Muhammed or...

[Damascus]

Mr ex nilhio-

Are you going to tell me the purpose of the first 7 ecumenical councils was an expression of loving the enemy?

NO it was denouncing the heretics.

You said I did not love my enemy.

I am surprised a muslim has not picked up on that one yet.

Are they my enemy?

You say no.

So if they are not my enemy- what is your point here?

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Part I : Being Singled Out : The Call of the Holy Spirit

First off-

You are singling me out here.

I wonder why. I am reading all these posts here and the comments made about muslims and about Islam and you seem to be very focused on me.

Because I’m hoping and praying that the Spirit will come upon you to show you what the Lord has shown to me through our Catholic faith.

---

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Part II : Bashing other Cultures

Damascus:

My concern was your bashing the Jewish people here for no apparent reason.

But I’m not bashing all Jewish people here.

I’m only pointing to a very small minority of Jewish people – a very small minority of Jewish people that most certainly do not speak for all Jewish people – a very small minority which many anti-Semites often point to in order to conclude that all Jewish people are evil.

I’m not saying that all Jewish people are evil. I’m not even saying that this very small minority of Jewish people concentrated with Israel are evil-- because they don’t even speak for all the Jews in Israel either.

I am, however, saying, that anyone who points to this small minority within the entire Jewish culture who concludes that all Jewish people are evil are no different from anyone who who points to this small minority within the entire Islamic culture who concludes that all Islamic people are evil.

---

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Part III : Comparing and Contasting Catholicism with Islam

Damascus:

Look at my first post to you.

Actually, let’s read your first post in this thread…
Damascus' 1st Post:

That is admirable of you but - it is futile.

Sounds harsh right? Nope. All the comparing and contrasting in the world won’t get you far. I don’t think a single Muslim or a single Christian has made their faith choice based on this one and only comparison.

It is far more complex than that, and many factors influence the mind of the undecided person. I just dont think it can be a Jesus or Muhhamed -which is it thing.

But, I read the post with interest to see if your test question will net any result on this.

In this post you seemd to be displaying an opinion where comparing and contrasting beliefs between Islam and Catholicism was fundamentally useless-- and yet this is exactly what I was arguing against if I recall correctly.

Now here’s your second post in this thread…
Damascus' 2nd Post:

First, define blind hatred by your definition please, then we can see if it even applies here or anywhere…

Second, why do muslims live in poverty?

With all the almsgiving you guys do- cant the calliphs share any of it?

At least with the poor Muslims?

We have Catholic Charities and they help all people of all faiths…

salami

For the record, you are not just bashing Islam here. You are actually bashing the people of the Islamic nations.

In other words, it’s not because of their religion that these calliphs refuse to share their wealth with their poorer Muslim brothers-- because, according to Muslim tradition called Zakat, Muslims must give 2 1/2 per cent of their wealth each year as a trust fund for the needy. In other words, it’s not because of their religion that these calliphs refuse to share their wealth. It is precisely because they are not obeying their own Islamic laws, most possibly out of greed I suppose, that they refuse to share their wealth.

I could go on with this by discussing Sadaqah, the act of voluntary tithing, and contast both these laws to Catholic thoughts on charity in order to dicuss the differences-- but I think you are getting the point now.

Anyway, now here’s your third post in this thread…
Damascus' 3rd Post:

I like blue cheese. It is , I think not just covered in mould, but I think it is really just mold and it still does not stop me from eating it.

But other than that, I still think it is a shame how many people have died in the last few years in the name of Allah.

Maybe in order to really have peace you need to have a role model that gave his very life for all.

For the record, I agree with this post third post of yours. I thought it was a good rejoinder to the previous post.

---

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Part IV : Personal Questions

And, finally, we come to your posts directed to me.

First of all, we read this…

Damascus:

mr ex nillio-

When did Jewish people put apostates to death?

Consequently, I’ve answered this question in detail for you-- which is why I brought up Jewish persecution of Christians in the first place if I recall correctly.

I’ve been attempting to discuss the socio-political issues regarding Muslim and, more specifcally, Christian persecution by certain Jewish authorities within the nation of Israel-- but, based on your responses so far, I don’t think you’re really understanding what I’m getting at yet.

Nonethless, very shortly thereafter, we read this…

Damascus:

What Jewish prophet had a six year old wife?

Mr ex nillio?

Now, quite frankly, I found this to be a bizarre question to ask me, especially after I explained my own position in great detail.

I’ve consistently pointed out that we must search out for what is true within other faiths so that we may draw them in closer in order to reason with them. To this end, we need to carefully discern by the Holy Spirit what is complementary to Catholic teaching and distinquish it from non-Catholic teaching – and this all the while carefully explaining our own position (without distorting it or leaving out information in order to get others to like us based on the things we omit from our presentation of the faith).

So why on earth anyone would ask me which Jewish prophet had a six year old wife is simply beyond me.

I’ve never claimed that this is a point of agreement between Catholics and Muslims. And furthermore, I’ve never claimed that this was even appropriate for anyone to practice either. And, quite frankly, you did direct that question directly to me.

Consequently, I’ve answered this question quite well.

---

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Part V : Conclusion : The Question of Hated
Damscus:

You seem to take the opinion that I have bashed Islam.

But you have bashed Islam Damascus. Your 2nd post above for example, where you ask why Muslims live in poverty, seems to be littered with it in my opinion.

You even stressed in other parts that dialogue with them, in the form of comparing and contrasting faiths, was fundamentally uselss as well-- and yet I’ve pointed to examples where this dialogue has made a significant difference.

Damascus:

You sir, have no response or excuse for bashing Jewish people, and you know, you make me wonder if you are singling them out too.

Not unless you feel a small minority of any particular culture speaks for the entire population of that culture-- something which is exactly what I’m arguing against if I recall correctly

Damascus:

You make a lot of accusations of me and hate in connection to Muslims and Islam.

You have not proven your point that I have.

I’ve asked you twice now to fogive me, and the second time I asked it was specifically with the intentions of reparing anything I said that might have offended you. I’ve even invoked our shared Catholic heritage in our liturgy to make this appeal.

And you’ve thus far twice refused my appeal-- perhaps it will be a third time by time I finish typing this post.

I’m sorry Damascus.

You are reacting out of both anger and hatred in regards to what apologies I have offered to you in the sense of asking for forgiveness. And, although you didn’t start of this way in this thread, you seem to be simply refusing to acknowledge my apology in regards to my defense of Islam insofar as the religion agrees with our Catholic teachings.

It seems as though you have specifically done this because you appear to have already made up your mind on this matter.

Damascus:

If your only victory in showing me “wrong” on the brother issue-

You have such a victory!

But I’m not looking for a victory. I’m just looking for all people involved to understand each other clearly without prejudice so that we can reason together on this matter by the Spirit.

Damascus:

What about accusing me of hating muslims or Islam?

How can you make that assertation based on anything I said?

Are you judgemental here?

Perhaps if you could stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment, you might understand what I’m trying to explain.

Do you have any further questions?

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Mr ex nilhio-

Are you going to tell me the purpose of the first 7 ecumenical councils was an expression of loving the enemy?

NO it was denouncing the heretics.

Actually, the purpose of the first 7 ecumenical councils was to allow the Holy Spirit to clearly manifest his will (which is God’s will) through the Church.

Consider New Advent’s article of the purpose of the General Councils as presented within the Catholic Encyclopedia…

I. DEFINITION
Councils are legally convened assemblies of ecclesiastical dignitaries and theological experts for the purpose of discussing and regulating matters of church doctrine and discipline. The terms council and synod are synonymous, although in the oldest Christian literature the ordinary meetings for worship are also called synods, and diocesan synods are not properly councils because they are only convened for deliberation. Councils unlawfully assembled are termed conciliabula, conventicula, and even latrocinia, i.e. “robber synods”. The constituent elements of an ecclesiastical council are the following:

• A legally convened meeting

• of members of the hierarchy,

• for the purpose of carrying out their judicial and doctrinal functions,

• by means of deliberation in common

• resulting in regulations and decrees invested with the authority of the whole assembly.

All these elements result from an analysis of the fact that councils are a concentration of the ruling powers of the Church for decisive action.

The first condition is that such concentration conform to the constitution of the Church: it must be started by the head of the forces that are to move and to act, e.g. by the metropolitan if the action is limited to one province. The actors themselves are necessarily the leaders of the Church in their double capacity of judges and teachers, for the proper object of conciliar activity is the settling of questions of faith and discipline.

When they assemble for other purposes, either at regular times or in extraordinary circumstances, in order to deliberate on current questions of administration or on concerted action in emergencies, their meetings are not called councils but simply meetings, or assemblies, of bishops.

Deliberation, with free discussion and ventilation of private views, is another essential note in the notion of councils. They are the mind of the Church in action, the sensus ecclesiae taking form and shape in the mould of dogmatic definition and authoritative decrees. The contrast of conflicting opinions, their actual clash necessarily precedes the final triumph of faith.

Lastly, in a council’s decisions we see the highest expression of authority of which its members are capable within the sphere of their jurisdiction, with the added strength and weight resulting from the combined action of the whole body.

In other words, the purpose of the councils was not explicitly for ther the purpose of denouncing the heretics. The the purpose of the councils was, more of less, for the express purpose of the Holy Spirit to speak through them in order to reconcile any disagreements within the church.

To the extent that heretical teachers were attempting to enter into the church and confound or even vex those who preached the Gospel, the councils most certainly did denounce their teachings. However, this aspect of the councils was peripheral to the primary purpose of discussing and regulating matters of church doctrine and discipline.

You may want to consider the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s teachings on the nature of the councils as well.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

You said I did not love my enemy.

I am surprised a muslim has not picked up on that one yet.

Are they my enemy?

I don’t know about you.

But I do think that Muslim extremists are most certainly my enemy if they’re seeking to kill me simply because of my faith in Jesus as God Incarnate. Consider what the Scriptures say in regards to those Israelites who reject Christ as Lord and yet still believe in God.
Romans 11:27-29:

And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.

As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

So too, when I look to the Muslims of the world, they too are enemies on our account; but as far as God’s promises are concerned, they too are loved on account of the patriarchs, for their ancestry traces to Ishmael through to Abraham the father of faith.

Indeed, as Romans 4:16 clearly states…

Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.

And again, in regards to Ishmael, the Scriptures clearly state in Genesis 17:20…

And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.

Damascus:

You say no.

No. I say yes-- and I’ve presented my thoughts clearly enough for anyone who wishes to challenge them further.

Damascus:

So if they are not my enemy- what is your point here?

My points in this thread are exactly what they’ve always been since I entered this thread…

• The Islamic religion is not inherently evil-- because there are many practices within it that complement our Catholic faith.
• A minority of Muslim extremists within the Islamic faith should not be considered as validly speaking in any way authoritatively on behalf of all Muslims around the world.
• One cannot effectively conduct any kind of reasonable ecumenical exchange of ideas between Catholicism and Islam without seriously taking the time to understand what the other side actually claims about themselves.

I don’t think I can make it much clearer than this. And I pray that those who read this understand what I’m trying to clearly explain.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Yes Mr Ex Nillo,

I see now after reading all your posts that I misunderstood your harsh treatment and mischarcterization of the Jewish people and their authorities.

I guess it was a gross misunderstanding on my part to read so much into your posts.

I have put this post aside in prayer for a bit before I responded. Because if I had responded before, I surely would have lashed out in anger.

I now feel more ready to respond with a more peaceful tone.

Please note, however, that I am going to state this rather sternly too.

This all started when Rodrigo Bivar and exoflare pointed out some powerful examples of where some who practice Islam go wrong.

I responded as follows…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:

But, to be fair, if that’s all that you see when you look to Islam, then neither of you have actually looked very hard to see what Islam actually has to offer.

I’m not a Muslim. I have no intentions of becoming a Muslim either. I think I’ve made these two points very clear.

But have either of you considered what happens to Christians in Israel under Jewish rule?

After I said this, you replied as follows…

Damascus:

mr ex nillio-

When did Jewish people put apostates to death?

Please note that even before I could respond to this question, you responded with the following…

Damascus:

That looks like a magazine I could use if I ran out of tp in the bathroom frankly. No , not even good enough for that.

Nonetheless, when I actually had the time to respond to your question, I actually did answer your question in detail. For example, I pointed to records regarding the death of St. Polycarp’s martyrdom. Likewise, I pointed to examples of this under the inluence of the spirit of Simon bar Kokhba.

To this you replied…

Damascus:

I am looking for examples of Jewish people putting Jewish people that convert to another faith to death.

I am not talking about early Christians.

I am talking about someone who never was a Christian - and a Jew all their life.

In response to this, I pointed to multiple Scriptural examples back during the era of Moses and the Judges.

In these instances, I specifically pointed to Moasic laws which provided examples of Jewish people putting Jewish people that convert to another faith to death.

In addition to this, I specifically pointed to periods under Joshua and the Judges which provided examples of Israelites putting non-Jewish people that refused to convert to their own faith to death.

To this, you replied…

Damascus:

Lets say this and make it really simple.

In the world we happen to have to live in TODAY–

Where have there been any incidents of Jewish people making a law to put apostates on trial with the punishment if found guilty would be death?

Answer that please.

I’ve been consistently trying to patiently answer this question for you Damascus. But each time I try to answer your question, even before I can answer it, you interject some other comment about me or my intentions.

So, for example, we read the following…

Damascus:

Because you talk about Jews a lot and so far, nothing nice to say of them.

And we also read this…

Damascus:

Yes Mr Ex Nillo,

I see now after reading all your posts that I misunderstood your harsh treatment and mischarcterization of the Jewish people and their authorities.

I guess it was a gross misunderstanding on my part to read so much into your posts.

Which brings us right back to the begnning again…

---

Damascus, this is simply unfair what you’ve done.

First you ask me, “When did Jewish people put apostates to death?”

Then we proceed with a long and convoluted conversion where I clearly demonstrate examples where Jewish people put apostates to death throughout history-- and I attempt to connect it with the actions of some Israeli authorities in our modern day.

And then, even before I can finish the connection, you claim that I talk about Jews a lot with nothing nice to say of them.

Even after I’ve explained all these things – and specifically and repeatedly explained that all these examples of violence toward Jews and even non-Jews do not speak for all Jewish people – do you truly and honestly not really understand what I’m talking about?

sigh
Luke 24:24-26:

Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."

He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?”

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

that site is so old you cant even order the dang magazine Mr ex nillio-

They claim to be experts on new spiritual trends mr ex nillio-

Islam sadly, is not new. Nor is Judaism.

What denomination prints this magazine?

That looks like a magazine I could use if I ran out of tp in the bathroom frankly. No , not even good enough for that.

salam mr ex nillio

For the record, the Spiritual Counterfeits Project is Reformed/Evangelical Protestant ministry whose mission is “confronting the occult, the cults, and the New Age movement.”

And, consequently, apparently some fellow Catholics would disagree with you about its usefulness.

Vatican Opposition to the United Religions Initiative

United Religions Initiative: Promoting a Politically Correct Global Ethic

For the record, I have encountered Catholic sources citing their information before.

The Pentecostal “speaking in tongues”

Now, to be fair, there are some things published by this organization that, as a true Catholic, I could not fully condone.

For example, there’s a current piece on the Da Vinci Code that has been published by this group. And while I agree with them that Brown has fabricated things and spoken a great evil against against Catholocism, I scratch my head in bewilderment when I read on further and see a nearly anti-Catholic view of Opus Dei itself.

In other words, you have to be careful what you read from this group. Being a Reformed/Evangelical Protestant ‘parachurch’ one is sure to encounter some non-Catholic bias. And, in some cases at least, you will encounter what I would consider anti-Catholcism from some of their writers.

Nonetheless, from the majority of what I have read from them, they seem to have their heads on straight even if they do sometimes lean too much into conspiracy theories. As I noted above, some Catholic sources have actually used their material when it agrees with sound Catholic teachings and presents Catholicism fairly.

And, in regards to the article Between Isaac and Ishmael, I think they’ve done their homework.

 

[RomanCrusader]

Our Lord did indeed prophesy that Mohammed would come:

Mat 24:24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”

Mohammed was a false prophet whose doctrines have indeed led to much human suffering. Whether Mohammed was greedy, insane, or possessed I don’t know, but his “revelation” sure didn’t come from God!

 

[benaiah]

I guess I get confused at trying to accept a religion that does not acknowledge the Deity of Jesus Christ. The koran does not say that allah had a son, but the bible says that God had a Son - Jesus Christ. Jesus told the apostles in the Gospel of John (14:6)that “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” I feel a good way to love a muslim is to point them to Jesus Christ as the only way to heaven. Maybe more Christians need to stop accepting islam as an alternative route to God and heaven and lead them through God’s only Son Jesus Christ. Then once they have Jesus Christ as their Saviour maybe the “fringe” group of muslims won’t see a need to kill people opposed to their religion. It’s just a thought. And no I don’t feel the Pope has a need to keep on apologizing for his quote. I think it lines up pretty correct.
God bless,
Benaiah (John 14:6)

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I’m going to try to explain this once more time…

If all these posts necesssary to respond to your one post here doesn’t explain my position clearly, then I give up

The OP is about:

Mohamed OR Jesus. Which one? Mr Ex Nillio seems to think it is not relevant.

That’s not true-- and I’ve made my points very clear in this thread too.

Will you please stop doing that.

Damascus:

On Post #42 Mr Ex Nillio takes a quote from Rodrigo Bivar and exoflare.

Rodrigos quote mentions the “special” tax, subjugation, and the six year old wife of Mohamed. Exoflares quote mentions the Polygamy, tax, and putting apostates to death.

Yes, I took these quotes and was beginning to respond to them appropriately.

And if you would have let me finish I would have been able to demonstrate that there are certain forces within Israel which do in fact use a “special” tax-- and much more too.

Like I said before, if this is a point of condemnation for a religion, then why aren’t people pointing out these same things going on in Israel?

As far as the second point is concerned, I’ve never attempted to defend anyone having a six year old wife.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

(He later defends polygamy)

No. I did not defend polygamy.

I’ve only pointed out that if this is a point of condemnation for a religion, then why hasn’t anyone pointed out that Abraham and Isaac did this too?

What about King Solomon?

Why do we judge one faith by this standard and say it’s ok and then judge another faith by this standard and say it’s wrong?

By the way, as far as our Catholic faith is concerned, I already gave that perspective too…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:

There’s no doubt from our Christian perspective, in light of Catholic revelation, that these things are morally wrong.

…so I don’t see how one can fairly say that I’m condoning the practice.

Damascus:

He then accuses these posters of not having looked at what Islam has to offer.

If the examples that their presenting represents the full spectrum of the contrast between Catholicism and Islam, then no they have not looked at what Islam has to offer.

Damascus:

I am not sure why one needs address this in connection with those truthful charges.

Because if they’re going to present these things as points of condemnation for Islam, then they have to explain why it’s not considered a point of condemnation for Judaism-- because Judaism has done the same thing in the name of God (and in large numbers too).

Damascus:

I also fail to see how this helps address the OP. The OP is asking you to tell us all why you pick one or the other. The OP is not asking us to point out the benefits of both.

But how can you make a fair comparison without pointing out the pros and cons of each side?

If you don’t point these things out, then there is really no comparison going on.

And the only way we can truly lead Muslims to our faith is by fairly presenting their position in contrast to our position as the Holy Spirit reveals.

I desire for our Muslim brothers to come to the Catholic faith.

Don’t you?

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Damascus:

I think both Rodrigos and exoflares quotes are enough reason to say this is why Jesus is my choice. There are a zillion others but this is enough IMHO.

Barring the case of the six year-old child, something which I’m going to have to check on further, all the examples presented could just as easilly be used against some of the greatest heroes of anceint Judaism too.

Furthermore, I’m not entirely sure about the six-year old girl. If the claim is true, then I am disgusted. But I’m not so sure it wasn’t a pre-arranged marriage until the age of consent which was customary in many parts of the world.

Damascus:

Then he procedes to tell us he is not a muslim. (which means nothing other than he is not of Muslim birth) No one asked him if he was a muslim. And it does not have anything to do with the quotes in this post.

I already explained this too…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:

You may not have been claming that I was a Muslim. But you seemed to be indicating that I was using the adversary’s methods when defending Islam-- essentially claming that I was poisoning the waters when defending them so to speak.

If you didn’t mean this, it certainly seemed that way with your next post…

exoflare:

Not by mixing truth with falsehood, that’s for sure!

For the record, I’m not mixing truth with falsehood.

Damascus:

Then he asks us if we are aware of what happens to Christians in Isreal under Jewish rule! Once again, no connection at all with these quotes or the OP.

But there is a connection insofar that many of the Jewish patriarchs did practice things which people are using to condemn Islam.

Damascus:

Jewish people are not even a factor in the OP Mohamed OR Jesus- why is mr ex nillio bringing them into this?

Because the people who are condemning the the actions of the ‘prophet’ of Islam are indirectly accusing many of the ancient Israelites of the same exact things.

And if they condemn the actions of the ancient Israelites with their condemnation of the leader of Islam, they are indirectly undermining the Jewish foundation upon which Christianity emerged.

Damascus:

Remember again the points in Rodrigos and exoflares quotes- Then he says MANY of the examples they raise could be applied to the Jewish authorities in Isreal too.

Yes. I did say that. And if you’d let me finish, I would explain this to you.

I’ve been trying for some time now…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:

In other words, many of the examples you’ve both given above could easilly be pointed out in this region of the world regarding Jewish authorites too-- yet I don’t see either of you getting up in arms about it. For that matter, I hardly even hear anything in the news about it.

Damascus:

Hmmm. The funny thing is – he never proved that they were the same at all.

I actually did answer your question in detail. For example, I pointed to records regarding the death of St. Polycarp’s martyrdom. Likewise, I pointed to examples of this under the inluence of the spirit of Simon bar Kokhba.

I also pointed to multiple Scriptural examples back during the era of Moses and the Judges.

In these instances, I specifically pointed to Moasic laws which provided examples of Jewish people putting Jewish people that convert to another faith to death.

In addition to this, I specifically pointed to periods under Joshua and the Judges which provided examples of Israelites putting non-Jewish people that refused to convert to their own faith to death.

And, if you would just give me the chance to explain, I would explain to you the modern examples too.

Damascus:

He only proves later that he spends a great deal of time dragging Isreal and the Jewish people into posts where they are not a subject of.

This is a common tactic I have seen in some posters who deflect and draw attention from the truthful charges put on the table.

~snip~

Damascus:

Anyway, in post 48 he picks up steam and clearly shows his hidden agenda.

Since I see all he wants to do is talk about the Jewish people,
I ask a question about apostates (exoflare made a point there and he ignored it)

That’s not fair Damascus.

I’m trying to clearly present the case for both Islam and Catholicism so that those who can clearly discern the difference without prejudice might be open to the Holy Spirit and choose Catholicism over Islam.

Damascus:

He takes advantage of this and brings in the OT Jewish people !

See post #63

At this point I’m too tired to go look up post 63…

Hopefully I’ve answered it by now.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Damascus:

He even asks me “how do you reconcile passages like this in the Hewbrew Scriptures with our loving God within Christianity”?

EASY- Because it was God condoning this and not ALLAH.

I’m glad that you could do this so easilly. I say this because I have to admit that if God asked me to go into a city and proceed to kill men, women, and children, I’d be unable to do it.

In other words, I would have disobeyed God. I know this.

Same thing with Abraham’s test of faith on his true heir, his son Isaac– because Ishmael was not the true heir.

Damascus:

But, why would a Catholic ask me “how I can reconcile” God in the OT?

It was actually an honest question Damascus-- with no ulterior motives intended. I’ve thought a lot about questions like this and very much thanked God that he did not cause me to be born in those ancient times.

Nonetheless, if you can so easilly believe that God condoned the slaughtering of innocent children, why can’t you see how these radical Muslims might not have any qualms when attempting to slaughter the ‘blasphemous infidels’ they feel ‘Allah’ is sending them against?

I’m not saying they’re right for what they’re doing. I think these extremist Muslims are wrong for what they’re doing.

Do you understand what I’m getting at now?

Damascus:

In post #53 he accuses me of hating Muslims. He shows no proof of this charge.

Actually Damascus, after reading through your posts here, I’m quite certain that, for whatever reason, you’re filled with hate right now.

And no, I’m not going to you retract this statement until you accept my apologies to you.

And if you refuse to accept my apology, then you can think of your hateful misrepresentation of my words as you’re partaking in the Eucharist in Mass.

I’ve done what I could to resolve any misunderstandings I may have caused with my words. My conscience is now clear.

Damascus:

In post 54 he asks accuses me of asking him if he is in favor of having sex with children.

I’ve explained this part clearly. I don’t have to explain this to you anymore.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Damascus:

In post 59 he brings up the “intrinsically evil” stuff.

Others in this thread had said they have no use for their religion, none what so ever.

And when Rodrigo said the following…
Rodrigo Bivar:

I don’t see telling the truth as slamming anyone.

I myself responded with…
Mr. Ex Nihilo:

Neither do I-- and I’ve never failed to point out the evils perpetuated by Islamic forces either.

But when someone goes even further than this and essentially claims that the Islamic faith is, for all practical purposes, instinsically evil and good for nothing, we’re stepping well past the “seeking elements of Christian truth in another faith” stage and instead going against the teachings of the Magisterium which seeks to find ways to reconcile Islam to Catholicism.

In other words, it seemed to be a fairly common theme that Rodrigo and exoflare seemed to be advocating to me.

Damascus:

I never used those words. Why does he bring it up?

Because, in response to Rodrigo’s and exoflare’s comments, I did use them.

And when you said the following…

Damascus:

That is admirable of you but - it is futile.

Sounds harsh right? Nope.

All the comparing and contrasting in the world won’t get you far. I don’t think a single Muslim or a single Christian has made their faith choice based on this one and only comparison.

It is far more complex than that, and many factors influence the mind of the undecided person. I just dont think it can be a Jesus or Muhhamed -which is it thing.

But, I read the post with interest to see if your test question will net any result on this.

…you seemed to be agreeing with Rodrigo and exoflare that discussion with Muslims regarding Muslims was, for all practical purposes, effectively useless.

And that was something that I was arguing against if I recall correctly.

Furthermore, you did align yourself with their position when you asked me the following…

Damascus:

Shure sounded confusing after your response to exoflare in that quote

Please note that exoflare has already said that Islam the religions effectively deserves to be slammed.

And furthermore, in regards to my thoughts on this matter, you gave me this flattering advise…

Damascus:

that site is so old you cant even order the dang magazine Mr ex nillio-

They claim to be experts on new spiritual trends mr ex nillio-

Islam sadly, is not new. Nor is Judaism.

What denomination prints this magazine?

That looks like a magazine I could use if I ran out of tp in the bathroom frankly. No , not even good enough for that.

salam mr ex nillio

And yet I’ve produced sound Catholic websites which quoted from this same source.

Should these websites be using these articles which defend Catholicism from ‘liberal’ Catholics-- or should they be using it for toilet paper?

Damascus:

Later, note his response to exoflares in post #76- he mentions “ideal society” – Bingo!

Who coined this phrase people? I think you get the point here.

Yeah. I get the point too.

Um…exoflare in post #25 brought up this phrase-- not me…

exoflare:

…making your ideal society where members of all other religions will have to pay a special tax for the “privilege” of living in peace…

In other words, I didn’t bring this up-- exoflare did.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Damascus:

He is clever though. He makes a “mistake” in his quotes and apologizes.

This is only to give the appearance he is able to apologize.

On the other false charges he does not.

In Islam, you don’t have to tell the truth to a non believer.

In Christianity you do.

Tell the truth Mr Ex nillio.

What was post 53? The charge of me hating muslims?

First off, Are you really asking me if I hate muslims or Islam?

Which statements did I make that were false?

I am telling the truth Damascus.

Do you have any further questions for me?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Telling the truth is not mutually exclusive to having a dialogue with Muslims. One should be not ashamed to tell the truth, no matter how awful, in order to save someone from the Devil’s grasp. If you see a person who has erred, do you not help him from erring? Do you not point out his errors and lead him back to the truth? Or do you ‘dialogue’ him with sweet lies? Or skirt around the issues hoping he’ll take the hint.

No. In my view - acknowledging the problem is the first step to cure. If people deny they have a problem then they will never take the steps necessary to solve it. All the self-help groups like Alcoholics Anonymous, and drug addicts help groups know this. Islam is the problem - the world is better off without it. I’m sorry I don’t bandy words - life is short and there is so much to do.

 

[RomanCrusader]

Telling the truth is not mutually exclusive to having a dialogue with Muslims. One should be not ashamed to tell the truth, no matter how awful, in order to save someone from the Devil’s grasp. If you see a person who has erred, do you not help him from erring? Do you not point out his errors and lead him back to the truth? Or do you ‘dialogue’ him with sweet lies? Or skirt around the issues hoping he’ll take the hint.

No. In my view - acknowledging the problem is the first step to cure. If people deny they have a problem then they will never take the steps necessary to solve it. All the self-help groups like Alcoholics Anonymous, and drug addicts help groups know this. Islam is the problem - the world is better off without it. I’m sorry I don’t bandy words - life is short and there is so much to do.

Exactly. Our Lord encouraged us to look at the fruit of something to judge if it was good or evil. Lets do a comparison of the fruit of Catholicism and Islam:

Catholicism: Worlds largest contributor to charity, manages hospitals, orphanages, and schools all around the globe, spread the gospel to the far ends of the earth, members witness miracles almost daily, defends innocent life and morality at every turn, has brought wars to an end (St. Leo I saving Rome for example), ect.

Islam: Created by a violent man married to a 6 year old child, spread through the sword, responsible for nearly all terrorist incidents today, a factor in 98% of the worlds wars, DENIES CHRIST, all Islamic theocracies are the most barbaric nations on earth, ect.

Catholicism bears good fruit, Islam bears evil fruit. The question to Muslims is do they really want bad fruit when good fruit lies just around the corner?