Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:48 pm Post subject: Religious Misunderstanding yet again
So the Holy Father made an innocuous remark about the Prophet Mohammed and the entire Muslim world over-reacted in typical fashion. To those who read the newspapers and who have an understanding on the issue, do you reckon that Pope Benedict XVI has made a diplomatic faux pas or do you think that his remarks had been taken out of context and blown out of proportion?
Here is an exerpt of the 'damning speech' which had aroused the ire of the Muslim world (God knows where they all find the time to take to the streets to protest all the time):
Quote:
In his speech at Regensburg University, the German-born Pope explored the historical and philosophical differences between Islam and Christianity, and the relationship between violence and faith.
Stressing that they were not his own words, he quoted Emperor Manuel II Paleologos of the Byzantine Empire, the Orthodox Christian empire which had its capital in what is now the Turkish city of Istanbul.
The emperor's words were, he said: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Benedict said "I quote" twice to stress the words were not his and added that violence was "incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul".
"The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application," he added in the concluding part of his speech.
Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today."
Frankly, I don't see what is all the fuss about. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
Posted: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:06 pm Post subject: Re: Religious Misunderstanding yet again
loic wrote:
So the Holy Father made an innocuous remark about the Prophet Mohammed and the entire Muslim world over-reacted in typical fashion. To those who read the newspapers and who have an understanding on the issue, do you reckon that Pope Benedict XVI has made a diplomatic faux pas or do you think that his remarks had been taken out of context and blown out of proportion?
Here is an exerpt of the 'damning speech' which had aroused the ire of the Muslim world (God knows where they all find the time to take to the streets to protest all the time):
Quote:
In his speech at Regensburg University, the German-born Pope explored the historical and philosophical differences between Islam and Christianity, and the relationship between violence and faith.
Stressing that they were not his own words, he quoted Emperor Manuel II Paleologos of the Byzantine Empire, the Orthodox Christian empire which had its capital in what is now the Turkish city of Istanbul.
The emperor's words were, he said: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Benedict said "I quote" twice to stress the words were not his and added that violence was "incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul".
"The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application," he added in the concluding part of his speech.
Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today."
Frankly, I don't see what is all the fuss about.
I find it ironic that the pope tries to (let's be honest that's what he's doing) make it seem Islam isn't a peaceful religion. I mean CRUSADES? Anyone?
True. But while most Christians today would renounce violent acts as a way of furthering their objectives, I doubt a similar proportion of believers in the Middle East feel the same way.
The Virgin Mary has been insulted so many times by other Christian sects and I do not see Catholics exploding in a similar way. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
True. But while most Christians today would renounce violent acts as a way of furthering their objectives, I doubt a similar proportion of believers in the Middle East feel the same way.
The Virgin Mary has been insulted so many times by other Christian sects and I do not see Catholics exploding in a similar way.
Well you have to realise that most Christians are much looser after over 500 years of ecclesiastical emancipation (peaking in the 60s) and that Muslims didn't experience this, so the power the "church/mosque" has over them is much bigger.
That said, I think there still are a great number of die hard christians who are much worse than the average muslim. (Ever watched a christian rally against abortion? :shock: :shock: :shock: )
No. But I can assure you that any Christian rallies of a public and garrulous nature are not Roman Catholic.
I feel sorry for Benedict XVI and he must be scratching his head as to how a speech that was produced for localised consumption has found itself printed and twisted across the world.
PS: Read the speech and you'd see why. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
Well you have to realise that most Christians are much looser after over 500 years of ecclesiastical emancipation (peaking in the 60s) and that Muslims didn't experience this, so the power the "church/mosque" has over them is much bigger.
Absolutely. A majority of Muslims today are not used to having their religion criticised or mocked; they are certainly not used to laughing about their religion.
This can be different for Muslims in Western countries through. Here's something which happened in one of my Religious Studies lessons last year:
Muslim boy: Even though I'm not a Christian...
Teacher: [cuts in] Yet...
*whole class laughs, most of whom are Muslims*
True. But while most Christians today would renounce violent acts as a way of furthering their objectives, I doubt a similar proportion of believers in the Middle East feel the same way.
Euh ? Are you thinking about the conspicuous newborn christians intoning sincere, heartbreaking prayers at the white house live on TV while US missiles were being launched on Iraqi civilians ?
True. But while most Christians today would renounce violent acts as a way of furthering their objectives, I doubt a similar proportion of believers in the Middle East feel the same way.
The Virgin Mary has been insulted so many times by other Christian sects and I do not see Catholics exploding in a similar way.
Well you have to realise that most Christians are much looser after over 500 years of ecclesiastical emancipation (peaking in the 60s) and that Muslims didn't experience this, so the power the "church/mosque" has over them is much bigger.
That said, I think there still are a great number of die hard christians who are much worse than the average muslim. (Ever watched a christian rally against abortion? :shock: :shock: :shock: )
Even an avarage Muslim is against abortion. As for extremists, I haven't heard about a single Christian extremist hijacking planes, setting explosives in the undegrounds, killing innocent people etc.
Last edited by KSa on Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: Re: Religious Misunderstanding yet again
Sander wrote:
loic wrote:
So the Holy Father made an innocuous remark about the Prophet Mohammed and the entire Muslim world over-reacted in typical fashion. To those who read the newspapers and who have an understanding on the issue, do you reckon that Pope Benedict XVI has made a diplomatic faux pas or do you think that his remarks had been taken out of context and blown out of proportion?
Here is an exerpt of the 'damning speech' which had aroused the ire of the Muslim world (God knows where they all find the time to take to the streets to protest all the time):
Quote:
In his speech at Regensburg University, the German-born Pope explored the historical and philosophical differences between Islam and Christianity, and the relationship between violence and faith.
Stressing that they were not his own words, he quoted Emperor Manuel II Paleologos of the Byzantine Empire, the Orthodox Christian empire which had its capital in what is now the Turkish city of Istanbul.
The emperor's words were, he said: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Benedict said "I quote" twice to stress the words were not his and added that violence was "incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul".
"The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application," he added in the concluding part of his speech.
Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today."
Frankly, I don't see what is all the fuss about.
I find it ironic that the pope tries to (let's be honest that's what he's doing) make it seem Islam isn't a peaceful religion. I mean CRUSADES? Anyone?
I wish you had watched about Islamic schools in Pakistan on CNN last week. There was an Imam who runs one of such schools and he said that he teaches about "jihad" because "nobody can make any amendments to Islam". So, can you explain how we can combine "peace" and "the holy war"?
Thanks in advance for the answer.
As for extremists, I haven't heard about a single Christian extremist hijacking planes, setting explosives in the undegrounds, killing innocent people etc.
Because christian extremists are usually rich enough to buy and/or bias elections to grasp power and then use a regular army to do the job for them. They don't have to highjack planes as they own them already : those planes called bombers are specially designed to drop bombs on easily targetable, innocent people living in urban concentrations called cities. The only thing christian extremists need to hijack is democracy. À chacun son tour de force. God will know His own.
As for extremists, I haven't heard about a single Christian extremist hijacking planes, setting explosives in the undegrounds, killing innocent people etc.
Because christian extremists are usually rich enough to buy and/or bias elections to grasp power and then use a regular army to do the job for them. They don't have to highjack planes as they own them already : those planes called bombers are specially designed to drop bombs on easily targetable, innocent people living in urban concentrations called cities. The only thing christian extremists need to hijack is democracy. À chacun son tour de force. God will know His own.
Such a bulk of nonsense, lies and stupidities is characteristic for the extremists - in this case anti-christian ones - who are equally dangerous as other extremists.
Because christian extremists are usually rich enough to buy and/or bias elections to grasp power and then use a regular army to do the job for them. They don't have to highjack planes as they own them already : those planes called bombers are specially designed to drop bombs on easily targetable, innocent people living in urban concentrations called cities. The only thing christian extremists need to hijack is democracy. À chacun son tour de force. God will know His own.
With all due respect, Greg, I don't think that's fair. I can't actually think of a single Christian extremist government in the world.... :? There are extremists in all religious groups, and indeed in the anti-religious group as well (Christians, along with members of other religious groups, were violently prosecuted in the Soviet Union and other officially atheist countries). We should condemn extremism - fullstop - not point fingers.
There is some truth in what you write, in the sense that Christian extremists are indeed constantly working to get power, to get their views accepted as the views of the community at large, but that applies to everyone who work to have their views agreed upon. Liberals want a liberal society, socialists want a socialist society, conservatives want a conservative society, and so on. Nothing wrong with that, that's democracy. It's when a group wins power and then abandons democracy that we have trouble. In the past there had been political groups who had used the Christian religion to appeal to voters, but that doesn't make them extremists. In a democracy it's up to the voters to see the politicians for what they really are, and get rid of them if their views are distasteful. In South Africa we have the African Christian Democratic Party, a Christian fundamentalist party. I've said if they ever get into power, I'll emigrate. But no change of that, in the last national election, they got only two percent of the vote. In the more recent local government elections, they got even less support. So the voters (in a country where more than seventy percent regard themselves to be Christians) are rejecting their views.
What you've written above, could be applied to any political group, extremist or not.
True, many atrocities have been committed in the past in the name of Christianity. I've met and know about many "Christians" who are a disgrace to the religion. But that doesn't make the religion bad, it does not make everybody bad who are Christians. _________________ Toe ek jonk was, het ek al die antwoorde geken. Nou verstaan ek nie eens die vrae nie.
I can't actually think of a single Christian extremist government in the world.... :?
Well, I can think of one : the Bush government in the USA. Bush has hijacked elections twice (2000 : we all know — 2004 : war-on-terror brainwash), has made no secret of his Jesus-knocked-at-my-door, drop-the-bottle, born-again hallucinations, organised TV-shot praying sessions in his office, is sold to radical-right groups, has launched a war against the people of Iraq (human loss : 30 times the WTC and the Pentagon and Pennsylvania combined), is increasingly using extreme-right & islamophobic terminology (disingenuously coalesced neologisms like islamofascism) and is most certainly sponsoring aggressive evangelical proselytism across the world.
To many Europeans things like In God we trust and God bless America are perceived as inoffensive relics of a naïve past. The rest, however, shows a much uglier face.
I hardly think of the Bush government as specifically Christian, any more that I think of our own government as specifically Christian. Many people voted for Bush while not being Christians themselves. Don't confuse the purposes of a politician who uses (abuses) Christianity to get votes with the religion as such. He didn't do those things because he's a Christian, he did it because he's a politician. This is different from, for example, the people responsible for 9/11, who did what they did because of a fanatical belief in their religion. Bush didn't attack Iraq to make Christians out of the Iraqis, he did it for political reasons which have nothing at all to do with religion.
Of course not all "Christians" are good people, as I said in my previous post. But don't blame all Christians for what some are doing. The fact that Bush does what he does, while professing that he's a Christian, doesn't mean he's doing what the Christian faith prescibes.
In fact, millions of Christians all over the world and indeed in the USA opposes him.
To condemn Christians for what Bush is doing, would be the same as condemning all atheists for what Stalin did. _________________ Toe ek jonk was, het ek al die antwoorde geken. Nou verstaan ek nie eens die vrae nie.
Don't make it your mission in life to offend the sensibilities of over 1 billion Catholics in the world. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
I can't actually think of a single Christian extremist government in the world.... :?
Well, I can think of one : the Bush government in the USA. Bush has hijacked elections twice (2000 : we all know — 2004 : war-on-terror brainwash), has made no secret of his Jesus-knocked-at-my-door, drop-the-bottle, born-again hallucinations, organised TV-shot praying sessions in his office, is sold to radical-right groups, has launched a war against the people of Iraq (human loss : 30 times the WTC and the Pentagon and Pennsylvania combined), is increasingly using extreme-right & islamophobic terminology (disingenuously coalesced neologisms like islamofascism) and is most certainly sponsoring aggressive evangelical proselytism across the world.
To many Europeans things like In God we trust and God bless America are perceived as inoffensive relics of a naïve past. The rest, however, shows a much uglier face.
Greg:
What you're doing is a nasty and deliberate manipulation but only people with IQ<80 can believe it. If it turns out that George Bush likes hunting don't forget to blame all the hunters in the world for what George Bush has done.
Reading your christianophobic posts, in the context of the main topic of the thread, I’ve come to a conclusion that if Christians could defend their religion as overtly as the Muslims, Christianity wouldn't be insulted and mocked as it is, especially in the secular countries of western Europe.
Last edited by KSa on Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
[True, many atrocities have been committed in the past in the name of Christianity. I've met and know about many "Christians" who are a disgrace to the religion. But that doesn't make the religion bad, it does not make everybody bad who are Christians.
André, let me say that I'm really fed up with those anti-christians constantly reminding me about atrocities of my religion in the XIII or XIV century... We will never forget it but yet how long are we supposed to be blamed for the sins of our predecessors?
I’m far from competing in the "who was worse" contest but let me remind assassinated priests, raped nuns, looted catholic churches during the French Revolution, millions of casualties in the communist countries, where the political system by definition rejected religion, or other atrocities committed in the name of atheism…
Last edited by KSa on Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
