Other Religions

[Mr.Cat]

As Catholics are to promote academic freedom and discussion allowing for all viewpoints to be taught and understood but at the same time we must demand academic legitimacy to declare and give testament to the truth, which is that the two viewpoints named are false. Hinduism and Islam is known for a violent history, while the Catholic Church is known to be involved with a violent history never directly involved as the two prior are. When we theologically examine the two belief systems they are contradictory in nature.

For example Islam professes that God messed up in giving is the sacred scripture and He allowed the Jews to “steal” their birthright. Since from Greek Metaphysics we know God to be infinitely perfect and powerful this contradicts itself, most of all because Islam keeps theses truths strongly. Without being disrespectful to those peaceful followers of Islam there are sects whom use military force from the start to now to keep their religious belief in power. While Christians died daily for centuries for the faith to thrive, which most other religions do not have a history of.

Hinduism professes in “reincarnation” but this thought process is fundamentally flawed. If everyone were simply reincarnating then “transmigrating” to new hosts it would make sense that the global population would remain about the same, this isn’t the case. Then if one considers the great evils of humanity one would ask if anyone would have enough “karma” to be humans or to do any better in life. It raises too many problems so in the end “reincarnation” is simply a contradiction in of its own self. Moreover, if God would allow us to keep living over and over again it would be a pointless existence since we could never retain our lessons or progress from where we left off.

As Catholics we are commanded to not fall into religious indifferentism were we claim all religions (human or divine) are sufficient to please God, that they are enough for salvation, or that they simply don’t matter for religious indifferentism is sinful and wrongful. But at the same time we are called to respect the individual person and their fundamental right to profess beliefs, wrong or right. We are under no circumstances called to “respect the beliefs” of others but rather we are called to “tolerate” their beliefs. This toleration could be worked into “religious freedom” but sadly many people wish to make the word “toleration” into something that isn’t very straightforward.

But to how we go through the proofs and evidence of religious belief there is objective truth. If there was no objective truth then there is no point at all in teaching anything about religion at all. The fact that Christianity has exited for so long with the same beliefs is a lot to handle, not to mention that it springs forth from the Jewish Temple System.

But moreover as Catholics we are to preach the gospel at all times teaching every nation all that our Blessed Lord commanded with academic legitimacy even while we respect the individual person, their rights, academic freedom, academic discussion, or tolerate their beliefs.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Mr.CatholicCat

[SJRod55]

One must presume that Dairygirl4u2c is a statistics major or an intern for a polsters office ...... statistically I believe she is the predominant polster in this forum.

But why?

Is it going to be .... 100 CAtholic Americans said .... (But rmemeber we are not all American and therefore are your polls really scientifically of any value?)

[dairygirl4u2c]

i'm just a curious person. i like to provoke the topic through stats first to see what this place htinks. maybe later i'd start a post without it. i figure why not start a poll, then have the posting that would be done anyway. that way you can have best of both worlds. also you can compare what one person says to the rest so you don't feel like you're arguing against everyone when it may be only one person.

[Aloysius]

What people here are not thinking of is this: we have always respected the parental authority over children and never considered it in any way justified to take children away from parents and teach them things contrary to what their parents want to teach them as regards faith and religion.

When you talk about historical facts, it gets hazy to many because we all have been convinced of the objectiwve truth of such historical facts. Now, we are influenced by our faith primarily to believe in the miracles of Jesus as historical facts. As such: those should not be taught as historical facts but as potential historical facts in a secular institution.

But when it comes down to who was the first pope: we are more convinced by history than our facts that at the very least the office of the papacy existed in Rome as the seat of Peter even prior to Constantine. First hand sources should be used in education about such events; the leter to Clement for instance. In the secular school it would be up to the child, as raised by their parents, to make the decision as to what to believe based upon the sources.

No one with any academic honesty could come out not believing there was something considered special and petrine about the office of the Bishop of Rome in the first centuries. But the modern doctrines of our faith should not necessarily be taught to children of other faiths in a secular setting; it would violate our principal of not preying on the children of pagans but rather trying to convert the actual pagans.

[123]

Schools already have enought trouble trying to balance darwinism and Intellegent Design to try and teach about the Dali Lamma and Muhammad.

[Socrates]

[quote name='musturde' post='1187908' date='Feb 7 2007, 09:47 PM']
I believe that schools, no matter where they are, should not teach that a certain religion is right or wrong. In a private school setting, it makes sense to teach about Catholicism but it's still wrong to tell someone of a different religion that his beliefs are wrong. Instead one should just say that Catholicism teaches this to be true.
[/quote]
So is the point of education to teach the truth, or simply to promote "getting along" and practice p.c. multicultural relativism?

Any private Catholic school worth its salt had better teach that the Catholic Faith is the one true religion! If it does not, it has failed as a Catholic school and should remove "Catholic" from its description!

One of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is to "Instruct the Ignorant." This means teaching those who do not know the truths of our Faith, not avoiding doing so for fear of offending others.
(Of course instruction should always be in charity and humility, but saying simply it's wrong to tell anyone else they're wrong is not Catholic, nor is it even honest.)

[mroger]

I am very sorry for all the confusion, but Mohammed was no prophet of God. God would never have abandoned His own people to bring His word to Mohammed. Mohammed wrote a political message, and that alone. He was envious of the faith of the Jews, or rather the lack thereof. Why? He wondered would there people deny God if Godself had chosen them from among alll others. It did not makes sense that God would have a chosen race, so Mohammed chose his own.

Mohammed's prophesies are highly inconsistent with Judaism and Christianity, and even from verse to verse. Mohammed was predicted, in fact, by Jeremiah and Daniel and by Jesus and by John. He was shown to bring all evil and destruction to the world. Those prophesies are begin fulfilled, just as was the prophesy of Jesus.

Any person who committs the sin of having any considerable faith in the teachings, any teachings, of Mohammed is taking the path of self-righteousness, and opening the gateway to Hell.

I realize these are strong words. I am not insulting Mohammed or Islam. I am not slandering them either. They are inherently slanderous because they are un-truth. They are false teachings by Mohammed. It does not matter what is politically correct, there is only one path to Heaven and it ain't by the way of Mohammed.

Jews have their convenant, Paul writes that they shall keep that. Those who have seen Christ in "The Word", also have their convenant, but they must be followers of Christ. Mohammed has no such convenant.

Paul tells us time and again to be careful not to fall into the traps set by the wicked and the unfaithful. Political correctness is one such trap.

If Catholic is counter-cultural, then it is also not politically correct. "Politics" confers that there may be "other paths", but I know of only one Truth.

As Jesus writes, "a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand", so how can God, in His kingdom in Heaven, present two separate and juxtapositioned truths? He cannot, for He would fail. And since I believe and know that God cannot fail, there must be an un-truth. One of these are false and it ain't Christ, so it must be Mohammed.

As for Dali-Lama, I'm not even going to bother with that one.

[SJRod55]

There used to be a course entitled Comparative Religions which was taught in high schools. The 'idea' was to show that there were in fact many different religions in the world and to teach tolerance and diversity. The idea was NOT to convert or undermine the beliefs of any student in the class.

I believe it would do a lot of young people good to understand what the 'foundations' of the various religions are so that some misunderstandings could be avoided. It is true that most people do not have a firm understanding of others religions. When I read the Koran I was very surprised at what it contained and how it was written and indeed it gave me a better understanding of the 'average' Muslim and totally defeated the extremist arguments which the popular press expound.

Knowledge is the most powerful tool and with knowledge and wisdom we are able to make good decisions. If on the other hand we do not have the facts and we do not see others points of view we become very isolated.

Today's world is one in which things happen instantly. The CNN coverage of the bombing of Baghdad many years ago is ample proof to anyone that we are now in a totally connected world. Whereas in the past it would take months, sometimes years for news to travel it is in our face all the time. Unfortunately with our dependence on television and those 'sound bites' we do in fact get a lesser education that when we actually sat and read a newspaper or magazine. Yet our society has moved to instant gratification, instant knowledge - these things are false. We Must take the time to read, to discuss and to debate, and to do so we must be knowledgeable before we start about our own point of view as well as having a rudimentary knowledge of the others argument.

We all truly believe and know that our faith is the 'one and only true faith - true religion' however there are others who believe their religion is exactly that 'the one and only true religion' we must therefore strive to understand them and likewise they must do the same to us. RESPECT. That is all.

Edited February 10, 2007 by Rod

[mroger]

I could say that it is ncessary to respect the person, and by that I must respect that this is what they believe. However, to accept or recognize or even acknowledge that any part of Islam is Truthful is blashpemy against the Holy Spirit.

Philosophically and Theologically - It is impossible for Islam to be true because a thing is either true or it is false, not part true and part false. Jesus nevers said, "I am like the Way..or I came for this, to witness to the Near Truth" He never said this is almost good enough.

Islam will not conced to you that Jesus is as good as Mohammed. They remain faithful to Islam. I recommend that we do the same and let God sort out the differences.

But, again, to profess truth in Islam is blasphemy. Oka,y I stand corrected. Parts of the Koran are basically quoted from the Holy Bible, so then parts of the Koran have truth, but are not full of truth because they distort the context of the Holy Bible. So, the Pope is right to suggest that there can be found truth in some other religions, but only when they reflect the Truth of what Christ teaches and that is all.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]However, to accept or recognize or even acknowledge that any part of Islam is Truthful is blashpemy against the Holy Spirit.[/quote]

I'm not sure that you're phrasing yourself correctly here. Muslims are speaking the truth when they say that there is One God. All the ninety-nine names they use for Him are truthful as well - Merciful, Compassionate, Great Forgiver, Generosity, Truth, the One, the Healer, etc. They are speaking the truth when they say that Jesus will come to Earth again. So there are clearly parts of Islam that are correct.

Edited February 10, 2007 by Cathoholic Anonymous

[mroger]

yes, it is just as i said it is. there are parts they have copied or manipulated from judaism and christian texts and practices, but mohammed is dead and islam uses truth to propagate a lie. paul warns us of this kind of behavior, so does jesus, and so does john. so does the old testament too. we've got to be able to discern the false parts from the true parts. i am also reflecting now on today's gospel from luke. his descriptions of the beatitudes include admonitions against melding truth with falsity. acknowledgin false prophets and giving them "street cred", or treating them even as equals among men.