Hello

[jello]

Well, Maranatha, you only have to look at the difference between a Catholic country like my native Venezuela (where each weekend 50 people at least are killed) and a Muslim country like Saudi Arabia, where one murder would gain national coverage in the television, newspapers, etc…

Hope that answers your question…

 

[Maranatha]

jello:

Well, Maranatha, you only have to look at the difference between a Catholic country like my native Venezuela (where each weekend 50 people at least are killed) and a Muslim country like Saudi Arabia, where one murder would gain national coverage in the television, newspapers, etc…

Hope that answers your question…

Sorry no it doesn’t. Muslims kill with the approval of their religion. Christians do not with a few exceptions such as self defense. Which moral system comes from God?

 

[jello]

Hello

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with you on this. The rules of Islam about how to wage war and what is considered as fair Jihad are quite clear and precise. However, we see that the Christian countries as a whole (Protestant and Catholic) have killed far more people throughout the centuries than the Muslims evwer have… just look at World War I and World War II… I am not saying they were the best of examples of Christianity, but they professed Christianity, and even received tacit support from the Chruches, and look at their misdeeds… Is going into an African country and massacring everyone “self-defense” ?
Is going into Iraqi villages with orders to kill “anything that moves” self-defense" ???

The answer is obvious…

 

[Maranatha]

I disagree with you as well. If you look at the acceptable reasons for killing Islam falls short.

On another point, I’m required to love my wife as myself. Divorce is not allowed for any reason. This is not the same for a Muslim. Which moral code comes from God?

 

[jello]

Hello yet again,

Then again, in my native Venezuela, divorce is quite common, because it is seen that it is impractical to force two people to live together and to “love” each other when they have clearly developed an apathy for each other. Perhaps it is not the view of the Catholic Church, but it does not show “higher” or “lower” morality…

 

[Maranatha]

jello:

Hello yet again,

Then again, in my native Venezuela, divorce is quite common, because it is seen that it is impractical to force two people to live together and to “love” each other when they have clearly developed an apathy for each other. Perhaps it is not the view of the Catholic Church, but it does not show “higher” or “lower” morality…

Once again you are basing your views of morality on man and not on God.

 

[Irene]

Jello,
My question to you is, can a Muslim sin? That is, can he or she break the rules God sets out in the Qur’an? And if an individual Muslim can commit sin, would you then say that the Qur’an contained error? If I understand Islamic teaching correctly, this is not possible. Catholics would use basically the same concept when talking about Church teaching. Anyone from a homeless man to the Pope can sin, but Church teaching is divinely inspired. The Church cannot teach error, Catholics believe, because it was founded by the Son of God (Jesus the Christ), and continues to be guided by the Holy Spirit.
Hope this helps!

 

[jimmy]

jello:

Hello again,

If there was no error at all during the 2000 years, there would be no need for the Catholic Church to apologize for errors commited in the past, because then all its actions would be inspired by the Holy Ghost.

This is a pointless statement. If I were to follow your logic, Osama Bin Ladin would prove Islam is a false relligion. If Islam were true we wouldn’t have evil men like Osama Bin Ladin, or any of these other terrorists. The fact that Osama Bin Ladin sinned proves Islam was never true.

 

[jello]

Hello to all

Mister jimmy, I was simply answering the claim about “infalibility” within the Church… We Muslims do not consider even our religious leaders to be infalible and guided by Allah on all aspects, so I do not know how this is related to Islam.

 

[jello]

I had overlooked Irene’s comments, but I would like to ask the following:

I do not believe that Catholics as a whole would equate a normal catholic with the Pope under “non-holy” situations either, would they ???

 

[jello]

I had overlooked Irene’s comments, but I would like to ask the following:

I do not believe that Catholics as a whole would equate a normal catholic with the Pope under “non-holy” situations either, would they ???

 

[Writer]

jello:

Hello again,

As I explained earlier, all the major world religions will eventually have to depend on very fallible, ordinary men in order to interpret the works and sayings of the Prophets, etc.

I know the Christians may say that my judgement is incorrect because true Christians are guided by the Holy Spirit, but how many Christians (Catholics only even) speak about being divinely inspired, yet it is impossible from an objective viewpoint for all of them to be divinely inspired.

You did not even come close to addressing the problems with your own conclusions as raised in my earlier post. Where is the logic in your own conclusions?? All I see is subjective ramblings without any hint of an underlying structure of argument.

 

[jello]

Well, Mister Writer, if I have to read the Gospels that were aparently inspired by God himself, I would have to say that the Gospels themselves do not agree with one another on what Jesus did or said. And this is included in the book on my site, even though it is a small example.

Also, note that now I am talking to one Catholic who knows that the Bible is corrupted, but since he feels “inspired by the Holy Ghost”, he seems to be oblivious to this…

 

[Writer]

jello:

Well, Mister Writer, if I have to read the Gospels that were aparently inspired by God himself, I would have to say that the Gospels themselves do not agree with one another on what Jesus did or said. And this is included in the book on my site, even though it is a small example.

Also, note that now I am talking to one Catholic who knows that the Bible is corrupted, but since he feels “inspired by the Holy Ghost”, he seems to be oblivious to this…

If you’re referring to the small differences found in the accounts of the Gospels, this is actually further testimony to their accuracy. For example, I used to work in the emergency response field. When one asked witnesses to a particular accident what happened, frequently different testemonies are delivered. That’s human nature. We see things differently though the lens of our values and experiences. The fact that the writers of the Gospels have some small differences in their accounts is actually authentication that they weren’t written by a single person who had decided one bright morning that “Hey, I am going to go start the greatest religion the world has ever known. Hmmm… Better start writing.” It seems that you are mistaking contradictions of the mundane (e.g which city did they travel to first) with supposed contradictions in issues of fundamental belief. I have seen examples of the former, but not the latter. Furthermore, we don’t worship the Bible, we worship God, its author. Since man was involved, perfection is impossible. That’s why the contradictons you likely point to are actually further authentication as to the Bible’s lasting truth.

If you have other examples of contradictions (perhaps I missed them earlier in the thread), I’d be interested to read them. I have never seen an example of contradiction which could not be explained quite easily with a simple look at the context. It is usually those with the weakest understanding of Scriptures who think they have found what no one else has…the contradictory verse which will send Christianity spiraling to its ear.

As far as the earlier debate, was Chirst the Son of God–as He declared himself to be? Or, do you believe He was simply a great prophet? If you say, prophet you’re putting words in His mouth. He never described Himself as only a prophet. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. You have to decide. Logic dictates he is either who he declared himself to be, or he was someone utterly mad. A madman, however, could not say the simple words of complex beauty and depth of reason which he uttered daily. Therefore, He’s God. Unless you have another argument. If not, perhaps its time to look beyond the faith of your father.

 

[Maryam]

Blessings to all and to you brother jello… I have to say that in reading the link you provided I could see that there were many opinions based on what were the actions of other Christians (negative actions) and this being used as an excuse to blame a whole religion for the actions of human beings who as a whole are weak by nature.

I saw many errors… one being the author stating why were the Gospels written in Greek when Jesus spoke only Aramaic? This logic makes no sense as the universal language used in that part of the world was Greek… The writers of the Gospels could not have envisioned that Greek would no longer be the dominant language in this part of the world any time soon, so they wanted the Gospels to be available to future generations and how do you expect the Non-Jewish Christian converts who in addition to speaking their native tongue, also understood Greek. How could they understand Aramaic, if it was not their native language or the** universal language spoken throughout the empire?**

Another are the claims that during the INQUISITION 3 million people were killed in the Netherlands alone!!!

Who in the world gave the author such numbers? and before you start with how the Catholic church killed this or that number of people (and with all due respect to the deceasesed)… Many in the Monarchy passed decrees and undertook actions that were not sanctioned by the Catholic church. To across the board lay all the blame on the Catholic church or its teachings is an easy way out.

If the Holy Father, JPII apologized for past wrongs done by some Catholics it was out of humility and showing as an example to ALL people that if anyone (Catholic or otherwise) commits an evil, that we must not hide from the consequences, but, own up to it and say “yes, this was wrong”.

One thing the author stated was that in Islam one has to take responsibility for ones actions and that in the Catholic church this is not so and was called ** Logic ** by the author. Where is the logic in across the board saying that in the Catholic church taking responsibility for ones actions is not taught?

I think the author bases much of his writings on his own feelings and opinions and not on facts about the Catholic church. Anytime you write about any other faith from feelings, opinions and so on… It comes across as offensive to those of that faith.

I have no problem with your wanting to enlighten people on Islam… Everyone has the freedom to want others to know about their faith… but, spreading errors such as this makes others view your character in a negative light.

Respect is key towards all regardless of faith and yes, some Catholics have done wrong things… but, evil is not a Catholic thing… to choose to do evil is in the free will of EVERY HUMAN BEING.

In terms of Islam… I respect all my Muslim brothers/sisters and there is a large Egyptian community in my city. I have had debates with them in a spirit of peace and love… never once have they had to resort to insulting me nor I them.

From my own studies in Islam there are several points that “for me” makes me see how it does not contain the full truth. If anything I say is in error, then I humbly ask to be corrected.

First, none of the prophets in the Old Testament, nor Jesus were ever tormented as Mohammed (pbuh) was with thoughts that the messages he was receiving were from Satan or from God.

Second, Mohammed (pbuh) had to be convinced by his wife Khadija that his messages were indeed from God and not Satan… Who has more of the authority to decide if something is from God or not?.. **a Prophet or his wife who did not experience directly the receiving of these messages? **

Third, Jesus was the only prophet according to Islam that was not born with SIN… Why Jesus and not Mohammed then? Lastly, when the final days of this world comes, why is it that Jesus will be the one to return and not Mohammed?

I am the last one to want this thread to degenerate into a “whose moral code is better… or **which religion had less/more bloodshed?”. **

Anyway, my brother jello… as a Latina I can understand your culture, but, the rest of it is not so clear. I respect your opinion even if I may not agree with it.

Salam and God bless all

 

[Therese_Martin]

Notice:

This thread is now closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.