Stoning adulterers may once again be reinstated in Afghanistan.

reply to post by SisyphusRide

Jesus was Jesus... the mighty bender and adapter.

Whatever the hell that means.

Jesus was a socialist. YOU are the one accusing all 'atheists' of "communism", dude. And, I thought you had figured out that your attempts at 'conversation' with me are, well....unwelcome.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Nenothtu is right about the respect of Mary in Islam( just read Surah Maryam in Qur'an)

she however is not reverved as a saint and neither prayed to or her shrine visited with the same intention as christians do by muslims in general.

The sites you mentioned are christian blog sites right? And they use terms like plane load of muslims, millions of muslims etc etc
I cannot deny that some muslims are no better than christian at bending at any tomb, any shrine to get their wishes rather than only having trust in God and only asking from Him.

So if you are mentioning these muslims and then projecting it on all muslims then you are wrong.

Mary was a truthful pious woman and mother of a Prophet and high in rank among women of the world.

She can't answer prayers or heal. Its very doubtful what was it that appeared at Fatima, just like its doubtful what appeared to paul but as you would be you and only doubt if Jibrael really appeared to Prophet Muhammad pbuh, only God can help you!

FlyersFan

I showed clearly that Islam has great admiration for Mary.
You see just what you want to.

"having great respect for" and "venerating her at the shrine of a Marian apparition" are two entirely different things. There is no dispute as to the respect, what is disputed is the form that respect takes, the character of it, and whether Islam calls for Muslims to fly around the world to worship at her cult shrines.

There is an Islamic center about 4 blocks from here. I think I'll saunter down there on my next day off and have a word with the headman there and see what HIS take on the matter is. Get it straight from the source.

It was just an accurate observation. You seem to take great pride in being like that.
You said it yourself ... you aren't a nice poster. I'm agreeing with you. Be happy.

Oh, I'm not disputing it - I AM a dick. You are correct there. I just said that saying so is in no way a refutation of any of my points.

That's obtuse. Those articles discussed the high number of muslims that go to the shrines.
It's not going to collect names and addresses.

It claimed to have collected a title - why not a name? WHICH of the 11 Sultans of Zanzibar was guilty of the heresy? If it ever occurred, then it had to be one of the last 3, so that narrows it down a bit. When did they move the cult shrine from Portugal to Zanzibar, which your article clearly states was the location of his alleged act?

When too many illogical claims start adding up, I smell a propagandist.

Strawman. I never said that they were 'worshiping foreign gods'. You should try reading what is posted and be more accurate when discussing it. Your 'translations' continually miss.

You made the claim that they were traveling around the world to "venerate" Mary at the cult centers of her alleged apparitions. That is indeed worshiping foreign gods. "Respecting" Mary can be done in your own closet - building a shrine to her there adds an entirely new dimension, and traveling to cult centers of foreign religions where she is alleged to have "appeared" after she had been long dead to "venerate" her pushes it right over the edge.

Like I said, you only see what you want. There are statues of Our Lady of Fatima all over the planet. Those particular Muslims mentioned were placing flowers at the statue of Mary where they were. They don't have to be in Fatima itself to do so. So no ... the story is not 'obviously false'.

Well, to be honest, I'm not really up to speed on the details of the whole Cult of Mary thing. Is ANY idol of of Mary considered "Our lady of Fatima"? Can you explain why a Muslim is laying an offering at the feet of an idol of Mary when Mohammed destroyed all the idols in the Ka'aba and said not to be doing that stuff?

Do you even understand the Islamic concept of what constitutes and "idol", or the prohibition on images of anything God created (including humans) in Islamic worship? I do. Maybe you do, too, but I am dead certain that the propagandist who penned the "articles" doesn't, or they would not have made such an egregious error.

Technically speaking, one is not even allowed to have an image containing an animal hanging on the wall of a Muslim home because God created animals. That's the whole basis for Islamic art being composed of abstracts, mosaics, and calligraphy. Muslims are pretty rough on idols, and even rougher on idolators. It's all part of the aversion to polytheism.

NOW they are jet-setting around the world to give offerings to an idol of "our lady"? when did all that start? Why have NONE of the Muslims around here (a city of around a million and a half) heard of it?

Some Muslims have been known to KILL people because someone drew a picture of Mohammed, but now they are just going to let Muslims giving offerings to foreign idols in defiance of Mohammed's dictates slide? Muslims will get up in arms and riot over whether bacon is a breakfast food in school meals. Now you expect people to believe that they're just going to say "meh" over legions of their co-religionists suddenly going off the reservation?

You seriously expect anyone to believe that mess?

Obviously you do not have a 'firm grasp' on it or you would have acknowledged the information provided, which was provided from multiple sources. What you DO have a firm grasp on is some kind of aversion to Mary being mentioned .... which me and my psychology degree, is finding rather interesting.

Your psych degree doesn't scare me. My first wife is a PhD psychologist. She didn't get there by herself. As far as I know, there is no section in the DSM-IV covering people who want to keep irrelevant things out of relevant discussion.

So... tell me how that makes you feel...

reply to post by Akragon


But daaad! She keeps poking me!

reply to post by FlyersFan

wildtimes

And atheists are not "communists" either.

Correct. Communists are Atheist, but Atheists are not necessarily Communists.

Jesus was a full-blown SOCIALIST.

OH HOLY MOTHER OF GOD!

There! NOW look what you've done gone and made me say! Now I'm gonna have to wash my brain out with lye soap!

If Christianity (esp. as the Pope is now framing it) were to actually follow Jesus's example,
and this country (the USA) was actually following his teachings, it would be a SOCIALIST country.

Which, in my opinion, is not a bad thing.

Sweet Jesus in a sidecar!

There is just so much wrong in that string of thoughts that it makes my brain hurt. Maybe it's just my blood pressure. Yeah, that's it. I'm gonna have to lay out of this thread for a while and go check my blood pressure.

reply to post by OpinionatedB

My god that's ignorant. A person who worships God isn't an atheist.
again ... pretty damn sad. De-indoctrinate yourself. It's stupefying.

nenothtu
So... tell me how that makes you feel...

I think this has become a waste of time. The facts are clear but you are going to think what you want. And the brain-dead indoctrinated will continue to engage in drive-bys claiming that I"m an atheist because I don't worship God exactly the same as they do. So discussion is useless. Whatever.

reply to post by FlyersFan


You're probably right. Brain-dead indoctrination is impossible to argue with. One can construct all the logical arguments in the world, and the brain-dead indoctrinated will still just repeat the same old things over and over again, because that is what they are indoctrinated to.

You can almost see the spirals in their eyes as they repeat the same old mantras time and time again, often in exactly the same words, perhaps going so far as to simply cut, paste, and re-post the same precise words over and over again, frequently the words of someone else,whomever it was that indoctrinated them to begin with, mindlessly repeating - and never questioning - what some webpage told them, like a parrot. They seem relieved that they can just toss something away and never have to think about it or evaluate it, because evidently someone else has already do that for them.

One of us IS doing exactly that.

I would beg you to reassess just WHICH is exhibiting brain-dead indoctrination, but I don't think your indoctrination will allow it.

Yup, you're probably right. Useless effort.

Facts are only "facts" when evaluated. Otherwise, they are mere indoctrination, and indoctrination can not stand up to questioning. It never gives answers when questions are raised as to the actual "factualness" of the indoctrination. It merely repeats the indoctrination, and never answers the questions raised, because indoctrination can't answer those questions - the original thinker is not there to provide answers for the indoctrinated.

reply to post by nenothtu

Blah blah blah. Dead wrong. But whatever. Think what you wish.
You aren't listening so it's useless to even attempt to discuss it any further.

reply to post by nenothtu


*shrug

Think what you want, neno. Socialism is NOT communism, just like atheism is NOT communism.

Have a look at CosmicDude's newest thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

20 quotes by the Pope.

Not socialist, eh? Jesus wasn't a socialist?

Okay, my dear friend, we'll just disagree on this one then. Like ya anyway!

reply to post by wildtimes


Correct. Socialism is NOT Communism. It is "Communism Lite". Communism is Socialism carried to it's logical end, but Socialism is NOT Communism, because it doesn't get to the goal. Neither is a workable system, because they both rely on the honor system, and humans as a whole are eminently dishonorable.

Likewise, as I said before, Atheism is NOT Communism. Communists ARE atheist, but not all Atheists are Communists.

I'll check the thread out later. Right now I'm between jobs, having worked this morning at one and having to go in later to the next. I'm trying to warm up for the trek to the next job.

I'm not yet sure why I should care what the Pope thinks. I do not recognize his authority in matters of religion. Like the Pharisees who placed themselves in the seat of Moses, the Pope has placed himself in the seat of Jesus (or Peter, if the Catholics are to be believed in the matter, although Peter was anything BUT "infallible"), but in no case has God granted him any authority over me. Just as Jesus' politics don't seem to affect the Pope, the Pope's politics don't affect Jesus. They affect the Vatican, since that is the Pope's kingdom, and Catholics, since they acknowledge him as their leader.

Yup, we will just have to agree to disagree on the matter of Jesus' political persuasions. I find no evidence for Socialism in his work. Most (not all) of the Socialists I've run across are people who ache to kill you if you refuse to join their hive. Since they believe in strength in numbers, the name of the game is to pump up the numbers and kill off the dissidents as a threat to the hive. That's why intellectuals (aka "intelligentsia") are the first to go in the inevitable purges. The Catholic Church is the only organization I know of who took that "join or die" message to the streets and blamed it on Jesus. Oddly enough, the Pope is the head of that very organization that did that, so I'm not surprised if he is a Socialist and trying to blame that on Jesus to pass the buck.

But I WILL leave you with this comment from an eminently conservative commentator from long ago (early 80's was when I heard him say it). He said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs, is the bottom line of Lenin, Karl Marx, and Jesus Christ". So you see, you are not alone in your assessment. There are even Conservatives who agree with you in the matter. I just don't happen to be one of them. The same guy told me that "Communists are not the enemies of the world - to nearly a third of humanity, Communists are the ONLY friends they have." He still wouldn't want his sister to marry one, though.

Yeah, we're still buds - if we agreed on everything, one of us would be entirely unnecessary!

ETA: Mixing politics and religion is a dangerous game, as the Jesuits found out in their attempts to do so in Central America in the late 70's and early 80's. Separately, those two things have killed more people than anything else I can think of, and together they become a nearly unstoppable killing machine, and the only way to slow it down is to kill them right back, which is sad. If the Pope wants to play that game, well, it's his dime. He should remember the Inquisition.

And the Jesuits.