Dialogue with Muslims

[AdamP88]

dzheremi Wrote:

We’re not dialoguing our way out of this one, people. There was a great deal more dialogue that went on in past eras (see Hoyland’s excellent “Seeing Islam As Others Saw It” for a compendium of translated primary source texts dating back to the very beginning of Muslim/non-Muslim engagement for a little taste of how our forefathers used to approach this idea, before the errors of popular monotheism and “interfaith dialogue” caused so many to turn their back on our traditions), and yet here we are. It’s not a coincidence.

This is a point relating to dialogue and how he sees it. Why is it less valid than anyone else’s point. Or your idea of where the discussion should be heading for that matter?

 

[Ontheway]

There is a statement here that describes our dialog with the Muslims in these terms:

" I think that it is on topic to discuss the teachings of Islam, but that it goes beyond the purpose of this thread to discuss how well these teachings are (or aren’t) put into practice by Muslims."

This is a call to study the Koran and not a call for a dialogue between Muslims and Catholics or Christians. For a somewhat better definition of dialogue, I would like to direct the forum to an academic web site where attempts are being made at a real dialogue. stthomas.edu/mcdc/
The authors begin with this simple introductory statement:

“Our method of dialogue is to begin by articulating what Muslims and Christians hold in common. Next we identify and explicate points where we differ. Third, we identify the points where further discussion would be promising. This method of beginning with what is held in common, explicating differences, and then identifying points for further discussion has produced great fruit over the years in Christian ecumenical dialogue. We hope it will be equally fruitful in Muslim-Christian dialogue.”

As in any good dialogue, both sides make their statements and explain their ideas. There are even some joint statements that have been issued.

Perhaps a visit there and a quick glance at what has actually been accomplished during the last few years could help us here.

 

[Bakmoon]

dzheremi Wrote:

This is a point relating to dialogue and how he sees it. Why is it less valid than anyone else’s point. Or your idea of where the discussion should be heading for that matter?

That quote comes from post 95. I was responding to post 92 in which dzheremi said:

And yet your co-religionists see no irony in condemning us for the proper worship of Christ, and mocking our faith and its tenets, which are likewise held by us as going beyond love of family, self, and the world? I’m sorry, I’d be much more willing accept your tender feelings for your prophet if it weren’t for the blatant double standard at play in ALL MUSLIM COUNTRIES and communities regarding the feelings of believers. You will never see a Muslim in jail or murdered by mobs in Pakistan for insulting Christians or Christianity, nor for any of the other vileness that spews forth from the masses who are incensed at any perceived insult or lack of respect/deference from their pets of the “Ahl el-Kitab”.

Indeed, as it is, what we see instead are a bunch of whiners going on and on about how YOUR RELIGION is so sacred…and the life of this little girl is not? And the lives of the non-Islamic natives of the Middle East like the Copts, Maronites, Yazidis and others are not? Why must we all bow to your feelings, while our own languish in prisons or are murdered by mobs and assassins for rumors or even less? These are the fruits of the societies that operate by their own admission according to the supposed revelation of Muhammad. This is Islam as we have experienced it for 1400 years and counting.

We have our own requests, in the ways that we would like to live in peace with our Muslim brothers and sisters. But the problem is not on our side. No ma’am. To borrow a phrase from a famous American Muslim leader for our own purposes, we did not land on the Sharia, the Sharia landed on us!

But, no…I guess you’re right…your feelings…your tender, precious feelings and your religion…they’re so much more important than everything. We should have to die so that you can worship your God, complete with all the build-in inferiority that he brought to us for having the temerity to pray in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and to not recognize anything else, regardless of those around us who might have their own different belief. We should have known that this would not be acceptable to Islam, as the writings of your religion do say that should any desire a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him. What is less clear, however, is why then Muslims frequently (or at least much more frequently than their non-Muslim neighbors) then see fit to stand in the place of God in executing apostates, stoning adulterers and whatnot. This is surely a step backwards from the teachings of Christ, who said that he who is without sin cast the first stone.

And you’ve embraced it, and now have come to explain to us why it is that your coreligionists will murder a mentally-impaired child for a supposed crime against a religion she is not even a part of. It boggles the mind. Really, there is nothing more to say to you. May the Lord our God – the ONE GOD who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – have mercy upon all, and guide Muslims away from such behavior, and in the light of His guidance may they come to true worship that is not dependent upon feelings or bibiolatry which causes the whole world to suffer, both Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

Which isn’t on the subject of dialogue at all. I don’t have a problem with post 95 where he said:

What of this discussion does not belong in the thread? I’m sorry, maybe you have a different idea as a Buddhist, but particularly for me as a Coptic Orthodox person, these are the issues that MUST be discussed with Muslims if we are ever going to discuss anything else. I am not interested in photo ops where the Christian leader reiterates that Islam is a religion of peace (when it’s not), and the Muslim leader talks about how much Islam respects and loves Jesus (when they don’t), and then everybody goes home feeling warm and fuzzy…until things like this happen, in complete conformity with the approach to the law engendered in Islamic (or, in Egypt’s case, rapidly Islamicizing) societies, and we all come back down to earth and look at how things are REALLY being run.

 

[AdamP88]

In fairness, I’m happy to hear the opinions of people on Islam as well. It seems like this person is passionate on the topic…to hear his point of view is probably important.

 

[MartinJordan]

I did read the Qur’an. I now follow Islam.

Picking bad bits of any religion is all too easy. You miss the great good that Islam gives to the world.

With regard to insulting the Prophet Muhammad (saw), you have to understand that for Muslims, love of the Prophet goes beyond love of family, love of self, of the world, but is striving to be like him in every way, as he is held to be the perfect example of how we should devote our lives to Allah, who comes above all else.

The thing is, Ive noticed Muslims are proud of saying similar what you say here. But what new thing exactly does Islam bring? Do we really NEED Islam to show us the way?

MJ

 

[AdamP88]

I did read the Qur’an. I now follow Islam.

Picking bad bits of any religion is all too easy. You miss the great good that Islam gives to the world.

With regard to insulting the Prophet Muhammad (saw), you have to understand that for Muslims, love of the Prophet goes beyond love of family, love of self, of the world, but is striving to be like him in every way, as he is held to be the perfect example of how we should devote our lives to Allah, who comes above all else.

You are correct in saying that it’s all to easy to pick and choose the bad bits of religion. Richard Dawkins is a master at this.

However, for me, as a Catholic, Jesus is the personification of love. Love and respect for Jesus is above all things human. Once you understand this you come a little closer to understanding Catholicism. I can understand your love of Mohammed. My love is just for my Saviour, Jesus Christ.

 

[dzheremi]

Hi everybody,

Sorry for being late to the party. We’re experiencing seasonal storms here right now, so my internet connection is not terribly reliable and has been down for the past five hours or so.

First, I feel a need to remind everyone that it was Kouyate42 who brought up the hurt feelings of Muslims in response to another poster’s mention of the current case in Pakistan with the mentally handicapped girl who might be murdered under that country’s blasphemy laws. My subsequent posts were meant to expand upon that idea and why I find it particularly heinous, not to demonize Muslims because they are Muslims or anything like that (indeed, Christians have strong feelings about similar topics, too, but as I wrote to Bakmoon, they are not a good guide, either). Perhaps this seems off topic because it’s not strict apologetics, but it can be relevant to the context and quality of our discussions (as it is hard to have good conversation if you cannot be honest for fear of inflaming your interlocutor’s sensibilities, which may be shaped by a cultural environment in which honest criticism of Islam, the Qur’an, or certain segments of the Muslim community are unthinkable or unacceptable, especially from a non-believer).

If our friend AdamPeter were to pick up the book I recommended, he would see that since the very beginning of Islam we have been engaging with Muslims on the issues he has asked about. There have been no breakthroughs on a consistent basis, and any success on the individual level is not generalizable. So we have stereotypes of and ready made answers for one another’s arguments, without getting at the real underlying issues that make us want understanding in the first place. It’s not for its own sake, after all, but for the conversion of the other, or at the very least, a cessation of perceived or actual hostilities which are, again, rooted in different ideas of how to serve God.

To look at it otherwise, we’d have to adopt the Muslim mindset whereby the Book take the place of the Word. This is why dialogue is fruitless unless it proceeds from that fundamental difference in understanding – that we are not dealing with principles/abstract properties of God (on which we might in a great many individual aspects agree: God is one, merciful, etc.), but with GOD Himself. Jesus Christ is God Himself, but of course to a Muslim, that is the height of blasphemy. Fine; so be it. But then don’t tell me that I should stick “engaging Muslim ideas” when it’s our different ideas in the first place that make dialogue basically impossible.

With that out of the way, regarding the OP, I’ll put it like this:

The only way to engage Muslims in any sort of worthwhile dialogue is to affirm the truth of your own faith, not over or against what they themselves believe, but as something operating outside of the bounds of Islamic theology and epistemology. Every single Muslim I have ever known who has come to embrace Christianity (and they are not many, sadly) has done so not by trying to reach it by reasoning from what Islam says (which is, of course, not possible, as the two religions make mutually exclusive claims), but by coming to see Christianity as true on its own merits. That we have the true God that they do not have. Put simply, you can’t get to Christianity from Islam as Islam is not merely Christianity with a few essential points disclaimed that you, the apologist, then have to prove. It requires a transfiguration of the mind of the believer that you will not get from all the Trinitarian analogies in the world. No amount of clovers will budge a man who is committed to “lam yalid wa lam yulad”.

In my experience, it is best to answer their questions when they have them, with gentleness and sure knowledge and confidence in your own faith, but not to introduce anything on your own accord. A Muslim (Hindu, Pagan, whatever) who is ready to listen to the Holy Spirit confirm the truth of Christ will have plenty of questions that can be answered in due time. You can your part by encouraging what is encouragible (“oh, you read the Bible? How did you find it?”), but anything more than that is hazardous. A potential convert is a potential burn out, one discussion removed. We have had several here on CAF that flirted with Christianity, saw that it didn’t make “sense” as Islam does (to which I say thank God), and so went back to Islam. Realistically, they were not ours to convert in the first place, as they had not been open to the Spirit who does the real work of changing a man.

Getting together simply for comparative religion discussions is something else, and in that case I really don’t even understand the point. It might be fun or interesting in an academic way, but doesn’t seem like it would require any kind of deep commitment or produce any good fruits.

 

[dzheremi]

Hi everybody,

Sorry for being late to the party. We’re experiencing seasonal storms here right now, so my internet connection is not terribly reliable and has been down for the past five hours or so.

First, I feel a need to remind everyone that it was Kouyate42 who brought up the hurt feelings of Muslims in response to another poster’s mention of the current case in Pakistan with the mentally handicapped girl who might be murdered under that country’s blasphemy laws. My subsequent posts were meant to expand upon that idea and why I find it particularly heinous, not to demonize Muslims because they are Muslims or anything like that (indeed, Christians have strong feelings about similar topics, too, but as I wrote to Bakmoon, they are not a good guide, either). Perhaps this seems off topic because it’s not strict apologetics, but it can be relevant to the context and quality of our discussions (as it is hard to have good conversation if you cannot be honest for fear of inflaming your interlocutor’s sensibilities, which may be shaped by a cultural environment in which honest criticism of Islam, the Qur’an, or certain segments of the Muslim community are unthinkable or unacceptable, especially from a non-believer).

If our friend AdamPeter were to pick up the book I recommended, he would see that since the very beginning of Islam we have been engaging with Muslims on the issues he has asked about. There have been no breakthroughs on a consistent basis, and any success on the individual level is not generalizable. So we have stereotypes of and ready made answers for one another’s arguments, without getting at the real underlying issues that make us want understanding in the first place. It’s not for its own sake, after all, but for the conversion of the other, or at the very least, a cessation of perceived or actual hostilities which are, again, rooted in different ideas of how to serve God.

To look at it otherwise, we’d have to adopt the Muslim mindset whereby the Book take the place of the Word. This is why dialogue is fruitless unless it proceeds from that fundamental difference in understanding – that we are not dealing with principles/abstract properties of God (on which we might in a great many individual aspects agree: God is one, merciful, etc.), but with GOD Himself. Jesus Christ is God Himself, but of course to a Muslim, that is the height of blasphemy. Fine; so be it. But then don’t tell me that I should stick “engaging Muslim ideas” when it’s our different ideas in the first place that make dialogue basically impossible.

With that out of the way, regarding the OP, as Bakmoon has requested that we stick only to that, I will put it like this:

The only way to engage Muslims in any sort of worthwhile dialogue is to affirm the truth of your own faith, not over or against what they themselves believe, but as something operating outside of the bounds of Islamic theology and epistemology. Every single Muslim I have ever known who has come to embrace Christianity (and they are not many, sadly) has done so not by trying to reach it by reasoning from what Islam says (which is, of course, not possible, as the two religions make mutually exclusive claims), but by coming to see Christianity as true on its own merits. That we have the true God that they do not have. Put simply, you can’t get to Christianity from Islam as Islam is not merely Christianity with a few essential points disclaimed that you, the apologist, then have to prove. It requires a transfiguration of the mind of the believer that you will not get from all the Trinitarian analogies in the world. No amount of clovers will budge a man who is committed to “lam yalid wa lam yulad”.

In my experience, it is best to answer their questions when they have them, with gentleness and sure knowledge and confidence in your own faith, but not to introduce anything on your own accord. A Muslim (Hindu, Pagan, whatever) who is ready to listen to the Holy Spirit confirm the truth of Christ will have plenty of questions that can be answered in due time. You can your part by encouraging what is encouragible (“oh, you read the Bible? How did you find it?”), but anything more than that is hazardous. A potential convert is a potential burn out, one discussion removed. We have had several here on CAF that flirted with Christianity, saw that it didn’t make “sense” as Islam does (to which I say thank God), and so went back to Islam. Realistically, they were not ours to convert in the first place, as they had not been open to the Spirit who does the real work of changing a man.

Getting together simply for comparative religion discussions is something else, and in that case I really don’t even understand the point. It might be fun or interesting in an academic way, but doesn’t seem like it would require any kind of deep commitment or produce any good fruits.

 

[AdamP88]

I disagree…A recent news report by al Jazeera had Islamic leaders expounding upon the crisis of Muslims converting to Christianity in the Northern African region.

I also disagree with your perception of how dialogue should be conducted. If we only ever bombarded muslims with the truth of our own faith there would be no point in dialogue. We need to start from a basic conversation and grow that into a proper discussion on faith.

 

[Bakmoon]

Hi everybody,

Sorry for being late to the party. We’re experiencing seasonal storms here right now, so my internet connection is not terribly reliable and has been down for the past five hours or so.

First, I feel a need to remind everyone that it was Kouyate42 who brought up the hurt feelings of Muslims in response to another poster’s mention of the current case in Pakistan with the mentally handicapped girl who might be murdered under that country’s blasphemy laws. My subsequent posts were meant to expand upon that idea and why I find it particularly heinous, not to demonize Muslims because they are Muslims or anything like that (indeed, Christians have strong feelings about similar topics, too, but as I wrote to Bakmoon, they are not a good guide, either). Perhaps this seems off topic because it’s not strict apologetics, but it can be relevant to the context and quality of our discussions (as it is hard to have good conversation if you cannot be honest for fear of inflaming your interlocutor’s sensibilities, which may be shaped by a cultural environment in which honest criticism of Islam, the Qur’an, or certain segments of the Muslim community are unthinkable or unacceptable, especially from a non-believer).

If our friend AdamPeter were to pick up the book I recommended, he would see that since the very beginning of Islam we have been engaging with Muslims on the issues he has asked about. There have been no breakthroughs on a consistent basis, and any success on the individual level is not generalizable. So we have stereotypes of and ready made answers for one another’s arguments, without getting at the real underlying issues that make us want understanding in the first place. It’s not for its own sake, after all, but for the conversion of the other, or at the very least, a cessation of perceived or actual hostilities which are, again, rooted in different ideas of how to serve God.

To look at it otherwise, we’d have to adopt the Muslim mindset whereby the Book take the place of the Word. This is why dialogue is fruitless unless it proceeds from that fundamental difference in understanding – that we are not dealing with principles/abstract properties of God (on which we might in a great many individual aspects agree: God is one, merciful, etc.), but with GOD Himself. Jesus Christ is God Himself, but of course to a Muslim, that is the height of blasphemy. Fine; so be it. But then don’t tell me that I should stick “engaging Muslim ideas” when it’s our different ideas in the first place that make dialogue basically impossible.

With that out of the way, regarding the OP, I’ll put it like this:

The only way to engage Muslims in any sort of worthwhile dialogue is to affirm the truth of your own faith, not over or against what they themselves believe, but as something operating outside of the bounds of Islamic theology and epistemology. Every single Muslim I have ever known who has come to embrace Christianity (and they are not many, sadly) has done so not by trying to reach it by reasoning from what Islam says (which is, of course, not possible, as the two religions make mutually exclusive claims), but by coming to see Christianity as true on its own merits. That we have the true God that they do not have. Put simply, you can’t get to Christianity from Islam as Islam is not merely Christianity with a few essential points disclaimed that you, the apologist, then have to prove. It requires a transfiguration of the mind of the believer that you will not get from all the Trinitarian analogies in the world. No amount of clovers will budge a man who is committed to “lam yalid wa lam yulad”.

In my experience, it is best to answer their questions when they have them, with gentleness and sure knowledge and confidence in your own faith, but not to introduce anything on your own accord. A Muslim (Hindu, Pagan, whatever) who is ready to listen to the Holy Spirit confirm the truth of Christ will have plenty of questions that can be answered in due time. You can your part by encouraging what is encouragible (“oh, you read the Bible? How did you find it?”), but anything more than that is hazardous. A potential convert is a potential burn out, one discussion removed. We have had several here on CAF that flirted with Christianity, saw that it didn’t make “sense” as Islam does (to which I say thank God), and so went back to Islam. Realistically, they were not ours to convert in the first place, as they had not been open to the Spirit who does the real work of changing a man.

Getting together simply for comparative religion discussions is something else, and in that case I really don’t even understand the point. It might be fun or interesting in an academic way, but doesn’t seem like it would require any kind of deep commitment or produce any good fruits.

Good post.

 

[AdamI]

Anyone who is familiar with and knows Islam will tell you that any honest religious dialog with Moslems is impossible.
One of the “10 pillars of Islam” demands that all non-believers be converted to Islam by any means possible. And, although Islam prohibits lieing, just as Christianity or Judaism does, the Koran permits it in the prosecution of the “true faith”.
Since Moslems consider that they have the “true faith”, they also consider that all non-believers (infidels) have no rights-not even the right to life. This is all covered in the Commentaries on the Koran.

Just to clarify:

Let there be no compulsion in religion.Truth has been made clear from error." (Quran 2:256)

“Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God’s will) in Islam. * Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them).” (Quran 15:2-3)

“If it had been thy Lord’s will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!” (Quran 10:99)

"Say, ‘The truth is from your Lord’: Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it)Quran 18:29)

No where does it say in the Quran that non-believers do not deserve life, on teh contrary. I do not knwo where you got that idea from (well… obviously media) but the only time it is permissable, is in war when they are being opressed. Just like God (who is Jesus in Christianity) permitted the ancient isralites to:

Several Deuteronomy quotes:

“You shall destroy all the peoples … showing them no pity.” Deuteronomy (7: 16)

“… All the people present there shall serve you as forced labour.” Deuteronomy (20:12)

“… You shall put all its males to the sword. You may, however, take as your booty the women, the children, the livestock, and everything in the town – all its spoil – and enjoy the use of the spoil of your enemy which the LORD your God gives you.” Deuteronomy (20:14-15)

“… You shall not let a soul remain alive.” Deuteronomy (20:17)

 

[AdamI]

This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God. But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. 1 John 4:2-3

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist–he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also. 1 John 2:22

Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 1:7

From these verses, we learn that the antichrist is a spirit that is identified as a “liar” and a “deceiver” which specifically denies the following:

• That Jesus is the Christ/Messiah (The savior/deliverer of Israel and the World)
• The Father and the Son (The Trinity or that Jesus is The Son of God).
• That Jesus has come in the flesh. (The incarnation - that God became man)

[/indent]

This might not work as Mohammed did not deny Jesus is the prophesised christ, nor does he deny that he was sent from the father:

He said: "I am indeed a servant of Allah: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;
"And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live;
"(He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable;
“So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)”!
—Quran, sura 19 Maryam, ayat 30-33[5][14]

Also, your last point will insight more discussion as the verses you quote don’t require the belief that Jesus is God incarnate. Rather, to a Muslim, this is Christian doctrine and an interpretation of the word of Jesus.

 

[AdamI]

As Christians we have to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. Great teaching. But when your neighbor straps himself w/ explosives w/ evil intentions, what will you do?
Here’s an extract from the writings of an ex-muslim who saw the light, Sujit Das ( faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/how-muslims-defend-the-flaws-of-islam/ ).
This could also help prepare anybody who wishes to have a dialogue w/ Muslims.

"Presently the debate on Islam is going on at full force on various social networking sites as well as in many ex-Muslim and anti-Islam websites. But truth is not always welcomed wholeheartedly and old beliefs don’t die so easily. Though many sympathizers of Islam (e.g., Karen Armstrong, Edward Said and John Esposito) try to portray a deceptively rosy picture of Islam, the true Muslims show the real face of Islam with their constant readiness to harass, intimidate and assassinate anyone who slights their religion. For this reason Theo Van Gogh was shot and stabbed to death in Netherlands and his associate Ayaan Hirsi Ali had to live with bodyguards and armoured cars (Ali, 2007, p. xii), the Bangladeshi feminist and secularist Taslima Nasrin has been living in exile since 1994, Egyptian human rights activist Faraj Foda was shot dead in front of his office in Cairo and Nasr Hamid Zayd fled out of Egypt to escape the death penalty and secularist Egyptian Sayyid Mahmoud al-Qimni was forced to recant all his writings (Ahmed, 2006, p. ix). Unfortunately before the outside world would get a chance to read their works these writers were silenced through murder, terrorization and death-threats, and their writings were banned in the Muslim world."
God bless.

Faith freedom is an anti islamic website. If you genuinely are seeking to understand the truth about Islam and the people behind it, then reseach pro Muslim websites. You wouldn’t want a non-christian who is trying to understand Christianity to research about the faith from a web site that is anti-christianity would you?

 

[Trebor135]

I disagree…A recent news report by al Jazeera had Islamic leaders expounding upon the crisis of Muslims converting to Christianity in the Northern African region.

Years ago I read the English translation of an al-Jazeera interview with an Islamic scholar from Libya who declared that 6.6 million Muslims were converting to Christianity every year in Africa. This claim was very difficult for me to swallow, however. Such huge changes across a whole region would surely have gained the attention of the authors of the CIA World Factbook at the very least, who annually publish an updated profile of every independent state and dependent territory in the world and provide a whole host of relevant data–including a breakdown of religious affiliation. (Edit: Also worth remembering is that if African Muslims were becoming Christian in such large numbers, it would be less likely that they would feel obliged for their personal safety to conceal their change of religion in light of the more lenient character of the Islam as practiced in the Sahel and further south.) I later read charges that the shaykh had fabricated the 6.6 million statistic to boost interest in Islamic da’wa (proselytizing) efforts.

Do you have another al-Jazeera broadcast in mind, perhaps even a link at hand?

I also disagree with your perception of how dialogue should be conducted. If we only ever bombarded muslims with the truth of our own faith there would be no point in dialogue. We need to start from a basic conversation and grow that into a proper discussion on faith.

Indeed.

 

[AdamI]

Chapter 9 - Repentance

1. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.
2. When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Religion of Peace???

Understandable AdamPeter, but i fnd it unfair and puposely misleading when you copy and paste out of context.

Mohammed was surrounded with enemies of Islam. Several treaties were created inorder to maintain peace within the tribes, however, these treaties were broken several times by the polytheists. Muslims were being killed, raped and tortured durig these times, and it was made haram ‘forbidden’ to fight during the holy period, however, after the holy period passes, it was made halal (allowable) to defend yourself.

and i quote again the follwoing verses from the bible, to understand that self defence is permissable in all Abrahamic religions:

“You shall destroy all the peoples … showing them no pity.” Deuteronomy (7: 16)

“… All the people present there shall serve you as forced labour.” Deuteronomy (20:12)

“… You shall put all its males to the sword. You may, however, take as your booty the women, the children, the livestock, and everything in the town – all its spoil – and enjoy the use of the spoil of your enemy which the LORD your God gives you.” Deuteronomy (20:14-15)

“… You shall not let a soul remain alive.” Deuteronomy (20:17)

NB: these verses when taken out of context seem violent and harsh, but as we know, when we research and open our hearts and minds a little, we realise that these people were being opressed for teh belief in God.

 

[dzheremi]

I disagree…A recent news report by al Jazeera had Islamic leaders expounding upon the crisis of Muslims converting to Christianity in the Northern African region.

Which, as Trebor has pointed out, is very doubtful. (I have also listened to that report, and I too find it very tough to swallow and it seems quite obvious that it is meant to energize Islamic proselytization activities.)

There is something of a resurgence of Christianity among the Imazighen (“Berbers”), but it is nothing on the order of what the Al-Jazeera interviewee said. Not even close.

I also disagree with your perception of how dialogue should be conducted. If we only ever bombarded muslims with the truth of our own faith there would be no point in dialogue. We need to start from a basic conversation and grow that into a proper discussion on faith.

“Bombard”? What I wrote was this:

The only way to engage Muslims in any sort of worthwhile dialogue is to affirm the truth of your own faith, not over or against what they themselves believe, but as something operating outside of the bounds of Islamic theology and epistemology.

In other words, the most important thing that you can establish in beginning to dialogue with Muslims is that Christianity does not work like Islam, and hence truly understanding it means stepping out of the Islamic bubble. It seems obvious, of course, but it is somewhat obscured by the more common “popular monotheism” approach that focuses on generic affirmations of attributes or number of God held in common between both religions that do not actually further the Muslim’s understanding of Christianity (nor the Christian’s understanding of Islam, which is very different than Christianity). I hate to repeat myself again, but dialogue is fruitless unless it proceeds from that recognition of our fundamental differences in understanding.

 

[Trebor135]

Which, as Trebor has pointed out, is very doubtful. (I have also listened to that report, and I too find it very tough to swallow and it seems quite obvious that it is meant to energize Islamic proselytization activities.)

Episcopalian scholar Philip Jenkins has written an interesting article, “Third World War”, which argues that Muslim violence against local Christians is fundamentally motivated by concern over the strong success of the Gospel and the relative failure of da’wa.

There is something of a resurgence of Christianity among the Imazighen (“Berbers”), but it is nothing on the order of what the Al-Jazeera interviewee said. Not even close.

Thanks for pointing this out. I thought of but forgot to mention it earlier.

In other words, the most important thing that you can establish in beginning to dialogue with Muslims is that Christianity does not work like Islam, and hence truly understanding it means stepping out of the Islamic bubble. It seems obvious, of course, but it is somewhat obscured by the more common “popular monotheism” approach that focuses on generic affirmations of attributes or number of God held in common between both religions that do not actually further the Muslim’s understanding of Christianity (nor the Christian’s understanding of Islam, which is very different than Christianity). I hate to repeat myself again, but dialogue is fruitless unless it proceeds from that recognition of our fundamental differences in understanding.

What particular issues do you recommend Christians raise straight away, so as to avoid falling into what you regard as the trap of “generic affirmations of attributes or number of God”?

 

[Kaninchen]

What particular issues do you recommend Christians raise straight away, so as to avoid falling into what you regard as the trap of “generic affirmations of attributes or number of God”?

I think dzheremi is completely right (I would say that because it’s the same argument that I use here in ‘interfaith dialogue’ ).

First of all you have to understand how other religions ‘work’, the mindset - when talking to Jews, Christians often don’t understand, for example, that we don’t believe in ‘original sin’, don’t think people need to be ‘saved’ and don’t think that people in other religions are ‘doomed’ at all. So, talking to us as if we did is a complete waste of time as is quoting scripture that we don’t accept.

In fact, I’d suggest that ‘scripture’ often hides the ‘paradigm’ because people read it through the lens of their own interpretation - you have to try to understand other religions on their own terms - in this case through ‘Islamic eyes’.

It really does take some time - after a decade and a half of talking to Christians on the Internet, I think I’ve learned something about how Christianity works through ‘Christian eyes’ - enough for some sensible conversations from time to time.

 

[Trebor135]

Kaninchen–I’m warming up to Dzheremi’s suggested approach, actually. I would simply like to grasp it better by finding out about his specific ideas of what to discuss and how to go about doing so.

 

[Kaninchen]

Kaninchen–I’m warming up to Dzheremi’s suggested approach, actually. I would simply like to grasp it better by finding out about his specific ideas of what to discuss and how to go about doing so.

Keeping away from proselytisers is a good idea (pointless rows ensue), I learn a lot by following (not participating in) threads where Catholics discuss what seem totally mystifying ideas, until you get a feel for the language and how it fits in with other things. Perhaps ‘listening’ to Muslims talking to each other about various articles of their faith?