O
- Status
O
Oneiron
Guest
Not irrelevant. Politics and religion are not the same. There could be a valid reason, such as “we want our holy land back” or an political reason such as “We want this land back.” But once again, this isn’t a trhead to discuss the crusades. I merely mentioned them in the beginning because it is a series of wars in Christianity’s history.
Besides, I already admitted my knowledge of the exact history in this time period is shaky.
Knowledge of the crusades is a very new interest for me, just started doing any research at all about a week ago. Already admitted to shaky knowledge.
And as before, if I’m not stating facts, then kindly to give me the truth. Telling me I’m wrong does nothing and doesn’t help your case. If I know next to nothing, enlighten me.
Once again, I said that there were similarities in the histories of both religions. Also, don’t forget that Christianity is about 650 years ahead of Islam. My belief is that eventually the religion will calm itself down as did Christianity.
First, that’s largely due to where you were born and raised and the religion you currently are.
And actually, Islam translates more correctly as ‘submission to God’
I ranted and raved, yes. About a specific point. Yopu people are taking exception with specific little things, not with the issue I addressed originally. That’s why I’m getting “huffy” about it. Someone mentions that I mentioned the inquisition and apparently I hit a raw nerve here. I apologize for even mentioning it because it’s drawn you all away from what i was saying.
And yes, i overreacted when I ranted, that’s how I am when something pisses me off, I’m not perfect. But next time you want to argue with me, kindly argue the same subject I am. I was not discussing the inquisition or the crusades. I was not discussing the similarities between Islam and Christianity, I was discussing people’s reactions to a comparison.
My apprently “illogical” arguing may seem so because you are attempting to bait me into discussion that aren’t welcome. I don’t want to debate those issues here, I never talked about those issues.
And I don’t think you understand your religion very well, or at least don’t live up to the loving part that I’m so concerned about, attacking both Islam and my faith. You say that i attacked your religion, i did not. There was a verbal assertion that the followers of your religion were not holding to the tenets of the faith as i knew them. If you wanna debate this, that’s fine by me, otherwise kindly be quiet.
D
Della
Guest
The reason these things were done to the Jews, although not rightly done, was because the Spanish government had just come out of a very long war with the Moors and believed the Jews had been in league with them. This fueled latent anti-Semitism and gave many a reason to grab Jewish property and oust Jews from Spain. Many “converted” to try to ward off such abuses. It’s much like what happened to Japanese-Americans after the Pearl Harbor attack. That wasn’t right, either, but in the atmosphere of the time, it was justified by the government because of fear and latent anti-Japanese fervor that swept the country. Many such horrible things have been done down through history. It does help to understand, but certainly not excuse, why they happen by looking into the circumstances of the times. Yes?
S
scylla
Guest
Here is why, God existing and giving His revelation to us must mean that there is either right or wrong. Truth that He taught and what we must adhere to, or else we can believe anything we want and no revelation is necessary.
So one belief system which is 100% correct must be necessary and available.
Would you agree with this?
God Bless
Scylla
V
Valke2
Guest
Well. We are trying to figure out here what, if anything, makes Christanity a more logical belief system than Islam. Muslims believe God gave his revelation to Mohammed. That they possess the truth that must be adhered to. The basis for their belief does not seem to be any less logical than the basis for Christian belief that God revealed Himself through Jesus.
Moreover, is it illogical to assume that God revealed Himself to different peoples at different times?
I don’t agree that one belief system that is in existence must be 100% correct. I’d be hard pressed to find two people within the same belief system that actually believed the same things.
Certainly, I would think we’d have to agree that there was a time when no one possessed a belief system that was 100% correct. I would say that there is nothing, other than faith, to suggest that has changed.
S
scylla
Guest
Before we can prove the invalidity of the Islamic system we must have some principals agreed upon or else we will just go in circles.
In other words we must agree upon a basis to talk or else we will just talk past each other.
We cannot base whether they are illogical on what it seems to be but what is truth.
So lets get down to basics first.
Truth is not opinion, as an example either God exists or He doesn’t. A belief in this does not create or define either. The truth already exists before we understand it and regardless of my opinion it doesn’t change it.
So if God exists and I believe it that means I believe 100% truth in the particular belief that God exists.
It is not a matter of individual opinions but the actual defined beliefs and their adherence to the truth. Regardless of the actions and opinions of individuals if they are not in submission to the truth then they would be dissenting from that, that does not disprove the belief system.
Would you agree with this?
God Bless,
Scylla
V
Valke2
Guest
Ok. But the question is what makes Christanity more logical than Islam. Not “Is Islam valid”
Ok. But we only have beliefs with which to go on. The “Truth” of God is supported by beliefs, not logcal propositions or factual evidence.
If God exists and you believe it, then you belief is 100% true. I’d agree, under those limited facts.
O
Oneiron
Guest
I apologize, to my knowledge you have not attack Islam, I was tired and thought it was you, but was slomeone else on a different thread.
O
Oneiron
Guest
So according to you, racism can be justified?
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I believe that Della made it quite clear that understanding the reasons for an action does not amount to justification of the actions.
Suppose a black man steals a loaf of bread. It’s to feed his child.
Another black man steals a loaf of bread, to exchange for pot.
In the first example, the understanding of why the man stole does not make it ‘less’ stealing but it does make us understand and to an extent some people might even sympathize.
In the second, understanding why that man stole again does not make it less stealing, but again we ‘understand’ and while we probably will not sympathize so much, greater understanding of why people do something wrong can only help those in authority to make a more informed judgment on what to do.
And NEITHER of those scenarios involves ‘racism’. The race of the person in question doesn’t have anything to do with his actions.
Really, I know it’s tempting to try to ‘catch’ people in what you think are ‘racist’ or other ‘sinful’ thoughts, words and deeds, in order to prove your own points and justify your own actions etc., but before you try for an “aha-gotcha” you should make darn sure that people are doing what you accuse them of.
Della, for sure, is not guilty of racism, or justifying racism.
O
Oneiron
Guest
Then she should probably stop telling me that I’m wrong when I say the inquisitions are horrible and led to the deaths and tortures of thousands of people. She then defends the crusades further, though she does say that they weren’t right. I hardly see howone can defend such a thing as an inquisition. They were horrible and atrocious acts against those of other religions.
I never tried to “gotcha” her. I was asking for clarification on the way I read it. It is my opinion that she can speak for herself, and doesn’t need you to speak for her.
And my point still stands, not a single person here has even challenged it.
Never said she was guilty of racism, and I never said she was racist. I simply asked for clarification. Pardon the way I asked if it’s not how you like to debate, I’ll try and make it clearer next time and just ask how someone can defend an act so evil for any reason. Understanding does not make the act any more good, and I didn’t understand why she would post it otherwise.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Well, individuals in the Crusades were guilty of wrong actions, but the Crusades themselves were conceived of, and started for, the goodly intention of the relief of those who had had their lands and property taken over by the Muslim invaders who were attempting to spread their faith forcibly, and who did this by taking over Christian territories (you do realize that places like Ilyria were Christian first–had been among the first places to embrace Christianity-- before the Muslims came in?)
So no, I’m not going to let revisionists try to claim that the Crusades were started by wicked, illiterate, stupid and evil Christians who were ticked off at the poor, peaceful, intelligent Muslims, in an effort to ‘get booty’ and 'kick infidel butt".
Still less will I let revisionists try to claim that the Inquisitions killed “thousands if not millions” of poor innocent people because of a “difference in faith opinion.”
No, I’m not a expert. I’m not a professional writer or professor. I do have some background in history, and many years worth of experience in research in some related fields, and I also had a very good classical education back before ‘history’ started to be presented with a eye to support whatever bias or worldview the particular historian/writer had personally.
Basically, none of the “research” by the revisionists on either of the above topics has anywhere near the credibility of the many, many historians and scholars who shaped my understanding. Unfortunately, I lack the time to gather my books and my data and to present a point by point refutation of various claims. Although if I have to suffer much more from the shrill clamor of “evil Christian crusades and Inquisitions”
*so help me I will wind up writing a 21st century book dealing with **accurate *history regarding these points!
So no, I’m not going to let revisionists try to claim that the Crusades were started by wicked, illiterate, stupid and evil Christians who were ticked off at the poor, peaceful, intelligent Muslims, in an effort to ‘get booty’ and 'kick infidel butt".
Still less will I let revisionists try to claim that the Inquisitions killed “thousands if not millions” of poor innocent people because of a “difference in faith opinion.”
No, I’m not a expert. I’m not a professional writer or professor. I do have some background in history, and many years worth of experience in research in some related fields, and I also had a very good classical education back before ‘history’ started to be presented with a eye to support whatever bias or worldview the particular historian/writer had personally.
Basically, none of the “research” by the revisionists on either of the above topics has anywhere near the credibility of the many, many historians and scholars who shaped my understanding. Unfortunately, I lack the time to gather my books and my data and to present a point by point refutation of various claims. Although if I have to suffer much more from the shrill clamor of “evil Christian crusades and Inquisitions”
*so help me I will wind up writing a 21st century book dealing with **accurate *history regarding these points!
O
Oneiron
Guest
Am not saying that the Crusades were inherently evil. However, there were atrocities commited, and there are courses of action that do not seem to me to be “good” when I look at them. I know a little of the crusades, see above.
The inquisitions on the other hand are irredeemable in my eyes. Torture and killing to find dissenters is hardly how it should be gone about. Anyways, that was not the subject of this thread.
On anotehr note, could you give me names and authors of some good books on the history of the crusades and inquisitions. Would be of great help
S
scylla
Guest
A system that is illogical would make it invalid as truth does not contradict itself. And in order to identify what is true we can do that by eliminating what clearly is untruth by examining it for consistancy.
So would you then agree that if it is indeed a fact and acknowledged then that would make that religion right in that aspect. Anything that is true can certainly be identified by being logical and possibly by having evidence for it’s existence.
If the religion differs from another in definition of belief of God then one must be false as one would be attributing a lie as truth. So it would be invalid.
So therefore there must be one religious system, that is the one revelation of God’s truth, as that would be a statement of what is true and necessary to believe.
Or else truth does not matter to God.
Do you agree?
God Bless
Scylla
V
Valke2
Guest
Not necessarily. Both can be equally false. Or both can be equally true. If we are going to agree that God is endlessness, or infinite, then any attribute we ascribe to God is purely a human convenience and not a “truth” about God.
No. I don’t agree. I don’t see why God cannot reveal truth in different ways to different people. But, even if I did agree, it would not explain why Christainity is more valid that Islam…
S
scylla
Guest
I agree that both can be false, and if they contradict then they both cannot be true.
As an expression of one truth yes there are ways to express truth differently. Yet if the belief systems express truth that contradict then one or both must be false.
Since both Christianity(I am defining Christianity as Catholic Christianity) and Islam groups both claim to be the one true faith, as I believe at least one Islamic group does also then one or both must be wrong.
If we get to some sort of agreement then we can discuss Islam itself apart from these pre-agreements.
God Bless
Scylla
K
Kevin42
Guest
The inquisition and the crusades, to be simplistic, were a mistake. I don’t know too much history though, so I try to stay away from making any statements about them.
As for rants on atheists, I’m at least one of the people who told you that it was you who turned away from God, not Him from you. I realize I was rather blunt, but from my perspective, I was being charitable. I apologize if you don’t feel that I was. However, I probably have more atheists friends than Catholic friends, so understand that I don’t have any hatred towards atheists. All of my friends who are atheists are wonderful people, who are all very just and kind people.
I don’t have any Islamaphobia. Since I am a Catholic though, I am sure you can at least respect my belief that Islam is false.
Perhaps some of us have made uncharitable posts. I am sure out of my 200+ posts, some of them have not been the most loving ones. However, love does not always envoke the emotion of bliss, acceptance, or peacefulness. Love is difficult and painful sometimes. I pray that I do my best to love in everything that I do, because without love we are nothing. I hope that I truly do, but I am sure to make some mistakes.
As for rants on atheists, I’m at least one of the people who told you that it was you who turned away from God, not Him from you. I realize I was rather blunt, but from my perspective, I was being charitable. I apologize if you don’t feel that I was. However, I probably have more atheists friends than Catholic friends, so understand that I don’t have any hatred towards atheists. All of my friends who are atheists are wonderful people, who are all very just and kind people.
I don’t have any Islamaphobia. Since I am a Catholic though, I am sure you can at least respect my belief that Islam is false.
Perhaps some of us have made uncharitable posts. I am sure out of my 200+ posts, some of them have not been the most loving ones. However, love does not always envoke the emotion of bliss, acceptance, or peacefulness. Love is difficult and painful sometimes. I pray that I do my best to love in everything that I do, because without love we are nothing. I hope that I truly do, but I am sure to make some mistakes.
M
Mr.Ex_Nihilo
Guest
I haven’t. I’ve actually defended Islam quite a bit here on these forums.
We care.
The problem is that they could have converted or left. No one denied them these options. But they refused.
They knew the Israelites were coming to take this land because the God of the Israelites had given this land to them. They repeatedly heard the reports and they persistently refused to understand that they were simply doomed if they stayed there.
Yes. But no one’s said that all actions that happened during the Crusades were good. I’ve gone on record myself saying this…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:
What do you want us to say?
We’ve already tried to explain many things about the Crusades, and you haven’t really agreed to anything we’ve said.
Why should we expect any different from you when we try to explain the Inquisition to you?
Actually, I’m not sure who said that to you. I know I didn’t.
I actually do beleive that poor catechesis can have this effect. I also think parents, loved ones, and friends can turn people way from God too.
In this regard, I think the one’s who have turned people from God almost definitely have more to answer for than the one’s they turned away from God ever did.
I myself have gone on record here saying…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:
V
Valke2
Guest
I agree that either or both Islam and Christanity must be wrong when they say “this is the one true faith”. Yes. That is, if we define “True faith” as the only proper way to believe in God.
- Status