MrBrown said:
RicOlie_2 said:
MrBrown said:
RicOlie_2 said:
...Islam: Despite what many insist, Islam is certainly not a religion of peace and this is apparent from the Qur'an. I believe in peace (though I think war is necessary sometimes), thus I cannot maintain the ideals of this religion.
...You are aware that much from the Qur'an is taken from the bible?
And regarding this point the bible is as bloody and bloodthirsty as the Qur'an. With both books, it is often more a question of the interpreting priests.A lot taken from the Bible is warped into a different story or the stories are drawn from different traditions (the latter being just a guess based on what I have read in the Qur'an). A new law of love and peace was given by Christ, so only the Old Testament contains the comparatively violent religion of the Jews/Israelites which was largely due to the way the world was at the time. Their violent behaviour was entirely normal back then. Muslims, at least according to the Qur'an, are still required to kill non-believers.
I really would love to read the Qur'an in its original language, but I am very bad at learning languages, so this would never happen. I think most of the "kill non-believers" is some kind of more or less mistranslation and misinterpreting by people, which want to bring people in a certain way. But as long as I don't know it literal words, I can only assume, and hope for the best.
Hey, you can't be that bad. You seem to understand English quite well and you write it pretty well too.
I think the Qur'an was clear enough on that point that it one would find the same message in its original language.
Also I may add, that inquisition, witch hunting, holy war, and purge the pagan was a catholic invention. Just to mention "Massacre de la Saint-Barthélemy" Night of August the 23rd to August 24th 1572.
None of which would have been anything but appalling to the members of the early Church. None of those were right, none of those are in accordance with the Catholic religion. Holy wars and massacres are not only allowed in the Qur'an, but are also required.
The point I was trying to take is, again, I think most problems of religions are created not by just believing in God, but by interpretation done by (wo)men. These activities in the Name of the Catholic Church maybe wrong today, they even were wrong thatdays, but for the catholics and the catholic church they were in the name and word of the Lord.
They were in the name of the Lord, yes, but those actions contradicted what was written in the Bible. In most cases kings, queens, and emperors were responsible for those actions, not the Pope (though, since there were bad Popes, some of those atrocities were approved by him).
I really beliefe that Earth with its live on it is just a coincidence, and that we are only a little bit of dust in the whole existence of all. I don't dare to beliefe that we are the most intelligent beeings, also not the most reasonable.
Though I believe our existence was planned from the beginning, I don't believe we are the most intelligent or reasonable beings. I believe the angels are both more intelligent and more reasonable, and of course that God is infinitely intelligent and reasonable.
And now a really challenging question(s):
Do you need the catholic church for your believe in God?You said, in the homosexual thread, that a homosexual who does act against the catholic church, if he commit homosexual acts (if I interporeted your words correctly). But you also said that actions in the past, like inquisition, were against what the catholic church stands for. As I said: Today these acts would be against it, but in past times it was exactly what the catholic chruch stands for that days. So what makes the conter homosexual teachings of the catholic church any more trustworthy, as the past time teachings against wiches and non-believers?
Homosexual sex acts are wrong according to Church doctrine, which is permanent. Witches were burned at the stake because they were thought to be users of black magic, but it is not and never was an actual doctrine, or even rule of the Church. The same goes for the Inquisition. The Inquisition as we know it was not formally approved by the Church, but a less severe form of it was in order to root out heresies. It was never a Church doctrine that heretics should be rooted out and killed, though it was permitted and at times encouraged. So the question isn't really that hard. It is important to distinguish between Church doctrine, which we believe is infallible and permanent, and actions permitted or encouraged by the Pope, since those actions may be fallible.
But I also think it is more complicate than that. There are some very delicate topics, which are not scrateched with that.
in Exsample what topic is not even scratched:
In the State of Vatikan it is illegal to commit sex out of marriage, you have to be marriaged to commit sex. (So it is illegal to commit homosexual sex at all, because you would not be married in the state of Vatikan.) Nice thing, but: The age for being marriaged depends in the State of Vatikan on the sex: Male may marriage with 16 years, female with the age of 12... (I didn't find any news, if the Age of marriage was raised, I only can find that in Spain the age of marriage was raised from 14 to 16.)
In Vatican City, I think it is fine to have restrictions like that since it has a population of something like 400 people, almost all of which are Roman Catholic, I am sure.