Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope [message #72661 is a reply to message #72657] |
Mon, 18 September 2006 22:11 |
ulfiyya
Messages: 25 Registered: July 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
for ... many times poeple.
THIS IS NOT A POLITIK SITE!!!
This is ...Paris site (Music) Remember...
Keep youre Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Thanks for the link. It looks like it might be a more interesting read
>than what you might expect of a book on probability theory.
>
>Without risk management there would be no insurance.
>
>Seems like we have some major risk management headaches ahead in the
>foreign relations area. I don't have much faith that our current
>government understands the situation or is capable of brokering a
>lasting and beneficial peace.
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>TCB wrote:
>> I never said faith was limited to religion _at all_ because that would
be
>> silly. I only bring this up because I think it's a very important point.
>> Nearly every time you read 'without faith there would be no XXXXXXXX'
it's
>> just not true and XXXXXXXX can get along just fine without faith. Probably
>> the best popular book about risk is called 'Against the Gods' and it's
sort
>> of about this very topic.
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Against-Gods-Remarkable-Story-Risk/dp/ 0471295639/sr=8-1/qid=1158631839/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2500887-29 81628?ie=UTF8&s=books
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>> There you go, clearly faith is not limited to religion. Although just
as
>>
>>> clearly it's important for religion.
>>>
>>> As to risk, many people have faith that their risks will pan out. Some
>>> people do things because they have such faith. I know people like that.
>>
>>> I am people like that. That doesn't preclude anyone from doing something
>>
>>> for some other reason, of course.
>>>
>>> If you want to say you don't have faith in anything, using any of the
>>> definitions below, then that's your prerogative and I don't have a
>>> problem with that.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>> TCB wrote:
>>>> Here's dictionary.com
>>>>
>>>> faith  /feɪθ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyth]
>>>> Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
>>>> –noun
>>>> 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
>>>> 2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis
>> would
>>>> be substantiated by fact.
>>>> 3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm
>> faith
>>>> of the Pilgrims.
>>>> 4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.:
>> to
>>>> be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
>>>> 5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
>>>> 6. the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement,
>>>> etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
>>>> 7. the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath,
>> allegiance,
>>>> etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
>>>> 8. Christian Theology. the trust in God and in His promises as made
through
>>>> Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see anything in there about risk. My point is that people can
>> do
>>>> the things you're talking about knowing full well they might fail, but
>> do
>>>> them anyway. That's taking a risk, not having faith. I don't have faith
>> but
>>>> I've taken lots of personal and professional risks in my life.
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>> We can disagree about that but the first line is the dictionary definition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB wrote:
>>>>>> You're confusing 'faith' with 'a willingness to take risks.' Animals
>> take
>>>>>> risks, to get food, create more animals, etc., but I doubt they have
>> faith.
>>>>>> One needs no faith to start businesses, invest money, get married,
etc.
>>>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Faith is complete trust or confidence in something or someone. Religious
>>>>>>> faith is one form of faith but not the only definition of "faith."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example I have faith that if I drop a guitar pick it will find
>> its
>>>>>>> way to the floor based on the gravitational attraction it has to
the
>>>>>>> planet. I have faith that I'll breathe my next breath, that I'll
see
>>>>>>> tomorrow morning. I have faith that other people are put together
much
>>>>>>> like I am and that I can therefore relate to other folks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Without faith, people would not invest money. Without faith people
>> would
>>>>>>> not vote. Without faith people would not start businesses, hire other
>>>>>>> people, raise children. Without faith people would not ride trains,
>> fly
>>>>>>> in planes or drive cars. Without faith no one would investigate
>>>>>>> scientific questions about reality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While you can clearly have faith without religion, you cannot have
>>
>>>>>>> religion without faith. Religion depends on faith that one or more
>>
>>>>>>> deities (good and sometimes bad) exist, that their associated stories
>>>>>>> actually occurred, and often, that there is some sort of afterlife.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, religious people believe in a variety of different deities.
>>>>>>> Even those who believe in the same deity disagree, sometimes violently,
>>>>>>> about the nature of their deity. Religions sometimes even disagree
>> about
>>>>>>> the nature of reality. If you want to base morality strictly on
>>>>>>> religion, and you look around, you'll notice that religion can be
a
>>
>>>>>>> somewhat chaotic basis unless...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ah, you might say, I want to base morality on MY religion. Well,
you
>>>>>>> just dissed the majority of religions. No problem because THEY ARE
>>
>>>>>>> WRONG. And people who believe in those religions may just be saying
>> the
>>>>>>> same thing about you and your religion. For those religions who are
>> not
>>>>>>> tolerant of other ideas, you may just have started a war.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So perhaps it's BETTER, in our time, to have a system of justice
that
>>>> is
>>>>>>> NOT based on a religion. But one which guarantees everyone the right
>>>> to
>>>>>>> practice the religion of their choice, guarantees other freedoms
such
>>>> as
>>>>>>> we in the USA do in our Bill of Rights, encourages honesty and
>>>>>>> integrity, while enforcing some common sense limits such as no human
>>>>>>> sacrifices, a minimum age for marriage, no incest, no slavery, no
>>>>>>> murder, no rape, no stealing, those sorts of things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is viewed as morality beyond a fair justice system and common
>> sense
>>>>>>> rules of behavior can be left to each freely chosen religion to sort
>>>>>>> out, like whether to restrict diet in some way, whether to wear a
>>>>>>> certain type of clothing, how to pray, etc. But none of these additional
>>>>>>> practices should be imposed on society as a whole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Golden Rule may also be of use as a basic moral foundation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So yes, you can have a moral system, one that BTW protects the freedom
>>>>>>> to practice religious beliefs (or not), without basing it on any
one
>>>>>>> religion. And it can protect all religions better than a system based
>>>> on
>>>>>>> any one religion (AKA a theocracy).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are other issues surrounding religions, such as the many examples
>>>>>>> of selfless dedication to helping others on the one hand, and hijacked
>>>>>>> religions used to legitimize earthly power structures in other cases.
>>>>>>> Dedric, I look forward to talking with you about the positives and
>>
>>>>>>> negatives of various religions, and where a moral culture ought to
>> go
>>>>>> >from here, whenever we next get together.
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> http://www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey Jimmy,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No doubt one can be a good person without believing in God - there
>> are
>>>>>> tons
>>>>>>>> of great people with no faith, or very little. That in and of itself
>>>>>> tells
>>>>>>>> me there must be a God so even non-believers would have a strong
sense
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> right and wrong on a societal and even global level.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To walk through some thoughts: with no God, or higher reference
point,
>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>> would be considered moral, or at least good? What would one use
to
>>>> decide
>>>>>>>> what is right and wrong?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Laws? Most would agree that we can't legislate morality now, so
with
>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>> basis for what morality is, why would we even bother with laws since
>>>>>>>> everyone would make their own choices anyway?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Intellect? That would simply depend on what one chose to accept
as
>>>>>>>> "intelligent" thought, based completely on opinion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Reasoning and Logic? Logic is determined by a hypothesis that has
>> a
>>>> proven
>>>>>>>> outcome in a given situation. Change the situation, and the reasoning
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> logic behind the "right" or "wrong" could easily change.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Experience? What if one's experience is filled with hatred, abuse,
>>>> anger
>>>>>>>> and violence, or worse? Then someone would have to decide whose
experience
>>>>>>>> we would use as a reference point. There would be no guarantee
that
>>>> person
>>>>>>>> or persons had experiences that would be best for the good of the
>> whole.
>>>>>>>> Survival instinct? If it were a reference point, then stealing,
lying,
>>>>>>>> cheating and even killing would be perfectly justified as those
can
>>>> be
>>>>>> means
>>>>>>>> of survival.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would right and wrong even exist? I would think that the differences
>>>>>>>> between societies' definitions of right and wrong, assuming societies
>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>> existed, would be so drastic we would never have ventured into any
>> form
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> inter-cultural/inter-geographic interaction, much less relationships,
>>>>>>>> diplomacy, collaboration, trade, and open travel.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As long as "morals" are only relative to each individual, they aren't
>>>>>>>> absolute morals that would last longer than the time it takes to
make
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> choice. We would just have 6.5 billion opinions. There would only
>>>> be
>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> ever changing perspective on what seems to "make sense" at the time,
>>>> and
>>>>>>>> based on this premise, even "making sense" would vary from person
>> to
>>>> person,
>>>>>>>> day to day, minute to minute. In that case, our prisons would either
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> filled with innocent people simply judged "wrong" at the time because
>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>> choices didn't match the preferences of the majority; or we wouldn't
>>>> have
>>>>>>>> prisons, or likely even organized societies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But is the majority always right? How would we know if there were
>> no
>>>>>>>> absolutes that supercede the majority in some form?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If there were no right and wrong, there would be no consequences
of
>>>> either,
>>>>>>>> or at least we wouldn't view the outcome as a good or bad consequence
>>>>>> - it
>>>>>>>> would just be another event in time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But by grace and as a gift of freedom, God gave us a choice, both
>> in
>>>> whether
>>>>>>>> to believe in Him and whether to make right or wrong decisions.
With
>>>>>> moral
>>>>>>>> absolutes (God's word) as a reference we have a way to evaluate
drastically
>>>>>>>> differing situations on an equivalent basis; with consistency in
reasoning
>>>>>>>> and compassion; by choice and instinct rather than puppetry. Even
>> when
>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> choose to do wrong, He is willing to forgive us. Without that option
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> choose, balanced by God's grace and forgiveness, there would be
no
>> power
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> choosing to believe in Him. That's what makes God a personal and
>> loving
>>>>>> God
>>>>>>>> rather than a dictator or puppet master.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Odd as it may seem to anyone who doesn't believe, I can see God
in
>> the
>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>> that 1) we as a group of intelligent people on this forum can discuss
>>>>>>>> completely opposing opinions and still care enough to consider insulting,
>>>>>>>> belittling, slandering and hating one another an intolerable concept;
>>>>>> and 2)
>>>>>>>> in all likelihood agree that peace and compassion completely trump
>> greed
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> power in importance to life and survival together on this planet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/17/06 7:12 PM, in article 450df091@linux, "Uptown Jimmy"
>>>>>>>> <johnson314@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The idea that one needs to believe in a god in order to have a
strong
>>>>>> morals
>>>>>>>>> is absurd, I think.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:C1325038.358D%dterry@keyofd.net...
>>>>>>>>>> Gene -
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You probably didn't realize it (so no offense), but your response
>>>> pretty
>>>>>>>>>> much confirms my assertion that the tendency of our country and
>> even
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> world society, is to place blame for religious conflict, violence
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> religiously motivated terrorism anywhere but with the single largest
>>>>>>>>>> growing, and currently most violent religion in the world. We
ignore
>>>>>> car
>>>>>>>>>> bombings, suicide bombers, torched churches, thousands of tortured
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> murdered, exiled and ostracized people in favor of blaming the
>>>>>>>>>> administration for anything and everything, as if Bush made the
>> Pope
>>>>>> quote
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> Byzantine emperor by going to war in Iraq.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Islam isn't the passive, peaceful, non-threatening, all-accepting
>>>> religion
>>>>>>>>>> our country seems to blindly want to believe. Some western Muslims
>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>> be, but just ask anyone who tried to believe in anything else
in
>> many
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> conservative Islamic countries of the world. I know, have talked
>>>> to,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> have heard missionaries to these countries speak - it's a different
>>>>>> world
>>>>>>>>>> from the free discussions and widely varying opinions we have
here.
>>>>>>>>> People
>>>>>>>>>> die for converting to anything else, or their families do. At
best,
>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>>>> families disown them and they sneak out of the country under threat
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> death. In fact it's the exact opposite of the "freedom" our country
>>>>>>>>>> continually pushes the limits of. Odd that we would turn on our
>> own
>>>>>>>>> country
>>>>>>>>>> in favor of supporting, or at least turning a blind eye to this
>> kind
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> ideology, somehow believing that is the more politically correct
>> thing
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The problem I see isn't religion, but a lack of faith in God,
and
>>>> hence
>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> sense of direction and moral guidance. God gives us the choice
>> to
>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>>> or not. Based on documents of their activities - in the name
of
>> Allah
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> 9/11 terrorists pretty much broke every one of the 10 commandments
>>>> in
>>>>>> 24
>>>>>>>>>> hours. That may seem a trivial or even silly fact, but there
is
>> a
>>>> sad,
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> frightening irony there. Faith in God isn't what one should fear
>>>> -
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>> believing in anything that conveniently appeases one's personal
>> whims
>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> is the true danger.... the terrorists proved that in one day.
That
>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>> includes believing in nothing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As Blaise Pascal once said (paraphrased): if one believes in God
>> and
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> wrong, at worst one has lived a good live and had some false hope
>>>> as
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> sense
>>>>>>>>>> of comfort along the way; if one doesn't believe and is wrong,
>> then
>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> best, all is lost for eternity. This is the paradox that we should
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> considering, and yet the most fear-inducing thought is that the
>> President
>>>>>>>>>> might believe in something other than nothing. Is no belief really
>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>>> than belief? What reference point for right and wrong accompanies
>>>>>>>>> disbelief
>>>>>>>>>> in anything higher than one's own decisions? What reference point
>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> respect for other people's beliefs accompanies a lack of belief
>> in
>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> guideline for living life and having respect and compassion for
>> others?
>>>>>>>>>> It isn't the administration's fault that the Pope quoted a guy
Islam
>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>> like just because he called like he saw it - something we do on
>> this
>>>>>> forum
>>>>>>>>>> every single day, ironically. It also isn't Christianity's intent
>>>> to
>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>> over the world, or the government. Far from it. The only goal
>> is
>>>> to
>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>> people a chance to decide. Yet, those that want to decide to
not
>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>>> would rather take that right away and remove Christianity from
public
>>>>>>>>> view.
>>>>>>>>>> The only way to force someone to remove their belief from public
>> in
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> country that promotes the freedom to believe as one wishes, is
to
>>>> outlaw
>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>> Yet another paradox.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Through our short sighted political glasses we want to see the
world
>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>>>> black and white, free-will, partisan vote where one's party always
>>>> wins
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> the decisions are always in our favor, but fail to see any validity
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> believing a God that gave us the very moral compass to maintain
>> the
>>>>>>>>> balance
>>>>>>>>>> that kind of choice affords us. In essence we put our trust in
>> the
>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>>>> thing we prove day in and day out to be one of the most fallible
>>>>>>>>>> characteristics of humanity - political and relativistic ideology.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess I ignored my own first comment....sorry about that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I should get back to mourning NI Battery 2's destruction of 10
hours
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> work
>>>>>>>>>> :-((....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/16/06 9:09 PM, in article 450cbc70$1@linux, "gene Lennon"
>>>>>>>>>> <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't want to start another religious or political thread
-...
>>>>>>>>>>> These are frightening times. While the true neocons in the current
>>>>>>>>>>> administration
>>>>>>>>>>> have had a variety of political, financial and power-based reasons
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> perusing
>>>>>>>>>>> the war against Iraq, the president has had an even scarier motivation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Religion.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you missed it, this week Bush has announced the "Third Great
>>>>>>>>> Awakening"
>>>>>>>>>>> of the international religious struggle. This is a good thing
as
>>>> he
>>>>>> sees
>>>>>>>>>>> it and it has been partially brought on by the new fight against
>>>>>>>>> terrorists
>>>>>>>>>>> (Translation - Due to his good work in God's name). A war that
>> he
>>>>>>>>> depicts
>>>>>>>>>>> as "a confrontation between good and evil."
>>>>>>>>>>> In 2001 he used the word "crusade" and got into quite a bit of
>> trouble
>>>>>>>>> (as
>>>>>>>>>>> has the Pope), but he seems to have the gloves off now.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Can anyone imagine a worse direction for the world to be headed?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course he also believes in the Rapture, so things could easily
>>>> go
>>>>>>>>> down
>>>>>>>>>>> hill from here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> More on the "Third Awakening":
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09 /12/AR2006091201
>>>>>>>>> 59
>>>>>>>>>>> 4_pf.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gene
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> `
>>
|
|
|
|
|
OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Sat, 16 September 2006 16:41
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: justcron on Sat, 16 September 2006 17:52
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Sat, 16 September 2006 18:36
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Sat, 16 September 2006 18:35
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Sat, 16 September 2006 18:29
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: DC on Sat, 16 September 2006 19:00
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Sat, 16 September 2006 19:00
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Sun, 17 September 2006 01:58
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Sun, 17 September 2006 13:58
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: dc[3] on Sat, 16 September 2006 21:15
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Sat, 16 September 2006 22:35
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: dc[3] on Sun, 17 September 2006 00:35
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: justcron on Sun, 17 September 2006 07:46
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Sun, 17 September 2006 08:40
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: dc[3] on Sun, 17 September 2006 15:32
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Mon, 18 September 2006 02:41
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: DC on Mon, 18 September 2006 13:41
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: DC on Sun, 17 September 2006 00:41
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Sun, 17 September 2006 22:14
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 00:40
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Mon, 18 September 2006 02:35
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: TCB on Mon, 18 September 2006 12:49
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 14:15
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: TCB on Mon, 18 September 2006 15:08
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 17:40
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: TCB on Mon, 18 September 2006 19:05
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 21:20
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: ulfiyya on Mon, 18 September 2006 22:11
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: rick on Tue, 19 September 2006 11:00
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: rick on Wed, 20 September 2006 02:08
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: rick on Wed, 20 September 2006 11:11
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Tue, 19 September 2006 12:36
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: rick on Wed, 20 September 2006 02:11
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: DC on Mon, 18 September 2006 14:08
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 14:29
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: dc[3] on Mon, 18 September 2006 15:49
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: dc[3] on Mon, 18 September 2006 08:13
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Mon, 18 September 2006 09:26
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: justcron on Mon, 18 September 2006 10:50
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 09:37
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Mon, 18 September 2006 11:26
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: justcron on Mon, 18 September 2006 11:40
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 11:47
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Mon, 18 September 2006 12:50
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 14:17
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Mon, 18 September 2006 15:16
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: justcron on Mon, 18 September 2006 16:36
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 17:30
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Mon, 18 September 2006 21:14
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Mon, 18 September 2006 23:22
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Tue, 19 September 2006 10:23
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Tue, 19 September 2006 11:31
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Tue, 19 September 2006 15:32
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Tue, 19 September 2006 16:41
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Tue, 19 September 2006 18:43
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Tue, 19 September 2006 21:11
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: TCB on Tue, 19 September 2006 21:12
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Tue, 19 September 2006 18:51
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej on Tue, 19 September 2006 22:17
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej on Tue, 19 September 2006 22:18
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Kim on Wed, 20 September 2006 03:13
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: animix on Wed, 20 September 2006 06:21
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Kim on Wed, 20 September 2006 07:34
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Sarah on Wed, 20 September 2006 20:45
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: DC on Wed, 20 September 2006 21:39
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: animix on Thu, 21 September 2006 07:57
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: animix on Wed, 20 September 2006 19:27
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Pauln[1] on Thu, 21 September 2006 06:11
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: TCB on Tue, 19 September 2006 15:29
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: excelav on Sun, 17 September 2006 00:02
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Deej [1] on Sun, 17 September 2006 05:55
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: excelav on Mon, 18 September 2006 11:22
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: excelav on Mon, 18 September 2006 13:18
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: OT: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: excelav on Mon, 18 September 2006 13:23
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
By: Jamie K on Sun, 17 September 2006 07:55
|
|
|
Re: An interesting paradox - Islam and the Pope
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Sep 26 07:53:54 PDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02920 seconds
|