Posted on 01/06/2014 5:22:44 PM PST by FR_addict
With whom is he engaged in any “dialogue?” Mohammedanism isn’t a hierarchial faith, so he has no counterpart. In any event, the imams understand their own religion, and are laughing at his idiotic naiveté.
Maybe so.
Pope has not done his Koran reading. The book is very clear.
Maybe it’s another bad translation.
Rome’s sins cannot be justified by pointing to the sins of others. My ancestors were Separatists, so I’m no defender of England, but her sins were nothing compared to Rome.
Popes and potentates don’t seem to know that no man can be converted at the point of a spear. From beginning to end, salvation is of the Lord. It takes an act of God to regenerate the dead heart of a sinner.
“And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.” (Revelation 17:6)
He is either an idiot or a liar
Francis is a very dangerous man. And now he has announced a visit to Israel. What could possibly go wrong?
Pope Urban II is facepalming you, Francis...
That works both ways.
"...but her sins were nothing compared to Rome."
Oh really? Well, thank goodness that's cleared up.
"Popes and potentates don’t seem to know that no man can be converted at the point of a spear."
And kings, queens, dictators, preachers, elders, generals, caliphs...In short, a universal problem. What's your point?
No. No it doesn’t. islam is a religion of oppression and death period.
Your whole comment was irrelevant. I merely said Christians were not responsible for the Inquisition, Rome was. Many of the victims of the Inquisition were Bible-believing Christians. I said nothing of England. English kings and queens who killed in the name of God were no more Christian than all those wicked popes. Popes and all the powerful secular leaders in the history of the world have lacked the power to convert a single man. Rome was able to terrorize through violence, and some gave in to her claims and demands, but not one soul was ever saved in a biblical sense.
So much for Papal Infallibility.
Pope Benedict XVI in the Regensburg University lecture delivered on 12 September 2006 in Germany, where he had once served as a professor of theology quoted Dialogues Held With A Certain Persian, the Worthy Mouterizes, in Anakara of Galatia,[4] written in 1391 as an expression of the views of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos, one of the last Christian rulers before the Fall of Constantinople to the Muslim Ottoman Empire, on such issues as forced conversion, holy war, and the relationship between faith and reason. The passage, in the English translation published by the Vatican, was:
“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
I guess there isn’t much “authentic izzlam” in this old world.
If you did not ask them about theological things, you could not have known.
An illiterate executive sounds, well, weird to me. But not being able to study the Koran might have advantages.
Extreme case of not seeing reality
Pope Francis is going to get in big trouble for lying about this.
Touché.
I learned NOT to make assumptions about them. Each person was a unique individual with his own history, talents and idiosyncrasies. They treated ME well so I tried to reciprocate. It helped by not making assumptions.
The Edict of Nantes that Henry IV signed comprised four basic texts, including a principal text made up of 92 articles and largely based on unsuccessful peace treaties signed during the recent wars. The Edict also included 56 "particular" (secret) articles dealing with Protestant rights and obligations. For example, the French state guaranteed protection of French Protestants travelling abroad from the Inquisition. "This crucifies me," protested Pope Clement VIII, upon hearing of the Edict.
In October 1685, Louis XIV, the grandson of Henry IV, renounced the Edict and declared Protestantism illegal with the Edict of Fontainebleau. This act, commonly called the 'revocation of the Edict of Nantes,' had very damaging results for France. Intense persecution of Protestants took place. All Protestant ministers were given two weeks to leave the country unless they converted to Catholicism and all other Protestants were prohibited from leaving the country. In spite of the prohibition, the persecution including many examples of torture caused as many as 400,000 to flee France at risk of their lives.
Many generations ago my grand father was one who was forced out, "open season" on protestants having been declared on protestants, he fled to England to fight for England against France. As a reward for his service he was given a land grant in Virginia, in 1695. Yes, I'm a Hugenot and am forever thankful to Rome and it's minion, Louis XIV, without which, I'd be typing in French right now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.