What Muslims are taught in their mosques - unbiased

[Palladio]

I am an infidel even to Muslims who are not nuts, which by the way is the majority of Muslims. And, yes, I would defend their right to consider me an infidel. Just as I once defended the rights of Catholics who call me a heretic. (A not so oblique reference to my former military service, and that as a Protestant I have been labelled a number of things in other threads on this board.)

As to inviting “one of those nuts in [my] house”, indeed just last week I had a friend who happens to be Muslim stay with me. Actually, it was the first time we had met face-to-face, knowing each other previously only from a year’s worth of internet conversations. But, I guess he wasn’t a nut since I’m still here to post this week. What he happens to be is an agronomist, which I found interesting as my grandfather was also an agronomist years ago. The point being, that beside religion, there isn’t as much difference between Muslims and the rest of us as some here would like to think. And I contend, that with the exception of a few dangerous individuals (which can be found in every religion), even those ideological differences might not be so big either.

“A few dangerous individuals?”

That’s outrageous.

Tell that to the families of 9/11: I know a few dozen.

If you think that Islamo-terrorism and Islamo-facism would not as soon destroy the U. S. as they already have the Twin Towers, you have your head deeper in the sand than is healthy.

You keep arguing against a straw man:** all Muslims**, which is not what I have read anybody argue here.

Then you counter with “a few dangerous individuals.”

I think I understand why so few outside of the Northeast have forgotten the innocents slaughtered on 9/11: they’ve convinced themselves there are only a “few dangerous individuals” threatening us.

God save us from thinking like that.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

“A few dangerous individuals?”

That’s outrageous.

Tell that to the families of 9/11: I know a few dozen.

If you think that Islamo-terrorism and Islamo-facism would not as soon destroy the U. S. as they already have the Twin Towers, you have your head deeper in the sand than is healthy.

You keep arguing against a straw man:** all Muslims**, which is not what I have read anybody argue here.

Then you counter with “a few dangerous individuals.”

I think I understand why so few outside of the Northeast have forgotten the innocents slaughtered on 9/11: they’ve convinced themselves there are only a “few dangerous individuals” threatening us.

God save us from thinking like that.

Though you have never once said all Muslims, there are those here who have. As I can understand how you might object to what you see as a strawman, can you understand how I might object to what I see as overgeneralization?

I said “NO”. Everything ever said by any muslim about christians and Americans are simply untrue where my grandchildren are concerned.

:
ALL and i repeat ALL muslims want sharia law, its what they believe.

I have never once denied that there are indeed people who seek to destroy all things different than them, and that this includes some who claim to be followers of Islam.

But relative to the whole of Islam, yes, I would suggest that it is only a “few dangerous individuals”. That doesn’t make the tragedy of 9/11 any less tragic, indeed it makes it more so that only a few (in that case 19) could create such terrible destruction. Those few and those that support them do need to be stopped. Attributing the guilt to all Muslims or to Islam as a whole is not the way to go about doing that, and does nothing to protect us from the very real danger of those perverters of Islam who would continue to seek to kill us.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Grace Seeker:

So, we must resist those who, having perverted the teachings of Islam to arrive at some sort of quasi-religious justification for their own agendas, now engage in terrorism. But we need not label all who are Muslim as believing in those same set of beliefs, because they don’t. And if instead, we go about convincing ourselves that everything about Islam is evil by citing only those verses that back up this singular view absent others that might provide a more rounded view, then we have merely copied those terrorist in becoming equally unbalanced in our thinking with regard to Isalm just like they have.

Pity you weren’t around in 622-632AD to tell Mr Muhammad bin Abdallah that he had perverted the teachings of Islam for his own agenda such as:

1. Genocide of the B. Qurayza
2. Caravan-raiding and murder of caravan drivers
3. Enslavement of women and CHILDREN
4. Ethnic-cleansing of Jews and Christians from Arabia
5. Torture and murder of unarmed prisoner of war
6. War-mongering as a means of spreading his religion
7. Oppressing of Christians as second-class dhimmis
8. Sex with a nine year old CHILD

Yeah, your daughter wasn’t told all these. Why don’t you tell her about these wonderful deeds of your prophet?

 

[Palladio]

Though you have never once said all Muslims, there are those here who have. As I can understand how you might object to what you see as a strawman, can you understand how I might object to what I see as overgeneralization?

I have never once denied that there are indeed people who seek to destroy all things different than them, and that this includes some who claim to be followers of Islam.

But relative to the whole of Islam, yes, I would suggest that it is only a “few dangerous individuals”. That doesn’t make the tragedy of 9/11 any less tragic, indeed it makes it more so that only a few (in that case 19) could create such terrible destruction. Those few and those that support them do need to be stopped. Attributing the guilt to all Muslims or to Islam as a whole is not the way to go about doing that, and does nothing to protect us from the very real danger of those perverters of Islam who would continue to seek to kill us.

A few = around 3.

Besides the 19, there were many, many more who supported them, and still more who cheered them.

Since then, there have been lots of attempts here, and all we know is those we’ve been told about.

The question is what is taught in mosques.

Again, apart from Islamo-facism and Islamo-terrorism, violence of all sorts, including opression of Christians, where they have not already been eradicated: a map of the m e suffices to see this.

Turkey is a sad and interesting example: majority Muslim, yet secular (via Ataturk) and a police and military state. That’s about as far as Islam has come–how like Egypt may be to it is unclear to me, which at least reached some peace with Israel. Islamophilic France opposes its entry into the EU: what do the French know that we do not?

The problem is East versus West, which is trying, here and elsewhere, to understand what it has been able to ignore or romanticize for most of its history. I’m afraid neither is possible any longer.

Given the number and proportion of those committed to violence coming out of mosques the world over, I am all for the strictest inspection of each and every voice professing confidence in Mohammed.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

A few = around 3.

By that way of counting, the USA has certainly made more than a few mistakes in this war on terror and committed more than a few acts of brutailty in the process. No wonder we don’t have the support among Muslims that we once had under George Bush, Sr.

Besides the 19, there were many, many more who supported them, and still more who cheered them.

And I included them in my consideration that it is still a relative few, when compared to all of Islam, that fit the category of which you express your concerns about.

The question is what is taught in mosques.

Agreed. And how do we find that out? Wouldn’t going to a mosque be the best way? Which is where I entered this discussion.

Turkey is a sad and interesting example: majority Muslim, yet secular (via Ataturk) and a police and military state. That’s about as far as Islam has come–how like Egypt may be to it is unclear to me, which at least reached some peace with Israel.

And yet this illustrates precisely that problem with the broad painting bruch. Two different countries, two different sets of government policies. And many different viewpoints within each country. But do Turks want Sharia law? Some do, some don’t. Do Turks support terror? They are waging their own internal war against the terror of the PKK, and they allow the US to have bases to support actions in Iraq. There are plenty of protests by the students, but this has more to do with what is perceived as American arrogance, aggression and imperialism than that to condone the use of terror in the name of Islam. Do Turks seek to kill non-Muslims? Though you may find a few in any crowd, on the whole the answer to this is decidely NO. It isn’t even close. Next month, my “niece”, who is a Muslim from Turkey will be marrying a man who is a Turkish Catholic. Her family has no objections, indeed Sahire’s mother considers Ercan to be like a son.

Now you will find many Muslims in this world who will say that Sahire has gone too far. But in Turkey, her case is not viewed that way at all. Indeed, I personally know of 3 other Muslim-Christian marriages in Turkey, (which, again, by your way of counting, would be more than a few) and not one of them is viewed by their neighbors as haraam. So, you can look it up and cite that it is from the Qur’an and the hadith all you want. But in point of fact, while it may be taught as not alllowed in other mosques around the world, it is being ignored in Turkey.

So, what is being taught in mosques? Just reading the Qur’an is not going actually answer that question. You have to go there, talk to Muslims and learn how it is that their religion is being practiced, find out what is being emphasized and what is being dismissed as not truly Muslim in character. And what I have found is an Islam that actually condemns those who have called for violence; they condemn it as not an Isalmic means to an end, and they seek to ignore, dismiss, or explain away passages that suggest otherwise – just like we suggest that Jesus’ comments in Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.” and Matthew 10:34, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” as not being truly representative of the Prince of Peace nor Christianity, especially when removed from their context.

Given the number and proportion of those committed to violence coming out of mosques the world over, I am all for the strictest inspection of each and every voice professing confidence in Mohammed.

This is where you and I disagree. Not with our concern over those who commit violence, but with our estimation of the proportion of Muslims who support it.

 

[Verisimilitude]

This is where you and I disagree. Not with our concern over those who commit violence, but with our estimation of the proportion of Muslims who support it.

What % of a billion do you think support it?

One quarter of one percent is 2.5 million people. The US military is about 3 million to include all branches and reserve units.

 

[Montalban]

You are right I am taking it personally. Indeed, very personally.

Even in defence of Moslems you use opinion.

And what I would like to help others here see, is that we are not talking about just a belief system. I disagree with it theologically. And there are some points where I disagree with it politically, as well. But just like not all Germans were Nazis, so not all Muslims are terrorists. Yes, the USA waged a war against Nazi Germany, but not against Germans. Look at how we responded to the German people. Same thing with Japan and the Japanese, though certainly that comes closer to the religious parallels you may wish to draw.

Yet even non-Nazi Germans, or Germans who were ‘just fighting for their country’ (like Rommel) were giving support to the Nazi reigme by prolonging it.

Now, Montalban, you seem to understand this, “Not everyone who’s Moslem is a practioner of all that is evil in Islam,” and I need to be careful to deal with your comments differently than that of others who appear to be ensconced in some other sort of xenophobic bigotry that judges people as a group rather than as indiviiduals. Please forgive me if I attribute or have attributed to you something perhaps is another poster’s point of view.

In the broad view, yes, the government of Japan had to be dealt with, and unfortunately that meant war.

Indeed, but exceptions don’t make rules, in the run of war *innocent *people will die.

But the difference here is that that little girl did not ascribe to the ideals of her nation.

Your daughter has ascribed to the ideals of Islam. She has knowingly done this (I would presume).

 

[Palladio]

By that way of counting, the USA has certainly made more than a few mistakes in this war on terror and committed more than a few acts of brutailty in the process. No wonder we don’t have the support among Muslims that we once had under George Bush, Sr.

And I included them in my consideration that it is still a relative few, when compared to all of Islam, that fit the category of which you express your concerns about.

Agreed. And how do we find that out? Wouldn’t going to a mosque be the best way? Which is where I entered this discussion.

And yet this illustrates precisely that problem with the broad painting bruch. Two different countries, two different sets of government policies. And many different viewpoints within each country. But do Turks want Sharia law? Some do, some don’t. Do Turks support terror? They are waging their own internal war against the terror of the PKK, and they allow the US to have bases to support actions in Iraq. There are plenty of protests by the students, but this has more to do with what is perceived as American arrogance, aggression and imperialism than that to condone the use of terror in the name of Islam. Do Turks seek to kill non-Muslims? Though you may find a few in any crowd, on the whole the answer to this is decidely NO. It isn’t even close. Next month, my “niece”, who is a Muslim from Turkey will be marrying a man who is a Turkish Catholic. Her family has no objections, indeed Sahire’s mother considers Ercan to be like a son.

Now you will find many Muslims in this world who will say that Sahire has gone too far. But in Turkey, her case is not viewed that way at all. Indeed, I personally know of 3 other Muslim-Christian marriages in Turkey, (which, again, by your way of counting, would be more than a few) and not one of them is viewed by their neighbors as haraam. So, you can look it up and cite that it is from the Qur’an and the hadith all you want. But in point of fact, while it may be taught as not alllowed in other mosques around the world, it is being ignored in Turkey.

So, what is being taught in mosques? Just reading the Qur’an is not going actually answer that question. You have to go there, talk to Muslims and learn how it is that their religion is being practiced, find out what is being emphasized and what is being dismissed as not truly Muslim in character. And what I have found is an Islam that actually condemns those who have called for violence; they condemn it as not an Isalmic means to an end, and they seek to ignore, dismiss, or explain away passages that suggest otherwise – just like we suggest that Jesus’ comments in Luke 14:26, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.” and Matthew 10:34, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” as not being truly representative of the Prince of Peace nor Christianity, especially when removed from their context.

This is where you and I disagree. Not with our concern over those who commit violence, but with our estimation of the proportion of Muslims who support it.

I am glad for the peace and love in your family: all God’s blessings.

I still think you are wearing rose-colored glasses with regard to the rest of the world.
You merely dismiss most of my argument, for whatever that argument may be worth.
Back to numbers, which perhaps are clearest, but which I think you are being coy with.
When I say few = three, I am speaking English, using a dictionary definition. It is infinitely larger than a few terrorists, hate mongers, and violence peddlers we are dealing with, around the world.

The absolute number and the proportion of Islamic violence is very large, and no other religion presents the West with such danger: Barnabas Fund, a Protestant site, records persecution of Christians by Islam, around the world. One bit of evidence easily accessible among many such bits. That Taliban is making a violent come back in Afghanistan is another such bit.

I like your idea of going to a mosque–I’ll run this by a priest soon. I have a Muslim colleague who seems as sweet as pie–and who will, I kid you not, placidly explain why wife beating is allowed in Islam. Another one of those bits of evidence impossible to ignore which arise so easily as East comes West.

God bless.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Dear Grace Seeker,
Perhaps you could ask your Muslim daughter to read this to see the true teachings of Islam.

This true letter (from the Persian Emperor Yazdgird III to Caliph Umar) is in the British Museum.

venusproject.com/Great_Persian_Empire/Emperor_Yazdgird_Letter.html

…

Tazi (i.e. Muslim) people have no value for God’s creatures! You behead God’s children, even the Prisoners of War, Rape Women, bury your daughters alive, attack the Caravans, mass murder, kidnap people’s wives & steal their property! Your hearts are made of stone, we condemn all these Evil which you do. How can you teach us Godly Ways when you commit these actions?

…

Is it Allah who commands you to murder, pillage & to destroy? Is it you the followers of Allah who do this in his name? Or is it both?

You have risen from heat of the deserts & burnt out infertile lands with no resources, you want to teach people the love of God by your military campaigns & the power of your Swords! You are Desert Savages, yet you want to teach urban people like us who lived in the cities for thousands of years, the love of God! We have thousands of years of culture behind us, a powerful tool indeed! Tell us? With all your military campaigns, barbarianism, murder & pillage in the name of Allah O Akbar, what have you taught to this Muslim Army? What knowledge have you taught the Muslim that you also insist on teaching it to non Muslim? What culture have you learned from your Allah, now that you want to force-teach it to others?

…

Don’t turn these “beasts with hearts of stone” loose, to mass murder our people, kidnap our women & children, rape our wives & send our daughters to Mecca as slaves! Don’t let them do these crimes in the name of Allah O Akbar, put a stop to your criminal behavior.

To the Islamo-apologists - the fruits of Islam are rotten because the tree itself is rotten.

 

[Tracyms1974]

I am an infidel even to Muslims who are not nuts, which by the way is the majority of Muslims. And, yes, I would defend their right to consider me an infidel. Just as I once defended the rights of Catholics who call me a heretic. (A not so oblique reference to my former military service, and that as a Protestant I have been labelled a number of things in other threads on this board.)

Well, I didn’t fault you for that. I always thought it was the other way around - Protestants didn’t like US.

As to inviting “one of those nuts in [my] house”, indeed just last week I had a friend who happens to be Muslim stay with me. Actually, it was the first time we had met face-to-face, knowing each other previously only from a year’s worth of internet conversations. But, I guess he wasn’t a nut since I’m still here to post this week.

Has this friend of yours ever admitted or confessed to you that he blew someone up in the name of Allah? If not, then I’m sorry, he’s not the “nuts” we are speaking of here. I still maintain that these “peaceful” Muslims you speak of are better off joining the Christian church of their choice. Their lives reflect the ways of Christ rather than Mohammed, and for that reason, why not reap the benefits of that way of life, namely Heaven, possibly.

What he happens to be is an agronomist, which I found interesting as my grandfather was also an agronomist years ago. The point being, that beside religion, there isn’t as much difference between Muslims and the rest of us as some here would like to think. And I contend, that with the exception of a few dangerous individuals (which can be found in every religion), even those ideological differences might not be so big either.

If you speak of the human existence, then no, there probably isn’t much difference. I disagree that there are more than a “few” Muslims, however. You just don’t hear about other religions blowing up people on purpose, not as much as the Muslims. This is a worldwide problem and it’s a shame you can’t see that. Even those people in Ireland tried to keep it in Ireland!

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

You’d give up ALL ideas not generated, or discovered, or revelealed to, by you because some ideas from others are “useless or worse”…?
thats part of the reason. the other reasons for not believing the ‘so called prophets’ (like moses, buddha, jesus, joseph smith, l.ron hubbard) is a combination of these three:

• its not convincing enough.
• its not proven enough.
• it looks fake enough.

You’re not convinced. That’s cool. They’d have to "bring it to you in a form you’ll ‘swallow’. That’s more “cater to me, please”, from you. That’s expected.

You’re not convinced, again, as “proven” mean that it would convince you, supposedly. So, it’s all about others catering to you again. Once again, expected.

You’re convinced it’s a fake. Using your standards, of course, f what “fake” looks like. This is simply another way of saying “you’re not convinced”, which is what the above sentences are about, which say, again, that it’s all about you.

But,… that’s cool,… as YOU are the arbiter of all truth, of course.

Quote:Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

Hmmm,… how is that NOT about you, and your egocentrism?
it dont believe in hell.

(( I take it you mean "YOU don’t believe in hell. ))

I fail to see the connection between it about being about you and “your not believing in hell”. Please clarify. Thanks…

Quote:Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

You have a bad impression of Christianity because, likely, you were (as stated before) abused by fools by their particular practice of what they thought was “Christianity”.
I dont really have a bad impression of Christianity. In fact I like it. I would rather have all Muslims become Christians. Its just not for me. its too much like the matrix- nice but not real.

OK. If you say so.

Quote:Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

and acting on what that phrase actually meant.
so what does that phrase mean for you?

What is the phrase that we’re talking about, as you’ve left the phrase out of our present text?

Communion DOESN’T make any sense to someone who doesn’t value others, in the sense that others are not “worthy” of communing with.

Communion, communing, is a give and take. If you’re only interested in “taking”, communion doesn’t happen, and therefore “playacting” communion is worthless.

communion is a very religious term. i value other people. if i just value myself then i wouldnt give a damn what muslims are doing because it does not affect me. no, i give a damn because i think islamization will retard human progress.

OK. That’s nice. Obviously you don’t want to discuss “communion”. So, unless you have something of substance to say about it, that topic is done for us here. Thanks.

Quote:Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

The translation of the olelo hawai’i is: Thanks be to God. May blessings always be with you. Great love to you.

What does yours translate to?
Oh ok. Mine says “Are you cursing me? Curse you too!”

hey I was just playin.

Right. Have a good one. Here’s hoping your powers of communication, if not “communion”, improve.

Best to 'ya.

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

 

[AgnosTheist]

You’re not convinced. That’s cool. They’d have to "bring it to you in a form you’ll ‘swallow’. That’s more “cater to me, please”, from you. That’s expected.

i dont really care. its the religious who wants to convert me. so if you want me then you cater for me, otherwise just leave me alone. eh?

Using your standards, of course,

these standards are pretty universal

“extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences”

“the proof lies on the shoulder of the positive claimant”

I fail to see the connection between it about being about you and “your not believing in hell”. Please clarify. Thanks…

you lost me.

What is the phrase that we’re talking about, as you’ve left the phrase out of our present text?

what does believing in god mean for you?

OK. That’s nice. Obviously you don’t want to discuss “communion”. So, unless you have something of substance to say about it, that topic is done for us here. Thanks.

you are the one who brought that up. i have my way of caring for other people.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*Now you’ve got me very interested indeed…!

Please tell us, or just me, if you like, EXACTLY why this thread has shaken your belief in Catholics.

PLEASE please please don’t leave such a “provocative” statement as you’ve made naked to rampant interpretation, and tell us precisely what you mean by what you’ve said.

Thanks VERY much in advance for your continued conversation, which I’m not expecting you to continue with, but which would be nice to share with you.

Best to you, Fatma…

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

I was brought up by a family of turbo catholics, here, there, everywhere was a nun or a priest in the family, catholicism was central to the family identity. The message I got loud and clear was that a good catholic was someone that didn’t judge other people, was charitable and tried to see the good in everyone. I saw this in my uncle who was a priest, not in other members of the family.

Firstly, by “didn’t judge other people” (above), do you mean that the behavior of terrorists should not be judged as “evil” and fought against?

Of course you don’t. What you see as (below) “a total lack of respect for a whole group of people”, is a misinterpretation of the fact that their are SOME moslems who do bad evil things, and that they need to be “dealt with”.

No one is arguing that “well behaved moslems” should be persecuted, only that “not-well behaved moslems” should be. I don’t consider “closely watching a super-set of ‘ALL MOSLEMS’” to be persecution of all moslems,… only a sensible precaution until it becomes more obvious how to distinguish “good moslems” from “bad moslems”.

What I see on here is a total lack of respect for a whole group of people based on their religion which I didn’t expect from people who professed to be catholic.

Your premise is wrong. You are seeing an illusion, largely promulgated by those whose interest it is to make ALL moslems, good and bad, into a single “thing” such that to “persecute bad moslems” is to “persecute all moslems”.

Now, in whose interest would that “confusion” be?

Family members have told me about the discrimination they faced because they were catholic in australia in the 1930s. I recall being called a ‘dirty catholic’ by the public school kids in primary school. I find the rhethoric about muslims fairly similar although more sophisticated.

Yet another hallucinatory “similarity” brought to you by those who wish to confuse the issue.

They just happen to be the current scapegoated minority and it’s ok to say anything about them because of a group of criminals that justify their behaviour using their religion.

…and you’ve fallen into the “false analogy” trap quite nicely.

I think the fear propagated by politicians and the media as a result of terrorism is designed to suit their own agenda. When we buy into it we are poisoning ourselves.

So, you blame the media and politicians for the actions of the terrorists?

Excellent choice…

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

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
You’re not convinced. That’s cool. They’d have to "bring it to you in a form you’ll ‘swallow’. That’s more “cater to me, please”, from you. That’s expected.

i dont really care. its the religious who wants to convert me. so if you want me then you cater for me, otherwise just leave me alone. eh?

I don’t want to convert you. You are HERE to talk with ME, a you’re the “alien” in this neck of the woods.

You’re here to “convert” others to your thinking. I’m just here responding to your “attacks”.

The fact that you so nicely show the typical traits (egomania, hyper-rationalism, et al) of an “atheist” (which is what agnostics really are in actuality) is a great service you perform for everyone here. Thank you for that very much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*Using your standards, of course, *

these standards are pretty universal

So you think, but would be surprisingly wrong.

“extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences”

People receiving revelations directly from God is extraordinary…!?
Oh,… that’s right,… only YOU count as a direct witness of such things,… sorry,… I forgot your “standards”.

“the proof lies on the shoulder of the positive claimant”

And when the proof is not accepted, there’s not much the positive claimant can do about it’s rejection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
I fail to see the connection between it about being about you and “your not believing in hell”. Please clarify. Thanks…

you lost me.

How does your not believing in hell have anything to do with your “it’s all about me” attitude?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
What is the phrase that we’re talking about, as you’ve left the phrase out of our present text?

what does believing in god mean for you?

It means accepting God’s words as such, and acting on them in my life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
OK. That’s nice. Obviously you don’t want to discuss “communion”. So, unless you have something of substance to say about it, that topic is done for us here. Thanks.

you are the one who brought that up. i have my way of caring for other people.

You simply misunderstand the meaning of the word communion.

Caring for others IS communion. You can’t care for others unless you commune with them. I wasn’t arguing that your DON’T CARE for other people, just that you have a “too narrow” definition of the meaning of the word communion.

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

 

[AgnosTheist]

hey k, you must have missed my post for you up there.

 

[AgnosTheist]

I don’t want to convert you. You are HERE to talk with ME, a you’re the “alien” in this neck of the woods.

I wast really referring to you personally. I was referring to you as a group. You know, for wanting to ‘make diciples of all nations’?

People receiving revelations directly from God is extraordinary…!?
Oh,… that’s right,… only YOU count as a direct witness of such things,… sorry,… I forgot your “standards”.

thats not it. just google the phrase i gave you.

And when the proof is not accepted, there’s not much the positive claimant can do about it’s rejection.

the proof is often rejected because they dont apply to the previous logic i gave you.

How does your not believing in hell have anything to do with your “it’s all about me” attitude?

we both have this attitude, its just that hell has nothing to do with me.

It means accepting God’s words as such, and acting on them in my life.

we are not much different from each other then. both of us end up doing good deeds for our faith.

You simply misunderstand the meaning of the word communion.

Caring for others IS communion.

thats what i was trying to tell you. i have my own way of caring for others. therefore i have my own way of communion. read between the lines, my friend.

 

[Keikiolu]

I wast really referring to you personally. I was referring to you as a group. You know, for wanting to ‘make diciples of all nations’?

thats not it. just google the phrase i gave you.

the proof is often rejected because they dont apply to the previous logic i gave you.

we both have this attitude, its just that hell has nothing to do with me.

we are not much different from each other then. both of us end up doing good deeds for our faith.

thats what i was trying to tell you. i have my own way of caring for others. therefore i have my own way of communion. read between the lines, my friend.

Blah blah blah… Best to 'ya buckeroo. I’m sure you’re a good person,… just antithetical to Christianity because of past wounds and “other things to do”.

That’s fine. Unfocused discussions like this one, which are WAY off topic considering the thread title, are amusing for only a very short time.

See’ya around…!

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

 

[jedi]

I am an infidel even to Muslims who are not nuts, which by the way is the majority of Muslims. And, yes, I would defend their right to consider me an infidel. Just as I once defended the rights of Catholics who call me a heretic. (A not so oblique reference to my former military service, and that as a Protestant I have been labelled a number of things in other threads on this board.)

As to inviting “one of those nuts in [my] house”, indeed just last week I had a friend who happens to be Muslim stay with me. Actually, it was the first time we had met face-to-face, knowing each other previously only from a year’s worth of internet conversations. But, I guess he wasn’t a nut since I’m still here to post this week. What he happens to be is an agronomist, which I found interesting as my grandfather was also an agronomist years ago. The point being, that beside religion, there isn’t as much difference between Muslims and the rest of us as some here would like to think. And I contend, that with the exception of a few dangerous individuals (which can be found in every religion), even those ideological differences might not be so big either.

To Grace Seeker, maybe you are christian before and married with a moslem man. i don’t understand why you put your named “Grace Seeker”. are you truly want to seek for Grace??? i totally agreed with Rodrigo Bivar, in fact i like to read his comment because he is telling the truth. Let us bring Mr Mohd back to life and put him into 21century. what will happen then??? sex with under age girl 9 year old, torture and murder (like Nazi) said Mr Rodrigo Bivar … Ms Grace you should ask your daughter to become jury for this trial…
For me is so hard to believe someone claim himself God and sex with under age little girl… this is only my comment maybe some of you guy don’t like this… god bless you Grace…

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

This thread has veered far off topic and is now closed. Thank you for your participation.

God bless-

Rachel