Imgflip Logo Icon

Philosoraptor

Philosoraptor Meme | IF ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE WHY AREN'T THE EXTREMISTS EXTREMELY PEACEFUL? | image tagged in memes,philosoraptor | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
2,327 views 37 upvotes Made by Turabi 6 years ago
Philosoraptor memeCaption this Meme
51 Comments
[deleted]
5 ups, 6y,
2 replies
Well put!
1 up, 6y
[image deleted]
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
They use Islam as an excuse.
1 up, 6y,
2 replies
ISIS is following the Koran down to the letter.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
Not to start an argument or anything, but if you make that claim, you should give some evidence to support it.
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
"Kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." -Koran 9:5

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his apostle nor acknowledge the religion of truth of the people of the Book (the Jews and the Christians) until they pay the Jizya [tax on non-Muslims] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued." -Koran 9:29

"Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war." -Hadith 19:4294
1 up, 6y
Thank you very much.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
The Koran tells people to be peaceful, clearly Isis isn't following that.
1 up, 6y
So Mohammad didn't follow his own teachings?
1 up, 6y
I wish U happy Christmas...
0 ups, 6y
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
I am not agree
[deleted]
0 ups, 6y
I wasn't stating a fact.....only a wish.
1 up, 6y,
5 replies
In middle ages, The Church was like Extremist Muslims today...
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
Not to offend anyone, but that was mostly the Catholic Church.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
That was only the Catholic church and that's not a bad thing , protestants didn't happen until after 1517.
2 ups, 6y,
2 replies
They existed; they just stayed quiet for the most part to avoid persecution.
1 up, 6y
*existed before then*
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
Theirs no proof of any protestant church until after 1517 when martin luther calvin and zsengli became the fathers of the protestant revolution. However you can go back to 110 AD and find Ignatius of Antioch talking about the Catholic church.
3 ups, 6y,
2 replies
I'm saying people held to the belief system of the Protestants before 1517.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
ok please name them, the specific belief, and the date(s).
The truth is there were heresies from the beginning of the church starting with the circumcisers and Gnostics and through the centuries like Ariannism, iconoclasm and so on .. . Fortunately, we have Christ’s promise that heresies will never prevail against the Church, he told Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The Church is truly, in Paul’s words, "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).. You CAN proove the church throughout the centuries held to " one faith one baptism " and that church is Catholic.
You can't proove there was any other protestant " belief system " until after Martin Luther started Protestantism and his own church Lutherans , same with Calvin Calvinists , King Henry Anglicans etc .

" the church is one " 1 Cor. 12:12 not over 30,000 denominations.
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
Throughout history (since after Christ's death), people have believed the true doctrine taught in the Bible. I honestly don't know of any groups that existed a long time ago. I haven't researched that. However, I find it likely that the Catholics tried to quell those groups.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
There was no bible at the beginning of the Church ...The early Church relied on word of mouth and tradition ... along with the Jewish scriptures.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 15 So then, brothers, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS that you were TAUGHT by us, either by our SPOKEN WORD OR by our LETTER.

Baptists were founded in the 1600's in England by John Smyth.

http://www.baptisthistory.org/baptistbeginnings.htm

"Conclusion:

Baptists originated in England in a time of intense religious reform. They sought to recover and proclaim the faith of the New Testament as first given by Jesus and his apostles. Since then they have spread their teachings and churches in many lands and many cultures."
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
By context, those traditions are the teachings of Jesus. I whole-heartedly agree that we should follow those.
BTW, I see a mistake I made. I didn't mean Protestants, I meant people who hold to the teachings of the Bible. The Protestants did indeed come about in the 16th century, but it's not like every person who claimed to be a Christian was a Catholic up until then.
0 ups, 6y
Yes but the bible says scripture is useful and stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS that you were TAUGHT by us, either by our SPOKEN WORD OR by our letter....and the church is the bulwark and pillar of truth and yes as a catholic is a Christian all Christians were catholic back then.
0 ups, 6y,
2 replies
How can a belief system (or movement, or whatever) remain underground or secretive for fifteen centuries, with millions of people passing it on to their children, without there being some kind of historical record of it? It's impossible.
[deleted]
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
In the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church didn't allow the public to read the bible, only the priests. Then Martin Luther read the bible, saw that the Catholic Church was bribing the public (if you give us money, God will forgive you, it says in the bible) and broke off and started the Protestant church. That's what I believe
1 up, 6y,
2 replies
How was the bible made before the printing press? The public couldn't one for the most part or read. the upper class scholars and such could afford bibles hand written. Martin luther was a priest and very troubled. He also didn't understand the Eucharist or indulgences.
[deleted]
1 up, 6y
K. I don't really feel like arguing rn but I definitely see your point. Agree to disagree
[deleted]
1 up, 6y,
1 reply
Written.
1 up, 6y
Exactly, it's not that the Church didn't allow the public to read the bible, there just weren't that many around or if there was , most of the public was illiterate. Stain glasses also were used to teach the Gospel . Being Catholic you're read the bible front to back over the course of 3 years. So after 30 years if you paid attention at church, you read the bible 10 times. That goes for the middle ages as well.
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
I'm saying when it became dangerous for people to oppose the Catholic church, they weren't outspoken on what they believed. I'm certain there have been people throughout the last 2000 years who have believed there's only one God, Jesus is God, and he died so that we can accept his salvation and restore the relationship with God that Adam and Eve broke.
I'll look into the history of Protestantism and Baptistism (that doesn't sound or look right). Thanks for the push. :)
0 ups, 6y,
3 replies
There is no "Protestant Belief System". That would imply that they all agreed on anything - the ONLY common belief among "Protestants" is that the Catholic Church must somehow be wrong. That is it. No two Reformers agreed with each other, most condemned the rest as heretics at one point or another. Even with individual groups, none stayed true to their founder's beliefs. Even today, it would be difficult to define a common set of beliefs for non-Catholic Christians even as many have tried to adopt "Protestant" pillars, but even their interpretation of those varies greatly.
I hope you do look into Church History and church fathers dating back from earliest centuries. You'll see they sound really Catholic. Here's a list of the heresies squashed by the church... Also please .. If you do want to find out what Catholics believe, go to a catholic resource like catholic.com or Ewtn.com... There's so much misinformation out there. And it make sense to hear it out the horses mouth right?

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-great-heresies
2 ups, 6y,
1 reply
No thanks. The Bible has convinced me Catholics are wrong in what they believe.
By Protestant belief system, I meant there's one God, Jesus is God, and God wants to save us. Still, I suppose Catholics probably agree with that. :P
0 ups, 6y
The Bible convinced me Protestantism is wrong.

The two defining dogmas of Protestantism are clearly refuted by Scripture. "traditions of men"

2 Thessalonians 2:15 15 So then, brothers, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS that you were TAUGHT by us, either by our SPOKEN WORD OR by our LETTER.

James 2:24 24 You see that a person is justified by WORKS and NOT by faith alone.

One can't make it any clearer than it already is.

Sola scriptura and sola fide Your religion is condemned by God and Scripture.
2 ups, 6y,
4 replies
rise1r, I'm a Protestant also, and I agree with XenusianSoldier. I believe that if you read the Bible the way it's intended to be read, it contradicts the claims of the Catholic church about salvation.

I noticed below that you commented,
"The Bible convinced me Protestantism is wrong. The two defining dogmas of Protestantism are clearly refuted by Scripture."

I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, but I find that comment to be naive. It comes across like you think you have a clearer understanding of the Bible than Protestant theologians throughout the centuries. You might not agree with Protestants, but to dismiss their side by quoting two verses (as if they had never seen those verses before), disrespects them and their understanding of the Bible. Martin Luther and John Calvin were not fools. They understood the Bible better than most.

There are also some problems with the way you quoted the verses in your comment.

When you use 2 Thessalonians 2:15 against Sola Scriptura, it misrepresents what Sola Scriptura actually affirms. Sola Scriptura teaches that the Bible is the only ultimate standard of faith and practice. That doesn't mean that other traditions or valid sources of authority are to be rejected outright. So there's nothing in the apostle's command to the Thessalonian church to "hold to the traditions you were taught by us" that goes against the Protestant understanding of Sola Scriptura.

As for James 2:24, I don't have a clear answer about what that verse means. It does indeed seem to go against Sola Fide. It specifically says "a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone."

But the trouble with using a verse like that against Sola Fide is that firstly, James didn't have 16th century church debates in mind when he wrote that verse. He wrote it in the 1st century. It would be important to study the letter in its original context and find out what he meant before deciding it was a proof-text against Protestantism.

But more importantly, it's dishonest to take verses from the Bible and interpret them in such a way that they contradict other verses. The Bible can't contradict itself. If you're going to refer to James 2:24 as a proof-text against Sola Fide, you need to answer the Scriptures such as Romans 3:28 or 11:6, in which Sola Fide (or something very much like it) seems to be affirmed.

I hope you will reconsider your claim that Sola Fide & Sola Scriptura are so clearly refuted by the Bible.
2 ups, 6y
I believe that if you read the Bible the way it's intended to be read, it contradicts the claims of the Catholic church about salvation.
That begs the question, what is it that you believe the Catholic church teaches on salvation? You might say that we rely on our works but that’s a gross misinformation protestants have of the catholic church and its “claim of salvation”
It comes across like you think you have a clearer understanding of the Bible than Protestant theologians throughout the centuries.
The centuries meaning the last 5. Versus them (Protestant theologians) thinking they have a better understanding than the theologians 15 Apostles and church fathers centuries prior to them?

You might not agree with Protestants, but to dismiss their side by quoting two verses (as if they had never seen those verses before), disrespects them and their understanding of the Bible. Martin Luther and John Calvin were not fools. They understood the Bible better than most.
I’ll quote more verses contradicting Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura later, I just didn’t have the space or time. I’m glad you respect Martin and John, did you know they were defenders of Mary’s Immaculate Conception and perpetual virginity? Today you’ll hear no protestant church defend her Immaculate Conception or perpetual virginity because of their interpretation of scripture. Sola scriptura causes many different interpretations of Bible verses. Another example , to baptize or not to baptize.
For a Christian what is the pillar and bulwark of truth? What is the definition of Bulwark? a defensive wall. What’s a pillar do? Hold up the truth. Does the bible say scripture is the bulwark and pillar of truth or is it the church?
1 Tim. 3:15 answers that for Christians.
[deleted]
1 up, 6y
Aw gee thx. :) I also am Protestant, and was questioning when he pulled the James verse saying you're not justified by faith alone... But James is kind of how to act like a Christian not be a Christian, also idk but the story I heard was the Catholic Church was corrupt and misusing penances, (if you tithe to the church, God will forgive you) and Martin Luther read the bible, broke off, etc. It is kind of worrying bc catholism was the first church, but I think it's just important to trust God.
1 up, 6y
When you use 2 Thessalonians 2:15 against Sola Scriptura, it misrepresents what Sola Scriptura actually affirms. Sola Scriptura teaches that the Bible is the only ultimate standard of faith and practice.
But where is that in the Bible? Chapter and verse??

As for James 2:24, I don't have a clear answer about what that verse means. It does indeed seem to go against Sola Fide. It specifically says "a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." Yes , Luther had a problem with the book of James and actually tried to have it cut from his bible along with the other 7 books he took out of the bible from the OT.

But the trouble with using a verse like that against Sola Fide is that firstly, James didn't have 16th century church debates in mind when he wrote that verse. He wrote it in the 1st century. Is the Bible inerrant or not ? is it inspired by the Holy Spirit or not?
0 ups, 6y
It would be important to study the letter in its original context and find out what he meant before deciding it was a proof-text against Protestantism. Then please do so, don’t assume Catholics for 2 thousand years haven’t done so already. It flys in the face of faith alone and is very problematic for protestants. And it’s inline with what Paul taught in Romans about faith and works.

The Bible can't contradict itself. If you're going to refer to James 2:24 as a proof-text against Sola Fide, you need to answer the Scriptures such as Romans 3:28 or 11:6, in which Sola Fide (or something very much like it) seems to be affirmed. I hope you will reconsider your claim that Sola Fide & Sola Scriptura are so clearly refuted by the Bible.

Actually I’ll show more contradictions to faith alone - Jas 2:14-17, 24 ... what good is faith without works? Phil 2:12; 2 Cor 5:10; Rom 2:6-10; Mt 25:32-46; Gal 6:6-10; Rev 20:12 ... works have merit. More contradictions to Scripture alone Jn 21:25 ... not everything is in the Bible. 2 Tim 2:2; 1 Cor 11:2 ... St. Paul speaks of oral tradition. Acts 2:42 ...early Christians followed apostolic tradition. 2 Jn 1:12 ...more oral tradition. 2 Pet 1:20-21 ... against personal interpretation. Heb 5:12 ... guidance needed to interpret scriptures. We say amen to the verses you provided however they do not say ALONE which is the problem . If the Bible said Alone we would also believe in scripture ALONE or faith ALONE however it doesn’t so we know Sacred Scripture is , Sacred Tradition handed down by the Aposteles and their successors are 2 Timothy 2:2; 1Corinthians 11:2; 1 Thessalonians 2:13 and that the Church has the authority (Mt 16:19 to defend and uphold the truth Mt 18:17-18 ... church has final authority.) . The question is which church? The answer is the one founded by Christ that is also found in the Nicene creed the One , Holy , Catholic and Apostolic church , it also doesn’t hurt that it’s historically found.
1 up, 6y
Thanks for your reply to my other comment. In answer to your question about my understanding of the Catholic view of salvation, I believe it is basically salvation through the sacraments of the church: i.e., baptism cleanses from original sin, and then the sacraments and penance are means of grace by which Christ works through the heart of each sincere believer to produce a life that is as acceptable in God's sight as it can be, and God's forgiveness and mercy takes care of the rest.

I appreciate your response, and I will think about what you wrote.
0 ups, 6y
If you think the crusades were bad , you don't know what the crusades were about or how long it took for it to happen or why it happened. Encyclopedia Britannica online has some good resources.
0 ups, 6y
How so?
1 up, 6y,
1 reply
The Church went through a reformation, Islam did not.
0 ups, 6y
Real Religions (Real Islam, Real Christianity and others) are OK...
But people?!
[deleted]
0 ups, 6y
Worse...much worse then. I tell people how fortunate we are that the world will probably never let it get to that extreme again.
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
We Should look at Bible & Quran
[deleted]
0 ups, 6y,
1 reply
The Bhagavad Gita is my scripture.
1 up, 6y,
1 reply
Bhagavad Gita?
I'll search about..
[deleted]
0 ups, 6y
In particular, "God Talks with Arjuna", the Bhagavad Gita, translated and commentary by Paramahansa Yogananda. No discrepancies, no contradictions....just a dialogue on human nature and human purpose. Amazon has it for about the best price.
Flip Settings
Philosoraptor memeCaption this Meme
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
IF ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF PEACE WHY AREN'T THE EXTREMISTS EXTREMELY PEACEFUL?
hotkeys: D = random, W = upvote, S = downvote, A = back
Feedback