Where did the doctrine of "once saved always saved

[cataracts]

youngstown said:

Once Saved Always Saved, only works if you don't negate it with your free will........thoughts & actions.

Youngstown,
If this is the case then "once save always saved can never ever work because free will is the greatest gift that God gave man.

Cataracts

[FightingFalcon]

jfree said:

Terrorist is clearly defined, only one w/a twisted perspective would call a terrorist a freedom fighter. Or are you suggesting that those who flew planes into the WTC were not terrorists? Is Al Queda a terrorist organization?

Anyone w/a semblence of right and wrong would know the difference, only those whose reality is clouded by extremist ideology is confused on whose who.

Falcon, you've becomes so extreme in your ideology that you reality is skewed. I suggest a step back, drop the superman books, their rotting your brain, your beginning to sound like a leftist loon.

Nothing is more ridiculous than all those leftist war protestors in the Che, Hamas, Hezbolah t-shirts, hypocritical and retarded, d-d-d. Anyone running round bombing innocents in trains, planes, school, markets and cars is a terrorist, it really is that simple. Invest in some black and white perspective, the world isn't a vast grey area, there is right and wrong, lose your moral compass and you end up like Rosie and co.

Terrorism is clearly defined, eh? Really? Care to share your expert definition with me?

So if the Free French moved to Nazi Germany and targetted civilians in trains, planes, cars, markets, etc. would they be terrorists? If a tyrannical government was slaughtering civilians by the thousands (e.g. Russia) and the only way for the people to hit back was through reprisal bombings, would they be terrorists?

By your definition, the governments of many countries (including Russia) would be considered terrorist organizations. Do I have that right?

My moral compass and the way I define right vs. wrong is for what cause the "terrorists" are fighting for. Groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. are not fighting for democracy so therefore I do not support them. Some groups though (the Old IRA for example) fought against tyranny to bring about a democratic representation of the people. Are they terrorists? I would hope you don't think so.

[Dave]

So if the Free French moved to Nazi Germany and targetted civilians in trains, planes, cars, markets, etc. would they be terrorists?

Yes

If a tyrannical government was slaughtering civilians by the thousands (e.g. Russia) and the only way for the people to hit back was through reprisal bombings, would they be terrorists?

That's democide. The def of democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder. If the people were hitting military targets only, then they'd be Rebels, Guerillas, etc.


By your definition, the governments of many countries (including Russia) would be considered terrorist organizations. Do I have that right?

See democide. If it's a political body, it tends to be looked at as an "oppressive regime", not so much a terror group. A terror group wants max casualties but really doesn't have any clearly defined goals. They're just bombs and bullets.

Democide on the other hand, the people doing it feel there is a valid reason for it, whether to assert power, get rid of a group of people they don't like, etc.

My moral compass and the way I define right vs. wrong is for what cause the "terrorists" are fighting for. Groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. are not fighting for democracy so therefore I do not support them. Some groups though (the Old IRA for example) fought against tyranny to bring about a democratic representation of the people. Are they terrorists? I would hope you don't think so.

The IRA has folded, Seamus. So what groups left do you have that are truly fighting oppressive regimes? Take a look around....there are none. They are all militant muslims engaged in the never ending quest for world domination.

The closest thing to your belief would be the fighting in Chechnya...but even those guys have done some sick things.

[FightingFalcon]

The closest thing to your belief would be the fighting in Chechnya...but even those guys have done some sick things.

Indeed - I sympathize with them in their struggle against Russia but at the same time, I hesitate to support them because I'm not sure what type of government they seek to establish. Many of the fighters are radical Jihadists who would obviously support an Islamic theocracy in the country. But still, a lot of the fighters are not radicals (or Muslims at all) and they simply seek to end Russia's tyranny in Chechnya.

To me, in the fight between Russia and Chechnya, Russia is infinitely worse and they deserve complete condemnation. You can use semantics all you like (terrorism vs. democide) but Russia is committing genocide in that country.

Like I said before - it all depends on what they are fighting for. Not how they go about fighting for it.

[Dave]

Indeed - I sympathize with them in their struggle against Russia but at the same time, I hesitate to support them because I'm not sure what type of government they seek to establish.

When they won the First Chechen War, their President, Aslan Maskhadov, installed Islamic Sharia law. And their terrorist attacks, such as the school incident and the theater, have turned me off.

To me, in the fight between Russia and Chechnya, Russia is infinitely worse and they deserve complete condemnation. You can use semantics all you like (terrorism vs. democide) but Russia is committing genocide in that country.

I'd say genocide may be a stretch. Russia has never had a problem with large amounts of casualties (See Stalingrad). So it's hard to discern whether they are purposely trying to kill them all because they are Chechen, or just adhering to their age old philosophy of "if it moves kill it", or "anything can be seized if you send in enough people"...

Like I said before - it all depends on what they are fighting for. Not how they go about fighting for it.

They are fighting for an Islamic Republic. Interpret how you want to, specifics are unknown.

[jfree]

I already gave you definition, all you need do is read what was written. A terrorist organization is one who specifically targets civilians for wonton execution, ie bombing planes, trains, buses, markets, churches, schools etc...

Genocide: among other things, the killing of people by a government because of their indelible group membership (race, ethnicity, religion, language).

Politicide: the murder of any person or people by a government because of their politics or for political purposes.

Mass Murder: the indiscriminate killing of any person or people by a government.

Democide: The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.

The difference between democide and terrorism is the state, although we do recognize state sponsored terrorism, a country generally backs away from direct terrorism outside of their borders because they are easy targets for a united coalition to take out, whereas groups such as hamas AQ etc.. will target around the world as a small and transient group they are harder to kill.

[FightingFalcon]

And their terrorist attacks, such as the school incident and the theater, have turned me off.

In Beslan, most of the children were found dead with Russian bullets in them. Not to mention that the Russian government to this day refuses to admit what toxic gas was used to subdue the theater hostages. None of that is surprising considering the fact that FSB agents were found in Ryazan attempting to blow up Russian apartment buildings.

So it's hard to discern whether they are purposely trying to kill them all because they are Chechen

The city of Grozny was almost completely wiped off the face of the Earth. Now I know some Americans wanted us to do the same to Fallujah but that's just not how a civilized country conducts itself.

I already gave you definition, all you need do is read what was written. A terrorist organization is one who specifically targets civilians for wonton execution, ie bombing planes, trains, buses, markets, churches, schools etc...

And we nuked two cities - so what? I fully support the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan but don't kid yourself into thinking that legitimate countries don't intentionally target civilians. The intentional targetting of civilians has been an accepted part of warfare for many years now.