Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue  
Message Icon Topic: Jesus had to die for our sins Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 5
Author Message
Win-Win  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Win-Win Replybullet Posted: 26 January 2019 at 11:02am
Originally posted by Ken7

No,it/she/it has not as far as I know has not done than. You are going to say your God, Allah, has done that but how do you know the Qur'an is from a goddess?


That's where human intellect comes in to making the right judgement.

The first step is to read with an open mind and a sincere objective approach, without prejudice or preconceived ideas.

After reading and reflecting, one is able to reach the right conclusion and make an informed correct decision.

The first word revealed in the Qur'an by the way was (Read)


No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Ken7  
Freshman
Freshman
Avatar
Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 56
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Ken7 Replybullet Posted: 26 January 2019 at 1:46pm
Originally posted by Win-Win


Originally posted by Ken7

No,it/she/it has not as far as I know has not done than. You are going to say your God, Allah, has done that but how do you know the Qur'an is from a goddess?
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's where human intellect comes in to making the right judgement.
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The first step is to read with an open mind and a sincere objective approach, without prejudice or preconceived ideas.
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After reading and reflecting, one is able to reach the right conclusion and make an informed correct decision.
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The first word revealed in the Qur'an by the way was (Read)
<font size="3" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">



Reading the Qur'an all by itself could not establish that it was written by any other than human beings. Your "god" could not have had anything to do with the Qur'an unless it exists. First you need to establish that your god exists before we can even begin to try to figure out if it/she/he wrote the Qur'an. I have read parts of the Qur'an and I agree to read the whole thing. Now, you need to somehow establish that your god does indeed exist. Saying "well, how else did the universe come into being exist by god creating it" is an argument from ignorance fallacy.
What is wanted is not the will to believe but the wish to find out.   Bertrand Russell
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4249
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 26 January 2019 at 3:07pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJQjpG-lGY4&t=209s

For want of a better title of this video but seems to be the only link i can find now. But in 8 minutes he pretty much sums up the age with Maher .

Your right in some things Magister,(hi by the way) i won't derail in order to detail why i see differently other than that clearly in light of a hindsight stretching between apr 2000-6000 years of biblical history its clear one was not intended to be at one with science in order to be at one so to speak with God. The RC Church did fund and transform science due to the the first universities in which the study of science among the brightest and best minds was something to the Church seen as vital. Western Christendom has become hollow . Indeed, within the very RC Church senior hierarchy have absconded from their solemn oaths,   many have entered the priesthood by deceit many having lost all faith, or having had none to begin with. I am having grave doubts about the very Pope himself who is allaying the church with a modernism that is heretical. Ominous times for Catholicism. However, such times were to proceed the end, when even the elect would falter. The decks have been stacked within the roman church, the conclave has been compromised.

Ironically however other than weaken my faith in Catholicism, it gives me surety in it.
For such things were to unfold.

Ominous times for many Catholics, and perhaps the world.

I hope you have a great 2019.

Edited by Damo808 - 26 January 2019 at 3:11pm
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Ken7  
Freshman
Freshman
Avatar
Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 56
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Ken7 Replybullet Posted: 26 January 2019 at 3:30pm
I typed in the address of the video but the page that came up said "video unavailable"
What is wanted is not the will to believe but the wish to find out.   Bertrand Russell
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Magister
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 5221
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Magister Replybullet Posted: 27 January 2019 at 1:09pm
Originally posted by Damo808

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJQjpG-lGY4&t=209s

For want of a better title of this video but seems to be the only link i can find now. But in 8 minutes he pretty much sums up the age with Maher .

Your right in some things Magister,(hi by the way) i won't derail in order to detail why i see differently other than that clearly in light of a hindsight stretching between apr 2000-6000 years of biblical history its clear one was not intended to be at one with science in order to be at one so to speak with God. The RC Church did fund and transform science due to the the first universities in which the study of science among the brightest and best minds was something to the Church seen as vital. Western Christendom has become hollow . Indeed, within the very RC Church senior hierarchy have absconded from their solemn oaths,   many have entered the priesthood by deceit many having lost all faith, or having had none to begin with. I am having grave doubts about the very Pope himself who is allaying the church with a modernism that is heretical. Ominous times for Catholicism. However, such times were to proceed the end, when even the elect would falter. The decks have been stacked within the roman church, the conclave has been compromised.

Ironically however other than weaken my faith in Catholicism, it gives me surety in it.
For such things were to unfold.

Ominous times for many Catholics, and perhaps the world.

I hope you have a great 2019.


Hi Damo. I remember watching this video a while back (not sure if it was you that referenced it to me at that time or if I came across it on my own), but he shows the errors in the ways that atheists think (or rather, GROUPthink). Don't get me wrong, I do find some atheists showing a healthy amount of skepticism, and skepticism is usually a good thing. But there's also an unreasonable amount of skepticism, or even using misinformation in order to claim religion is bad. The Catholic man's arguments against Maher were my own on these very forums years ago, Damo, if you don't remember my old debates with atheists about how religion is in and of itself not the cause of rotten human nature. It's still my defense to this day toward critics of Islam who attempt to use ISIS as the model Muslims. As for the Pope, you're not the first Catholic I see to show dissatisfaction with his approaches and positions. He is certainly the most progressive of the popes I've ever seen, which I actually find to be nice, but I don't know if he's any less Catholic in his views, opinions, than he ought to be. He's still against gays and abortions, right? He's still of the position that in order to get into heaven, one must be baptized into the church, no? This ultimately may only be a marketing tool he's using to gain more converts or at the very least more people being less hostile to the RCC.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Magister
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 5221
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Magister Replybullet Posted: 27 January 2019 at 1:22pm
Originally posted by Ken7

Originally posted by Magister

I claim there is indeed a first cause which is independent of our universe. I don't "know" anything - logic and evidence point to this. Do you think logic and evidence point to something else? Please explain.

"Now, how do you know whatever that is is outside our universe?"
I don't know. Logic just seems to point in that direction given that it makes the most sense.

Perhaps a better phrasing is not that it exists "outside" our universe, but exists "independent" of our universe.


Go back and read your post two posts back. You said "We do KNOW" that there is a first cause. You're being dishonest when you say don't KNOW. In logic our conclusions are only as reliable as the assumptions and premises we started with. A mystery cannot be solved by appealing to another mystery. It's like saying universe creating pixies are the first cause. Just like your god we have to first demonstrate those pixies actually exist before we can say they caused the universe.




Well, it'd take an atheist to jump immediately to saying "dishonest" (maybe their own guilty conscience, I don't know), but it'd take a person of common sense to think of the alternative scenario: that I made an error.

I'm using different definitions of the word "know" in each post - context-based. In the first one, I'm saying "know" more in the sense of "all the evidence points to this" while in the latter case I'm using "know" more in the sense of "we don't really KNOW anything". It was an error on my part for not clarifying that, and it was an error on my part for using the same word for the two different shades of meaning.

And again, you're jumping to the complex from the simple. You haven't grasped the simple yet in order for us to even address the complex. You can't just make that leap. Forget that anyone's "God" made the universe. First, you have to grasp that the universe did not exist here for all eternity, that it had a beginning.

Second, only after you can admit to yourself that the universe had a beginning, you can then realize that the alternative must be true: that the universe had a beginning and that it was caused to come into existence.

Third, now that you've taken the logical step that the universe was caused into existence, you need to verbally admit there was an initial cause to our universe. Forget the other attributes of the "cause" because that seems to be confusing you. Just make it simple: someTHING happened that caused our universe to exist as it is now. That's it. You've come to the conclusion that I've been bringing up for the last dozen or so posts with you that there was an initial cause to our universe.

Fourth: Now that you realize there was an initial cause to our universe, you need to be honest and answer this question: is it independent of the laws of our universe? Well, one way to discern this is to realize that it existed prior to the existence of the laws of our universe. Another way to look at it is that it brought about the existence of the laws of our universe. Perhaps it has laws it obeys of its own, I don't know - you don't know - but we see from the evidence that it is most certainly independent of the laws that we are subject to.

Fifth: once you get through the prior four steps can we move forward. If you still can't get through the prior points, and if you can't demonstrate how any of them are fundamentally false, then I don't know how to move forward from here.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4249
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 28 January 2019 at 6:08am
Originally posted by Magister


Hi Damo. I remember watching this video a while back (not sure if it was you that referenced it to me at that time or if I came across it on my own), but he shows the errors in the ways that atheists think (or rather, GROUPthink). Don't get me wrong, I do find some atheists showing a healthy amount of skepticism, and skepticism is usually a good thing. But there's also an unreasonable amount of skepticism, or even using misinformation in order to claim religion is bad. The Catholic man's arguments against Maher were my own on these very forums years ago, Damo, if you don't remember my old debates with atheists about how religion is in and of itself not the cause of rotten human nature. It's still my defense to this day toward critics of Islam who attempt to use ISIS as the model Muslims.


Well, Douthat is speaking specifically on the West's relationship with or lack there-of its Judaeo/Christian heritage.       


Originally posted by Magister

As for the Pope, you're not the first Catholic I see to show dissatisfaction with his approaches and positions. He is certainly the most progressive of the popes I've ever seen, which I actually find to be nice, but I don't know if he's any less Catholic in his views, opinions, than he ought to be. He's still against gays and abortions, right? He's still of the position that in order to get into heaven, one must be baptized into the church, no? This ultimately may only be a marketing tool he's using to gain more converts or at the very least more people being less hostile to the RCC.


He is against homosexual lifestyle buy states 'Who am i to judge' ?

He's pictured wearing and LGBT cross.

https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/report-priest-pedophilia-is-on-the-rise-again-linked-to-homosexuality#comment-241979

He releases a known gay sexual predator of minors (14 yrs old upward)from sanctions placed on him by the then Pope Benedict years earlier and re-appoints him in great places of influence.

He continued his behavior. And now its hitting the fan.

said predator went on to preside over the Chinese negotiations recently in china declaring chinese state appointed 'catholic' Bishops as legitimate clergy. This is spiritual abandonment pure and simple.

Check out the 'Dubia' if you want to know the backdoor he's left open in order for the most liberal of priests to conduct heresy from a catholic perspective.

There is his known interruption of a mass held by cardinal Mueller who was at that time conducting a high level investigation of the now deceased English cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor regarding a ritual abuse claim by a 14 year old girl. He was about to celebrate Holy Communion at His church as he does every week when he was interrupted on the alter and asked to take a call from the very Pontiff himself ( which i should state , even a death within a church should NOT prevent a mass continuing) in order for the Pope to tell him to drop the investigation... This was AFTER the pope was informed that the Cardinal Mueller was at that time mid mass celebration. Not a done thing EVER !!

I could go on and on

Check out the three separate statement issued by the (currently in hiding) Nuncio Vigano, trusted lieutenant of both PJPII and Pope Benedict, of whom Pope Francis simply says i' I will say no word on it'

No Magister, Pope Francis, is set on debasing catholic dogma. I don't believe their plan is to bring this about in but one rein, but successive popes will now be handpicked by a cliche rather than the whole of the church, unless the rot it rooted out. As i said the stacking of the decks has been in the works for over 50 years in the form of freemasonry.. He may be the culmination of the old 'Alta Vendita'.
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3247
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Shenango Replybullet Posted: 03 February 2019 at 3:24pm
Originally posted by Damo808

I don't believe their plan is to bring this about in but one rein, but successive popes will now be handpicked by a cliche rather than the whole of the church, unless the rot it rooted out. As i said the stacking of the decks has been in the works for over 50 years in the form of freemasonry.. He may be the culmination of the old 'Alta Vendita'.


I don't think you can blame liberalization on any one pope or a masonic conspiracy. Popes after all, are human beings, influenced by their environment and times. The ideas they grew up with affect them in subtle, subconscious ways in complementary fashion to their religious training.

It's not to say there isn't a conspiracy, there may well be, but I think the bigger point to be made is about Catholicism's centralization of authority, which leaves it vulnerable both to conspiracy theories and actual conspiracies. Influence one man and you've got the whole flock in toe. It also makes the whole hierarchy responsible for the bad actions of a few (like the Sex Abuse scandal), and gives those actions an official stamp of approval.

I'm not just picking on Catholicism here. Mormons have the same problem, as would any religion with such a centralized authority structure. These religions rely on the demonstrably false idea that one elect guy at the top has special revelation and/or guidance from God. These centralized models usually have poor scriptural support as well. Can a few words in Matthew 16:19 really justify the monstrosity the RCC has become today? It should be clear to all with eyes to see that the popes and Nelson of the Mormons are schmoes no better-guided than the rest of us, except more educated because of their religious training.

The Holy Spirit hasn't protected the current pope and the RCC from the excesses of the modern-day secularist-driven liberalization trend any more than his medieval predecessors against the excesses of their own greed. The common illness afflicting all of them is love of worldly life (what Islam calls the "dunya").

Sunni Islam and Protestantism's decentralized models are better at keeping reality in check.     
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4249
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 04 February 2019 at 1:24pm
Originally posted by Shenango


I don't think you can blame liberalization on any one pope or a masonic conspiracy. Popes after all, are human beings, influenced by their environment and times. The ideas they grew up with affect them in subtle, subconscious ways in complementary fashion to their religious training.


A Pope must adhere, preach and uphold to that which is according to and in harmony with Catholic doctrine.
For the vast majority of over its last 2000 years this has demonstrably been a success albeit even though acknowledged anti-popes have come and gone.


Originally posted by Shenango

It's not to say there isn't a conspiracy, there may well be, but I think the bigger point to be made is about Catholicism's centralization of authority, which leaves it vulnerable both to conspiracy theories and actual conspiracies. Influence one man and you've got the whole flock in toe. It also makes the whole hierarchy responsible for the bad actions of a few (like the Sex Abuse scandal), and gives those actions an official stamp of approval.


On the other hand 'too many chiefs' or none at all among other religious groups as the non affiliated world looks on, this also brings well not so much just heresy but bombings and religious lynch mobs, and usually to the detriment of the non affiliated. Who can fix this continual issue if no-one is recognized as authoritative and could condemn it and bring it to a close ?

If you have an answer the Non Muslim world would love to know.

Originally posted by Shenango

I'm not just picking on Catholicism here. Mormons have the same problem, as would any religion with such a centralized authority structure. These religions rely on the demonstrably false idea that one elect guy at the top has special revelation and/or guidance from God. These centralized models usually have poor scriptural support as well. Can a few words in Matthew 16:19 really justify the monstrosity the RCC has become today? It should be clear to all with eyes to see that the popes and Nelson of the Mormons are schmoes no better-guided than the rest of us, except more educated because of their religious training.


Shenango, if you think the hierarchical structure of Catholicism has no basis anywhere else in scripture other than in Mathew 16:19 then what the hell was the purpose of the Temple under the stewardship of the anointed chief priests recorded throughout the Torah ? Demonstrably God indeed set in place a hierarchical structure in which to lead the masses. Scripture as indeed history is on my side here.

Originally posted by Shenango

The Holy Spirit hasn't protected the current pope and the RCC from the excesses of the modern-day secularist-driven liberalization trend any more than his medieval predecessors against the excesses of their own greed. The common illness afflicting all of them is love of worldly life (what Islam calls the "dunya").


As i said such 'falling away' of the 'elect' is scriptural. But the Church as a body of believers will never be orphaned.


Originally posted by Shenango

Sunni Islam and Protestantism's decentralized models are better at keeping reality in check.


30,000 protestant sects and the terms 'moderate', 'fundamentalist' and 'progressive' in regards to any Muslim sect speak volumes to that statement. That and the fact as i've already told you that for thousands of years the Hebrews had centralized hierarchy which even you have to concede that God himself did indeed institute.

Edited by Damo808 - 04 February 2019 at 1:35pm
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3247
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Shenango Replybullet Posted: 05 February 2019 at 12:53am
Originally posted by Damo808

A Pope must adhere, preach and uphold to that which is according to and in harmony with Catholic doctrine.


Yes, but my point is that Catholic doctrine itself was shaped and promulgated by councils led by popes and shaped by their ideas and teachings. Unless you're claiming the pope is in violation of the Bible, I know of no other source of Christian doctrine that is not even potentially alterable. Much doctrine is established by tradition. Some tradition may become outdated over time. And that's the whole point of a modernization agenda.

Who can fix this continual issue if no-one is recognized as authoritative and could condemn it and bring it to a close ?


Decentralized faiths like Islam and Protestanism employ the scholarly consensus model. True, not having one central authority makes it more difficult to determine something definitively, but because the opinions of individuals vary, they tend to have a moderating effect, and a consensus among them is likely as definitive as things will get.

I never said the decentralized model doesn't have its drawbacks and imperfections, just that the centralized one is fatally flawed. There is simply no comparison in my view.

then what the hell was the purpose of the Temple under the stewardship of the anointed chief priests recorded throughout the Torah?


There is nothing wrong with organizing communal worship and appointing leadership to steward it. But I'm not aware the Sanhedrin or the chief priest it appointed ever claimed to be the vicars of God Almighty, or receivers of his direct revelation. The revealers were only ever the prophets.

I see now that I may have led you down the wrong track with my emphasis on centralized authority. But centralized authority comes from spiritual revelation, and that's ultimately what I'm getting at.

I mean the keys to the kingdom that Jesus (AS) supposedly gave to Peter have been interpreted to mean that popes on down the line have some sort of special access to revelation from God that continues after Jesus (AS) in unbroken succession. Mormon presidents are the same with their 'revelations'. Revelation doesn't continue down some invisible unbroken line of succession. Catholic history is replete with examples of popes who were unholy and the furthest thing from being inspired by God. That is what I'm calling demonstrably false, the idea that they were, such that this belief justifies the existence of a permanently centralized spiritual authority.

I hope my point is clearer now. Islam and Protestantism aren't decentralized by accident. It owes to their demonstrably correct view that God's revelation only came through an elect few God actively sent in history. Aside from these special periods of time, none of us have any special answers, and hence the scholarly consensus model of authority that I mentioned above. No one can claim special access because nobody has been given it.

Edited by Shenango - 05 February 2019 at 12:54am
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4249
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 05 February 2019 at 4:06pm
Originally posted by Damo808

A Pope must adhere, preach and uphold to that which is according to and in harmony with Catholic doctrine.


Originally posted by Shenango

Yes, but my point is that Catholic doctrine itself was shaped and promulgated by councils led by popes and shaped by their ideas and teachings.


As time advances so do modern ways, such councils are necessary in order to address the issues of their time. Today its abortion and contraception, unethical stem-cell technology etc etc, a moral mine field of dilemmas which ever present themselves to society throughout the ages which simply cannot be specifically gleaned from any biblical verse if one was to demand one. However such councils are duty bound to ultimately defend and preserve unto death the deposit of faith handed down from the very beginning of the Church.   

Unless you're claiming the pope is in violation of the Bible, I know of no other source of Christian doctrine that is not even potentially alterable. Much doctrine is established by tradition.Some tradition may become outdated over time.


You read my reply to Magister. The objections against Pope Francis are there.

As to conspiracy .. theory or just plain conspiracy.

Did the US infiltrate the conclave immediately post Pope Benedict's very strange resignation(incidentally accompanied with the double lightening strike on St pauls basilica 6 hrs later.)? Well many high level Catholics are concerned over a Wiki cable which suggests it may very well have been a pondered option. Acted upon ? Who can say.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/25256-catholics-ask-trump-to-probe-soros-obama-clinton-conspiracy-at-vatican

One should also check out the so called 'St Gallen mafia' within the American RC church in account to the above.   



And that's the whole point of a modernization agenda.


You seem to miss the point entirely . The Church has been modernizing for the past 2000 years, but is still in line and in keeping with the defending of the deposit of the faith.

Decentralized faiths like Islam and Protestanism employ the scholarly consensus model. True, not having one central authority makes it more difficult to determine something definitively, but because the opinions of individuals vary, they tend to have a moderating effect, and a consensus among them is likely as definitive as things will get.

I never said the decentralized model doesn't have its drawbacks and imperfections, just that the centralized one is fatally flawed. There is simply no comparison in my view.


So you admit then that in approx 1400 years the best you have is, is that some heresy here and there is ok as you see it. I see.


Originally posted by Damo808

then what the hell was the purpose of the Temple under the stewardship of the anointed chief priests recorded throughout the Torah?


There is nothing wrong with organizing communal worship and appointing leadership to steward it.


As it was for God in the Torah for e.g. you mean .


But I'm not aware the Sanhedrin or the chief priest it appointed ever claimed to be the vicars of God Almighty, or receivers of his direct revelation. The revealers were only ever the prophets.


No not vicars no, but anointed High Priests of God Almighty none the less, any difference in title is semantic.   



I mean the keys to the kingdom that Jesus (AS) supposedly gave to Peter have been interpreted to mean that popes on down the line have some sort of special access to revelation from God that continues after Jesus (AS) in unbroken succession.

Mormon presidents are the same with their 'revelations'. Revelation doesn't continue down some invisible unbroken line of succession.


What relevance does Mormonism have here ? You continue drawing false parallels between Mormonism and Catholicism when there are probably more many real parallels between Islam with Mormonism. Mormons have no pope, they operate very differently from Catholics and hold to their own set of 'divine' manuscripts like do Muslims and who likewise have their own self appointed leader who sows seeds of doubt in what came before.      

Catholic history is replete with examples of popes who were unholy and the furthest thing from being inspired by God. That is what I'm calling demonstrably false, the idea that they were, such that this belief justifies the existence of a permanently centralized spiritual authority.


Popes are merely men. As aforementioned anti-popes have come and gone and are acknowledged as such. Even Jesus had His Judas, the Temple also in ancient times had some questionable high priests. However the status of the office is ever authoritative and never questioned on its teaching .   

I hope my point is clearer now. Islam and Protestantism aren't decentralized by accident. It owes to their demonstrably correct view that God's revelation only came through an elect few God actively sent in history.


Whats 'demonstrably correct' about 30,000 + denominations interpreting the same book differently ? This is demonstrably a false statement.

How many separate Islamic groups are there and how many variances are there within each group in their interpretation of their respective scripture ? Who even knows.. ? Seems a bit mish mash to me, but your entitled to your opinion as am i mine.




Edited by Damo808 - 05 February 2019 at 4:34pm
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3247
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Shenango Replybullet Posted: 08 February 2019 at 1:00pm
Originally posted by Damo808

However such councils are duty bound to ultimately defend and preserve unto death the deposit of faith handed down from the very beginning of the Church.


So if that's not being done, and this pope isn't doing it, what does that tell you about your belief in the Holy Spirit's ability to protect the Church's teachings, and the pope from doctrinal errors? Isn't God all-powerful against any conspiracy? Doesn't that tell you that the RCC and people running it are just schmoes like the rest of us?

So you admit then that in approx 1400 years the best you have is, is that some heresy here and there is ok as you see it. I see.


Pretty much. Heresies will always be around, but the moderating effect of consensus keeps them marginal.

No not vicars no, but anointed High Priests of God Almighty none the less, any difference in title is semantic.


There is a rather chasmic difference. You see the Jews never claimed any special inspiration or direct revelation of God for the Temple priests. That's why they're just organizers of communal worship. They don't have all the spiritual trappings Catholics have wrapped the pope with. Can't you see that?

What relevance does Mormonism have here ?


Mormonism has every relevance. Both Catholics and Mormons believe revelation continues down a spiritual line of holy men. It should be long obvious to both flocks that that's not the case, and that's my whole point.

Whats 'demonstrably correct' about 30,000 + denominations interpreting the same book differently ? This is demonstrably a false statement.


Well, there aren't 30,000 Islamic sects, but even if you're referring to Protestantism that's really just saying in Christianity there's more to disagree over. But it depends on what you value more, truth or unity. I guess you're saying you choose unity over truth.

Edited by Shenango - 08 February 2019 at 1:03pm
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4249
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Damo808 Replybullet Posted: 10 February 2019 at 7:58pm
Originally posted by Damo808

However such councils are duty bound to ultimately defend and preserve unto death the deposit of faith handed down from the very beginning of the Church.


Originally posted by Shenango

So if that's not being done, and this pope isn't doing it, what does that tell you about your belief in the Holy Spirit's ability to protect the Church's teachings, and the pope from doctrinal errors?


If we contend the words of Paul "Let no one deceive you in any way. For unless the apostasy comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one doomed to perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god and object of worship, so as to seat himself in the temple of God, claiming that he is a god"(2 Thess. 2:3-4) - with what Jesus said when He promises that the'Gates of hell shall not prevail against it" in regards the Church. One must contend that the church will always be laid siege, and that such attacks will become more and more devastating towards the faithful, such as that only a 'remnant' will remain, in the last days rather than the 1.2 Billion in the world today.

So first the church must shrink rapidly which we are witnessing today throughout the West. And the scourn being poured upon the Church as a whole due to the sexual appetites of imposters. I think its fair to say that the Gospel has reached all nations, which is a precondition prior to the coming towards the end of time. I fear the day Paul speaks of is not for off.

Ultimately however the Church will not be defeated but what form that preservation takes is not clear. . Preservation of the Church does not necessarily mean preservation of say Vatican City spiritually or even physically.      

Pope Francis is a cunning man. Ex-cathedra dogmatically so far nothing of his pronouncements have been heretical so to speak. However its his off cuff comments to journos which have ruffled many conservatives as well as his post-synodal apostolic exhortation - Amoris laetitia (Joy of Love) which many conservatives also believe leaves the door open to abuse of practice by so called progressive clergy by what has been left to (intentional ?) ambiguity. As protecting the Church. The dogma and teaching of the church will always be preserved, that does not mean to say that those who lead the church are always good leaders . Yet this is nothing new really

Jesus Himself affirmed the unquestionable Authority of the Chair of Moses despite it even at that very time being served by ungodly men.

"The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. [3] All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not." Mat 23:2.

The Holy Spirit was as much at work then as is now. But God has His way of righting things.

Apostasy within the Church was foretold by Christ, also in the book of Revelations.

Its not so much that The Holy Spirit is unable to protect the Church, its just that He is allowing the snare setters to set their own snares for themselves and the unfaithful.

Also as Catholic i am a believer in the 1917 Fatima appearances of the Virgin Mary which many believe concerns Church Apostasy in the coming age and the Divine devastation that will accompany it. According to now deceaced Fr. Amorth, Chief Vatican exorcist Padre Pio said that the Third Secret pertained to the infiltration of the Vatican by Satan and the rise of a “false church” – details that are not found in the Vatican’s official publication of the Third Secret in 2000. Father Amorth stated "“One day Padre Pio said to me very sorrowfully: ‘You know, Gabriele? It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church.’”

Isn't God all-powerful against any conspiracy? Doesn't that tell you that the RCC and people running it are just schmoes like the rest of us?


No-one claimed those in high office were more than mere men. But as i said earlier for the vast most part of the last 2000 years the church has maintained and managed its hierarchical system fairly successfully. But prophesy is prophesy.


Originally posted by Damo808

So you admit then that in approx 1400 years the best you have is, is that some heresy here and there is ok as you see it. I see.


Originally posted by Shenango

Pretty much. Heresies will always be around, but the moderating effect of consensus keeps them marginal.


Or it could be said the effect is systemic tribalism and the tensions there-of which spill out in violence within mixed Islamic societies. Not to mention that by your admission within Islam Allah via Muhammad has left a legacy by which man has no source in which to turn for
authoritative spiritual guidance that he can rest assured is pure. That to me is very troubling.



Originally posted by Dam808

No not vicars no, but anointed High Priests of God Almighty none the less, any difference in title is semantic.


Originally posted by Shenango

There is a rather chasmic difference. You see the Jews never claimed any special inspiration or direct revelation of God for the Temple priests.
That's why they're just organizers of communal worship. They don't have all the spiritual trappings Catholics have wrapped the pope with. Can't you see that?


You misunderstand the role of the Chair of Peter. Revelation can come to anyone. As i said prior, the prime job of the Pope is to preserve and defend what has been passed down. But unto the Chair of Peter was conferred by Jesus Himself with great authority :"Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning any thing whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven." (Mat18:16). That's what i see.

Originally posted by Damo808

What relevance does Mormonism have here ?


Originally posted by Shenango

Mormonism has every relevance. Both Catholics and Mormons believe revelation continues down a spiritual line of holy men. It should be long obvious to both flocks that that's not the case, and that's my whole point.


Thats still your similarity ? Despite as stated that even the Torah puts and end to that nonsensical claim ?



Originally posted by Damo808

Whats 'demonstrably correct' about 30,000 + denominations interpreting the same book differently ? This is demonstrably a false statement.


Originally posted by Shenango

Well, there aren't 30,000 Islamic sects, but even if you're referring to Protestantism that's really just saying in Christianity there's more to disagree over.


No, 30,000 is just the reality of religious freedom and the ability to distinguish such differences via labels freely under the banner Protestantism.

Islam suffers the same variable differences of interpretation of scripture some valid others invalid but non freedom of religion prevents any fragmentation yet great variation remains, regardless of whether they be Shia or Sunni and is disingenuous to pretend that such fragmentation of interpretation is no different to modern day protestant group fragmentation.


Originally posted by Shenango

But it depends on what you value more, truth or unity. I guess you're saying you choose unity over truth.


I say the RCC demonstrably has both, where as Islam has neither, no ultimate source of teaching authority nor is unity ever present in the 'ummah'.
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 5
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.