and three sons targeted the other churches, police chief Tito Karnavian said.

The attack is the deadliest in Indonesia since 2005.

Indonesia's new breed of militantsSo-called Islamic State's influence in IndonesiaInside the home of Indonesia's most notorious IS militant

The Islamic State group (IS) has claimed responsibility for the bombings.

Earlier in the day, Wawan Purwanto, of Indonesia's intelligence agency, said an IS-inspired group, Jemaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD), was suspected to be behind them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44100278

 But just yesterday the So-Called BBC was saying ISIS was defeated last year.

Ah I see it's IS inspired.  Another new name - Jemaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD).  Despite there being so many different groups they all seem to know what to do.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

I would like to see the Pope speak out against the underlying motivation for these and similar crimes: the ideology of sunni islam.

But he won't.

Pope Francis I'm told ousted traditionalist Pope Benedict in a silent coup. Francis will do what his globalist masters say....

image.jpeg.8b264de18900962a47eef388ab700f42.jpeg

10 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Too many people view islam as another religion. To talk of it as an ideology makes people dismiss its principles as academic and too serious to try and understand. Far better in my view to call it a cult:

By calling it a cult it immediately gives it a negative connotation from our Western European perspective, and calls into question the stupidity and naivety of its adherents. After all does anyone with any intelligence seriously believe that a violent fool who murders and injures innocent people going about their everyday activities is a martyr who will be rewarded in the after life? 

While I'm ranting how often have you heard Islamic apologists make the claim that there are terrible writings of violence in The Bible to divert from the inherent aggressiveness of islam.

Well to start with The Biblical stories set the scene for the qu'ran, which is a sequel to The Bible in any case, written hundreds of years after it.

The New Testament contains the teachings of Jesus, a peaceful man who did not commit any acts of violence in contrast to mo the warlord. 

Then the violence in the Old Testament is descriptive, whereas the qu'ran is prescriptive. The Old Testament describes what happened, the qu'ran instructs followers to commit violent acts. 

 

 

It also has totalitarian characteristics hence the embedded Cultural Marxists falling over each other to embrace the ROP.

 

9 hours ago, twocents said:

I don't think any modern christian leaders would encourage and endorse violence

Christianity is at its core is non violent (offer the other cheek) and secular (render to Caesers what is Caesars)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, WorkingPoor said:

Just seen on the news that the entire family inc children who carried out this attack had recently arrived back from Syria.

  

Did they have any friends in Syria and who headed to Britain instead of Indonesia?

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, sleepwello'nights said:

The schisms in islam started on the death of mo, ironically he eat poison knowing that god would not let him, the perfect man, die.

There are parallels with King Canute, he too had delusions of grandeur.

What strikes me with Moses, Mo, Joseph Smith etc is that they alone heard the word of god and there are no other witnesses etc to back their story up.

In fact, any old fruit can do the same, wander off somewhere and recieve the word of god (with or without the aid of substances), nowadays you would get locked up for making such a claim.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surabaya church attacks: Indonesian family of bombers 'had been to Syria'

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44101070

Police say the family were among hundreds of Indonesians who had returned from Syria, where IS has been fighting government forces. No details were given about the family's alleged involvement in that conflict.

Edited by WorkingPoor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

There are parallels with King Canute, he too had delusions of grandeur.

What strikes me with Moses, Mo, Joseph Smith etc is that they alone heard the word of god and there are no other witnesses etc to back their story up.

In fact, any old fruit can do the same, wander off somewhere and recieve the word of god (with or without the aid of substances), nowadays you would get locked up for making such a claim.

 

 

Indeed but places are far more congested these days.  They can't take the risk of the idea catching on - it might easily get out of control.

The authorities don't like competition.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WorkingPoor said:

Surabaya church attacks: Indonesian family of bombers 'had been to Syria'

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44101070

Police say the family were among hundreds of Indonesians who had returned from Syria, where IS has been fighting government forces. No details were given about the family's alleged involvement in that conflict.

So allies of Britain, the US and Israel except when the US decided they were the enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

There are parallels with King Canute, he too had delusions of grandeur.

 

I think that King Canute was wiser than he is often portrayed. The story I discovered was that he wanted to demonstrate to his advisors that he did not have supernatural powers. By showing that he could not control the tide he hoped they would accept that he was a mortal. He didn't believe he could control the tide as is often told.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

I think that King Canute was wiser than he is often portrayed. The story I discovered was that he wanted to demonstrate to his advisors that he did not have supernatural powers. By showing that he could not control the tide he hoped they would accept that he was a mortal. He didn't believe he could control the tide as is often told.

Is the correct answer.

A classic and early example of misinformation / spin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canute wasn't that great then.  You couldn't shout out Canute is Great.  

You could only shout out something like Canute is OK.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

There are parallels with King Canute, he too had delusions of grandeur.

What strikes me with Moses, Mo, Joseph Smith etc is that they alone heard the word of god and there are no other witnesses etc to back their story up.

In fact, any old fruit can do the same, wander off somewhere and recieve the word of god (with or without the aid of substances), nowadays you would get locked up for making such a claim.

 

DD-JgNXW0AEyuEm.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chewing Grass said:

What strikes me with Moses, Mo, Joseph Smith etc is that they alone heard the word of god and there are no other witnesses etc to back their story up.

Joseph Smith is an interesting one, because there were three "witnesses" who claimed they saw the golden plates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Witnesses

But (you'll love this) all three witnesses apostasised at one point or another - rendering their accounts as unreliable...

I wouldn't bring this up initially with the next Mormon Elder you meet on the streets though. Because, like Islam and SJWism, it's all about the 'feelz'.

Remember, in Islam blaspheming the prophet isn't about saying untrue things about Mo, it's about saying true things that make him look bad.

At one time, when I was living in a Muslim country, there was a high profile salafist family prosecuted in a very nasty abuse case.

Someone wrote a letter to the local newspaper insisting that they shouldn't publish the sordid details of the case, because things like this shouldn't happen in a Muslim country; and that accurate, truthful reporting would therefore harm the reputation of Islam. In short, saying, "We want to feel that we are morally superior to the kafir - don't remind us that we're not!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

I would like to see the Pope speak out against the underlying motivation for these and similar crimes: the ideology of sunni islam.

But he won't.

This Pope is a fake Pope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.