Muslim propaganda event at my school

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Even if this was true, the Pope’s personal opinions do not matter more than teaching outlined in an Ecumenical Council and in the catechism currently in force. The Pope’s personal opinion is not infallible.

Also, this is not even the Pope’s personal opinion. I will repeat the part of my post which you ignored:

In any case, the Pope’s understanding of Islam is that he “Esteems Muslims, who adore the only God,” according to Cardinal Bertone, who I am sure knows the Pope better than you do.

cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe…lam/index.html

Oops - read the latest about the Pope and the letter by the 138 Muslim scholars. It is clear the VATICAN rejected the notion of dialogue with Muslims because they reject the Trinity. In other words - their notion of God is different from yours.

I don’t really think the Ecumenical Council - being subordinate to the Pope - is here or there - since the issue is what is the Pope’s belief about Islam.

I urge you to look at the history of the catechism which does change from time to time. To point to it as some sort of “end all arguments” authority is wrong, IMO.

This is what is defined:
“Catechesis is an education in the faith of children, young people and adults which includes especially the teaching of Christian doctrine imparted, generally speaking, in an organic and systematic way, with a view to initiating the hearers into the fullness of Christian life”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catechism

= ie. an initial teaching manual. Nothing more. You are giving it undue authority.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

LMFAO talk about logical fallicies, look up “strawman” while you’re at it, I never made the argument you are stating. NOR did I ever say Christians follow the OT dietary laws, however that doesn’t change the fact that Christians worship the OT God as God, they are indivisible. So you worship the same God that ordered the massacre of tens of thousands. THAT is an argument you can’t finnegle your way out of by your strawmen that you set up here.

I won’t tone down anything buddy, I give back what I recieve, you’ve been nothing but disrespectful to me, so I gave it back, if you can’t handle it don’t dish it out…

Yes you have. Coming here and saying, ‘Islam is not bad because the OT is worse’ is TU QUOQUE.

PS: I’m an atheist.

 

[lukewarm]

Yes you have. Coming here and saying, **‘Islam is not bad because the OT is worse’ **is TU QUOQUE.

PS: I’m an atheist.

Great, if you can quote where I’ve said that I will agree, I never said that. I said both have faults, but IMO the Bible is more vile, how that becomes me loving Islam because the Bible is bad I have no idea I never said that… What you just did is called a strawman, setting up a weakened version of someones position and attacking, it’s the most common logical fallacy.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Remember this post?

lukewarm:

I see a lot of propaganda on this board about wife beating, Jihad etc… in the Qu’ran.

As someone who is basically without a faith right now I can’t understand how someone in a glass palace can throw bolders like that. I’ve read the Bible and the Qu’ran cover to cover and I was brought to near tears reading the horrors and immoralty within the Bible, it destroyed my faith frankly. I’m almost willing to bet 99% of the people who can remain Christians have never read the entire Old Testament. Meanwhile while reading the Qu’ran I was at best left with a feeling of “well that’s over the top or obvious bias”.

Now to the point let’s have a challenge of sorts the worst of the worst. Post your worst Qu’ran Surahs’ and see if anyone can counter with a more offensive Bible verse.

My bet if I were a betting man is that the Bible has much worse verse and it’s not even close.

That is classic TU QUOQUE, man.

 

[lukewarm]

Remember this post?

That is classic TU QUOQUE, man.

No it isn’t, you need to go back to logical fallacy school and learn how to use them properly.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

You really are silly.

The third type of ad hominem is known as “tu quoque” (Latin for “you too”). A tu quoque retort is basically a tacit concession on the part of the opponent committing this fallacy to the position submitted by the arguer, but with the attempt to discredit the arguer by asserting in some manner that the position argued applies to the arguer himself as well. The tu quoque ad hominem may also be called the “two wrongs make a right” fallacy.
geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/1019/Fallacies.htm

Pretty much exactly what you did and are doing, rage boy.

 

[lukewarm]

You really are silly.

The third type of ad hominem is known as “tu quoque” (Latin for “you too”). A tu quoque retort is basically a tacit concession on the part of the opponent committing this fallacy to the position submitted by the arguer, but with the attempt to discredit the arguer by asserting in some manner that the position argued applies to the arguer himself as well. The tu quoque ad hominem may also be called the “two wrongs make a right” fallacy.
geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/1019/Fallacies.htm

Pretty much exactly what you did and are doing, rage boy.

Yeah and if you can prove I ever said Islam was right or wasn’t ridiculous you may have a point, but I never said that, I said they’re two wrongs, neither is right at all, but the Bible IMO happens to be worse. That is not a proper usage of tu quoque at all. Try another wiki before tossing around big words.

Rage boy LOL, good one psuedo-intellectual…

 

[Keikiolu]

No it isn’t, you need to go back to logical fallacy school and learn how to use them properly.

You’d THINK that I was following Luke around and suggesting that people simply use the /ignore switch (your ignore list) to relieve their “abdominal pressure” at having to listen to Luke’s ravings,…

…but that’s NOT the case at all…!!

He simply is unavoidable as we seem to have very similar tastes in those threads we like to observe.

Anyway, not that I WOULDN’T suggest that people ignore this fellow, but I’d rather not be accused of “stalking”, so I won’t suggest such a thing here.

Best to you all…!!

Most best to you Luke…! You need it.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Read the part about ‘TWO WRONGS make a right.’

That’s what tu quoque is.

So what’s this strawman about “if you can prove I ever said Islam wasn’t right or ridiculous”?

So you said Islam is wrong. But when you tried to say that the OT is also wrong - so stop ‘propaganda’ about Islam - you slipped into tu quoque.

Got it, rage boy.

 

[lukewarm]

Read the part about ‘TWO WRONGS make a right.’

That’s what tu quoque is.

So what’s this strawman about “if you can prove I ever said Islam wasn’t right or ridiculous”?

So you said Islam is wrong. But when you tried to say that the OT is also wrong - so stop ‘propaganda’ about Islam - you slipped into tu quoque.

Got it, rage boy.

Again you are not using it properly psuedo-intellectual… I know you tried hard, but you’re using it foolishly. I never made an argument for or against Islam or Christianity so it’s impossible for me to be using a tu quoque argument.

 

[lukewarm]

You’d THINK that I was following Luke around and suggesting that people simply use the /ignore switch (your ignore list) to relieve their “abdominal pressure” at having to listen to Luke’s ravings,…

…but that’s NOT the case at all…!!

He simply is unavoidable as we seem to have very similar tastes in those threads we like to observe.

Anyway, not that I WOULDN’T suggest that people ignore this fellow, but I’d rather not be accused of “stalking”, so I won’t suggest such a thing here.

Best to you all…!!

Most best to you Luke…! You need it.

This is just pathetic now, just ignore me already you drama queen.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

So you never made arguments for or against Islam and/or Christianity by trying to compare the Quran and OT?

Huh? You expect people here to believe that, rage boy?

 

[lukewarm]

So you never made arguments for or against Islam and/or Christianity by trying to compare the Quran and OT?

Huh? You expect people here to believe that, rage boy?

No I didn’t, I am takin both texts at face value and doing a comparison.

Rage boy LMFAO making up a nickname like that goes a long way to proving this is getting to you a lot more than it is me right half-wit?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

No I didn’t, I am takin both texts at face value and doing a comparison.

Rage boy LMFAO making up a nickname like that goes a long way to proving this is getting to you a lot more than it is me right half-wit?

Why then did you say this?

Now to the point let’s have a challenge of sorts the worst of the worst. Post your worst Qu’ran Surahs’ and see if anyone can counter with a more offensive Bible verse.

My bet if I were a betting man is that the Bible has much worse verse and it’s not even close.

You committed a tu quoque against the Christians here by telling them that they have no right to slam Islam because the OT is just as bad if not worse.

Now, that is classic tu quoque, rage boy.

 

[lukewarm]

Why then did you say this?

You committed a tu quoque against the Christians here by telling them that they have no right to slam Islam because the OT is just as bad if not worse.

Now, that is classic tu quoque, rage boy.

Uhh no it’s not, I said both stink but the Bible is worse, that’s what I said, and it isn’t a “classic tu quoque” half-wit… seriously I’m done educating a psuedo-intellectual. it isn’t, and you don’t know how to use it properly in an argument, simple as that.

 

[Montalban]

You’d THINK that I was following Luke around and suggesting that people simply use the /ignore switch (your ignore list) to relieve their “abdominal pressure” at having to listen to Luke’s ravings,…

I agree. He’s going on my list.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Uhh no it’s not, I said both stink but the Bible is worse, that’s what I said, and it isn’t a “classic tu quoque” half-wit… seriously I’m done educating a psuedo-intellectual. it isn’t, and you don’t know how to use it properly in an argument, simple as that.

That is still a tu quoque since there is no requirement that one premise has to be more wrong than the other.

Yet another straw man from you to compound your tu quoque, rage boy.

 

[Montalban]

This isn’t propaganda, it’s simply learing about Islam in a matter that’s entirely optional and unforced. Looks like ecumenism.

Just because somthing has to do with Islam doesn’t mean it’s intrinsically evil.

Unless Islam is intrincially evil.

 

[Pius_X]

I don’t really think the Ecumenical Council - being subordinate to the Pope - is here or there - since the issue is what is the Pope’s belief about Islam.

Once an Ecumenical Council’s document is approved by that Pope, no Pope can overturn that teaching. A future Pope must follow an Ecumenical Council’s rulings or he is wrong.

The issue in this thread was over a so called Islamic “Propaganda” event. My post was to keep in mind the church’s- not one man’s- official teachings.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Once an Ecumenical Council’s document is approved by that Pope, no Pope can overturn that teaching. A future Pope must follow an Ecumenical Council’s rulings or he is wrong.

The issue in this thread was over a so called Islamic “Propaganda” event. My post was to keep in mind the church’s- not one man’s- official teachings.

Sure and that is why the catechism has been changed over the years. The point about the catechism is the same for a pope. They are not infallible unless speaking infallibly. Parts of the catechism are based on infallible teachings, but not the part about Islam. Never has and never will - because of its nature.

Regardless, you place too much authority on the catechism. If the Pope does not place value on it wrt Islam, why should I or anyone else?