What Muslims are taught in their mosques - unbiased

[Grace_Seeker]

It is, unfortunately, not that simple. Violence is indeed a human trait, but religions promote or restrain violence in various ways. All religions are not the same, and Muhammad’s own use of violence (and the reflection of this in the Qur’an) has clearly had a significant effect on the Islamic tradition.

Edwin

You make a good point.

 

[AgnosTheist]

That is exactly what I said pages ago. You are welcome to question that view

Thanks for the clarification. We both have the same view so on that so no need to question anything.

 

[Keikiolu]

And third, as even you agreed with me, there is value in making connections.

Absolutely…!

In 2001 I knew next to nothing about Islam. Today I have Muslim friends and family. I am in regular conversation with an Islamic community where we seek to understand each other. I have seen Muslims speaking strongly to other Muslims who suggested any sort of militant or even unlawful behavior in response to perceived insults to Islam. They have declared such views to NOT be part of Islam. They refute the positions of those who cherry pick lines from the Qur’an and hadiths to justify acts of aggression in the name of Islam.

Good for you, and for them…! They are what I would call “bad soil”, then, for the jihadis.

Have you asked a jihadi, or someone not of your “friends and family” type moslem, if they consider your “friends and family” good moslems?

And from me they have learned that the west is not a monolithic entity that many had thought it was.

Now, WHY would they have thought that “the west” was a “monolithic entity”…!?

Were they educated in “true islam” as perveyed by “jihadis”, perhaps?

What do your “friends and family” say about why they thought as they did before being “enlightened” by your beautiful efforts…?

PLEASE answer these questions, as opposed to the usual tactic of ignoring those questions you don’t like, and thereby not answering them, which is so prevalent of “the pacifist”.

Having learned some of the language of the culture (I don’t mean Arabic, I mean the way of thinking that perceives the importance of jihad as a struggle for righteousness), I was able to communicate that this is not something unique to Islam, that indeed Christian around the globe share this concern (we call it by other names than they do like righteousness, which is my term not theirs, and sanctification). Muslims in many places have a very narrowly defined view of Christianity and of the west as a whole.

I’m very happy that you could convince them of the real meaning of the “struggle for righteousness”. Once again, why did your “moslems” have the view of Christianity that they did, and what made them “convincable” that your were to be listened to?

(When I used the phrase “islam as a whole”, you objected to it rightly stating that their is no Islam as a whole. But I had not intended such an understanding, I was referring to the whole of your approach toward Islam.

OK. The “whole of my approach to islam” is that islam, as interpreted by those who would use it for violence, is evil and the carrier of evil,… while the islam that your “moderate moslems” profess is not actually islam, but an “islam-light substitute” specifically created to be compatible with non-islamic cultures so as to appease both the surrounding non-islamic culture and the “moderate moslem’s” sense of cultural continuity (so as to not utterly disenculturate the “moderate moslem”, which is extremely uncomfortable).

That while it may not be wrong in every respect, that taken as a whole, I think your approach to Islam is greatly misguided.

Of course you do. My approach is not “applicable to all instances” of dealing with the individual problems that islam creates, and any approach that is not “nice”, is wrong, in your eyes.

…continued below →

 

[Keikiolu]

…continued from above:

But, now when I use the phrase “the west as a whole”, I do indeed mean that many Muslims especially those who have become radicalized, tend to view “the west” as a monolithic entity.)

Of course they do. ANY time one sees the “non-monolithic” as a monolith, one is liable to seriously WRONG in some way.

Thus,… I think it wrong that the “non-monolith” of islam be treated as if to “understand” them, and to “excuse their evil behavior” is ALWAYS the right thing to do.

Making contact with Muslims from some of these hotspots of the world and developing relations with them, helps to reshape their perception of reality.

Absolutely!

Now, if they were to read my writings and your writings, which one of us do you think they will feel more inclined to continue being in conversation with and which one of us more inclined to just attempt to reject and treat as hostile to their overall purpose in life?

And how many of them would see your “approach” as weakness deserving of continued confrontation so as to dominate you, and my “approach” as making their job more difficult?

Your approach is beautiful and NEEDS to be applied to the appropriate audience (the amenable part of the non-monolith that is islam). My approach is needed to apply to it’s appropriate audience.

I have and do stand up for myself with some of these radicalize Muslims I have interacted with. (And I don’t mean to imply that those Muslims I am acquainted with are all radicalized, in fact few of them are even in agreement with the concepts of radical Islam. And none of those that I have come to have a personal kinship with.)

I don’t condone any of their ideology, and I would move to stop them from putting it to action if I were to become aware of it.

Mightn’t it be better if they KNEW that you would do that?

But, at the same time, they have confessed that they have learned from me that not everything is as they once perceived it to be. So, we debate, and we chat endlessly, and we reconsider and review, and it is a marathon discussion that most frequently seems to go nowhere. And then I remember. It is going nowhere. These few radicalized Muslims that I have contact with have elected to debate with me rather than act out their ideology.

You converse with them 24 hors a day? How do you know what they do in their “spare time”…?

Once again,… your naivete and somewhat overblown sense of your personal importance is showing.

We are talking, and no one (at least to the best of my knowledge) is building bombs. And as long as that remains true, I feel that maybe I am winning. In fact, maybe we both are.

You’re SURE they’re not building bombs?

How do you know that?

The ego-mania of the typical “post-modern westerner” is quite amazing, isn’t it?

But,… best to you in your most wonderfully intended efforts…!! Do keep it up…!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Well, I am obviously in the minority on this thread and am convincing no one as we are all each already convinced of our own truth. But who here has actually sat in a mosque and listened to the teaching there?

Would a mosque, who by the way has many “moslems” in it, who is preaching what they know is “inflamatory” (bad evil jihad as opposed to good enlightened jihad) be more inclined to sound “benign” (with kafirs present) by way of takkiya, or just come out and tell us about how the non-moslem will be subjugated and subdued into dhimmi status?

It would be REALLY nice to see some reality come from your mouth, Grace.

When you start sharing with me those experiences, maybe I’ll believe the rabid views of Islam that are being expressed here. I have, and what I have heard is not what you are claiming is being preached.

And your “personal experiences” sensed by your particular sense organs (eyes and ears) are to be trusted above evidence from ALL OTHER SOURCES…?

Nothing like thinking highly of yourself, eh…?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

In my opinion, a lot of things that get labelled acts of Islamic terrorism are really acts of political terrorism committed by people who happen to be Islamic.

The fact that you constantly seem to miss, is that islam IS A POLITICAL thing…!

Anyone who IS islamic and commits terrorism, is doing so for the advancement of islam,… always. Even if it’s terrorism against other moslems, as the justification of that is simply that the “other moslems” weren’t really moslems.

I think that is the case with the majority of the suicide bombings in Iraq as they are Muslim on Muslim crimes, not intended to defend Islam or advance the Islamic cause in the world, but purely for a groups own political goals.

You SAY (back in this thread) that you don’t believe in the “monolith of islam”, yet you site a motivation of evil doers to “defend islam” and “advance the islamic cause”.

Who decides what it is that needs to be deffended, and what the “cause” really is?

The answer: each individual moslem.

Thus, each individual moslem can claim, RIGHTLY, that he is a true moslem and NEVER simply being “political” because his interpretation of what is “true islam” is perfectly justified.

If there is ALWAYS an out, if it’s ALWAYS possible to be self-righteous and claim to be “defending islam” and not “doing political violence”, why (or even HOW) would a person chose to condemn himself for being “political” when he can always be “pious”…?!

Now bin Laden is definitely an Islamic terrorist, as was the Intifada and its succeeding manifestations. And admittedly sometimes when dealing with Islam one cannot really distinguish between a poltical and a religious motivation for they are so mixed together as one. But I do think that Beslan was an act of political terrorism committed by people who saw themselves primarily as fighting for a Chechen, not Muslim, cause.

You may hold any delusion you like, but your de-islamication of the motives of the Beslan perps would NOT be taken very well by them, or by any of their sympathizers.

Who, exactly, are you trying to appease, by putting words into the mouths of self-professed islamists?

The answer to that is simple enough. You are appeasing your own sense of discomfort that islam is what it is, by redefining as something other than what it is.

“Those germans aren’t so bad! I know lots of them, especially in Hamburg. They’re great people, with wonderful sausage. That “fascist” thing will never go anywhere, 'cause only a handful buy that trash,… my german friends tell me that weekly…!!,… and THEY aughta know…!! Eh…?”

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Then why don’t we hear of Christian suicide bombers attacking other Christians? You can substitute Buddhist, Hindu or almost anyother religion except Islam into the above phrase. It looks like and Islamist thing. Islam is as Islam does.

Two words: Tamil Tigers.

They invented the suicide vest, and used terror against Muslims in Sri Lanka.

And there are Christian examples of using suicide as a weapon of war. Most notably, from the time of the Crusades, when the Knights Templar destroyed one of their own ships, killing 140 Christians in order to kill ten times as many Muslims.

Touche (I think, as I’m not overly familiar with the Tigers), Grace…!!

The issue, though, Gracie, is the issue of the meaning of martyrdom.

To the moslem: Martyrdom is the killing of others for islam.

To the Christian: Martyrdom is DYING FOR Jesus, without “taking the enemy with you to ‘judgement’”.

A Christian who dies in active defence of “his family and God” is not necessarily a “martyr”, but is subject to the judgement of God as to whether what he did was correct or not.

ANY moslem who dies killing kafirim (sic?) is a (islamically defined) “martyr”, subject to the interpretation of any particular moslem.

What does this say of the “islamic definition” of the word “martyr”…?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
Well, I am obviously in the minority on this thread and am convincing no one as we are all each already convinced of our own truth. But who here has actually sat in a mosque and listened to the teaching there? When you start sharing with me those experiences, maybe I’ll believe the rabid views of Islam that are being expressed here. I have, and what I have heard is not what you are claiming is being preached.

I exhausted myself on a mission to convince people that Muslims are human beings on this forum in the past.

Pro, we all agree that moslems are human. You haven’t “exhausted yourself” in that task,… but in the task of calling islam something that it simply isn’t.

You are making clearly logical, moderate statements about the religion. You have obviously made an effort to seek out sources of information that will give you an insight into what Muslims believe, rather than turning to the likes of Daniel Pipes. I think this is what anyone who sincerely wants the truth will do to learn about another religion.

Don’t take issue with the sources of info, Pro. Take issue with the reasoning of those who you are presently talking to about what islam is.

You call islam a religion. I call it a socio-political manipulation of populations in the service of the slavemaster demon Allah.

Let’s argue about THAT, and not the (obvious) humanity of moslem people.

Unfortunately, it looks like most people aren’t interested in learning-they just want to “teach everyone else about the threat.”

As opposed to (what I see as) your wanting to teach everyone the “correctness” of islam.

Can you see how we’re not going to come to agreement on that regardless of your “teaching”, or our “teaching”, considering our basic intitial points of view?

It’s a depressing venture you’ve taken on here, and you’re to be commended for carrying it out so well and with so much energy.

I find it quite energizing, and interesting that the only “side” that gets “exhausted” and “depressed” is the one promoting the false view of the basic character of islam.

Please,… do keep the conversation going. The more it continues, the more the “bad interpreters of islam” get tired and depressed.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Where are your words of condemnation for the (Mostly Christian) Russian army that killed tens of thousands of Chechen children?

Right here, dude.

Do you find it hard to predict that Chechens would do such things considering that their cities have been emptied and that they’ve literally hundreds of thousands of lives to a Russian invasion?

So the choice is between defending Russian evil or islamic evil?

How’s about we jut say: Evil behavior is bad. Let’s not have people do that, OK?

Should the Chechens fight evil? Absolutely.

Should the Russians fight evil? Absolutely.

Does SOMEBODY, either Russian or Chechen, have to be called “the good guys” to have this situation “make sense” to you?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

Violence Is A Human, Not An Islamic Trait
By: Hussein Ibish*
The Philadelphia Inquirer ( 1 February 2004 )

The idea that Islam, and by extension Muslims, are inherently violent and irrational has become commonplace in our culture.

Why?

This misperception, with deep origins in the historical rivalry between Christian Europe and the Muslim Middle East, was intensified by the Arab-Israeli conflict and a slew of bigoted Hollywood movies, and gained a solid foothold in the minds of many Americans after 9/11.

So, it’s a cross-town rivalry, and the “evilness” of the “friends” of “the west”, is it,… as well as that trivial issue of those avowadly (sic?) islamic killers on 911, eh?

Since 9/11, right-wing evangelical preachers such as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, and commentators such as Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes, have spared no effort to spread fear and hatred of Islam and the growing American Muslim community.

Why?

This defamation probably has its greatest parallel in the anti-Semitic ideas that took hold in American culture between the First and Second World Wars. The charges directed against the American Jewish community - now eerily echoed by anti-Muslim rhetoric - smeared a religious minority as dangerous and subversive aliens. The Father Coughlins and Henry Fords of that era, and ours, found the political space to promote prejudice yet remain “respectable.”

A truly funny thing to say coming from a moslem who’s religion describes Jews in such zoological specificity…!

Certainly the 19 hijackers responsible for the carnage of 9/11 saw themselves as Muslims. But so, of course, did about 300 of their victims. And it is true that the United States faces a threat from al-Qaeda and like-minded organizations. But so, of course, does the entire Arab and Islamic world, in which almost all governments and most people are committed to the war against al-Qaeda, and which is home to most of the victims of such fanaticism.

It’s not MOSLEMS that we are “wary of”. It is people who justify evildoing WITH the “religion” of islam.

Some point to the glories of Muslim Spain, the notable tolerance and multiculturalism of the Ottoman Empire, or the relative peacefulness of the Islamic world over the past millennium compared to Christian Europe to make the case that Islam is essentially an agent of peace.

The “glories” and “slavery” of which are SO positive in the minds of the west…

The more complex truth is that the Islamic world, at present and historically, is composed of a vast constellation of human beliefs, experiences and endeavors - a dizzying multiplicity, not a monolith. Like all great civilizations and cultures, those of the Islamic world have produced more than enough of the good to demand the highest respect, and enough of the bad to prohibit any complacency or chauvinism on the part of Muslims.

And yet,… moslems DEMAND their chauvanism. When they stop doing that, then I’ll listen to their “grievences”.

More than 1.3 billion people are Muslims, constituting about one fifth of humanity. Hence, the entire range of human experience and orientation can be readily found among them.

The Nigerian novelist Chinua Achebe said simply that “Africa is people.” So is the Islamic world. Not better or worse, villain or victim, but simply people. Violence, extremism and intolerance are universal human failings. They certainly are not particular to any culture or faith.

Absolutely. The problem is that islam has codified the ultimate need for violence (as a necessary means which are always justified by it’s ends [social-political domination of planet earth by islam]) on the part of it’s adherents.

• Hussein Ibish is communications director for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

===================================================================

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

you are obviously just being provocative and not worth replying to in a serious fashion.

Replying to the “provocative” and “unworthy” with WORTHY commentary is VERY persuasive to me, at any rate.

Retreating with your mind packed away nicely under your “cloak of invincibility” in the face of “opposition” is the mark of the truly un-self-convinced of your own words.

I prefer to keep talking, but if you wish to slink off, that’s ilustrative of where you’re coming from too.

Thanks…!

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Keikiolu]

…{snip}…

…Western people should learn more about such thinkers as Qutb, and become aware of the many dramatically different shades of opinion in the Muslim world. There are too many lazy, unexamined assumptions about Islam, which tends to be regarded as an amorphous, monolithic entity. Remarks such as “They hate our freedom” may give some a righteous glow, but they are not useful, because they are rarely accompanied by a rigorous analysis of who exactly “they” are.

…{snip}…

· Karen Armstrong is author of Islam: a Short History

karmstronginfo@btopenworld.com

I agree with Karen completely.

Once we learn what the islam that “jihadis” means, in terms of it’s implications for the free people of the planet, the more we’ll see that the “islam” of the “non-jihadis” is truly non-islamic, and only makes the “non-jihadi” moslem societies “fertile ground” for the growth of the jihadi-moslem’s jihad.

Once the non-jihadi moslems discover that they aren’t “moslems” (as defined by the only THREAT that counts who are the jihadis) they will be more likely to toss islam altogether as the sham that it is, and find a TRUE religion in which to ensconce the beauty and valuable parts of their culture sans-islam.

As went “Odinism”, shall go islam.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Palladio]

**FOUL!!! **
Resorting to name calling.

I find such langauge as deplorable as the violence you object to.

If that last statement is true, may God bless you, because you are deeply confused, and there is little I can do but pray for you, who equate the slaughter of innocents with frank words.

Fatma is clowning, sometimes pretending to be Catholic, sometimes Muslim, listing her religion as etc…

A child clowning is very charitable language. And she is ignorant, and needs to be told so. I hope she is a child, because if she is an adult, how very sad.

You cherrypick scripture to hold up against me: in fact, you do, very sanctimoniously, just what you accuse me of.

Message board dictators are one thing, those with Bible thumping are quite another: please give both a rest.

 

[fatma]

If that last statement is true, may God bless you, because you are deeply confused, and there is little I can do but pray for you, who equate the slaughter of innocents with frank words.

Fatma is clowning, sometimes pretending to be Catholic, sometimes Muslim, listing her religion as etc…

A child clowning is very charitable language. And she is ignorant, and needs to be told so. I hope she is a child, because if she is an adult, how very sad.

You cherrypick scripture to hold up against me: in fact, you do, very sanctimoniously, just what you accuse me of.

Message board dictators are one thing, those with Bible thumping are quite another: please give both a rest.

This thread has certainly shaken my belief in catholics and if I thought that certain people on this thread were representative of catholicism, i would not want to be associated with it. However I am still catholic.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

The fact is violence is actually being taught in some mosques. Its impossible to tell how much but it certainly cant be near a majority. Right?

I disagree. Unless somehow the ‘jihad the infidels’ verses have been expunged from the Quran why would it that these verses are not taught in each and every mosque?

Are Muslims ashamed of surah 9? No. They are proud of it.

Do Muslims resile from the ‘hate the infidels’ verses? No. They are proud of them.

Have there been any imam anywhere in the world who have said that the ‘jihad the infidels’ verses are wrong and shouldn’t be taught? No. They are proud of those verses.

 

[Montalban]

This thread has certainly shaken my belief in catholics and if I thought that certain people on this thread were representative of catholicism, i would not want to be associated with it. However I am still catholic.

Good for you!

 

[paarsurrey]

I disagree. Unless somehow the ‘jihad the infidels’ verses have been expunged from the Quran why would it that these verses are not taught in each and every mosque?
Are Muslims ashamed of surah 9? No. They are proud of it.
Do Muslims resile from the ‘hate the infidels’ verses? No. They are proud of them.
Have there been any imam anywhere in the world who have said that the ‘jihad the infidels’ verses are wrong and shouldn’t be taught? No. They are proud of those verses.

Hi

I would now bridge the gaps between the TraditionalMuslims and the Catholics/Orthodox Christians, if both sides don’t mind it, please.

Christianity which is propagated the world over by its various (33000+) denominations is peaceful, but when they preach it, they virtually expunge the following verses from it (and many, many more):

[Math. 10:34]"Do not think that I have come to make peace on earth? I HAVE NOT COME TO BRING PEACE, BUT A SWORD.“For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against hermother.”[said Jesus]!

[Luk. 12:49]'I CAME TO CAST FIRE UPON THE EARTH, AND WOULD THAT IT WERE ALREADY KINDLED…DO YOU THINK THAT I HAVE COME TO GIVE PEACE ON EARTH? NO, I TELL YOU, BUTRATHER DIVISION; for from henceforth in one house there will be five divided,three against two, and two against three. They will be divided, father againstson, and son against father, mother against daughter, and daughter against hermother. [said Jesus]!

[Luk. 19:27]For these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, BRING THEMHERE AND SLAY THEM BEFORE ME.

Luk. 14:26]If any one comes to me and does not HATE his own father and mother and wife,and children, and brothers and sisters yes and even his own life: he cannot be my disciple.

Now, the Catholics would come to explain away the above, but won’t let the TraditionalMuslims to explain away the verses in Quran.

I put it in another way for understanding of the Catholics/Orthodox that Jesus lived for only 23 to 33 years in this world (as per the Catholics/Orthodox, which would be near half of the age of Muhammad) till he departed from Galilee and went to India, most probably if he would have lived up to the age of 63 in Jerusalem, he would have waged war with his opponents, as clearly were his intention (as reflected in the above passages). One thinks in terms of this, because Jesus’ teachings were treated incomplete by the Clergy, so they had to be practical and they promulgated the “Just war Doctrine” to complete the teachings of Jesus, yet they preferred not to include it in the Bible.

The Muslims have it complete in the Quran, the Catholics held the half of it hidden from the common man’s eyes for propagation purposes.

I think the gaps have been bridged for both sides equitably.
I think this is sufficient for the time beings.

Please don’t follow my views blindly; only if you are convinced heart and soul with sound reasonable arguments.

Thanks

 

[Palladio]

Hi

I would now bridge the gaps between the TraditionalMuslims and the Catholics/Orthodox Christians, if both sides don’t mind it, please.

Christianity which is propagated the world over by its various (33000+) denominations is peaceful, but when they preach it, they virtually expunge the following verses from it (and many, many more):

[Math. 10:34]"Do not think that I have come to make peace on earth? I HAVE NOT COME TO BRING PEACE, BUT A SWORD.“For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against hermother.”[said Jesus]!

[Luk. 12:49]'I CAME TO CAST FIRE UPON THE EARTH, AND WOULD THAT IT WERE ALREADY KINDLED…DO YOU THINK THAT I HAVE COME TO GIVE PEACE ON EARTH? NO, I TELL YOU, BUTRATHER DIVISION; for from henceforth in one house there will be five divided,three against two, and two against three. They will be divided, father againstson, and son against father, mother against daughter, and daughter against hermother. [said Jesus]!

[Luk. 19:27]For these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, BRING THEMHERE AND SLAY THEM BEFORE ME.

Luk. 14:26]If any one comes to me and does not HATE his own father and mother and wife,and children, and brothers and sisters yes and even his own life: he cannot be my disciple.

Now, the Catholics would come to explain away the above, but won’t let the TraditionalMuslims to explain away the verses in Quran.

I put it in another way for understanding of the Catholics/Orthodox that Jesus lived for only 23 to 33 years in this world (as per the Catholics/Orthodox, which would be near half of the age of Muhammad) till he departed from Galilee and went to India, most probably if he would have lived up to the age of 63 in Jerusalem, he would have waged war with his opponents, as clearly were his intention (as reflected in the above passages). One thinks in terms of this, because Jesus’ teachings were treated incomplete by the Clergy, so they had to be practical and they promulgated the “Just war Doctrine” to complete the teachings of Jesus, yet they preferred not to include it in the Bible.

The Muslims have it complete in the Quran, the Catholics held the half of it hidden from the common man’s eyes for propagation purposes.

I think the gaps have been bridged for both sides equitably.
I think this is sufficient for the time beings.

Please don’t follow my views blindly; only if you are convinced heart and soul with sound reasonable arguments.

Thanks

You know nothing about Catholics, so please refrain from making such outrageous claims as you do in this post.

You know less about the NT.

I am going to use just one example.

You are lamentably wrong about the famous–repeat famous–passage in which Christ speaks of a sword, which is nothing but a figure of speech for the division between families and civil society to occur as Jews and Gentiles become Christians. If your grotesquely mistaken misinterpretation were true–and it is blasphemously false–it would warrant family member killing family member. Which is stupid and disgusting beyond words.

 

[paarsurrey]

You know nothing about Catholics, so please refrain from making such outrageous claims as you do in this post.

You know less about the NT.

I am going to use just one example.

You are lamentably wrong about the famous–repeat famous–passage in which Christ speaks of a sword, which is nothing but a figure of speech for the division between families and civil society to occur as Jews and Gentiles become Christians. If your grotesquely mistaken misinterpretation were true–and it is blasphemously false–it would warrant family member killing family member. Which is stupid and disgusting beyond words.

Hi

You are most welcome to differ with me.
Please don’t mind, it is just a discussion to reach the truth.
No compulsion.

Thanks

 

[Palladio]

This thread has certainly shaken my belief in catholics and if I thought that certain people on this thread were representative of catholicism, i would not want to be associated with it. However I am still catholic.

You are a Catholic (if not a great speller: majescules matter), but enter as your religion Muslim Catholic: which is ignorant, disgusting, and blasphemous.

Your creed does not ask you to believe in Catholics, but in the RCC.

Do grow up.