Russia Bans Quran

[Didacus]

 

On May 30, 19-year-old Joan of Arc was taken into the public marketplace of Rouen, tied to a stake and burned alive. Based on a technicality buried within canon law, the Maid of Orléans died for the crime of cross-dressing. Twenty years later, once Charles VII had driven a majority of the English forces out of France, the verdict was nullified. In 1920, the Catholic Church canonized Joan of Arc as a saint. The last word the supposed heretic screamed before dying amid the flames was the name of Jesus.

emphasis my own

 

So what's your point?  Joan was a political victim, and an example of the abuse of religion; a technicality was used to political ends.  The Church has apologized for such abuses in the past. 

 

 

 

The old testament laws were superseded by Jesus - 'let he without sin cast the first stone' and these are not understood as authorative since.  Whereas the later chapters in the koran supersede pacifist passages with those which outright command violence.

 

Furthermore the bible is admittedly opened to criticism and interpretation - not so for the koran which is understood by muslims as the immovable word of God, which remains to this day beyond scrutiny. 

 

Yet another distinction, is that the penalty related to old-testament laws were imposed because for transgressions (admittedly harsh penalties by our standards), whereas the koran imposes violence simply based on a person's affiliation (which is unacceptable by any reasonable standards).

 

Overall the comparison I advanced is true; the bible depicts violence as history, the koran commands violence towards others. If you take the old and new testament together, the authorative laws are of forgiveness and love (these are so abundant in the new testament that they need not be cited, and these are the ones which hold the final word in the bible).  If you do the same with the koran, you reach drastically different conclusions.

 

 

 

[Apteka]

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm

 

Point?

[4588686]

Point?

#55

[AugustineA]

#55

 

Now what are you thinking Hasan? Go back to my response. Figure out what I said about the separation of Church and State and why. It was a historical note, pointing out one of the many reasons we cannot compare Islam and Christianity.

 

You are not making any valid or interesting responses. I'm going to go do homework. 

[4588686]

Now what are you thinking Hasan? Go back to my response. Figure out what I said about the separation of Church and State and why. It was a historical note, pointing out one of the many reasons we cannot compare Islam and Christianity.

 

You are not making any valid or interesting responses. I'm going to go do homework. 

 

 

Right.  Well, I guess the Pope stating, in an official Church document, that it is an error of modernism that the state ought to be separated from the Church or the Church from the state, has no bearing on your claim that Christianity has always, as a matter of course, separated the Church from the state.  

[Apteka]

#55

 

So I see Hasan requests we infer his points instead of having him make them, lol. I take it he is suggesting Catholicism is like Islam because the Pope condemned separation of Church an state. Of course, in Catholicism there always was some separation between the Spiritual Authority and the Temporal Power, and many a time these two came into conflict. What the Pope condemned was a radical separation, the kind that subverts the true religion and endorses de fact atheism with it's sister relativism. So in Catholicism there are separate spheres, but the spiritual is above the temporal, and exists to guide the latter. In Islam there is no such separation, the spiritual authority and temporal power are one and the same, usually embodied in the Khalif or Sultan .Ultimately both Muslims and Catholics (any other traditional minded person, e.g. Hindu, etc) believes in a higher principle that a society (and this includes the State) must submit itself to.

[4588686]

So I see Hasan requests we infer his points instead of having him make them, lol. I take it he is suggesting Catholicism is like Islam because the Pope condemned separation of Church an state. Of course, in Catholicism there always was some separation between the Spiritual Authority and the Temporal Power, and many a time these two came into conflict. What the Pope condemned was a radical separation, the kind that subverts the true religion and endorses de fact atheism with it's sister relativism. So in Catholicism there are separate spheres, but the spiritual is above the temporal, and exists to guide the latter. In Islam there is no such separation, the spiritual authority and temporal power are one and the same, usually embodied in the Khalif or Sultan .Ultimately both Muslims and Catholics (any other traditional minded person, e.g. Hindu, etc) believes in a higher principle that a society (and this includes the State) must submit itself to.

 

 

1-I assume that most Catholics who fancy themselves informed know what the Syllabus of Errors is and most of the contents contained within it.  I apologize for assuming that you had a basic working knowledge of the texts that comprise the tradition which you are making claims about.

 

2-I don't think you understand what the word 'separation' means.  

 

3-America has had a genuine separation of the Church from the State.  This has not been the case for the majority of Christian history.  You have had, to greater or lesser degrees, a separation of powers between the Church and the State, throughout much of the Christian world.  That is the case in many Muslim countries currently and things are working fine.  

[4588686]

There has also existed varying degrees of secularism in the Muslim world going back at least 1,000ish yeas

[Apteka]

1-I assume that most Catholics who fancy themselves informed know what the Syllabus of Errors is and most of the contents contained within it.  I apologize for assuming that you had a basic working knowledge of the texts that comprise the tradition which you are making claims about.

 

 

Did Hasan really just assume we would have most of the Syllabus memorized? His naiveté is just mind-blowing at times, I would be surprised if most Catholics even heard of the Syllabus, let alone what it contained. Either way, if a person is serious about a discussion it helps if they actually make points instead of responses consisting nothing more than a link or number. Do use those typing skills, ol' chap!

 

2-I don't think you understand what the word 'separation' means.    

 

3-America has had a genuine separation of the Church from the State.  This has not been the case for the majority of Christian history.  You have had, to greater or lesser degrees, a separation of powers between the Church and the State, throughout much of the Christian world.  That is the case in many Muslim countries currently and things are working fine

 

Hasan confuses himself here, primarily because he doesn't know what he's talking about. He says the word "separation" is not understood by me but then takes it upon himself to paraphrase what I said in my above post... Right... Anyway, so moving on to his suggestion that many Muslim countries parallel the medieval social structure. Not sure which "Muslim Nation" he has in mind, but many of these countries are secular countries with predominantly Muslim inhabitants. There is no nation that upholds Shariah law, as many Muslims will readily admit, and there is great desire to reunite the Ummah under an Amir. With that said, there is not Spiritual Authority comparable to a Pope or Bishop in these secular societies that is over and above the government, acting as it's guide. So I would have to disagree his suggested comparison.

[Apteka]

There has also existed varying degrees of secularism in the Muslim world going back at least 1,000ish yeas

 

In traditional Islam there is no concept of a secular sphere because the Deen envelops everything. Typical of you though you don't really elaborate on your points, perhaps you need to read up on the material before you can post? (Fyi, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. )

[4588686]

Did Hasan really just assume we would have most of the Syllabus memorized? His naiveté is just mind-blowing at times, I would be surprised if most Catholics even heard of the Syllabus, let alone what it contained. Either way, if a person is serious about a discussion it helps if they actually make points instead of responses consisting nothing more than a link or number. Do use those typing skills, ol' chap!

 

 

 

Hasan confuses himself here, primarily because he doesn't know what he's talking about. He says the word "separation" is not understood by me but then takes it upon himself to paraphrase what I said in my above post... Right... Anyway, so moving on to his suggestion that many Muslim countries parallel the medieval social structure. Not sure which "Muslim Nation" he has in mind, but many of these countries are secular countries with predominantly Muslim inhabitants. There is no nation that upholds Shariah law, as many Muslims will readily admit, and there is great desire to reunite the Ummah under an Amir. With that said, there is not Spiritual Authority comparable to a Pope or Bishop in these secular societies that is over and above the government, acting as it's guide. So I would have to disagree his suggested comparison.

 

 

I did assume that.  I think most posters here have not only heard of the Syllabus but are basically familiar with it's contents, at least in broad strokes.  I guess you're just unusually ignorant.  I'll keep that in mind as we have future discussion and will try to remember to hold your hand and walk you through the argument so you don't get lost.  

 

'Muslim country' is a pretty commonly used terms for a country a majority of whose inhabitants identify as Muslim.  Although, since your ignorance has been the recurring theme of this thread, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the term threw you.  

 

I don't feel like any of your other attempts at making points merit a response.  If you feel that one does, let me know.  

[4588686]

In traditional Islam there is no concept of a secular sphere because the Deen envelops everything. Typical of you though you don't really elaborate on your points, perhaps you need to read up on the material before you can post? (Fyi, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. )

 

How do you define secularism?  

[Apteka]

I did assume that.  I think most posters here have not only heard of the Syllabus but are basically familiar with it's contents, at least in broad strokes.  I guess you're just unusually ignorant.  I'll keep that in mind as we have future discussion and will try to remember to hold your hand and walk you through the argument so you don't get lost.  

 

You responded to AgustineA's three paragraph post (#58) with a link to an encyclical containing eighty points. It took a request on our part for you to specify exactly what the heck you were talking about, and then it became evident you misinterpreted the point you tried to make. AugustineA was right, there is no comparison between Catholicism and Islam because there is absolutely no separation between "Mosque" and State. And yes, for the future, actually discuss a point instead of doing something lame like posting a link. If someone takes the time to type out their position, at least give the poster the courtesy of a decent response. Now if you're not really serious about dialogue and you just like being controversial, that's another issue.

 

'Muslim country' is a pretty commonly used terms for a country a majority of whose inhabitants identify as Muslim.  Although, since your ignorance has been the recurring theme of this thread, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the term threw you.  

 

Oh Hasan, not only do you not respond to posts you don't even bother to read to read them. Here, let me take your hand and point out what is of discussion:

 

My previous post:

Anyway, so moving on to his suggestion that many Muslim countries parallel the medieval social structure. Not sure which "Muslim Nation" he has in mind, but many of these countries are secular countries with predominantly Muslim inhabitants.

 

I know you don't know what you're talking about Hasan, that's why I'm asking you to be specific.

 

Enjoy looking things upon in Wikipedia.

[4588686]

 

 

.. Anyway, so moving on to his suggestion that many Muslim countries parallel the medieval social structure. 

What are you talking about?

[r2Dtoo]

Obstinate heretics who were repeat offenders were to be delivered to the secular tribunal, and in most European nations that meant death. Is this a just sentence? After all, in our day one may think as they wish, and essentially create their own personal religion. In the traditional societies however, heresy was worse than a temporal crime such as forging money, which also carried a capital offense apparently. It's hard for us moderns to understand how important a thing doctrine can be, since our worldview is so vastly different. Is there anything in our secular world worth dying for? Anything that if a man failed to do, or infringed upon, would cost him his life? To us, life itself is the most important thing, nothing else is sacred, only trivial, so who are we to judge?

 

Jesus thought so:

 

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

 

 

 

As for this whole discussion over secular Muslim countries.  The only one I know of is Turkey.