What to do about Islamic Expansion in US?

[George Australia]

Personally, I would prefer freedom to slavery.

Duly noted.

[brendan]

Should Western countries have insisted on an equilavence between freedoms offered in Moslem and Western countries? And if there was to be a retrospective and legally reinforced demand for the such, would this be a 'good idea' or simply establish a principle which may be bitterly regretted by the Orthodox at a later date?

Any thoughts, dear brothers and sisters?

I advocate that all Christian countries should immediately ban all Muslim immigration and then devise a reasonable repatriation programs to encourage Muslims already present to leave. The same should apply to Jews and any members of non-Christian religions.

Allowing non-Christians to flourish, gain power, and spread their influence in a Christian country is completely idiotic and damaging to Christianity.

[George Australia]

I advocate that all Christian countries should immediately ban all Muslim immigration and then devise a reasonable repatriation programs to encourage Muslims already present to leave. The same should apply to Jews and any members of non-Christian religions.

Your suggestion is noted.

[brendan]

Actually according to scholars of Hebrew Linguistics, the word Cush or Cushite in Bible usage was used to refer to any dark skinned or black people.

The original lands of Cush was located in Arabia and Mesopotamia, and
the people who lived in those lands were known as Cushites and Ethiopians.

According to Mathew Henry's Commentary in One Volume pg 153 the use
of the term Ethiopian in Numbers 12 is a reference to Arabia, or the
lower Tigris Euphrates valley.

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary on the whole bible vol 1 pg
104 says An Ethiopian woman, a Cushite woman Arabia was usually
called in scripture the land of Cush it's inhabitants being the
descendants of the son of Ham.

According to Peake's Commentary on the Bible pg 259 concerning the
Identity of the Cushite woman modern writers tend to think of the
Cassites, east of Babylonia, or with better justification of Kusi in
North Arabia mentioned by Esarhadden of Assyria.

Professor Davidson's new bible commentary pg 177 states the biblical
word Ethiopian is a reference to the the Cassite people orth east of
Mesopotamia. Unger's bible handbook pg 53 acknowledges that the land
of biblical Ethiopia was not originally located in Africa when he
writes "Cush is connected with Kish, the ancient city state of lower
Babylonia.

The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary pg 191 says Cush the name
of the territory through which the Gihon flowed Genesis 2:13
translated as Ethiopia in the King James Version but in view of the
distance of Ethiopia in relation to the Red sea the site is probably
in south east Babylonia or Chaldea.

According to the Interpreter's One Volume Commentary on the Bible pg
215 in 2 Chronicles 14:9 Zerah the Ethiopian refers to a person of
an Arabian tribe.

In Habakkuk 3:7 the term Cushan derives from the word Cush and is
identified with the land of Midian which is the region of Arabia
Strong's Hebrew dictionary# 3572.

The new Standard Bible Dictionary pg 162 states, "Recent researchers
have made it probable that two districts were known both to the
Assyrians and Hebrews under the same name "Cush". One of them was
Ethiopia, the other was in the west and south of Arabia, not always
exactly defined. Winckler considers the Arabian Cush is meant in the
following passages Gen. 2:13, Gen 1:6, Num.12:1, 2 Sam.18:21, 2
Ch.14:8, 2 Ch.21:16, Is 20:3, Is 43:3, Is 45:14, Hab 3:7 and Psalms
87:4.

The confirms that the wife of Moses in Numbers 12 was in the region
of southern Mesopotamia and was of the same race as Abraham who was
from the Ur of Chaldeans of lower Mesopotamia Gen 11:31. This was
the only region of Cushite people at that time. The Ethiopia of
Africa was not actually named such at the time of Moses

The George Lamsa's Old Testament Light p 15 reads " The Ethiopians
ruled southwestern Arabia for many years. Cush is mentioned in Gen
10:8 as the father of Nimrod, whose kingdom began in Babylon and
Erech, Accad and Calneh in the land of Shinar (Sumer). Cush might
have originally have been an ancient region is Assyria named after
Cush the Father of Nimrod.

The present Ethiopia was unknown and uninhabited at this time. The
original Cushites (Ethiopians)settled in Mesopotamia after the flood,
as did the Shemites, They both helped to form the ancient states of
Sumer, Akkad and Babel but centuries later some migrated to Africa
and became mongrelized.

The History of Herodotus 7 pg 379 declares in 440 bc The Ethiopians
came from the region north of Egypt!

Peake's Commentary on the bible pg 259 states that Cushite under
Hebrew etymology means "fair in appearance."

[Hexapsalms]

I advocate that all Christian countries should immediately ban all Muslim immigration and then devise a reasonable repatriation programs to encourage Muslims already present to leave. The same should apply to Jews and any members of non-Christian religions.

Allowing non-Christians to flourish, gain power, and spread their influence in a Christian country is completely idiotic and damaging to Christianity.

Brendan, this is foolishness. This is advocating utopia. This will do NOTHING to protect Christianity, as it's only a SECULAR solution to a spiritual problem. Christianity's problem is that NOT ENOUGH CHRISTIANS BELIEVE IN CHRIST. There are state supported churches in Europe,yet they are empty museums now because state supported churches are an oppression. The only Christian empire in history (Byzantine) fell because it was only a secular government--not Christ's kingdom which is not of this world.

I sure wouldn't want my Chinese Buddhist doctor who had saved my life from cancer banished from America. I wouldn't want my Jewish lawyer to be banished, either. He sure helped me with a nasty legal problem concerning an estate. I have Hindu friends I enjoy who are teaching me Sanskrit, and the Egyptian muslim that runs the coffee shop I frequent is a decent fellow and treats me well. He makes good sandwiches, too. One of the nicest people I've ever met was an Afghan muslim, who is wonderfully hospitable, works very hard at his low paying job and tries to be a good husband and father to his family. And I have many agnostic/atheist friends who are white Americans-- what do we banish them, too?

The problem is not these people-the problem lies with us Christians who have been poor examples to them. Banishing these folks to protect ourselves is the easy way out, and all that will be left are a bunch of Christians quarreling among themselves and stealing converts from each other's churches.

[gphadraig]

I agree with the above and could similarly give examples of those from other faiths to whom I am indebted.

My original thought still stands. If the Saudis so restrict any form of Christian expression within the kindom then it is exceedingly questionable to allow their ruling family to fund mosques, etc., in North America or Europe. This is not about "not being Christian" but about reciprocity. To hear of an American local council allowing Moslem to build beyond what is allowed within their local ordinances when Christians may exercise the right even to process or wear clerical garb in the street appears to me barmy.

Others may think differently, of course.........

[brendan]

Brendan, this is foolishness. This is advocating utopia. This will do NOTHING to protect Christianity, as it's only a SECULAR solution to a spiritual problem. Christianity's problem is that NOT ENOUGH CHRISTIANS BELIEVE IN CHRIST. There are state supported churches in Europe,yet they are empty museums now because state supported churches are an oppression. The only Christian empire in history (Byzantine) fell because it was only a secular government--not Christ's kingdom which is not of this world.

Yes, we need more people to believe in Christ, but do you really think having more Buddhist, Jewish, and Arab influence will help that? Hardly. The presence of these people will only result in the suppression of Christian expression. If you notice its usually been Jews complaining against Christian expression, but now gradually the others are getting involved.

I sure wouldn't want my Chinese Buddhist doctor who had saved my life from cancer banished from America. I wouldn't want my Jewish lawyer to be banished, either. He sure helped me with a nasty legal problem concerning an estate. I have Hindu friends I enjoy who are teaching me Sanskrit, and the Egyptian muslim that runs the coffee shop I frequent is a decent fellow and treats me well. He makes good sandwiches, too. One of the nicest people I've ever met was an Afghan muslim, who is wonderfully hospitable, works very hard at his low paying job and tries to be a good husband and father to his family. And I have many agnostic/atheist friends who are white Americans-- what do we banish them, too?

Maybe this is part of the problem. You seem to only do business with Non-Christians. Personally, I don't deal with non-Christians, at least I try to avoid enriching them and their businesses. Its not a hard thing to do in most cases. For example, when my doctor refers me to specialist, I just tell him "no foreigners." That pretty much covers it.

The problem is not these people--the problem lies with us Christians who have been poor examples to them. Banishing these folks to protect ourselves is the easy way out, and all that will be left are a bunch of Christians quarreling among themselves and stealing converts from each other's churches.

Again, one is not connected to the other. Because there are not-so-good Christians doesn't justify flooding the country with non-Christians. Having millions of non-Christians in our midst isn't going to make more people become Christians. It will only endanger Christianity.