But what how you like to have Muslims treat Christians? That's the question., isn't it?
Are the Ecumenical Councils valid?
- Thread starter Grailhunter
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No comments on individual posts but reading along just the same with some interest. Generally I agree with @Giuliano with regard to Muslims, what the Quran says and how some do one thing while others do another. They are people just as those called Christians are people. I don't know any Muslims now, but I have known them in the past. Some of them on both sides of that Islamic/Christian line are nearly if not completely impossible to get along with...
What Giuliano says about the contents of the Quran is not new to me. I haven't read the book myself, but I've read the quotations from the Quran which support his view point on how they are to treat Jews and Christians. Muslims get it wrong lots of time according to that, but then again so do a great many bearing the label of Christian from what I see.
The only thing I can do is stand where I am continuing to strive to move or to be moved always toward God... even when I may have some errors and when I may not understand everything that is happening. We are, when it comes down to it, to live by faith more so than by knowledge. That absolute knowledge thing can and does get people [Muslim or Christian] into trouble with God, I believe, when they claim too inflexibly that they have IT.
Christians and Westerners have still not woken up to the fact that the MIGRANT INVASION OF MUSLIMS into the West is a deliberate ploy to undermine and eventually destroy Christian and Western values and establish Muslim values.
After 9/11 all the government of the Western world had a solemn duty and obligation to focus on the meaning of Radical Islam and Jihad and the many different ways in which Jihad would be mounted against the West. Ayatollah Khomeini had already declared Jihad on the Great Satan (America) and the lesser Satan (the Soviet union) about 50 years ago. But no Western politician or leader took his declaration of war seriously.
After 9/11 no Western politician came out and stated publicly that Muslim migration into the West must be banned, and all Muslims who had entered into the West since Osama bin Laden declared Jihad in 1996 should be carefully scrutinzed. Instead all the craven Western politicians tried to fool their constituents by telling them that Islam was a religion of peace, and also opened the doors wide to Muslim migration. They never took the time to study the Quran and see that Muslim migrant invasion is simply another aspect of Jihad.
Bin Laden's Declaration of War on the United States, 1996
On August 23, 1996, Osama bin Laden signed and issued the "Declaration of Jihad Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Mosques," meaning Saudi Arabia. It was the first of two explicit declarations of war against the United States. The declaration summed up bin Laden's belief, categorical and uncompromising, that "there is nothing more imperative, after faith, than to repel the aggressor who corrupts religion and life, unconditionally, as far as possible." In that line was the seed of bin Laden's stance that even the killing of innocent civilians was justified in defense of the faith...
Bin Laden's Declaration of War on the United States, 1996
Here are some of bin Laden's remarks in his Fatwa against the West:
BLAMING THE WEST FOR ALL MUSLIM ILLS
It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies...
BLAMING THE JEWS FOR ALL MUSLIM ILLS
Today we work from the same mountains to lift the iniquity that had been imposed on the Ummah by the Zionist Crusader alliance, particularly after they have occupied the blessed land around Jerusalem, route of the journey of the Prophet...
REJECTION OF ALL LAWS OTHER THAN SHARIA LAW
As stated by the people of knowledge, it is not a secret that to use man made law instead of the Shari'a and to support the infidels against the Muslims is one of the ten "voiders" that would strip a person from his Islamic status (turn a Muslim into a Mushrik, non believer status).
WAR AGAINST THE WEST AND ISRAEL THE ONLY OPTION
Therefore every one agreed that the situation can not be rectified (the shadow cannot be straighten when its' source, the rod, is not straight either) unless the root of the problem is tackled. Hence it is essential to hit the main enemy who divided the Ummah into small and little countries and pushed it, for the last few decades, into a state of confusion...The right answer is to follow what have been decided by the people of knowledge, as was said by Ibn Taymiyyah (Allah's mercy upon him): "people of Islam should join forces and support each other to get rid of the main "Kufr" [INFIDELS] who is controlling the countries of the Islamic world, even to bear the lesser damage to get rid of the major one, that is the great Kufr"...
Hi G,,,
If I can't translate something...Google sure won't be able to!
Expressions are difficult to translate but what I told you comes very close.
IOW, the one with more brains will stop first.
Regarding my pride being wounded....
Let me assure you that only those I love could wound my pride...
And I mean LOVE....a person I don't even respect cannot wound my pride.
About the bishops?
Yes. I've been following this since, I think 2015...BEFORE the Synod for the family.
Bishops are very upset with him exactly because the Pope is doing something no other pope ever did before --- change a dogma or doctrine. They have been upset with him for years now...it'll be interesting to see how he handles this in his next Papal Bull.
This is where the Pope finds himself these days:
Philip James
Well-Known Member
Hi G,,,
If I can't translate something...Google sure won't be able to!
Expressions are difficult to translate but what I told you comes very close.
IOW, the one with more brains will stop first.
Regarding my pride being wounded....
Let me assure you that only those I love could wound my pride...
And I mean LOVE....a person I don't even respect cannot wound my pride.
About the bishops?
Yes. I've been following this since, I think 2015...BEFORE the Synod for the family.
Bishops are very upset with him exactly because the Pope is doing something no other pope ever did before --- change a dogma or doctrine. They have been upset with him for years now...it'll be interesting to see how he handles this in his next Papal Bull.
This is where the Pope finds himself these days:
hi GG,
If the pope did try to teach heresy, he would automatically excomunicate himself and would therefore no longer be pope.
Peace!
Nothing to add...you've said it all.
I especially like your first paragraph....
This had me very upset about 3 years ago.
Too many are asleep....
The Middle East is in shambles, I mean Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Libya -- so many countries, not all listed here....
I'm happy some people are aware of what's going on.
Thanks for the post.
That's too funny PJ....
I won't even reply to it.
Could you explain ex-communication BTW?
What exactly does it mean?
P.S.
For those that don't know....
that's kind of like if Clinton tried to impeach himself.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
Funny? Heretics receive a latae sententiae penalty. They are automatically excommunicated by force of law.
Excommunication effectively cuts one off from the Church, they can no longer receive the sacraments or excerise their offices, until they have been properly reconciled.
If you like dry reading, you can find the Code of canon law here:
Code of Canon Law - Book II - The People of God - Part I. (Cann. 208-329).
Peace!
It's OK PJ.
I've done my share of dry reading.
How's this:
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Excommunication
Have fun!
P.S.
You've read Canon Law?
I'm impressed.
I've made it my business to stay away from that.
Too much to know and I've never needed it.
I did have to know pretty much "everything" about catholicism.
NOBODY knows everything. It's too complicated.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
"He may not participate in public worship nor receive the Body of Christ or any of the sacraments. Moreover, if he be a cleric, he is forbidden to administer a sacred rite or to exercise an act of spiritual authority."
Yep, i think that's pretty muxh what I said
The issue with a pope that may/or may not be teaching heresy, is that there is no competent ecclisial court to try the case.
Peace!
What about Novatian? He got put on trial, convicted and excommunicated and I believe the man who called the council that tried him became Pope."He may not participate in public worship nor receive the Body of Christ or any of the sacraments. Moreover, if he be a cleric, he is forbidden to administer a sacred rite or to exercise an act of spiritual authority."
Yep, i think that's pretty muxh what I said
The issue with a pope that may/or may not be teaching heresy, is that there is no competent ecclisial court to try the case.
Peace!
Novatian - Wikipedia
Philip James
Well-Known Member
The man who called the council to excommunicate him was the pope Cornelius.
Instances of more than one man claiming to be pope have occurred more than once in the past, but I'm not sure that applies here.
I suppose that if Francis came out and clearly taught heresy, some might argue Benedict as a competant authority to call a council and try him, but I think the chance of that happening is essentialy nil..
Peace!
Yes, Cornelius had already been declared Pope. Some people objected and said they elected Novatian Pope. When you have two people claiming to be Popeand don't know which is the real one, then what? Is the person who can call a council and get the votes first the Pope? What if Novatian had called a council first and had the votes to say Cornelius was an antipope? I find it confusing.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
I'm sure it was for many.
Sometimes we just to have faith that Holy Spirit will take care of it, and just live our faith. As always, the barque of Peter continues to sail, through clear skies AND stormy seas...
"Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat,
but I have prayed that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers."
Peace!
I don't think God would blame the sheep that much if they didn't know which shepherd to follow. They could be held to account for following the wrong voice; but I think the greater blame falls on the pretender who is abusing the sheep.
When unity is restored, it becomes clearer which one was the false shepherd.
Philip James
Well-Known Member
I agree. I would never encourage one of my orthodox brethren to abandon their bishop and follow another.
To pray for the HS to work on our bishops to heal their division and restore us that we might again sit together at our Father's table?
Abolutely yes!
Peace!
