Do you think Pope is wise in making this statement even in quote?

[kai]

'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'

Conquering the Arabian peninsula is part of the military aspect of the political situation during that time, Muhammed did not forced and spread the religion by the sword. That phrase is a disinformation of the west Christian Propaganda. which is it military or not?

It is just like if I, as a Jew's spiritual and religious leader were to say "Show me just what Jesus or Paul brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the cross the faith he preached", and the evil and inhuman can be seen from the forced conversion of native American during the early period of European invasion of the new continent yes and i dont think many will deny the inhuman tratment of the americas and the "cross" is this a weapon GC?

I am not trying to pitch Judaism against Christianity, but just as parallel to illustrate the serious implication of accusing another religion esteem holy one.

does not compute

 

[greatcalgarian]

Wait...

I've quoted the mufti during the war in 48, does that mean I agree with him?

No.

The problem is that the pope didn't proclaim his disagreement with the Byzantine.

You are not the Pope. You can say anything, and people may understand what you say. However, from the exerted text reported by various MSM, the Pope did quote and can be inferred that he agreed with the quote. I did not find the complete lecture of the Pope that was in question, and is not in the position to know exactly the situation. However, if the media has reported correctly and has not been in the usual habit of distorting the story to make it sensational, it may be safe to infer that the Pope may actually be quoting that to describe his own personal feeling and understanding of Mohammed.
You said the problem may be the phrase in red, but I really doubt it. Look at the length of time the Vetican office coming up with the response, and only now when things have been out of control that the Vetican office is trying to do some damage control, but I do not expect the Pope will proclaim disagreement with Byzantine.

 

[Djamila]

that is what you said

Exactly?

 

[greatcalgarian]

does not compute

Never mind.

 

[kai]

Exactly?

its not the same thing djamilla and you know it! come on, are you now saying you mean manuel11 not the pope?

 

[greatcalgarian]

so he is hinting that agreed with manuel 11, hinting?, hinting?,
1. A slight indication or intimation:
1. A brief or indirect suggestion;
2. A statement conveying information in an indirect fashion;

well it seems you were wrong GC he has said
"These in fact were a quotation from a medieval text, which do not in any way express my personal thought".

i hope you will be apologising GC

I have not read this (in red) reported in the media. If the Pope has said that, then if I could not find and read those in the reported news from MSM, then MSM must be having an axe to grind with the Pope, or has a hidden agenda to stir up Muslim vs Catholic. I shall search more and see whether that is the case.

You see, Alan said that the Pope didn't claim his disagreement.

 

[GloriaPatri]

'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'

Yes, there are quotes in the Qu'ran that say to kill the pagans, etc. Muhammed's successor (I can't remember his name) continued to forcibly conquer land. He did spread Islam through force. You can't deny a historical fact.

It is just like if I, as a Jew's spiritual and religious leader were to say "Show me just what Jesus or Paul brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the cross the faith he preached", and the evil and inhuman can be seen from the forced conversion of native American during the early period of European invasion of the new continent

Jesus spread Christianity through preaching - not by conquering Israel. He was a pacifist and preached a message of love, tolerance, and good deeds. Yes, Christians have done evil things but that doesn't mean Jesus was evil. You see, Jesus didn't do anything evil or inhumane.

 

[Djamila]

its not the same thing djamilla and you know it! come on, are you now saying you mean manuel11 not the pope?

Oh God, the fact that he quoted someone else is irrelevent to me. He still said it.

He repeated this quote as a means of strengthening his arguement in the speech he gave, and made no attempt to refute it. This lends, at the very least, approval to the quote on behalf of the Pope - and thus he is responsible for his words.

If I wrote an article about the importance of an Islamic government and cited quotes from Arab leaders denouncing Kemal Mustafa Ataturk and the secular reforms he brought to Turkey, and then continued with my hypothesis that Islamic government is the only acceptable option... it would be common sense that I at least approved these quotes denouncing Kemal Mustafa Ataturk, if I didn't, why put them in the article? If they were an example of what I didn't believe, I would certainly frame these quotes as such - or else I've made a mockery of my entire speech.

And I'm just a normal, everyday woman. The Roman Catholic Pope, like all those in leadership positions, has even more responsibilities and is justified in being held to even higher expectations.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Muslim anger grows at Pope speech

The Pope's comments came on a visit to Germany

A statement from the Vatican has failed to quell criticism of Pope Benedict XVI from Muslim leaders, after a speech touching on the concept of holy war.
Speaking in Germany, the Pope quoted a 14th Century Christian emperor who said the Prophet Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhuman" things.
Pakistan's parliament passed a resolution on Friday criticising the Pope for making "derogatory" comments.
The Vatican said the Pope had not intended to offend Muslims.

HAVE YOUR SAY
I think the Pope's comments weren't anti-Islamic, they were used to prove a point


Chris, Liverpool

Send us your comments


"It is clear that the Holy Father's intention is to cultivate a position of respect and dialogue towards other religions and cultures, and that clearly includes Islam," said chief Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi in a statement. But in spite of the statement, the pontiff returned to Rome to face a barrage of criticism, reports the BBC's David Willey in Rome.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5347876.stm

 

[greatcalgarian]

Yes, there are quotes in the Qu'ran that say to kill the pagans, etc. Muhammed's successor (I can't remember his name) continued to forcibly conquer land. He did spread Islam through force. You can't deny a historical fact.


Jesus spread Christianity through preaching - not by conquering Israel. He was a pacifist and preached a message of love, tolerance, and good deeds. Yes, Christians have done evil things but that doesn't mean Jesus was evil. You see, Jesus didn't do anything evil or inhumane.

True, New Testament has nothing bloody, but Catholic and Protestants are not using only the NT, occasionally they used the OT, and when using that could be very bloody.

Jesus/Paul did not do anything evil or inhumane, and you are implying that Moahammed did do something evil or inhumane? If it is just something, it is still better than the quote, which is implying Mohammed has brought nothign good except evil and inhumane.

 

[Ody]

I have noted a double standard GC, when one such as the pope declares his message to be misinterpreted, you will not hear it, however when the president of Iran says so, your all ears.

 

[Ody]

For reference for this tedium.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,,1873277,00.html

 

[greatcalgarian]

Found the text, and I do not think the Pope has said he disagreed with the emperor:

In the seventh conversation (*4V8,>4H - controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably (F&#215;< 8`(T) is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_09_06_pope.pdf

 

[greatcalgarian]

I have noted a double standard GC, when one such as the pope declares his message to be misinterpreted, you will not hear it, however when the president of Iran says so, your all ears.

Love is blind I love President of Iran

 

[GloriaPatri]

Jesus/Paul did not do anything evil or inhumane, and you are implying that Moahammed did do something evil or inhumane?

Yes, conquering the Arabian peninsula. He coerced the population into accepting Islam by forcing them to get rid of the pagan idols, etc.

 

[GloriaPatri]

I have noted a double standard GC, when one such as the pope declares his message to be misinterpreted, you will not hear it, however when the president of Iran says so, your all ears.

I never said anything about Iran. Don't put words in my mouth, please.

 

[GloriaPatri]

Found the text, and I do not think the Pope has said he disagreed with the emperor:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_09_06_pope.pdf

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2000486.cms

"The pope on Sunday apologised in person for the angry Muslim reaction to his comments on Islam. Benedict XVI added for good measure that his quote from a 14th century Christian Byzantine emperor about Prophet Mohammed and jehad didn’t reflect his personal opinion."

 

[kai]

Oh God, the fact that he quoted someone else is irrelevent to me. He still said it.

He repeated this quote as a means of strengthening his arguement in the speech he gave, and made no attempt to refute it. This lends, at the very least, approval to the quote on behalf of the Pope - and thus he is responsible for his words.

I am sorry you didnt understand his speech it was abou the responsibility and rationality of your actions and not laying the blame or responsaiblity on god, not an attack on Islam

If I wrote an article about the importance of an Islamic government and cited quotes from Arab leaders denouncing Kemal Mustafa Ataturk and the secular reforms he brought to Turkey, and then continued with my hypothesis that Islamic government is the only acceptable option... it would be common sense that I at least approved these quotes denouncing Kemal Mustafa Ataturk, if I didn't, why put them in the article? If they were an example of what I didn't believe, I would certainly frame these quotes as such - or else I've made a mockery of my entire speech.

And I'm just a normal, everyday woman. The Roman Catholic Pope, like all those in leadership positions, has even more responsibilities and is justified in being held to even higher expectations.

i think ist a missunderstanding he is very academic and his speech was not understood

 

[greatcalgarian]

Yes, conquering the Arabian peninsula. He coerced the population into accepting Islam by forcing them to get rid of the pagan idols, etc.

In China, those accepted Christianity were forced to get rid of their ancestor respect cutsom as well, getting rid of the pagan idols of the Chinese, by force actually....

Let us faced it, all religion at a certain stage or time did have unreligious behavior. I am not arguing Muslim or Islam, the entire population really practice Peace but nothing else. The question here is "Mohammed is nothing but evil and inhuman" that is unacceptable.
The Pope is calling Mohammed resorting to violenct to spread Islam as wrong, but has he looked at the Catholics in the early period when Constantine accepted Christianity?

This is the Pot calling the Kettle black, and I do not think he is doing a good lecture if what he is trying to do is to tell every one that preaching should be done in peace and not by force.

 

[greatcalgarian]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2000486.cms

"The pope on Sunday apologised in person for the angry Muslim reaction to his comments on Islam. Benedict XVI added for good measure that his quote from a 14th century Christian Byzantine emperor about Prophet Mohammed and jehad didn’t reflect his personal opinion."

Thanks for the link. Hope this will settle the issue and bring peace to interfaith. God bless.