What do you cats think of the pope's comments about Islam? I don't think they are far from the true.
Printable View
What do you cats think of the pope's comments about Islam? I don't think they are far from the true.
He is right on. I am actually starting to like this guy now, he's not afraid to say it like it is.
Here's the story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5351988.stm (everyone apart from Royal Dragon can read it cause he is ignoring everyone!)
He was quoting a source from the 14th century in an academic lecture, so it may be that his words were taken out of context! This pope certainly doesnt mince his words!
Big Grin------> :D
.................................................. .................................................. ..........................
I love the fact that they're protesting against accusations of violence by rioting :rolleyes:
The Pope and the catholic church are ones to talk or to even cast stones at anyone. The CC has been the author of so much death and destruction of other cultures that it amazes me that the CC would want to say anything. They ignored the atrocities on the jews in ww2 and have always maintained this pretentious mightier than thou attitude towards everything. take a look at the crusades in history.
the CC should not be casting any stones. they should just STFU and go about their rituals and pomp and circumstance. TWS
They have moved past the "Dark ages", islam seeks to preserve it.
it's like an older man who seeks the path of peace, because he made mistakes with violence in his past, and now seeks to help the youger generation avoid his short commings.
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Ben Gash
I like this Pope, but I also liked JPII even when I didn't agree with him.
I disagree as I don't think Islam itself is trying to preserve any era in history. You do have a some large branches of Islam that do but I think it's more about power than about being pious.Quote:
They have moved past the "Dark ages", islam seeks to preserve it.
The Pope was quoting something from a book, not his own words. We can throw stone at the Muslims but lets not forget the Holy War against the Muslims, The Catholics killed thousands of men women and children.
Vlad the impaler got his rep by impaleing men women and children as decorations in front of his castle.
In fact there was an incident during the holy wars when they invaded a city and not only killed everyone but they also ate their victums.
The Catholics should shut their trap when it comes to the Muslims, since they killed more Muslims over the years in the name of Christianity than the Muslims ever will.
Just food for thought.
The entire speech was rather dense, and was intended for a rather academic audience. The pope was the Vatican's chief theologian for a decade-plus, so this man thinks and has thought some rather heavy things about religion.
In outline form:
1. Religion and reason are inextricably linked in the west, in contrast to more "transcendent/mystical" approaches, thanks to the Greeks and Romans. We assume that God is rational, and that he acts within rational boundaries - he can make the IMPOSSIBLE happen, but he's got an articulable reason for that.
2. By corollary, we use reason to try and understand God, and thus truth. Also by corollary, faith and reason are not mutually exclusive
3. Continuing on, religion can therefore persuade through reason, since you can use reason to get to truth and truth is convincing. Religion should not coerce. Violence in the name of religion is therefore an abomination in the eyes of God.
The purpose of picking the Byzantine emporer's comments was to contrast that Greek accultured logician's statements with Ibn Husn (ibn Hussein), whom he also quoted in the speech, who cited a transcendental God as opposed to a God of reason. It was an exceptionally minor part of the speech, designed to highlight the western tradition of reason and faith reinforcing each other and co-existing side by side.
The phraseology and choice of quotations was, however, appalling in light of current affairs. Pope John Paul II was an erudite politician. This speech reminded me of an academic who has trouble/insensitivity trying to get his point across...He's not the Chief Theologian anymore...He's the frickin POPE. His words matter now.
For the record bringing up the Catholic church's sordid past seems particularly pointless. Are we going to excoriate the Pontiff of 2006 for something that happened generations ago? If that is to be the case, then we will all be paralyzed in speech and action. Moral perfection - and certainly not when you aren't personally responsible! - is not a pre-requisite for criticism and action. The larger ramifications of such an approach are these: if that is the standard we are going to judge against, we might as just well all nip off and shoot ourselves, since we are dooming mankind to inaction and stagnation.
Not my cup of tea, thanks.
very well written MP, I agree the Pope was just reading something that someone else wrote about Mohamed and then tied it in with how bad it is to have wars over religion.
That was a mistake since that text was written thousands of years ago that's why I bought up the Holy wars.
Bad move on the Popes part, we have to take in consideration that he is a theologin not a politician. That said it was politicaly incorrect since what happened over 2 thousand years ago has nothing to do with modern day.
The statement was OT since the Catholics in the past have comitted great atrosidies in the past.
If you've noticed Bush's rhetoric has changed too. Like before he used extremists or terrorists and then recently he said 'islamic fascist'.
That might have been in a more academic speech, but given the timing it would be hard to look at that in a positive context for Islam.
It really seems like they're priming for a showdown here. Islam vs. everybody else.
But yeah, the Catholic church wasn't ever innocent of violence. I mean, look at the Inquisition, the mistreatment of other cultures ('pagans'), all of that.
??? Islam isn't even 2000 years old.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Cloud
How do we have free discussion when there is a group of people who take offense easily?
Well, we don't, that's the thing. Islam seeks to impose their law upon the state, which is totally counter to freedom of religion or speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue
Of course, Catholics used to do the same thing. The very name 'catholic' means 'universal', or in other words, everybody following the same religion.
to be honest I'm not sure. It depends on wether or not it was around before Jesus???Quote:
Originally Posted by lunghushan
Islam was started around 600 A.D. Muslims consider Jesus to be a prophet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Cloud
But the entire conflict, yes, is older because it is from the two sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael. A simplified way to think of it is Isaac->Jews and Ishmael->Arabs.
BTW, if you want to score bonus points with Muslim guys, compliment them on their nice 'Abraham beard'. If you are ever captured by them, profess to Christianity, and then listen to them about Islam.
Because part of their tradition is of people 'of the book'. So Christians and Jews are kindof cousins in a way (well, it used to be that way, not as much anymore). So originally infidel meant somebody not of 'the book' (the Bible or Quran). This changed more to be anybody not Islam.
But they're supposed to try to convert you, change the error in your thinking, before they kill you. So they are obliged to show you a lot of hospitality, feed you, give you lodging, and all that, while they give you the entire speal about the 5 pillars and all that stuff.
So if you're ever in a bind (or just want to make idle conversation), ask them about Islam. Because as long as they're trying to convert you, they're supposed to be nice to you, before they kill you.
Also, if you're traveling in an Islamic country, always say you're Canadian. :) Actually that's supposed to be what you should do in every country if you can get away with it, because nobody hates Canadians.
Learn their culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue
Understand their people's history.
Respect them as equals (don't treat them like heathens)
Listen more to them; comment less on what they believe.
Be compassionate and caring about their needs.
Most important of all whatever you do don't turn your back towards them and be watchful. ;)
Mantis108
Nice advice, but it takes two to tango. How can you relate to a group who is bent on either converting, or killing and EXTERMINATEING infadels?
Keep in mind an infedel is anyone that is not them.
There is only black and white with them. There are no shades of grey, let alone color.
This is the battle between good and evil. It has nothing to do with Oil, or Bush's petty revenge. They want to exterminate ANYONE who is not a devout follower of thier religion. It is a holy war, and not in any way rational.
It may come to the point where we have to wipe them out, or die....
Quote:
Well, we don't, that's the thing. Islam seeks to impose their law upon the state, which is totally counter to freedom of religion or speech.
No actually, Political Islamists do, and that can actually be traced straight back to Sayyid Qutb and his landmark book, Ma'alim fi-l-Tariq, (Milestones) which significantly recast the role of Islam in society and the state. Politically active Islam is a 20th century phenomenon, not one that is hundreds of years old.
I would also argue that it is a response to European Imperialism and corrupt post-Imperial regimes and owes significantly to the Marxist concept of the proletariat as an agent for change. But that's a slightly different issue.
Rogue, in some ways, mantis108 hit the nail on the head. Much of the Middle East suffers from what you might call an inferiority complex, and everything is therefore a slight. Have you read a lot of the rhetoric w/respect to Israel-Palestine and Western relationships with the west? It's loaded not with "killing our children and taking our land and destroying our infrastructure..."
It's loaded more often with "these repeated humiliations will not stand."
Something to think about.
You don't relate to them. You kill them.Quote:
How can you relate to a group who is bent on either converting, or killing and EXTERMINATEING infadels?
Fortunately the ones who hold the sort of opinion you talk about represent a small part of the Islamic world.
You were joking, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Cloud
Well there's only 3 ways, really. Either return to the moderate Islam of the past, which some would argue is the true Islam, or extermate all Muslims, or exterminate everybody not a Muslim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Dragon
There are a lot of laws in other religions which aren't really enforced anymore. For example, Jews are supposed to stone adulterers or ****sexuals (Leviticus), and follow a lot of other old laws. They don't practice this anymore.
But originally Islam was not such a kill the infidel type religion. It was a religion of high culture, and a lot of places (Jerusalem, for example), Muslims lived in peace side by side Jews and Christians.
But then certain things happened, like the Crusades, and the expanding of empires by certain Islamic rulers, and that kindof ended.
But it seems like they could return to a moderate Islam of the past. Unfortunately due to some clerics and economics and things, many Muslims don't want to do that. The fact that modern society is so, shall we say, amoral, does not really help things any because it really sets their beliefs apart from the modern world which is extremely amoral even compared to traditional Christian and Jewish standards.
Well the fact that they want this now does not mean that it is not part of Islam now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merryprankster
But yes, for example the Ottoman empire practiced religious tolerance (mostly).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merryprankster
But the only part, apparently, going out of its way to represent the faith to the world. That huge majority is awfully quiet when terrorists kill, destroy, and force conversions in the name of their faith.
But then the numbers of politically active believers seem to swell remarkably every time something terrible like a cartoon or a misinterpreted line from a long speech comes along.
Been captured by radical Islamists often, have you?Quote:
Originally Posted by lunghushan
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunghushan
If that's how you feel you should be a Canadian, or something else, but you don't deserve to be a citizen of the United States.
Kind of. The "moderate Islam of the past," is a bit of an idealized myth. Islam has been a patchwork of customs and cultures within a belief system since its expansions.Quote:
But it seems like they could return to a moderate Islam of the past. Unfortunately due to some clerics and economics and things, many Muslims don't want to do that. The fact that modern society is so, shall we say, amoral, does not really help things any because it really sets their beliefs apart from the modern world which is extremely amoral even compared to traditional Christian and Jewish standards.
Many (ie, most) Muslims would, I think be fine with a "moderate" form of Islam. The problem is that there is no heir apparent to take the mantle of leadership, so to speak, thanks to the governments in much of the Islamic world.
There is a complex interplay of forces that are at work.
Well, part of the silence is because when these people start doing terror, Muslims at least in the U.S. get pretty freaked out over the thought of reprisals, so they duck and cover.Quote:
Originally Posted by unkokusai
I don't know what more they could do. They also have clerics from time to time make public declarations.
I mean, when white supremacists march, Neo-Nazi sympathizers or whatever, what are we supposed to do? Go out and shoot them? Unfortunately freedom of religion and speech means that bad people can say what they want.
Anyway, they have passed a lot of anti-hate speech and crime legislation, so that helps somewhat.
Well, people tend to do and say what they think will bring them advantage, right? So a lot of people get advantage and make a living off of preaching hate, or keeping people down, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merryprankster
Anyway, all of this is for people like Bush and the CIA to worry about. The average person can't do anything about it except hope they don't get bombed.
You don't relate to them. You kill them.
Reply]
No, I would only kill them when they express a distinct desire to Kill me...which they have been doing so quite loudly for some time now.
Fortunately the ones who hold the sort of opinion you talk about represent a small part of the Islamic world.
Reply]
Really? Thier frik'n Holy book commands them to Kill anyone not belonging to thier sick little religious club. A LOT of them are taking it to heart, and putting the plan into action.
This will get worse, before it gets better.
Good point. Similarly, none of us should disagree with murder, since we all have ancestors who killed. And the same for theft. Oh and rape. Actually, let's just abandon all attempts at ethics, since the past hasn't been perfect. This is a brilliant idea, and definitely not incoherent gibbish fueled by your own religious intolerance.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Willow Sword
My point is that political Islamists want what you are talking about. But, there is a nice solid chunk of people out there who do not want what the political Islamists want.Quote:
Well the fact that they want this now does not mean that it is not part of Islam now.
Saying it is "part of Islam" now is like saying that the Unitarian rejection of the Divine Trinity is "part of Christianity" now. One group of people does not equate to a generalized comment about what is or is not "in" a religion, because MOST Muslims are not political Islamists, just like MOST Christians are not Unitarians, and accept the Divine Trinity.
It's usually the extremists that bark loudest. It's hard to be excited about being moderate. Prudence doesn't translate into sound bites well. That huge majority is also rather sympathetic to many of the points of view that violent Islamists hold. They just disagree with the methodology. Jumping up and saying "the violence - that's wrong" can also get you killed in some places. Hence my point about an heir apparent.Quote:
But the only part, apparently, going out of its way to represent the faith to the world. That huge majority is awfully quiet when terrorists kill, destroy, and force conversions in the name of their faith.
And, admittedly, a lot of them think that the bad guys are exacting just retribution for past wrongs. I think that sort of revenge motive is a universal human trait though.
I think my comments about humiliation are relevent here. A lot of these disenfranchised folk are looking for anything to explain their lack of opportunity - a Western conspiracy is a plausible choice, given the history of European empire, and the willingness of the West to support corrupt regimes in the ME. They have some very real greivances w/regard to Western meddling in their affairs. I'm not justifying the perspective, I'm suggesting that if I were viewing the world through that lens a "Western intent to keep us down," would be much preferable to the alternative (and actual) state of things "The average Western country doesn't actually think you matter much, and couldn't give a rat's ass about you."Quote:
But then the numbers of politically active believers seem to swell remarkably every time something terrible like a cartoon or a misinterpreted line from a long speech comes along.
No, that's a load. First of all, Muslims are freer, in a way, to practice their faith in the US than almost anywhere else in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by lunghushan
Second, Muslim groups in the US are vocal, active, and unafraid when it comes to denouncing a...cartoon:rolleyes: or other such horrors... but suddenly scared to speak up for something that their fellow Americans would love to hear from them? That argument doesn't work at all.
And its not just about Muslims in America, of course. Where are the tens of thousands strong rallies in Muslim countries against the people corrupting the image of their religion by committing terror in its name? Where is the great outrage over forced conversions or videotape of slow, painful decapitations?
Good post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher M
You know, I was going to post something JUST this biting, but actually deleted it at the last minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher M
Huzzah for you Chris M.
BTW, where in America Lite did you say you lived?
Actually, as a Jewish priest pointed out to me, the Torah does not say say do not kill. It says do not murder. The Jewish religion had quite a tradition of killing. For example, when the Jews attacked the 'Promised Land', they killed every living thing. Every man, woman, child and beast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher M
But like you said, just because they used to do this, doesn't mean they have to continue to do this. They do not continue to do this now. (Well, at least they do not continue to randomly kill people outside Palestine. They still kill people IN Palestine. LOL).
I'm sorry. I don't know what your point is.Quote:
Originally Posted by lunghushan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merryprankster
Well, if they agree with the views of the terrorists and are silent about the methods, I'm sorry but that adds up to complicity.
Can't have it both ways.
Sorry I'm a bit rusty when it comes to theoligy, besides I'm Buddhist. That and I flunked out of Sunday school. Longshuan already clarified that question.Quote:
Originally Posted by unkokusai
Now can we just continue before you start correcting my spelling:rolleyes: