How do you know that when most of your faith has been changed? Um, because the existence of the Messianic Jews (the christians jews) are a documented part of history And how do you know that history wasn't changed too? He fullfilled, as you said, the most important part is the HE SAID, kee pthe sabath holy, i guess you are not following, he didn't change the day of worship. Actually, he berated the Jewish religious leaders, for reprimanding him and the apostles, because they didnt abide by the laws of the Sabbath. and isn't that fullfillment? too bad for them, because there are proofs that Jesus didn't die or was crucified. Yeah, so Muhammad borrows Jesus from the Christians and discards the testimony of those that actually followed Jesus. Talk about pick and choose. and that's what i hate about people who don't know anything about what they're talking about :} we have a Jesus in Islam, we call him by his Original name, and we believe that he is a miracle birth, spoke in his childhood, has no father, he resurrected the dead, cured the blind and the sick, and he transformed sand into gold to give an example, and created a bird out of mud, he was not killed. These christians that you're talking about know alot more than you do, believe me, and not all of them didn't know what the sabath was, and i bet you didn't either :} Are you kidding me? There's no way in heck they know more than me if they don't even know what the Sabbath is. It's like 1st year christian learning for goodness sake. Heck, many non-religious people know what the Sabbath is. So, for you tell me that you spoke to these suppossed learned Christians...who didn't know what the Sabbath is...sorry, I don't buy it. you don't have to, it's just that they were open minded people. and about muslims burning and killing for cartoons, no one said it was right, it was wrong, and if it was me i'd punish them. as of your lovely pope, he is a trouble stirrer, seriously, the previous pope saught peace, the current one seeks to destroy it, you might as well overthrow him and replace him with a better one, WHO THE HELL IS HE? telling the people that Islam is evil EH? Way to regurgitate what your mosque told you. Have you even read the speech? It was a denunciation of religious violence and hatred. It was a quote of someone else, in a full speech. Quoting, in agreement is different than quoting in disagreement, why would anyone quote anyone? to either agree or disagree, there are no other options, the dear pope quoted in agreement, and this is where he's destroying the peace and is starting a new religious war, and yes, words KILL just for your information. By the way, interesting view you have there. The Pope destroys peace with just words? Just words? It's that kind of thinking that get's Cartoon artists killed, embassies burned, authors assassinated, etc. Those things are the destroyers of peace. Not mere words. Especially words from a speech that asked for peace. A speech in which you will not find him calling Islam evil, as you just claimed. He called our prophet Evil, he said he brought Evil which is Islam, he said that violence contradicts the nature of something i forgot, and he was talking about the Muslims, why can't he just shut up? instead of sayign those foolish words, why don't he say something like, let's work together in solving this conflict with the muslims? why? or is he just another bush? who gets his speaches written and he reads them without thinking? is that catholic pope this kind of closed minded person? as i said before, yes words kill, it only takes a matter of time before someone puts them into action.
Originally posted by OneMuslim How do you know that when most of your faith has been changed? Um, because the existence of the Messianic Jews (the christians jews) are a documented part of history And how do you know that history wasn't changed too?
as of your lovely pope, he is a trouble stirrer, seriously, the previous pope saught peace, the current one seeks to destroy it, you might as well overthrow him and replace him with a better one, WHO THE HELL IS HE? telling the people that Islam is evil EH?
Yes, and we all know that the Islam NEVER says anything bad about christianity /sarcasm. just like we know that there has NEVER been war or riots because of the islam /sarcasm.
I do have a question for you. Many of the Islamic groups that are taking the Pope's words out of proportion are extremist groups such as al-Qaeda.
First, clarification. The Pope did not speak these words from his own mind, they were repeated words from a Byzantine emperor.
Now, the question. Why doesn't any Muslim organization denounce the behavior of these extremist groups? I know you cannot speak on behalf of WHY the organizations do not, but just your opinion on the matter.
Second, what do you think of the comments and actions of al-Qaeda in response of the Pope's repetition of the words?
What the Pope quoted "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached"
All of this debate lends proof to my belief about all of this.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
Originally posted by OneMuslim And how do you know that history wasn't changed too? That isn't christian taught history. It's historical, period. and isn't that fullfillment? Reread what I wrote. Jesus and his apostles were berated by Jewish religious figures for not following the laws of the Sabbath. and that's what i hate about people who don't know anything about what they're talking about :} we have a Jesus in Islam, we call him by his Original name, and we believe that he is a miracle birth, spoke in his childhood, has no father, he resurrected the dead, cured the blind and the sick, and he transformed sand into gold to give an example, and created a bird out of mud, he was not killed. Yes, exactly, and you got all that from the testimony of Messianic Jews which became the christians, and so forth. you don't have to, it's just that they were open minded people. meaning, you either made it up. Or, spoke to some seriously uniformed "christians" (not knowing what sabbath is?) whose lack of knowledge fed your agenda. Quoting, in agreement is different than quoting in disagreement, why would anyone quote anyone? to either agree or disagree, there are no other options, the dear pope quoted in agreement, and this is where he's destroying the peace and is starting a new religious war, and yes, words KILL just for your information. No, people qoute others for a variety of reasons. Not just to agree completely with everything, or disgree completely. Have you read the speech? Have you read his statements shortly after clarifying what he himself believes? I've never met a man who spoke and killed with his words. No, it's the fanatical reaction to a misunderstanding of intent, that is killing people. The Catholics aren't jumping off their couches to burn effigy's of Muhhamad. Or to fire bomb and shoot at mosques. Of course, muslims are actually doing this. Actions kill people. I think you better look inward to your own religion, at this time. That is, if you are actually looking to head off religious violence. He called our prophet Evil, he said he brought Evil which is Islam, he said that violence contradicts the nature of something i forgot, and he was talking about the Muslims, why can't he just shut up? instead of sayign those foolish words, why don't he say something like, let's work together in solving this conflict with the muslims? why? or is he just another bush? who gets his speaches written and he reads them without thinking? is that catholic pope this kind of closed minded person? Actually, the Emporer (whom the Pope was quoting) called the military conquests being carried out under the name of Islam, evil. I'm sorry, but that is a part of history. And the the Emperor believe that religious conquest and forced conversion were evil. But, that wasn't the point of the qoute. It was the later parts of the qoute (of the emporer) that the Pope was actually trying to get across, that religion can not be forced onto people by threat of the sword. Where do you disagree with this point? Is it simply because he use used a historical refrence that happened to involve Islam? The Pope has made it clear in his own words that he does not agree with the Emperor, that Islam is evil. In fact, if you'd read the actual speech, the Pope started by commenting that the Emperor addressed the Perian with "startling brusqueness." In otherwords, his words were in a startling abrubt discourteous manner. That's right, he called the way the Emporer made his point startingly rude. The Pope was merely focused on the Emporer's underlying point. Which was, that religious conquest and conversion by threat, is irrational. Trust me, we Catholics, know from experience the wrongness of this. We still say prayers for the sins committed in the name of our church. as i said before, yes words kill, it only takes a matter of time before someone puts them into action. Except, it's not Catholics doing the things I mentioned above. You said above that the Pope was starting a new religious war. Perhaps, it's the folks running around burning and shooting that are starting a new religious war. Or, the various Islamic councils and groups threatening to target and kill all christians (yes, some threats go beyond just the Pope) because of mere words. Words, that are taken way out of context, if not completely distorted.
Originally posted by reavo All of this debate lends proof to my belief about all of this.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but your post didn't sound atheistic.
Originally posted by OneMuslim Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by OneMuslim Actually he's right, the Romans and Greeks used christianity as a method to control people, but people didn't like the idea of one God, so they made two, God and his son, and they didn't like the idea either so they made the mother of God. Um, before the Romans ever excepted Christianity as a legal practice, christians were being martyered for even attempting to practice their young religion. Jesus as god was believed long before the Nicaen Council was even thought of. About 3 centuries. I'm sorry but real christians didn't believe Jesus as a God, go back to the original texts in Aramaic if you even have them and see for yourself.
That hit me like a ton of bricks. If I have read the text, it looks to me that not only did Christ equate himself with God on a plethora of occassions, he even went as far as to declare himself "I AM". The exact name God told Moses to tell the Hebrew leaders as to who sent Moses.
Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by reavo All of this debate lends proof to my belief about all of this.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
God did put us in a world of bad things. You're right. But he also put us into a world where we can experience love, compassion, friendship and loyalty, knowledge, a feeling of accomplishment, etc... I think one of the lessons we're supposed to learn is to look to the positive, experience the negative, but to know that the negative is there to gain respect for the positive.
Oh, btw, I say "he" just as a label. I don't know if there is more than one God or not. But I do know it's going to take more than a book or a popular belief to sway me to an absolute. I need more than that. It's just my nature. And I bet whoever created me understands that. After all, they made me this way.
And I don't really have a belief. I don't know what to believe. But I do know that any religion that tries to get me to join with them by threatening me with eternal damnation if I don't follow is going to make me turn the other way every time. And any belief that holds up a book as the absolute word of God is bordering on lunacy in my opinion. It takes someone pretty gullible to believe a man made book is the word of the creator. It throws all kinds of bells, whistles, and alarms up for me.
Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by reavo All of this debate lends proof to my belief about all of this.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
I'll answer this as best as I can from my point of view (which is quite similar to Reavos) as I'm bored - and pray for Reavos forgiveness if he disagrees.
Reavo is a Unitarian Universalist, and as such, just about everything you wrote there is actually completely contrary to his (and my) beliefs. The purpose of life is to grow spiritually as a person - through faith or otherwise. Empathy/charity/compassion may be great for you if that's what your development needs... Or it may be more applicable for you at a particular time in your life to alienate yourself from others to allow yourself to grow. The whole idea of learning is the backbone for life. Learning of all ideas and approaches, and anything that makes you a 'better' person (yes yes yes, 'what is 'better'?' Entirely subject to opinion really... Whatever it is that makes you happiest in my own opinion). There is no explanation given to us by God (for definate) of why/what we're doing here or what is expected of us. As such, it's up to us to answer those questions for ourselves with learning and with our own ideas. That's all the are though; our ideas. Noones ideas are more right or more wrong. Whatever works best for you as a person is what is right for you. And at this point, yes, I must apologise for voicing my opinion as fact earlier in this paragraph - it is clearly not fact. A key part of my personal opinion of how we distinguish what we can and cannot do here (in terms of morals) is not inhibiting others ability to grow. The very 'american liberalist' idea of "do what you want, but dont let it hurt others" is the key here. As long as what you're doing isn't harming anyone else, or stopping their own growth, then as far as I'm concerned, it's morally right and a worthy method of development.
Confused now? Good! That's the idea! You can't give me definite answers when questioned about proofs behind your faith, - nor can anyone else, as it IS all about faith - as such, neither can I. Noone can really give true answers about any ideas in religion, as none of it is 'uniform' - it is all subject to personal/social opinion - and as such, I choose not to aline myself to a specific set of beliefs/rules/ideals. Instead I'll keep an open mind, and try my best to learn and grow as best as I can for whatever God, Hell, Heaven, nothingness etc etc may await me when I meet my own demise - and hopefully if it's the Jewish God, he'll forgive me for eating shellfish, or the Christian God, for not going to Church on a Sunday, or if it's Allah, eating meat that isn't 'clean' (or whatever the word translates to, I forget) etc etc etc.
EDIT: Hit send by accident :P Added everything after "neither can I" in the final paragraph.
Heh, please don't take my questioning as rude, or an attempt to convert. Just wanted to post my disagreement, and get a more fleshed out response. Just civil discourse. Thanks for the replies.
Originally posted by lardmouth Heh, please don't take my questioning as rude, or an attempt to convert. Just wanted to post my disagreement, and get a more fleshed out response. Just civil discourse. Thanks for the replies.
As long as it's 'civil', I've never got a complaint. It's the whole idea of these boards - to question and discuss ^^
Originally posted by Khuzarrz Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by reavo All of this debate lends proof to my belief about all of this.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
I'll answer this as best as I can from my point of view (which is quite similar to Reavos) as I'm bored - and pray for Reavos forgiveness if he disagrees.
Reavo is a Unitarian Universalist, and as such, just about everything you wrote there is actually completely contrary to his (and my) beliefs. The purpose of life is to grow spiritually as a person - through faith or otherwise. Empathy/charity/compassion may be great for you if that's what your development needs... Or it may be more applicable for you at a particular time in your life to alienate yourself from others to allow yourself to grow. The whole idea of learning is the backbone for life. Learning of all ideas and approaches, and anything that makes you a 'better' person (yes yes yes, 'what is 'better'?' Entirely subject to opinion really... Whatever it is that makes you happiest in my own opinion). There is no explanation given to us by God (for definate) of why/what we're doing here or what is expected of us. As such, it's up to us to answer those questions for ourselves with learning and with our own ideas. That's all the are though; our ideas. Noones ideas are more right or more wrong. Whatever works best for you as a person is what is right for you. And at this point, yes, I must apologise for voicing my opinion as fact earlier in this paragraph - it is clearly not fact. A key part of my personal opinion of how we distinguish what we can and cannot do here (in terms of morals) is not inhibiting others ability to grow. The very 'american liberalist' idea of "do what you want, but dont let it hurt others" is the key here. As long as what you're doing isn't harming anyone else, or stopping their own growth, then as far as I'm concerned, it's morally right and a worthy method of development.
Confused now? Good! That's the idea! You can't give me definite answers when questioned about proofs behind your faith, - nor can anyone else, as it IS all about faith - as such, neither can I. Noone can really give true answers about any ideas in religion, as none of it is 'uniform' - it is all subject to personal/social opinion - and as such, I choose not to aline myself to a specific set of beliefs/rules/ideals. Instead I'll keep an open mind, and try my best to learn and grow as best as I can for whatever God, Hell, Heaven, nothingness etc etc may await me when I meet my own demise - and hopefully if it's the Jewish God, he'll forgive me for eating shellfish, or the Christian God, for not going to Church on a Sunday, or if it's Allah, eating meat that isn't 'clean' (or whatever the word translates to, I forget) etc etc etc.
EDIT: Hit send by accident :P Added everything after "neither can I" in the final paragraph.
Originally posted by lardmouth Heh, please don't take my questioning as rude, or an attempt to convert. Just wanted to post my disagreement, and get a more fleshed out response. Just civil discourse. Thanks for the replies.
I didn't think of it as rude at all.
As long as someone is willing to discuss something with me on a civil level I'm more than open for a respectful debate. I promise, I go into every disagreement with an open mind. I know there are at least two sides to every story (even when people agree).
Originally posted by JoHosephat Originally posted by OneMuslim How do you know that when most of your faith has been changed? Um, because the existence of the Messianic Jews (the christians jews) are a documented part of history And how do you know that history wasn't changed too?
How do you know that Muhammad even existed? We have his grave available for whoever wants to visit, but where's Jesus's grave?
Originally posted by Dekron Onemuslim, I do have a question for you. Many of the Islamic groups that are taking the Pope's words out of proportion are extremist groups such as al-Qaeda. Islam Denounces the actions of the Al-Qaeda, give me one verse of the Qur'an or one hadeeth of the prophet that supports their actions, there are non sadly so don't bother :} First, clarification. The Pope did not speak these words from his own mind, they were repeated words from a Byzantine emperor. And why is he repeating them? were the Byzantine emperor a good person? i doubt it, did he start trouble by repeating them? YES, it's a bad choice of words imo, the pope chose badly. Now, the question. Why doesn't any Muslim organization denounce the behavior of these extremist groups? I know you cannot speak on behalf of WHY the organizations do not, but just your opinion on the matter. I denounce the actions of these extremist groups and every extremist individual, and Islam denounces the actions of extremism, as the prophet has told us to be in the middle, not too soft and not too hard, the middle is the best. Second, what do you think of the comments and actions of al-Qaeda in response of the Pope's repetition of the words? It's not good, in fact, bad, they should act more humble to those things, they should act like how the prophet mohammad acted towards those who stoned him, he prayed for them and he prayed that Allah would guide them to the true path. What the Pope quoted "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached" Such foul words from that old man you call the pope, seriously, since when Islam spread by the sword? the muslims have protected themselves against invasions, see who started the Crusade, see why they started the crusade, see how the muslims occupied what was recaptured by the crusades, if you can understand what i mean that is. What extremists are saying... "We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060918/ap_on_re_mi_ea/muslims_pope Are they not doing exactly what was quoted? 2 wrongs don't make a right, isn't this what we always say? i'd never say that, what i would have done is just show how soul and corrupted that pope is, not say words that would stirr up a war. but let's not forget that the POPE himself was the one who started this ok?
Originally posted by ob1sr Originally posted by JoHosephat Originally posted by OneMuslim How do you know that when most of your faith has been changed? Um, because the existence of the Messianic Jews (the christians jews) are a documented part of history And how do you know that history wasn't changed too?
How do you know that Muhammad even existed? We have his grave available for whoever wants to visit, but where's Jesus's grave?
How do you know it's Mohammed? After you work out you can't answer that... Next tell me please, based on the presumption that it IS a man named Mohammed who lived in the times/places he was supposed to have, how you know it is the same man that wrote the Qu'ran, or was a prophet, or even vaguely Muslim in belief?
And Jesus' grave has been found I believe (I can't remember... They either found his grave or his 'birth certificate'... Either way, it proved the existance of Jesus as a man at least...)
Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by OneMuslim And how do you know that history wasn't changed too? That isn't christian taught history. It's historical, period. so it's even worse. and isn't that fullfillment? Reread what I wrote. Jesus and his apostles were berated by Jewish religious figures for not following the laws of the Sabbath. umm, ok i got no say for this one. and that's what i hate about people who don't know anything about what they're talking about :} we have a Jesus in Islam, we call him by his Original name, and we believe that he is a miracle birth, spoke in his childhood, has no father, he resurrected the dead, cured the blind and the sick, and he transformed sand into gold to give an example, and created a bird out of mud, he was not killed. Yes, exactly, and you got all that from the testimony of Messianic Jews which became the christians, and so forth. umm, no? we got that from the Qur'an which was revealed by GOD himself :} you don't have to, it's just that they were open minded people. meaning, you either made it up. Or, spoke to some seriously uniformed "christians" (not knowing what sabbath is?) whose lack of knowledge fed your agenda. my agenda? i wished i had one, such closed mindedness. Quoting, in agreement is different than quoting in disagreement, why would anyone quote anyone? to either agree or disagree, there are no other options, the dear pope quoted in agreement, and this is where he's destroying the peace and is starting a new religious war, and yes, words KILL just for your information. No, people qoute others for a variety of reasons. Not just to agree completely with everything, or disgree completely. Have you read the speech? Have you read his statements shortly after clarifying what he himself believes? I've never met a man who spoke and killed with his words. No, it's the fanatical reaction to a misunderstanding of intent, that is killing people. The Catholics aren't jumping off their couches to burn effigy's of Muhhamad. Or to fire bomb and shoot at mosques. Of course, muslims are actually doing this. Actions kill people. I think you better look inward to your own religion, at this time. That is, if you are actually looking to head off religious violence. I'm sorry but who's doing this? who's destroying mosques? the muslims? every single muslims knows that destroying a mosque is a path to eternal hell, what are you talking about? those who destroy mosques are nothing but infidels imo, and Islam rejects every single one of them. He called our prophet Evil, he said he brought Evil which is Islam, he said that violence contradicts the nature of something i forgot, and he was talking about the Muslims, why can't he just shut up? instead of sayign those foolish words, why don't he say something like, let's work together in solving this conflict with the muslims? why? or is he just another bush? who gets his speaches written and he reads them without thinking? is that catholic pope this kind of closed minded person? Actually, the Emporer (whom the Pope was quoting) called the military conquests being carried out under the name of Islam, evil. I'm sorry, but that is a part of history. And the the Emperor believe that religious conquest and forced conversion were evil. But, that wasn't the point of the qoute. It was the later parts of the qoute (of the emporer) that the Pope was actually trying to get across, that religion can not be forced onto people by threat of the sword. Where do you disagree with this point? Is it simply because he use used a historical refrence that happened to involve Islam? proof that people were being converted under the sword? where's the proof? does islam say that? where's the proof? please man, don't speak out of your butt, think before you quote anyone in anything. The Pope has made it clear in his own words that he does not agree with the Emperor, that Islam is evil. In fact, if you'd read the actual speech, the Pope started by commenting that the Emperor addressed the Perian with "startling brusqueness." In otherwords, his words were in a startling abrubt discourteous manner. That's right, he called the way the Emporer made his point startingly rude. The Pope was merely focused on the Emporer's underlying point. Which was, that religious conquest and conversion by threat, is irrational. Trust me, we Catholics, know from experience the wrongness of this. We still say prayers for the sins committed in the name of our church. this is NOT how i saw it realy, and this is NOT how the people here saw it, the pop chose badly. as i said before, yes words kill, it only takes a matter of time before someone puts them into action. Except, it's not Catholics doing the things I mentioned above. You said above that the Pope was starting a new religious war. Perhaps, it's the folks running around burning and shooting that are starting a new religious war. Or, the various Islamic councils and groups threatening to target and kill all christians (yes, some threats go beyond just the Pope) because of mere words. Words, that are taken way out of context, if not completely distorted. or the USA invading other countries for oil, or the Muslims defending themselves from the illegal invasion. wake up.
Originally posted by ob1sr Such foul words from that old man you call the pope, seriously, since when Islam spread by the sword? the muslims have protected themselves against invasions, see who started the Crusade, see why they started the crusade, see how the muslims occupied what was recaptured by the crusades, if you can understand what i mean that is.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Originally posted by Finwe Originally posted by ob1sr Such foul words from that old man you call the pope, seriously, since when Islam spread by the sword? the muslims have protected themselves against invasions, see who started the Crusade, see why they started the crusade, see how the muslims occupied what was recaptured by the crusades, if you can understand what i mean that is.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
Originally posted by ob1sr Originally posted by Finwe Originally posted by ob1sr Such foul words from that old man you call the pope, seriously, since when Islam spread by the sword? the muslims have protected themselves against invasions, see who started the Crusade, see why they started the crusade, see how the muslims occupied what was recaptured by the crusades, if you can understand what i mean that is.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
If a Muslim asks a person to convert to Islam and they refuse to, then what is that Muslim obliged to do?
Please don't think I was taking a stab at Islam, or yourself with my questions. I was just asking away. I never did say that it stated in the Qur'an that extremism is the correct form of practicing, nor did I say that I agreed with the Pope.
I am looking at this non-biased. I am agnostic, so, I do not disagree, nor agree with either side. I was just trying to get your side since there are not very many Muslims on the boards. I hate hearing the side of Muslims from Christians and the side of Christians from Muslims.
So, I was just asking. Apologies if you offense to anything.
Originally posted by ob1sr Originally posted by Finwe Originally posted by ob1sr Such foul words from that old man you call the pope, seriously, since when Islam spread by the sword? the muslims have protected themselves against invasions, see who started the Crusade, see why they started the crusade, see how the muslims occupied what was recaptured by the crusades, if you can understand what i mean that is.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
Finwe, I think i'd better translate for you here. 'Fair' means 'Islam and in agreement with my personal beliefs.'
There are no lies here OneMuslim, he's spot on on all of his points - and the only way they were from 'invitations' were in the same way Hungary was 'invited' to join the Warsaw Pact.
Also, do you not think the actions of those Muslims in Britain, constantly threatening white British people and making claims that Britain will only be 'safe' when it is under Islamic law, or those suicide bombers in Bali and London (and other countries of course) are spreading by the sword? Though I HATE to mention them, the 9/11 attacks (if in fact carried out by Al Queda) were done in attempt to make the West see the error of their ways and join fundamentalist Islam... Whether your opinion of what makes a muslim 'good' does not extend to these folk aparently (what about the Palestinians btw? Or the Lebanese? 'Driving the jews into the sea'...) that does not excuse that they ARE muslims, by claim and by observation. Maybe ALL muslims don't spread their word by the sword, but a large group do/have.
Originally posted by lardmouth Once again, wrong. The First Council of Nicaea was attended by 250-320 BISHOPS of the christian faith. These were christian bishops before the council was ever thought up. Please try to research more.
A. The modern Church Hierarchy did not exist at the time, there wasnt any such thing as a Bishop
B. Christianity was Illegal, there could not have been more than 100 religious leaders of any stripe anywhere near the Roman Empire, much less 250
C. The council of which I speak (NOT THE NICAEAN ONE) was attended by Constantine's advisors and Senate leaders, all "proper" Romans.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
Comments
How do you know that when most of your faith has been changed?
Um, because the existence of the Messianic Jews (the christians jews) are a documented part of history
And how do you know that history wasn't changed too?
He fullfilled, as you said, the most important part is the HE SAID, kee pthe sabath holy, i guess you are not following, he didn't change the day of worship.
Actually, he berated the Jewish religious leaders, for reprimanding him and the apostles, because they didnt abide by the laws of the Sabbath.
and isn't that fullfillment?
too bad for them, because there are proofs that Jesus didn't die or was crucified.
Yeah, so Muhammad borrows Jesus from the Christians and discards the testimony of those that actually followed Jesus. Talk about pick and choose.
and that's what i hate about people who don't know anything about what they're talking about :}
we have a Jesus in Islam, we call him by his Original name, and we believe that he is a miracle birth, spoke in his childhood, has no father, he resurrected the dead, cured the blind and the sick, and he transformed sand into gold to give an example, and created a bird out of mud, he was not killed.
These christians that you're talking about know alot more than you do, believe me, and not all of them didn't know what the sabath was, and i bet you didn't either :}
Are you kidding me? There's no way in heck they know more than me if they don't even know what the Sabbath is. It's like 1st year christian learning for goodness sake. Heck, many non-religious people know what the Sabbath is. So, for you tell me that you spoke to these suppossed learned Christians...who didn't know what the Sabbath is...sorry, I don't buy it.
you don't have to, it's just that they were open minded people.
and about muslims burning and killing for cartoons, no one said it was right, it was wrong, and if it was me i'd punish them.
as of your lovely pope, he is a trouble stirrer, seriously, the previous pope saught peace, the current one seeks to destroy it, you might as well overthrow him and replace him with a better one, WHO THE HELL IS HE? telling the people that Islam is evil EH?
Way to regurgitate what your mosque told you. Have you even read the speech? It was a denunciation of religious violence and hatred. It was a quote of someone else, in a full speech.
Quoting, in agreement is different than quoting in disagreement, why would anyone quote anyone? to either agree or disagree, there are no other options, the dear pope quoted in agreement, and this is where he's destroying the peace and is starting a new religious war, and yes, words KILL just for your information.
By the way, interesting view you have there. The Pope destroys peace with just words? Just words? It's that kind of thinking that get's Cartoon artists killed, embassies burned, authors assassinated, etc. Those things are the destroyers of peace. Not mere words. Especially words from a speech that asked for peace. A speech in which you will not find him calling Islam evil, as you just claimed.
He called our prophet Evil, he said he brought Evil which is Islam, he said that violence contradicts the nature of something i forgot, and he was talking about the Muslims, why can't he just shut up? instead of sayign those foolish words, why don't he say something like, let's work together in solving this conflict with the muslims? why? or is he just another bush? who gets his speaches written and he reads them without thinking? is that catholic pope this kind of closed minded person?
as i said before, yes words kill, it only takes a matter of time before someone puts them into action.
Yes, and we all know that the Islam NEVER says anything bad about christianity /sarcasm.
just like we know that there has NEVER been war or riots because of the islam /sarcasm.
Onemuslim,
I do have a question for you. Many of the Islamic groups that are taking the Pope's words out of proportion are extremist groups such as al-Qaeda.
First, clarification. The Pope did not speak these words from his own mind, they were repeated words from a Byzantine emperor.
Now, the question. Why doesn't any Muslim organization denounce the behavior of these extremist groups? I know you cannot speak on behalf of WHY the organizations do not, but just your opinion on the matter.
Second, what do you think of the comments and actions of al-Qaeda in response of the Pope's repetition of the words?
What the Pope quoted "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached"
What extremists are saying...
"We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060918/ap_on_re_mi_ea/muslims_pope
Are they not doing exactly what was quoted?
Thanks for the reply.
If God were going to give us a piece of news so utterly important as the salvation of our soul, then don't you think he would have chosen a better medium than a book? Not only a book, but a book written by man that can be traced back to man. And not only just that, but a book that is so unclear that men have fought over the meanings of these books for millenia. Think about it, each and every man and woman alive reads the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, or whatever and gets different meaning from it. Those books are fallible for that reason alone. They are not leading us in the same direction. They're man made and they're full of error for that reason.
I believe God is a whooooole lot smarter than that. And the only conclusion that you can derive from what he has given us is that we all came from the same place and we're all going to the same place. We're all on seperate journeys, but journeys that are leading us in a unique way to the same goal.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but your post didn't sound atheistic.
That hit me like a ton of bricks. If I have read the text, it looks to me that not only did Christ equate himself with God on a plethora of occassions, he even went as far as to declare himself "I AM". The exact name God told Moses to tell the Hebrew leaders as to who sent Moses.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
God did put us in a world of bad things. You're right. But he also put us into a world where we can experience love, compassion, friendship and loyalty, knowledge, a feeling of accomplishment, etc... I think one of the lessons we're supposed to learn is to look to the positive, experience the negative, but to know that the negative is there to gain respect for the positive.
Oh, btw, I say "he" just as a label. I don't know if there is more than one God or not. But I do know it's going to take more than a book or a popular belief to sway me to an absolute. I need more than that. It's just my nature. And I bet whoever created me understands that. After all, they made me this way.
And I don't really have a belief. I don't know what to believe. But I do know that any religion that tries to get me to join with them by threatening me with eternal damnation if I don't follow is going to make me turn the other way every time. And any belief that holds up a book as the absolute word of God is bordering on lunacy in my opinion. It takes someone pretty gullible to believe a man made book is the word of the creator. It throws all kinds of bells, whistles, and alarms up for me.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
I'll answer this as best as I can from my point of view (which is quite similar to Reavos) as I'm bored - and pray for Reavos forgiveness if he disagrees.
Reavo is a Unitarian Universalist, and as such, just about everything you wrote there is actually completely contrary to his (and my) beliefs. The purpose of life is to grow spiritually as a person - through faith or otherwise. Empathy/charity/compassion may be great for you if that's what your development needs... Or it may be more applicable for you at a particular time in your life to alienate yourself from others to allow yourself to grow. The whole idea of learning is the backbone for life. Learning of all ideas and approaches, and anything that makes you a 'better' person (yes yes yes, 'what is 'better'?' Entirely subject to opinion really... Whatever it is that makes you happiest in my own opinion). There is no explanation given to us by God (for definate) of why/what we're doing here or what is expected of us. As such, it's up to us to answer those questions for ourselves with learning and with our own ideas. That's all the are though; our ideas. Noones ideas are more right or more wrong. Whatever works best for you as a person is what is right for you. And at this point, yes, I must apologise for voicing my opinion as fact earlier in this paragraph - it is clearly not fact. A key part of my personal opinion of how we distinguish what we can and cannot do here (in terms of morals) is not inhibiting others ability to grow. The very 'american liberalist' idea of "do what you want, but dont let it hurt others" is the key here. As long as what you're doing isn't harming anyone else, or stopping their own growth, then as far as I'm concerned, it's morally right and a worthy method of development.
Confused now?
Good! That's the idea! You can't give me definite answers when questioned about proofs behind your faith, - nor can anyone else, as it IS all about faith - as such, neither can I. Noone can really give true answers about any ideas in religion, as none of it is 'uniform' - it is all subject to personal/social opinion - and as such, I choose not to aline myself to a specific set of beliefs/rules/ideals. Instead I'll keep an open mind, and try my best to learn and grow as best as I can for whatever God, Hell, Heaven, nothingness etc etc may await me when I meet my own demise - and hopefully if it's the Jewish God, he'll forgive me for eating shellfish, or the Christian God, for not going to Church on a Sunday, or if it's Allah, eating meat that isn't 'clean' (or whatever the word translates to, I forget) etc etc etc.
EDIT: Hit send by accident :P Added everything after "neither can I" in the final paragraph.
I don't see this debate as lending you proof. In fact, you list your own brand of religious belief.
1. There is a god 2. A monotheistic god (you only used the singular "god" and "he") 3. That we're arbitrarily made mortal to experience pain and death and loss. 4. That there aren't any actual lessons to be learned, or dictated morality to follow, to get to the "same place." 5. That our "journeys" are non-defined
Basically, a god placed us into an existence that involves pain, disease, starvation, death, etc with no real purpose to it. No shaping of the soul. No learning of empathy, charity, compassion is required. No explanation as to why and what we're doing here. And what is expected of us. Now, before you say "well, obviously you're not suppossed to murder people," why aren't you? Is that dicated by the God you speak of? If so, where? Maybe he's a god of violence and war, rape and plunder. And, to please him is to become a barbaric tyrant in his name. You do describe a rather joyfol sounding ideal. But, I have to ask what you base that off of? Of course, this isn't really an issue for athiests, but you're answer didn't sound atheistic.
I'll answer this as best as I can from my point of view (which is quite similar to Reavos) as I'm bored - and pray for Reavos forgiveness if he disagrees.
Reavo is a Unitarian Universalist, and as such, just about everything you wrote there is actually completely contrary to his (and my) beliefs. The purpose of life is to grow spiritually as a person - through faith or otherwise. Empathy/charity/compassion may be great for you if that's what your development needs... Or it may be more applicable for you at a particular time in your life to alienate yourself from others to allow yourself to grow. The whole idea of learning is the backbone for life. Learning of all ideas and approaches, and anything that makes you a 'better' person (yes yes yes, 'what is 'better'?' Entirely subject to opinion really... Whatever it is that makes you happiest in my own opinion). There is no explanation given to us by God (for definate) of why/what we're doing here or what is expected of us. As such, it's up to us to answer those questions for ourselves with learning and with our own ideas. That's all the are though; our ideas. Noones ideas are more right or more wrong. Whatever works best for you as a person is what is right for you. And at this point, yes, I must apologise for voicing my opinion as fact earlier in this paragraph - it is clearly not fact. A key part of my personal opinion of how we distinguish what we can and cannot do here (in terms of morals) is not inhibiting others ability to grow. The very 'american liberalist' idea of "do what you want, but dont let it hurt others" is the key here. As long as what you're doing isn't harming anyone else, or stopping their own growth, then as far as I'm concerned, it's morally right and a worthy method of development.
Confused now?
Good! That's the idea! You can't give me definite answers when questioned about proofs behind your faith, - nor can anyone else, as it IS all about faith - as such, neither can I. Noone can really give true answers about any ideas in religion, as none of it is 'uniform' - it is all subject to personal/social opinion - and as such, I choose not to aline myself to a specific set of beliefs/rules/ideals. Instead I'll keep an open mind, and try my best to learn and grow as best as I can for whatever God, Hell, Heaven, nothingness etc etc may await me when I meet my own demise - and hopefully if it's the Jewish God, he'll forgive me for eating shellfish, or the Christian God, for not going to Church on a Sunday, or if it's Allah, eating meat that isn't 'clean' (or whatever the word translates to, I forget) etc etc etc.
EDIT: Hit send by accident :P Added everything after "neither can I" in the final paragraph.
Well said.
As long as someone is willing to discuss something with me on a civil level I'm more than open for a respectful debate. I promise, I go into every disagreement with an open mind. I know there are at least two sides to every story (even when people agree).
Why, thank you ^^
We have his grave available for whoever wants to visit, but where's Jesus's grave?
We have his grave available for whoever wants to visit, but where's Jesus's grave?
How do you know it's Mohammed? After you work out you can't answer that... Next tell me please, based on the presumption that it IS a man named Mohammed who lived in the times/places he was supposed to have, how you know it is the same man that wrote the Qu'ran, or was a prophet, or even vaguely Muslim in belief?
And Jesus' grave has been found I believe (I can't remember... They either found his grave or his 'birth certificate'... Either way, it proved the existance of Jesus as a man at least...)
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
If a Muslim asks a person to convert to Islam and they refuse to, then what is that Muslim obliged to do?
ob1sr,
Please don't think I was taking a stab at Islam, or yourself with my questions. I was just asking away. I never did say that it stated in the Qur'an that extremism is the correct form of practicing, nor did I say that I agreed with the Pope.
I am looking at this non-biased. I am agnostic, so, I do not disagree, nor agree with either side. I was just trying to get your side since there are not very many Muslims on the boards. I hate hearing the side of Muslims from Christians and the side of Christians from Muslims.
So, I was just asking. Apologies if you offense to anything.
Conquest of Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Spain - All very Christian lands before their capture by Islamic armies. If it wasn't for Charles Martel stopping them at the Battle of Tours, all of Europe probably would have been converted by the sword.
Lies?
how many casualties in these wars of conquest as you describe them? on top of that most of conversions were from invitations to Islam.
go back to history where fair people write it, you'll find that your claims are not true.
Finwe, I think i'd better translate for you here. 'Fair' means 'Islam and in agreement with my personal beliefs.'
There are no lies here OneMuslim, he's spot on on all of his points - and the only way they were from 'invitations' were in the same way Hungary was 'invited' to join the Warsaw Pact.
Also, do you not think the actions of those Muslims in Britain, constantly threatening white British people and making claims that Britain will only be 'safe' when it is under Islamic law, or those suicide bombers in Bali and London (and other countries of course) are spreading by the sword? Though I HATE to mention them, the 9/11 attacks (if in fact carried out by Al Queda) were done in attempt to make the West see the error of their ways and join fundamentalist Islam... Whether your opinion of what makes a muslim 'good' does not extend to these folk aparently (what about the Palestinians btw? Or the Lebanese? 'Driving the jews into the sea'...) that does not excuse that they ARE muslims, by claim and by observation. Maybe ALL muslims don't spread their word by the sword, but a large group do/have.
A. The modern Church Hierarchy did not exist at the time, there wasnt any such thing as a Bishop
B. Christianity was Illegal, there could not have been more than 100 religious leaders of any stripe anywhere near the Roman Empire, much less 250
C. The council of which I speak (NOT THE NICAEAN ONE) was attended by Constantine's advisors and Senate leaders, all "proper" Romans.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway