"Your Holiness, Copernicus new book says that the Earth revolves around the Sun"...
"Who cares, I'm trying to figure out the miracle of how Jesus turns water into wine..."
February 19, 2013
By Steph Solis
Legend has it that Nicolaus Copernicus and the church were at odds over his development of the heliocentric theory, a principle that disputed the widely held belief that Earth was the center of the universe.
Unlike Galileo and other controversial astronomers, however, Copernicus had a good relationship with the Catholic Church. It may come as a surprise, considering the Church banned Copernicus' "Des revolutionibus" for more than 200 years.
Copernicus was actually respected as a canon and regarded as a renowned astronomer. Contrary to popular belief, the Church accepted Copernicus' heliocentric theory before a wave of Protestant opposition led the Church to ban Copernican views in the 17th century.
Throughout his lifetime, Copernicus was active in the religious community. Copernicus was born in 1473 in Torun, Poland, the youngest of four children. At age 10, his father died and he were sent to live with his uncle Lucas Watzenrode, who would later become the bishop of Warmia (Ermland).
Copernicus studied at St. John’s Church in Torun's parochial school before going to Krakow Academy in 1491 to pursue astronomy and astrology. He became known as a skilled mathematical and astronomer, but he also maintained his ties to the church. He became a canon of the cathedral chapter of Frombork through his uncle, and he served the church of Warmia as a medical advisor.
Copernicus first outlined his ideas about the heliocentric theory in a manuscript titled “Commentariolus.” There he suggested a heliostatic system, where the sun was at the center of the universe and the earth made rotations.
The astronomer published “De revolutionibus” in March 1543, after more than a decade of revisions. The book included a letter to Pope Paul III arguing the legitimacy of the heliocentric theory. He died two months later.
“De revolutionibus” initially met no resistance from the Catholic Church. It was not until 1616 that the church banned the book. The ban continued until 1835.
However, the article also notes that Copernicus gained ridicule from poets and Protestants, who condemned it as heresy. While the Catholic Church initially accepted heliocentricity, Catholics eventually joined the wave of Protestant opposition and banned the book in 1616. The Protestant churches accepted Copernicus’ findings after more evidence emerged to support it. The Catholic Church, however, remained ground in its anti-Copernican beliefs until the 19th century. The ban on Copernicus's views was lifted in 1822, and the ban on his book until 1835.
Heresy, Heresy!!! It's a Sin!!!
On this day in 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculano da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII,begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the Sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial.
This was the second time that Galileo was in the hot seat for refusing to accept Church orthodoxy that the Earth was the immovable center of the universe: In 1616, he had been forbidden from holding or defending his beliefs. In the 1633 interrogation, Galileo denied that he “held” belief in the Copernican view but continued to write about the issue and evidence as a means of “discussion” rather than belief. The Church had decided the idea that the Sun moved around the Earth was an absolute fact of scripture that could not be disputed, despite the fact that scientists had known for centuries that the Earth was not the center of the universe.
This time, Galileo’s technical argument didn’t win the day. On June 22, 1633, the Church handed down the following order: “We pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo… have rendered yourself vehemently suspected by this Holy Office of heresy, that is, of having believed and held the doctrine (which is false and contrary to the Holy and Divine Scriptures) that the sun is the center of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth does move, and is not the center of the world.”
Along with the order came the following penalty: “We order that by a public edict the book of Dialogues of Galileo Galilei be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms.”
Galileo agreed not to teach the heresy anymore and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It took more than 300 years for the Church to admit that Galileo was right and to clear his name of heresy.
Opinion Is a Crime against God...
This is merely an opinion. Opinions may be correct and opinions may be wrong. But is giving an opinion considered a crime against God?
It was not until 360 years later that the Church admitted it was wrong and Galileo was right. However, it took 360 years before the church would openly and publicly admit that earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around and that earth has been in existence for tens of billions of years. And that was only because Pope John Paul II was one of the more progressive church leaders.
The church wanted Galileo put to death for his heresy but because he had strong links with those who walk in the corridors of power they could only put him under house arrest. That probably saved him from being burned alive at the stake.
Hadith in Tirmidhi which states:
قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم " مَنْ قَالَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ بِرَأْيِهِ فَأَصَابَ فَقَدْ أَخْطَأَ "
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Whoever says (something) about the Qur'an according to his own opinion and he is correct, yet he has committed a mistake."
Vol. 5, Book 44, Hadith 2952
Some sects in Islam do not accept Hadith. Some sects do but only a few of the 7,000 or so Hadith that the Sunni Muslims consider authentic. Then again, some sects believe in different Hadith from those that the Sunni Muslims believe. So there is no real standardisation when it comes to Hadith. Different sects have different views regarding the matter.
The fact that originally there were about 700,000 Hadith and less than 1% (or less than 7,000) were classified as Sahih or authentic means that there is certainly grounds to ask for even the balance 1% be looked at again. In fact, if you were to delete the repetition or overlapping Hadith, you would be left with just 5,000 and not 7,000.
The orthodox or fundamentalist Muslims would defend the Hadith to the death. They would classify those who question or reject the Hadith as infidels or apostates. A true Muslim must believe in both the Qur’an and the Hadith. To only believe in the Qur’an but not the Hadith means you are not a Muslim but an apostate. And the punishment for the crime of apostasy is death, no two ways about it.
This is the stand of the orthodox or fundamentalist Muslim. Why do these ulama’ or mullah have so much power and authority to decide on what we can and cannot believe and what will happen to us if we believe the wrong thing? Who created this priesthood class and this religious hierarchy? And who gave them the power of life and death?
All this was not there during the time of Prophet Muhammad. It was created many years later so that the power and authority over religion can be monopolised by a handful of ‘scholars’.
Opinion As An Act of Deviance and of Defiance...
Whenever someone has a different opinion to yours, he or she is an infidel.
Martin Luther and the 95 Theses
Born in Eisleben, Germany, in 1483, Martin Luther went on to become one of Western history’s most significant figures. Luther spent his early years in relative anonymity as a monk and scholar. But in 1517 Luther penned a document attacking the Catholic Church’s corrupt practice of selling “indulgences” to absolve sin. His “95 Theses,” which propounded two central beliefs—that the Bible is the central religious authority and that humans may reach salvation only by their faith and not by their deeds—was to spark the Protestant Reformation. Although these ideas had been advanced before, Martin Luther codified them at a moment in history ripe for religious reformation. The Catholic Church was ever after divided, and the Protestantism that soon emerged was shaped by Luther’s ideas. His writings changed the course of religious and cultural history in the West.
Martin Luther Questions the Catholic Church
In early 16th-century Europe, some theologians and scholars were beginning to question the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. It was also around this time that translations of original texts—namely, the Bible and the writings of the early church philosopher Augustine—became more widely available.
Augustine (340–430) had emphasized the primacy of the Bible rather than Church officials as the ultimate religious authority. He also believed that humans could not reach salvation by their own acts, but that only God could bestow salvation by his divine grace. In the Middle Ages the Catholic Church taught that salvation was possible through “good works,” or works of righteousness, that pleased God. Luther came to share Augustine’s two central beliefs, which would later form the basis of Protestantism.
Meanwhile, the Catholic Church’s practice of granting “indulgences” to provide absolution to sinners became increasingly corrupt. Indulgence-selling had been banned in Germany, but the practice continued unabated. In 1517, a friar named Johann Tetzel began to sell indulgences in Germany to raise funds to renovate St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
HUMANISM... Act Of Man!!!
Martin Luther was a German monk and priest who became the icon for Protestant reforms in the 1500s. Luther, who was also a professor of theology, strongly disputed the claim that freedom from God’s punishment for sin could be bought with money. Luther challenged the authority of the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Leo X, and defied the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, resulting in his excommunication by the Pope and the Emperor condemning him as an outlaw.
Being the controversial figure that he was, Luther rejected the idea of a Holy War or Crusade and instead urged Emperor Charles V and the German people to fight a secular war against the Turks who were knocking on Vienna’s door. He also preached that it was a matter of great urgency that the Jews be expelled from all German territory.
500 hundred years ago, Christendom saw the emergence of a reformer, Martin Luther, who challenged both the Pope as well as the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. No doubt, then, Luther was considered a heretic, deviant, loose cannon, etc., and was excommunicated and declared an outlaw. Today, he is called a hero.
Not long after that, along came an Italian, Galileo Galilei, who also defied the Pope, Urban VIII. Galileo was put on trial and was declared a heretic. He spent the rest of his life under house arrest and it was not until about 400 years later, on 31st October 1992, when Galileo was absolved of his ‘crime’ when Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled. The Pope issued a declaration acknowledging the errors committed by the Catholic Church tribunal that judged the scientific positions of Galileo.
History has now judged Martin Luther, Galileo Galilei, and a host of other ‘criminals’ as actually great reformers, thinkers and scientists, hundreds of years after their deaths. Reluctantly, the Church has had to admit that it was wrong and that these people right. But at that time, people who challenged the authority of the Church or the Crown were condemned.
Committed to the idea that salvation could be reached through faith and by divine grace only, Luther vigorously objected to the corrupt practice of selling indulgences. Acting on this belief, he wrote the “Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences,” also known as “The 95 Theses,” a list of questions and propositions for debate. Popular legend has it that on October 31, 1517 Luther defiantly nailed a copy of his 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenberg Castle church. The reality was probably not so dramatic; Luther more likely hung the document on the door of the church matter-of-factly to announce the ensuing academic discussion around it that he was organizing.
The 95 Theses, which would later become the foundation of the Protestant Reformation, were written in a remarkably humble and academic tone, questioning rather than accusing. The overall thrust of the document was nonetheless quite provocative. The first two of the theses contained Luther’s central idea, that God intended believers to seek repentance and that faith alone, and not deeds, would lead to salvation. The other 93 theses, a number of them directly criticizing the practice of indulgences, supported these first two.
In addition to his criticisms of indulgences, Luther also reflected popular sentiment about the “St. Peter’s scandal” in the 95 Theses:
Why does not the pope, whose wealth today is greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build the basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?
The 95 Theses were quickly distributed throughout Germany and then made their way to Rome. In 1518, Luther was summoned to Augsburg, a city in southern Germany, to defend his opinions before an imperial diet (assembly). A debate lasting three days between Luther and Cardinal Thomas Cajetan produced no agreement. Cajetan defended the church’s use of indulgences, but Luther refused to recant and returned to Wittenberg.
It's My Way, Or The Highway!!!
Martin Luther - how a humble 15th-century monk was able to change the world. Luther was born into a world governed by the Roman Church and a distant emperor.
He managed to awaken a national spirit in Germans and become someone they identified with. ‘Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation’ was what the territories in central Europe were called in the 15th century. It was the era of the Habsburg ruler Charles V, who saw himself as ruler by God’s grace and defender of Christian unity. In 1521, he said that the sun never set in his empire, which stretched from Latin America in the west to central Europe and to the Philippines in the east. The German territories were just one of his realms, and powerful princes defended their own interests here. Secular and religious power was still based on the Christianity of the Roman church. But many saw the Reformation as an opportunity to distance themselves from Rome and the Emperor, and to improve their standing in the political power structure of the day. Unlike the Habsburg emperor Charles V, who didn’t even speak German, Luther grew to become someone the people identified with, and he became hugely popular. The reformer was one of the first major figures to explicitly play the German card and appeal to national sentiment: one of his missives said, "Why should the Germans put up with robbery and oppression imposed by foreigners?” Luther’s translation of the Bible into German was an important step in forming a German identity, but the Reformation left Germany divided along religious lines.
Reformation: Here's what Martin Luther thought the Catholic Church was wrong about
On October 31, 1517, German scholar Martin Luther is said to have nailed his argument against the Catholic Church's sale of better treatment after death to a church door in Wittenberg.
Whether this actually happened is disputed, but what's not disputed is that his "95 Theses" quickly spread debate through Europe and led to an irrevocable split in Western Christianity.
Luther's influence can still be felt — he's been credited with the rise of secular democracy, among other things — but it was theology that he was concerned about.
If all you know about the Reformation are references on The Simpsons, read on to find out why Luther disagreed with the Catholic Church.
Luther didn't like the fact people could buy indulgences — or reduced punishment after death
This was the subject of the 95 Theses, and it was the disagreement that started it all.
As Oxford professor Diarmaid MacCulloch writes in A History Of Christianity: "An argument about a side alley of medieval soteriology [the study of salvation] escalated into the division of Europe."
If you don't know what indulgences are, the Catholic Church's definition is a good place to start:
"An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven."
Joel Hodge, from ACU's School of Theology, says the belief is that indulgences can reduce believers' need for purification from the effects of sin in Purgatory before they can enter heaven.
To this day they've been given out by the Church for acts of charity or the recital of prayers, as examples. You can use them for yourself or loved ones who have died.
Luther had a problem with the fact the Catholic Church of his day was essentially selling indulgences — indeed, according to Professor MacCulloch, they helped pay for the rebuilding of Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome.
Later, Luther appears to have dropped his belief in Purgatory altogether. Certainly, he denied that a person's actions had any role to play in salvation, saying faith alone was what counted.
The sale of indulgences was abolished by the Pope in 1567.
He believed Christians should hold to the Bible alone
This was another of the major issues of the Protestant Reformation.
According to Dr Hodge, Catholics teach that divine revelation is communicated through scripture and tradition. For instance, they argue the living tradition (oral stories, practices) existed before the New Testament was written down.
Examples of Catholic tradition include clerical celibacy, papal infallibility and the immaculate conception of Mary the mother of Jesus.
But Luther disapproved of any additional traditions. He taught that the Bible alone was the source of revelation.
"Neither the Church nor the pope can establish articles of faith. These must come from Scripture," he said.
He believed the Catholic Church got it wrong on salvation
Luther believed people were saved by faith alone and that this was the summary of all Christian doctrine, and that the Catholic Church of his day had got this wrong.
It's often stated Catholics, by contrast to Protestants, believe a mixture of faith and works is necessary for salvation.
It should be noted, however, many Catholics believe their objection to "faith alone" has been misunderstood. They would say true faith can't actually be separated from works, and that Catholics agree it is grace that gives salvation.
Indeed, Pope Benedict XVI had this to say about Luther's beliefs in 2008:
"Luther's phrase 'faith alone' is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love. So it is that in the Letter to the Galatians in which he primarily developed his teaching on justification, St Paul speaks of faith that works through love."
"For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, A righteousness that is by Faith from first to last, just as it is written: The righteous will live by Faith."
He who live through righteous shall Live...
You don't need all the traditions from the church, You just need a powerful individual relationship with God...
Salvation comes not from the man made rituals of the church...
But by Faith alone, this means not the Pope, not the Vatican not even a priest is necessary to ensure a person entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven...
(Feels Like) Heaven
Fiction Factory
Heaven is closer now today The sound is in my ears I can't believe the things you say They echo what I fear
Twisting the bones until they snap I scream but no one knows You say I'm familiar, cold to touch And then you turn and go
Feels like heaven Feels like heaven
See how we planned for saddened eyes And tears to pave the way I fought the fever as I knew My hair returned to gray
Study your face and fade the frame Too close for comfort now We can recall the harmony That lingered but turned sour
Feels like heaven Feels like heaven
You wanted all I had to give See me, I feel, see me, I live
Feels like heaven (heaven is closer, heaven is closer) Feels like heaven (heaven is closer, heaven is closer) Feels like heaven (heaven is closer, heaven is closer) Feels like heaven (heaven is closer, heaven is closer) Feels like heaven (heaven is closer, heaven is closer)
Songwriters: Edward Alexander Jordan / Kevin Patterson
(Feels Like) Heaven lyrics © Warner/Chappell Music, Inc
Whenever someone has a different opinion to yours, he or she is an infidel.
While Christians have been at odds for 2,000 years since the time of Paul and James regarding how to interpret the teachings of Jesus, Muslims, too, have suffered a serious split in whether Hadith (sayings of the Prophet) is or is not part of the Islamic doctrine. And some Muslims regard those who reject the Hadith as infidels, just like how some non-Catholics regard Catholics as infidels.
Anyway, for certain, this clash of doctrine between Muslim and Muslim, Christian and Christian, Muslim and Christian, Jew and non-Jew, etc., will go on till the end of time when every single one of them will discover that they were actually all wrong and no one was right after all.
After all, there were originally 700,000 Hadith, which were eventually whittled down to less than 7,000 — or less than 1%. Hence, if you consider more than 99% of the Hadith as nonsense, is there not a possibility that a couple more could also be nonsense?
That is all these learned people are saying. Look at them again. Ponder. And then come to a sensible conclusion regarding if more than 693,000 Hadith are fake, could there possibly be a few more within that 6,000 plus remaining ‘sahih’ (confirmed or accepted) Hadith that are equally fake?
If you think no, then no! If some people think yes, then let them think yes. Why get upset when you think no and they think yes? Why must they also think no just because you think no? Let them think yes. You can go ahead and think no. Why start screaming infidel?
Whenever someone has a different opinion to yours, he or she is an infidel. Anyway, just to ponder on the do's and dont's, could this be a Yes or a No category???
The Prophet said, “Do not write down anything from me except the Quran.” [Ahmed, Vol. 1, Page 171, and Sahih Moslim, Zuhd, Book 42, Number 7147]
Ibn Saeed Al-Khudry reported that the messenger of God had said, “Do not write anything from me except Quran. Anyone who wrote anything other than the Quran shall erase it.”
From Ibn Hanbal: “Zayd Ibn Thabit (The Prophet’s closest revelation writer) visited the Khalifa Mu’aawiyah (more than 30 years after the Prophet’s death), and told him a story about the Prophet. Mu’aawiyah liked the story and ordered someone to write it down. But Zayd said, ‘The messenger of God ordered us never to write anything of his Hadith’.”
The famous book, ‘Ulum Al-Hadith’ by Ibn Al-Salah, reports a Hadith by Abu Hurayra in which Abu Hurayra said the messenger of God came out to us while we were writing his Hadiths and said, “What are you writing?” We said, “Hadiths that we hear from you, messenger of God.” He said, “A book other than the book of God?” We said, “Should we talk about you?” He said, “Talk about me, that would be fine, but those who will lie will go to Hell. Abu Hurayra said, we collected what we wrote of Hadiths and burned them in fire.”
In the famous book, ‘Taq-yeed Al-Ilm’, Abu Hurayra said, the messenger of God was informed that some people are writing his Hadiths. He took to the pulpit of the mosque and said, ”What are these books that I heard you wrote? I am just a human being. Anyone who has any of these writings should bring it here.” Abu Hurayra said we collected all these and burned them in fire.
Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad book, narrates a Hadith in which Abdullah Ibn Omar said, “The messenger of God one day came out to us as if he was going to depart us soon and said, ‘When I depart you (die), hold to the book of God, prohibit what it prohibits and accept as halal what it makes halal’.”
Again, in the book ‘Taq-yeed Al-Ilm’, Abu Saeed Al-Khudry said, “I asked the messenger of God a permission to write his Hadiths, but he refused to give me a permission.”
ISIS: Shia Vs Sunni war?
Harun al-Rashid was the fifth Abbasid Caliph who ruled from 786 to 809. This period is said to be the beginning of the Golden Age of Islam. It was during this period, too, that the Ulama (religious scholars) were prosecuted and persecuted due to their difference of opinion with the Caliphs on how Islam should be interpreted. Many Ulama were tortured and then put to death, or sometimes tortured to death over a long period of time (unless they relented, repented and recanted and abandoned their ‘deviant’ ways).
It was not until the rule of the tenth Caliph, Al-Mutawakkil, who ruled from 847 to 861, that the Inquisition against the Ulama ended. This was when Islam more or less saw the separation of Church and State and power over Islam was handed over to the Ulama. However, it was not until the 25th Caliph, Al-Qadir, who ruled from 991 to 1031, that the Ulama were united under a single doctrine.
Because the Ulama were now ‘free’ and were no longer under the control of the State, they were able to reach the heights of unquestioned religious authority. And this made it also possible for them to institutionalise their legal and theological opinions into a school of thought and code of conduct called the Sharia.
Not everyone recognised the authority of the Ulama plus their opinions or interpretation of Islam, though. However, because of the power they held over the Umma (society), any dispute over what the Ulama decreed would be viewed as a crime of apostasy or heresy and would be punishable by death.
In 1877, Sayyid Ahmed Khan founded the Aligarh School that fought to free Muslims from the shackles of the Ulama and what he viewed as an outdated doctrine. He believed that the only way forward for Muslims, who by then were overtaken (and in fact colonised) by the West, was to modernise the Sharia.
“What I acknowledge to be the original religion of Islam is not the religion which the preachers have fashioned,” declared Sayyid.
Chiragh Ali, Sayyid’s protégé, said that the Sharia is a fiction created by the Ulama to control Muslims and cannot be considered as a civil code of law because it deviates from the Qur’an. He argued that it would be ridiculous to regard Islamic law, which is a product of the Ulama’s imagination, as something that cannot be challenged or changed.
Modernists like Maulana Maududi, the founder of Jama’at-i Islami, countered this belief and said that Islam makes it mandatory that the law of God must become the law that Muslims adopt. His belief eventually laid the foundation for the first modern Islamic State called Pakistan.
Another modernist, Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani, agreed with Sayyid in that the Ulama were the cause for the collapse of the Islamic Empire. He accused the Ulama of stifling independent thought and scientific progress, which resulted in the West leaving the Muslim countries far behind to remain in the middle ages.
Afghani even went so far as to label the Ulama the true enemies of Islam. Afghani influenced the thinking of a group that became known as the Young Ottomans, a group that fought to combine Western democratic ideals with traditional Islamic principles.
One of Afghani’s followers, Muhammad Abdu, believed that the way forward for Muslims is to liberate Islam from the iron grip of the Ulama and their narrow interpretation of the Sharia. This eventually saw the overthrow of the Ottoman Empire by the Young Ottomans (also known as the Young Turks) and the transformation of Turkey into a modern Secular Republic.
Today, even the Ulama are at odds with one another as to what ‘proper’ Islam is. Is Islam the religion that is the cause of this or is it those Ulama who have interpreted Islam according to their understanding and beliefs that are the problem?
The Ulama tell us that the Sharia is mandatory and to oppose it tantamount to defying God Himself. Is this true?
Not all renowned Ulama agree with this notion. But the Ulama have the final say over the interpretation of Islam and what they say goes. And most followers are not learned enough or brave enough to challenge these notions.
This is the real crux to the whole matter. And until this is resolved expect even more conflict regarding Islam as religion continues to be used as a means of control over the hearts and minds of the god loving people.
DARK AGES...
Who is Right? Who holds the truth?
This was what they used to do in Christendom for almost 2,000 years. They weeded out the Christian deviants, heretics, and infidels. Thousands upon thousands were put to death. Churches were burned. Priests were hanged. Witches, warlocks and devil worshippers were drowned. And the followers of the ‘wrong’ sect of Christianity were put to the sword.
Basically, one man or a small handful of men decided what was right and what was wrong and all those perceived wrongdoers were exterminated like rats and cockroaches.
And that, incidentally, was called the dark ages. Hence if Muslims continue down this same dark-ages path of Christendom what would you call it if not also the dark ages? And should we get offended if non-Muslims were to say that Islam is a religion from the dark ages?
The Mysteries of the Dark Ages
Europeans Dark Ages the Muslim golden age...
People Are People - Depeche Mode
People are people so why should it be You and I should get along so awfully
So we're different colours And we're different creeds And different people have different needs It's obvious you hate me Though I've done nothing wrong I never even met you So what could I have done
I can't understand What makes a man Hate another man Help me understand
People are people so why should it be You and I should get along so awfully
Help me understand
Now you're punching and you're kicking And you're shouting at me I'm relying on your common decency So far it hasn't surfaced But I'm sure it exists It just takes a while to travel From your head to your fist
I can't understand What makes a man Hate another man
Help me understand
Songwriters: Martin Gore
People Are People lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC