posted
@PeterK: I merely say that point out acts committed by one man really isn't reasonable when it comes to this sort of debate. Mohammed might not have done anything personally wonderful, and there are those who would have argued that Jesus didn't do anything personally wonderful (depending on how you interpret the miracles, as actual events or parables). However, people who turn to Mohammed or Jesus in times of despair is an example of good acts being carried out in the name of religion. Surely no-one believes that people only turn to Islam to preach hatred.
Hence I believe the Pope's comments to have been ill-advised and unduly harsh. Burning churches isn't a sensible response however (death metal reaches Palestine!!)
Posts: 1985 | From: Reading, England | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: Sorry, it has to be good AND NEW brought by Mahomet...
One imagines that the second largest religion in the world has something novel to offer its adherents in the way of its own cultural accent on the timeless themes of all mythologies.
But I fear this may be an impossible argument: just what is your (or the dead Emperor's) criteria for "good"? (I sincerely hope your qualifying answers are not in the order of: When a Moslem takes one step away from the mountain of Islam and one step closer to Christianity)
How does the question address the relative cultural moral codes of two different societies, where what may be “good” in one circumstance for a Moslem may not be so for a Christian or Jew or Hindu or Buddhist? Or are you genuinely trying to examine an ethic of universality?
An enormous question...Hamlet, after all and in his vicissitudes ("There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so"), could be called a suicide bomber.
-------------------- The salty fragrance of L’EauD’I’mNotDedalus - made entirely of and entirely for sea turtles. Posts: 1983 | From: Chicagoland, IL | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Muslims believe that Muhammad, peace to him, gave people a book which was written by God. If you are going to ask what "good" he did, such as stopping infanticide, (why must it be "new"?) you might have a harder time looking from a non-muslim perspective. Same with Jesus, if you aren't a christian, you might even say he didn't even exist. the question is flawed.
Posts: 122 | From: Minneapolis/London | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei joined a chorus of Muslim criticism of the head of the world’s 1.1 billion Roman Catholics, calling the pope’s remarks “the latest chain of the crusade against Islam started by America’s (President) Bush”.
[Insert world-weary sigh here]
Wonko
-------------------- "It seemed to me that any civilization that had so far lost its head as to need to include detailed instructions for use in a package of toothpicks, was no longer a civilzation in which I could live and stay sane." Posts: 1462 | From: Outside the Asylum (Massachusetts) | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Now, there may be an element of 2+2=5 here - people get shot quite often in Somalia.
But we have seen such levels of idiocy previously. If it was related to Benny's comments, I really can't get my head around the logic. "My Imam says the Pope reckons Islam is violent and evil! How dare he! Quick, let's go to the childrens hospital and **** up a nun!"
Posts: 1710 | From: Newcastle, UK | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
its hilarious, in a bad way, that Iran wants war. I can't believe it. Well, I can. I thought the same thing when the people in London called for violence after the cartoons.
Posts: 122 | From: Minneapolis/London | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, Iran's just looking for an excuse. That's my personal belief anyway.
Honestly, are the radicals mad that the Pope quoted a quote saying that Islam is violent? Is that what they are angry about? Because if that's the case, they are basically saying, "How dare you call us violent! We'll kill all of you for that!" This defies logic.
So kinda what BlueStar said.
-------------------- "How do you make chocolate? You take dark chocolate, you mix it with white milk, and it becomes a delicious drink. That is the chocolate I am talking about." --Ray Nagin Posts: 1325 | From: Missouri | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
quote:The group 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 head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword."
Charming.
-------------------- People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril) Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The group 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 head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword."
Charming.
Well, they may not be Islamofascists, but it sure looks like they're Islamoimperialists.
-------------------- "Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide." - Jerry Pournelle Posts: 14567 | From: Pennsylvania | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: Sorry, it has to be good AND NEW brought by Mahomet
One imagines that the second largest religion in the world has something novel to offer its adherents in the way of its own cultural accent on the timeless themes of all mythologies.
Indeed. So one wonders why the offended Moslems don't respond by pointing out these novel benefits which Mahomet brought to the world which would not otherwise have occurred, instead of responding with bombs, burning, bullets and bloodshed.
quote: But I fear this may be an impossible argument: just what is your (or the dead Emperor's) criteria for "good"? (I sincerely hope your qualifying answers are not in the order of: When a Moslem takes one step away from the mountain of Islam and one step closer to Christianity)
How does the question address the relative cultural moral codes of two different societies, where what may be “good” in one circumstance for a Moslem may not be so for a Christian or Jew or Hindu or Buddhist? Or are you genuinely trying to examine an ethic of universality?
An enormous question...Hamlet, after all and in his vicissitudes ("There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so"), could be called a suicide bomber.
Certainly a novel reading of Hamlet. I'm sure old Bill didn't dream of making Hamlet mean that "good" and "bad" are totally subjective and meaningless and that bad things are good if somebody thinks they are good. That sort of illogical postmodern nihilist moral ultra-relativism wasn't around then. Hamlet is saying that the seed of both good and bad actions is planted when one starts to think about doing them. And I'm sure reference to "good" in the Emperor's question to a Moslem, (and in the Pope's quoting of it to a religiously diverse university body) refers to things acceppted as "good" by all concerned.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer: And sloppy drinkers, too.
Ain't no one touching my Moosehead! They even dare, it's war!
-------------------- People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril) Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: So one wonders why the offended Moslems don't respond by pointing out these novel benefits which Mahomet brought to the world which would not otherwise have occurred, instead of responding with bombs, burning, bullets and bloodshed.
Where are you looking for nonviolent Moslem responses? The Media? Have you ever known the Media to place calm, articulate, religious critics of any faith in their spotlight for an extended period of time?
-------------------- The salty fragrance of L’EauD’I’mNotDedalus - made entirely of and entirely for sea turtles. Posts: 1983 | From: Chicagoland, IL | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: And I'm sure reference to "good" in the Emperor's question to a Moslem, (and in the Pope's quoting of it to a religiously diverse university body) refers to things acceppted as "good" by all concerned.
Isn't the point that there's very little in the world that is considered "good" by all concerned?
-------------------- seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears. Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: So one wonders why the offended Moslems don't respond by pointing out these novel benefits which Mahomet brought to the world which would not otherwise have occurred, instead of responding with bombs, burning, bullets and bloodshed.
Where are you looking for nonviolent Moslem responses? The Media? Have you ever known the Media to place calm, articulate, religious critics of any faith in their spotlight for an extended period of time?
No. But in this case at least, I don't think it was the media which goaded the Moslems into their violent "response". They couldn't have reported it if it didn't happen. Instead they would have been forced to report any response they did get.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: And I'm sure reference to "good" in the Emperor's question to a Moslem, (and in the Pope's quoting of it to a religiously diverse university body) refers to things acceppted as "good" by all concerned.
Isn't the point that there's very little in the world that is considered "good" by all concerned?
If that's your point, it's a very illogical one. If mutual agreement on what is "good" was so rare, international relations, not to mention interpersonal relations, would be impossible, as they fundamentally depend on this mutual agreement. You may find your silly sophistry amusing, but 99.9% of the world's population have no problem talking about goodness without cavilling about what "good" means.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: If that's your point, it's a very illogical one.
Not at all. The death penalty is good: discuss.
quote:If mutual agreement on what is "good" was so rare, international relations, not to mention interpersonal relations, would be impossible, as they fundamentally depend on this mutual agreement.
No they don't, they depend on the leaders of the countries being able to put aside their differences of opinion to work together for their mutual benefit.
quote:You may find your silly sophistry amusing, but 99.9% of the world's population have no problem talking about goodness without cavilling about what "good" means.
I don't find your unthinking, insulting attitude amusing.
Of course people have to discuss what "good" means. What do you think the point of international meetings is? Of organisations like the UN? Or do you honestly think that everybody on the whole planet really thinks the same about every subject?
-------------------- seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears. Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: If that's your point, it's a very illogical one.
Not at all. The death penalty is good: discuss.
That isn't a logical response; you've just isolated one specific issue. Unless you can show that it is representative of all moral disputes, you've demonstrated nothing.
quote:You may find your silly sophistry amusing, but 99.9% of the world's population have no problem talking about goodness without cavilling about what "good" means.
I don't find your unthinking, insulting attitude amusing. [/quote] I would suggest that 95% or more of your fellow snopesters consider *both* of you to be less than wholly good because of your use of insulting language.
quote: Of course people have to discuss what "good" means. What do you think the point of international meetings is? Of organisations like the UN? Or do you honestly think that everybody on the whole planet really thinks the same about every subject?
I think that 99.9% of humanity agree on the basic moral values, having to do with murder, rape, theft, torture, etc.
Such universal morals break down when exceptions are taken into consideration, based on justifications such as greater good, retribution, defense against aggression, and so on. But that doesn't rebut the fact that such universal morality does exist.
Silas (never claimed to be "wholly good" either)
Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: The Emperor asked first. But I guess he'd point you to the Sermon on the Mount in answer to your question (and yes I do know that many of the ideas there were already current in certain strands of Judaism, though not central).
So which are good and original to Jesus?
-------------------- ~~Ai am in mai prrrrrraime!~~ Posts: 10111 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: Certainly a novel reading of Hamlet. I'm sure old Bill didn't dream of making Hamlet mean that "good" and "bad" are totally subjective and meaningless and that bad things are good if somebody thinks they are good. That sort of illogical postmodern nihilist moral ultra-relativism wasn't around then.
What about Montaigne? "I find that there is nothing barbarous and savage in this nation, by anything that I can gather, excepting, that every one gives the title of barbarism to everything that is not in use in his own country. As, indeed, we have no other level of truth and reason, than the example and idea of the opinions and customs of the place wherein we live: there is always the perfect religion, there the perfect government, there the most exact and accomplished usage of all things." 1580, when Shakespeare was nobbut a lad of 16.
-------------------- ~~Ai am in mai prrrrrraime!~~ Posts: 10111 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer: That isn't a logical response; you've just isolated one specific issue. Unless you can show that it is representative of all moral disputes, you've demonstrated nothing.
Well, I'm not going to list them all, am I?
quote:I think that 99.9% of humanity agree on the basic moral values, having to do with murder, rape, theft, torture, etc.
Define "murder". How is it defined in the Congo? Veitnam? South Africa?
Rape is bad? Tell that to the soldiers at Nanking. Or in concentration camps. Tell that to the soldiers who worked for Saddam. Or the police in Afganistan. Or any of a hundred examples I could provide.
Theft is bad? Again, define "theft". There's a huge controvosy going on at the moment due to illegal downloads. That's classed as theft, and yet a very sizable number of people do it.
Torture? Isn't there controversy over the fact that the US has shipped out prisoners to countries that use torture as part of their interrogation techniques? Haven't they even tried to redefine the word "torture" so that they can get away with doing more themselves? And I'll tell you what, as much as I've heard people condemn this and fight against it, I've heard many people praise it, too.
So, no, I don't think that these things are universally condemned.
quote:Such universal morals break down when exceptions are taken into consideration, based on justifications such as greater good, retribution, defense against aggression, and so on. But that doesn't rebut the fact that such universal morality does exist.
But of course it does. You can't say "this is bad, except when we do it." I don't think that there is such a thing as a universal morality. Morality is a product of society, a device that ensures that we can all live together. It's certainly not absolute, and changes with the situation - both the situation that an individual is in, and the situation that a group of people find themselves in.
-------------------- seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears. Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chloe is a Goddess; I didn't intend to turn our attentions onto the philosophical muse-pool of 16th Century Europe (although, of Shakespeare's contemporaries, I think Marlowe could probably be called a "postmodern nihilist" or "moral ultra-relativist"). Hamlet is far too complex and contradictory a character (much like Jesus and Muhammad) to assign any one meaning to his loftiest phrasings.
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: But in this case at least, I don't think it was the media which goaded the Moslems into their violent "response". They couldn't have reported it if it didn't happen. Instead they would have been forced to report any response they did get.
I hardly think one needs to "force" the Media to report a violent "Moslem Retaliation!!! BAM! POW! FIZZ! Cue the Eagle eating his Brunch!" in the Middle East during these times. Nevertheless, I agree, the "goading" comes from such people as Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Osama bin Laden, etc. But this, sensibly so, forces us to examine the truism: Do these people encapsulate Islam, be it politically or theologically? No more than the Ku Klux Klan encapsulates Christianity, or George W. Bush encapsulates the U.S., or Mel Gibson encapsulates Australian men of faith. (As I say, this is a relatively easy answer on my part, but there is some truth to it)
I've been thinking about "What is good and new about Muhammad?" or, at my feeblest, how most Moslems may answer this question. I think most Moslems would comment on the expressed human quality of this character, Muhammad, found in the Qur'an and the Hadith Collections. There is that astounding moment (somewhere in the Sahih Bukhari), on the day of the Muhammad’s death, when Abu Bakr approached the crowds and informed them so. The passage mirrors the same disbelief the Moslems felt during their first victory at Medina, when all feared Muhammad had died in battle. Thus, some in the crowd express doubt over Abu Bakr's news; others mystically look at the sky and speak of the dreariness they felt in the morning, how they knew this would be their Prophet's final day, etc. And Abu Bakr somewhat shakes his head at these responses and magnificently states: "Whoever worshipped Muhammad knows that he is dead, but whoever worships God knows God lives forever."
This is indicative (at least to me) of that astonishing quality of Islam to keep you away from concretizing the faith in one man, to always refer back and beyond to God--another obvious example being the expressed forbiddance to depict Muhammad in any medium (aside from calligraphy); to idolize him is to forget just what your spiritual worship is supposed to be aimed at. Islam is certainly good and novel in this respect. However, long before the 6th Century, Hinduism and Buddhism stressed similar teachings of their own...it's a bit ridiculous, I suppose, to look for any living mythology that can one-up many of the novelties of Hinduism. Śiva, after all, is the oldest deity on Earth who is still worshipped.
Another good novelty: Muhammad's relationship with Khadijah. There's the immediate early fact that Khadijah proposed marriage to this young man. Of course, she was an older woman; a widow with some money, and a woman in her position could very well propose marriage. Nevertheless, it’s a gender quality of 7th Century Arabia that is rarely popularized to such a magnitude.
More importantly, in my mind, is the story of Muhammad running directly to Khadijah after Gabriel's first revelation in the Cave of Hira. To begin, we have an astounding depiction of Muhammad's humility, telling Gabriel "I'm not a Reciter!” doubting the authenticity of the experience after the fact, etc. The part of the story that moves me, though, is Muhammad, womb-like, falling into the lap of Khadijah, expressing these horrible doubts and fears. Was it real? Was it the Devil? She soothes and affirms him, becoming the first convert by literal standards. To have an Abrahamic Prophet of God approach a woman in such a way, seeking her counsel and affirmations...astonishing.
It feels a bit arrogant and ignorant on my part to pick away at Islam for moments of novelty. These mythologies are not breakfast menus. More so, in the context of this thread, it is utterly impossible to look at the life of Muhammad as an example of total secular peace: this man was, both, a peace-dealing diplomat and wartime general. Similarly, it’s too simplistic to mistake Francis of Assisi for Jesus of Nazareth. But, I did want to further the discussion you were trying to introduce.
-------------------- The salty fragrance of L’EauD’I’mNotDedalus - made entirely of and entirely for sea turtles. Posts: 1983 | From: Chicagoland, IL | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
-------------------- People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril) Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is not uncommon for individuals or organizations in Turkey to seek legal action against world leaders whose actions they disapprove of. They have never succeeded.
The Department of Futility, mayhaps?
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
quote:Originally posted by AnglRdr: From Canuckistan's post:
quote:It is not uncommon for individuals or organizations in Turkey to seek legal action against world leaders whose actions they disapprove of. They have never succeeded.
The Department of Futility, mayhaps?
Department of Futility ... DMV ... same thing, no?
-------------------- People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril) Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by trollface: do you honestly think that everybody on the whole planet really thinks the same about every subject?
Of course not. I was merely refuting your silly statement that there is almost nothing in the world that is agreed on as good by both the Emperor and his Persian interlocutor, or by the faculty of Regensburg uni. You reply with an even sillier misrepresentation of me.
And if you find the mild expression "your silly sophistry" unbearably "insulting", why did you choose the far more insulting name of "trollface"??
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: Of course not. I was merely refuting your silly statement that there is almost nothing in the world that is agreed on as good by both the Emperor and his Persian interlocutor, or by the faculty of Regensburg uni.
If that is what you had meant in the first place by "all concerned", then I'd agree that it would have been silly to say that there was almost nothing in the world that was agreed on as "good" by those specific two groups of people, were that what I had said.
However, what I said was that very little in the world was considered "good" by "all concerned", in a conversation about public reaction to the idea of "good" and the fact that your reply discussed "99.9%" of the world's population and "international relations" gives the lie to you only having meant those two specific groups of people, or at least to pretending that you didn't know that I wasn't limiting it to those two groups.
If you can't find a real issue with my posts, then please don't resort to making ones up.
quote:You reply with an even sillier misrepresentation of me.
If you have a problem with anything that I've said, or feel that you've been misrepresented, then address those concerns. Don't just resort to childish taunts.
quote:And if you find the mild expression "your silly sophistry" unbearably "insulting", why did you choose the far more insulting name of "trollface"??
What I am or am not called, and the reason why, is no reason to make ad hominem attacks in a civilised discussion. It'd be as inappropriate as my questioning your intelligence due to your use of multiple punctuation marks.
-------------------- seriously , everyone on here , just trys to give someone crap about something they do !! , its shitting me to tears. Posts: 16061 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
I'd be interested in reading PeterK's response to Chloe's question. I know he stated the Sermon on the Mount could be isolated as something "good and novel" about Jesus, but I wonder if he could elaborate. Certainly, “Judge not, that ye be not judged” is an astonishing novelty. But this is Matthew’s diction (7:1, IIRC). John supplies a slightly different connotation (as the author of John normally does): “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”
The attribution of novelty to Jesus is a bit more difficult, in some respects, than doing so for Muhammad. For one, which depiction of Jesus do we extrapolate from? Paul's or Mark's or John's or Thomas' or even Muhammad's? How about Origen or Marcion or Valentinus? Or do we find common ground in what probably could be read in the supposed Q Document?
The question becomes even more muddled when you introduce varying historical perspectives: A century after his death, most Romans probably wouldn't cite "novelty" as an aspect of the Jesus Movement (well, Pilate and Pliny the Younger may have considered Jesus as a "new" bureaucratic annoyance). However, most Biblical scholars agree that many Romans, living in a society where 3/4 of the population were slaves, would have been astounded by a religious movement stating that all human beings, from every caste, are made in God's image.
What novelties did the 1st-3rd Century Jews find in Jesus? Josephus took notice of him (and James, the brother of Jesus--although Josephus' accounts of the two are very disputed points of scholarship). Rabbi Akiva (whom I'm not entirely sure knew of Jesus of Nazareth) certainly found more of a Messianic figure in Simon bar Kokhba. But, hey, don't the Dead Sea Scrolls hail the coming of two Messiahs?
These, of course, are only contemporary accounts or discounts of Jesus. They hardly disqualify the later impact of the man (Christianity did, after all, become the stamp of Rome and would grow into the largest religion on Earth).
But, we can also contrast these "contemporary perspectives of Jesus" with Muhammad, who, it is claimed, had tens of thousands of converts joining him on his February, 632 pilgrimage to Mecca. Comparing the immediate number of converts while each figure was still alive doesn't ultimately prove one stronger or more popular "novelty" over another, at all. It is an interesting historical aspect of Islam, though.
Edited for clarity
-------------------- The salty fragrance of L’EauD’I’mNotDedalus - made entirely of and entirely for sea turtles. Posts: 1983 | From: Chicagoland, IL | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I ignored this story for a while because I thought it was a minor incident that wouldn't last past the next news cycle. But the protests seem to have some staying power.
Assassination threats. Protests demanding his resignation. "The Pope, and all Infidels, should know that no Muslim, under any circumstances, can tolerate an insult to the Prophet.... If the West does not change its stance regarding Islam, it will face severe consequences."
I'll just be the millionth person to chime in that the protestors responses are really not helping disprove the comments the Pope quoted. This just further demonstrates that this extremism is about religious hegemony and not foreign policy.
Posts: 2018 | From: Santa Barbara, California | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't press send before your piece is finished.
-------------------- Cogito ergo sum, non sum qualis eram. Putting Descartes before the Horace every time. Posts: 377 | From: East Anglia, UK | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm NotDedalus, may I thank you for mentioning my namesake in your post. It should have been obvious for me to point out the relationship between them in my post ages ago. cool lady, she was.
Posts: 122 | From: Minneapolis/London | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't press the send button when you haven't written your piece. Idjit.
Never try writing with a cat on the keyboard. Divvy
-------------------- Cogito ergo sum, non sum qualis eram. Putting Descartes before the Horace every time. Posts: 377 | From: East Anglia, UK | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PeterK: [qb]Of course not. I was merely refuting your silly statement that there is almost nothing in the world that is agreed on as good by both the Emperor and his Persian interlocutor, or by the faculty of Regensburg uni.
If that is what you had meant in the first place by "all concerned", then I'd agree that it would have been silly to say that there was almost nothing in the world that was agreed on as "good" by those specific two groups of people, were that what I had said.
However, what I said was that very little in the world was considered "good" by "all concerned", in a conversation about public reaction to the idea of "good" and the fact that your reply discussed "99.9%" of the world's population and "international relations" gives the lie to you only having meant those two specific groups of people, or at least to pretending that you didn't know that I wasn't limiting it to those two groups.
The fact that my reference to "99.9 of the world's population" was posted AFTER your claim that "there is very little that is considered good by all concerned" (not "all the world") gives the lie to your claim that you were referring to everybody in the world, not just the people we were talking about.
If you are so exquisitely sensitive that you feel "taunted" by the description of your statement (not you) as "silly", then I withdraw it.
My double question mark denotes a question I find particularly puzzling. This is pretty standard use, I thought.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by IngestingDailyMites: [QB] Now, boys, no reason to get upset; we're only just trying to settle, once and for all, the dispute between Christianity and Islam
My aim is far more limited - simply to understand why Moslems reacted the way they did to the pope's speech.
quote: I'd be interested in reading PeterK's response to Chloe's question. I know he stated the Sermon on the Mount could be isolated as something "good and novel" about Jesus, but I wonder if he could elaborate.
No, I stated that I guessed that the emperor would point to the Sermon on the Mount. I have neither the inclination nor the talent to write a dissertation on the novelties brought by Jesus and Mahomet. Some here seem to think my aim is to prove that Christianity is somehow "better" than Islam, and have reacted with the usual reflexive attacks on Christianity. Rather, as I pointed out in my first post, Mahomet brought new and good things to the world and I seek merely to understand why Moslems didn't point this out if they felt that the emperor's question quoted by the Pope required a response, instead of responding with violence. It's very puzzling, especially as it seems it is not just a few young hotheads and extremist rabblerousers, but respected Moslem religious and political leaders who are calling for violence and other sanctions, withdrawing ambassadors etc.
Posts: 670 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
