C
Cojuanco
Guest
Yes, it is. Just like we have the obligation to spread the Christian Faith. Evangelism is nothing new in this world.
- Status
N
noobio
Guest
But, Muslim preach a Jesus who is not the Son of God, not a person of the trinity or God, a Jesus who was not crucified, they deny that he rised on the third day. So, don’t you think this message bieng preach is corrupted ? And there is Christians who convert to islam and believe that.
T
trdchubi
Guest
I doubt if their is a bit of good in it. I would not even trust any institution that says LYING IS A RIGHT THING to cover your true intentions. The integrity of this so called religion of peace crumbles down when bearing false witness is gravely encouraged.
Another point, it’s a very very bad copy of the Good thing to say the least.
S
swariffin
Guest
Thanks Brother. I may not understand Islam, perhaps I never will. But, I do not mean offense to Islam. If Islam believes that Quran is the word of God, then Quran must supersedes everything. That is correct, and all Muslims I know confirm that. The next thing, however, really challenge my logic. If that so, if there is/are things not mentioned in Quran, then they cannot be explained by the lesser books such as Hadith, let alone Fatwas. How can a lesser source ever explain the word of God? Just thinking, brother. I alway enjoy reading your post. You are inspiring me.
S
Sam_777
Guest
Brother in Christ swariffin, Quran supersedes Hadith & Fatwas ONLY when there is a conflict between them, for example if there is a non-authentic Hadith which says something which contradict a verse in Quran, then the Quran has the edge on that particular conflict.But that is not the case with the authentic Hadiths, they complement each others and considered in the same level of authenticity, one example is how Muslims pray 5 times a day, there is nothing mentioned in Quran regarding that, Muslims have to learn how to pray from Hadiths.
C
Contarini
Guest
But you’re assuming that there is a “pure Islam.” When you were a Muslim (probably a Wahhabi?), you believed that there was a “pure Islam.” Now that you are not a Muslim, you have no reason to believe in any such thing. The only meaningful way I can see to use the word “pure” with regard to a religion is to mean “the version that agrees with God’s original revelation on which the religion is based.” Since you no longer believe that Islam is divinely revealed, what on earth can you mean by speaking of “pure” Islam? It doesn’t make any sense.
As a human construct, Islam cannot possibly be “pure.” It’s just a cultural artifact with some divine and some demonic elements (like every other cultural artifact, including Christianity when Christianity is viewed strictly as a historical phenomenon).
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
We can’t have a rational conversation that way.
When you make a general claim, other people are going to say “doesn’t that imply X?”
If you don’t want to engage in that kind of conversation, then don’t make generalizations on a public forum.
A rational conversation means (among other things) that we try to challenge each other to think about the logical implications of what we are saying.
You are welcome to explain why your generalization about the meaning of “evil” does not apply to post-Christian Judaism.
Edwin
C
Contarini
Guest
There are a number of Christian ethicists who have allowed for lying in certain circumstances, and most of those who don’t allow for “equivocation.”
This was actually a point with which Protestants used to reproach Catholics (ignoring the fact that Protestant ethicists were no more rigorous than Catholic, as Newman pointed out).
It’s striking how exactly contemporary anti-Islamic rhetoric matches 19th-century anti-Catholic rhetoric.
Most of what anti-Muslim polemicists say about “taqiyya” is itself “bearing false witness.” In Sunni Islam, taqiyya is an extremely limited and restricted practice.
Most Muslim apologetics is nonsense, but that doesn’t mean that it’s deliberately deceptive, any more than bad Christian apologetics is deliberately deceptive. Apologetics is an intrinsically corrupting enterprise.
Edwin
T
thedarknight
Guest
There are a number of Christian ethicists who have allowed for lying in certain circumstances, and most of those who don’t allow for “equivocation.”
This was actually a point with which Protestants used to reproach Catholics (ignoring the fact that Protestant ethicists were no more rigorous than Catholic, as Newman pointed out).
It’s striking how exactly contemporary anti-Islamic rhetoric matches 19th-century anti-Catholic rhetoric.
Most of what anti-Muslim polemicists say about “taqiyya” is itself “bearing false witness.” In Sunni Islam, taqiyya is an extremely limited and restricted practice.
Most Muslim apologetics is nonsense, but that doesn’t mean that it’s deliberately deceptive, any more than bad Christian apologetics is deliberately deceptive. Apologetics is an intrinsically corrupting enterprise.
Edwin
Please provide evidence to support lying from the Bible or Church Fathers.
In contrast, taqiyya is intrinsically supported in the Qur’an, Hadiths, and Shari’a.
T
thedarknight
Guest
Islam is a human construct. Muhammad, in the Qur’an and Hadith, is the last prophet to correct the errors of Christianity and Judaism and to bring the true faith to humanity.
As a Christian, with the eyes of faith and anthropologically speaking, how can that be when John the Baptist was the last prophet.
The* Catechism *points this out (paragraph 719):
John the Baptist is “more than a prophet.”** In him, the Holy Spirit concludes his speaking through the prophets. John completes the cycle of prophets begun by Elijah.** [emphasis mine] He proclaims the imminence of the consolation of Israel; he is the “voice” of the Consoler who is coming. As the Spirit of truth will also do, John “came to bear witness to the light.” In John’s sight, the Spirit thus brings to completion the careful search of the prophets and fulfills the longing of the angels. “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God. . . . Behold, the Lamb of God.”
K
Kouyate42
Guest
NO-ONE is forcing you to do any of those things. And it is perfectly possible to listen to and consider the views of others without agreeing with them. Indeed, knowing why someone believes a certain idea or thinks in that certain way can be a great thing in helping you understand those things you believe.
I’ll end this on a quote: ‘‘I may not agree with your opinion sir, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it’’.
F
followingtheway
Guest
WHAT!?
E
EzraJacob
Guest
I will not die for the right to campaign and support violent Jihad, or Nazism.
Both are the enemies, and to support even the right to allow either is treason.
That is what is wrong with America. They allow you to have the right to speak and spread ideas that are deadly and held by the enemies of, not only America, but of the whole west.
Both are the enemies, and to support even the right to allow either is treason.
That is what is wrong with America. They allow you to have the right to speak and spread ideas that are deadly and held by the enemies of, not only America, but of the whole west.
C
Contarini
Guest
Joshua 2:4-5, Judges 4:18, and 2 Kings 6:19 all contain examples of lies/deceit/treachery which are either committed by a person we are expected to admire (Elisha in the last example) or by people who are specifically praised in the Bible for the actions in question (Rahab and Jael in the other examples). Rahab’s example further consists of treason to her own people, and Jael’s is an act of blatant treachery toward a guest. These aren’t just white lies–they’re pretty horrific examples of malicious deception, particularly Jael’s. (Of course, you can justify them by saying that they were siding with God against evil people who deserved to be destroyed–which is precisely what an Islamic radical would say about a Muslim American who conspires to commit terrorism.) Some folks argue that these characters are not specifically praised for their lying, but that seems to be a bit of a strain–the lie was part of the action for which they were praised.
For an excellent summary of the Catholic tradition’s views on this subject, I refer you to Newman.
Perhaps you can give more specifics, as I have done (and more clarification on just what “taqiyya” means in these specific contexts).
Edwin
N
noobio
Guest
What is the problem about not knowing a religionWHAT!?
N
noobio
Guest
In the book of Joshua, chapter 2 verse 4-6 Rahab does lie, but it was to protect the Israelite men from being captured. So Rehab lied so, the two spies would not get killed.
In Judges 4:18 Jael does deceive Sisera. But, Sisera was an enemy, who escaped war (4:17). The Lord, told the Israelites that they were going to have victory over him (4:7). The prophet Deborah said that credit will go to a women, because she will kill Sisera (4:9), which did happen (4:21). So we can see the Lord, was giving victory to the people and that why Jael lied, so Sisera, would be killed and later on, they would defeat Jabin the king. So, there was a war going on, killing is required.
When Elisha lied by telling the Syrians they where going the right way, it was to prevent them attacking. Elisha would usually tell the Israelites to be on there guard. (2 Kings 6:9-12). Also, the deceiving that Elisha caused the Syrians to stop attacking (2 Kings 6:23)
F
followingtheway
Guest
Because everyone knows what Buddhism is!!! :dts:What is the problem about not knowing a religion
N
noobio
Guest
Well, I never did any research about Buddhism anyway, so I can’t answer your question.
So wouldn’t you say Buddhism is evil?
F
followingtheway
Guest
Okay, that’s different from “not knowing what Buddhism IS”
N
noobio
Guest
If you don’t do any research on a religion or find out what it is, how do you know what Buddhism is or have any correct idea about the Buddhist beliefs ?
- Status