pro_universal:
Alright, now consider your choice quotes below. If the head of the Catholic Church can be disregarded in some of his writings, why would snippets from various scholars of islam (all from hundreds of years after the time of Muhammad) have to be “owned” by the muslims?
Don’t ask me, you’re the one that started that argument. I wasn’t quoting Muslim scholars until you made Pope Alexander’s Papal Bull the crux of your argument.
Furthermore, I’ve said this a hundred times already, but since you seem to be unable to grasp this concept, you cannot judge a religion by the people who fail to live by it. When someone, such as Pope Alexander, makes an erroneous statement regarding the Christian mission, Christians can say that he’s not really Christian
because we can point to Jesus and the first several hundred years of Christianity as a model. **Islam cannot do this.**You can talk all you want about terrorists “misrepresenting” Islam, but you cannot point out exactly which part of Islamic history they are “misrepresenting.”
This is a fundamentally hypocritical statement you are making. You disown the words of the head of the Catholic Church as to what the faith requires, and then demand that muslims own everything said by another muslim.
No, I’m holding you up to your own rule. I did not mention a single Muslim author until you played that card. Either stick to your guns or don’t use them.
For the benefit of the people who live there. I shed no tears when evil regimes fall, and neither should you, and no one did for the Byzantines either.
Would it be safe to assume then that you were elated with the United States ousting Saddam from Iraq?
Read the call. The only thing I see evidence of Urban II doing is getting the brigands and mercenaries out of Europe and into the middle east. There’s not a single word about “reconciliation”.
You mean, despite the fact that Urban II spent a good portion of his papacy towards trying to reconcile the Byzantines with Rome? You mean, despite the fact that the Byzantines sent Urban II a request for his assistance? Why on earth would they do that if they knew Urban II didn’t care about them? Your specious reasoning makes a muddled mess of history.
Your error here is in assuming that anyone who isn’t muslim is an enemy of Islam. Even your own quotes prove that this isn’t true.
I never made such a claim and nor do the quotes. Rather, those that *reject *Islam are enemies of Islam.
By this logic, there was no muslim army. Just Turkish, Arab, and Persian armies.
Nice try, but Islam does not abide by this logic, there is no seperation of Church and State as there was in the West. The State was under the authority of the Q’uranic Law. The West made this seperation, Muslims did not.
The Papal state did have its own army at one point in history, btw.
They still do. It’s called the Swiss Gaurd.
You are referring to the Caliph Al Hakim, who was actually not a muslim…he’s the first Druze, and had declared himself God, and was hated by the orthodox muslims of the day.
The following of the “Druze” came after his death, but what is even more interesting is that there is little condemnation from the Islamic community about what he did. Where is this opposition you speak of? Where did the Muslims speak out against his destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and where did the Muslims of the day speak out against the attacks on Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land?
Curious…
What I find astounding is that people who are eager to point out the political, non-christian aspects of the crimes of christians automatically assume that no thing a muslim ever does is somehow unconnected to religion. I think this is the root of the problem here.
What I find astounding is that you have no argument in defense of Islam’s history. Your arguments amount to: “Christianity did worse” and yet you have ridiculed other’s on this thread for using this same argument against you. Hypocricy abounds, my friend.
Can you, for once, without mentioning Christianity or another religion’s history, demonstrate how Islam is a religion of “peace” despite its first 1000 years of existence shrouded in perpetual war?
