/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>667450

> this is an insult to all the European nations who suffered at the hands of Islam

Yeah, because the middle-east/north africa/central asian christian didn't get, and continue to be winnie the poohed by Islam.

t. euro for whom the ottomans caused constant problems and persecution

Heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas"

Scandal? Definitely. Heresy? No. And when it comes to scandal, those who are scandalised (i.e. you) sin mortally.

yeah lmao he totally should have spit on it or something

i'm sure that would have worked out really nicely for arab christians

>>667488

>No. And when it comes to scandal, those who are scandalised (i.e. you) sin mortally.

<"If you are angry that the Pope committed heresy, YOU"RE the sinner, not the Pope!"

<"Jesus was the sinner for getting angry at the money changers in the temple!"

Seriously?

>>667509

But anon!

Muh Pope was just pranking that Muslim! He never kissed the Quran in ex cathedra.

>>667560

Responses like this are why you guys get banned by the mods.

>>667450

Saint Pope John Paul II kissed a great many things. It was kind of his thing. It didn't mean endorsement. The minute he blessed that Qur'an, he made it unusable to Muslims. It's worse than rubbing it in bacon grease to them.

Maybe you should think before you post about "m-muh catlick herrrsy".

>>667587

>Pope lighting a Jooish manorah and celebrating with them means the joos cant use the manorah

>Pope kissing a sodomites means Pope is really blessing the sodomite, making him unusable for other sodomites

This is your mind on papal doublethink.

>>667509

>Because those are the only two options, right?

how do you miss the point this hard

>>667587

I am serious. Go ask /islam/. A Qur'an blessed by a "mushrikeen" is unusable and must be destroyed. They take Qur'an extremely seriously. There are so many rules concerning it. Can't place it on the same shelf as other books, can't put it on the floor, must read it with absolute reverence. Can't make marks in it or tear its pages - even accidentally. His Holiness blessing that Qur'an was an absolute "screw you" to Muslims.

>>667612

So this:

https://bloggerpriest.com/2010/08/29/why-did-pope-john-paul-ii-kiss-the-koran/

says:

>Thus, at the end of the audience, the Pope showed his deep appreciation to this intimate self-donation, by bowing and kissing the Koran as a sign of respect. Such a gesture ran totally against the grain of crusades and condemnations. It did not mean that the Pope accepted all that was in the book, only that his love for the Muslim people, and the Iraqis in particular, was genuine. He makes the first move, not in the capitulation of our faith, but in the recognition that the followers of Jesus and those who cherish Mohammed should not be engaged in name-calling, or worse, killing each other. The Pope appreciated the suffering of the Iraqi people, particularly the women and children. It showed he did not look down upon them but had a genuine respect for them within the brotherhood of man.

But you're saying that in order to show proper respect, he actually SHOULDN"T have kissed it?

>>667450

And Pope Francis excuses Islamic violence

>>667575

You’re dead wrong on that point. They take great joy in any measly endorsement they can find. Some book in the 70s claimed Muhammad was the most influential person ever (just most influential, not good. The list contained quite a few dictators and murderers) yet Muslims tout it as proof that everyone likes Muhammad

>>667659

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muhammad_and_Historys_100_Most_Influential_People

This book

>>667450

Hutton Gibson called him garrulous Karolus, the Koran Kisser.

>>667659

>a religion of ~2 billion people needs validation

I have my doubts

>>667675

>Doubting Turdworlder demon worshipers want popular validation

<Heh, so you're saying that jews suffer from a massive inferiority complex despite the fact that they dominate the media and global banking? Umm yeah, I have my doubts

Satan delights in even the most trivial sins of the already condemned, and he is the greatest among demons; the lowliest of whom is of far greater intellect and ability than any person. Don't underestimate the pettiness of the spiritually ill.

>>667612

>If you prep the bull, you win

I believe in the one, holy, Catholic church, but the disingenuous defense of Popes on this board, past and present, is a disgrace. You know that he wasn't antagonizing or disrespecting the muslims, even if it is true that the Koran he blessed had to be destroyed, in fact it was exactly the opposite.

Not wanting to come to blows with them is reasonable enough, but pretending that the religion of the mohammedans is on par with Christianity, or even a valid option is blasphemy.

>>667450

>this thread again

It's almost like people grasp at straws to condemn and slander the Church and her members unceasingly. I wonder whose behind this.

>>667723

I'm very opposed to the slander Catholic Christians get in here but the Pope and the papacy in general needs to be called out for what it is, herecy. That's actually an action of love towards Catholics.

>>667450

Because it's just a book. You don't worship a book, do you?

>>667734

Are you an idiot ? What does that have to do with jews ? It's satan you doofus. Why is there so much sh't being thrown at the Church since the beginning ? A continuous flow of crap against herself, her members, her doctrines, whatever it is you can think of - there's no end to it. Why ? Because the Church bears the Truth and satan HATES it with all his existence.

Get off your /pol/ infected horse mate.

>>667734

>>667854

Forgive me, I didn't mean to insult you but I gave in to the first thing that popped into my head :(

>>667854

>>667723

>People are legitimately angry and/or confused by an action by the Pope that is, at best, morally questionable, and at worst, outright heresy, and are made further frustrated by responses that are flimsy and contradictory mental gymnastics:

<"You're sinning if you are upset/confused by this!"

<"It was the heat of the moment!"

<"He was just being diplomatic!"

<"He was passive-aggressively dissing them!" (even though Muslims did not riot over the supposed "desecration" of their book by the Pope's "blessing".)

<"It's just a book (that blasphemes Jesus' divinity), what's the big deal?"

<"You're all just Satan attacking us! Stop picking on us!"

>>667717

No one told you to schism lol

>>667946

based

>>667854

I assumed you meant the Jews, as "I wonder who's behind this" is a common meme intended to imply that. Either way, it's not grasping at straws to be concerned about a pope kissing and showing reverence towards a monstrously evil book.

I don't get why you think it is heresy. He didn't say "there is only one god whose name is Allah and Mohammed is his prophet."

Every time I see this I don't get why it's such a big deal. It doesn't really mean anything.

>>668009

The Pope is just V E N E R A T I N G the book like he would a statue of Mary.

>>668009

It's not that big of a deal and every Catholic knows it. It's just one of the standard catalog of images Prots use to "prove" Catholicism is heresy. Next comes the pic of Francis kissing a black man's foot.

>>667580

> I suspect that many of you do not know much about Islam. The Pope understood Islam and recognized the many messages we hold in common. People, who feel they must hate something, in order to love something else, are the reason why there are world wars and much suffering in the world.

Ahaha this is the power of Vatican 2 Catholicism. It is Clear that just as St Pope Gregory said, anyone who claims the title universal bishop is the forerunner to the Antichrist. No wonder that this gay syncratism is so common and even dogmatised by Vatican II

>>667871

Compared to crawling forward and passionately kissing the toes of a statue it's pretty mild. So in one way, it makes sense they don't see the big problem.

>>668049

>Vatican 2

How can it be something born of the 1960s when you believe that Islam was invented by the RCC way back in the 600s?

>>668052

>when you believe that Islam was invented by the RCC way back in the 600s?

What? it is like the mental gymnastics are making your brain melt.

>>668042

Also don't forget that photo with a bunch of people surrounding a statue of Mary and a forest in the background, looking like it was taken in some tropical country. It's pretty much obligatory at this point.

>>668056

Someone needs to read more Psalm 115 and Psalm 135.

>>668009

He is giving honor to a blasphemous book by a warlord. In that book he commands the slaughter of unbelievers (us), denies Christ is God, denies He dies on the cross and was resurrected, etc. How does that not bother you?

>>668042

Honestly I've seen it brought up more by sedes and other traditional Catholics than by prots.

>>668077

> How does that not bother you?

Easy. He never acknowledged anything in the book was true. He can kiss every copy of Harry Potter ever printed, but that doesn't make any of it true nor does it mean he believes Harry Potter to be nonfiction.

>>668099

The absolute state of catholic mental gymnastics

Bump. This thread needs more attention.

Not a problem with the many paths to salvation doctrine.

The kissing is just a demonstration of the above. Not that I endorse it.

>>668111

If you think about it, it makes sense.

Catholics kiss idols of the virgin mary, but that means its just V E N E R A T I O N not worship.

So if anything, the Pope is just venerating the Quran, not giving it legitimacy.

Bap cucks BTFO by muh BASED Pope once again

>>668647

For muslims worship the same God as we do….MWAH! now that's a spicy meatball!

>>668658

>it says you're gay

>>668718

>it says we worship the same god

>>667575

>>667612

You are incorrect. Here’s proof you’re incorrect: the Quran was a gift to him. If they didn’t allow infidels to touch it, they wouldn’t have given it to him.

>>668720

>it says: do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

>>668922

>Bad translation. "Friend" should be "Allies" and it is in reference to conflict/war, not in general life.

Wrong. You are listening to liars. If you want to know about a verse, read the exegisis (tafsirs). All muslim apologists and muslims you meet are professional liars. It is their job 24/7 to lie about their religion. Never trust them.

http://quranx.com/Tafsirs/5.51

from Ibn Kathir, one of the most respected tafsirs:

The Prohibition of Taking the Jews, Christians and Enemies of Islam as Friends

Allah forbids His believing servants from having Jews and Christians as friends, because they are the enemies of Islam and its people, may Allah curse them. Allah then states that they are friends of each other and He gives a warning threat to those who do this,

ibn Abbas (mohammed's cousin and only named scholar by mohammed):

(O ye who believe!) in Muhammad and the Qur'an. (Take not the Jews and Christians for friends) seeking their assistance and help. (They are friends one to another) He says: some are followers of the religion of others in secret and in the open, just as they are friends of each other. (He among you) O group of believers (who taketh them for friends) seeking their assistance and help (is (one) of them) in alliance and is not included in Allah's protection and safety. (Lo! Allah guideth not) to His religion and proof (wrong-doing folk) the Jews and Christians.

Al-Jalalayn (The two jalals, very well respected tafsir):

O you who believe, do not take Jews and Christians as patrons, affiliating with them or showing them affection; they are patrons of each other, being united in disbelief. Whoever amongst you affiliates with them, he is one of them, counted with them. God does not guide the folk who do wrong, by affiliating with disbelievers.

Do not show them affection or affiliate with them.

It's typical nonsense islamic lying apologetics to say it is only during warfare or other BS. None of these extremely respected scholars (the top in all of sunni islam) say this is just for war time. Do not listen to their lies.

https://islamqa.info/en/2179

Explaining why taking christians as close friends is haraam. Read that - nowhere does it say it is only for "wartime" or only for that, it says not to imitate them, send them to schools, allow a disbeliever to have a higher position in a job, be a close or trusted friend, take advice from them etc.

If you're a real christian don't fall for these lies.

>>668935

>Wrong. You are listening to liars.

NO U

Not an argument, anyway. I can read the actual Arabic and it says, quite clearly, "allies".

Also also, quranx and islamqa are Saudi sponsored Wahabbist websites. You trust wahabbists?

>>668970

hahahah quranx is Wahhabist? lol it doesn't matter you can read the tafsirs from any site. clearly this guy is a winnie the pooh mohammedan don't listen to him.

so you with your puny Arabic understand the Quran better than all the scholars of Islam. ibn Kathir, ibn Abbas they are all liars right? hahahah my sides. go away Abdul, your BS won't work here.

>>668974

>doesn't speak Arabic

>has never read Qur'an

>only accepts sources that confirm his bias

/christian/ in a nutshell about Islam.

>>668970

Taqiyya.

>>669008

Rather Turkish than Protestant!

Of course it was heresy, “Saint” “Pope” John Paul was a wicked man

https://novusordowatch.org/john-paul-ii/

>>668970

>>668997

>>>/islam/

>>668997

>believe everything I say about the Quran cause only I can read it/know what it really says.

Plenty of people can read Arabic. Scholars and people who have left Islam. Learn from this man who saw the light

>>669319

>click on the link

>JPII kissing the Koran on the front page

kek

>>669354

No surprise there. The Catholic-Muslim alliance is deeply rooted in history.

Some people even believe that the Vatican created Islam in order to weaken the Christian East.

>>668997

t.muslim

i've studied islam for many years, and know many muslims and arab christians. only accept sources? you're clearly an abdul here, do you even know the people i've quoted? you clearly don't haha or your bullshitting.

first you laughibly call quranx a wahhabist source really exposing yourself. the english translation fo ibn kathir is available on many other websites, so is ibn abbas, al jalalayn etc. these are all the most respected tafisrs for all of sunni islam. they aren't extremist at all.

you provide no tafsir, no reputable scholars saying otherwise, just "muh i spek arabic this is what it means". you are an idiot actually speaking about the verse with no content, not even referencing the asbab al-nuzul. and guess what, no regular person has the authority to interpret the quran, that's for the scholars. so we go to what the scholars say.

none of the highest scholars in islam say what you are claiming. so otherwise they're ALL liars… or you are. hmm. nice try abdul.

and auliya, the plural of wali can't just be said IT MEANS ALLY only, it means protector, friend, helper etc. Don't play games abdul. Leave your satanic religion of deception - look what it's doing to you. Why do all of the scholars of islam disagree with you? They must be islamophobes right, ibn Abbas, ibn Kathir, all islamophobes right? Hahaha

Still no satisfactory answer…

>>670080

He's not kissing it, they told him it was scratch'n'sniff

>>667450

because Vatican II is the end time apostasy. Look up sedevacantism. Look up Most Holy Family Monastery

>>670160

What do you think it makes muslims think about Christianity, and those who are supposed to bear the testimony of Jesus Christ. The pope is a clown whom nobody should take seriously.

>>670322

/isalm/ already has a thread on this

https://8ch.net/islam/res/29502.html

>>670183

He's saying that if the Pope spat on the Quran and tossed it into the sea, arab muslims will go on a rampage against arab christians.

> t. lebanese catholic

>>670107

This is the most believable one thusfar.

Was Jesus a heretic for loving his murderers? Only satan possesed LARPers want endless war instead of peace towards our fellow man.

The Crusades were justified, but any such continuation of war today would not be. Showing love and respect in brotherhood of man is not legitimizing false faiths or "cucking out", it's doing what Our Lord commanded. Plus >>670489 is right.

The awful level of strawmanning and dishonest vitriol against the Church is more evidence of the real war going on, and it's disappointing how strong of a hold it has on this board.

it fits with this board. This board is full of disgusting mods anyway who might aswell be sucking islam dick. God was an alien and a devip and an asshole.

>>667499

>i'm sure that would have worked out really nicely for arab christians

You realize Catholic countries have 50 times the firepower of muslim countries? He could've shat on it, if he was serious about his faith.

Have a bump.

>>667450

>Some honestly explain to me why this is not heresy?

Not sure why this surprises you. It's just a one off situation, just politics, nothing to see here…

It's not like the Catechism teaches there is some sort of theological unity between Catholics and muslims, and the Quran is worthy of respect and not a false gospel. What did Paul say about those who come preaching a different Gospel?? I think he said to join together with them in adoring the one, merciful God that judges mankind. Right?

>"CCC 841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm

>>673792

Seriously, defend this. 1 John 2 and John 6 and the Athanasian creed tend to go the other way. This is dissembly at best, scandal in the expected case, and endangers souls at worst.

>>674763

Papism endangers souls as it's found nowhere in Scripture and seeks to replace it. All papists need to repent of their false, unbiblical theology.

>>674765

The sign of the Cross is nowhere in scripture, but is not odious thereto. The liturgy cannot be derived from scripture alone. The key is that tradition cannot supersede scripture, as that would imply God changed.

>>674768

Romans 2:29

>>673792

This is why sedes reject V2, the antipopes, and the 1983 updates to the code of canon law.

>>673792

And of course this ""document"" contradicts Mortalium Animos:

>4. Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one."

>>674771

What do you mean the cross is not in the bible? Its not a picture book.

There is nothing in the bible venerating the church in Rome, in fact, they were so messed they got a letter telling them to straighten up.

>>674771

>The key is that tradition cannot supersede scripture, as that would imply God changed.

Seriously, see Mark 7:7-13. There are people teaching entire alien gospels based on doing good works to be saved and calling that "tradition" found outside scripture. Because if you ask for their basis, it isn't in Scripture at all. Therefore Mark 7:13; making the word of God of none effect through their traditions which they have delivered.

Those non-scriptural traditions are not only unscriptural but are being used to undermine actual scripture— and that's why you see their indifference to the contents of scripture, despite the fact that it's the word of God. They could toss the word of God in the trash (and have), it doesn't really matter to them as everything to them is outside traditions which have nothing to do with the word of God. Such as idols, praying to idols, and so on. That's what they really care about. They only feign to use the Bible, for keeping up appearances only. As soon as it becomes inconvenient it gets tucked away and all the vain repetitions, idols, and other contra-biblical stuff come out. Being part of the club is inherently is all about scoffing at the precepts of the Bible and acting like you know better than the word of God. Just like the pharisees who invented their own oral traditions out of their own perverse imaginations and were rebuked. Jesus himself showed how their own traditions turned the word of God on its head, and yet they refused to listen.

>>674906

>Seriously, see Mark 7:7-13. There are people teaching entire alien gospels based on doing good works to be saved and calling that "tradition" found outside scripture. Because if you ask for their basis, it isn't in Scripture at all.

What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him?

15 And if a brother or sister be naked, and want daily food:

16 And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit?

17 So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.

>>674906

faith with no works = dead

faith with works = alive

the dead stay dead, the living have the living God as their God, makes sense right?

>>674884

Not the cross, the Sign of the Cross

>>675235

disgusting

>>670080

Because there is none. JPII screwed up by kissin the Qran and he shouldn't have done that. Turns out he is human and makes mistakes. Has zero impact in validity of Catholic doctrine or of the papal office. It is only a big deal and blown out of proportion because the press is full of enemies of the Church that want to destroy it at all costs.

>>678307

To make things clear, what JPII did was not heresy (much less the formal, excommunicationable sort), it was "just" a faux pas.

>>678308

he did speak heresy by saying "let st. john the baptist bless islam". jp2 was a sucker for heresy.

>>678307

>Turns out he is human and makes mistakes.

I thought he was the Vicar of Christ? What now?

>>678615

No Catholic is arguing that the Pope must be a perfect man. Peter certainly wasn’t.

>>667450

>How is the Pope kissing the Quran not heresy?

Because the real world isn't Warhammer 40k and doing something bad isn't what heresy means

When are we going to get a pope that actually stands up for his beliefs? All this ball fondling of Muslims and Jews and atheists is just wrong. When was the last time you saw one of them venerate the Bible?

>>678620

Peter would have never kissed a book that denies Christ.

>>678628

>if you have values you must live in a fantasy universe

You liberals are too far gone.

>>667588

KEK

>>674946

>James 2:14-26

It's about showing another man your faith. Why leave out verse 18?

James 2:18

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

>>678748

True, St. Peter would go and deny Christ himself three times, a thousandfold more serious than JPII's kiss of the Quran. And even then St. Peter is still the holder of the keys of Heaven, his moment of weakness not beyond the reach of forgiveness. JPII was wrong in kissing the Quran and I hope he repented of it, but no one should be deceived into thinking that these attacks are in good faith.

>>679182

>True, St. Peter would go and deny Christ himself three times, a thousandfold more serious than JPII's kiss of the Quran.

St. Peter was under threat of death. What you say would make the Pope even less sinful than St. Peter, wow! The more you know.

>>679182

Peter wasnt confirmed

>>680081

The pope explicitly chose to go and do it when he could have just not done it. It's not like he was under some sort of threat, at least I think not.

>>679261

This week on "Sin Olympics"!

>>680085

You're talking about St. Peter? I was saying that he denyied Christ because he havent passed through confirmation, i.e. received the Holy Spirit.

>>680230

When I say Pope I'm referring to papist leaders. I'm talking about the pope who chose freely to go to a meeting where he would kiss the quran in a big ceremony. I'm not talking about Peter here.