Please Tell Me I'm Dreaming

  • Thread starter Thread starter obvious_ron
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If we think these people are truly in danger from an Antichrist, then we should be doing all we can to be friendly to them so that when the bad guy shows up, or even before, they might turn to Jesus.

Basically, if anybody short of a Satanist showed up and wanted to have a joint celebration of Jesus and Mary with me, I’d say sure, come on over.
 
I agree that Islam is the forerunner of the antichrist, fits the bill described in the Bible as to who is “antichrist”.
I hope all Muslims may come to Christ.
 
Even Cardinal Kasper gets this right:
The ecumenical dialogue and the interreligious dialogue are connected and overlap, but are not identical with each other another. There is a specific, qualitative difference between them and, therefore, they should not be confused. Ecumenical dialogues are not only based on the tolerance and respect due for every human and religious conviction; nor are they founded solely on liberal philanthropy or mere polite courtesy; on the contrary, ecumenical dialogue is rooted in the common faith in Jesus Christ and the reciprocal recognition of baptism, which means that all the baptized become members of the one Body of Christ (cf. Gal 3,28); I Cor 12,13; Ut unum sint, n. 42) and can pray the"Our Father" together, as Jesus taught us. In other religions the Church recognizes a ray of that truth “that enlightens every man” (Jn 1,9), but is revealed in its fullness only in Jesus Christ; only he is “the Way, the Truth and the Life” (Jn 14,6; cf. Nostra aetate, n. 2). It is therefore ambiguous to refer to interreligious dialogue in terms of macro-ecumenism or of a new and vaster phase of ecumenism.

Christians and the followers of other religions can pray, but cannot pray together. Every form of syncretism is to be excluded.
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...pc_chrstuni_doc_20020107_peace-kasper_en.html
 
Last edited:
When I was a kid the Red Soviet Commies were the forerunners of the antichrist.
 
anikins said:
Jews also believe god has no son. Does this mean they worship a different god as well?
Click to expand...
I would say yes, it does mean that.

“All things are delivered to me by my Father; and no one knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and to whom the Son will reveal him.”
Luke 10:22
 
That’s absurd.

It’s also flat out contradictory to what the Church teaches.
 
In the 14th century, Clement V bemoaned that in Christian lands one hears “the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet”; in the 15th century, Callixtus III denounced Islam as a “diabolical sect.” Pius II warned against Muhammad as a “false prophet,” and Pope Eugene condemned “the abominable sect of Mahomet”; in the 16th century Pope Leo X portrayed the Muslims as replacing the light of salvation with “totally unyielding blindness”; and in the 18th century, Pope Benedict XIV castigated Christians who indirectly promote “the errors of Mohammed” when they take Muslim names in order to avoid taxation and other penalties by Muslim authorities.

And there was harsh criticism of Islam in past centuries by saints such as Thomas Aquinas, or John of Damascus, who called Islam “diabolical.”
Selectively taken from, please view article for full content:

 
Last edited:
Hm, well that’s understandable, I suppose they may have also denied who Christ is, and were a huge threat at the time, trying to bring the people together under a bloody, atheist regime that killed or imprisoned the religious.
 
There were more martyrs under the Communists than in all other times + places combined.
 
Spitting on someone is assault.

Saying that Bible Belters will do this is generalizing and insulting. So much so that Muslims and other minority groups (sadly enough) have to invent hate crimes to get attention.
 
That is a very good point. Communism is a horrible ideology that may have killed more people in the last century than all of the monotheistic faiths combined.

It’s a shame its reality is not taught in North American schools.
 
But you do understand that this particular god is older than the New Testament, yes? I hope you understand that.
 
How come they catch them so quickly ? while Christian Churches are being vandalizes or Christians are being killed on the street.and they are still at large!
 
Do you have examples of situations in USA where Christians were targeted and the perp was not caught?

I know in one of the situations I posted, a perp’s disgruntled wife turned him in; in another case there was an entire bar full of witnesses; these things tend to help catch a person quickly.
 
anikins said:
But you do understand that this particular god is older than the New Testament, yes? I hope you understand that.
Click to expand...
“This particular God” who is “older than the New Testament” was fully revealed in the humanity of Christ. To reject that full revelation has implications with regard to the real relationship of the people – those who rejected or continue to reject the fullness of that revelation – to “this particular God.”

This rejection isn’t a mere oversight or of no significance, it is important. It would be like coming to realize fully who or what someone is and rejecting the person himself by opting for your incomplete conception of that person. That would seem a significant development. Do the Jews still worship the same God or a God that they lost touch with somewhere along the line?

That is an important question. Perhaps what is worshiped are certain characteristics and ideals that are transposed into the supernatural rather than those being received from the supernatural.

If it is the same “God” you still need to explain why that God in the person of Jesus Christ isn’t worshiped nor even recognized by Jews.
 
Did you miss the fact that I did not simply read this account online or see it on TV, this happened more than once to my family member. It was witnessed by others, and each time this family member declined to press charges because she is a kind person. This sort of sneer, verbal abuse, take place every single day in this part of the country. When visiting other parts of the US (New York City, the West Coast, Chicago, St Louis) my family member is able to walk down the street, shop, eat in restaurants and there are not harsh words, stares, gestures of hate.

Remember, there are real people on the other side of the screen, and real people on the other side of the hijab. To accuse me of inventing hate crimes, honestly, I have thick skin and you hurt me with those words.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
It’s worth pointing out that in Northeast Ohio, where I am from, women walking down the street in a hijab will sometimes get abuse from passersby as well. Not just limited to the South. More like, limited to ignorant bigots everywhere.
Click to expand...
It is worth pointing out that in the Middle East, Christian men, women and children are being beheaded, blown up and crucified by “ignorant bigots,” so the phenomenon isn’t limited to the south or northeast of the USA, it is a worldwide problem. Jewish believers are moving out of Paris and Europe generally because of more than merely being spit upon. Acid thrown into the faces of, mostly, women in London are becoming much more frequent, to say nothing of bombings, truck attacks, mass killings, etc., throughout Europe and the ME.

The issue, as far as I can tell – which never seems to get directly addressed – is that spitting on women wearing hijabs is not a Biblical injunction, as far as Bible Belters seeking justification are concerned, but there are Qur’anic grounds for the mistreatment of Jews and Christians, as far as practitioners of Islam are concerned. That needs to be seriously analyzed before any kind of agreement based upon fairness or justice can be arrived at. When one group is treated unfairly, there will not be any lasting peace.

In Canada, the Liberal government pushed through Motion 103 condemning Islamophobia as religious intolerance. When the opposition party made a case for condemning all religious bigotry – seeing as anti-Semitic attacks are much more prevalent in Canada – that amendment was voted down by the Liberal majority. So why the “special” treatment of Islam by “progressive” liberals?

There is a clear preference on behalf of Islam in progressive liberal camps and this preference is showing up in religious affiliations where Christian groups appear ready to capitulate to progressive social pressure to denigrate and downplay their own beliefs in deference to Islam. That would be a big mistake. A truly just solution requires an assessment which can properly view what is right and fair independently of religious beliefs, instead of permitting whatever BECAUSE it happens to be someone’s religious belief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top