Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

[tvolsfan]

as far as i can tell protestants claim moral superiority simply because they haven't been around as long (for full disclosure i'm a protestant that went to catholic school). there is plenty of blame to go around in every religion.

Just out of curiosity, aren't you an atheist/agnostic? Maybe I remember that wrong.

 

[droski]

Just out of curiosity, aren't you an atheist/agnostic? Maybe I remember that wrong.

agnostic. i suppose i should have said born protestant.

 

[tvolsfan]

agnostic. i suppose i should have said born protestant.

That's what I assumed, but I was just trying to clarify.

 

[droski]

i'm no lover of the catholic church in general, but i'm a firm believer in the good they have done through education. particurally the jesuits.

 

[tigervol9802]

i'm no lover of the catholic church in general, but i'm a firm believer in the good they have done through education. particurally the jesuits.

There's a lot about the Jesuits I don't necessarily agree with, but in term of education you are 100% correct.

 

[gsvol]

Hard to blame the demise of that library on one culture and/or religion. I am pretty sure that the Romans, Christians, and Muslims were all pretty instrumental in destroying both the library and its works.

The final destruction of that famous library came
at the hands of the islamic saracen forces in 640
AD, although the pagan Julius Ceaser did destroy
some of the Greek works in trying to establish
dominance of the Roman over the Greek cultures.

Saracens Conquer Egypt Destruction Of The Library At Alexandria

The destruction of the Alexandria Library, by
command of Omar, was as complete as the
extinction of literature in China by Hwangti,
as head of the Moslem religion.

Omar, using the intrepid Amru, was vicariously
proselyting in true Mahometan style - in one
hand offering the Koran, the while the other
extended the sword.

After a successful campaign in Palestine, Omar's
victorious banners were planted in the historic
soil of the Pharaohs. A protracted siege of seven
months found Amru master of the royal city of
Alexandria. The library there was famed as the
greatest magazine of literature. But this availed
nothing with the ruthless Omar, for he doomed it
to annihilation.
----------------------------------

"But the piecemeal destruction of many hundreds
of thousands of manuscripts was no trifling task,
even for a despotic caliph. A few escaped their
doom; how, we do not know.
---------------------------

The reply of Omar was laconic, but fatal.
"The contents of those books," said he, "are
in conformity with the Koran, or they are not.
If they are, the Koran is sufficient without
them; if they are not, they are pernicious.
Let them, therefore, be destroyed."

 

[rjd970]

You are correct. The Church bought Galileo a fabulous Roman villa and ensured that he would be comfortable the rest of his life while he continued his scientific research and teaching.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Tbe Church basically issued an apology 350 years later. I'm sure they thought they treated more than fair.

You are either being intentionally obtuse or unable to comprehend my point. You want to discuss how Galileo wasn't treated all that bad instead of discussing no matter how relevant Galileo's punishment was, it was still more than any card carrying church member of the Nazi party was subjected to.

As far as the particulars of what Galileo actually went through, I couldn't care less.

 

[therealUT]

The final destruction of that famous library came
at the hands of the islamic saracen forces in 640
AD, although the pagan Julius Ceaser did destroy
some of the Greek works in trying to establish
dominance of the Roman over the Greek cultures.

Saracens Conquer Egypt Destruction Of The Library At Alexandria

You do understand that the story of Umar's destruction is held as dubious by many Western historians, most notably Bernard Lewis, right?

 

[therealUT]

Tbe Church basically issued an apology 350 years later. I'm sure they thought they treated more than fair.

You are either being intentionally obtuse or unable to comprehend my point. You want to discuss how Galileo wasn't treated all that bad instead of discussing no matter how relevant Galileo's punishment was, it was still more than any card carrying church member of the Nazi party was subjected to.

As far as the particulars of what Galileo actually went through, I couldn't care less.

The Church no longer arrests and/or subjects members to corporal or capital punishment.

You are, in effect, asking for the Church to supernaturally regain the political, military, and legal powers it had in the Middle Ages.

Do you know what excommunication is? It is not locking someone up. It is simply stating that the person cannot receive Eucharist until absolved by the Church. Do honestly believe that by excommunicating a small number of mid-level players in the Nazi Regime, the atrocities of the Holocaust would have been significantly altered for the benefit of mankind???

 

[sjt18]

This is ridiculous. You are correct, Jesus never committed any violent acts (aside from whipping merchants in the Temple).

No. Truly ridiculous is comparing the righteous anger of Christ in the temple to the craven acts of violence committed by Muhammad and many of his followers in the name of Islam.

However, Jesus certainly, for a one who is supposedly a god, did not do much to explicitly distance himself from violent teachings, laws, and/or prophets. Do you remember when Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus? Elijah certainly was not a pacifist. I think he ordered the deaths of all Ahab's prophets and then goes on to kill three of Ahaziah's soldiers. Maybe Jesus was peaceful in that he celebrated the Passover; you know, the celebration commemorating that time when "his father" sent the angel of darkness through Egypt to kill all first-born males...

We simply have no common foundation to debate this non-sense. You cannot discern between righteous wrath and wrath emanating from unbridled, immoral, egocentric lusts.

 

[sjt18]

It certainly wasn't the Catholic Church pressuring the Attorney General in Tennessee to put John Scopes on trial.

Nope... It was a set up by supporters of evolution so that they could embarrass those opposed to abortion. The trick worked. WJB was not allowed to plead his case.

 

[sjt18]

as far as i can tell protestants claim moral superiority simply because they haven't been around as long (for full disclosure i'm a protestant that went to catholic school). there is plenty of blame to go around in every religion.

Some of us believe that non-Catholics were around continuously for the last 2000 years but claim no moral superiority other than a superior faith in the text of the NT.

And no.... quite frankly there isn't. Who have Baptists persecuted? The 1st Amendment found its greatest support from Baptists, Independents, and Separatists... and other groups that both Protestants and Catholics considered heretical. Part of the "heresy" of Baptists dates back at least to the late 1500's... "separation of church and state".

We have never believed that force or gov't should be used to advance the cause of Christ... Just like the NT says.

 

[rjd970]

The Church no longer arrests and/or subjects members to corporal or capital punishment.

You are, in effect, asking for the Church to supernaturally regain the political, military, and legal powers it had in the Middle Ages.

Do you know what excommunication is? It is not locking someone up. It is simply stating that the person cannot receive Eucharist until absolved by the Church. Do honestly believe that by excommunicating a small number of mid-level players in the Nazi Regime, the atrocities of the Holocaust would have been significantly altered for the benefit of mankind???

At this point I should just walk away from the conversation.

I'm not saying the Church should have done to the Nazis what they did to Galileo. They could have done other internal brandishing up to and including excommunication. It's like a brick wall at this point, but the issue is they did something to Galileo, they did nothing to any member of the Nazi party. Even a formal pronouncment of "These individuals, given the actions perpetrated during WWII, are no longer able to receive sacrament or to be counted in any Catholic Church registry" would have been something.

 

[IPorange]

Some of us believe that non-Catholics were around continuously for the last 2000 years but claim no moral superiority other than a superior faith in the text of the NT.

And no.... quite frankly there isn't. Who have Baptists persecuted? The 1st Amendment found its greatest support from Baptists, Independents, and Separatists... and other groups that both Protestants and Catholics considered heretical. Part of the "heresy" of Baptists dates back at least to the late 1500's... "separation of church and state".

We have never believed that force or gov't should be used to advance the cause of Christ... Just like the NT says.

I have personal life experiences that tell me many Baptists are human garbage and manipulative, violent, lying pieces of ****. No BS "1500's separation of church and state" manufactured history is going to change what I have personally seen and experienced. Some Baptists and Church of God folks in the mid-South are hate-filled beyond imagination.

 

[tigervol9802]

I have personal life experiences that tell me many Baptists are human garbage and manipulative, violent, lying pieces of ****. No BS "1500's separation of church and state" manufactured history is going to change what I have personally seen and experienced. Some Baptists and Church of God folks in the mid-South are hate-filled beyond imagination.

:hmm:

 

[IPorange]

:hmm:

Tell me I'm a liar. I know what I've personally seen.

 

[tigervol9802]

Tell me I'm a liar. I know what I've personally seen.

That wasn't meant for you. It was for the fact I know that you are 100% correct and legitimately breaks my heart in half as well as pisses me off beyond belief.

 

[therealUT]

No. Truly ridiculous is comparing the righteous anger of Christ in the temple to the craven acts of violence committed by Muhammad and many of his followers in the name of Islam.



We simply have no common foundation to debate this non-sense. You cannot discern between righteous wrath and wrath emanating from unbridled, immoral, egocentric lusts.

Its righteous if it is committed by followers of your god; it is not if it is committed by followers of Allah. Right...

Nope... It was a set up by supporters of evolution so that they could embarrass those opposed to abortion. The trick worked. WJB was not allowed to plead his case.

I think you meant "those opposed to evolution". Those opposed to the Theory of Natural Selection should be embarrassed.

Some of us believe that non-Catholics were around continuously for the last 2000 years but claim no moral superiority other than a superior faith in the text of the NT.

And no.... quite frankly there isn't. Who have Baptists persecuted? The 1st Amendment found its greatest support from Baptists, Independents, and Separatists... and other groups that both Protestants and Catholics considered heretical. Part of the "heresy" of Baptists dates back at least to the late 1500's... "separation of church and state".

You do realize that the Southern Baptist Convention was formed in 1845 on the foundations that Baptist theology and scripture interpretation formed a defense for their institution of slavery, right?

I would argue that goes against your "who have Baptists persecuted" argument, as well as the spirit of your "1st amendment found its greatest support".

Baptists and Anabaptists actually date back to 1609.

We have never believed that force or gov't should be used to advance the cause of Christ...

Nope...just slavery...

 

[tigervol9802]

Its righteous if it is committed by followers of your god; it is not if it is committed by followers of Allah. Right...



I think you meant "those opposed to evolution". Those opposed to the Theory of Natural Selection should be embarrassed.



You do realize that the Southern Baptist Convention was formed in 1845 on the foundations that Baptist theology and scripture interpretation formed a defense for their institution of slavery, right?

I would argue that goes against your "who have Baptists persecuted" argument, as well as the spirit of your "1st amendment found its greatest support".

Baptists and Anabaptists actually date back to 1609.



Nope...just slavery...

Christianity was also the driver that ended the slave trade in England as well, almost exclusively through William Wilberforce.

 

[therealUT]

Christianity was also the driver that ended the slave trade in England as well, almost exclusively through William Wilberforce.

That, along with white-slavery. Michel Foucault spends around forty to fifty pages covering this issue in his book Madness and Civilization: The History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. As more of the mentally unstable, as well as vagabonds and beggars, were forced into labor, the need to purchase African slaves dropped off significantly in Europe.

 

[tigervol9802]

That, along with white-slavery. Michel Foucault spends around forty to fifty pages covering this issue in his book Madness and Civilization: The History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. As more of the mentally unstable, as well as vagabonds and beggars, were forced into labor, the need to purchase African slaves dropped off significantly in Europe.

Are you saying the church in Europe (specifically England in my mind) helped stop/curtail or encouraged white slavery?

 

[therealUT]

Are you saying the church in Europe (specifically England in my mind) helped stop/curtail or encouraged white slavery?

Encouraged. Especially in France and England.

 

[tigervol9802]

Encouraged. Especially in France and England.

Yes and no.

The church in England was basically split on how to handle the industrial revolution and what came with it. Slow acting? Sure. But at the same time Christians in England attempted (and in some cases succeeded) to stop the exploitation of the workers as well.

 

[therealUT]

Yes and no.

The church in England was basically split on how to handle the industrial revolution and what came with it. Slow acting? Sure. But at the same time Christians in England attempted (and in some cases succeeded) to stop the exploitation of the workers as well.

You are misunderstanding what I mean by white-slavery. I am not simply talking about blue-collar, low class workers. Starting in the 18th Century, the governments of France and England began rounding up "the unreasonable". These including both people that were mad, as well as vagabonds and beggars.

Initially, they simply institutionalized them, at the behest of the Bourgeoisie, to keep the riff-raff off the streets. By the end of the 18th Century, beginning of the 19th Century these governments realized they could put the institutionalized to work in non-skilled labor positions.

Most of the institutions were run by the Catholic Church (in France) and the Church of England (in England, of course). The history is shocking and compelling. Yet, I have not found that any academic has disputed Foucault's findings.

 

[tigervol9802]

You are misunderstanding what I mean by white-slavery. I am not simply talking about blue-collar, low class workers. Starting in the 18th Century, the governments of France and England began rounding up "the unreasonable". These including both people that were mad, as well as vagabonds and beggars.

Initially, they simply institutionalized them, at the behest of the Bourgeoisie, to keep the riff-raff off the streets. By the end of the 18th Century, beginning of the 19th Century these governments realized they could put the institutionalized to work in non-skilled labor positions.

Most of the institutions were run by the Catholic Church (in France) and the Church of England (in England, of course). The history is shocking and compelling. Yet, I have not found that any academic has disputed Foucault's findings.

I have never heard about this. That's very interesting and sad.

That said, I'm not about to come here and make jsutifications for the many screw-ups that have littered the church throught the past 2000 years. They are well documented and most intellegent and grounded in faith Christians regret they happened and wish they never had. That said, Christians through the ages have done their part to repair social ills as best as possible.

As I said earlier, just because managment and upper management of an organization is corrupt, that doesn't mean the lower level workers are as well. In many cases, esp with the church in the middle ages, the Vatacin had so much power that it was impossible for a layman to do anything to correct it. And those that tried usually met a terrible ending. Most, if not all church ills have come when it became too intertwined with governments and tried to regain to much power.