/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Pope Benedict must accept Dr Zakir Naik's invitation



trueislam
07-11-2007, 02:26 AM
Asalaam alaikum, muslim brothers/sisters and none-Muslim friends

To: Pope Benedict XVI

Dr Zakir Naik has invited you, i.e. Pope Benedict XVI for an open interfaith dialogue. Now you must accept the invitation and hold an open interfaith dialogue on Islam and Christianity in front of the entire world so that people will be able to understand the truth about Islam and Christianity. Dr Zakir Naik's words relevant to this issue can be verified from any news web site covering the issue. Dr Zakir Naik's words regarding this great invitation for you include:

"I am more than willing to participate in the inter-faith dialogue with Pope Benedict XVI. I am ready on any topic he (the Pope) wishes as long as it focuses on Quran and the Bible," "I can go to Rome and to Vatican on my own expense if an Italian visa is arranged for me," "I am absolutely ready for an open and public debate with the pope under live international TV coverage," Let the 1.3 billion Muslims and 2 billion Christians around the world listen to the debate based on equal slot of time allotted to both sides, he said. "It is not only a debate but also a question and answer session allowing the people to ask queries,".

yes a peaceful lecture between Dr Zakir and the Pope,

http://www.petitiononline.com/ai2nd/petition.html

Please sign the petition all the best Peace

wa-alaikum salaam :)
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Woodrow
07-11-2007, 10:21 PM
Just my opinion. I think it would be a dangerous debate.

The Pope only represents Roman Catholics. I doubt if the majority of the world's Christians would be in favor of him speaking on behalf of Christianity.

Outside of that it would be an interesting debate. But, it world have to be remembered it would be a debate of Catholicism and Islam. Or more exact a debate between Dr. Naik and the Pope.

If the Pope loses the debate, it would strengthen the views of the Protestants and Evangelicals and produce a more favorable attitude towards fundamentalism by the Christians.

If somehow Dr. Naik has a bad day and the Pope wins it would strengthen Catholicism, and see them return to their days of evangelism.

Either way it would spur an increase in evangelism


If the Pope did represent Christianity, it would be a worthwhile debate and it would be the one with the best proof who would win. but, as it is I think it could end up as a loose-loose situation for Dr. Naik. The world would see Christianity as being the winner, no matter if the Pope wins or if Dr. Naik wins.
Reply

Salaam
07-12-2007, 12:19 AM
The pope will never accept this, he knows that hes not going to win. Anyway can he speak english?
Reply

snakelegs
07-12-2007, 12:25 AM
why should muslims think the pope is important?
i don't.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Woodrow
07-12-2007, 12:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
why should muslims think the pope is important?
i don't.
A very large number of the world's Christians would agree with you on that. Even some Catholics feel the Papacy has out lived it's purpose.

Salaam
The pope will never accept this, he knows that hes not going to win. Anyway can he speak english?
I really haven't read anything about Benedict. But for some reason I do not believe he can speak English. I just did a Google and found this:

OOOPS he does speak English.

As well as his native German, Benedict XVI fluently speaks Italian, French, English, Spanish and Latin, and has a knowledge of Portuguese. He can read Ancient Greek and biblical Hebrew. He is a member of a large number of academies, such as the French Académie des sciences morales et politiques. He plays the piano and has a preference for Mozart and Bach[3].
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI
Reply

guyabano
07-12-2007, 07:18 AM
I just had a look at the petition list and it is flagrant, that 99% of the list are muslims.

Sooo, Dr. Zakir Naik:

(out of wikipedia)

'Political Analyst Khaled Ahmed considers that Zakir Naik, by his criticism of other religions, and by his claims of Islam's superiority over other religious faiths, practices what he calls "reverse Orientalism" when discussing comparative religion.'

We know, what happen to people who go already snobbish, sure about a victory to a debate!
Reply

Pynthanomai
07-12-2007, 11:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
[...]
If the Pope did represent Christianity, it would be a worthwhile debate and it would be the one with the best proof who would win. but, as it is I think it could end up as a loose-loose situation for Dr. Naik. The world would see Christianity as being the winner, no matter if the Pope wins or if Dr. Naik wins.

The thought of such a debate is indeed very interesting. However, I wonder how anyone would be able to decide a "winner" in such a contest. A few hours' dialogue could cover several topics superficially, or a few in depth; but when we consider the antiquity of the religions involved and their beliefs, and the vast sea of material that has been published by each side for the propogation and confirmation of its teachings, it seems that a "victory" on the side of either party would be extremely spurious. Indeed, I'm tempted to think that the positions undertaken by each party would invariably reduce themselves to a simple asseveration of their unwavering belief in the veracity of the claims of their respective religions: which, being their starting position, wouldn't produce much material for the arbiters to work with in determining a winner!
Reply

Umar001
07-12-2007, 11:33 AM
Would be interesting, I'd love to witness such an event, just for the sheer uniqueness of it.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-12-2007, 04:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Salaam
The pope will never accept this, he knows that hes not going to win. Anyway can he speak english?
First of all pope Benedict XVI is one of the greatest minds of our times and surely one of greatest thoelogians nowadays.
Second thing, Benedict XVI is more conservative than John Paul II and he is very sceptical about interfaith ecumenism between catholicism and non christian faiths. For him non christian faiths are simply not right. Pope rather prefers to discuss with other christian churches , like orthodox or dialogue with protestants.
Reply

Cognescenti
07-12-2007, 05:06 PM
The Pope speaks Latin, German, English and Italian (at least, maybe more). His English is not bad at least when read from a script. Ditto the Italian. Whether he could conduct a theleogical debate in English is another matter.

The problem, of course, is that problems arising from matters of faith do not lend themselves to solution by the well turned phrase. I don't think this is what the Vatican had in mind when they proposed a Muslim-Christian dialogue :D

I once went to a Creation vs. Evolution debate sponsored by a fundamentalist church with a traveling Creationist speaker vs. one of my Biology professors and a Chemistry professor. The Biology prof. was a brilliant and funny guy and the Chemistry prof. brilliant but not so funny. The Creationist was a polished and gifted public speaker and he had a handbag of pat one-liners.

The Biology prof. absolutely demolished the Creation argument with the fossil record, structural homologies, molecular biological argumetns...etc etc., but his opponent merely asked if anyone had ever seen a pile of bricks jump into a neat stack in the back of a pick-up truck. The crowd went wild, holding their Bibles aloft and making great merriment (it was a definite home court advantage :smile: )

It was immensely entertaining but I believe not one person had their mind changed on the subject. :D

I too would like to see such a debate, complete with commentators and scoring judges. I would pay good money to see it.
Reply

guyabano
07-12-2007, 06:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Aaron85
For him non christian faiths are simply not right.
Anyway, with these words, he's in good company. Thats what also all the muslims pretend. So, everything is balanced.
Reply

guyabano
07-12-2007, 06:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
why should muslims think the pope is important?
i don't.
agree? I never saw the benefits of such a person. I just would like to have his salary ! :D
Reply

Keltoi
07-12-2007, 07:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
why should muslims think the pope is important?
i don't.
The Pope is important because he represents many millions of Catholics worldwide. While I'm not Catholic, I do understand his importance to Christendom, and as a result, I understand why Muslims interested in dialogue would seek to discuss subjects with him. The fact that he isn't important to you or me, as far as our daily lives, doesn't mean he has no importance in the greater scheme of things.
Reply

snakelegs
07-12-2007, 09:15 PM
maybe it's just a lack of imagination on my part, but i can't imagine what could be gained by such a dialogue. maybe i've just read the comparative religion section too much.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-12-2007, 09:16 PM
Seriously i think that there are many christian scholars who are able to discuss with dr Naik about these two faiths. How to say, pope cant have discission with everyone who wants it.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-12-2007, 09:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
maybe it's just a lack of imagination on my part, but i can't imagine what could be gained by such a dialogue. maybe i've just read the comparative religion section too much.
Yes you are right Snakelegs. Its obvious that both sides would want to prove that their faith is the right one, and the opposite is the wrone one. BTW i saw dr Naik on YouTube and , with all due respect to him, he sould rather seek discussion with scholars on his level.
Reply

sudais1
07-13-2007, 03:44 AM
uhh to be honest, aaron, all thos scholars he faced were very good and they were all just simply beat, the biggest test for him would indeed be the pope himself
Reply

Cognescenti
07-13-2007, 04:32 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sudais1
uhh to be honest, aaron, all thos scholars he faced were very good and they were all just simply beat, the biggest test for him would indeed be the pope himself
Despite the entertainment value, which would be substantial, I just can't see why a couple of guys citing passages out of centuries-old texts are going to sway true believers.

It almost sounds like something out of a Woody Allen movie.
Reply

wilberhum
07-13-2007, 04:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sudais1
uhh to be honest, aaron, all thos scholars he faced were very good and they were all just simply beat, the biggest test for him would indeed be the pope himself
Being the best debater means only one thing,
you are the best debater. :confused:
Reply

Trumble
07-13-2007, 06:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sudais1
uhh to be honest, aaron, all thos scholars he faced were very good and they were all just simply beat, the biggest test for him would indeed be the pope himself
I disagree that the Pope would prove 'the biggest' test. The Pope is an old man and a scholar, not a rhetoritician or public speaker. As wilberhum rightly implies being a skilled debater, which Naik certainly is, has very little to do with whether your arguments are 'right' or not... as any student of politics will agree!
Reply

Cognescenti
07-13-2007, 06:39 PM
There is the recurrent theme of one's faith being the "true" faith. It has always seemed kind of silly to me. What is wrong with simply leading a moral life and trying to add goodness to the world? If everyone simply followed the Rabbis Golden Rule it would be a nicer place to be. Would a benevolent Supreme Being really be angered because a falliable mortal made a pilgrimage to Mecca instead of Lourdes or vice versa?
Reply

Pynthanomai
07-14-2007, 06:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Cognescenti
There is the recurrent theme of one's faith being the "true" faith. It has always seemed kind of silly to me. What is wrong with simply leading a moral life and trying to add goodness to the world? If everyone simply followed the Rabbis Golden Rule it would be a nicer place to be. Would a benevolent Supreme Being really be angered because a falliable mortal made a pilgrimage to Mecca instead of Lourdes or vice versa?

I guess the problem with such a suggestion (which does indeed sound attractive) is that not everyone is happy to go through their lives with a kind of self-imposed morality or a lack of spiritual direction. More importantly, humans are notoriously fallible and changeable creatures, and history has shown that, left to their own devices, either with or without the support of any particular religion, they are quite capable of committing the most appalling atrocities conceivable. To me the suggestion places an unbearable load upon the assumption that humans are all quite capable of getting along without hurting each other, and of actually being of a mind to want to make the world "a nicer place to be". In my opinion, history demonstrates with unimpeachable clarity that humans are generally evil, and that continually.
Reply

Cognescenti
07-14-2007, 03:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pynthanomai
I guess the problem with such a suggestion (which does indeed sound attractive) is that not everyone is happy to go through their lives with a kind of self-imposed morality or a lack of spiritual direction. More importantly, humans are notoriously fallible and changeable creatures, and history has shown that, left to their own devices, either with or without the support of any particular religion, they are quite capable of committing the most appalling atrocities conceivable. To me the suggestion places an unbearable load upon the assumption that humans are all quite capable of getting along without hurting each other, and of actually being of a mind to want to make the world "a nicer place to be". In my opinion, history demonstrates with unimpeachable clarity that humans are generally evil, and that continually.
Right..what you are describing is the socializing influence of organized religion which all religions offer to some degree. This is an important and positive influence in most cases, but, if the socialized group is persuaded that believers in another religion (which fundamentally has the same goals) are different or inferior because of the nature of their beliefs, then there is much mischief to be made. This is the part that seems silly to me.

BTW..sociopaths (Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, etc.) are not constrained by moral concerns precisely because they are sociopaths) It generally takes a gun to change their behavior.
Reply

Eric H
07-14-2007, 06:49 PM
Greetings and peace be with you all,

If such a public encounter was ever to come about I think it would be a terrible waste if it were to turn into a competitive point scoring exercise, I doubt that would do either religion any good.

However it would be a wonderful opportunity to try and work out how Muslims and Christians can live together in communities peacefully.
I believe there is a great need for bridge building, and reducing the apparent fear that seems to exist between people of our faiths. How can we learn to trust each other?

in the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric
Reply

sudais1
07-14-2007, 06:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
I disagree that the Pope would prove 'the biggest' test. The Pope is an old man and a scholar, not a rhetoritician or public speaker. As wilberhum rightly implies being a skilled debater, which Naik certainly is, has very little to do with whether your arguments are 'right' or not... as any student of politics will agree!
very true indeed,

i would only love to see this debate for entertainment loool, it would be great. but its not going to happend
Reply

Pynthanomai
07-14-2007, 10:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Cognescenti

Right..what you are describing is the socializing influence of organized religion which all religions offer to some degree. This is an important and positive influence in most cases, but, if the socialized group is persuaded that believers in another religion (which fundamentally has the same goals) are different or inferior because of the nature of their beliefs, then there is much mischief to be made. This is the part that seems silly to me..

OK, I accept what you're saying, and I can appreciate why it would seem "silly" to you. I guess the argument holds true from an "outsider's" perspective; but to believers of a particular religion, it is probably the case that they believe their own conception of what is right and wrong, and good and evil - defined in terms of their own religion - to be the only correct interpretation of the world, so to speak. In this latter case, apparent similarities between religions may not be of any force in leading them to see the "silliness" you've highlighted.


format_quote Originally Posted by Cognescenti

BTW..sociopaths (Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, etc.) are not constrained by moral concerns precisely because they are sociopaths) It generally takes a gun to change their behavior.

Well said. :)
Reply

Skywalker
07-23-2007, 07:56 AM
The pope would never accept. Dr. Zakir is a debater, and somehow I don't see the pope as one. In that case, the pope would lose even if he's right, lol!
Reply

Eric H
07-23-2007, 10:03 AM
Greetings and peace be with you Skywalker;

Any such public debate has a huge responsibility, it cannot be viewed as an entertaining spectacle. About half of the world population is either Muslim or Christian; much of the hostility in the world centres on the religion of the opposing factions.

We do not need more debate about our differences and who is right, these questions cannot be proven and all we have is arguments.

With all the tension in the world at the moment there is a great need for Muslims and Christians to build interfaith understanding, tolerance and friendships.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric
Reply

Keltoi
07-23-2007, 01:23 PM
It appears as if Benedict is more concerned with taking liberalism out of the church than fostering inter-faith relationships. While John Paul was popular among many Catholics and people of other faiths, some, like Benedict, felt the church was becoming too "understanding" of sinful practices.
Reply

Skywalker
07-23-2007, 03:09 PM
Sinful practices such as inter-faith dialogue? :D
Reply

Trumble
07-23-2007, 03:33 PM
This proposed debate does not represent "inter-faith dialogue" or an attempt to 'foster' anything. To me IFD involves discussions to establish common interests, and work out how to co-operate to further such things as preventing conflict between different religious communities, establish world peace, feed the hungry or even preserve moral standards. It is not a p***ing contest over who might be right or wrong regarding theological issues, or an attack on the beliefs and scripture of the other side which would achieve absolutely nothing. It seems it is such a contest Niak wants, hence the insistence on 'focussing on the Qur'an and the Bible'.
Reply

Darkseid
07-23-2007, 06:25 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by trueislam
Asalaam alaikum, muslim brothers/sisters and none-Muslim friends

To: Pope Benedict XVI

Dr Zakir Naik has invited you, i.e. Pope Benedict XVI for an open interfaith dialogue. Now you must accept the invitation and hold an open interfaith dialogue on Islam and Christianity in front of the entire world so that people will be able to understand the truth about Islam and Christianity. Dr Zakir Naik's words relevant to this issue can be verified from any news web site covering the issue. Dr Zakir Naik's words regarding this great invitation for you include:

"I am more than willing to participate in the inter-faith dialogue with Pope Benedict XVI. I am ready on any topic he (the Pope) wishes as long as it focuses on Quran and the Bible," "I can go to Rome and to Vatican on my own expense if an Italian visa is arranged for me," "I am absolutely ready for an open and public debate with the pope under live international TV coverage," Let the 1.3 billion Muslims and 2 billion Christians around the world listen to the debate based on equal slot of time allotted to both sides, he said. "It is not only a debate but also a question and answer session allowing the people to ask queries,".

yes a peaceful lecture between Dr Zakir and the Pope,

http://www.petitiononline.com/ai2nd/petition.html

Please sign the petition all the best Peace

wa-alaikum salaam :)
Only Roman Catholics hold an interest on the Pope. Don't be so stereotypical.
Reply

wilberhum
07-23-2007, 06:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Darkseid
Only Roman Catholics hold an interest on the Pope. Don't be so stereotypical.
Only Roman Catholics hold an interest? :-\
Like only Buddhists hold any interest in the Dalai Lama.
:embarrass
Reply

Eric H
07-23-2007, 06:51 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Trumble;

To me IFD involves discussions to establish common interests, and work out how to co-operate to further such things as preventing conflict between different religious communities, establish world peace, feed the hungry or even preserve moral standards.
Exactly right, thses are the kind of issues any talks should follow.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric
Reply

Darkseid
07-23-2007, 07:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by wilberhum
Only Roman Catholics hold an interest? :-\
Like only Buddhists hold any interest in the Dalai Lama.
:embarrass
Shut up. Certainly you are acting like a big shot, believing you know a lot about this world. I will ignore you, if you continue to act in this ridiculous fashion.
Reply

wilberhum
07-23-2007, 07:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Darkseid
Shut up. Certainly you are acting like a big shot, believing you know a lot about this world. I will ignore you, if you continue to act in this ridiculous fashion.
Shut up? Boy, you don't play nice. :confused:
Acting like a big shot? Why? Because I point out stupid remarks? :D
Ignore me? Please do. :shade:
Reply

Woodrow
07-23-2007, 07:53 PM
Everybody play nice and argue the topics, not fight with the posters.
Reply

wigon
07-24-2007, 03:21 AM
I agree with Trumble. I have participated in many interfaith dialog programs and have seen some that failed horribly because the participants were not trained in REAL dialog and confused it with a debate. Also often the way the participants were arranged was such that the different religions were placed at different tables. The successful interfaith dialog programs that I observed however, as Trumble mentioned, were based upon shared beliefs with the goal of peace and solving problems between the religioius communities with the basis being the love of God and of all of humanity. These were generally very informal and often at someone's house over a nice Helal/Kosher dinner and tea where everyone was mixed together. Eating together seems to foster better dialog. But more importantly they had good moderators and everyone was taught the difference between debate and dialog before starting with the dialog.
Usually after successful interfaith dialog, friendships form in which the tougher questions about differences can be approached with respect to each other. I have many Muslim friends myself who I can ask very difficult questions to about their religion. Through them and through studying good Islamic scholars (such as Shaykh Hamza Yusuf) I have developed a deep appreciation for Islam as well as a much clearer ability to discriminate between extremists and traditional Muslims.
At the same time it has given me the tools needed to better have dialog with extremist Muslims in order to convince them of certain dangers in their belief systems that go against traditional Islamic principles.
Likewise Muslims can use the same tools of dialog to learn how to develop dialog with fundamentalist Christians so as to convince them that Muslims are not their enemy and that they have much in common and even many similar goals.


Wigon
Reply

Eric H
07-24-2007, 03:58 AM
Greetings and peace be with you wigon; welcome to the forum, it is refreshing to hear something positive for interfaith dialogue.

I look forwards to reading more of your posts.

In the spirit of fostering greater interfaith friendships

Eric
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-04-2012, 12:04 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-22-2010, 08:54 PM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-10-2007, 08:07 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-17-2006, 06:16 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!