In the seventh conversation ("diálesis" -- controversy) edited by professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that sura 2:256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion." It 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 Koran, concerning holy war.
Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels," he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: "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 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 is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably ("syn logo") 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...."
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: Not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. 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. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practice idolatry.
Originally posted by: TheWart
here is the transcript of the speech
Here are the relevant paragraphs:
In the seventh conversation ("diálesis" -- controversy) edited by professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that sura 2:256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion." It 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 Koran, concerning holy war.
Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels," he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: "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 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 is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably ("syn logo") 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...."
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: Not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. 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. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practice idolatry.
Make up your own minds, but I think this thing has been blown out of proportion, and the murdering of the nun and the burning of churches/etc has taken it way, way too far.
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
murdered nun. this is sick
http://www.garoweonline.com/stories/publish/article_5022.shtml
Italian Nun Murdered In Somalia
17 Sep 17, 2006, 10:13
An Italian nun was shot dead at a hospital by Somali gunmen Sunday, hours after a leading Muslim cleric condemned Pope Benedict XVI for his remarks on Islam and violence.
Originally posted by: waggy
the pope was stupid. there is no way they wouldnt have known that this was going to anger the muslims. makes me wonder why he said it.
It's a much closer analogy, and I see nothing wrong with the opinion, though I disagreeOriginally posted by: Molondo
How does rap sound
Rap music as a whole is, IMO, worthless. The world would be a better place without it.
happy?
Originally posted by: NFS4
If you were born in China to Chinese parents, what would your religion likely be?
If you were born in Egypt to Egyptian parents, what would your religion likely be?
If you were born in India to Indian parents, what would your religion likely be?
For this reason, I hold no ill will to different religions from around the world. Who knows what kind of religious background I'd grow up in if my parents didn't raise me Baptist. I may not agree with another religion's teachings, but I respect their rights to believe in what they want to believe in.
characterized some of the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, Islam's founder, as "evil and inhuman."
Palestinian Muslims hurled firebombs and opened fire at five churches in the West Bank and Gaza Strip Saturday to protest the Pope's comments, sparking concerns of a rift between Palestinian Muslims and Christians.
An Italian nun was shot dead at a hospital by Somali gunmen Sunday, hours after a leading Muslim cleric condemned Pope Benedict XVI for his remarks on Islam and violence.
Originally posted by: jjsole
To apologize for the proceeding furor, while implicitely standing behind the remarks is disingenuous and deceitful imo.
Originally posted by: TehMac
You know your history well.Originally posted by: waggy
yeah. after all the church NEVER has used force to get people to convert..
The church never did.
Nice try though, come again?
But yeah, Islam in a way is perverted in wrong. Only recently did Muslims who moved to America try to make Islam look more "civilized". It is a barbaric religion started up in a barbaric part of the world.
And its followers are a bunch of ignorants and savages who are led by ignorants and hate filled fools who seek to dominate the world.
I'm tired of this Muslism ass kissing for the sake of appearing neutral.
True, some Muslims are decent and many I respect for their disipline and faith in their beliefs as well as their self restraint from commenting on the idiocy of their counterparts in the middle east.
With that said, a good deal too many of these Muslisms are fanatical crackpots who at one little misconception of an insult will try and and follow the destructive legacies of their ancestors.
While the rest of the world is advancing, they've pulled themselves back in a dark age far worse than what Europe experienced when Rome fell.
The Pope should release a new statement asking for all the Muslims who don't like what he said to
"KISS HIS ASS!"
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: jjsole
To apologize for the proceeding furor, while implicitely standing behind the remarks is disingenuous and deceitful imo.
Why?
Originally posted by: gevorg
The Pope is very wise. I bet he know how muslims would react.
Originally posted by: huberm
i think it is funny how islamics got all offended that he quoted that, so they go burn churches, threaten his life, etc.
The islamics were offended because they feel they are not militant and harsh, yet they do this?
The Speech was not about Islam, but a discourse on faith and Reason, and the various phases that the Christian Religion has passed through. It is an interesting speech, which undoubtedly will receive more attention than was probably thought possible, simply because some nut cases hell bent on an Islamic/Christian war, have seen an opportunity to stir up the ignorant to serve the militant purposes of Religious Deviates.
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: jjsole
To apologize for the proceeding furor, while implicitely standing behind the remarks is disingenuous and deceitful imo.
Why?
His apology was more of a "sorry to hear it, sorry you were hurt", rather than a genuine apology that takes responsibility for the hurt and the disrespect that he showed muslims with his comments.
And that's the definition imo of a disingenuous apology, and its deceitful to pretend (imo) to show compassion for the situation when he's not regretful for the dagger he himself delivered to muslims as a whole, who are already feeling disrespected by much of the world.
If Islam is ever to peacefully co-exist with other faiths in the manner that Christendom finally learned how to do, then it has to start abiding questions and criticisms without resorting to violence. Islam has to learn to persuade and to attract people through reason, not through forced conversions and coexistence through violent supremacy. Muslim leaders around the world still believe that our faith can only exist at their sufferance, and any question of their doctrinal beliefs has to be met with violence or demands for apologies, not with rhetoric, facts, and reason.
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: CKent
Originally posted by: Molondo
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
The Islamic culture as a whole is, IMO, worthless. The world would be a better place without it.
.............................,-~*`¯lllllll`*~,..........................................
.......................,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,....................................
..................,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,..................................
...............,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\.................................
.............;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\................................
..............\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/.........\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,...........................
...............\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*...........`~-~-,...(.(¯`*,`,..........................
................\llllllllllll,-~*.....................)_-\..*`*;..)..........................
.................\,-*`¯,*`)............,-~*`~................/.....................
..................|/.../.../~,......-~*,-~*`;................/.\..................
................./.../.../.../..,-,..*~,.`*~*................*...\.................
................|.../.../.../.*`...\...........................)....)¯`~,..................
................|./.../..../.......)......,.)`*~-,............/....|..)...`~-,.............
..............././.../...,*`-,.....`-,...*`....,---......\..../...../..|.........¯```*~-,,,,
...............(..........)`*~-,....`*`.,-~*.,-*......|.../..../.../............\........
................*-,.......`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*..........|.,*...,*...|..............\........
...................*,.........`-,...)-,..............,-*`...,-*....(`-,............\.......
Thats Something along the lines me saying
The black man as a whole is, IMO, worthless. The world would be a better place without them.
No it's not. We are able to choose our religious beliefs, and our religious beliefs absolutely have an effect on our behavior. Religion and race are two entirely different things, and I agree with Astaroth on this one.
If you were born in China to Chinese parents, what would your religion likely be?
If you were born in Egypt to Egyptian parents, what would your religion likely be?
If you were born in India to Indian parents, what would your religion likely be?
For this reason, I hold no ill will to different religions from around the world. Who knows what kind of religious background I'd grow up in if my parents didn't raise me Baptist. I may not agree with another religion's teachings, but I respect their rights to believe in what they want to believe in.
Some Muslim leaders accept apology
Some Muslim leaders said they accepted the Pope's personal apology.
Senior Muslim clerics in India said it would "help in building good relations between Muslims and Christians" and asked their supporters to call off planned protests.
Turkey's foreign minister said the Pope was still expected to visit in November in what would be his first trip to a Muslim nation.
"From our point of view, there is no change," Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul told reporters before departing for a trip to the United States.
Representatives of the Muslim community in Canada also praised the Pope for his apology on Sunday.
"We commend him for offering the apology," said Mohamed Elmasry, president of the Canadian Islamic Council. "I think he is setting an example to youth all over the world, not only to Catholics, but youths of other faiths that even the Pope can make a mistake, and if you do make a mistake you can offer regret, or retraction or apology."
"Right now is a time for healing," he added, saying there was a need for more understanding between Roman Catholics and Muslims.
Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Pope Sorry for Reaction to His Remarks
By PIER PAOLO CITO, Associated Press Writer
4 hours ago
CASTEL GANDOLFO, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI said Sunday that he was "deeply sorry" about the angry reaction to his recent remarks about Islam, which he said came from a text that didn't reflect his personal opinion.
"These (words) were in fact a quotation from a Medieval text which do not in any way express my personal thought," Benedict told pilgrims at his summer palace outside Rome.
The pope sparked the controversy when, in a speech Tuesday to university professors during a pilgrimage to his native Germany, he cited the words of a Byzantine emperor who characterized some of the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, Islam's founder, as "evil and inhuman."
"At this time I wish also to add that 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," the pope said Sunday.
Muslim leaders in the Mideast gave mixed reactions to the pontiff's apology.
Mahmoud Ashour, the former deputy of Cairo's Al-Azhar Mosque, the Sunni Arab world's most powerful institution, told Al-Arabiya TV immediately after the pope's speech that, "It is not enough. He should apologize because he insulted the beliefs of Islam. He must apologize in a frank way and say he made a mistake."
Mohammed al-Nujeimi, a professor at the Institute of Judicial and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, also criticized the pope's statement.
"The pope does not want to apologize. He is evading apology and what he said today is a repetition of his previous statement," he told Al-Arabiya TV.
The Vatican released a statement Saturday saying the pope "sincerely regrets" that Muslims were offended, but stopped short of the apology demanded by many Muslim leaders.
But the leader of Egypt's largest Islamic political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, said that "while anger over the Pope's remarks is necessary, it shouldn't last for long."
"While he is the head of the Catholic Church in the world, many Europeans are not following (the church) so what he said won't influence them. Our relations with Christians should remain good, civilized and cooperative," Mohammed Mahdi Akef told The Associated Press.
Turkey's foreign minister said Sunday the pope was still expected to visit in November in what would be his first trip to a Muslim nation. "From our point of view, there is no change," Abdullah Gul told reporters before departing for a trip to the United States.
The Vatican's secretary of state echoed Gul's remarks.
"I hope that he will do" the trip, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone was quoted as saying by the Italian news agency ANSA. "Until now, there are no reasons not to make it."
Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier urged world religious leaders to show "responsibility and restraint" to avoid what he called "extremes" in relations between faiths.
"We understand perfectly how sensitive this sphere is. I think it would be right if we call for responsibility and restraint from the leaders of all world faiths," he said during a meeting with parliamentary leaders from Group of Eight nations in the Russian resort city of Sochi.
In his speech on Tuesday, Benedict quoted from a book recounting a conversation between 14th century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II and an educated Persian on the truths of Christianity and Islam.
"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the pope said. "He said, I quote, '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.'"
The remarks sparked protests and some violence across parts of the Muslim world.
Earlier Sunday in the West Bank, two churches were set on fire as anger over the pope's comments grew throughout the Palestinian territories.
In the town of Tulkarem, a 170-year-old stone church was torched before dawn and its interior was destroyed, Christian officials said. In the village of Tubas, a small church was attacked with firebombs and partially burned, Christians said. Neither church is Catholic, the officials said.
Palestinian Muslims hurled firebombs and opened fire at five churches in the West Bank and Gaza Strip Saturday to protest the Pope's comments, sparking concerns of a rift between Palestinian Muslims and Christians.
Security was high at the summer palace before Benedict spoke Sunday. Police patted down many pilgrims, confiscating umbrellas with metal tips and bottles of liquids. Sharpshooters kept watch from a balcony and other officers, dressed like tourists, monitored the crowd with video cameras.
Police headquarters across Italy were also ordered to raise security at potential Catholic targets, the Italian news agency ANSA reported. However, at the Vatican, no additional security measures could be seen as tourists strolled across St. Peter's Square.
Italian Interior Minister Giuliano Amato said he believed tensions over Benedict's remarks wouldn't result in any further heightening of security concerns. He told Italian state radio that suspected terrorist cells under surveillance inside the country were considered to be focused on targets "outside of Italy."
Originally posted by: Madwand1
How about those in positions of vast responsibility also take into account that negligent words about an entire religion and its founder are going to be taken negatively by the entire population, and so negatively by a few as to hurt the cause of peace more than anything else?
Is it really news that if you demonize Mohammed publicly that you'll get hostile reactions? Of course these aren't good reasons for violence, but do you still need to learn that there are people around who find these good reasons for violence?
The intellectual stretch here for many is that they do not represent the whole, and that by fanning the flames of hatred, the extremists are strengthed. This is exactly what they want -- the pope did them a big favour. He should have been smarter and not made the mistake in the first place, and once he'd realized the mistake, backed off better. There are moderates who have accepted the apology. But they're drowned out in the noise of the immoderates and their attendant media coverage, still fueled by an apology for the reaction but not the words.
This is another mistake -- to apologize for the reactions. You don't apologize for triggering terrorism, that justifies the terrorism and makes you to blame in part. You apologize for saying something inflamatory, not for their reactions.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/09/17/pope.html
Some Muslim leaders accept apology
Some Muslim leaders said they accepted the Pope's personal apology.
Senior Muslim clerics in India said it would "help in building good relations between Muslims and Christians" and asked their supporters to call off planned protests.
Turkey's foreign minister said the Pope was still expected to visit in November in what would be his first trip to a Muslim nation.
"From our point of view, there is no change," Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul told reporters before departing for a trip to the United States.
Representatives of the Muslim community in Canada also praised the Pope for his apology on Sunday.
"We commend him for offering the apology," said Mohamed Elmasry, president of the Canadian Islamic Council. "I think he is setting an example to youth all over the world, not only to Catholics, but youths of other faiths that even the Pope can make a mistake, and if you do make a mistake you can offer regret, or retraction or apology."
"Right now is a time for healing," he added, saying there was a need for more understanding between Roman Catholics and Muslims.
If you really want peace, you should focus on the "healing", and not on fanning the flames further. It's clear that many here don't want peace, as it is plainly obvious elsewhere. The role of those who actually want peace is to speak out against all those who generate violence, and in this case, that applies to the pope, and those who are yet to accept the apologies given. I further hope for a better apology to be given instead of foolish pride, so that the cause of war is hurt further.
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: jjsole
To apologize for the proceeding furor, while implicitely standing behind the remarks is disingenuous and deceitful imo.
Why?
His apology was more of a "sorry to hear it, sorry you were hurt", rather than a genuine apology that takes responsibility for the hurt and the disrespect that he showed muslims with his comments.
And that's the definition imo of a disingenuous apology, and its deceitful to pretend (imo) to show compassion for the situation when he's not regretful for the dagger he himself delivered to muslims as a whole, who are already feeling disrespected by much of the world.
But the point is that he didn't say anything negative about Islam. He is simply apologizing that people didn't understand what he said.Originally posted by: Madwand1
How about those in positions of vast responsibility also take into account that negligent words about an entire religion and its founder are going to be taken negatively by the entire population, and so negatively by a few as to hurt the cause of peace more than anything else?
Is it really news that if you demonize Mohammed publicly that you'll get hostile reactions? Of course these aren't good reasons for violence, but do you still need to learn that there are people around who find these good reasons for violence?
The intellectual stretch here for many is that they do not represent the whole, and that by fanning the flames of hatred, the extremists are strengthed. This is exactly what they want -- the pope did them a big favour. He should have been smarter and not made the mistake in the first place, and once he'd realized the mistake, backed off better. There are moderates who have accepted the apology. But they're drowned out in the noise of the immoderates and their attendant media coverage, still fueled by an apology for the reaction but not the words.
This is another mistake -- to apologize for the reactions. You don't apologize for triggering terrorism, that justifies the terrorism and makes you to blame in part. You apologize for saying something inflamatory, not for their reactions.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/09/17/pope.html
Some Muslim leaders accept apology
Some Muslim leaders said they accepted the Pope's personal apology.
Senior Muslim clerics in India said it would "help in building good relations between Muslims and Christians" and asked their supporters to call off planned protests.
Turkey's foreign minister said the Pope was still expected to visit in November in what would be his first trip to a Muslim nation.
"From our point of view, there is no change," Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul told reporters before departing for a trip to the United States.
Representatives of the Muslim community in Canada also praised the Pope for his apology on Sunday.
"We commend him for offering the apology," said Mohamed Elmasry, president of the Canadian Islamic Council. "I think he is setting an example to youth all over the world, not only to Catholics, but youths of other faiths that even the Pope can make a mistake, and if you do make a mistake you can offer regret, or retraction or apology."
"Right now is a time for healing," he added, saying there was a need for more understanding between Roman Catholics and Muslims.
If you really want peace, you should focus on the "healing", and not on fanning the flames further. It's clear that many here don't want peace, as it is plainly obvious elsewhere. The role of those who actually want peace is to speak out against all those who generate violence, and in this case, that applies to the pope, and those who are yet to accept the apologies given. I further hope for a better apology to be given instead of foolish pride, so that the cause of war is hurt further.