Nick Against the World (230 Viewers)
- Thread starter IncuboRossonero
- Start date
who the hell is that? 
e.g.:
Berlusconi Makes Public Apology to Wife
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/01/31/international/i091504S19.DTL
Someone went to Richards for highschool btw callaghan went to another dump of a college: benedictine univ.
btw callaghan went to another dump of a college: benedictine univ.
Dude, I don't know whose double account you are, but I think I've seen your avatar once when I snuck upstairs at the Sant'Ignazio in Roma, flicked on the circuit breakers, and lit up the scary image of Saint Stanislaus Kostka on his deathbed rendered in marble.
Exactly....
Spot on Erik
THis circle is never ending....shame
An Imam leads congregational prayers... they really dont have that much authority... on the other hand A mufti or an Islamic scholar who interprets the Islamic law (Sharia), and is capable of issuing fataawa has the real authority.... they are like u said the ones "who wear the hats" in islam..
Spot on Erik
THis circle is never ending....shameAn Imam leads congregational prayers... they really dont have that much authority... on the other hand A mufti or an Islamic scholar who interprets the Islamic law (Sharia), and is capable of issuing fataawa has the real authority.... they are like u said the ones "who wear the hats" in islam..
Must be a meteorology class. If this was physics, at the end of all that the question would have been, "What color was his tie?"
Could be worse. The exams I get nowdays require my dropping my pants and turning to the left and coughing while someone wearing latex gloves searches for loose change.umpkin:
Could be worse. The exams I get nowdays require my dropping my pants and turning to the left and coughing while someone wearing latex gloves searches for loose change.
umpkin:
You kidding me? Every Tuesday and Thursday, religiously
Oh, the shit hole is Princess Anne, Maryland.
This Uni is pretty pathetic. The only thing we have to be 'proud' of is that the head coach of the Oakland Raiders, Art Shell went here and that UMES, along with U of Miami or "The U" as they call it, have provided the most players in a Superbowl.
Neither of which is anything to be proud of if you think about it. Art Shell lead the Raiders to the worst season ever in their history, and I believe even in the league (correct me if I'm wrong) and UMES no longer has a football team.
Oh, the shit hole is Princess Anne, Maryland.
This Uni is pretty pathetic. The only thing we have to be 'proud' of is that the head coach of the Oakland Raiders, Art Shell went here and that UMES, along with U of Miami or "The U" as they call it, have provided the most players in a Superbowl.
Neither of which is anything to be proud of if you think about it. Art Shell lead the Raiders to the worst season ever in their history, and I believe even in the league (correct me if I'm wrong) and UMES no longer has a football team.
Speaking of which, we (including Burke, Enron and the like) should obtain a timeshare at Ocean City and pay the $5,000,000,000 rent some of those places are asking. :wth: That market is gonna drop quicker than you can say "Batman"... if you know what I'm talking about.
That's disturbing and I can place several parallels between what you described, and the rise of protestantism in Christianity.
From what I read, the main split in Islam is that of Sunni versus Shia (you may correct my spellings, I read about these things in Dutch which uses different phonetics for Arabic) which is comparable to the old [Catholicism <> Protestantism <> Orthodoxism] rift in Christianity. Besides that, there are various different streams of which I don't know all the names and characteristics in Islam (that would require some serious studying) but in Christianity they include Calvinism, Lutherism, Baptism, Mennonism, Reformed etc etc
Since I'm more familiar with Christianity, I'm going to draw some parallels here cause I'd like to know exactly how the evolutions of the two religions compare. Maybe you could point out where I'm wrong and where I'm right cause obviously otherwise I won't know
Christianity was first torn apart centuries ago in the days of the Roman Empire. That happened mostly because Christianity spread beyond its monocultural borders. Different peoples of different cultures and different languages all differently interpreted the Bible but most importantly the codes of conduct and protocols of the religion which lead to separate movements.
As times changed, the Roman Empire dissolved and the insecurities of the Middle Ages slowly but surely eroded the European continent; more and more splits occurred: which I would compare to current insecurities and severe lack of stability in most of the Muslim world right now, particularly the Middle East.
The fact Islam is a younger religion also adds up in the equation because what took place first in Christianity was the divide between Catholics and Orthodoxists (or Sunni and Shia). Protestantism and its numerous small movements didn't arrive in history until the Roman Empire had as good as disappeared and Europe was in absolute chaos comparable to the Middle East today but also applicable to large parts of Indonesia and other great Muslim countries like Pakistan.
Here's the backlash: Europeans know, because they are taught so in schools, that the violence within Christianity lasted for centuries on end. Dutch independence for example was directly inspired by Dutch Protestants seeking to tackle the Catholic Spanish rule in the Low Countries. The Northern Irish conflict still hasn't been resolved. The reasons the worst of the violence disappeared are easy to identify:
1) Secularity, the divide between Church and State and resulting freedom of religion.
2) Increasing wealth. If you have something to lose, you are unlikely to pick a fight.
So when Europeans today hear about conflicts within Islam, they visualise a bloody conflict that will last for centuries and that will expand into Europe since the Muslim minority here doesn't seem to be too worried about losing Western values and wealth to start with.
Is the above comparison completely wrong, or is there truth to it? Because if there is, an increasingly globalised world is going to suffer by the hands of a religion yet again.
"My God we need China now."
Bah So your multiple choice questions aren't like the one I posted in this thread a while ago then?
From what I read, the main split in Islam is that of Sunni versus Shia (you may correct my spellings, I read about these things in Dutch which uses different phonetics for Arabic) which is comparable to the old [Catholicism <> Protestantism <> Orthodoxism] rift in Christianity. Besides that, there are various different streams of which I don't know all the names and characteristics in Islam (that would require some serious studying) but in Christianity they include Calvinism, Lutherism, Baptism, Mennonism, Reformed etc etc
Since I'm more familiar with Christianity, I'm going to draw some parallels here cause I'd like to know exactly how the evolutions of the two religions compare. Maybe you could point out where I'm wrong and where I'm right cause obviously otherwise I won't know
Christianity was first torn apart centuries ago in the days of the Roman Empire. That happened mostly because Christianity spread beyond its monocultural borders. Different peoples of different cultures and different languages all differently interpreted the Bible but most importantly the codes of conduct and protocols of the religion which lead to separate movements.
As times changed, the Roman Empire dissolved and the insecurities of the Middle Ages slowly but surely eroded the European continent; more and more splits occurred: which I would compare to current insecurities and severe lack of stability in most of the Muslim world right now, particularly the Middle East.
The fact Islam is a younger religion also adds up in the equation because what took place first in Christianity was the divide between Catholics and Orthodoxists (or Sunni and Shia). Protestantism and its numerous small movements didn't arrive in history until the Roman Empire had as good as disappeared and Europe was in absolute chaos comparable to the Middle East today but also applicable to large parts of Indonesia and other great Muslim countries like Pakistan.
Here's the backlash: Europeans know, because they are taught so in schools, that the violence within Christianity lasted for centuries on end. Dutch independence for example was directly inspired by Dutch Protestants seeking to tackle the Catholic Spanish rule in the Low Countries. The Northern Irish conflict still hasn't been resolved. The reasons the worst of the violence disappeared are easy to identify:
1) Secularity, the divide between Church and State and resulting freedom of religion.
2) Increasing wealth. If you have something to lose, you are unlikely to pick a fight.
So when Europeans today hear about conflicts within Islam, they visualise a bloody conflict that will last for centuries and that will expand into Europe since the Muslim minority here doesn't seem to be too worried about losing Western values and wealth to start with.
Is the above comparison completely wrong, or is there truth to it? Because if there is, an increasingly globalised world is going to suffer by the hands of a religion yet again.
"My God we need China now."
Bah
So your multiple choice questions aren't like the one I posted in this thread a while ago then?
Oh no, though reactionary in nature Shia rise is the direct result of a political rift. To put it in the plainest most superficial terms, the dispute arose after the death of the prophet of islam and an alleged proclamation of his potential replacement: Ali. A few decades later Ali finally became caliph only to be fighting Aisha one of Mohammed's wives over ali's reluctance to apprehend his predecessor's murderers. An astute meccan politician and syria's governor sees in this an irresistible opportunity which in turn only makes this quiditty more of a quandary. Fast forward a couple more decades and you have what remains as the most dramatic event between the two sects(at least from a shia point of view) Hussein(ali's son, Mohammed's grandson) along with his family(except for one Zayn Abideen) and entourage are brutally killed by an army sent by the son of the aforementioned meccan nobility. To the bottom of it, though some of the tradition differs mainly because of the standards used to relate tradition, the schism has actually left the ethos and spirit of the religion quite intact. Overall, both mainstreams see the road to heaven and hell pretty commonly, unlike the perplexing christian questions of grace, sacraments and consubstantiation.