Islam & Allah O.K. in public schools,

[musturde]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994380' date='Jun 1 2006, 05:41 AM']
Muslims believe that the objective good is rooted in the will of God, we believe that the objective good is rooted in the nature of God. There's a big difference; the former is called Divine Command Theory, and means that what is good can change based on God's will that day. If God tells you one day that murder is good, then murder is good. The latter is called (I think) Natural Law Theory, and basically says that God and goodness are inseparable; God always wills what is good since God's will is based on His nature. This philosophical stuff comes from the question "Is something good because God wills it, or does God will something because it is good?" (the latter inferring that the objective good is something completely separate from God, and God is subject to the higher power which is the objective good, creating a paradox)
[/quote]

My post was more centered in stating that we worship the same God. Just because we have different ideas of how the same God works, doesn't mean the same God doesn't accept prayers from both sides. They claim they are descendants of Ishmael (and Abraham) and worship the same God as the Jews and Christians (otherwise it'd be completely pointless to respect us as "people of the book".

[Franimus]

[quote name='musturde' post='994564' date='Jun 1 2006, 12:02 PM']
My post was more centered in stating that we worship the same God. Just because we have different ideas of how the same God works, doesn't mean the same God doesn't accept prayers from both sides. They claim they are descendants of Ishmael (and Abraham) and worship the same God as the Jews and Christians (otherwise it'd be completely pointless to respect us as "people of the book".
[/quote]
From that, you could say that all who worship a good higher being worship the same god, but have different beliefs about it. I don't think I see anything wrong with that, though.. just kinda counters Mateo's post.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994870' date='Jun 1 2006, 05:41 PM']From that, you could say that all who worship a good higher being worship the same god, but have different beliefs about it. I don't think I see anything wrong with that, though.. just kinda counters Mateo's post.[/quote]Are you trying to counter St. Paul's words about pagan gods?

[musturde]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994870' date='Jun 1 2006, 04:41 PM']
From that, you could say that all who worship a good higher being worship the same god, but have different beliefs about it. I don't think I see anything wrong with that, though.. just kinda counters Mateo's post.
[/quote]

Oh I missenterpretted you then. oops. I've thought about what you said before. I'm not sure what I would believe on that. I do stand firm on the fact that if you try to worship God(aka God of the Bible), then he will accept it (unless you're like sacrificing people).

[MichaelF]

Actually, by the time Paul comes on the scene (middle-late Antiquity), Rome and Her Empire were what you could probably call the 1st Agnostic nation.

The Religio Romana (Roman State Religion) had become moribund, as civil religions tend to do. Not many Citizens gave a hoot about Jupiter or Mars, day to day. The Religious importance of the civic Priesthoods had waned (they were still politically important, however).

The only going concerns (aside from the festivals, which had become Xmas-like parties/economic holidays) were the Imperial Cult (backed by Law, and accusations of treason if you didnt visibly subscribe) and the foreign Mystery Cults imported from the East.

The Mystery Cults were small and cell-like. They also competed -directly- with the Early Church, which may account for Pauls annoyance expressed in the Epistles. Mithraism, in particular, bore many similarities to Early Christianity, and was extremely popular in the Legions.

Overall, however, Romans were sort of like "Easter and Christmas" catholics or the bulk of the Japanese population (mostly atheistic, but go to the festivals).

[Socrates]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994380' date='Jun 1 2006, 04:41 AM']
Oh, and everything I've heard about Cortez and the Aztecs was that Cortez was a greedy, bad man who took advantage of the Aztecs for their gold (they mention this in Pirates of the Carribbean too, but I learned this long before that movie came out). I don't remember hearing anything about Aztec human sacrifice, nor about the "satanic gods" of the Aztecs. Just because the Aztecs were polytheistic and had a god of war, doesn't mean that they worshipped "satanic" gods. We don't call all pagans, muslims, mormons, greeks, romans, etc. satanists, now do we? Of course, the aztecs are long gone so it could be possible that what you say, Socrates, is true, but I've never heard of it.
[/quote]
I've heard the same politically-correct tripe in grade school, but have since studied and learned the truth. The fact is that the Aztecs practiced human sacrifice on a larger scale than any other pagan civilization in known history. This sacrifice involved the victim being taken to the top of a pyramid where the priest would tear the heart out of the living victim. Victims were lined up and slaughtered like cattle.

For an excellent and entertaining Catholic read on the conquest of Mexico, I'd recommend [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0931888123/qid=1149213582/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-4435920-4371255?s=books&v=glance&n=283155"][i]Our Lady of Guadalupe and the Conquest of Darkness[/i] by Dr. Warren H. Carroll[/url].

The conquest by Cortez and his men of an entire empire against unbelievable odds is one of the most amazing stories of history.

I studied and under Dr. Carroll and have written a paper on this topic, which I researched inside and out, using original eye-witness sources.
And while people may quibble over the number killed, no one denies that the human sacrifice took place on a massive scale. (The whole issue of the real nature of the Aztec religion and sacrifices is simply glossed over or ignored in p.c. textbook "histories.")
And it is unlikely the Spaniards would have won without the aid of many natives who were happy to fight their Aztec oppressors who would use them for human sacrifice.

Cortez was not without his sins, but was a genuine Catholic hero fighting a genuinely satanic enemy. After this conquest, many Mexicans would conmvert to the True Faith.

[Mateo el Feo]

We could fill an entire thread with all the misconceptions of the state of civilization in North America when the Spaniards arrived.