Is Islam A Religion Of Truth, Peace And Love Or Not?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='11 December 2009 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1260565331' post='2018618']
Actually, it is Sacredheart who asked me if any Phatmassers had accepted Muslim doctrines, and I told him I have no idea if there are any, but that he could create a poll if he wanted (see [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=101137&view=findpost&p=2018307"]Post#11[/url]). Evidently he wanted to create a poll.
[/quote]

I have no doubt he misunderstood you

Regardless of who came up with it, its ridiculous (and offensve )to suggest that anyone would leave Catholicism to become muslim because a few muslims showed up on our board.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='11 December 2009 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1260565758' post='2018623']
I have no doubt he misunderstood you[/quote]
Who knows?

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Winchester' date='11 December 2009 - 04:59 PM' timestamp='1260565179' post='2018614']
The Church did not do it. Your argument was that the Church did not do it. Your argument was incorrect because you were unaware of history. The Church herself does not evolve. The Church herself does not sin. If you learned the proper terminology, you would have fewer problems. If you accepted proper correction, you would make a better impression. I speak from experience.
[/quote]


The Church, that is its members, did in fact condemn heretics to burn at the stake, and approved the use of torture. Whether it was the Church or the state that carried out the executions does remove the
culpability.

The Church evolves as the Church gains deeper understanding of the truths that have been revealed.

Teilhard De Chardin is where I first read this idea from, and I have to agree with him. So does the Church, although he was silenced at first, for they thought he was promoting Darwin's theories of evolution.


Jim

Edited December 11, 2009 by JimR-OCDS

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='11 December 2009 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1260565758' post='2018623']
. . . its ridiculous . . . to suggest that anyone would leave Catholicism to become muslim because a few muslims showed up on our board.
[/quote]
Yeah. I do not understand why anyone would want to leave Christ's Holy Church in order to become a Muslim.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='11 December 2009 - 04:12 PM' timestamp='1260565953' post='2018629']
Who knows?
[/quote]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='11 December 2009 - 04:09 PM' timestamp='1260565758' post='2018623']


Regardlessof who came up with it, its ridiculous (and offensve )to suggest thatanyone would leave Catholicism to become muslim because a few muslimsshowed up on our board.
[/quote]

[Apotheoun]

I posted the comment "Who knows?" because I am not privy to the inner workings of Sacredheartandbloodofjesus's (a.k.a. Shaboj's) mind, and so I have no way of knowing why he posts what he does.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='11 December 2009 - 03:14 PM' timestamp='1260566049' post='2018632']
The Church, that is its members, did in fact condemn heretics to burn at the stake, and approved the use of torture. Whether it was the Church or the state that carried out the executions does remove the
culpability.

The Church evolves as the Church gains deeper understanding of the truths that have been revealed.

Teilhard De Chardin is where I first read this idea from, and I have to agree with him. So does the Church, although he was silenced at first, for they thought he was promoting Darwin's theories of evolution.


Jim
[/quote]
"The Church" understood in Her fullest and most true sense, is perfect and can never change.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Nihil Obstat

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='11 December 2009 - 05:38 PM' timestamp='1260567498' post='2018643']
"The Church" understood in Her fullest and most true sense, is perfect and can never change.
[/quote]


The Church is made up of its members, and how the Church is spiritually, has a lot to do with the spiritual level of its members.

We are a lot further along spiritually, than in the Middle Ages, but it doesn't mean we're not able to digress backwards, and there are those who would have us do so.

For one, we all have access to the writings of the spiritual masters of the Church, that those of the past did not.

We have can read Scripture, where at one time, it was limited to the elite who had higher education and could read Latin.

I know its upsetting when young Catholics today hear about the dirty laundry of the past, and they go through all sorts of gymnastics to defend it or white-wash it as if it was nothing.

However, it merely shows the level of spiritual immaturity they have.

Pope John Paul II showed the maturity and strength of his faith, when he acknowledge the mistakes of the past, and apologized for them. But even he was criticised for it.

Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='11 December 2009 - 03:53 PM' timestamp='1260568418' post='2018654']
The Church is made up of its members, and how the Church is spiritually, has a lot to do with the spiritual level of its members.

We are a lot further along spiritually, than in the Middle Ages, but it doesn't mean we're not able to digress backwards, and there are those who would have us do so.

For one, we all have access to the writings of the spiritual masters of the Church, that those of the past did not.

We have can read Scripture, where at one time, it was limited to the elite who had higher education and could read Latin.

I know its upsetting when young Catholics today hear about the dirty laundry of the past, and they go through all sorts of gymnastics to defend it or white-wash it as if it was nothing.

However, it merely shows the level of spiritual immaturity they have.

Pope John Paul II showed the maturity and strength of his faith, when he acknowledge the mistakes of the past, and apologized for them. But even he was criticised for it.

Jim
[/quote]
The Church is not defined by Her members on earth.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='11 December 2009 - 02:55 PM' timestamp='1260568515' post='2018658']
The Church is not defined by Her members on earth.
[/quote]
I agree. In fact, Christ is the Church, for the head and the body together form one mystical man.

Thus, when a person is baptized he is assimilated to Christ, and becomes a member of His body; and that is why the Church - according to the Holy Fathers - is the perpetual extension of the incarnation through space and time. Now to call the Church - the body of Christ - sinful, is the same as calling Christ sinful, which is contrary to both scripture and tradition. The Holy Fathers always distinguished between the members of the Church, who can and often do fall into sins, and the Church herself, which is and always will be the spotless bride of Christ.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Socrates]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='11 December 2009 - 03:48 PM' timestamp='1260564495' post='2018602']
Socrates




True, but the members make up the body of Christ, which is the Church. When the members sin, it harms the Church.[/quote]
True.
However, I sincerely doubt there's any less sin in the Church now than in the "bad old days" before the Church "evolved," but I'll admit my knowledge of such things is limited.

[quote]

The Church as an institution, no longer burns heretics at the stake. She no longer forces conversion, etc.[/quote]
See Winchester's response - these were the actions of secular authorities. Church courts were usually much more fair and just than the secular courts of the time, which would put people to death on flimsy evidence. Church courts cleared most of the accused of heresy. And witch hunts and such were actually a largely Protestant activity.
It's not so much the Church changed as outside society and political structures.

[quote]Teilhard De Chardin, wrote on the spiritual evolution of the Church. Just as man evolved biologically, so too, he evolve spiritually. The Church is responsible for bring man through that spiritual evolution.
[/quote]
I honestly really don't give a rat's butt what Teilhard De Chardin wrote. His (often bizarre) theories are not authoritative teaching, and don't hold water with me.
And I seriously doubt men today are any more virtuous or "spiritually evolved" (whatever the heck that means) than they were in ages past. The tangible evidence sure points against it.


[quote]Our understanding of truth evolves and how we bring that truth to the world does as well.[/quote]
Nice. Vague enough to mean absolutely anything and nothing at all.



[quote]Fundamentalism is when a person reads either the Bible, or in the case with Catholics, the Catechism or other Church teachings, and takes them literally as he/she understands them, not as the Church teaches them.
[/quote][quote][/quote]
God forbid Catholics take the Catechism or Church teachings literally at face value!!

All us smurt people know they're highly cryptic and obscure documents that can only be properly interpreted by really, really clever liberal Jesuits who write for [i]America[/i] magazine.
Too many people are taking Church moral teaching literally these days about stuff like sex and abortion and whatnot, of course.



[quote]So use the definition I heard Pastor Rick Warren use, a fundamentalist, is one who has stopped listening.

Jim[/quote]
Yes, we must all harken to the infallible word of Pastor Rick Warren!

One who has stopped listening?
You mean like all those "Catholics" who've stopped listening to what the Church teaches, and just do their own thing?

Don't worry, no chance of them taking over the Church. Gates of Hell shall not prevail and all . . .

Edited December 11, 2009 by Socrates

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='11 December 2009 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1260568418' post='2018654']
We are a lot further along spiritually, than in the Middle Ages
[/quote]

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

Question #1. 5 votes for true 27 votes for false


Question #2. 9 votes for true 23 votes for false



Question #3. 6 votes for true 26 votes for false



By the way I clicked on public poll but then messed up and had to redo it and forgot to click it on my second try.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Varg' date='11 December 2009 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1260547504' post='2018405']
... both can be very easily manipulated to justify evil things. ...
[/quote]

I agree with your point. And so can science. So can nationalism. Nationalistic ideologies, in the 1900s, killed more people than religious differences ever did. The Political Class will use whatever they need to in order to move people's passions and to kill in the name of the State.

[Pomak]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='12 December 2009 - 05:26 AM' timestamp='1260555982' post='2018502']
The Catholic Church certainly has its sins of the past, for which Pope John Paul II apologized.

However, I think the Church has evolve spiritually over the centuries since its conception and I think it was
the reformation which forced the Church to evolve.


I don't think I can say the same for Islam. However, perhaps the current times we live in, are the deigning of a turning point which will trigger a Islamic-reformation, where Muslims will
begin to reject intolerance.

That being said. Lets pray that Christianity doesn't digress backwards, which can happen very easily,
especially as fundamentalism has been trying to take control of the Catholic Church.

Jim
[/quote]
Erm not sure if you are familiar but our reformation is actually Al Qaida. Our traditional understanding was informed by a hadith that has a meaning of "If someone mistreats a dhimmi(non muslim in a muslim state), I shall advocate on his behalf in front of God." and it was rather tolerant in its context.

All legitimate Muslim scholars(in the eyes of Muslims) advocate a revival of that spirit while rejecting any claims of "reformation". Largely because a reformation can not happen when you do not have a church.