Did the Pope Slander Islam?

[M.Dancer]

"We tell the worshipper of the cross (the Pope) that you and the West will be defeated, as is the case in Iraq,

Afghanistan,

Chechnya," said a Web statement by the Mujahideen Shura Council, an umbrella group led by Iraq's branch of al Qaeda.

"We shall break the cross and spill the wine ... God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome ... (May) God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the mujahideen," said the statement, posted on Sunday on an Internet site often used by al Qaeda and other militant groups.

Yep... the Pope says that Moslems "live by the sword", and how do Moslems react? With the sword. Kind of proves his point.

Notwithsatnding the reactions of knee jerk muslims....that's not what the Pope said at all.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict...ensburg_en.html

[kimmy]

As I HIGHLY doubt many Muslims have read the actual speech (illiteracy being quite high in the Muslim world), I would say "read the actual speech which had a small portion quoted out of context and then brayed out to the Muslim world so they could start tearing at their beards again."

During the "cartoon crisis", it turned out that British muslim clerics had gone on a tour of muslim countries, circulating inflammatory drawings that Postens had never even published, with the aim of provoking an angry response.

I would expect that the same is probably going on with this latest "crisis" as well. There seem to be some who believe that riling up the muslim world would benefit some sort of cause.

-k

[Chuck U. Farlie]

"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".

He did say the above quote. Maybe I was a bit off with "live by the sword", but he did quote some emperor as spreading their faith by the sword, and then some extremists come off saying that Rome will be defeated - which basically proves the point.

[M.Dancer]

"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".

He did say the above quote. Maybe I was a bit off with "live by the sword", but he did quote some emperor as spreading their faith by the sword, and then some extremists come off saying that Rome will be defeated - which basically proves the point.

Yes but what you have done is exactly what the knee jerk muslims have done....taken one quote out of context...omitting......

The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent.

....and

At this point, as far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we are faced with an unavoidable dilemma. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true?

.....on another note, the audacity of a Byzantine emperor knocking the muslims for spreading the faith via the sword........In the Deline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon goes into great detail the battles that the xtians fought against the pagans fo their souls........

[Rue]

I would also warn Mr. Anthony his eye could get poked out by the point in the Pope's hat/head. I would advise him to avoid anyone who wears robes unless they look like Paris Hilton who I have decided should be everyone's God since she has no brain and has absolutely nothing to say about anything.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Yes but what you have done is exactly what the knee jerk muslims have done....taken one quote out of context...omitting......

Thats not the point I was trying to make. I personally don't care what the Pope said in context or not.

I just find it ironic that a lot of Moslems, and not just the extremists either, are taking what they THINK the Pope said, and are reacting exactly the way that they THINK the Pope said it. Shouldn't they be reacting in the opposite manner just to prove him wrong?

[Charles Anthony]

I would also warn Mr. Anthony his eye could get poked out by the point in the Pope's hat/head.

If such an attack is the result of my invasion of his personal space, would I still have a right to follow the "eye for an eye" rule?

I would advise him to avoid anyone who wears robes unless they look like Paris Hilton who I have decided should be everyone's God since she has no brain and has absolutely nothing to say about anything.

I do not think I care about what she wears, if you can promise that she says absolutely nothing.

[M.Dancer]

Yes but what you have done is exactly what the knee jerk muslims have done....taken one quote out of context...omitting......

Thats not the point I was trying to make. I personally don't care what the Pope said in context or not.

I just find it ironic that a lot of Moslems, and not just the extremists either, are taking what they THINK the Pope said, and are reacting exactly the way that they THINK the Pope said it. Shouldn't they be reacting in the opposite manner just to prove him wrong?

I don't find it surprising at all. The media, whether it is canadian or egyptian is lazy and opportunistic. What makes a more interesting headline?

POPE: Muslims Live By Sword

or

Pope discusses the evolution of religious critical thinking from the Hellenists to the modern age.....

[myata]

To be fair (and after reading and making an effort to understand the pointiff's point) I still can't quite figure out how the quote in question fits in his line of thought and why this particular quote was chosen to be in that place. Which leaves only two possibilites: unintentional messup or deliberate attempt to insult. So this is a valid question. Personally, I don't see any gain in the second, so my vote is for the "goof". Which still doesn't reflect well on his ability to lead such an important institution.

I'm all for the the "reason" argument and only wish it'll be (eventually) applied in the everyday practice as well as in learned discussions.

[scribblet]

To some extent this is all part of irrresponsible journalism which centred on a piece taken out of context ,which the media knew would inflame the Muslim street (well, and the demonstration planners). He actually only made one mention of Islam in a rather long speech. A small part which has been picked up on and taken out of context is being used to inflame the radicals.

The words which have not been heeded were only an implied criticism of Islam, that is a faith which is deaf to reason not only acts in way that displeases God, e.g. through conversion by force, but also has problems entering into dialogue with different cultures. Surely therefore, it is a challenge to all religious leaders, including Islam, to engage in such dialogue with the Pope (and other religious leaders) - reason should be the weapon of choice.

Why is it that when Islam is criticized there are violent mass protests, and demands for an apology, but when do Christians ever protest violently and demand an apology for all the pain, fear and death they have been caused through terrorism, beheadings, death threats, anti-Semitism etc.?

How many other faiths would respond so violently to a fairly innocuous message and a call for dialogue with other religions Now what was the response by some Muslims - oh yeah, they are calling for a day of anger, attacking churches in the PA, killing, and calling for violence against the Pope.

"How dare you call our religion violent, we should kill you for that"..... say what !

[jbg]

"How dare you call our religion violent, we should kill you for that"..... say what !

Didn't Mohatma Ghandi threaten to kill anyone who called him "violent"?

[August1991]

The current pope is an academic and was speaking to a crowd of academics - not to illiterate goat herders.

Argus, you are a bigot.

How can that be when August1991 says Argus is one of his favourite posters and August has been here like ---forever!

Since my name somehow got involved in this, let me respond.

It seems to that we have to choose between the Pope (who doesn't like gays) and an illiterate goatherder (who doesn't like gays).

Or, in multicultural land, the illiterate goatherder has a valid culture worthy of our respect since the comparison of cultures is purely subjective and we cannot say which cultures are good or bad.

Is it bigotry to say that certain worldviews (ie. cultures) are backward and ignorant?

Now then, between a backward, ignorant Pope Benedict and a backward, ignorant Ayatollah Khamanei, I think I'd choose the Pope. For one, the Pope seems to have an appreciation of reason and the scientific method. (I think that was a point made in his speech.) For two, the Pope - as Stalin famously observed - has no divisions. Khamanei has far more temporal power - he's commander in chief of Iran's military.

-----

As to this speech, I think the Pope knew perfectly well what he was doing and saying. He chose the name Benedict to represent Europe. He clearly wants Europe to be Christian. That does not mean he is opposed to reconciliation or peaceful co-existence. He will soon go to Turkey.

Lastly, I don't know if Argus is a bigot or not but he's certainly not politically correct. I find him vulgar at times. Leafless, just because I enjoy reading a poster most certainly does not mean I agree with the poster. I object to this kind of guilt by association.

[jbg]

Somehow, I'm left out of this fun?

[cybercoma]

.....on another note, the audacity of a Byzantine emperor knocking the muslims for spreading the faith via the sword........In the Deline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon goes into great detail the battles that the xtians fought against the pagans fo their souls........

Let's live in 2006, hmm?

I don't see great battles being waged where Christians are flying passenger jets bound for Tehran into mosques.

Try playing the reality card.

[myata]

Let's live in 2006, hmm?

I don't see great battles being waged where Christians are flying passenger jets bound for Tehran into mosques.

Try playing the reality card.

Uhmm ... what about Christiands flying bomber jets?

[Argus]

Let's live in 2006, hmm?

I don't see great battles being waged where Christians are flying passenger jets bound for Tehran into mosques.

Try playing the reality card.

Uhmm ... what about Christiands flying bomber jets?

When they start trying to maximize civilian deaths - like the Muslims - instead of minimizing them, you'll have a point.

[myata]

Maximizing, minimizing... We'd have to read the mind to know. Why don't just put two numbers, side by side, plain and simple. Is one is any better than the other just because it was maximizing (sorry, the other way)?

[sharkman]

Maximizing, minimizing... We'd have to read the mind to know. Why don't just put two numbers, side by side, plain and simple. Is one is any better than the other just because it was maximizing (sorry, the other way)?

The issue is becoming muddled in your mind. One is trying to kill themselves and take out as many infidels (women and children civilians and men) as they can as their Holy Book teaches so they can claim 72 virgins. The other isn't.

And Scriblet, a very valid point: anyone daring to call their religion violent is risking death. How ironic.

[jbg]

And Scriblet, a very valid point: anyone daring to call their religion violent is risking death. How ironic.

They admit they are the Religion of Pieces.

[myata]

And we're here all for love. I should agree. Then, one question you guys always fail to answer is this:

why is it that the bodycounts resulting from your "love" far exceed those of their hate?

[PocketRocket]

In his apology he explained.....

Look. I-- I'd had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was, 'That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.'

No one is to throw any stones until I blow this whistle, even, and I want to make this perfectly clear, even if they DO say Jehova.......

[Rue]

Look all I know is in Tunisia they are pulling La Soleil and other French newspapers that suggested in an article that Islam incites anger and terror. According to the Tunisian government, Islam is a religion of peace and love.

All those people screaming and yelling and all those clerics on t.v. discussing the intifadah and the coming war against the West and its infidels and all this talk about killing Jews and Israelis and non believers, its all just part of the peace process and part of love.

Get with it. The Pope should love his fellow humans. He should get on his balcony and light something on fire, and then urge a slaughter of some sect. Feel the love.

[Argus]

Maximizing, minimizing... We'd have to read the mind to know.

No, we wouldn't. We would know very clearly because if the Israelis or Americans or Brits wanted to maximize civilian casualties they'd be dropping cluster bombs and napalm into packed soccer stadiums and markets> Wouldn't be very difficult at all.

[August1991]

Maximizing, minimizing... We'd have to read the mind to know.

No, we wouldn't. We would know very clearly because if the Israelis or Americans or Brits wanted to maximize civilian casualties they'd be dropping cluster bombs and napalm into packed soccer stadiums and markets> Wouldn't be very difficult at all.

You're right Argus. It wouldn't be difficult.

When Harry Truman approved the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he did exactly as you suggest. Churchill did the same when he approved the bombing of Dresden.

I'm not certain that claiming the West only aims to kill combatants and not civilians is a tenable argument. Given circumstances, the West can aim for civilian deaths too.

Argus, the only tenable argument is that we are right. Galileo, standing before the inquisition, murmured it best, "But it moves." The West uses reason to question superstition and intuition - as stationary as we seem to be, we know the earth is moving.

[myata]

They don't have to. Civilian death toll in just one country (Iraq) in just two months was over 6,500.

That's way more than the combined casualties of all terrorist acts since before 9/11.