Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
William

BREAKING: U.S. has launched airstrikes against ISIS weapons of mass destruction; here’s what you need to know

Recommended Posts

CNN is reporting that our U.S. military has conducted airstrikes against ISIS chemical weapons targets — weapons of mass destruction — based on information provided by a senior ISIS operative capture .

 

The U.S. military has conducted airstrikes against targets it believes are crucial to ISIS’ chemical weapons program based on information provided by a senior ISIS operative involved in chemical weapons, several U.S. officials told CNN.

 

The information he provided to interrogators has given the U.S. enough information to begin striking ISIS areas in Iraq associated with the group’s chemical weapons program. One U.S. official said the goal is to locate, target and carry out strikes that will result in the destruction of ISIS’s entire chemical weapons enterprise — mainly mustard agent ISIS produces itself.

 

So, what does this mean beyond the headlines? Col. Allen West delves deeper here with his analysis:

 

So, President Obama has said the “war on terror” has pretty much ended. Just for the record, I do believe that’s a horrible moniker, as a nation cannot fight a tactic, such as “terror.” Therefore, let’s establish this is a war against Islamic jihadism or Islamo-fascism.

 

Obama has declared — unilaterally mind you — that combat operations are over, done, kaput. So, may I ask, why are we deploying U.S. Special Operations forces and conventional combat troops to Iraq and Afghanistan? C’mon Barack, just level with us, you based strategic security decisions on your campaign promises and political ideology, and it’s backfired. And now you and your genius National Security Advisors Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes — an English poetry major, I believe — cannot get out of your own way fast enough. And it seems the real strategy, in your mind, is just to pass this hot potato onto the next unlucky schmuck while you open up a presidential library.

 

http://www.allenbwest.com/2016/03/breaking-u-s-has-launched-airstrikes-against-isis-weapons-of-mass-destruction-heres-what-you-need-to-know/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, President Hillary will have more cojones in her dealings with ISIS...Maybe she'll ask for help from ladies who do more than just talk tough...

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n11637[/ATTACH]

 

 

PermaFrost

israelplanevssaudicars.jpg.ac75f19f3c5e12365286db63ba105a9a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hopefully, President Hillary will have more cojones in her dealings with ISIS...Maybe she'll ask for help from ladies who do more than just talk tough...

 

PermaFrost

 

More than who? Obama? Liberal women do tend to be more butch. I'm sure Democrats will push women into all combat roles, and include them in any future draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More than who? Obama?

 

Yes, more than Obama. President Hillary - it seems she's going to be the next One - will hopefully be tougher than President Putin. If the U.S. really wants a tough President, you would have to elect the guy that all the Republicans are against...

 

Liberal women do tend to be more butch.

 

Democrat women aren't as attractive as Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin but that may be just bad genes...or maybe Democrat women are bitter hags. Israeli lady fighter pilots are quite attractive for the most part. I'm sure they all vote Likud...

 

I'm sure Democrats will push women into all combat roles...

 

Again, if a woman wants a combat role, give it to her. (A draft would be a different story.)

 

 

PermaFrost

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scripture says to elect God fearing men. No way around it. Scripture does not say vote for the lesser of two evils so your party can win. Our ballots have a place to put "other" should it come down to only Hillary and Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scripture says to elect God fearing men. No way around it. Scripture does not say vote for the lesser of two evils so your party can win. Our ballots have a place to put "other" should it come down to only Hillary and Trump.

 

There is nothing about democracies in Scripture, so you're reaching. The Bible reference you quoted elsewhere about choosing God-fearing men does not apply. If the CEO of a company isn't a Christian, does that mean you can't work for the company?

 

There isn't a single God-fearing presidential hopeful in either party. The parties have very different ideologies so all votes count. To abstain from voting is to waste a vote.

 

 

PermaFrost

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is nothing about democracies in Scripture, so you're reaching. The Bible reference you quoted elsewhere about choosing God-fearing men does not apply. If the CEO of a company isn't a Christian, does that mean you can't work for the company?

 

There isn't a single God-fearing presidential hopeful in either party. The parties have very different ideologies so all votes count. To abstain from voting is to waste a vote.

 

 

PermaFrost

 

So you're suggesting this has no application today? Exodus 18:21 - "Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens". Clearly, Exodus 18:21 speaks of what manner men ought to be chosen to bear office. Also see 1 Peter 2:13-14. The fear of God is the principle which best fortifies a man against all temptations to injustice, Nehemiah 5:15; Genesis 42:18.

 

However, it will nevertheless be subjected to a liberal interpretation which says these Scriptures were only for a time, cultural, and no longer applicable, they are chauvinistic, bias, and demonstrate prejudice. And this line of unbelief and thinking is what has led to the slippery slope and apostasy of so many churches and needlessly said, our country.

 

You also ignore the obvious. There is nothing about democracy in God's word. His word is not up for a vote. We are talking about the Government's role to not only rule over the affairs of men but also wield the sword.

 

The civil magistrate cannot function without some standard of good and evil. If that standard is not the revealed law of God, then in some form or expression it will have to be a law of men -- the standard of self-law or autonomy. Men must choose in their civil affairs to be governed by God's law (theonomy), to be ruled by tyrants, or acquiesce to increasing social degeneracy. - What is Theonomy

 

You certainly spoke your mind on the Scripture, but you're entitled to only one vote. I will vote for the man that I believe God fearing whether he is the nominee of my party or not.

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, because a mom should be flying combat missions... not.

 

Women in Israel may be far ahead of women in Saudi Arabia, but Christians in Israel are not far ahead of Christians in Saudi Arabia. But, granted, being kicked out of the country doesn't hurt as much as corporeal punishment. But, I don't defend, let alone idolize, either Saudi Arabia or Israel.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, because a mom should be flying combat missions... not.

 

Women in Israel may be far ahead of women in Saudi Arabia, but Christians in Israel are not far ahead of Christians in Saudi Arabia. But, granted, being kicked out of the country doesn't hurt as much as corporeal punishment. But, I don't defend, let alone idolize, either Saudi Arabia or Israel.

 

I didn't find anything commendable about having women fly F-16s in combat. Neither do I find what Israel is doing as a "light to all nations". And I think you're right Cornelius, being a mom is viewed as degrading by some women. Our women are something us men should be defending, and not sending in harms way. Top military Generals are already saying women need be included in the draft.

 

On topic, stories are rolling in today of IS using WMDs in Iraq: Eyewitness account: ISIL steps up mustard gas attacks on Kurds in Iraq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're suggesting this has no application today?

 

 

It does have application for today ...but not much. I also said this:

 

There is nothing about democracies in Scripture, so you're reaching

 

Exodus 18 isn't about a democracy. No one is elected. Moses isn't named Cheif by his peers. No one can be voted out of office. You are reaching or extrapolating when you apply this to a democracy. The very first democracy wasn't established until 3000 years after the events in Exodus.

 

By spoiling your ballot or not voting you are contributing to the demise of the USA. But don't worry about that...you're in the majority. Most Americans have better things to do than vote! You've just found a better-sounding excuse...

 

 

 

PermaFrost

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It does have application for today ...but not much. I also said this:

 

 

 

Exodus 18 isn't about a democracy. No one is elected. Moses isn't named Cheif by his peers. No one can be voted out of office. You are reaching or extrapolating when you apply this to a democracy. The very first democracy wasn't established until 3000 years after the events in Exodus.

 

By spoiling your ballot or not voting you are contributing to the demise of the USA. But don't worry about that...you're in the majority. Most Americans have better things to do than vote! You've just found a better-sounding excuse...

 

PermaFrost

 

I feel like a mosquito in a nudest colony. I do not even know where to begin.

 

God bless,

William

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're suggesting this has no application today? Exodus 18:21 - "Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens"

 

Yes, if election is how we choose leaders, then we are to elect men who fear God, are trustworthy, and hates bribes (being influenced).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like a mosquito in a nudest colony. I do not even know where to begin.

 

There are all kinds of crazy and unbiblical ideas floating around in Christianity. On one site, a guy got all insensed that I kept referring to the Messiah as «Jesus». He insisted that true Christians call the Messiah «Yehashua». When I pointed out that other Christians insisted with just as much force as he that the real name of Messiah was «Yeshua», he said this to me:

 

«You're a lawless anti-Torah Christian who uses the false man-made name for Messiah. You're not calling on Messiah but on a DEMON.»

 

LOL...Some people are just sooooo wacko they don't even deserve a response! As for you, William, I don't put you in that category. I'm sure you abstain from voting for what you feel are noble reasons. Unfortunately, an abstention isn't a vote. An abstention just makes all votes count even more. Abstentions also make it that much easier for bad resolutions to pass.

 

 

PermaFrost

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure you abstain from voting for what you feel are noble reasons. Unfortunately, an abstention isn't a vote. An abstention just makes all votes count even more. Abstentions also make it that much easier for bad resolutions to pass.

 

I did not say I wouldn't vote. But I will not vote for someone that advocates abortion, and another that advocated abortion, donated to the cause, and currently defends Planned Parenthood. I will say the other major thing that bothers me about Trump, besides his flip flopping. The man admitted to never reading the Constitution. He said that he never saw the value in it. Mind you, soldiers take an oath to defend the Constitution from both foreign and domestic threats. Yet he appeals to military persons and those supporting our troops. I can't vote for a Commander and Chief that has made such a statement. He never saw the value in the Constitution. Sounds like Obama, only Trump is the "Right" leaning version.

 

Lastly, Trump's testimony and statements are contrary to a Christian worldview. The man is not an active member at any church, and does not ask God for forgiveness. He said he has never even ever asked God for forgiveness. He will not even keep his eyes closed and head bowed for prayer for the deceased during a moment of silence.

 

You are entitled to vote for the person you think is best. As for me, I will vote by filling out the "other" on the ballot if it comes down to Trump. Trump calls himself a Washington outsider and plays that tune. Yet today Rubio, an establishment favorite wants people to vote for others to defeat Trump instead of Cruz. Why is that? Guess one will need to take Trump for his promises, because he has absolutely no track record on the issues of keeping them, but to the contrary he has plenty. Guess some will have to forget everything they know about the depravity of man. As for me, I'm going with a candidate that has a track record on the issues that are important to the Christian worldview. A man I believe is God fearing.

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I did not say I wouldn't vote. But I will not vote for someone that advocates abortion, and another that advocated abortion, donated to the cause, and currently defends Planned Parenthood. I will say the other major thing that bothers me about Trump, besides his flip flopping. The man admitted to never reading the Constitution. He said that he never saw the value in it. Mind you, soldiers take an oath to defend the Constitution from both foreign and domestic threats. Yet he appeals to military persons and those supporting our troops. I can't vote for a Commander and Chief that has made such a statement. He never saw the value in the Constitution. Sounds like Obama, only Trump is the "Right" leaning version.

 

Lastly, Trump's testimony and statements are contrary to a Christian worldview. The man is not an active member at any church, and does not ask God for forgiveness. He said he has never even ever asked God for forgiveness. He will not even keep his eyes closed and head bowed during prayer for the deceased during a moment of silence.

 

You are entitled to vote for the person you think is best. As for me, I will vote by filling out the "other" on the ballot if it comes down to Trump. Trump calls himself a Washington outsider and plays that tune. Yet today Rubio, an establishment favorite wants people to vote for Trump instead of Cruz. Why is that? Guess one will need to take Trump for his promises, because he has absolutely no track record on the issues for keeping them, but to the contrary he has plenty. Guess some will have to forget everything they know about the depravity of man. As for me, I'm going with a candidate that has a track record on the issues that are important to the Christian worldview. A man I believe is God fearing.

 

God bless,

William

Love your post. But what was that you said about staying on topic? LOL Not that easy is it.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Love your post. But what was that you said about staying on topic? LOL Not that easy is it.

 

 

I must admit. I wrote that post about staying on topic after frustration with this one. The OP is about WMDs being used by IS. Nobody seemingly wants to comment on that. Meanwhile, I'm also taking interest in Russia threatening to invade North Korea, because of North Korea's threat to launch WMDs. Being of South Korean descent it has my attention as I have much family there on the peninsula.

 

I'm going to close this topic because of its derailment if the next response does not reestablish the OP.

 

Thanks for the reminder, brother!

 

God bless,

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OP is about WMDs being used by IS. Nobody seemingly wants to comment on that.

 

ISIS has been accused of a number of chemical weapons attacks. But, I don't think ISIS has yet refined the process enough to make their chemical weapons attacks deadly. The OP doesn't mention any chemical weapons deaths. Right now, ISIS is using Weapons of Mass Irritation.

 

Comment on OP :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ISIS has been accused of a number of chemical weapons attacks. But, I don't think ISIS has yet refined the process enough to make their chemical weapons attacks deadly. The OP doesn't mention any chemical weapons deaths. Right now, ISIS is using Weapons of Mass Irritation.

 

Comment on OP :)

 

I wouldn't call Mustard Gas an irritant. A British nurse treating soldiers with mustard agent burns during World War I commented:

 

They cannot be bandaged or touched. We cover them with a tent of propped-up sheets. Gas burns must be agonizing because usually the other cases do not complain, even with the worst wounds, but gas cases are invariably beyond endurance and they cannot help crying out.

 

These are the kinds of images of chemical casualties I saw in the military when Desert Shield rolled into Desert Storm. Now in Iraq ISIL is using chemical weapons, the first time since Saddam was in power. It is obvious that if IS ever got its hands on biological/nuclear WMDs they would use them. Bring back Bush's policy, we will not differentiate between the terrorist and the one's harboring them. I find it hard to believe though, that we will ever consider that after having been subjected to the pacifist liberal thumb sucking for the last 7 years.

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n11809[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n11808[/ATTACH]

image_519.jpg.7ad02f22432a5cf93b21a9d0e625df04.jpg

image_518.jpg.e7245a2231f1fbb20c4dac6b37984c0e.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't call Mustard Gas an irritant.

 

It depends on the quality and concentration of the gas. ISIS' gas is more of an irritant. It's their bullets that do the killing.

 

600 non-Muslim Kurdish prisoners being executed by ISIS:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n11814[/ATTACH]

Screen-Shot-2015-05-02-at-0_48_43.png.5251eb1708e25d526362b2af1a4643b5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad we're finally doing something. Really am. Do I like war? No. Do I think resorting to killing is good? No. But I am glad we're doing something.

 

We shouldn't have pulled out of the Middle East, we should have finished what we started. That's okay though, whatever God has in store for the country I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm glad we're finally doing something. Really am. Do I like war? No. Do I think resorting to killing is good? No. But I am glad we're doing something.

 

We shouldn't have pulled out of the Middle East, we should have finished what we started. That's okay though, whatever God has in store for the country I guess.

 

Nobody should like war. But there is a time for everything:

 

1 For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:

2 a time to be born, and a time to die;

a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;

3 a time to kill, and a time to heal;

a time to break down, and a time to build up;

4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh;

a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

5 a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;

a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

6 a time to seek, and a time to lose;

a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

7 a time to tear, and a time to sew;

a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

8 a time to love, and a time to hate;

a time for war, and a time for peace.

 

 

God bless,

William

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking News for 3/12/2016:

 

Iraqi officials say the Islamic State group has launched two chemical attacks, killing a three-year-old girl and wounding some 600 people near the northern city of Kirkuk.

 

Security and hospital officials say the latest attack took place early Saturday in the small town of Taza, which was struck by a barrage of rockets carrying chemicals three days earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Breaking News for 3/12/2016:

 

 

Oh my... I'll be praying for the events transpiring over there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The U.S.-led coalition said the chemicals IS has so far used include chlorine and a low-grade sulfur mustard which is not very potent. "It's a legitimate threat. It's not a high threat. We're not, frankly, losing too much sleep over it," U.S. Army Col. Steve Warren told reporters Friday. ... The mustard agent that IS is using is not very toxic, Gordon says."

 

Of 600-ish people exposed, eight were transferred to Bahgdad for treatment. One three-year-old girl died. She died of chemical burns, but she also died because of medical incompetence. She was sent home to recover after initial treatment when she needed to continued treatment.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The U.S.-led coalition said the chemicals IS has so far used include chlorine and a low-grade sulfur mustard which is not very potent. "It's a legitimate threat. It's not a high threat. We're not, frankly, losing too much sleep over it," U.S. Army Col. Steve Warren told reporters Friday. ... The mustard agent that IS is using is not very toxic, Gordon says."

 

Of 600-ish people exposed, eight were transferred to Bahgdad for treatment. One three-year-old girl died. She died of chemical burns, but she also died because of medical incompetence. She was sent home to recover after initial treatment when she needed to continued treatment.

 

 

With 600 casualties, I wouldn't suggest medical incompetence. Unless you consider a medical facility being overwhelmed during a chemical attack incompetence. I'm sure our soldiers are just itching to go back to the desert. Meh, maybe not under this Commander and Chief, but when they do, God speed.

 

God bless,

William

 

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.

×
Articles - News - Privacy Policy