Islam & Allah O.K. in public schools,

[musturde]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='992424' date='May 29 2006, 02:27 PM']
Myles,

Great posts. The following question hits the center of this discussion:Everyone should consider this question.
[/quote]
We should consider it and work to change it in the areas in which it is occuring. These are Human Rights Violation, not a religious successes.
[quote]
I hope we've moved the discussion beyond the idea that we're fighting against a small band of "false Muslims" and confront the fact that the non-Muslim persecution in the Muslim world is commited by a variety of religious and nominally secular governments, not to mention the quasi-governmental "religious police" in some countries and other vigilantes who act with the complicit approval of the government.
[/quote]
True, there are many Muslims who are idiots and use their religion for political gain. These Muslims use their power to bring in Muslims with a lower faith, people with the same political goals, or Muslims who don't know much about their religion.

[quote]
There is a diversity of thought within Islamic jurisprudence. Unfortunately, the institutional persecution of non-Muslims is one of the things that they seem to agree on. As a consequence of this fact, it seems apparent that non-Muslims don't really want Muslims to adopt an existing "moderate Islam." Instead, they want Muslims to drop 1400 years of well-established Islamic Law.
[/quote]
This is true when it comes to wars. There are governments that tolerate Christians. Muhammad taught tolerance of other religions.

[quote]Islam has an institutional history which demands that Muslims (as individuals or through government) treat all non-Muslims as second class citizens. Non-Muslim rights are all subject to the bounds of Sharia ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_Declaration_on_Human_Rights_in_Islam"]link[/url]). And while 20th century Middle Eastern secular movements have advanced the cause of non-Muslim rights, those same secular movements are increasingly being seen as a failed experiment whose cure is a return to "true" Islam.
[/quote]

A return of their view of true Islam. A state should never incorporate religion. Although it is traditional. Even Christian based governments (that are based on rules and regulations strictly for a specific religion) were oppressive.

[quote]In posts above, there have been discussion of Osama bin Laden and Arab Nationalism. If anyone questions that these are red herrings, I would have no problem isolating my citations of non-Muslim persecution to non-Arabs who have nothing to do with Al Qaeda. Unfortunately, the news gives us more evidence each day of human rights abuses by Muslim faithful.[/quote]

Wait, I'm confused. You agree with Era Might on this one? (just clarifying)

[quote]
[b]The Catholic Church's Response to Islam[/b]
Above, someone cited Pope John Paul II's words of reconciliation toward Islam. While I am for peaceful co-existence, my opinion is that JPII's words may have caused negative side effects that were not anticipated. For example: some seem to have interpreted these statements as a modern form of indifferentialism (i.e. one religion is as good as another). Pope John Paul II's conciliatory tone led one of the Muslim posters to believe that the Pope had secretly converted to Islam! I suspect that he wasn't the only person to believe this conspiracy theory. [url="http://www.amirbutler.com/archives/2002/11/15/12"]See this link for a discussion of Muslim Conspiracy theories written by a Muslim.[/url][/quote]

The idea of saying that Islam is just like Christianity is not what the Pope intended. Also, he didn't intend people to bash the religion and say every true follower has to blow up a Christian. There are two extremes.
[quote]
The Vatican--along with bishops around the world--are calling on Muslims to respect Christians and other non-Muslims, just as the West respects the freedom of Muslims in its midst. Today, the Vatican is realizing more and more that it cannot remain silent when non-Muslim abuse occurs, even if Muslims are "offended" by us bringing up these ugly facts.
[/quote]
The Bishops have always been doing this (at least the Bishops I'm thinking of). Muslims wouldn't be offended by these "ugly facts" because many aren't a part of them. Educated people in bigger cities (even in Afghanistan) are more prone to open minds.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='musturde' post='992526' date='May 29 2006, 08:41 PM']
I don't know where you're getting your information from. Perhaps the history is true. Whatever the history is, the fact remains, Christian Arabs use Allah during worship and say the same phrases Muslims do "allah Mahuk" (God Be With You), "Enshallah" (Ojala in espanol), which means "If God Wills", and the casual "Ya Allah!", which translates, "Oh God". Most Christians I know say that Allah is the same God (without Jesus and the Holy Spirit). Unless you are talking to Christians who hate Muslims so much they refuse to admit they worship the same God lol.
[/quote]Hi Musturde,

First, could you refrain from stuff like, "Unless you are talking to Christians who hate Muslims so much they refuse to admit they worship the same God"? It feels a little bit like [i]ad hominem[/i]. I don't believe that I even brought up the "God is the same as Allah" question.

Maybe you've misunderstood what my statement was. I'm trying to be as precise as possible. I've spoken of the usage of the terms "Allah" and "God" in the English language. This is my claim: When Christian Arabs speak [u]English[/u], they [i]always[/i] refer to the Divine Being as "God." When Muslims speak [u]English[/u], they [i]tend to[/i] refer to the Divine being as "Allah." I've seen exceptions to the latter rule, but never the former.

Here's a couple Arab Christian websites in English:
[url="http://www.bkerke.org.lb/themaronites.html"]http://www.bkerke.org.lb/themaronites.html[/url]
[url="http://www.melkite.org/PRIMER.htm"]http://www.melkite.org/PRIMER.htm[/url]

Aside from people's names, you won't be able to find the word "Allah" mentioned anywhere.

In contrast, here's a quote from the Wiki ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah"]link[/url]):
[quote]Islamic scholars often translate Allah directly into English as 'God', especially Qur'an Alone Muslims. Other scholars feel that Allah should not be translated arguing that Allah is the term for "The God" in a glorified pronunciation. This is a significant issue when translating the Qur'an.[/quote]

Edited May 30, 2006 by Mateo el Feo

[kujo]

[quote name='Socrates' post='991627' date='May 27 2006, 08:20 PM']
"...the cause of the Crusades was just, and was a response to violent Muslim aggression.

The Inquisition did not have the purpose of killing Muslims.

And Islam itself was originally spread by violent military conquest, in which those attacked by the Muslims had to either submit to Islam or die.

Islam has historically been far from a "religion of peace," and in most violent conflicts between Christianity and Islam, the Muslims were the original aggressors.
[/quote]

Not to play semantics here, but I see some fallacies in your historical clarifications:
1. Whether or not the "purpose" of The Inquisition was to kill Muslims, Christians did engage in some heinous (not "less-than-honorable") acts. The ends do not justify the means, and our mission (a noble one) in no way excuses the fact that some within our ranks used this cause for their own personal gain.

2. As for the expansion of Islam through military conquest...join the club. Christianity was spread in a similar way, my friend. You know that.

[quote name='Akalyte' post='991422' date='May 27 2006, 11:06 AM']
The crusades and inquisitions were mostly myths, when will catholics stop believing in protestant lies?

again, history shows what muslims have done since their founding.

personally, I wish catholics would stop defending other religions and start defending and protecting their own.

yeah the bible has cruelty and violence in it too. But muslims have done far worse/
[/quote]

Can you justify your claims that the Crusades and Inquisition was a myth? Or is this just mindless-rhetoric?

[musturde]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='992629' date='May 29 2006, 10:33 PM']
Hi Musturde,

First, could you refrain from stuff like, "Unless you are talking to Christians who hate Muslims so much they refuse to admit they worship the same God"? It feels a little bit like [i]ad hominem[/i]. I don't believe that I even brought up the "God is the same as Allah" question.[/quote]

Sorry If I missinterpretted. However, you stated that Christian Arabs would say they worship God. I thought you meant that they would differentiate between God and Allah. There are some Christian Arabs who do in fact hate Muslims soo much that they would say something like this. This is why I said "most" of the people I know would say they worship the same God as the Muslims. I'm sorry for the mix up.

[quote]
Maybe you've misunderstood what my statement was. I'm trying to be as precise as possible. I've spoken of the usage of the terms "Allah" and "God" in the English language. This is my claim: When Christian Arabs speak [u]English[/u], they [i]always[/i] refer to the Divine Being as "God." When Muslims speak [u]English[/u], they [i]tend to[/i] refer to the Divine being as "Allah." I've seen exceptions to the latter rule, but never the former.
[/quote]
Yes, this is true. Muslims do this because they hold the Arabic language as a sacred language. Muslims highly revere God and the prophets of God. That is why they believe that Arabic, being the Language God revealed the Koran to Mohhamad through, is a sacred language. That is why they say Allah, which is God translated into Arabic, instead of God. They believe the language is Sacred.

[quote]
Here's a couple Arab Christian websites in English:
[url="http://www.bkerke.org.lb/themaronites.html"]http://www.bkerke.org.lb/themaronites.html[/url]
[url="http://www.melkite.org/PRIMER.htm"]http://www.melkite.org/PRIMER.htm[/url]

Aside from people's names, you won't be able to find the word "Allah" mentioned anywhere.

In contrast, here's a quote from the Wiki ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah"]link[/url]):
[/quote]

Of course, Christians just use it as a translation. Muslims believe the language of Arabic is sacred and that is why Allah is never translated when the Koran is translated (Muslim authority prefer the Koran not to be translated but if it must be, Allah, must not be translated).

Peace

Btw, just wondering, are you eastern rite Matt?

[Mateo el Feo]

Trying to catch up...
[quote name='musturde' post='992537' date='May 29 2006, 09:01 PM']True, there are many Muslims who are idiots and use their religion for political gain. These Muslims use their power to bring in Muslims with a lower faith, people with the same political goals, or Muslims who don't know much about their religion.[/quote]If the Muslims don't know much about their faith, then it concerns me that Saudi Arabia is pumping all the money it can into educating the worldwide Ummah with Wahabbism. ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahabbism#Modern_spread_of_Wahhabism"]link[/url])
[quote name='musturde' post='992537' date='May 29 2006, 09:01 PM']This is true when it comes to wars. There are governments that tolerate Christians. Muhammad taught tolerance of other religions.[/quote]This is not exactly correct. Starting with non-monotheistic religions, here's a direct quote of the Prophet from Bukhari's collection of Hadith([url="http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html#004.052.288"]link[/url]):
[quote name='Bukhari' date=' Volume 4, Book 52, Number 288']The Prophet on his death-bed, gave three orders saying, "[b]Expel the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula[/b], respect and give gifts to the foreign delegates as you have seen me dealing with them." I forgot the third (order)" (Ya'qub bin Muhammad said, "I asked Al-Mughira bin 'Abdur-Rahman about the Arabian Peninsula and he said, 'It comprises Mecca, Medina, Al-Yama-ma and Yemen." Ya'qub added, "And Al-Arj, the beginning of Tihama.")[/quote]Non-monotheists have generally had more problems (e.g. massacres) because of Islam than "People of the Book."

The Quran teaches both tolerance and intolerance of the People of the Book. (see [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book#Qur.27an"]link[/url]). Often, a slow strangling of non-Muslim religion was preferred. It also helped Islam to piggyback on Greek and Roman culture by keeping the Christians and Jews intellectuals alive in the areas occupied by Muslim armies.
[quote name='musturde' post='992537' date='May 29 2006, 09:01 PM'] A return of their view of true Islam. A state should never incorporate religion. Although it is traditional. Even Christian based governments (that are based on rules and regulations strictly for a specific religion) were oppressive.[/quote]There have been Christian monarchies, but this idea is not central to Christianity. Our Lord never says that He wanted to establish a temporal domain for His followers. In contrast, Islam is both a religious and a political system.
[quote name='musturde' post='992537' date='May 29 2006, 09:01 PM']Wait, I'm confused. You agree with Era Might on this one? (just clarifying)[/quote]I'm sorry. I think my wording was bad. Try number 2: I believe that trying to argue that Osama and/or Arab Nationalism are the cause for non-Muslim persecution is a red herring. For those who disagree, I'd be happy to focus on those Muslims who are neither Arab nor members of Al Qaeda, in order to more clearly make the connection between the religion of Islam and the systematic persecution of non-Muslims. Does that make sense?
[quote name='musturde' post='992537' date='May 29 2006, 09:01 PM']The Bishops have always been doing this (at least the Bishops I'm thinking of). Muslims wouldn't be offended by these "ugly facts" because many aren't a part of them. Educated people in bigger cities (even in Afghanistan) are more prone to open minds.[/quote]I am sure that there are a large number of Muslims who are educated enough to reject this kind of institutional bigotry. It may be that many of them are also educated enough to keep their mouth shut so as not to call attention to themselves and risk harm to themselves by their government or the local mob/militia. As it is commonly said: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Edited May 30, 2006 by Mateo el Feo

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='musturde' post='992877' date='May 30 2006, 12:32 PM']Sorry If I missinterpretted. However, you stated that Christian Arabs would say they worship God.[/quote]I was only speaking of Christian Arabs when the speak in English. I realize that they use the term "Allah" when speaking in Arabic. I don't think there's a disagreement here. I think we just had to understand eachother.
[quote name='musturde' post='992877' date='May 30 2006, 12:32 PM']Btw, just wondering, are you eastern rite Matt?[/quote]I am Maronite, but I have almost always been a member of a Latin Rite parish.

[musturde]

Ah, Your grandparents were straight from Lebanon right? My moms Maronite, and I thought I was too untill like 2 yrs ago.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='musturde' post='992945' date='May 30 2006, 01:48 PM']
Ah, Your grandparents were straight from Lebanon right? My moms Maronite, and I thought I was too untill like 2 yrs ago.[/quote]What happened to you two years ago?

[Desert Walker]

[quote name='kujo' post='992687' date='May 29 2006, 10:08 PM']
Can you justify your claims that the Crusades and Inquisition was a myth? Or is this just mindless rhetoric?
[/quote]

They were certainly not myths! But they have been grossly exaggerated many times. The Inquisition was a real thing, but that court was not responsible for the death of nearly 100,000 people as the mythology tells us. The Crusades were acts of war conducted against the sovereign powers of the Holy Land by sovereign powers in Europe. There were geopolitical reasons for waging war against the Islamic governments, one of which was the Islamic military encroachment into Catholic Europe and the very real harrassment of Christian pilgrims along the road to the Holy Land.

There are other, not so well known, but far more personal reasons, for which the lords of Europe wished to invade the Holy Lands. These reasons were not, of course, spoken about very openly, but they were there. There existed a desire among some of the more knowledgeable rulers of Europe for any surviving historical, technical and or mystical manuscripts which were known to be related to what we would term "Pre-Historic Civillizations."

[Socrates]

[quote name='kujo' post='992687' date='May 29 2006, 10:08 PM']
Not to play semantics here, but I see some fallacies in your historical clarifications:
1. Whether or not the "purpose" of The Inquisition was to kill Muslims, Christians did engage in some heinous (not "less-than-honorable") acts. The ends do not justify the means, and our mission (a noble one) in no way excuses the fact that some within our ranks used this cause for their own personal gain.

2. As for the expansion of Islam through military conquest...join the club. Christianity was spread in a similar way, my friend. You know that.
Can you justify your claims that the Crusades and Inquisition was a myth? Or is this just mindless-rhetoric?
[/quote]
1. It is not clear what "heinous" acts you are referring to here, but while evil deeds have been committed by those calling themselves Christian, they are the exception rather than the norm in the history of the Church, and are almost never supported by the Church itself. Commonly, in the English-speaking world, the truth about events such as the Inquisition and the Crusades are twisted by anti-Catholic prejudice and "the Black Legend."

2. Read the Acts of the Apostles, and study early Church history, and compare that with the early histoy of Islam. The Christian Faith was in its first centuries spread largely by missionary activity and the blood of martyrs, not by violence, or forceful military conquest. The Church never taught a "convert or die" ethos, and in fact, has opposed "forced conversions." Christian armies have fought and conquered pagan enemies, but it is usually to counter a serious threat to Christians, or to oppose intolerable evil (such as Cortez fighting the Aztecs, who sacrificed over 50,000 human victims a year to their bloodthirsty and Satanic gods).
However, violence was never the Church's chief modus operandi of spreading the Faith.

[quote name='Desert Walker' post='992977' date='May 30 2006, 12:55 PM']
There are other, not so well known, but far more personal reasons, for which the lords of Europe wished to invade the Holy Lands. These reasons were not, of course, spoken about very openly, but they were there. There existed a desire among some of the more knowledgeable rulers of Europe for any surviving historical, technical and or mystical manuscripts which were known to be related to what we would term "Pre-Historic Civillizations."
[/quote]
Of course. Involving Atlantis and space aliens no doubt, and an amazing weapon which would give whoever possessed it absolute power in the universe.
Leave it to our resident conspiracy-theorist to explain what the Crusades were [b]really[/b] all about!

[God the Father]

A minority gets a better deal out of fear of being labelled racist and/or sued? A majority group loses rights in the name of equality?

I've never seen this anywhere before, ever. Not even here in America, in public universities admission policies or private businesses and employment quotas. Seriously, this is totally new to me.

[musturde]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='992961' date='May 30 2006, 01:03 PM']
What happened to you two years ago?
[/quote]

Found out I'm Melkite even though my Melkite family all goes to a Maronite Church and, as of what I know, none of them know anything about the Melkite rite. lol.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='musturde' post='992526' date='May 29 2006, 08:41 PM']
I don't know where you're getting your information from. Perhaps the history is true. Whatever the history is, the fact remains, Christian Arabs use Allah during worship and say the same phrases Muslims do "allah Mahuk" (God Be With You), "Enshallah" (Ojala in espanol), which means "If God Wills", and the casual "Ya Allah!", which translates, "Oh God". Most Christians I know say that Allah is the same God (without Jesus and the Holy Spirit). Unless you are talking to Christians who hate Muslims so much they refuse to admit they worship the same God lol.
[/quote]

small hijack here
There is another thread on the discussion of whether Islam worships the same God as the Christians and Jews. We would agree with them there is one God, but that the muslim description of god is not the same God worshipped by Christians any more than the mormon god is the same. Maybe the same name is used in all instances, but the characteristics are different, and should not lead to the idea that when we use the term, we have the same God in mind.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming

[Desert Walker]

[quote name='Socrates' post='993184' date='May 30 2006, 05:48 PM']
Involving Atlantis and space aliens no doubt, and an amazing weapon which would give whoever possessed it absolute power in the universe.

Leave it to our resident conspiracy-theorist to explain what the Crusades were [b]really[/b] all about!
[/quote]



Doesn't have to involve space aliens or even universe-dominating weaponry.

Most of modern technology is based on purely mechanical laws. But there is another area of reality which has been almost completely unexplored scientifically for thousands of years:

Manipulation of the wave properties of matter using electromagnetic forces. Theoretical knowledge of how to do this would make the technologies of science fiction part of every-day life.

Read Rene Noorbergen's book [i]Secrets of the Lost Races[/i]. He's not exactly reputable, but he's collated some great facts. It's an eye-opener if nothing else.

Don't believe me? A Russian scientist by the name of Eugene Podkletnov has built and tested a "gravity gun." It can fire pulses of gravitational force 60 times faster than the speed of light with enough force to punch through concrete walls and warp metal.

And YES this scientist IS REPUTABLE, but VERY unpopular in the mainstream scientific community.

[musturde]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='993420' date='May 31 2006, 06:26 AM']
small hijack here
There is another thread on the discussion of whether Islam worships the same God as the Christians and Jews. We would agree with them there is one God, but that the muslim description of god is not the same God worshipped by Christians any more than the mormon god is the same. Maybe the same name is used in all instances, but the characteristics are different, and should not lead to the idea that when we use the term, we have the same God in mind.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming
[/quote]


Only I can legally hijack ... I was in that thread too. I would still say they worship the Father since they claim to and by claiming to worship an entitiy, you are even if it's in the least perfect way. Btw Cmom, how are you?

[Socrates]

[quote name='Desert Walker' post='993489' date='May 31 2006, 07:54 AM']


Doesn't have to involve space aliens or even universe-dominating weaponry.

Most of modern technology is based on purely mechanical laws. But there is another area of reality which has been almost completely unexplored scientifically for thousands of years:

Manipulation of the wave properties of matter using electromagnetic forces. Theoretical knowledge of how to do this would make the technologies of science fiction part of every-day life.

Read Rene Noorbergen's book [i]Secrets of the Lost Races[/i]. He's not exactly reputable, but he's collated some great facts. It's an eye-opener if nothing else.

Don't believe me? A Russian scientist by the name of Eugene Podkletnov has built and tested a "gravity gun." It can fire pulses of gravitational force 60 times faster than the speed of light with enough force to punch through concrete walls and warp metal.

And YES this scientist IS REPUTABLE, but VERY unpopular in the mainstream scientific community.
[/quote]
So the Crusades were [b]really[/b] a war over possession of blueprints for prehistoric electromagnetic gravity guns?
Fascinating . . . I did not know that. . . .

[misereremi]

[quote name='Myles Domini' post='992457' date='May 29 2006, 10:21 PM']
I apologise if you felt I was accusing you. It was not my intention to do so, simply that I interpreted your comment about having a "them and us" mentality as implying that my comments were being unduly aggressive and adversarial towards Muslims.

I'm well aware that Islam in the West is spreading without violence. I did not make any reference to the contemporary Western situation because I did not believe it was strictly relevant to the points being addressed when I entered this debate. My attitude towards them as towards all people is the same though, as previously stated, bring them the love of God. Come prepared with the Catechetical teaching of the Church and be willing to enter into dialogue.

Be able to challenge the historical veracity of Surah 61; be able to illustrate that Surah 6's comments about God needing to have a consort to have a Son are only true in a material sense--a sense Christianity rejects; be able to identify the error of Muslims in using the so-called 'gospel of Barnabas' which if true nullifies the Koran since it claims Jesus is not the Messiah a claim the Koran wants to make etc.etc. Know your own faith, know the questions that will arise and be ready to give answer to them. Essentially debating with Muslims isnt so different from arguing against Jehovah Witnesses' or Mormons. Proving we didnt change the Bible, giving evidence that Jesus was divine yadda yadda yadda. If you're able to carry a healthy apologetics on one front you should be able to do it on basically any front.

The problem of the Church is the lack of theologian bishops actually willing to enter into controversy. Did Athanasius ignore the challenge from the pagans and Arians? Did the Cappodacians simply sit still before Apollinarius, Eunomius and co? Did Ambrose quietly allow Auxentius to cease his basilica? Did Augustine meekly hold his tongue before the Manichees, the Platonists, the Homoions and the Pelagians? Having isolated apologists carrying on the struggle is good but they need a platform wherein their message can be widely broadcast. Only the episcopate really has that capacity and indeed only they have the right by episcopal orders. Essential (in the philosophical sense of what it means to be by nature something) to the Bishop's vocation is that he [b]preach[/b] and propagate the faith. The inability to do this, though understandable, is damaging. After all if the shepherds do not tend the sheep who will?
[/quote]
True indeed. You know it's not easy on the street level, we can't do great things. I'm just a young mum thrown in the deep end with many of my friends now converting to Islam, and I'm not finding things simple in practice. Still, when we talk about the bridges that link us, like our Maryam Ana, people start listening to each other more. I think a lot of good can come from dialogue. It was a Muslim who made me a better Catholic.

[Franimus]

[quote name='musturde' post='993584' date='May 31 2006, 01:43 PM']
Only I can legally hijack ... I was in that thread too. I would still say they worship the Father since they claim to and by claiming to worship an entitiy, you are even if it's in the least perfect way. Btw Cmom, how are you?
[/quote]

Muslims believe that the objective good is rooted in the will of God, we believe that the objective good is rooted in the nature of God. There's a big difference; the former is called Divine Command Theory, and means that what is good can change based on God's will that day. If God tells you one day that murder is good, then murder is good. The latter is called (I think) Natural Law Theory, and basically says that God and goodness are inseparable; God always wills what is good since God's will is based on His nature. This philosophical stuff comes from the question "Is something good because God wills it, or does God will something because it is good?" (the latter inferring that the objective good is something completely separate from God, and God is subject to the higher power which is the objective good, creating a paradox)

Oh, and everything I've heard about Cortez and the Aztecs was that Cortez was a greedy, bad man who took advantage of the Aztecs for their gold (they mention this in Pirates of the Carribbean too, but I learned this long before that movie came out). I don't remember hearing anything about Aztec human sacrifice, nor about the "satanic gods" of the Aztecs. Just because the Aztecs were polytheistic and had a god of war, doesn't mean that they worshipped "satanic" gods. We don't call all pagans, muslims, mormons, greeks, romans, etc. satanists, now do we? Of course, the aztecs are long gone so it could be possible that what you say, Socrates, is true, but I've never heard of it.

[Desert Walker]

[quote name='Socrates' post='994118' date='May 31 2006, 08:56 PM']
So the Crusades were [b]really[/b] a war over possession of blueprints for prehistoric electromagnetic gravity guns?
Fascinating . . . I did not know that. . . .
[/quote]

I don't know. I wasn't saying that. I was just giving an example of that kind of technology (gravity gun) so you would understand that the technology isn't just fantasy, and that ancient cultures may have developed such things; because they are being developed in OUR time.

There other applications for this kind of thing. Matter wave modification technology can be used to lower an object's mass to near zero (like 10 ton stone blocks).

Ever heard of "lifters?" You can build them yourself. A current of high voltage induces an anti-gravity effect, and they float upward. Some experiments with lifters have shown definite inertial field differentials. That is, the lifter becomes independent of the local "space-time fabric" and does whatever it wants to do. This was observed when some guy attached a lifter to a gymbal system, fed it some high voltage, and the thing began to move in directions that the gymbal wasn't.

It's a long way from the government's flying saucers, but one day these basement/garage types might make a breakthrough.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994380' date='Jun 1 2006, 06:41 AM']Oh, and everything I've heard about Cortez and the Aztecs was that Cortez was a greedy, bad man who took advantage of the Aztecs for their gold (they mention this in Pirates of the Carribbean too, but I learned this long before that movie came out).[/quote]Ahhhh...politically correct education. Europeans=bad, Natives=good. It's so easy!

If you have the chance, I'd recommend the following narrative: [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1558850600/sr=8-8/qid=1149180774/ref=pd_bbs_8/104-6288521-1719161?%5Fencoding=UTF8"]Cabeza de Vaca (link)[/url]. It doesn't deal directly with Mexico (the author is actually travelling through the southern United States); but, it's a first-hand account from almost five hundred years ago. The author is honest about the good and the bad among both native and Spanish men. (note: there is also a movie version--it misrepresents the book).
[quote name='Franimus' post='994380' date='Jun 1 2006, 06:41 AM']I don't remember hearing anything about Aztec human sacrifice, nor about the "satanic gods" of the Aztecs. Just because the Aztecs were polytheistic and had a god of war, doesn't mean that they worshipped "satanic" gods. We don't call all pagans, muslims, mormons, greeks, romans, etc. satanists, now do we?[/quote]Looking at it one way: aside from satan, what other "god" would ask his followers to continually offer human sacrifice? Secondly, the New Testament scriptures seem to be clear that pagans are actually worshipping demons ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/1corinthians/1corinthians10.htm#v19"]link[/url]):
[quote name='1 Cor 10:19-21']So what am I saying? That meat sacrificed to idols is anything? Or that an idol is anything? No, I mean that what they sacrifice, (they sacrifice) to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to become participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and also the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. [/quote]

[quote name='Franimus' post='994380' date='Jun 1 2006, 06:41 AM']Of course, the aztecs are long gone so it could be possible that what you say, Socrates, is true, but I've never heard of it.[/quote]
Here's the Wiki article:
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifi...n_Aztec_culture[/url]