toldailytopic: Should Osama Bin Laden be forgiven?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HisServant

New member
OR ... while in prison, he could continue on his murderous rampage ...

You do realize you chastising the WRONG side here, right. WE are the good guys. Our country did the world a great service by taking out this horrible, murderous wretch of a hum ... err, scratch that.

I refuse to refer to the maggot known as OBL as human.

We also created him in the first place by training and arming him to help him drive Russia out of Afghanistan and then abandoned him

There is no right or wrong here.. it's just one big choice between the lesser of evils.. and I honestly do not know which side is more evil.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
Him seeking forgiveness is not a prerequisite for us forgiving him..

But is it a prerequisite for him receiving any forgiveness that anyone might want to bestow upon him. Luke 7:47 ...to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.

Vengence is the Lord's..

I agree. That's why I asked you:

When God takes vengeance on His enemies, does He love them? Yes or no.

I didn't see God's vengence here.. just the misguided vengence of sinful men.

Because God didn't use men and nations throughout history to execute his vengeance, even though the scriptures show he did?
 

Lovejoy

Active member
We also created him in the first place by training and arming him

There is no right or wrong here.. it's just one big choice between the lesser of evils.

I think that is a dubious charge, and even if it were true, why does he repay it with violence rather than gratitude? Are we to blame for his lack of fidelity? Does a lack of savvy equate to a moral evil?
 

HisServant

New member
But is it a prerequisite for him receiving any forgiveness that anyone might want to bestow upon him. Luke 7:47 ...to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.



I agree. That's why I asked you:

When God takes vengeance on His enemies, does He love them? Yes or no.



Because God didn't use men and nations throughout history to execute his vengeance, even though the scriptures show he did?

But when the scripture show he did.. it was undeniable who did so.. (God).

God's vengance was on Israels enemies, because he loved Israel.. all men deserve to die when measured by God's measuring stick.
 

Lovejoy

Active member
If he is still a danger to others.. then forgiving him and placing him in a position where he can do no more harm seems to be the only logical choice. But taking his life is out of the question.

Fox news, and a few others, are reporting that he was given a chance to surrender. Heck, he had million chances to do so. Our men were at no obligation to place themselves at further risk attempting to take him alive if he was bent on a proxy suicide. I think you overestimate our ability to take a man like him captive if he does not wish to have it so. Would it have been preferrable if we had lost half a dozen men on the effort, particularly if it increased the risk of his escaping?
 

Sherman

I identify as a Christian
Staff member
Administrator
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame

toldailytopic: Should Osama Bin Laden be forgiven?


Complex question: but I will tackle it. Christ offered the pardon for everyone including Osama at Calvary. It is possible for someone as evil as Osama to be pardoned by Jesus if he accepts that pardon. However, it is obvious from his actions, that he had no intention of accepting the sacrifice of the LORD Jesus. That leaves him open to God's wrath. Right now he is experiencing God's wrath as he awaits his final doom. Osama is facing hard reality now. There are no 70 virgins and silk beds for him.

Should we forgive this terrorist? Sounds like sappy political doublespeak. He's dead. Forget about him and move on. We should deal with terrorists like this severely and swiftly, lest they take more innocent lives. Molly coddling terrorists is foolish.
 

elohiym

Well-known member

Lovejoy

Active member

Precisely. From your own article:

U.S. government officials and a number of other parties maintain that the U.S. supported only the indigenous Afghan mujahideen. They deny that the CIA or other American officials had contact with the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) or Bin Laden, let alone armed, trained, coached or indoctrinated them. Scholars and reporters have called the idea the CIA backed Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) "nonsense",[17] "sheer fantasy",[18] and "simply a folk myth."[19]

They argue that:

with a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land
that with several hundred million dollars a year in funding from non-American, Muslim sources, Arab Afghans themselves would have no need for American funds
that Americans could not train mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of them to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan;[20]
that the Afghan Arabs were militant Islamists, reflexively hostile to Westerners, and prone to threaten or attack Westerners even though they knew the Westerners were helping the mujahideen.
Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri says much the same thing in his book Knights Under the Prophet's Banner.[21]

Bin Laden himself has said "the collapse of the Soviet Union ... goes to God and the mujahideen in Afghanistan ... the US had no mentionable role," but "collapse made the US more haughty and arrogant." [22]
 

HisServant

New member
Fox news, and a few others, are reporting that he was given a chance to surrender. Heck, he had million chances to do so. Our men were at no obligation to place themselves at further risk attempting to take him alive if he was bent on a proxy suicide. I think you overestimate our ability to take a man like him captive if he does not wish to have it so. Would it have been preferrable if we had lost half a dozen men on the effort, particularly if it increased the risk of his escaping?

No he wasn't... the orders were to go and kill him and bring back his body.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
But when the scripture show he did.. it was undeniable who did so.. (God).

God's vengance was on Israels enemies, because he loved Israel.. all men deserve to die when measured by God's measuring stick.

When God takes vengeance on His enemies, does He love them? Yes or no.
 

Lovejoy

Active member
No he wasn't... the orders were to go and kill him and bring back his body.

From CNN:

Updated 10:50 a.m. ET] There was no indication bin Laden was going to surrender when the U.S. launched its operation, a U.S. official said.

"There was no evidence they tried to surrender," the official told CNN. “The order going in was to get UBL (Osama bin Laden)”

“All of the contingency planning was that we would encounter heavy resistance," the U.S. official said. "That is what we expected and what happened. Obviously if everybody had put there hands up and surrendered we would have taken them but that did not happen and we did not expect it.”

That assumption bore itself out, the official said.

“We encountered resistance upon entering the compound," CNN was told.

A second U.S. official says the president's order was always to capture or kill bin Laden. The second official said the assumption all along was there would be no surrender by the al Qaeda leader.

The official said that the mission was originally supposed to happen on Saturday, but would not discuss why it was delayed until Sunday.

They were realistic, but he did not die until 30 minutes into a 40 minute fight. He could have quit.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
"The official said that the mission was originally supposed to happen on Saturday, but would not discuss why it was delayed until Sunday."

Saturday night was Obama's appearance at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

:duh:
 

keypurr

Well-known member
I couldn't agree more. And that applies to both sides of the political spectrum, of coruse!



I think it's at once understandable and hypocritical do so. On the one hand, the West (I say this so that it applies to European countries as well) frequently abuses its position as dominant world power through greed, cultural imperialism, rash intervention, insensitivity, and environmental irresponsibility. On the other, it is also a force for real improvement in the world, gives vast amounts in aid and other noble causes, and is undoubtedly has higher standards of living than the majority the rest of the world. To lose sight of either is leads to a skewed perspective; to act as a result of that perspective almost always ends horrifically.


Forgive them father for they know not what they do.....

Sometimes that is kind of hard to do. But if Jesus did it so can we.
 

HisServant

New member
Fox news, and a few others, are reporting that he was given a chance to surrender. Heck, he had million chances to do so. Our men were at no obligation to place themselves at further risk attempting to take him alive if he was bent on a proxy suicide. I think you overestimate our ability to take a man like him captive if he does not wish to have it so. Would it have been preferrable if we had lost half a dozen men on the effort, particularly if it increased the risk of his escaping?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/us-binladen-kill-idUSTRE7413H220110502
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top