Are Catholics and Islamists the same?

[Delta4Embassy]

No, Not only no, but fuck no.

Islam was started by a thug that forced people to convert...Catholics were started by a man of peace that may at times through history had popes that didn't follow to the "t" that mindset....Catholics promoted western civilization that at least developed into the civilization that we enjoy.

Islam fucked goats and killed people. Of course, there was a period and place like in Baghdad that it didn't, but in general.

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

No, Not only no, but fuck no.

Islam was started by a thug that forced people to convert...Catholics were started by a man of peace that may at times through history had popes that didn't follow to the "t" that mindset....Catholics promoted western civilization that at least developed into the civilization that we enjoy.

Islam fucked goats and killed people. Of course, there was a period and place like in Baghdad that it didn't, but in general.

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

This is why I like reading your comments on certain subjects, Delta. You know your history and you do not mind speaking up. Knowing that you are Jewish - I find it to be a great blessing to see you here. Hopefully many people will read this one.

 

[zaangalewa]

what is "scroupelous" ????

I thought in context with the government "G.W.Bush" about "unscroupelous" (The final syllable "-los" in the word "skrupellos" in my own german language means "without". The english language uses an additional prefix "un-".) I remember G.W. Bush and his government as criminals and the situation of all american people in the beginning of the war with the Iraq as an extremly mass-psychotic situation, what seemed to disable the moral selfcontrol of the american nation.

 

[zaangalewa]

No, Not only no, but fuck no.

Islam was started by a thug that forced people to convert...Catholics were started by a man of peace that may at times through history had popes that didn't follow to the "t" that mindset....Catholics promoted western civilization that at least developed into the civilization that we enjoy.

Islam fucked goats and killed people. Of course, there was a period and place like in Baghdad that it didn't, but in general.

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance

Catholics made the Renaissance

and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

 

[zaangalewa]

No, Not only no, but fuck no.

Islam was started by a thug that forced people to convert...Catholics were started by a man of peace that may at times through history had popes that didn't follow to the "t" that mindset....Catholics promoted western civilization that at least developed into the civilization that we enjoy.

Islam fucked goats and killed people. Of course, there was a period and place like in Baghdad that it didn't, but in general.

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

This is why I like reading your comments on certain subjects, Delta. You know your history and you do not mind speaking up. Knowing that you are Jewish - I find it to be a great blessing to see you here. Hopefully many people will read this one.

He's an antisemite - not a Jew.

 

[ninja007]

yes, lets watch a 90 min vid.

 

[Picaro]

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Who didn't in that era? Feudal lords determined everybody's religion throughout most of history. Is there something especially evil about the western practice that makes it stand out?

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Not many 'standing armies' in the modern sense in western Europe then; too expensive. Armies weren't 'Catholic' armies, they were feudal armies.

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

Given the Renaissance began in Italy, this is a strange claim. As for western culture, I doubt the alternatives would have matched what did develop if da evul Xians hadn't dominated. In fact I'm certain it wouldn't have. Western culture certainly surpasses the rest of the world's, and that's with the rest of the world having a long head start

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

Pot, kettle, black.

 

[amrchaos]

As to why it is believed that Khadija was a Catholic and how the Catholic influence came upon Muhammed comes from a story told by one Alberto Rivera (a former Jesuit Priest) in this video:

sorry ----I cannot do videos----but-----at the time muhummad was active in the business of his wealthy (older) wife----he was exposed to Christians, jews,
Zoroastrians, Sabeans----etc. He was CLEARLY
very much influenced by both Christian and Jewish
theology --------is that not enough ?? Arabia at that time was not "ARAB" It was a busy commercial highway to the east (and back again) and---to the north and west. He also seems to have been influenced by
Zoroastrians------sorta

He stole from whatever he felt like would make him look good or justify his current actions. He was just making it all up as he went along; the Koran is just a load of disconnected, contradictory rubbish. It's not a religion, it's a violent political cult designed for bandits and murderers.

It is an amusing book ------you can follow the utter self-promoting of the disgusting pig

I find it a ridiculous collection of incoherent gibberish. Anybody who actually thinks it's a religious/philosophical text needs a psychiatrist.

You know, you have a point

Of all the religious texts I gleamed over, the Quran does not try to the fundemental question--"How should I live". Instead, it seems to focus on .given orders and self promotion of itself/the Prophet

Even the orders it gives does not seem to follow any coherent basis on how to deal with others. Well, except for that which it tends to take from its precursors

I find the Quran mostly boring. Cmpared to t

 

[irosie91]

As to why it is believed that Khadija was a Catholic and how the Catholic influence came upon Muhammed comes from a story told by one Alberto Rivera (a former Jesuit Priest) in this video:

sorry ----I cannot do videos----but-----at the time muhummad was active in the business of his wealthy (older) wife----he was exposed to Christians, jews,
Zoroastrians, Sabeans----etc. He was CLEARLY
very much influenced by both Christian and Jewish
theology --------is that not enough ?? Arabia at that time was not "ARAB" It was a busy commercial highway to the east (and back again) and---to the north and west. He also seems to have been influenced by
Zoroastrians------sorta

He stole from whatever he felt like would make him look good or justify his current actions. He was just making it all up as he went along; the Koran is just a load of disconnected, contradictory rubbish. It's not a religion, it's a violent political cult designed for bandits and murderers.

It is an amusing book ------you can follow the utter self-promoting of the disgusting pig

I find it a ridiculous collection of incoherent gibberish. Anybody who actually thinks it's a religious/philosophical text needs a psychiatrist.

You know, you have a point

Of all the religious texts I gleamed over, the Quran does not try to the fundemental question--"How should I live". Instead, it seems to focus on .given orders and self promotion of itself/the Prophet

Even the orders it gives does not seem to follow any coherent basis on how to deal with others. Well, except for that which it tends to take from its precursors

I find the Quran mostly boring. Cmpared to t

I am an old literature lover-----so I read the Koran before "ISLAM" became a word in
the USA (well---I did not SEEK it out----a copy fell into my hands----a box of discards).
As a point of comparison ----I would say----
compared to the Odyssey, and the ancient
greek plays, and the hindu stuff----Gita and Ramayana, and---even DANTE----I would say that even BEOWULF beats the Koran----
no literary merit whatsoever

 

[amrchaos]

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Who didn't in that era? Feudal lords determined everybody's religion throughout most of history. Is there something especially evil about the western practice that makes it stand out?

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Not many 'standing armies' in the modern sense in western Europe then; too expensive. Armies weren't 'Catholic' armies, they were feudal armies.

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

Given the Renaissance began in Italy, this is a strange claim. As for western culture, I doubt the alternatives would have matched what did develop if da evul Xians hadn't dominated. In fact I'm certain it wouldn't have. Western culture certainly surpasses the rest of the world's, and that's with the rest of the world having a long head start

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

Pot, kettle, black.

I will give the fact that Catholicism influenced the rise of much of the science philosophy and art from the fall of Rome even up to now.
But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.

By the time of the Industrial Age, the Catholic church had to take care of whom they excommunicated! Inquisitions were akin to political suicide.

In fact, when the fascist came to power in Central Europe, most of the church leaders were probably scared shitless on how to deal with them.

 

[Picaro]

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Who didn't in that era? Feudal lords determined everybody's religion throughout most of history. Is there something especially evil about the western practice that makes it stand out?

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Not many 'standing armies' in the modern sense in western Europe then; too expensive. Armies weren't 'Catholic' armies, they were feudal armies.

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

Given the Renaissance began in Italy, this is a strange claim. As for western culture, I doubt the alternatives would have matched what did develop if da evul Xians hadn't dominated. In fact I'm certain it wouldn't have. Western culture certainly surpasses the rest of the world's, and that's with the rest of the world having a long head start

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

Pot, kettle, black.

I will give the fact that Catholicism influenced the rise of much of the science philosophy and art from the fall of Rome even up to now.
But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.

By the time of the Industrial Age, the Catholic church had to take care of whom they excommunicated! Inquisitions were akin to political suicide.

In fact, when the fascist came to power in Central Europe, most of the church leaders were probably scared shitless on how to deal with them.

I think the problem for most when reading the history is the belief that the Catholic Church had unlimited power and could order the various fuedal kingdoms around like puppets. This isn't the case; they could rarely even influence who could be made Bishops in many of these fiefs, much less even control who got parish churches; the Feudal Lords made the appointments, usually family members or family members of political allies. Once that notion gets tossed aside as not representative of the actual case, the relative chaos and seeming 'contradictions' become more 'sensible'. As for the various Inquisitions, the Spanish one had obvious political reasons, they were still very much under Islamic threats and feared a 'fifth column' made up of former Muslims and Jews, the latter having mostly sided with both Persians and Muslims for most of the preceding centuries and not to be trusted. The Roman Inquisition was the Church's doctrinal Inquisition, different altogether, and almost never put anybody to death, despite all the propaganda and hand wringing; the Cathar purge had put a bad taste in the mouths of many of the Church's scholars, and it was roundly condemned internally. The Portuguese Inquisition had pretty much the same motivations of the Spanish Inquisition; these were ordered by feudal lords, for personal concerns of their national security.

The Catholic Church's main problems came with it developing into a feudal power, and thus having to become involved in the politics of the era. Wealthy people had adopted the habit of leaving lands to the Church, and over the centuries this began to amount to a significant asset, and therefore a target for opportunists.

But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.

What were they opposed to, specifically?

 

[amrchaos]

Catholics never forced people to convert? Wow are you ignorant.

Who didn't in that era? Feudal lords determined everybody's religion throughout most of history. Is there something especially evil about the western practice that makes it stand out?

Catholics didn't have standing armies to get their way?

Not many 'standing armies' in the modern sense in western Europe then; too expensive. Armies weren't 'Catholic' armies, they were feudal armies.

Catholics didn't oppose the Renaissance and other 'western' cultural advancements you now say you like, but that they didn't.

Given the Renaissance began in Italy, this is a strange claim. As for western culture, I doubt the alternatives would have matched what did develop if da evul Xians hadn't dominated. In fact I'm certain it wouldn't have. Western culture certainly surpasses the rest of the world's, and that's with the rest of the world having a long head start

You're either compeltely ignorant when it comes to Catholicism, or you're a deceptive hypocrite trying to polish a turd.

Pot, kettle, black.

I will give the fact that Catholicism influenced the rise of much of the science philosophy and art from the fall of Rome even up to now.
But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.

By the time of the Industrial Age, the Catholic church had to take care of whom they excommunicated! Inquisitions were akin to political suicide.

In fact, when the fascist came to power in Central Europe, most of the church leaders were probably scared shitless on how to deal with them.

I think the problem for most when reading the history is the belief that the Catholic Church had unlimited power and could order the various fuedal kingdoms around like puppets. This isn't the case; they could rarely even influence who could be made Bishops in many of these fiefs, much less even control who got parish churches; the Feudal Lords made the appointments, usually family members or family members of political allies. Once that notion gets tossed aside as not representative of the actual case, the relative chaos and seeming 'contradictions' become more 'sensible'. As for the various Inquisitions, the Spanish one had obvious political reasons, they were still very much under Islamic threats and feared a 'fifth column' made up of former Muslims and Jews, the latter having mostly sided with both Persians and Muslims for most of the preceding centuries and not to be trusted. The Roman Inquisition was the Church's doctrinal Inquisition, different altogether, and almost never put anybody to death, despite all the propaganda and hand wringing; the Cathar purge had put a bad taste in the mouths of many of the Church's scholars, and it was roundly condemned internally. The Portuguese Inquisition had pretty much the same motivations of the Spanish Inquisition; these were ordered by feudal lords, for personal concerns of their national security.

The Catholic Church's main problems came with it developing into a feudal power, and thus having to become involved in the politics of the era. Wealthy people had adopted the habit of leaving lands to the Church, and over the centuries this began to amount to a significant asset, and therefore a target for opportunists.

But they(RCC) did not support everything--in fact they were against most of it because it undermined their authority in Europe.

What were they opposed to, specifically?

Given that the Pope could make the Emperor of the HRE beg forgiveness in the snow for disparaging him(not the church, but the pope) Yes, the RCC had the political clout to push leaders of nations. around.