Political Crossfire Forums

[lovebush]

mODULAR mAN wrote: lovebush wrote:
As for "Christian violence", google it. then google "muslim violence" there is no comparisan. and most of the hits...

Fallacy alert! This is a form of "Red Herring" Fallacy. It makes an illogical connection between the number of times one thing is mention to another, asserting that this means something.

It is, specifically, an:
Appeal to Popularity
Argument by Consensus
Argumentum ad Populum
Authority of the Many

My fallacy was assuming that everyone who read my post would be able to comprehend the point I was making. You have truly proved me to be mistaken.

[jeechoscopy]

lovebush wrote: jeechoscopy wrote:
use , while his own followers are breaking the records of murders ever made in history. His followers slaughtered 3 million Muslims from Bosnia to Afghanistan, during the last 15 years.

What are you talking about?

Quote: Unfortunately he chose when Muslims are killed in their own streets by the Pope-loving invaders. If God is with the murderers and invaders who is with those are slaughtered, before they hear Pope's comments that God is love?

The pope is not the leader of all Christians and He is against war. Our religious leaders dont call for war. that is a muslim thing.

Quote:
I’m very sorry that you have not perceived that what should be and what should not be in the circumstances where Muslim countries are under attack by the people call themselves Christians.

In Kosovo, it was th US that bombed the Christians, to stop them from killing the muslims. I guess that doesnt get on the news where you live.

Quote: A fear of civilizational clash is in my Mind.

it should be, in all of our minds. When your religious leaders, lead chants of DEATH TO AMERICA! that is ok with you, but you dont like what the Pope said, yet he was against violence.



Kamel wrote: Quote: Christians don't need to do all that... their political and religious leaders are doing the perfect job to maintain the peace (for themselves) by mass destruction and mass aggression (for others.) As do yours

Quote: If it is possible, give balance a chance, unfortunately that is not seen in the world we breath together but think different. Balance must be acheived by both sides. As long as the Muslim sheiks say things like "the only dialog we will accept is when all religions convert to Islam" and call for death and destruction of the 'infadels', this problem cannot be resolved.

Quote: I don't want to spew out this way, because I'm afraid that we Muslims and Christians need more favorable environment than ever. And this kind of debate creates hurdles toward healthy dialogues. If I’m a responsible citizen of this global village I must be care other religions, in spite of that whatever I personally think about them. It's not only Christians and Muslims, but all religions. The three religions that acknowledge Abraham and Isaac are one and the same. We all believe in the one true God. You, me, us, them, we're no different. The followers of other religions are no different either. We all breathe and bleed. We need food, water, shelter, and the freindship of others. Why can't Islam offer it's hand in freindship to the rest of the world unconditionally?

Well, I got the response what I have already estimated.
You only see Osama and company those have full of hatred and preach hatred rather than anything Islam. And you give his speeches more value than other Islamic Scholars and Mullah or Imams. There are More than 1000 well known scholars Imam and Molluhs preaching us peace and patience and asking this is not Jihad. But unfortunately Osama and his company is well heard by you and well terrorise you and your society...
I think it is because Osama's Islam is needed as a political reason for invasions in the countries targeted a decade ago by America and allay... So, in my view as for others, it is simply a political wave against Islam and Osama is a show case. That's the worst unfortunate.

The Pope represents 1.2 billion catholics... Osama and company represents some thousands (max 100 thousands.)

A voice that we hate osama is not heard upto know, but a cry that we want better invironment for peace dialogue is neglected by blaming that we are not not worthy.
Generally, if you see, Osama has not yet attacked ever christianity... he has been political declaration of war... but a compaign by the west is wholly against Islam..

PS. sorry for inconveneince because of my bad english...

[Snake]

First, this isn't a war on Islam, it's a war against Saddam Husein and Osama Bin Laden. Second, we don't see the whole story on tv, that's why research is done, and when I hear your religious leaders telling us we have to convert to Islam before they will even listen, that only makes things worse. Muslims claim we offend them, but they never care about what offends us. You think we're not going to get pissed off that the muslims in the middle east burn flags and tell us they are going to kill us?

No need to worry about inconveinience, your english is pretty good. :)

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

jeechoscopy wrote: el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: jeechoscopy wrote: Whatever his speech was, intellectual or fractous, desolated the chance of healthy conversation between the two religions.

The more the responsible personalites would behaving the way, the less a chance of a successful dialogue would be there.


Show me a responsible person of Muslim world of the day who hit a religion the way Pope did.

He didn't do it in the first place. His speech was about how violence is incompatible with the nature of God. He was using the quote as a reference, not as a statement to support his views.

Islam needs to get a life instead of living as if it were in a perpetual chump complex. It seems that any word or statement given cross wise that confronts its duplicity sets off another jihad. :lol:


So you know how jihad works.... :lol:

Let's hope and see what Pope does for preparing a better invironment.

The line the pope quoted from was spoken by a person whose city was encircled and under siege..by guess who? Expansionist Ottoman Turks, Muslims who where using 'Jihad' for political reasons just as much as religious ones.

What many here in the west see is reprobate self-righteous fools the Muslims somehow have adorned with the title 'mullah' who preach hate and division in the name of God. What fuels their distorted views of both the west and their religion is their self-righteous pride. It is easy to see how these children of the devil insight riots and mayhem because they preach to mostly uneducated or half educated people. These hoards are easy to manipulate with self-righteous rhetoric; being spiritually unregenerated themselves they allow these power drunk 'mullahs' to insight them to do things civilized people would be repulsed to. And it is of little wonder they are so easily duped. Their window to the world is a distortion of anti-Western and Israeli hatred put out by self serving Arab or nationalist 'muslim inspired' news medias.

It is the truth that sets people free. But form what I see the air waves in both the east and west, and worse many a pulpit in Islamic countries, are vehicles from which lies and hatred are instilled in a new generation.

No follower of Christ could openly advocate an unjust war. And the killing of innocents in Christendom means automatic spiritual consignment for eternity to hell. Never, would and real follower of Christ insight a suicide bomber and then claim the murderer of innocents would be rewarded with paradise. And Islam doesn't have a cancer within it? Yeah..right.

Both Pope John Paul II and the current Pope Benedict are people dedicated to peace. But as seen in this thread, there are more than a few who view things they don't like through their own myopic vision of simplistic misguided hatred. They heap abuse on Christianity with distortions.

And as we can see. The western distortion machine, and Muslim, "cut their heads off first and ask questions later" did the Pope and the world a great disservice with their vile lies.
Wikipedia wrote: Key paragraphs
Quoted below are the three paragraphs (of sixteen total) which discuss Islam in Pope Benedict's lecture:

"I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on — perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara — by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both. It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor. The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between — as they were called — three "Laws" or "rules of life": the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur'an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point — itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole — which, in the context of the issue of "faith and reason", I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.
In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that sura 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "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". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood — and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death…

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: "For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality." Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Muslim R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practice idolatry."


Translation differences
The original German text of the Pope's lecture as published at the Vatican website differs slightly in several respects from the English translation, despite both versions being official (though "provisional") Vatican versions. It is unknown whether this had an impact on perceptions of the speech.

Commenting on the quote from the Byzantine emperor, Pope Benedict states in the English translation of his lecture, "he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness". According to the German text the Pope's original comment was "He addresses his interlocutor in an astoundingly harsh — to us surprisingly harsh — way" (wendet er sich in erstaunlich schroffer, uns überraschend schroffer Form).[5]

This difference was corrected on 17 September. The official (though still "provisional") passage now reads: "he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness which leaves us astounded". (emphasis in original)

Another difference involves the use of the word "jihad", which is present in the German version but not in the English one: the original statement "The emperor touches on the theme of jihad, holy war" (kommt der Kaiser auf das Thema des Djihad, des heiligen Krieges zu sprechen) became in the English rendition "The emperor touches on the theme of the holy war."

A third difference involves the emperor's quote employed by the Pope: "...things only evil and inhuman...". What the Pope said, and which is found in the German text and verifiable with the audio from the lecture, was "... things only bad and inhumane ... ". The word used was "Schlechtes" (bad/wicked), whereas the English word "evil" would have corresponded to "Böses", a word the Pope did not use. Similarly, the German word "inhuman" (inhumane) was used, and not "unmenschlich" (inhuman). Pope_Benedict XVI Islam controversy

[lovebush]

jeechoscopy wrote: [

I’m very sorry that you have not perceived that what should be and what should not be in the circumstances where Muslim countries are under attack by the people call themselves Christians.

If we wanted to kill muslims, there would be no one left alive in any country we attack. America has the abuility to lay waist to entire citys. we haven even come close to that. infact Afganistan has more highways conecting its citys and more schools than before.

Quote:

The Pope represents 1.2 billion catholics... Osama and company represents some thousands (max 100 thousands.)

then the billions of peaceful muslims should jail those violent ones, and we wont have to bomb you back to the stone age!

Quote: A voice that we hate osama is not heard upto know, but a cry that we want better invironment for peace dialogue is neglected by blaming that we are not not worthy.
Generally, if you see, Osama has not yet attacked ever christianity... he has been political declaration of war... but a compaign by the west is wholly against Islam..

PS. sorry for inconveneince because of my bad english... [/quote]

If the war was against all muslims it would be over by now. It would be much easyer to wage a war of extermination.

[riciforkids]

If God wanted us to live together in peace as one, then why would he want us to create religions that separate us? This holds true for the Popes and his religion too.

Religion is a man made concoction. The fears created in religion are what allows man to harm each other. Whether Catholic or Muslim, each has caused cruel harm to man - reality exposed in our history of religions.

[no.1]

"1993 Gallup poll, for example, found that only 30 percent of American Catholics believe they are actually receiving the body and blood of Christ when they receive communion." - http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word093005.htm

This is not the article I had read, but I found it in only 30 seconds of searching. The one I had read was in print a few years ago and I don't remember what book it was. The Roman Catholic Church in America is in a lot of trouble and is in danger of fragmenting if people don't start to believe again, which they won't. It comes down to people wanting to do whatever they want and they don't want anyone telling them its wrong. Why feel guilty if you can simply convince yourself it wasn't wrong in the first place right?

[lovebush]

riciforkids wrote: If God wanted us to live together in peace as one, then why would he want us to create religions that separate us? This holds true for the Popes and his religion too.

Religion is a man made concoction. The fears created in religion are what allows man to harm each other. Whether Catholic or Muslim, each has caused cruel harm to man - reality exposed in our history of religions.


Sounds like something Marx would have said, His ideology lead to more deaths in one century than religion did in all centuries combined. The question really should be weather the religion really endorses violence or not. With the advent of the printing press, the Bible was mass produced and became cheaper and cheaper as the years progressed. this allowed the common man access to it and made him much less likely to be lead away from its teachings and into violence. this is not to say that Christians have not fought wars over other issues but they no longer participate in wars for the propagation of Christianity, or the suppression of other sects. Unfortunately the jihadists have many surras in the quran and passages in the hadeeth to support their continued violence.

[Lumina]

no.1 wrote: "1993 Gallup poll, for example, found that only 30 percent of American Catholics believe they are actually receiving the body and blood of Christ when they receive communion." - http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word093005.htm

This is not the article I had read, but I found it in only 30 seconds of searching. The one I had read was in print a few years ago and I don't remember what book it was. The Roman Catholic Church in America is in a lot of trouble and is in danger of fragmenting if people don't start to believe again, which they won't. It comes down to people wanting to do whatever they want and they don't want anyone telling them its wrong. Why feel guilty if you can simply convince yourself it wasn't wrong in the first place right?

I don't think a poll taken nearly 14 years ago is necessarily relevant. and what I see is a resurgence in orthodox faith across the religious spectrum. I'm not a bit worried about His "Pilgrim Church."

[Abner Doon]

Aww then whats the point of religion?

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

riciforkids wrote: If God wanted us to live together in peace as one, then why would he want us to create religions that separate us? This holds true for the Popes and his religion too.

Religion is a man made concoction. The fears created in religion are what allows man to harm each other. Whether Catholic or Muslim, each has caused cruel harm to man - reality exposed in our history of religions.

This is so half baked and one sided it belongs in one place...the trash. So the 100 million murdered last century in the name of secularisms vision of a utopian society mean nothing? :moon:

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

Abner Doon wrote: Aww then whats the point of religion?

It help define and give validity to life. What person likes to believe life is but a by-product of chaos; and when we die thats it. We might as well eat, drink and be merry if that's all there is to life. But there is a soft whisper within each one of us that says there is much more than meets the eye here. May believe that whisper is none other than the voice of God's spirit calling one to a transcendent reality. That reality is expressed in religion.

[no.1]

Life without an afterlife has no meaning or inherent value. It is trite and cheap and society would decay to a point of people as cogs in a machine, discarded when they are no longer productive or profitable.

[henrilegrand]

[quote="el_hombre_de_Dios"][quote="Abner Doon"]Aww then whats the point of religion?[/quote]

It help define and give validity to life. What person likes to believe life is but a by-product of chaos; and when we die thats it. We might as well eat, drink and be merry if that's all there is to life. But there is a soft whisper within each one of us that says there is much more than meets the eye here. May believe that whisper is none other than the voice of God's spirit calling one to a transcendent reality. That reality is expressed in religion.[/quote]

*****

Was "that reality" expressed when you guys killed and bombed each other during the 80 years of war in Northern Ireland?

Which whispering of God's voice has given the "spirit" to a transcendent reality? To the Catholics or to the Protestants?

In nomini Patri et Filii et Spritu Sancti...Amen or Haleluyah?

[henrilegrand]

- Pope condemns use of religion for hate -

Wa-do-ye-know...His Holyness's thong tries to speak so..."honest".

He 'forgot' that the Vatican had blessed the Nazi Wehrmacht which started the Second Worldwar.

He 'forgot' that he was part of the "Hitler Jugend" organization.

He "doesn't remember" that Roman Catholics in Europe with the blessings of their Popes had persecuted and mass murdered the Jewish people for almost two millennia that culminated in the barbecueing of 6million of them during the Holocaust.
(Buddhists. Hindus and Muslims were not invited)

He calmly 'forgot' that the Roman Catholic Church not so long ago had declared Judaism null and void !

Please Pope, keep your Roman Catholic "immaculate hippocracy" between the walls of your Vatican, will you?

In nomini Patri et Flii et Spritu Sancti ?

[asainspace]

jeechoscopy wrote: lovebush wrote: jeechoscopy wrote:
use , while his own followers are breaking the records of murders ever made in history. His followers slaughtered 3 million Muslims from Bosnia to Afghanistan, during the last 15 years.

What are you talking about?

Quote: Unfortunately he chose when Muslims are killed in their own streets by the Pope-loving invaders. If God is with the murderers and invaders who is with those are slaughtered, before they hear Pope's comments that God is love?

The pope is not the leader of all Christians and He is against war. Our religious leaders dont call for war. that is a muslim thing.

Quote:
I’m very sorry that you have not perceived that what should be and what should not be in the circumstances where Muslim countries are under attack by the people call themselves Christians.

In Kosovo, it was th US that bombed the Christians, to stop them from killing the muslims. I guess that doesnt get on the news where you live.

Quote: A fear of civilizational clash is in my Mind.

it should be, in all of our minds. When your religious leaders, lead chants of DEATH TO AMERICA! that is ok with you, but you dont like what the Pope said, yet he was against violence.



Kamel wrote: Quote: Christians don't need to do all that... their political and religious leaders are doing the perfect job to maintain the peace (for themselves) by mass destruction and mass aggression (for others.) As do yours

Quote: If it is possible, give balance a chance, unfortunately that is not seen in the world we breath together but think different. Balance must be acheived by both sides. As long as the Muslim sheiks say things like "the only dialog we will accept is when all religions convert to Islam" and call for death and destruction of the 'infadels', this problem cannot be resolved.

Quote: I don't want to spew out this way, because I'm afraid that we Muslims and Christians need more favorable environment than ever. And this kind of debate creates hurdles toward healthy dialogues. If I’m a responsible citizen of this global village I must be care other religions, in spite of that whatever I personally think about them. It's not only Christians and Muslims, but all religions. The three religions that acknowledge Abraham and Isaac are one and the same. We all believe in the one true God. You, me, us, them, we're no different. The followers of other religions are no different either. We all breathe and bleed. We need food, water, shelter, and the freindship of others. Why can't Islam offer it's hand in freindship to the rest of the world unconditionally?

Well, I got the response what I have already estimated.
You only see Osama and company those have full of hatred and preach hatred rather than anything Islam. And you give his speeches more value than other Islamic Scholars and Mullah or Imams. There are More than 1000 well known scholars Imam and Molluhs preaching us peace and patience and asking this is not Jihad. But unfortunately Osama and his company is well heard by you and well terrorise you and your society...
I think it is because Osama's Islam is needed as a political reason for invasions in the countries targeted a decade ago by America and allay... So, in my view as for others, it is simply a political wave against Islam and Osama is a show case. That's the worst unfortunate.

The Pope represents 1.2 billion catholics... Osama and company represents some thousands (max 100 thousands.)

A voice that we hate osama is not heard upto know, but a cry that we want better invironment for peace dialogue is neglected by blaming that we are not not worthy.
Generally, if you see, Osama has not yet attacked ever christianity... he has been political declaration of war... but a compaign by the west is wholly against Islam..

PS. sorry for inconveneince because of my bad english...

You hit the nail right on the head. :-D

The politics of America since the second world war dictate that it must have a common enemy. Where it once was the Former Soviet Union (it's intentions and capabilities were blatantly exaggerated and weapons etc created to heighten the sense of threat by such credible men as Rumsfeld)
it is now Muslim extemists and a heavy price is being paid for by innocent blood in Iraq. Yes, there may well be a very tiny minority of Muslims that are radicalised and prepared to attack, but this threat is unjustifiable placed on Muslims as a whole, as a justification exercise by the corrupt and murderous regimes of Washington and London.

Many of us are ashamed of our nations actions in the ME in general, some of us have never followed the policies our governments have pursued, but our democracies are under attack from the people who are supposed to protect it and that my friend is the sad state of play we today face.

As for Osama.......well, his game plan could not have gone any better. He now has the Americans in a situation where they are losing men and cannot do a thing about it. America and it's allies are not winning in Iraq no matter what Bush says and to be quite truthful never were and the result of these last three years is that if anything, Bush and Blair have made the world a less safe place for all of us to live and I'm still waiting for justice to be delivered to them for their actions.

[asainspace]

henrilegrand wrote: - Pope condemns use of religion for hate -

Wa-do-ye-know...His Holyness's thong tries to speak so..."honest".

He 'forgot' that the Vatican had blessed the Nazi Wehrmacht which started the Second Worldwar.

He 'forgot' that he was part of the "Hitler Jugend" organization.

He "doesn't remember" that Roman Catholics in Europe with the blessings of their Popes had persecuted and mass murdered the Jewish people for almost two millennia that culminated in the barbecueing of 6million of them during the Holocaust.
(Buddhists. Hindus and Muslims were not invited)

He calmly 'forgot' that the Roman Catholic Church not so long ago had declared Judaism null and void !

Please Pope, keep your Roman Catholic "immaculate hippocracy" between the walls of your Vatican, will you?

In nomini Patri et Flii et Spritu Sancti ?

Well said. :-D

The pope only promotes the irrelevance of religion by his actions. Are we still today with all we know looking up to "keepers of the lies" when we know fully well the church means nothing. There is no god, so who is this babbling old man who once was a member of the SS????????????

Do his words mean anything, doe's he actually contribute anything other than reign other a business enterprise and wealth which contradicts the very essence of their sacred religion.

It is all bulls**t, why are people such suckers for this crap. I guess people are fearful of the world, so turn to non-existent god to make sense of it......and all to often the church has to be dragged kicking and screaming from it's outdated and false beliefs.

[asainspace]

no.1 wrote: Life without an afterlife has no meaning or inherent value. It is trite and cheap and society would decay to a point of people as cogs in a machine, discarded when they are no longer productive or profitable.

Isn't that basically how Capitalism works? Aren't we all really just slaves in a machine when you consider that we stand on a rock spinning through space?????

Just because people don't believe in God doe's not in any way demean or devalue life. Life as temporary creatures in this world is about experience, love, eating, laughing, shagging, debating, working, reproducing, music, art, travel, relaxation, feelings, anger, dispair, heartbreak and everyother emotion or experience we as humans need to experience before we die. Cause there is no heaven doe's not devalue life for me, it actually ensures that I live it to the full and enjoy everything single moment.

For me, have fun, do what you want, but be considerate and kind to all those around you. There is no profit on being an ****, for when you take your last breath, knowing you were a decent and good person is the most important thing.................and God can kiss my ass. :-D

[el_hombre_de_Dios]

asainspace wrote: Just because people don't believe in God doe's not in any way demean or devalue life.

If you really believe that then you've lost half the pieces in your philosohpical puzzle someplace. What did Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Lenin, Engles and Marx base the philosophical justification of their ideas on? (Which ultimately led to the murder of 100+ million last century.)

God does not exist.

And then you can actually parrot such empty drivel as if it had any real meaning. :rotf:

[mODULAR mAN]

el_hombre_de_Dios wrote: asainspace wrote: Just because people don't believe in God doe's not in any way demean or devalue life.

If you really believe that then you've lost half the pieces in your philosohpical puzzle someplace. What did Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Lenin, Engles and Marx base the philosophical justification of their ideas on? (Which ultimately led to the murder of 100+ million last century.)

God does not exist.

And then you can actually parrot such empty drivel as if it had any real meaning. :rotf:
You are totally illogical, aren't you? Hitler was a Xian ("Gott mit uns"). Stalin and Pol Pot were bastards, no doubt, but obviously not following the tenets of Humanism.

Now, let's talk about ALL the other leaders that were religious:

The list is too long, since it includes almost everyone you didn't mention.

So, you will say, "but they weren't "good Xians" (or, Buddhists)". Which is my point about Stalin and Pol Pot. (Hilter was Xian).

So, i will not ask for Special Pleading, will you?

Either accept that Hitler wasn't following the tenets of his religion (which is debatable: see Moses), as Stalin wasn't following the tenets of a Humanist philosophy.

You have a habit of claiming attributes for your opponents (people who don;t think in lock step with you) and then attack them for it. You obviously don't care about dialouge - just bloviating.