English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I was thinking about what the pope said. He outraged the muslim world by stating

'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.'

Without going into the reaction from the muslim world, isn't it a bit ironic that the quotation taken from Byzantine emperor Manuel was quoted as 14th Century (the dark ages?) where insurmountable attrocities & barbarism were commited under the flag of christianity, eg

+ Pagan torture and mass genocide 6th Cent
+ Emperor Karl (Charlemagne) in 782 had 4500 Saxons, unwilling to convert to Christianity, beheaded.
+ Spanish inquisition (Spanish Inquisitor Torquemada alone allegedly responsible for 10,220 burnings.)
+ from the beginning of Christianity to 1484 probably more than several thousand 'witches' killed
List goes on (http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm)

So isn't that quote a little rich?

2006-09-18 10:55:28 · 38 answers · asked by Joe_Floggs 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

I've got to be honest, I'm not against the pope here, i;m just wondering about the 'hypocracy' of that quote.

2006-09-18 11:02:48 · update #1

38 answers

On Tuesday, September 12th, Pope Benedict XVI made a speech on "Faith and Reason" at the University of Regensburg in Germany and quoted from writings of an erudite 14th Century Byzantine Christian Emperor, Manuel II Palaiologos. Manuel II took notes during his dialogs in 1391 with the Persian Muderris at Ankara and his notebooks were preserved as the "Twenty-six Dialogs with a Persian" on the "truths of Christianity and Islam". The pontiff quoted Manuel II who said that spreading the faith through violence is unreasonable and that acting without reason was against God's nature.

Manuel II's empire had been conquerored by Muslims and was made to pay the jizyah (submission tribute) so naturally he experienced Islam at its worst. Between 1379 and 1402 Byzantium had paid 690,000 hyperpyra (or 345,000 ducats) to the Ottomans.
http://www.roman-emperors.org/manuel2.htm

The pontiff said, "Speaking about the issue of jihad, holy war, the emperor [Manuel II] said, 'Show me just what Muhammad 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.'"

"Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul," added the pontiff in his own words.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=46474

Muslim reaction to that speech spanned from outrage to violence against nuns and churches. An Iraqi insurgent group threatened the Vatican with a suicide attack over the pope's remarks on Islam, according to a statement posted Saturday on the Web.

"We swear to God to send you people who adore death as much as you adore life," said the message posted in the name of the Mujahedeen Army on a Web site frequently used by militant groups. The message's authenticity could not be independently verified. The statement was addressed to "you dog of Rome" and threatens to "shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home."

Full statement by Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone on Pope Benedict XVI's response to Muslim anger over a speech he gave in Germany Tuesday... the pontiff was "very sorry" if he offended the sensibilities of Muslims worldwide.
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2006-09/16/05a.shtml

On Sunday, September 17th the pontiff said, " I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5353774.stm

Pope Benedict has the right to speak, he can certainly quote from the Bible and he can quote former Popes. His "apology" that he regrets Muslims became upset is appropriate because Muslims are always offended and humiliated whenever anything is said about Islam that is unflattering.

Pope Benedict made the comments in a speech at the University of Regensburg which was probably a written speech and his remarks were probably carefully researched and edited. In my opinion, the quote was appropriate for the times of the Crusades. The quote also seems applicable to Islamic jihhadists today.

Of course Muslims are outraged. It is a tenet of Islam that any time the religion is attacked that all Muslims have a duty to defend it. Violence gets attention. The timing of the speech is just before Ramadan. (Dates for Ramadan 2006 (or the Islamic year of 1427) are September 24th thru October 23rd.)

I wonder what level of protection the Swiss guards at the Vatican provide? What kind of weapons do they have?

Some contemporary evangelical Christian leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Jerry Vines have called Muhammad "a terrorist" and a "demon possessed pedophile who had twelve wives". Daniel Pipes sees Muhammad as a politician, stating that "because Muhammad created a new community, the religion that was its raison d'etre had to meet the political needs of its adherents." By contrast, Pope Benedict quoting Manual II is quite mild.

Here is what Robbie Burns wrote and I think it can also be applied to jihaddists of today although it was written for Christians:
"On Thanksgiving For A National Victory"
Ye hypocrites are these your pranks
to murder men and give God thanks?
Desist, for shame proceed no further
God does ne want your thanks for murder.

Yah, I know, there is no compulsion in religion (2:256) and Islam is a peaceful religion. Taqiyah.

The one page essay by Dr. Walid Phares, "Islamic concept of Al-Taqiyah to infiltrate and destroy kafir countries" explains how a convert will become a terrorist:
http://www.fisiusa.org/fisi_News_items/news109.htm

Phares states, "It [taqiyah] is done to prevent the new converts from seeing the real face of Islam; at least until their faith or mental conditioning is strong enough to make them turn against their own country and people."

Not all Muslims blow up things, yet "jihad in the cause of Allah" "jihad fee sybil Allah" is "fard ayn" "compulsory duty" for all Muslims. Why? There are rules from the Quran for combattive jihad. Read this:
http://www.notislam.com/id8.html
What does the tape from Gadahn mean? Does anyone realize that Muslims are supposed to "dawa" "invite others to Islam" before jihad?

According to al-Mawardi an 11th Century Shafi'i jurist:

The mushrikun [infidels] of Dar al-Harb (the arena of battle) are of two types: First, those whom the call of Islam has reached, but they have refused it and have taken up arms.… Second, those whom the invitation to Islam has not reached, although such persons are few nowadays since Allah has made manifest the call of his Messenger…it is forbidden to…begin an attack before explaining the invitation to Islam to them, informing them of the miracles of the Prophet and making plain the proofs so as to encourage acceptance on their part; if they still refuse to accept after this, war is waged against them and they are treated as those whom the call has reached…

In the Hidayah, vol. II. p. 140 (Hanafi school):
It is not lawful to make war upon any people who have never before been called to the faith, without previously requiring them to embrace it, because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith, and also because the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war… If the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax, it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do."

Islam is insidious, it encroaches on a culture slowly and deliberately. Here is a document which discusses the progression of Islam in great detail (50+ pages) -- "From dawa to jihad - the various threats from radical Islam to the democratic legal order":
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/netherlands/dawa.pdf

Among Muslims there are those who:
a) jihad in the path of Allah with their wealth and their lives (including those who sit at home but give asylum to mujahidin 4:74) = true Muslim
b) those who sit at home (and do not give asylum to mujahidin or jihad in the path of Allah)
c) the handicapped (does not count as a category)

According to the Qur'an who is a true believer?

3:140 If you have sustained a wound, _ (a blow in the battlefield) _ others too have suffered a similar kind of wound, earlier. These are the vicissitudes of life that We circulate among mankind by turns. Thus, Allah tests the true believers among you, so He may pick the martyrs among you. Allah does not like the wrongdoers.

4:95 The two are not equal: those who sit at home (and do not join the fighting) _ unless they have a reason; they are handicapped _ and those who [jihad] strive hard in the path of Allah with their wealth and lives. Over those who sit at home, Allah has excelled and elevated to a higher honor those who strive hard with their wealth and lives.
Compared to those who sit at home, Allah will award a far greater reward to those who wage a struggle.

8:74 Those who believed, left their homes and waged a struggle for the cause of Allah as well as those who helped and protected them are really the true believers. There is forgiveness for them and a generous rewards.

49:15 The (true) believers are actually those who believe in Allah and His messenger and then do not waver (and do not entertain doubts). With their wealth and their lives, they strive for the sake of Allah. Such are truly the sincere ones

9:86 As soon as a chapter (of the Qur’an) is revealed (instructing them), “Believe in Allah and wage a struggle along with His messenger” the able bodied (and well to do) among them ask to be exempted. They say, “Leave us (behind). Let us be among those who sit at home

Killing (qitl) and jihad in the cause of Allah is the hallmark of true Muslim believers. It is not a matter of moderate or fanatic. It is the distinction of a true believer or a rebel.

4:76 Those who believe, do fight for the sake of Allah, while those who reject faith (Islam) fight for the cause of ‘taghut’ _ (all rebellious forces aligned against Allah). So, fight against the minions of Shaitan. Feeble indeed is the wily guile of Shaitan!

Does this include atomic weapons?
8:60 Acquire and prepare all the (military) strength you can muster, including the finest trained horses (and other military wares). With that, you would daunt and deter the enemies of Allah _ your enemies, and others besides them. You do not know them, but Allah (surely) knows them. Anything you spend in the path of Allah will be returned to you in full. You will not be wronged (at all).

2:216 Warfare (for the sake of Allah) has been ordained for you, though it is not something you like. It is possible that the thing you detest might just (turn out to) be good for you. It is possible that the thing you like (the most) might in reality be bad for you. Allah knows (all) while you know nothing (at all)!

4:74 Those who have traded away the life of this world for (the benefits of) the life-to-come, ought to fight for the sake of Allah. To anyone who fights for the sake of Allah, We will award the most generous reward whether he is killed (in the process) or comes out victorious.

These verses from the Qur'an can give us insight into the mind of a Muslim believer and the peaceful religion of Islam. Do read the entire sura from which they were extracted to get the entire context of the verses. It may make a difference.

2006-09-19 14:36:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

They all have their funny little inconsistencies and paranoid hypocricies, most religions and faiths do. It seems to make people braindead. Just look at the looney element in football fans, it's the same, they have an unjustified hate of the opposition.

But it's not just religion, russia and china, all so called communist countries were as barbaric as religious countries.

People will be people, untill they become satisfied with their own lives they won't be able to face peace.

Of all the religions Islam is the faith the most pushed around the world, by stealth, by any means at their disposal. The devil does'nt exist, people are the demons. They treat each other with contempt. I have never experienced so much contempt against me than I did when I was in Iran and other parts of the ME. My crime apparently was that I was a female not chained to the kitchen sink, barefoot and pregnant. I was a woman first before I was a person, and I did'nt feel any better treated than the livestock.

2006-09-18 11:08:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Yes the history of the Catholic church contains much violence, but you cannot change the past. You can only change the future.

I find it very refreshing that the pope claims using the sword to spread faith is evil and inhumane. If the popes of the Middle Ages had agreed with him, the Crusades would not have happened. If the Muslims at the time of the Crusades had agreed with him, they would not have been waging their jihad against the Christian Byzantine Empire and it never would have sent out the plea to Rome for help which resulted in the Crusades.

The crimes of the past do not justify crimes in the present. Violence in the name of religion must stop. When a plea to end violence in the name of religion results in worldwide condemnation, I have to seriously wonder what is wrong with the world.

2006-09-18 11:05:53 · answer #3 · answered by scifiguy 6 · 5 0

The irony is that he used a religious bigot to preach against religious bigotry. The Pope was saying that in the 14th century, Manuel was appalled at Islam spreading religion by the sword rather than through reasoned debate.
The world of Islam brought us universities and places of learning algebra mathematics engineering and architects.
The hypocrisy is where religion was used to incite hatred and act as a recruitment drive for Christian English Saxons to invade the German pagan Saxon lands for Charlemagne because they wouldn't pay their taxes.
Human "Faith" leads to the Divine comedy of religious bigots of all stripes who profess Love and Peace as their credo being the most violent psychos. That's Hypocrisy.

2006-09-22 05:36:03 · answer #4 · answered by Ashley K 3 · 0 0

properly, that's no longer somewhat what the Pope mentioned, in spite of what you have gotten heard. What the Pope extremely mentioned grew to become into that Protestant church homes are incomplete interior the experience that they have got not got the full non secular authority handed down from the apostles to their successors. He additionally mentioned that Protestant and Orthodox church homes have a "degree of the certainty" and are certainly Christian. yet you're good -- that's ironic that the comparable Protestants who bash Catholics in this communicate board and let us know that we are no longer "actual" Christians are those doing the main wailing and gnashing of the teeth. curiously the shoe extremely pinches while that's on the Protestant foot for a transformation. "How ought to the Pope say we are no longer actual Christians?" (sob, whimper, whine) i wish that people who've been maximum vocal approximately their hatred of Catholicism will bear in strategies the harm they felt while they thought they have been being advised they weren't actual Christians. perhaps they are going to think of two times earlier they lash out at a brother or sister in Christ -- no count what denomination they are.

2016-10-15 03:36:07 · answer #5 · answered by mcfee 4 · 0 0

You are correct that many atrocities have been done in the name of Christianity. The difference is now it is the name of Islam that atrocities are committed on a massive scale.

Personally I am spiritual and not religious. Especially the old Testament and the Koran have a lot of violence in them which if taken seriously much suffering will result. This is why I only take the good from the texts I read and leave the rest behind as blind allegiance to any texts is extremely dangerous mode of not thinking.

2006-09-18 11:03:58 · answer #6 · answered by Love of Truth 5 · 3 0

Without a doubt. Almost every Christian I know looks down on Islam as a backwards religion steeped in violence... yet fails to understand that their own history is almost exactly the same. Christianity had a 600 year head start over Islam, so maybe it just needs a little time to be curbed in by the common sense of the outside world like Christianity did.

2006-09-18 10:59:25 · answer #7 · answered by Eldritch 5 · 2 0

That's because you didn't read the quote in context. The Pope was not saying "This proves that Christianity is better than Islam". The Pope was saying that even in the 14th century, some people were appalled at spreading religion by the sword than than through reasoned debate.

2006-09-18 10:59:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Even more irony, here's a response from muslims:

"Al-Qaida in Iraq said Muslims would be victorious and addressed the pope as "the worshipper of the cross" saying "you and the West are doomed as you can see from the defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere. ... We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose the 'jizya' tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (being killed by) the sword."

Imagine killing a man because you were offended that he called you a killer. Mmm, that's good hypocrisy.

2006-09-18 11:00:15 · answer #9 · answered by The Resurrectionist 6 · 5 0

I think that anyone looking at this closely will find it hypocritical. But what surprised me more was the response to it was exactly what the speech said it was!! (Hey did that make sense?) I mean YES the Pope should have researched what he was saying and well should just not have said it now at this time in our history. BUT the response, killing Nuns and Christians, does this not make the saying seem true, more than dissuading us of its relevance?

2006-09-18 11:07:49 · answer #10 · answered by Queen Fromage 3 · 0 0

I don't have much time to respond fully to your question. I just have to ask you. Did you hear the whole lecture that the Holy Father gave or are you making your opinions from the limited soundbites from the press? Be careful. See if you can find the whole of the lecture to discover the context and reason of the quote. May the Lord bless and keep you. May He let the light of His face shine upon you.
God's and your beast of burden
Fr. john

2006-09-18 11:01:06 · answer #11 · answered by som 3 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers