Tom123 wrote:      May their courageous Christian witness be an example to us all. They followed Jesus by going into a warzone and extending a helping hand to people tyrannized by poverty and war.

Hahahaha, Classic!

I hope you're joking cause if you're not you probably dont have the slightest clue about what actually happened.

Tom123 wrote:      Upon capture, some of the men were ordered to renounce their faith in Christ and convert to Islam. They refused and were severely beaten. They also stood by their sisters in Christ and refused to abandon them, even though this earned them more beatings.

How do you "know" all this???

Tom123 I think your naive thinking has taken over your rational judgement.

These so-called christian missionaries endangered themselves by trying to preach the "word" and although in the eyes of Christendom, it is a noble act such acts alone are ignorant. God has given us intelligible faculties and the ability to utilize these faculties. I don't see why one would praise Jesus after a group just endangered themselves. So you think they should get a medal for not practicing common sense?

Tom123 wrote:      May their courageous Christian witness be an example to us all. They followed Jesus by going into a warzone and extending a helping hand to people tyrannized by poverty and war.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Hahahaha, Classic! I hope you're joking cause if you're not you probably dont have the slightest clue about what actually happened.

   So what 'actually happened', Sawtul Khilafah? What evidence can you provide me that these people were not helping the people of Afghanistan?

   I guess you find it funny when people cross borders to help victims of poverty and war and get killed, huh? Were you also laughing when Margaret Hassan was murdered in Iraq? Did that tickle you, too?

Tom123 wrote:      Upon capture, some of the men were ordered to renounce their faith in Christ and convert to Islam. They refused and were severely beaten. They also stood by their sisters in Christ and refused to abandon them, even though this earned them more beatings.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: How do you "know" all this???

Tom123 funny how in response to me you use the word hatred and armed as if those are things that are common to me (or common in true Islamic practice). First off I do not hate them nor do I think what they did is wrong in the sense that their intention was purely humanitarian. HOWEVER, seeing how those areas are known to be run by the Taliban and seeing how the Taliban is hostile towards non-muslims I think common sense would take over here. If they cared about doing humanitarian work and making changes why not do humanitarian work through Muslim elements why put yourself in harm's way?

Islamispeace autonomy is not synonymous with right action. Just because "it is their choice" doesn't mean it was the right choice. Judging from your poor response would you say a suicidal person has the right to kill themselves and that, it is ok because they are an autonomous human being? I would suspect not. I think these missionaries were doing so-called humanitarian work but with intention of conversion. I have friends over seas serving and basically Christian missionaries basically set up bath houses but these places are only avaliable to people who are "saved" yes real godly people eh?

Tom123

Soldiers are heroes.

Police Officers are heroes.

Firefighters are heroes.

Religious figures are heroes.

Misguided religious idealist do not count as heroes in my book. Any group who is conscious of a dangerous warzone and knows the possibility that they may be either be permanantly incapacitated or seriously harmed but still proceeds to do the work anyway is not heroism its called st**idity. I would be equallys (and even more critical) of Muslims who proceeded to go to a non-muslim area especially if they were conscious of the consequences. Saving lives is one thing because its a moral necessity but humanitarian work can always be done without putting yourself in harm's way.

This is a similar point I was getting to with Islamispeace when he said that these korean missionaries have a choice. What I was explaining to him was that autonomy, that is, us sovereign beings, have the ability to make "free" choices but not every free choice is logical.

Tom123 even reading my criticism of those former hostages I didn't see any "hateful" words. I think your subjectively is misattributed because nothing that I've said outside my normal behavior was hateful. Hateful or hate is a strong word therefore I ask you for strong evidence showing what I said in my words that were hateful. Just because I called their actions st**id doesn't mean the word st**id is hateful. It an be an insult but its not hateful.

BTW most missionary work today is covert Christian conversion we can start with the bible belt for instance by reading this old article:

Bible Belt missionaries set out on a 'war for souls' in Iraq Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 27/12/2003 American Christian missionaries have declared a "war for souls" in Iraq, telling supporters that the formal end of the US-led occupation next June will close an historic "window of opportunity". Organising in secrecy, and emphasising their humanitarian aid work, Christian groups are pouring into the country, which is 97 per cent Muslim, bearing Arabic Bibles, videos and religious tracts designed to "save" Muslims from their "false" religion.   Mission from god: Jon Hanna and Jackie Cone after they visited Iraq The International Mission Board, the missionary arm of the Southern Baptists, is one of those leading the charge. John Brady, the IMB's head for the Middle East and North Africa, this month appealed to the 16 million members of his church, the largest Protestant denomination in America. "Southern Baptists have prayed for years that Iraq would somehow be opened to the gospel," his appeal began. That "open door" for Christians may soon close. "Southern Baptists must understand that there is a war for souls under way in Iraq," his bulletin added, listing Islamic leaders and "pseudo-Christian" groups also flooding Iraq as his chief rivals. talk of Muslims and Christians worshipping the same God. Jerry Vines, former head of the Southern Baptist Convention, has described the Prophet Mohammed as a "demon-obsessed paedophile". Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham and the head of Samaritan's Purse, a big donor to Iraq, has described Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion". The missionaries pose a dilemma for President George W Bush. He has reached out to Muslims since September 11, shrugging off criticism from evangelicals to describe Islam as "peaceful". But Christian conservatives are also a key Bush constituency: Franklin Graham delivered the invocation prayer at his presidential inauguration. The US Agency for International Development has said that the government cannot rein in private charities. "Imagine what the US Congress would say to us," said a spokesman in April. Jon Hanna, an evangelical from Ohio who has recently returned from Iraq, applied for a new passport to travel there, describing himself as a humanitarian worker. "I was worried the US authorities might try to stop us, might be worried we were going to start a riot with our Bibles." In Baghdad last month Mr Hanna met two other American missionary teams. One, from Indiana, had shipped in 1.3 million Christian tracts. "A US passport is all you need to get in, until the new Iraqi government takes over. What we thought was a two-year window, originally, has narrowed down to a six month window," said Mr Hanna, an evangelical minister and editor of Connection Magazine, a Christian newspaper in Ohio. He describes Islam as "false". He cited St John's Gospel, saying: "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist." Mr Hanna concluded: "The Muslim religion is an antichrist religion." Later Mr Hanna asked to retract that choice of words. "Without the reader hearing my voice and looking into my eyes as I made that statement, it would be easy for certain readers to feel personally attacked and be offended," Mr Hanna wrote by email. "That would be unfruitful." He rejected the suggestion that aid work was a "cover" for missionary work, preferring to call it a "conduit for sharing the gospel of Jesus. Christians are commanded to minister to the hungry, but also to the hunger of the spirit. It can't be separated," he said. In public, the largest groups put the emphasis on their delivery of food parcels and their medical work. However, their internal fund-raising materials emphasise mission work. One IMB bulletin reported aid workers handing out copies of the New Testament and praying with Muslim recipients. Another bulletin said Iraqis understood "who was bringing the food . . . it was the Christians from America." Southern Baptists from North Carolina visited Iraq in October to help hand out 45,000 boxes of donated food. One of the team, Jim Walker, told IMB's Urgent News bulletin that he met village children "starved of attention and I could tell some of them have not eaten well. But their biggest need is to know the love of Christ." Mr Hanna said he encountered friendly curiosity, with noisy crowds gathering to take his group's tracts. "Maybe 10 per cent were hostile." He was one of 21 on his mission including Jackie Cone, 72, a Pentecostalist grandmother from Ohio who said God had told her to join a second mission planned for next year. "I sensed Him telling me to come back in January," she said. Mrs Cone is confident she made converts in Baghdad. In her hotel she met a Muslim woman on crutches with a leg operation due that day. Mrs Cone knelt on the lobby floor and prayed that surgery would not be required. "I saw her that evening and she said God had healed her, and she hadn't needed the surgery. She didn't say Allah, she pointed to Heaven and gave God the glory," she said. Mrs Cone led the Kurdish woman and her brother in prayer, asking Jesus into their hearts. "I'd given them a Bible and a Jesus video in Arabic. I think they think of themselves as Christians now," she said. "They have the Bible and I hope they will grow in grace." Muslims are hard converts, American missionaries admit. The large organisations have experts trained in refuting Muslim teachings that Jesus is just another prophet. Before going to Iraq, Mr Hanna studied Christian training manuals and attended a seminar for missionaries to the Arab world. Mr Hanna concedes his new Iraqi friends were possibly drawn by the novelty of meeting Americans. "But you don't discount that, you use it as an opportunity to tell them about Jesus. Last time we only took 8,000 Arabic Bibles to Iraq. In future missions the goal is one million." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XG3OFBSVSMSZ5QFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2003/12/27/wirq27.xml - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XG3OFB SVSMSZ5QFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2003/12/27/wirq27.xml

Also,

Whose arrogance is that I think I "know" how to help these people? Do the folks speak Dar, Farsi etc? What do they have to offer? Why not donate to the Red Crescent?

The Afghani people have had their world destroyed. By outsiders coming in.. and you know, I spoek once a long time ago to a woman talking at my school about the women in India, oppression etc. I asked her what we could do, she said fix your government.

Considering outsiders are in the land, and call people there the "enemy" (meaning Afghanis) cause they aren't doing what we want them to do, why and how can people tell the difference? What they should have done is work for peace by changing their government's policy, not supporting US.

See I don't feel much Tom, cause you know what, hundreds of thousands of people havedied over there. Why oh why are they any different then the other people? The people there just would like us all to leave.. They would like to leave.

And on top of it, sorry but the South Koreans are HUGE evangelicals. Huge. If you wanto help, gather the food and give it to CARE or another international aid group.  And really, why aren't they going to the Christian African nations? why not? There is tons and tons of poverty there.. but no one to convert.. hmmm

I appreciate anyone who aims to do good. But this is all fishy. And i grew up in the Liberation Theology tradition of Catholicism and have great respect for many of them. But you don't head into a war with no credentials or knowledge. Really they not only endanger themselves, they are endangering others.  

Israfil wrote: Tom123 Soldiers are heroes. Police Officers are heroes.

   Israfil, I strongly disagree, particularly with the soldiers. I believe that the heroes in our world are people who do their best to help others and take risks for doing so, but that they do not carry guns. Then again, bear in mind I am writing from a Christian viewpoint, and so I believe that the use of violence is never justified since Jesus said we are to love our enemies. I recognize there are some Christians who will disagree with me on this, but I challenge anyone to try justify war or violence of any kind in light of what Jesus taught.

   But I may be digressing a bit here. Although I believe that there are many soldiers who are brave and I have nothing against them, I do not believe they are heroes.

Israfil wrote: Firefighters are heroes.

Israfil wrote: Religious figures are heroes.

   Depends which ones.  I think we agree that the 'hero' title would not apply to Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson

Israfil wrote: Misguided religious idealist do not count as heroes in my book. Any group who is conscious of a dangerous warzone and knows the possibility that they may be either be permanantly incapacitated or seriously harmed but still proceeds to do the work anyway is not heroism its called st**idity. I would be equallys (and even more critical) of Muslims who proceeded to go to a non-muslim area especially if they were conscious of the consequences. Saving lives is one thing because its a moral necessity but humanitarian work can always be done without putting yourself in harm's way.

   OK, thank you for being so frank with me. I appreciate hearing your view, but strongly disagree. I believe that when we see people suffering we have an obligation to do what we can to help them, and if that means placing our lives in danger or even losing them, so be it. Giving money to charities for example may be a 'safer' way, but often there is a lot of controversy about how much of that cash gets there.

   BTW someone had to deliver these medicines, is that not correct? So if these South Koreans did not go, someone else would have in their place. They were doing a very dangerous job and if it wasn't them it could have been someone else.   

Israfil wrote: This is a similar point I was getting to with Islamispeace when he said that these korean missionaries have a choice. What I was explaining to him was that autonomy, that is, us sovereign beings, have the ability to make "free" choices but not every free choice is logical.

   How do you define 'logical'? Are you saying that because these people took a risk that their actions were illogical? Perhaps if the person deciding what is or is not logical (I'm not saying that person would be you) defines 'logical' as doing something that is safe. I believe that serving God is not always safe.

Israfil wrote: Tom123 even reading my criticism of those former hostages I didn't see any "hateful" words. I think your subjectively is misattributed because nothing that I've said outside my normal behavior was hateful. Hateful or hate is a strong word therefore I ask you for strong evidence showing what I said in my words that were hateful. Just because I called their actions st**id doesn't mean the word st**id is hateful. It an be an insult but its not hateful.

   Alright, you do have a point here, Israfil. Hate was a strong and now that I look back on this discussion an inappropriate word to describe your response. Insulting would be a better word. I still strongly disagree with you on this issue but I take back calling your words 'hateful' and I apologize.

Israfil wrote: BTW most missionary work today is covert Christian conversion we can start with the bible belt for instance by reading this old article: Bible Belt missionaries set out on a 'war for souls' in Iraq Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 27/12/2003 American Christian missionaries have declared a "war for souls" in Iraq, telling supporters that the formal end of the US-led occupation next June will close an historic "window of opportunity". Organising in secrecy, and emphasising their humanitarian aid work, Christian groups are pouring into the country, which is 97 per cent Muslim, bearing Arabic Bibles, videos and religious tracts designed to "save" Muslims from their "false" religion.   Mission from god: Jon Hanna and Jackie Cone after they visited Iraq The International Mission Board, the missionary arm of the Southern Baptists, is one of those leading the charge. John Brady, the IMB's head for the Middle East and North Africa, this month appealed to the 16 million members of his church, the largest Protestant denomination in America. "Southern Baptists have prayed for years that Iraq would somehow be opened to the gospel," his appeal began. That "open door" for Christians may soon close. "Southern Baptists must understand that there is a war for souls under way in Iraq," his bulletin added, listing Islamic leaders and "pseudo-Christian" groups also flooding Iraq as his chief rivals. talk of Muslims and Christians worshipping the same God. Jerry Vines, former head of the Southern Baptist Convention, has described the Prophet Mohammed as a "demon-obsessed paedophile". Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham and the head of Samaritan's Purse, a big donor to Iraq, has described Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion". The missionaries pose a dilemma for President George W Bush. He has reached out to Muslims since September 11, shrugging off criticism from evangelicals to describe Islam as "peaceful". But Christian conservatives are also a key Bush constituency: Franklin Graham delivered the invocation prayer at his presidential inauguration. The US Agency for International Development has said that the government cannot rein in private charities. "Imagine what the US Congress would say to us," said a spokesman in April. Jon Hanna, an evangelical from Ohio who has recently returned from Iraq, applied for a new passport to travel there, describing himself as a humanitarian worker. "I was worried the US authorities might try to stop us, might be worried we were going to start a riot with our Bibles." In Baghdad last month Mr Hanna met two other American missionary teams. One, from Indiana, had shipped in 1.3 million Christian tracts. "A US passport is all you need to get in, until the new Iraqi government takes over. What we thought was a two-year window, originally, has narrowed down to a six month window," said Mr Hanna, an evangelical minister and editor of Connection Magazine, a Christian newspaper in Ohio. He describes Islam as "false". He cited St John's Gospel, saying: "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist." Mr Hanna concluded: "The Muslim religion is an antichrist religion." Later Mr Hanna asked to retract that choice of words. "Without the reader hearing my voice and looking into my eyes as I made that statement, it would be easy for certain readers to feel personally attacked and be offended," Mr Hanna wrote by email. "That would be unfruitful." He rejected the suggestion that aid work was a "cover" for missionary work, preferring to call it a "conduit for sharing the gospel of Jesus. Christians are commanded to minister to the hungry, but also to the hunger of the spirit. It can't be separated," he said. In public, the largest groups put the emphasis on their delivery of food parcels and their medical work. However, their internal fund-raising materials emphasise mission work. One IMB bulletin reported aid workers handing out copies of the New Testament and praying with Muslim recipients. Another bulletin said Iraqis understood "who was bringing the food . . . it was the Christians from America." Southern Baptists from North Carolina visited Iraq in October to help hand out 45,000 boxes of donated food. One of the team, Jim Walker, told IMB's Urgent News bulletin that he met village children "starved of attention and I could tell some of them have not eaten well. But their biggest need is to know the love of Christ." Mr Hanna said he encountered friendly curiosity, with noisy crowds gathering to take his group's tracts. "Maybe 10 per cent were hostile." He was one of 21 on his mission including Jackie Cone, 72, a Pentecostalist grandmother from Ohio who said God had told her to join a second mission planned for next year. "I sensed Him telling me to come back in January," she said. Mrs Cone is confident she made converts in Baghdad. In her hotel she met a Muslim woman on crutches with a leg operation due that day. Mrs Cone knelt on the lobby floor and prayed that surgery would not be required. "I saw her that evening and she said God had healed her, and she hadn't needed the surgery. She didn't say Allah, she pointed to Heaven and gave God the glory," she said. Mrs Cone led the Kurdish woman and her brother in prayer, asking Jesus into their hearts. "I'd given them a Bible and a Jesus video in Arabic. I think they think of themselves as Christians now," she said. "They have the Bible and I hope they will grow in grace." Muslims are hard converts, American missionaries admit. The large organisations have experts trained in refuting Muslim teachings that Jesus is just another prophet. Before going to Iraq, Mr Hanna studied Christian training manuals and attended a seminar for missionaries to the Arab world. Mr Hanna concedes his new Iraqi friends were possibly drawn by the novelty of meeting Americans. "But you don't discount that, you use it as an opportunity to tell them about Jesus. Last time we only took 8,000 Arabic Bibles to Iraq. In future missions the goal is one million." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XG3OFBSVSMSZ5QFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2003/12/27/wirq27.xml - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XG3OFB SVSMSZ5QFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2003/12/27/wirq27.xml

Hayfa wrote: Also, Whose arrogance is that I think I "know" how to help these people? Do the folks speak Dar, Farsi etc? What do they have to offer? Why not donate to the Red Crescent?

   Giving donations is certainly one way to help. Going there personally is another, and I see nothing wrong with it. Do you think that the Taleban would not have kidnapped and murdered Red Crescent workers? Had these people not went, someone else who would have could have also been kidnapped and murdered.

Hayfa wrote: The Afghani people have had their world destroyed. By outsiders coming in.. and you know, I spoek once a long time ago to a woman talking at my school about the women in India, oppression etc. I asked her what we could do, she said fix your government.

   I fully agree that we need to be challenging the policies of our governments when they lead to imperialism and injustice. But there are many possible ways to help, and aid work is certainly one of them. You certainly support at least one aid group, the Red Crescent (as do I).

So just as there is a need for protest, there is also a need for aid work. If all the Red Crescent members decided to disband their charity and stop their work and devote their energies to government changing only, imagine how many would die. The actions of the South Koreans were no less important.

Hayfa wrote: Considering outsiders are in the land, and call people there the "enemy" (meaning Afghanis) cause they aren't doing what we want them to do, why and how can people tell the difference?

   I may have overlooked something, but where did the missionaries call the people of Afghanistan 'the enemy'? Where does it say that the South Koreans ordered the Afghans around or told them what to believe? In fact, they did not even talk about their faith openly (except possibly when refusing to accept Islam under the pain of being beaten).

Hayfa wrote: What they should have done is work for peace by changing their government's policy, not supporting US.

   I agree that they should have voiced their opposition to the war, I do not know if they did. I certainly oppose it. But that does not mean that activism is the only possible action to take. Aid work is important too.

Hayfa wrote: See I don't feel much Tom, cause you know what, hundreds of thousands of people havedied over there. Why oh why are they any different then the other people? The people there just would like us all to leave.. They would like to leave.

   I believe they would like the US soldiers, NATO occupying troops and foreign militants fighting for the Taleban and/or Al Qaeda to leave. I believe most would like to see the Taleban and Northern Alliance leave them alone, too.

   I don't know if they would want aid workers who are providing them with food and medicine to leave.

Hayfa wrote: And on top of it, sorry but the South Koreans are HUGE  evangelicals. Huge.

   So? How does that make their work any less important or less worthy of support?

Hayfa wrote: If you wanto help, gather the food and give it to CARE or another international aid group.

   Why not to them? Because they are Christians?

Hayfa wrote: And really, why aren't they going to the Christian African nations? why not? There is tons and tons of poverty there.. but no one to convert.. hmmm

   How do you know they do not go to Christian African nations?

This may or may not be on topic, but I have a bit of missions experience myself. I went on a missions trip to El Salvador last summer, I spent 2 weeks with a group of El Salvadoran social workers working for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in El Salvador who are involved in working among prisoners to teach them about peaceful alternatives to violence and with street youth to organize activities and keep them out of gangs. The program was founded and is led by a Canadian missionary. Both the ELCIES and a Catholic aid group in El Salvador, CRIDPES, are also otspoken in their opposition to abuses committed by foreign mining companies and during the war have opposed the US backed military regimes. One of my friends' friend in CRIDPES has been arrested recently for helping organize a rally against water privatization. She is being charged with 'terrorism'.

   The people in ELCIES who I have worked with did awesome social justice work and they do it in the name of Jesus and yes, they do talk about Him to others when oppurtunities arise, which is pretty often.

   My role? I went there, observed what they had done, prayed with them, learned from them. In Canada, I have spoken and written about my time there to raise awareness among Canadians and particularly Canadian Christians about the injustices that my El Salvadoran brothers and sisters are facing each day. I also send money to them when I can and keep in touch with them and pray for them and do my best to encourage them in their work.

Hayfa wrote: I appreciate anyone who aims to do good. But this is all fishy.

   I don't see how this is 'fishy'.

Hayfa wrote: And i grew up in the Liberation Theology tradition of Catholicism and have great respect for many of them. But you don't head into a war with no credentials or knowledge. Really they not only endanger themselves, they are endangering others.

   What kind of 'credentials' would you say are necessary? I believe that if we see people suffering, we should do everything we can to help them. Help can come in different ways, and what these people did in my opinion certainly was good and appropriate.

   Cristo Vive!

        - Tomasz 

Tom 123, I agree with Isafril;

Didnt Jesus state that we should not harm the children?

So is it nice to taunt children by stating if they want food for their families they need to sing a Jesus song? Is that how your propagate the faith?

You should watch the clip on Utube showing what they were really doing. And judge not yet ye not be judged.

And see the documentary of the Crusades, the Crescent and the Cross, done by the history channel.

You might then understand why Crusaders are not welcome in some parts of the world.

Open your  mind and expand.

Israfil wrote: Tom123 I think your naive thinking has taken over your rational judgement. These so-called christian missionaries endangered themselves by trying to preach the "word" and although in the eyes of Christendom, it is a noble act such acts alone are ignorant. God has given us intelligible faculties and the ability to utilize these faculties. I don't see why one would praise Jesus after a group just endangered themselves. So you think they should get a medal for not practicing common sense?

I believe that the use of violence is never justified

So if a robber breaks into your house with the intent to harm you you simply lay down your life?

How do you define 'logical'?

logical is anything that encompasses common sense and/or rational decisions that involve critical thinking.

Giving money to charities for example may be a 'safer' way, but often there is a lot of controversy about how much of that cash gets there.

This is why you investigate humanitarian groups and track your money and make sure that, that money reaches your goal.

To me Tom123 it sounds like christian missionaries thrive off the possibility of death because they know that because they are doing "God's work" they would be rewarded with paradise. To me that is innately a selfish motive to begin with. For one, if you go into a situation knowing the possibility that death may be eminent what is the most common sense thing to do? Anyway I think if christians wish to do missionary work they can do it safely.

Simple question Tom:

If they were just "spreading the message of Christ" why didnt they do so in their own country where over 70% are not christians!!???

If they just wanted to help people as you claim, why didnt they go to one of many countries in Africa where children are starving to death in their thousands, more so than in Afghanistan??

The answer to both questions is that they were part of America's Crusade. Appart from the secret activities which they may well have been involved in, they were trying to convert poor Afghans to Christianity by offering them food and material things in order to make America's occupation of Afghanistan easier by increasing support for Crusader style "Christianity".

I also advise you to go to this thread: http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9806&PN=2 - http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9806& ;PN=2  watch the video that was posted and also watch the video that I posted on that very same thread to see the true face of these "Christian" missionaries.

Israfil wrote: So if a robber breaks into your house with the intent to harm you you simply lay down your life?

   Personally I pray that if I was in a situation like that, God would give me the courage not to hate him or try to hurt him or fight him and do exactly what you just said, adding I would hope to be telling him about Jesus and His love and grace as I was being bludgeoned to death or dismemembered.

 If he was going to attack my wife or kids (I'm single so this is a hypothetical scenario) I would try to get between them and him and would gladly take his blows in order that they might escape.

Israfil wrote: logical is anything that encompasses common sense and/or rational decisions that involve critical thinking.

   OK, but common sense to you may be something different than it is to someone else.

Israfil wrote: This is why you investigate humanitarian groups and track your money and make sure that, that money reaches your goal.

   Fair enough, that is a good course of action. Or... you can also go yourself. Because someone in the end has to deliver the supplies.

Israfil wrote: To me Tom123 it sounds like christian missionaries thrive off the possibility of death because they know that because they are doing "God's work" they would be rewarded with paradise. To me that is innately a selfish motive to begin with. For one, if you go into a situation knowing the possibility that death may be eminent what is the most common sense thing to do? Anyway I think if christians wish to do missionary work they can do it safely.

Personally I pray that if I was in a situation like that, God would give me the courage not to hate him or try to hurt him or fight him and do exactly what you just said, adding I would hope to be telling him about Jesus and His love and grace as I was being bludgeoned to death or dismemembered.

I don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously. I guess cause I'm from Los Angeles we have a different frame of mind here when it comes to defending your household. I know if it was me the intruder would not be in this world anymore. I don't think someone with the intent to harm you would want to hear about Jesus. In my city there have been people who have begged for their life and still was murdered. Jesus was no wimp and neither should you be one IMHO.

If he was going to attack my wife or kids (I'm single so this is a hypothetical scenario) I would try to get between them and him and would gladly take his blows in order that they might escape.

How heroic, but you're no good to your family if you're dead. Normally in these times most intruders don't give out "blows" but one shot from a hand gun so how good are you if an intruder pulls out a gun and kills you on the first hit? I'm sure in this scenario your family wouldn't have time to make it out the door.

OK, but common sense to you may be something different than it is to someone else.

Tell me from what I stated about logical thinkin do you disagree with?

 I don't think any missionary goes abroad for the sole purpose of getting himself/herself killed. I know I didn't. We want to serve Jesus, and He says that we do so by helping the poor and by preaching the Gospel. If we get killed doing this, praise God. If we don't get killed, praise God.
   You say that missionary work should be done safely, yet don't soldiers, police officers and firefighters take risks? So are they wrong to do so?
   The difference is that when we take risks for Christ, we do it to serve Him instead of doing it to get a paycheck. As a Christian, I have no reason to fear dying.

Most Jews, Muslims, and Christians are inherently selfish (not to say its ultimately bad) because we do things for God to get a reward. The idea of matyrdom and obtaining paradise is attractive and especially when scholars indicate to their followers that God will forgive you for your sin if you do this or that. Or, God will reward you because of doing this or that. Religious acts which have no intrinsic value, are done solely for the purpose of self fulfilment.

I don't think any missionary goes abroad for the sole purpose of getting himself/herself killed. I know I didn't. We want to serve Jesus, and He says that we do so by helping the poor and by preaching the Gospel.

Tom, you just said it preach the gospel. There are two motives here.. and well you know, peaching your gospel in this time of crisis YOU believe is right. most Afghanis, i think already beleive in God. So what are they doing??? Really Tom... Are they then not taking advantage of peoples' situation. Those South Koreans ought to find the athiests and help them. Would you not think?  

Tom123 wrote:    If you bothered to even read the BBC article I posted, in it you have hopefully found that South Korean missionaries and aid workers operate in both South Korea and parts of Africa, as well as North America, Asia, the Middle East.

I did read it. It QUOTED the Saemmul Church as saying that they were there to help people, and of course THEY would say that.

It also said that there were missionaries in Africa and Middle-east, but didnt say they were "helping people" there, but trying to convert.

Now allow me to ask the question again. Why did these missionaries go to Afghanistan to "help people" when they could have gone to many other countries where people are suffering?

Well because they were trying to convert people, and of course they would "help" poor people in order to win them over and convert them. (didnt Satan try to trick Jesus in that way according to the Bible?) So they were there just to convert and of course you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials (that's Satan's old trick).

If they were sincere they would have tried to convert their own people first, the great marority of whom are NOT christians. Why travel all the way to a country in the middle of a war and preach "christianity"?

And why was the Korean Government so worried about them and was willing to actually negotiate with the Taliban for them?

Because S.Korea has joined America's Crusade and sent troops to Afghanistan (which proves they are part of a Crusade, why else would they send troops to fight the Taliban when the Taliban had never done anything to them and did not even "threaten their interests") and so these hostages were obviously part of the Crusade (actually a very important part of it).

Tom123 wrote:    If you bothered to even read the BBC article I posted, in it you have hopefully found that South Korean missionaries and aid workers operate in both South Korea and parts of Africa, as well as North America, Asia, the Middle East.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: I did read it. It QUOTED the Saemmul Church as saying that they were there to help people, and of course THEY would say that.

   So show me evidence that they were doing otherwise. Until you do, I see no reason not to take their word. Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it. I see no reason why they would want to hide that or be ashamed of it.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: It also said that there were missionaries in Africa and Middle-east, but didnt say they were "helping people" there, but trying to convert.

Actually, this is what was written:

There is no evidence that the Saemmul Church was guilty of such behaviour, but South Korea is certainly known for the zeal of its missionaries, as well as the number of people it sends overseas on mission trips.

Korean evangelical groups have dispatched about 17,000 people to 173 countries, from the Middle East and Africa through to Central and East Asia, and South Korea is the second largest source of Christian missionaries after the US.

   It does not say here that they were only trying to help people, but neither does it say that they were trying to convert. Missionary work can sometimes only involve aid when prosyletizing is not allowed, more often it involves both.

   You will probably point to a segment below which says that the Afghan government in August deported hundreds of South Koreans who were planning to stage a parade in Kabul. There is no evidence that the people who were taken hostage were involved in that, though.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Now allow me to ask the question again. Why did these missionaries go to Afghanistan to "help people" when they could have gone to many other countries where people are suffering?

   Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Well because they were trying to convert people, and of course they would "help" poor people in order to win them over and convert them. (didnt Satan try to trick Jesus in that way according to the Bible?) So they were there just to convert and of course you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials (that's Satan's old trick).

  That is pretty offensive. You are making unproven accusations that these people were somehow trying to 'bribe' Afghans into becoming Christians. You haven't proven anything to back up these claims instead of posting some videos which were about problems in AMERICAN churches. No offense, but this is so absurd that I'm doing my best not to laugh as I'm reading some of the stuff you've written.

   You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

   Granted, there are some jerks who preach a 'prosperity gospel' and dangle money in front of poor people and promise to help them only if they convert, there isn't any evidence to indicate that these people were doing that.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: If they were sincere they would have tried to convert their own people first, the great marority of whom are NOT christians. Why travel all the way to a country in the middle of a war and preach "christianity"?

   Jesus calls on Christians to preach the Gospel to everyone, and to help everyone who is suffering. That includes Afghan Muslims.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: And why was the Korean Government so worried about them and was willing to actually negotiate with the Taliban for them?

   Because they were afraid of getting bad publicity if they didn't do anything.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Because S.Korea has joined America's Crusade and sent troops to Afghanistan (which proves they are part of a Crusade, why else would they send troops to fight the Taliban when the Taliban had never done anything to them and did not even "threaten their interests") and so these hostages were obviously part of the Crusade (actually a very important part of it).

   You are making up a false and unproven allegation. You haven't shown any evidence that these hostages were in support of the 'war on terror'. You are demonizing and slandering people who haven't cheated anyone, lied to anyone or hurt anyone. They went to Afghanistan to help people in need. And they were Christians. And they refused to renounce their faith, even under threats and beatings.

   So you are so angry them and will look for any oppurtunity to slander them and downplay their courage.

Colin Powell's famous dictum about NGOs as US "force multipliers" avant la lettre: human rights and medical services for US friends and clients, none for the opposition.

Tom123 wrote: Personally I pray that if I was in a situation like that, God would give me the courage not to hate him or try to hurt him or fight him and do exactly what you just said, adding I would hope to be telling him about Jesus and His love and grace as I was being bludgeoned to death or dismemembered.

Israfil wrote: I don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously. I guess cause I'm from Los Angeles we have a different frame of mind here when it comes to defending your household. I know if it was me the intruder would not be in this world anymore. I don't think someone with the intent to harm you would want to hear about Jesus. In my city there have been people who have begged for their life and still was murdered. Jesus was no wimp and neither should you be one IMHO.

   So you think that non-violence is 'wimpy'? Then Martin Luther King and Gandhi must have been wimps. They didn't beg for their lives. They didn't turn to violence either.

   Jesus prayed for the people who were crucifying Him. So did His followers, like Stephen. Have you heard of Archbishop Romero? Or Dirk Willems?

http://salt.claretianpubs.org/romero/romero.html

http://chi.gospelcom.net/DAILYF/2003/05/daily-05-16-2003.sht ml

   These people combatted evil with love and the Truth of the Gospel. They did not beg for their lives. Neither did they turn to violence. They followed Jesus and were witnesses to Him to the end.

    Read their stories. Were they cowards?

Tom123 wrote: If he was going to attack my wife or kids (I'm single so this is a hypothetical scenario) I would try to get between them and him and would gladly take his blows in order that they might escape.

Israfil wrote: How heroic, but you're no good to your family if you're dead. Normally in these times most intruders don't give out "blows" but one shot from a hand gun so how good are you if an intruder pulls out a gun and kills you on the first hit? I'm sure in this scenario your family wouldn't have time to make it out the door.[/QUOTE    I don't know how to shoot a gun and couldn't use one even if I wanted to, so looks like we'd be dead anyways. But even if I died, I know I would go to Heaven. And so would my Christian wife and kids whom I would nurture in the faith. Israfil wrote: Tell me from what I stated about logical thinkin do you disagree with?    'Common sense' to some may mean preserving their lives on earth no matter what the cost. If you are desperate to keep your life, perhaps violence would make sense. For me I know that I have nothing to fear when I die and I will be with God. So why should I disobey Him and turn to violence to save my life?   Tom123 wrote: I don't think any missionary goes abroad for the sole purpose of getting himself/herself killed. I know I didn't. We want to serve Jesus, and He says that we do so by helping the poor and by preaching the Gospel. If we get killed doing this, praise God. If we don't get killed, praise God.    You say that missionary work should be done safely, yet don't soldiers, police officers and firefighters take risks? So are they wrong to do so?    The difference is that when we take risks for Christ, we do it to serve Him instead of doing it to get a paycheck. As a Christian, I have no reason to fear dying. [QUOTE=Israfil]Most Jews, Muslims, and Christians are inherently selfish (not to say its ultimately bad) because we do things for God to get a reward.[/QUOTE[    Speak for yourself. I do not do good to get a reward from God. Jesus already gave me more than I could ever ask for or deserve when He died on the cross for me. I have put my faith in Him, and I know that when I die I will be with Him in Heaven.    I want to serve Him because I am so grateful for what He has done for me, and the Holy Spirit moves me to take action against injustice and to want to serve God. Service is a part of my faith, I serve and am glad to do so because I love God. I do not expect any rewards from Him. He has already given me more than I ever deserve. [QUOTE=Israfil]The idea of matyrdom and obtaining paradise is attractive and especially when scholars indicate to their followers that God will forgive you for your sin if you do this or that. Or, God will reward you because of doing this or that. Religious acts which have no intrinsic value, are done solely for the purpose of self fulfilment.

   Probably to some (among Christians, Muslims and Jews) such an idea may be attractive and some may buy into it.

   Nice exchanging views with you.

   Cristo Vive!

       - Tomasz

Tom123 wrote: Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it.

Yeah right!

Tom123 wrote:  Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Because there are many countries that suffer from poverty and desease more than Afghanistan, and Afghanistan is in the middle of a war between Crusader Christian Zionists and Muslims. It's obvious that they went there to serve the Crusade.

Tom123 wrote:    You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

I was talking about converting MUSLIMS to Christianity, not pagans and atheists.

Tom123 wrote: Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Yeah right! You just keep saying "there is no evidence", well the truth is we cant prove what they were or werent doing because we werent there (neither me nor you) but the fact that they went all the way to Afghanistan when 70% of their own people are not Christians and dont even believe in Jesus (not even as a Prophet as we Muslims do) is evidence that they did not have the best of intentions and were part of America's Crusade as their Government has proven to be.

Tom123 wrote:  Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Because there are many countries that suffer from poverty and desease more than Afghanistan, and Afghanistan is in the middle of a war between Crusader Christian Zionists and Muslims. It's obvious that they went there to serve the Crusade.

   If you can provide me any evidence whatsoever that these people were there bribing anyone or serving US forces or defending or supporting the 'war on terror' please show it to me. Until then, I have no reason to believe any of your accusations.

Tom123 wrote:    You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: I was talking about converting MUSLIMS to Christianity, not pagans and atheists.

   So are you saying that Muslims can be bought?...

   I actually know a person who was raised in a Muslim family but became a Christian. She was cast out by her own mother, and many people in her family and community. She lost a lot because of her choice to follow Jesus. She didn't get any money from anyone for her decision; had she wanted to have a life with less financial and family stress, she could have remained a Muslim.

   Cristo Vive!

        - Tomasz

Yes there is nothing wrong with peaceful protest. But you know these people may do more good if the peacefull, with civil disobedience protest their government's policies. Really the harm these foreign nations are donig in Afghanistand and Iraq is immense. AS they say, fix your government. Tell them to get out. They should protest arms sales.

And exactly what "huamitarian" aid were they doing? Anything can be claimed under such a title. Dod you know the US government has been known to send CIA people through the Peace Corps.  

Tom123 wrote:     If you can provide me any evidence whatsoever that these people were there bribing anyone or serving US forces or defending or supporting the 'war on terror' please show it to me.

Im saying  EVEN IF they were not doing anything bad except trying to convert people, even then that would be a great help to the occupation forces because the occupation forces are "Christian". So the fact is they were helping the occupation one way or another.

So... if their goal was just to spread Christianity, they could have done so in their own country where 70% are none-Christians. Why fly all the way to Afghanistan in the middle of a war? Just to convert people? I dont think so, since they still had a lot of converting to do in their own country and then their neighbouring countries and also many other countries that are not in the middle of a war between Muslims and Christians, and many countries where people are suffering from poverty more so than in Afghanistan.

Hence, even if we assume that they were just trying to convert people, they were still helping the occupation, and it seems that was their goal or else they would have tried to convert the remaining 70% of their own people instead.

Tom123 wrote:     If you can provide me any evidence whatsoever that these people were there bribing anyone or serving US forces or defending or supporting the 'war on terror' please show it to me.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Im saying  EVEN IF they were not doing anything bad except trying to convert people, even then that would be a great help to the occupation forces because the occupation forces are "Christian". So the fact is they were helping the occupation one way or another.

   The occupation forces are not Christian, neither in name or in nature. America is going in as a secular Western 'democracy', not a 'Christian nation'. Yes, George Bush may claim he is a Christian. But he doesn't even claim to be there to spread Christianity, but according to him, democracy.

   True Christians are not allies of the occupation of Afghanistan. Jesus orders Christians to love our enemies, bless those who hate us, do good to those who hate us, and pray for those who mistreat us. Even if the people of Afghanistan who our countries are murdering were guilty of oppressing us (they aren't, it's the other way around) we wouldn't be able to wage war against them.

   Jesus calls on us to be peacemakers, and to go out of our way to help people who are hungry, naked, imprisoned (oppressed), homeless. The war in Afghanistan (as every other war) does the complete opposite. War turns the Kingdom of God upside down. Instead of loving their enemies, people kill them. Instead of being peacemakers, they howl for more killing. Instead of aiding the poor, they make their lives worse- because it is always the poor who suffer most because of war.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: ... if their goal was just to spread Christianity, they could have done so in their own country where 70% are none-Christians. Why fly all the way to Afghanistan in the middle of a war? Just to convert people? I dont think so, since they still had a lot of converting to do in their own country and then their neighbouring countries and also many other countries that are not in the middle of a war between Muslims and Christians, and many countries where people are suffering from poverty more so than in Afghanistan.

   First of all, they were not going to Afghanistan to convert people. And Christ did not say that Christians should focus more on some people and less on others in need. Jesus in fact said that He is present in the hungry, the imprisoned, the homeless, the poor (Matt 25:31-49). What we do to them we do to Him.

   Did you know that Islamic mission groups operate in North America and South Korea? According to your logic, should they not be in Muslim countries helping their own poor people and fighting against their unjust and corrupt rulers? Should we tell them to leave all of the non-Muslim countries and go back home and convert everyone there to Islam and solve all of their problems back home before they show their faces in non-Muslim lands? And then let's say why not kidnap a group and shoot one or two to make an example of them? And when the rest are released, how about if we mock them for not staying in their Muslim countries and demonize them for coming here and claim they're supporting Osama bin Laden- like you are claiming these South Koreans were supporting the Americans.

How well do you think that would go over on this thread? How would you respond?

   Well, this is the same kind of attitude you are showing towards the South Koreans. They went to Afghanistan to help people, and they were punished for doing so, by both the Taleban and now their own society.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Hence, even if we assume that they were just trying to convert people,

   Not even that is true, unless you understand doing aid work as a Christian to be 'converting people'. If that is the case, then Red Crescent and Islamic Relief are 'converting' people too.

   You could say they were being witnesses to Christianity and by their actions representing the faith, but I wouldn't use the word converting.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: they were still helping the occupation, and it seems that was their goal

   They were not doing anything to help the occupation. Even if they were converting people, that wouldn't be of much help to the occupation since Christianity opposes war and injustice.

   You have yet to prove how helping the occupation forces was 'the goal' of the Koreans. So far I've seen a lot of speculation and not one bit of any evidence either backing up your earlier claims they were bribing people or that they went to support the American or Coalition forces.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: or else they would have tried to convert the remaining 70% of their own people instead.

   We are called to be witnesses to Christ wherever we go. There are South Korean missionaries and Christian aid workers who are at work in South Korea as well, don't worry about that.

   Cristo Vive!

       - Tomasz

Tom123 the thing you must realize is regardless how you feel, majority of muslims are skeptical of missionaries regardless whether their intentions are good or otherwise. There have been "good christian folk" who has called muslims "devils and needed to be saved" kind of similar to that of the African slaves in the 1600 when they arrived on the shores of West Virginia of course not making this a race issue but to show you that good peacekeeping missionaries have been acting for God since the 1600's.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that let's say these individual acted out of pure good intention without the intent to convert my question is who knew they were Christian? Couldn't they keep their belief private knowing the cultural sensitivities there? Unless their beliefs were forced out by the Taliban captors, I don't see it necessary for them to reveal their beliefs.

Contrary to what you think Tom123 (although you make it sound like Islamispeace is the only muslim who speaks out against injustice) I think its wrong to kidnapp anyone unless during a time of war and the captors are part of an established army. The Taliban, in my opinion are outlaws, savages, and cowards. I however don't support them but at the same time the Korean missionaries or any missionary need to have some type of rational judgement when it comes to helping others (but the subtle message is to convert the muslim heathens).

Tom123 you must als understand that we (at least I myself) am skeptical on why you are here. I have been here as you may know, since '03 and have seen people come and go and have seen missionaries of all kinds come here and preach the "word" without even trying to get to know Islam. It is obvious that you have no intent to at least know Islam. It is obvious as it is indicated in your writings that you don't even hold Islam as an Abrahamic faith nor do you agree with its tenents because, they don't reflect yours of course the same can be said about Judaism but that is pointless now.

My main concern in this situation are the people in those regions who need adequate attention. Frankly they don't need to hear about Jesus they need to hear about whether their lights are going to come on and the other biological necessities humans need. If missionaries want to impress me have the bog wig Christians donate the millions of money they steal...err...I mean get from their churches and donate it to the U.S. military so they can speed up the process of building facilities that serve the people.

Tom123 you have indicated that your intent is indeed selfish not purely altruistic especially when you talk about where you're going after you die. I mean, how confident can you be? So you can imagine that same cockiness you have the missionaries that go to these 3rd world countries and preach to the poor. I wish I can be that confident in my destination.

Tom, do you actually deny that these people were missionaries??? Or that the goal of missionaries is to convert?? Next you'll be denying their very existence!

Tom123 wrote:    The occupation forces are not Christian, neither in name or in nature.

First of all, they are Christian by name. Why do you keep denying the obvious?

As for them not being "TRUE" Christians, well how do you know those Koreans were "True" Christians???

And of course every Christian defines "true Christianity" in their own way (Catholic, Orthodox, Jehovah's witnesses, Mormons, Protestants, Evangelicals.......etc. Who are the "TRUE" Christians???)

Tom123 wrote:  The 'war on terror' is not supported by most Christians

Is that why Bush was re-elected after making war on both Afghanistan and Iraq??

Tom123 wrote:   Did you know that Islamic mission groups operate in North America and South Korea? According to your logic, should they not be in Muslim countries helping their own poor people and fighting against their unjust and corrupt rulers? Should we tell them to leave all of the non-Muslim countries and go back home and convert everyone there to Islam and solve all of their problems back home before they show their faces in non-Muslim lands? And then let's say why not kidnap a group and shoot one or two to make an example of them?

First of all, a lot of religious Muslims were arrested by the United States and their allies right after 9/11 and kept in prison without trial and most of them are still being tortured in prison after 6 years without any evidence that they had anything to do with 9/11 (the US Government has not even proven bin Laden to have had anything to do with 9/11, let alone the Guantanamo prisoners)

Secondly the United States has NOT been invaded by Muslims the way Afghanistan and Iraq have been invaded by people who (at least in name) are Christians. I assure you that if the US was invaded by Muslims, not only missionaries but most other Muslims would have been mercilessly murdered as we see the US and their allies doing right now in Iraq and Afghanistan where they do not even spare small children.

And lastly, you gave a very poor example since Muslim missionaries coming from countries where 90-99% are Muslims, where finding non-Muslims is quite rare.

Tom123 wrote: They were not doing anything to help the occupation. Even if they were converting people, that wouldn't be of much help to the occupation since Christianity opposes war and injustice.

There are millions of christians who would disagree with you, including the very people who originally compiled your Bible.

As to the specific type of work they were doing, they were working with children and supplying medicine to people. They went to organize "medical activities and activities for children," according to Kim Hyung-suk, president of the Korean Foundation for World Aid, which organized the trip.

1. Well why could they not donate their materials to Red Crescent?

The issue I have Tom, is that you make this big post about these few people who are donig things "in Christ" and went to a war-tornm country, with complete lack of ignorance and treid to help these poor non Christian people. A group of people quite well known to be strong evangelicals. You are right, none of us were there to know their true motivations. My parents did international aid / missionary work for many years. Of course they felt their motivations were "true," just and honest. But that does not mean they are right Tom.

 But you know what, people have gone into these places with terrible, terrible motivations. Of course we want to believe in the "goodness" of people. But you know what, trust is to be earned.

Have you ever heard of a group called Central Asia Institute? http://www.ikat.org/ - http://www.ikat.org/   It is one of the few nonMoslem groups I support in that region. Why? Cause it has the respect of the local people there. The man who runs it is phenomenal. It is about respect. Too many people go over there in that region who do not respect the people, their views, etc.

Are people her skeptical. I think so. And if you look at the history and experiences of people from around the world they have every right to be.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Tom, do you actually deny that these people were missionaries??? Or that the goal of missionaries is to convert?? Next you'll be denying their very existence!

   Prove to me that they were out there converting people. They were aid workers.

Tom123 wrote:    The occupation forces are not Christian, neither in name or in nature.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: First of all, they are Christian by name. Why do you keep denying the obvious?

   They go by the name 'Coalition forces', not 'Christian soldiers'. Their purpose is to defend Western interests not spread Christianity.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: As for them not being "TRUE" Christians, well how do you know those Koreans were "True" Christians???

   They went to a warzone to help people. They did not renounce their faith even when they were being beaten. They were living out their faith in Christ.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: And of course every Christian defines "true Christianity" in their own way (Catholic, Orthodox, Jehovah's witnesses, Mormons, Protestants, Evangelicals.......etc. Who are the "TRUE" Christians???)

   People who have decided to believe in and follow Jesus Christ. His commands and instructions for how Christians are to live can be found in the Gospels.

Tom123 wrote:  The 'war on terror' is not supported by most Christians

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Is that why Bush was re-elected after making war on both Afghanistan and Iraq??

   Do you actually believe that America is the Christian world or that most Christians are Americans?

Tom123 wrote:   Did you know that Islamic mission groups operate in North America and South Korea? According to your logic, should they not be in Muslim countries helping their own poor people and fighting against their unjust and corrupt rulers? Should we tell them to leave all of the non-Muslim countries and go back home and convert everyone there to Islam and solve all of their problems back home before they show their faces in non-Muslim lands? And then let's say why not kidnap a group and shoot one or two to make an example of them?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: First of all, a lot of religious Muslims were arrested by the United States and their allies right after 9/11 and kept in prison without trial and most of them are still being tortured in prison after 6 years without any evidence that they had anything to do with 9/11 (the US Government has not even proven bin Laden to have had anything to do with 9/11, let alone the Guantanamo prisoners)

   Many Christians (local Christians) are being persecuted in Muslim majority countries for their faith as well. I strongly oppose the imprisonment of Muslims in the US and Canada under the so-called 'anti-terror laws' and have fought to stop a man's deportation.

   I don't see what this has to do with missionaries though.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Secondly the United States has NOT been invaded by Muslims the way Afghanistan and Iraq have been invaded by people who (at least in name) are Christians.

   I never said it was.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: I assure you that if the US was invaded by Muslims, not only missionaries but most other Muslims would have been mercilessly murdered as we see the US and their allies doing right now in Iraq and Afghanistan where they do not even spare small children.

   Would this then be just? To kill all Muslims because of the actions of a few?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: And lastly, you gave a very poor example since Muslim missionaries coming from countries where 90-99% are Muslims, where finding non-Muslims is quite rare.

Tom123 wrote: They were not doing anything to help the occupation. Even if they were converting people, that wouldn't be of much help to the occupation since Christianity opposes war and injustice.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: There are millions of christians who would disagree with you, including the very people who originally compiled your Bible.

   And millions who would agree. Like the 45 million or so represented by the World Council of Churches- who opposed the war in Iraq. The Gospel writers clearly record Jesus as saying that we are to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, and not hate. And for Christians our authoritative source of faith is the Bible. In which Jesus - our Lord and Saviour- clearly states that injustice and violence are wrong.

   Christians in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th centuries (before Constantine reared his head) lived out these teachings which are found in the New Testament.

   Cristo Vive!

       - Tomasz

Im even more sure than before that these hostages were doing something sinister in Afghanistan (besides trying to convert illiterate poor Afghan children which you can see in this video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6790348944738125597&q=korean+afghanistan&total=430&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1 - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6790348944738125597 &q=korean+afghanistan&total=430&start=0&num= 10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1 )

Why? Because their family obviously lied about them:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrz_gV34fsE - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrz_gV34fsE

One says her daughter was there to teach Afghan children how to paint!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (missionary goes all the way to Afghanistan to teach a child whose dying out of hunger how to paint??????)

Another one was supposedly there to teach Afghan children how to use Computers!!!!!!!

Wow! Were they in Afghanistan or Disneyland??

So they were clearly lying, which suggests they had something to hide regarding their mission.
 

Tom123 then allow me to officially change my opinion and give you the benefit of the doubt. Although this interfaith dialogue doesn't accomplish anything at least you have thus far acknolwegded your intentions.

Regarding the Christian Missionaries

I didn't say specifically that the Korean missionaries called the muslims "devils" rather, I'm merely indicating the running opinion of mainstream evangelical christianity. Time and time again I have heard that missionaries are out to do the work of "Jesus" by preaching the word of God to the godless (that being muslims).

Regarding altruism

Tom123 in my opinion when people do charity especially when such charities are associated with religion it usually generates this feeling that one is doing good for the deity they worship, but, in essence, such charitble acts as I have experienced personally are done because there is usually a blessing or reward. Obviously religionist like yourself will not admit to the fact that what they do are inherently selfish of course not and I wouldn't expect you or others to admit that. But haven't you ever done something that makes you feel good and you find yourself doing that again because it makes you feel good (as well as the person whom you're helping)?

Scientifically speaking we are attracted to the things that makes us feel good whether its sex or charity we do certain things based on our biological chemistry. Seeing the smile from a child after give him/her a toy makes us feel good inside because we are seeing the fruits or labor so to speak. When it comes to religion this generates the same results. People do things for God because obviously they link moral action with religious teachings but an incentive to doing moral good is the future paradise that we end up in once we die. You mentioned this briefly by saying if you were to die you know you'd go to heaven. Not just because you were baptized but because you feel in heart that what you do as a Christian you would be rewarded for. Christians may operate on similar though processes by doing missionary work. Although they may not admit to acting for self-interest their actions whether good intention or not is not pure altruistic.

Tom123 think about it in your chair for a second that, there is no such thing as pure altruism in this word. Humans are selfish creatures and its not necessarily a bad thing but merely a biological process in our brains that trigger a "reward mechanism" when certain beneficial actions take place. with that being said I'm continuously skeptical of mssionaries who say they are doing the work of Christ because their reasons are religiously motivated not necessarily humanitarian. Of course the humanitarian part is second but take into account the prioritization.

Israfil wrote: Tom123 then allow me to officially change my opinion and give you the benefit of the doubt. Although this interfaith dialogue doesn't accomplish anything at least you have thus far acknolwegded your intentions.

   Glad you know where I stand. I acted quite boorish, I should have introduced myself and stated why I'm here in the Introduction Section.

Israfil wrote: Regarding the Christian Missionaries I didn't say specifically that the Korean missionaries called the muslims "devils" rather, I'm merely indicating the running opinion of mainstream evangelical christianity. Time and time again I have heard that missionaries are out to do the work of "Jesus" by preaching the word of God to the godless (that being muslims).

   OK, glad you clarified that. There are Christians who call Muslims 'devils', although this is not as mainstream as you may believe. Although that kind of offensive language is used by some high profile religious leaders in the USA, they do not represent most Christians around the world. They do not represent even all Christians in the US, and even in their denominations (evangelical, pentecostal and baptist for the most part) there are many who are beginning to question and challenge their misinterpretation and political abuse of the Christian faith. The Pope also quoted an offensive statement about Muslims, I know, but he later stated he did not believe what the quote said. It was dumb of him to said what he said but he I don't believe he hates Muslims. The Islam-bashers are for the most part found in the American South (not S. America ), they do not represent most of the Christian world although with the media attention they get one could be justified for believing that.

   Now as Christians, we do believe that our faith has the whole truth about God, as you as a Muslim believe that you have the whole truth about God. So we both want to share what we believe is the truth with others.

   I have also heard Muslims speak of the Christian faith in very arrogant terms, even if they do not mean to. I read a 'testimony' by a person who converted to Christianity from Islam ending by saying that he or she (I read this a while ago, will try to find it) hopes that one day churches will lead people to heaven instead of hell like they are now.

Israfil wrote: Regarding altruism Tom123 in my opinion when people do charity especially when such charities are associated with religion it usually generates this feeling that one is doing good for the deity they worship, but, in essence, such charitble acts as I have experienced personally are done because there is usually a blessing or reward. Obviously religionist like yourself will not admit to the fact that what they do are inherently selfish of course not and I wouldn't expect you or others to admit that. But haven't you ever done something that makes you feel good and you find yourself doing that again because it makes you feel good (as well as the person whom you're helping)? Scientifically speaking we are attracted to the things that makes us feel good whether its sex or charity we do certain things based on our biological chemistry. Seeing the smile from a child after give him/her a toy makes us feel good inside because we are seeing the fruits or labor so to speak. When it comes to religion this generates the same results. People do things for God because obviously they link moral action with religious teachings but an incentive to doing moral good is the future paradise that we end up in once we die. You mentioned this briefly by saying if you were to die you know you'd go to heaven. Not just because you were baptized but because you feel in heart that what you do as a Christian you would be rewarded for. Christians may operate on similar though processes by doing missionary work. Although they may not admit to acting for self-interest their actions whether good intention or not is not pure altruistic. Tom123 think about it in your chair for a second that, there is no such thing as pure altruism in this word. Humans are selfish creatures and its not necessarily a bad thing but merely a biological process in our brains that trigger a "reward mechanism" when certain beneficial actions take place. with that being said I'm continuously skeptical of mssionaries who say they are doing the work of Christ because their reasons are religiously motivated not necessarily humanitarian. Of course the humanitarian part is second but take into account the prioritization.

Feeling good by doing good things is not necessarily a bad thing its just that we've developed a reward mechanism in our body that rewards us with this "feeling" ofelation that we've done a good thing. Humans biologically are geared to more pleasurable things than harmful things so it is not surprising that people do things for God and for helping others both are triggers for the reward mechanism.

Am I skeptical of muslims who help others? Yes I am skeptical. There are muslims who fund bad groups and some who fund good groups. The same rule applies to Jews and Christians it depends on the organization. Not saying God isn't in all things because God is existing and his essence is an emanation of all things but, if we do things it should be because we want to not some religious or spiritual motivation.

When I'm on the streets and I help someone yes I do feel good about helping people but I try to get rid of the feeling of feeling good because this is my job and that is what I should do. I want to help other humans because it the human thing to do. I believe in the success of our species and in order to maintain that I must preserve human life that is how I see things. I've heard muslims talk about doing things to get mutiple blessings and doing things to get triple blessings. To me, I don't look at charity or other things like a video game with the person with the most blessings wins, I look at it as something that all humans who are conscious of morality should do.

As far as evangelical christianity is concerned I'm glad to see your an apologist to those in mainstram chgristianity because as far as the running opinion of Christianity of today is concerned, Islam is the anti-christ (although such terminology is wrong since we believe in the christ who is Jesus). Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all christians but I say most christians in mainstream believe this way. The pope changed his answers based upon soiciety but he still believes those views. I remember read about him and his beliefs on Islam and let me say that he had nothing good to say about it.

Sawtul I disagree with you on that you assume that the entire U.S military is Christian. Do you not know there are Muslims, Jews and Buddhist in the military? Of course in different branches but there are people of different faiths in the U.S. military so it would be wrong to assert the U.S. military is entirely Christian. Of course Christianity maybe the majority faith but its wrong to say the entire military is majority Christian.

Israfil wrote: Feeling good by doing good things is not necessarily a bad thing its just that we've developed a reward mechanism in our body that rewards us with this "feeling" ofelation that we've done a good thing. Humans biologically are geared to more pleasurable things than harmful things so it is not surprising that people do things for God and for helping others both are triggers for the reward mechanism. Am I skeptical of muslims who help others? Yes I am skeptical. There are muslims who fund bad groups and some who fund good groups. The same rule applies to Jews and Christians it depends on the organization. Not saying God isn't in all things because God is existing and his essence is an emanation of all things but, if we do things it should be because we want to not some religious or spiritual motivation. When I'm on the streets and I help someone yes I do feel good about helping people but I try to get rid of the feeling of feeling good because this is my job and that is what I should do. I want to help other humans because it the human thing to do. I believe in the success of our species and in order to maintain that I must preserve human life that is how I see things. I've heard muslims talk about doing things to get mutiple blessings and doing things to get triple blessings. To me, I don't look at charity or other things like a video game with the person with the most blessings wins, I look at it as something that all humans who are conscious of morality should do.

   We agree on everything. Even if you don't help people just to make yourself 'feel good' though, Israfil, you do feel so after you help them, don't you? Not necessarily 'aww... I'm such a nice person' feeling but you do feel some satisfaction after seeing someone benefiting from something good you've done, even if you don't want to feel that way.

   This may be one of the things we have in common. I also don't go out to help people so people can see 'what a nice person I am' (I'm not) or to get something back from them or to feel 'good about myself'. I also feel that if someone needs help I have a responsibility and duty to help them, perhaps like in your case, my conviction comes from my faith. When I start feeling 'good' about myself for helping someone, I also do my best to push these thoughts aside and have been getting better at it. I'll actually say 'in Christ's name, go away Satan'. I believe that such thoughts are actually sinful b/c they are pride, and I don't believe we should be proud of ourselves because we are all sinners and only God is perfect, secondly when we help someone we don't do anything extraordinary except living out our faith. I don't deserve any blessings from God, I believe as a Christian He has already given me the ultimate blessing on the cross so I have no reason to ask for more.

Israfil wrote: As far as evangelical christianity is concerned I'm glad to see your an apologist to those in mainstram chgristianity because as far as the running opinion of Christianity of today is concerned, Islam is the anti-christ (although such terminology is wrong since we believe in the christ who is Jesus). Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all christians but I say most christians in mainstream believe this way.

   Thanks, Israfil.

   I don't hate Muslims or think Islam is violent or demonic like some do, though to be honest with you I also don't believe that it is correct in all its teachings (as I'm sure you feel about Christianity and other faiths).

   In terms of the 'antichrist' word, the New Testament does say that people who deny that Jesus is from God ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=69&chapter=4&verse=3&version=31&context=verse - 1 John 4:3 ), who deny 'the Father and the Son' ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=69&chapter=2&verse=22&version=31&context=verse - 1 John 2:22 ), who deny Jesus Christ 'coming in the flesh' ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=70&chapter=1&verse=7&version=31&context=verse - 2 John 1:7 ) (Christians believe Jesus was God in flesh when He walked on the earth)  is 'an' antichrist.

   I know that as a Muslim you see this as offensive, though the Quran also has passages that would offend many Christians- like where it says that those who believe Jesus Son of Mary is God (which happens to be what Christians believe) are 'blasphemers'.

   So in terms of the word 'antichrist' being applied by some Christians, it does have some Biblical background although their behaviour does not. Christians are told to be loving towards others, to be humble and patient, not to judge or condemn others, and to look for logs in our own eyes before we point out the specks in those of others. None of these traits apply to most of the televangelists who go around bashing Muslims.

   I don't see how labelling someone an 'antichrist' would be helpful in discussion with him or her, especially if we want to share our faith with them. John does not tell Christians to run around condemning and insulting people and he does not call anyone an antichrist to his face. The term is used  to denote people who deny Christian beliefs, but nowhere do the disciples go around calling people antichrists.

   I think a comparison can be made with the word 'blasphemer' in the Quran. Muslims may believe it applies to non-Muslims who believe in the Trinity but in a friendly discussion with a Christian where both of you are conducting yourselves in a respectful manner you aren't probably going to yell 'you blasphemer!' at him or her.

   I think there are many good and true things in Islam and I have a lot of respect for many Muslims, even if I believe that on certain issues you are mistaken. I believe that many of the vociferous and disgusting attacks on islambashing engaged in by certain 'christian' religious leaders like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Anne Coulter, others...are usually wrong, often unjust, almost always hypocritical, and always unChristian.

Israfil wrote: The pope changed his answers based upon soiciety but he still believes those views. I remember read about him and his beliefs on Islam and let me say that he had nothing good to say about it.

   Can you show me where, please? I wouldn't be surprised if that was true but I'm curious to see what he actually wrote. The reason I'm saying this is sometimes the media misquotes people. I certainly had a lot of issues with Pope John Paul 2 but I think he was far more respectful towards Muslims than Ratzinger and he built many bridges with Muslims which sadly the new Pope is now destroying.

   Cristo Vive!

     - Tomasz

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICIENT, THE MERCIFUL.

HAPPY  RAMADAN!

I just couldn�t resist to lend few words on the topic; thought I have read the entire responses, I just think that you either have to be too ignorant or a hypocrite to be an oblivious to the sheer deceitfulness of these so called humanitarian workers who�s only agenda is to convert and lure, and have absolutely no respect for human life what so ever. After having studied the movement, I have come to realized that war and the entity are in- separable.  I hope iam not being too harsh but the hypocrisy of those serpent missionaries who have not only  blessed slavery, but are the sole perpetuators� of war and misery in this world AS WE SPEAK .

Like they say, pictures speak louder than words. Here is a bit of reality check for the author of the post and for those who defend the so-called humanitarian workers.   

Radical Christian Missionaries in Iraq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owCXbDVTLRE - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owCXbDVTLRE

peace

They invade our countries, kill thousands of people making tens of thousands of children homeless and orphans. Then they gather the poor and the orphans who dont even know how to read or write and have little or no idea what religion they belong to and convert them by giving them a few gifts.

Tom123 wrote:    Are you saying that the South Korean aid workers invaded Afghanistan?    Cristo Vive!        - Tomasz

South Korea sent troops to Afghanistan (as did the United States) then sent missionaries to convert.

Obviously, everyone does their own job. One man doesnt plan, bomb, shoot and convert people at the same time!

Tom123 wrote:      What proof do you have that the South Korean government is trying to convert Afghans to Christianity?    What proof do you have that these aid workers were working for the South Korean or American government?    What proof do you have that they were actually verbally trying to convert people?

What proof do you have that they even existed? Maybe they were just inventions of the media

Tom123 wrote:    When you come up with something worth replying to, let me know.

Where's your proof that what I said was not worth replying to?

Thanks for the kind words, Tom.

Tom, i agree with you that there are some decent Christians who are righteous/ sincere in helping the poor etc, but that does not mean that there weren�t missionaries who not only justified slavery, but have worked hand in hand with colonial powers and the oppressors. I mean if there action are genuine in any sense, which i really doubt, why don�t they condemn the occupiers rather than pretending to be against the occupation superficially, but are collaborating with them secretly as evident in the video i have shown.

Honestly speaking, it disgusts me more than anything by the actions of the so called peace loving missionaries because i guess i happened to dig too deep into the laundry- perhaps. Anyways iam a bit short of time, but i disagree with your synopsis in general, per my understanding, its just a lure to the faith-nothing more.

palistine

Tom,

The South Koreans went to Afghanistan as aid workers, not even as missionaries. So while they were going there as Christians, they were not verbally prosyletizing.

A question? How do you know? Do you know these people? I am sure you know some people go under the cover of "aid" workers to go and "spread the word." How are you so sure that they did none of this?

Hello Tom, sorry for the late reply, I have been busy.

   Glad to hear back from you.

 i have to admit you are one of the first few Christians I would say, is Jesus like. Apparently, you guys have got plenty of work at hand to bring back the already strayed masses of Christendom, who have gone ferociously insane over the course of the last few centuries or more!  It seems to be that Jesus is superficial but the prevailing doctrine has been the conquest and domination of Rome Empire.

 I agree with you among Christians claiming to be serving Jesus and sharing the Gospel with others and serving the poor there are those who actually do that�. And ere are also those who do not and are hypocrites.

Oh- this is why history has been so unfavorable in the eye of Christendom because ever since the inception of this faith who has been adapted after its messenger, it has been turned twisted and used to annihilate the indigenous inhibitors of various lands/ counties of many seemingly more loving people than the exporters of peace and  love that Jesus thought us.    

Among people who serve as missionaries there are those who do the above mentioned things��

these people have had too much of their days. It�s about time that decent and righteous Christians like your self take the podium and triumph the loving message of Jesus. Enough is enough.  

 and do a lot of good, and there are those who are cynically going to defend imperialism and Western politics while falsely claiming they are doing it to serve Jesus. Among Muslims who claim to be spreading Islam there are those who do so by telling people about their faith and expressing their beliefs in good works, and there are those who bomb, behead, murder and invade others.

Sure Tome, there is good and bad in every comp, but this camp has had too much of the nasty guys who evoke the message of love but at day and turn serpents at night. Ex. Pat Roberson, who surely prays in front of his audiences but do you know that he has been secretly investing in Liberia/seara leon (sp?) which not only fueled the bloody civil war, but have contributed the lose of human life for the sake of diamond.

   The South Koreans went to Afghanistan as aid workers, not even as missionaries. So while they were going there as Christians, they were not verbally prosyletizing.

Once again what evidence is there to punish anyone ,especially if that being is reluctant to speak to his/her persecutors. Let me just say that, I have been acquainted with one evangelist and they would tell me in my face that they would hide behind the cover of �humanitarian� to lure poor and suffering masses while turning a blind eye to the cause of their suffering,  Which is not only hypocritical but criminal in every sense who should be sent Hagues as the murderers who kill because they been ordered by their superiors. it is also fair to acknowledge that there are decent and  sincere Christians who fight for justice, thought I would say that they are minority and often lack influence in their own church let a lone their denomination.    

   The video you showed me was about US 'missionaries' sent by the Southern Baptist Convention. Most of them are rabidly pro-war and support George Bush. They put patriotism ahead of the Gospel, which calls for love of enemies and serving the poor.

   The people taken hostage in Afghanistan had nothing to do with them. It would be like comparing Muslims who preach Islam on this forum with Al Qaeda in Iraq- since both you and them claim to be wanting to spread Islam. If you can provide me with any proof that the South Koreans were working with the occupation forces or abusing Afghan people in any way, please show it to me. Otherwise, I stand by what I said previously- they were true servants of Christ and have only brought good to the people of Afghanistan whom they were serving in His name.

   About my synopsis being a 'lure to the faith' let me elaborate I have been invited to this forum by a Muslim poster for interfaith discussion and while I am here I also engage in other forms of discussion with people here. I am a Christian and am here to share my faith with Muslims on this forum and to listen to what you have to tell me about what you believe. My faith is everything in my life and extends into social justice issues. My involvement in social justice work and antiwar activism and human rights campaigning (on and off internet forums  ) is because Jesus clearly says in Scripture He expects this of His followers. I do not separate my faith from my activism or anything else in my life.  

The term 'lure' was not being referred to you, but iam addressing the issue with in the context of the missionaries who are out as humanitarians but are really there to convert people. Furthermore, It does not concern me the color of your skin/ creed/ gender as long us we are all for justice. You have every right to practice and preach your faith as long as iam not forced upon it.    

   Nice exchanging views with you. Take care and all the best. Assalamu Alaikum.

Its been nice to exchange views with you as well. God bless and take care.

Palestine