In a recent edition in the “West Tennessee Catholic” newspaper, it had an article covering a Muslim & Christian Forum at St. Augustine Church.
There were 3 Christians and 3 Muslims. The three Christians were the pastor at St. Augustine’s, a Presbyterian Liberation Church Pastor, and a pastor at a “Church of Human Development”.
So in this article, there is the following sentence:
So I’m a little confused…
Muslims - Does the Islamic faith regard Jesus as the Messiah?
Christians - Does the Christian faith regard Muhammad as a prophet?
I’ve never been taught that I should regard Muhammad as a prophet, and I’ve been a Catholic for a year. What else do I need to know?
Of course, I realize the mix of panelists on both sides could have contributed to a bad dissemination of information.
I’m all for inter-religious dialogue. Here my two cents on it.
It is about respecting other religions, respecting the right of others to follow their own religions. (It goes without saying that no belief should threaten the well being of any human being, whether a person who belongs to the same religion or another. ) And to learn what one can from other religions to enrich one’s own.
So in a dialogue between Christians and Muslims it about Christians respecting the Muslim view that they consider Mohammad as their last prophet and Jesus as merely one of their prophets, only and not as the Son of God. Muslims do believe in the virgin birth of Jesus and yet do not accept Him as the Son of God. Muslims do not believe Jesus died as a result of crucifixion, nor that He rose from the dead. All of the aspects on which the foundation of Christianity rests. Yet Christians must allow Muslims their right to reject what Christians believe.
For Muslims it should be about respecting the fact that Mohammad is not in the New Testament of Christians and hence Christians do not accept Mohammad as a/their prophet; and Christians worship Jesus Christ as the Son of God, as the Second Person of the Trinity. That Christianity is founded on the basis of the death by crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus and belief in Him as the Son of God.
If inter-religious dialogue becomes about accepting other religious beliefs as one’s own, then dialogue becomes meaningless. Inter-religious dialogue is not about converting the other. It is merely laying out: Here is my belief. Please respect it. You are not obliged to accept it.
For instance, in an inter-religious dialogue, a Muslim cannot insist that Christians give up eating pork, nor can a Hindu insist that all Christians and Muslims should give up eating beef. To each his own. The other should accept and respect it as long as no one is hurt. How each religion treats animals is so different that no religion can prescribe rules for another, except present their case in favor of any animal, or against any practice. Jains are such strict vegetarians, who respect all living beings to a degree that it would be almost impossible to follow their care for animals and living being of all kinds. Buddhism does not fall far behind.
lighten up.
