Young Jews, Catholics And Muslims United At Wyd Rio

[Apotheoun]

Do you see what I mean now? Your logic isn't far from the radical Muslims. I hope the majority of Catholics disagree with you. 

Except, which you seem to be unable to grasp, I have nowhere advocated - nor have the great saints done so either - violence in order to bring people to Christ. Mohammad - on the other hand - did advocate that as anyone who has read both the Qur'an and the Hadith knows. The early Christians never harmed anyone when they refused to sprinkle a pinch of incense in front of the image of the Roman Emperor, but they were harmed for refusing to do what the pagans of that time commanded. You did not see the early saints and martyrs entering into "dialogue" with pagans about how best to get along, no they refused to betray Christ in that fashion; instead, they preached the good news about Christ and the salvation that became possible only through His incarnation, passion, death, and resurrection, and died rather than compromise on those immutable truths. But - as I already indicated - the early Christians did not harm anyone through their preaching, and that is what I am advocating now. Preach Christ crucified and risen and bring real peace and beatitude to those in error, and stop confirming people in falsehood. The modernist attempts to bring peace through religious indifferentism will bring nothing but death and destruction in the end, and even worse - the loss of souls.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Lilllabettt]

 

 

Dialogue that confirms people in falsehood is not the answer. Preaching there is one God and Muhammad is his prophet is the answer. I make no apologies for the fact that I am a Muslim, and sacred scripture and the tradition of the Ulama - which comes to us from the Sunna - is clear, God does not have a son, and anyone who denies the oneness of God is committing shirk (and the Pope qualifies on that count)

 

 

I have two very devout Muslim roommates; if these words were in their lips the only part I would possibly take offense to is the linking of the Pope with shirk.

 

I lean more towards the dialogue side of things; at the same time I know that devout people all faiths respect those who take pains not to offer compromises on their religious beliefs. I have more in common with my orthodox Muslim friends than I do with less observant Muslims.

[Apotheoun]

Bob Dylan 

When a person quotes Bob Dylan as an authority you know that he is out of his depth.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

Except, which you seem to be unable to grasp, I have nowhere advocated - nor have the great saints done so either - violence in order to bring people to Christ. Mohammad - on the other hand - did advocate that as anyone who has read both the Qur'an and the Hadith knows. The early Christians never harmed anyone when they refused to sprinkle a pinch of incense in front of the image of the Roman Emperor, but they were harmed for refusing to do what the pagans of that time commanded. You did not see the early saints and martyrs entering into "dialogue" with pagans about how best to get along, no they refused to betray Christ in that fashion; instead, they preached the good news about Christ and the salvation that became possible only through His incarnation, passion, death, and resurrection, and died rather than compromise on those immutable truths, but they did not harm anyone in their preaching, and that is what I am advocating now. Preach Christ crucified and risen and bring real peace and beatitude to those in error, and stop confirming people in falsehood. The modernist attempts to bring peace through religious indifferentism will bring nothing but death and destruction in the end, and even worse - the loss of souls.

 

This is completely irrelevant, but I'll humor you. I'm not going to go into the methodological principals of Qur'anic hermeneutics. If a majority of Muslims actually followed the interpretation you're providing, you and I would be dead. People are less likely to mindlessly follow their religious leaders/political leaders when they actually get to interact with people from the other side. 

Edited June 14, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Apotheoun]

I have two very devout Muslim roommates; if these words were in their lips the only part I would possibly take offense to is the linking of the Pope with shirk.

 

I lean more towards the dialogue side of things; at the same time I know that devout people all faiths respect those who take pains not to offer compromises on their religious beliefs. I have more in common with my orthodox Muslim friends than I do with less observant Muslims.

You can dialogue till you are blue in the face but the likelihood is that you will simply confirm them in their error. The Church Fathers would correct the error, and as any good Catholic knows, the correction of error is an act of charity.

 

I have talked with plenty of Muslims, and in all my religious discussions with them, I always pointed out that Christ is the only Savior. I actually got several of them to think about the issues involved, and made them question their own beliefs in doing so. I am not advocating ignorance of what Muslims believe, after all I studied Islamic theology in college as a part of my BA in History. What I learned was very helpful in my discussions with Muslims about Christ, because I was able to both refute the many errors they believe in connection with Christ, the Trinity, and many other Catholic doctrines, while simultaneously pointing out the things that undermine the claims made by advocates of the Islamic error. For example, the accusation often made by Muslims against Christians that we associate things with God (shirk), while Islam - through its doctrine of attributes - does exactly that, i.e., it makes all of God's many attributes self-subsisting things along side of Allah. Christians believe in a Trinity of persons who are one God, while Muslims believe in 99 distinct names that are all uncreated and eternally existing things along side Allah, they are not him, but exist eternally with him as uncreated realities. They also believe that God has a pen in heaven and a physical throne and many other strange things that are affirmed in their creeds that they do not like to talk about in conversations with Christians because they know that it undermines their monotheistic claims.

 

That said, what I do not advocate is a wishful thinking sort of dialogue were everyone pretends that we all believe in and worship the same God, i.e., the kind of wishful thinking that will no doubt be promoted at World Youth Day. I am sure that that kind of approach will produce even more indifferentist young Catholics, as if there are not enough of them already. As I said in another post, it was really sad when I would have talks with Catholics at SF State only to find out that most of them (all confirmed young Catholics) did not know the even rudiments of the Church's doctrine of the Trinity, but they knew a lot about Hinduism and Buddhism and those two religions different approaches to reincarnation.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

When it comes to talking to Muslims I normally advocate the approach that St. Gregory of Nyssa advocated in his Great Catechism, which is to point out that the polytheism of the pagans is false, because it fails to affirm the true unity of the Godhead, while simultaneously explaining why the monotheism of the Jews (and by extension the Muslims) is false because it confounds the persons of the Trinity failing to distinguish the tri-hypostatic reality of God as revealed in both the Old and New Testaments.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Apotheoun

[CatholicsAreKewl]

When a person quotes Bob Dylan as an authority you know that he is out of his depth.

Touché.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

You can dialogue till you are blue in the face but the likelihood is that you will simply confirm them in their error. The Church Fathers would correct the error, and as any good Catholic knows, the correction of error is an act of charity.

 

I have talked with plenty of Muslims, and in all my religious discussions with them, I always pointed out that Christ is the only Savior. I actually got several of them to think about the issues involved, and made them question their own beliefs in doing so. I am not advocating ignorance of what Muslims believe, after all I studied Islamic theology in college as a part of my BA in History. What I learned was very helpful in my discussions with Muslims about Christ, because I was able to both refute the many errors they believe in connection with Christ, the Trinity, and many other Catholic doctrines, while simultaneously pointing out the things that undermine the claims made by advocates of the Islamic error. For example, the accusation often made by Muslims against Christians that we associate things with God (shirk), while Islam - through its doctrine of attributes - does exactly that, i.e., it makes all of God's many attributes self-subsisting things along side of Allah. Christians believe in a Trinity of persons who are one God, while Muslims believe in 99 distinct names that are all uncreated and eternally existing things along side Allah, they are not him, but exist eternally with him as uncreated realities. They also believe that God has a pen in heaven and a physical throne and many other strange things that are affirmed in their creeds that they do not like to talk about in conversations with Christians because they know that it undermines their monotheistic claims.

 

That said, what I do not advocate is a wishful thinking sort of dialogue were everyone pretends that we all believe in and worship the same God, i.e., the kind of wishful thinking that will no doubt be promoted at World Youth Day. I am sure that that kind of approach will produce even more indifferentist young Catholics, as if there are not enough of them already. As I said in another post, it was really sad when I would have talks with Catholics at SF State only to find out that most of them (all confirmed young Catholics) did not know the even rudiments of the Church's doctrine of the Trinity, but they knew a lot about Hinduism and Buddhism and those two religions different approaches to reincarnation.

 

Interfaith dialogue is effective when it is used to discuss differences, identify similarities, and understand each other. Such discussions become pointless when they merely focus on differences and why the other side is wrong. 

[Basilisa Marie]

I've done both. Islam is a false religion and it was only when I gave up the indifferentist views advocated by Vatican II that I even began to make headway with Muslims in personal discussions. While I pushed the standard modern Catholic line the only result was that Muslims felt confirmed in their false belief, while simultaneously thinking that I was ripe for conversion to Mohammadanism.

 

Indifferentism is a heresy, and I'd ask you not characterize an ecumenical council as such.  Criticize those who have manhandled the council's documents if you want, but not the council itself.  

[Basilisa Marie]

Apo, I know you've written a lot about your bad experiences talking with Muslims.  But it seems to me that young people attending World Youth Day are probably passionate Catholics, well-versed in their faith.  Or, the ones who are participating in inter-religious activities are.  I highly doubt they're at risk of indifferentism.  I don't think it's right to deny them the opportunity to talk with Jews and Muslims about their faith.  

[HisChildForever]

Interfaith dialogue is effective when it is used to discuss differences, identify similarities, and understand each other. Such discussions become pointless when they merely focus on differences and why the other side is wrong. 

 

If a non-Catholic asks me a question about something I believe, I talk with them, not at them - I show my appreciation for their interest and answer as honestly and educationally as I can. Through my words, knowledge, and passion I hope to convey the great love I have of Christ and the amazing impact He's had on my life. If I had a question for a non-Catholic I would very much appreciate the same kind of response. I want that person to talk with me, not at me. I believe as a Catholic that I can show the beauty of Catholicism to others not just through the teachings I explain but how the Catholic life is lived and how it's changed me. If I just sit there and dictate why the person is apt to end up in Hell then I'm not going to foster interest but disdain. The person might get turned off entirely from Christianity.

[Socrates]

Let's fight ignorance and bigotry with more ignorance and bigotry. Do you hear that? That's another Coptic church burning down.

 

So is actually believing that the Christian Faith is true ignorance and bigotry?

[CatholicsAreKewl]

So is actually believing that the Christian Faith is true ignorance and bigotry?

 

Nope. 

[Socrates]

I just find it interesting that you're taking the position of the Muslims I have issue with. This way of thinking isn't going to solve anything, neither is your idle prayer and criticism. Dehumanization occurs when we distance ourselves from others and refuse to dialogue with them. The less two groups understand each other, the more likely it is for them to act violently towards one another. 

 

With all due respect, this is complete nonsense.  It's not dehumanizing to sincerely disagree with those whose views contradict your own, nor to try to bring them to the truth.  Apotheoun has in fact dialogued with Muslims plenty of times, and seems in fact a lot more knowledgeable about Islam than yourself.  The Christian Faith and Islam are in disagreement on many key points, and pretending that we basically agree on everything is not true dialogue, and in fact respects neither the Christian Faith, nor Muslims - who are quite aware that the two religions are incompatible.

 

Obviously, you disagree with Apotheoun, and are trying to argue against his beliefs, but it would be stupid (despite the profound ignorance and inanity of your positions) to accuse you of "dehumanizing" him by your disagreement with his beliefs.

 

 

This proves everything I've been saying so far. Your posts are a strong argument for Atheism. 

 

 

Do you see what I mean now? Your logic isn't far from the radical Muslims. I hope the majority of Catholics disagree with you. 

 

"Fearing not that I'd become my enemy. In the instant that I preach." Bob Dylan 

 

 

This is completely irrelevant, but I'll humor you. I'm not going to go into the methodological principals of Qur'anic hermeneutics. If a majority of Muslims actually followed the interpretation you're providing, you and I would be dead. People are less likely to mindlessly follow their religious leaders/political leaders when they actually get to interact with people from the other side. 

 

(Actually, the most violence tends to be between two groups of people who have interacted with one another for many years.  Brutal hatred rarely exists between complete strangers.  But that's an aside.)

 

It seems that you are saying that it is somehow wrong and hateful to actually believe in the truth of one's Faith or to try to bring others to believe in it.

 

Christianity and Islam are contradictory religions, and cannot simultaneously be true.  Either Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Redeemer of mankind, or He is not.  Either Christ was killed and resurrected (as the Christian gospels claim) or He was not (as Islam claims).  Either Mohammed was a genuine prophet receiving divine revelation, or he was not.

Either Islam is true and Christianity false, or else Christianity is true and Islam false.

 

The truth of those matters is not at all trivial to the believing Christian or Muslim, and to attempt to trivialize these differences and pretend as though Christians and Muslims basically believe the same thing is both dishonest, and shows no respect to either Christians or Muslims.

 

This is not to say that Christians should not be respectful of Muslims as persons when arguing religion with them, but to pretend these differences are not real or important does not show respect to anyone, and accomplishes absolutely nothing - it would be a pointless waste of time.

 

Of course, you may believe that neither Christianity not Islam is true, and that both religions are equally false, but if I did not believe what the Christian Faith teaches to be true, there would be no real point in calling myself a Christian.  (And the same would go for a Muslim regarding the teachings of Islam.)

Edited June 14, 2013 by Socrates

[Socrates]

Nope. 

 

So what did Apo say that was ignorant and bigoted?