John-Paul II, kissing the Koran

[Didacus]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 12:45 AM'] It is not always better, there is a time for war and sometimes that is the most moral Choice.[/quote]
I agree, there is at times, a call to war. But this call to war is a somber call that should be heeded as the last (if not one of the last) resorts within this imperfect world.

Maybe 'better' might not have been the correct term, maybe 'preferable' might have been more appropriate. I do make mistakes... heck, more than my share believe me.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:02 AM'] Ah yes, there is a Hell, and Hell burns hot. But the Lord does hot hold to Hell those who repent their sins, or hold those to Hell who have made simple mistakes. It takes far far more than mere mistake to earn Hell, from the little i know, I know that much! [/quote]
Then you know more than I or the Church for niether She nor I claim to know who does and does not go to Hell, I do not know who has and has not truly repented nor even if I have truly repented, And some " mistakes" are indeed grieves sins.

[Don John of Austria]

Let me ask all of you who say that this was just a poor judgement or not even that a simple question. If JPII had kissed Mein Kampf or the KKK's Manefesto, or the Satanic Bible would you be as equally understanding. The Koran worse than the first two and as bad as the third, though more subtle. would you all find that equally excusable?

[Didacus]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:06 AM']Then you know more than I or the Church for niether She nor I claim to know who does and does not go to Hell, I do not know who has and has not truly repented nor even if I have truly repented, And some " mistakes" are indeed grieves sins.[/quote]
Then we depart in definitions I do believe, little more.

I need not to know who repented, only to know that those who do are forgiven (what would be the sacrament of forgiveness (sacrement du pardon) then, or final rights? or absolution?)

As for mistakes being sins... The difference between us is simply the definition of what is a sin, and what is a mistake.

One thing for certain, I cannot believe in a God that would dam his followers for an accident that constitues a mistake; like turning left when one should have turned right.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:11 AM'] Then we depart in definitions I do believe, little more.

I need not to know who repented, only to know that those who do are forgiven (what would be the sacrament of forgiveness (sacrement du pardon) then, or final rights? or absolution?)

As for mistakes being sins... The difference between us is simply the definition of what is a sin, and what is a mistake.

One thing for certain, I cannot believe in a God that would dam his followers for an accident that constitues a mistake; like turning left when one should have turned right. [/quote]
[quote]One thing for certain, I cannot believe in a God that would dam his followers for an accident that constitues a mistake; like turning left when one should have turned right. [/quote] well there we agree.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:11 AM']The Koran worse than the first two and as bad as the third, though more subtle. would you all find that equally excusable?[/quote]
I do not seek escuse, but understanding. Hence my post some few minutes back.

I started this thread uncertain of right or wrong. It is not a sin to be unknowing of a fact, the sin lies in refusing to seek the truth.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:13 AM'] well there we agree.[/quote]
In a small island of common ground, one may find an ocean mutual understanding.

I am glad we found for the least, a little island where we can meet.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:14 AM'] I do not seek escuse, but understanding. Hence my post some few minutes back.

I started this thread uncertain of right or wrong. It is not a sin to be unknowing of a fact, the sin lies in refusing to seek the truth. [/quote]
It is not you who I think is trying to excuse it, it is not you who I really take issue with about this, the question was not directed somuch to you as to those who have truly tried to gloss over it.

[quote]It is not a sin to be unknowing of a fact, the sin lies in refusing to seek the truth.[/quote] Agian we agree.

[musturde]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Jun 1 2005, 06:23 AM'] The story has no credibility. It was an attempt by one the late Holy Father's slightly overzealous apologists to make the story less objectionable. The vast majority, almost all, of his most ardent defenders, as well as numerous scholars, admit that it was in fact the Koran. That being the case, it is quite scandalous as the Koran is demonic. Countless martyrs died rather than commit any act that would imply belief or sympathy with the Mohammedans. Kissing the Koran was an act that would have saved thier lives, but what good is it to save one's life at the cost of his soul?

I have little doubt that the late Holy Father’s intentions were noble enough. However, that is irrelevant. The act itself caused grave scandal. It was a bad thing to do. It was viewed as a slap in the face to countless martyrs and gave the impression to the Mohammedans that there is credibility to their 'revelation".

Does it shake my faith? Not hardly. Why? Because my faith is based on the Divinely revealed truth of the Catholic Faith, not on some cult of personality surrounding the late Holy Father. In fact it had nothing to do with him as a person. Rather, my faith relied on him insofar as he possessed the full teaching authority of the Church in his capacity as Pope. Kissing the Koran was not a "Papal action", but the act of the person who happens to occupy the See of Peter. This act shakes my faith no more than the fact that Pope Alexander VI had illegitimate children does; which is to say, not at all. [/quote]
I'm guessing the Catholic Church never killed infidels either. The pope is just showing respect by doing this act NOT unity of faiths but instead a unity of people in the middle east. The Holy Father was embracing Islam as a brother religion worshiping the SAME GOD. (haha I guess the Pope has MY stance on this issue then huh?). The same is a very tricky word indeed. They worship the God of Abraham in a different way than we do and there's no way they don't since they attempt to and God recieves and answers their prayers. They don't pray like we do. This is an attempt by the Pope however to bring the Christians and Muslims in the Middle East in unity instead of fighting eachother. The Koran was all dedicated to God, the writer was just very ignorant of the truth of the trinity/how God works. He had more of the idea of the Old Testament God than the new testament God. (No, please don't call me a heretic on this one, I meant the interpretation of God. I'm not going gnostic on any of you).

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]no way they don't since they attempt to and God recieves and answers their prayers.[/quote] We have been round and round on this one but you shouldn't make statments like that because you don't know that he answers there Prayers, can you show me any magisterial document that Says " God Hears and answers muslim prayers". If not then you need to stop saying that it is so.
[quote]
This is an attempt by the Pope however to bring the Christians and Muslims in the Middle East in unity instead of fighting eachother.[/quote] You say this like it is a Good thing, we shouldn't be unified with evil, we should be fighting it. God I hope the Pope was just trying to be repectful and not actually trying to promote unity with the enemies of Christ.


[quote]The Koran was all dedicated to God, the writer was just very ignorant of the truth of the trinity/how God works. [/quote] The Koran was inspired by the Devil either a demon appeared to Mohammed and lied to Him ( which is what I think probably happened, I actually feel sorry for Mohammed) or he simply was a Lier of Extraodinary skill, which is also of the Devil. The Devil being the Father of lies and All.

[quote]He had more of the idea of the Old Testament God than the new testament God. [/quote] The God of the Muslims is a Puppet master, nothing like the God of the Old Testement at all, the New Testement is actually supports that type of God more than the Old. ( not that I am saying that is it's intent).

[Don John of Austria]

And Mustarde you didn't answer my question would you feel thus if he had kissed Mein kampf or the KKK's manefesto, or the Satanic Bible?

[Didacus]

Don,

I am very glad we can agree on things, but I hope we can respectfully disgaree as well. There are several statements you make to which I disagree.


[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:50 AM']If not then you need to stop saying that it is so.
You say this like it is a Good thing, we shouldn't be unified with evil, we should be fighting it. God I hope the Pope was just trying to be repectful and not actually trying to promote unity with the enemies of Christ.
[/quote]

No unity with the ennemies of Christ - I agree.
No being unified with evil - I agree.
That muslims are evil, and that all their teachings are evil as well - I disagree.
I disagree because you seem to generalize a great deal. One could turn many of your questions against yourself and ask "Where in the CCC do you identify specifically that the Koran and Muslim teachings are evil?", or "How can you prove the Koran to be unrevocably evil in every respect?".

I have read several passages in the Koran, and had them explained. Many of the 'barbaric teachings' of Islam found in the Koran can have parallels drawn to equally 'barbaric' scriptures in the old testament. (please notice that barbaric is a term to designate interpretation and not truth thereof, I am trying not to sound so much as a heretic here... please remember I am French and sometimes I do struggle to find the words in english)

Remember Sodom and Gomora? Did not God Himself say that if 10 just men and woman be found between the two cities, that the two cities would be spared? Can you claim to know the hearts of so many muslims, faithful to their religion onto death, and that none amongst the millions and millions of them can sum within themselves 10 just men and woman?


[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:50 AM']
The Koran was inspired by the Devil either a demon appeared to Mohammed and lied to Him
[/quote]

THAT is a STRONG statement to say the least. Have you put proper thought into it? Have you reflected on its implications?

For one, I cannot believe that such a fruitful religion can possibly have been inspired entirely by the devil's work and minions. No lies, hatred, ect... could endure for so long the self destructive nature of sin and evil. There must be somewhere, somehow, some truth within the Koran, which faithful's have seen and followed in some manner - have you ever looked for it? And remember, just becasue you have not found it, means in no way that it is not there.

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:50 AM']
The God of the Muslims is a Puppet master,

[/quote]


You know, that sounds very similar to atheist splurting to me similar allegations pertaining to the Papacy. Heck, I don't have to go so far, almost word for word protestants would claim the same of the thrown of StPeter. I cannot possibly see how this can be a well founded statement.



[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:50 AM']
nothing like the God of the Old Testement at all, the New Testement is actually  supports that type of God more than the Old. ( not that I am saying that is it's intent).[/quote]

Ahhh, at last, we once again find agreement. In no way does the new testament contradict the old testament, and it is my firm belief that both books must be read in CONjUCTURE with each other in order to fully grasp the word of God as it was intended for us to hear. Yes, it is very clear to me that the new testament supports fully the old testament (though I would take more care in choosing my wording, the God of the old testament IS the God of the new testament... we did not change gods at this point, simpoly obtained a new understanding of Him)

[musturde]

[quote] We have been round and round on this one but you shouldn't make statments like that because you don't know that he answers there Prayers, can you show me any magisterial document that Says " God Hears and answers muslim prayers". If not then you need to stop saying that it is so.[/quote]
Well it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't does it? There is also no where in the Church that says they worship a different God. Show me anywhere that contradicts my claims and provides proof for your views.

From the Nosta Aetate:

[b]3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.[/b]
[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_council...-aetate_en.html[/url]

[quote]
You say this like it is a Good thing, we shouldn't be unified with evil, we should be fighting it. God I hope the Pope was just trying to be repectful and not actually trying to promote unity with the enemies of Christ.[/quote]
uhh... Unifying Christians and muslims so that they don't kill eachother is a good thing. Enemies of Christ... nice one. I didn't mean it as religious unity, i meant as people. Come on now...


[quote] The Koran was inspired by the Devil either a demon appeared to Mohammed and lied to Him ( which is what I think probably happened, I actually feel sorry for Mohammed) or he simply was a Lier of Extraodinary skill, which is also of the Devil. The Devil being the Father of lies and All. [/quote]
A lot of Catholics believe Muhamad was a descendant of Ishmael. So would God have made this religion? Possibly, you don't know that. You're making statements up not believed by the Church. Show me the documents.

[quote] The God of the Muslims is a Puppet master, nothing like the God of the Old Testement at all, the New Testement is actually  supports that type of God more than the Old. ( not that I am saying that is it's intent).[/quote]
Actually, it depends on where you look. The koran teaches revenge and an "eye for an eye". The NT goes against that completely.

[musturde]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 2 2005, 01:54 AM'] And Mustarde you didn't answer my question would you feel thus if he had kissed Mein kampf or the KKK's manefesto, or the Satanic Bible? [/quote]
Your going bezerk with your examples. The KKK is a hate group, do you know why and when it was founded? It's a CULT in reliance to hate. To kiss the manefesto would be stupid because we'd never even have any KKK leader talk to the Pope in the first place. The Satanic Bible is obvious because it's worship of the devil NOT the God of Abraham. If the Pope kissed the Mein Kampf it'd make him look kind of bad. Especially with all the Nazi propaganda .

[MichaelFilo]

Several things :

1) We are going off topic.

2) Kissing any book of lies cannot be taken as anything good. It is parallel to kissing the Mien Kempf to promote unity between skinheads and Catholics. Equally so, it could be kissing a statue of Buddah or one of the unholy books of that damned religion. It is lies, and as Catholics, we only show respect to that of Christ, for respecting that of the Devil is contradictory to our obligation to love the Truth, and only Him.

3) The man who is the Supreme Pontiff, the Pontifex(sp?) Maximus, the servant of servants, the Holy Father, the Peterine descendant, or what have you is still a man. His office is that of the Pope. Inasmuch as that is true, he does not act from office the entire time, much like any other man who holds an office (be it a lawyer, a judge, etc.). However, it is reasonably clear the late Pope John Paul II meant to show a unity between the peoples who adhere to the falsehoods of Islam (the Mohammadeans) and Christian men. However, being a falliable man, it is very clear that no matter what the intent was, he chose an errounous manner to show his this hope for the unity between these men (and not the Faiths, for the damnable beliefs of Mohammad are to never to intermingle (since they cannot) with the Catholic Faith).

4) Islam is worship aimed at God the Father. Muslims, like other infidels, heretics, and schismatics are not united. Some do not believe that Christians worship the same God as they, so incididently, they do not worship the True God (since they will even claim we don't worship God), the only God of Abraham. The story behind Mohammad's "revelations" aren't told the same way by different people, most especially the Christians in the Middle East (they have an alternate belief as to how his lies became manifest, which can be discussed, but in a different thread, this one has already veered off-track). Whatever the story, they are not from God.

God bless,
Mikey