Dialogue with Muslims

[Franciscanguy]

Yeah. I just want to jump back in here from experience. All the politics is interesting but really has no bearing on what we experience here in the USA, unless, maybe you live in Dearborne- but even then I would argue it’s essentially the same as what I am about to present.

Empathy is step one. Not sympathy but true empathy. If you are unwilling to think, feel, and even pray and worship (the call to prayer is beautiful) like the other you are trying to dialogue with then forget it. Don’t bother. Just as an example the full prayer of the “Salaam…” echos Christ’s “Peace be with you.”

It’s also important to remember the person infront of you may be a Muslim but that does not mean that he or she is the definition of a “corperate” Muslim- that is to say a cookie cutter- what you read in a book somewhere Muslim. The fact that there are charasmatic Catholics makes some protestant’s (and some Catholic’s) heads explode. But those Catholics experience God and Catholicism in a very specific way. Islam is no diffrent.

Don’t assume the person you are talking to is either as emotional or intellectual in their experience of God and religion as you. This is probably the worst sin i see outside of not having respect. Just because you read that Aquinas’s 5 Proofs for God’s Existance are…fool proof does not mean that others will find them compelling. (I don’t and I am a Catholic.) If you experience your relationship with God in a “loving” manner that may not be the person you are talking to either.

Finally, dialogue is not trying to convert someone. No where in english does it have that meaning. dialogue is conversation and mutual learning.

There are more “rules” i have but these will suffice for now.

 

[MartinJordan]

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.

Glad to see a Jew come in here and get involved in this thread, because…I want to ask you something.

What do Jews think of Islam and Muslims when they seem to recognize Jesus as a Prophet. Why do you think this happened?

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

Glad to see a Jew come in here and get involved in this thread, because…I want to ask you something.

What do Jews think of Islam and Muslims when they seem to recognize Jesus as a Prophet. Why do you think this happened?

MJ

Well, that’s two Islamic prophets we don’t accept then.

As to why, well that’s complex, isn’t it? Judaism can be seen, in some ways, as a ‘Reformation’ itself - a rejection of the interpretations and practices of the dominant Middle Eastern religions/traditions at the time but having the stories and legends in a different form (the ‘coming of age’ stories - the garden, the tree, for example).

Then Judaism was affected by Zoroastrian ideas and when we come to Christianity, there are new developments that reflect other ideas - to say this isn’t to say that Christianity is a ‘Pagan’ religion, it’s saying that grew up in a world of different attitudes, ideas and interpretations - rather like Judaism changed after the experience of ‘Egypt’, the formality of ‘Law’ and priesthood - which isn’t to deny ‘Torah from Sinai’ but to say that ‘Egypt’ changed us from a collection of pastoralists to people who could relate to such formalism and organization.

Islam was born in world a different mix of ideas - the precepts and ideas of two different monotheisms, together with the stories, ideas and traditions of another set of desert dwellers. Add another in the list of religious geniuses and you have a new melding of ideas and there you go . . . .

 

[MartinJordan]

Well, that’s two Islamic prophets we don’t accept then.

Islam was born in world a different mix of ideas - the precepts and ideas of two different monotheisms, together with the stories, ideas and traditions of another set of desert dwellers. Add another in the list of religious geniuses and you have a new melding of ideas and there you go . . . .

Thanks.

Pardon me for leaving your first two parts and focusing on the last one.

So it doesn’t really bother you too much (or at all) that Islam had taken some examples of Christianity and Judaism created their own brand of Monotheism;am I right in deducing this?

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

Thanks.

Pardon me for leaving your first two parts and focusing on the last one.

So you doesn’t really bother too much (or at all) that Islam seems to have taken some examples of Christianity and Judaism created their own brand of Monotheism;am I right in deducing this?

MJ

Why would it? We don’t think belief in Islam, in itself, does Muslims any harm, any more than belief in Christianity, in itself, does Christians any harm.

 

[MartinJordan]

Why would it? We don’t think belief in Islam, in itself, does Muslims any harm, any more than belief in Christianity, in itself, does Christians any harm.

Wow. What with the horrors of Shiite vs Sunnis and what not? Not even that?

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

Wow. What with the horrors of Shiite vs Sunnis and what not? Not even that?

MJ

Even ‘what with’ the horrors that various Christian groups have inflicted on each other.

Notice I used the words ‘in itself’, they were chosen for a purpose.

 

[MartinJordan]

Even ‘what with’ the horrors that various Christian groups have inflicted on each other.

Notice I used the words ‘in itself’, they were chosen for a purpose.

Again, I’m perplexed then!

Year 2012 and Christians are killing each other?

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

Again, I’m perplexed then!

Perhaps you’re perplexing yourself because the principle remains the same. The fact that Christians have stopped killing each other over religion doesn’t change the fact that Christians killed one another in large numbers (in the name of religion at least).

The fact that they did doesn’t change our view that belief in Christianity, in and of itself, doesn’t do the Christian any harm and that the best they can do is be as good a Christian as they can be.

 

[Ontheway]

Thank you Dzheremi for your wonderful post. It is clear from your message that you have practical experience in conducting dialogue with Muslims.

 

[Ontheway]

On a lighter note,

A dozen Christians, a Buddhist and a Jew are conducting a Christian-Muslim dialogue.

Is this an example of the “one hand clapping” koan?

 

[MartinJordan]

Perhaps you’re perplexing yourself because the principle remains the same. The fact that Christians have stopped killing each other over religion doesn’t change the fact that Christians killed one another in large numbers (in the name of religion at least).

The fact that they did doesn’t change our view that belief in Christianity, in and of itself, doesn’t do the Christian any harm and that the best they can do is be as good a Christian as they can be.

I’m rather more perplexed by the view that Christianity and Islam are looked by the same lense when they should not be. Especially when the latter says that Jews and Christians have corrupted their texts. Or that David never sinned or Solomon never sinned. Doesn’t it matter? Or Is it just matter of interpretation?

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

I’m rather more perplexed by the view that Christianity and Islam are looked by the same lense when they should not be. Especially when the latter says that Jews and Christians have corrupted their texts. Or that David never sinned or Solomon never sinned. Doesn’t it matter? Or Is it just matter of interpretation?

MJ

OK, let’s move back to the point dzheremi was making and I make in most threads about Judaism that appear here.

If you want to talk sensibly to people of an entirely different religion (unlike Catholics and Anglicans, say, where it’s differing interpretations but within a shared context) then it really is a good idea to try to understand them in their own terms.

There is no point in trying to ‘include me in’ here. I don’t share a Christian perspective because, well, obviously, I’m not a Christian. If I’m asked about the Qur’an, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.” If I’m asked about the ‘New Testament’, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.”

I don’t expect Christians and Muslims to have a Jewish understanding, it’s enough that both Christianity and Islam fall under the ‘Noah covenant’ (being against, idolatry, murder, theft, sexual naughtiness, blasphemy, not taking the flesh of live animals, having a justice system) and that they endeavour to provide some understanding of ‘the one God’.

Now, Muslims believe the Tanakh (‘Old Testament’ to you) is corrupted but Christians keep telling me that Jews don’t understand (even purposefully misunderstand) the Tanakh because, if we really understood it, we’d accept the Christian Saviour etc. They also tell me that they’re fulfilled Jews and we’re just a misguided remnant.

So, tell me, why should I be more annoyed by one rather than the other?

Dialogues that demand that people agree with your perspective are dialogues of the deaf.

 

[AdamP88]

OK, let’s move back to the point dzheremi was making and I make in most threads about Judaism that appear here.

If you want to talk sensibly to people of an entirely different religion (unlike Catholics and Anglicans, say, where it’s differing interpretations but within a shared context) then it really is a good idea to try to understand them in their own terms.

There is no point in trying to ‘include me in’ here. I don’t share a Christian perspective because, well, obviously, I’m not a Christian. If I’m asked about the Qur’an, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.” If I’m asked about the ‘New Testament’, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.”

I don’t expect Christians and Muslims to have a Jewish understanding, it’s enough that both Christianity and Islam fall under the ‘Noah covenant’ (being against, idolatry, murder, theft, sexual naughtiness, blasphemy, not taking the flesh of live animals, having a justice system) and that they endeavour to provide some understanding of ‘the one God’.

Now, Muslims believe the Tanakh (‘Old Testament’ to you) is corrupted but Christians keep telling me that Jews don’t understand (even purposefully misunderstand) the Tanakh because, if we really understood it, we’d accept the Christian Saviour etc. They also tell me that they’re fulfilled Jews and we’re just a misguided remnant.

So, tell me, why should I be more annoyed by one rather than the other?

Dialogues that demand that people agree with your perspective are dialogues of the deaf.

I believe that Jews are our brothers and as Jesus Christ was a Jew, I have great respect for all Jews. I would not presume to call them “misguided”.

However, what I truly believe is that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God, who was Crucified and died for the sins of mankind. And who rose from the dead allowing us to overcome death.

If this is so, it is simply the most important thing in the history of the world.

Any dialogue I have with anyone ought to be respectful and “Christ-like”.

But the ultimate aim for me is to convince the other of the truth and beauty of the risen Christ.

 

[504Katrin]

I believe that Jews are our brothers and as Jesus Christ was a Jew, I have great respect for all Jews. I would not presume to call them “misguided”.

However, what I truly believe is that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God, who was Crucified and died for the sins of mankind. And who rose from the dead allowing us to overcome death.

If this is so, it is simply the most important thing in the history of the world.

Any dialogue I have with anyone ought to be respectful and “Christ-like”.

But the ultimate aim for me is to convince the other of the truth and beauty of the risen Christ.

I think it can be a means to connect with someone elses’ heart an soul if you try to show them how much YOU think it’s the truth and how much it makes YOU truly happy to have found the one faith that is the right one for you. However, as soon as you try to convince someone from your faith, chances to connect with that person are getting slim because you don’t respect their identity in the first place which is bad and the wrong thing to do in my opinion. Didn’t we just discuss how much we like it when muslims try to convice us of their faith? Why does it offend some people or hurt them when a Muslim tries to convert them? Imagine this situation, and think about it for a second.

I already caught criticism in another thread because I tried to keep a Jew from converting. Now this is why. Speaking about identity I’d even go one step further as to say that it’s not only a crime but also a sin to try to convince a Jew out of all people. A crime (and actually therefore a sin also) because do you want to take away someones’ soul, culture, and breath, and even though you don’t have any proof that our faith is the right one, either? I would call that to be a crime, and I would maybe even call it a crime under the circumstance that we had proof of our faith to be the truth (I have yet to think about that). A sin because they are the chosen people. There’s no other people that does so many little things all day long and that has so many rules and all of them are for one thing only: To connect with the Lord that they’re searching. I have yet to meet one Christian - and I’m not saying that I’m better than everyone else - who is that faithful and that intense in their faith like a faithful Jew. They are the chosen people no matter if some like it or not. If there’s nothing else than at least accept that the bible says so. We either believe in scripture - and we believe all of it - or we don’t believe our scriptures are true.

You might now say that we as Christians are to evangelize other people and make all of them Christians. That’s fine and hence I am very, very bad when it comes to evangelizing people, I have to admit that, but I feel it’s the right thing to do. Hate speeches on TV or in the papers from Muslims, Christians, no matter what faith you’re talking about, won’t bring us peace. Show your neigbors that you love them and truly respect them and want them to be happy, and we have a basis to connect with each other; I believe this is more important than anything else as this is when “thy kingdom comes”.

 

[dzheremi]

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 don’t recommend that Christians bring up any particular issues. From elsewhere in the same post you are responding to (emphasis added):

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.

Obviously, if you have someone who wants to engage in such discussions, chances are they have some questions that they would like answered and are looking to you as a representative of your religion. Going back to my overall point, which appears to also be Kaninchen’s point (and they say Jews and Christians can’t get along!), you answer their questions and encourage good tendencies because you want them to be guiding the discussion about your religion. Because you can’t inhabit their mind and see things as they see them, if you bring up whatever your points are, how do you know that you’ll even answer what they’re actually wanting to know? Christians have, I’m sorry to say, actually been failing at reaching Muslims for so long that Muslims have been able to develop ready set and in some cases quite well researched objections to standard Christian apologetics/talking points. You saw that, for instance, with a person like Ahmed Deedat, who I think was dreadful, but who often bested his (Evangelical) Christian debate partner by appearing to have answers from the Bible that would show how the Christian is wrong (granted they didn’t really do that, but my point is that the Christian usually fell into the trap because they merely went over the same old ground that the Muslim already knew about; Islam does, after all, have its own take on the scriptures and theology of Christianity…the fact that its wrong doesn’t really amount to much if the Christian can be made to appear weak in his knowledge or analysis of his own scriptures).

So rather than bringing up the biggies like the Trinity or the Incarnation straight out of the gate, I would and do accept any question or comment from a Muslim. If you listen carefully to how they phrase their questions even about the well-known topics, it can show you a lot about how they think, but also you need to muzzle yourself a bit so as to not be too eager to destroy their argument. It’s better to find out why they believe as they do than to simply assign a truth value to everything they say. After all, we know that they’re wrong even without having to dialogue, but if you want to open their minds to ways of looking at things that aren’t within the set Islamic epistemology, you have to be sensitive not necessarily to what they believe (cf. my earlier comments about not really being interested in indulging Islamic heresy), but more so how they arrived at it. Dr. Nabeel Jabbour, a Syrian Protestant who lived for some years in Egypt, wrote a wonderful book called “The Crescent Through the Eyes of the Cross” about his experiences there and how they inform his way of discussing theology with Muslims. I recommend that you read it. You might be surprised at how little “hard theology” is in it (not necessarily because Dr. Jabbour is a Protestant, but because he observed that most of his Muslim friends’ objections to and questions about Christianity were on a rather low theological level, and instead revolved around questions of praxis and culture). I don’t know whether he converted anyone, but as I was reading it it struck me that there are many common threads between his approach and my approach (and I’m Orthodox!), simply because we let the Muslim be Muslim, first and foremost. Meet people where they are, not where you expect them to be.

 

[dzheremi]

OK, let’s move back to the point dzheremi was making and I make in most threads about Judaism that appear here.

If you want to talk sensibly to people of an entirely different religion (unlike Catholics and Anglicans, say, where it’s differing interpretations but within a shared context) then it really is a good idea to try to understand them in their own terms.

There is no point in trying to ‘include me in’ here. I don’t share a Christian perspective because, well, obviously, I’m not a Christian. If I’m asked about the Qur’an, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.” If I’m asked about the ‘New Testament’, I’ll say “I don’t believe a word of it.”

I don’t expect Christians and Muslims to have a Jewish understanding, it’s enough that both Christianity and Islam fall under the ‘Noah covenant’ (being against, idolatry, murder, theft, sexual naughtiness, blasphemy, not taking the flesh of live animals, having a justice system) and that they endeavour to provide some understanding of ‘the one God’.

Now, Muslims believe the Tanakh (‘Old Testament’ to you) is corrupted but Christians keep telling me that Jews don’t understand (even purposefully misunderstand) the Tanakh because, if we really understood it, we’d accept the Christian Saviour etc. They also tell me that they’re fulfilled Jews and we’re just a misguided remnant.

So, tell me, why should I be more annoyed by one rather than the other?

Dialogues that demand that people agree with your perspective are dialogues of the deaf.

Bravo! Yes! I agree with every word of this, minus the Jew-specific stuff.

 

[IbnFiktur]

If you want to talk sensibly to people of an entirely different religion (unlike Catholics and Anglicans, say, where it’s differing interpretations but within a shared context) then it really is a good idea to try to understand them in their own terms.

I don’t expect Christians and Muslims to have a Jewish understanding, it’s enough that both Christianity and Islam fall under the ‘Noah covenant’ (being against, idolatry, murder, theft, sexual naughtiness, blasphemy, not taking the flesh of live animals, having a justice system) and that they endeavour to provide some understanding of ‘the one God’.

Now, Muslims believe the Tanakh (‘Old Testament’ to you) is corrupted but Christians keep telling me that Jews don’t understand (even purposefully misunderstand) the Tanakh because, if we really understood it, we’d accept the Christian Saviour etc. They also tell me that they’re fulfilled Jews and we’re just a misguided remnant.

So, tell me, why should I be more annoyed by one rather than the other?

Dialogues that demand that people agree with your perspective are dialogues of the deaf.

This thread just keeps making my day.

 

[Kouyate42]

Such as…?

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”.

ALL Muslim countries? Last time I checked, there are many Muslim or majority Muslim countries where the rights of other religious believers are protected, including Indonesia and Egypt. If you are going to make claims, at least make them believable.

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.

It’s funny you mention Coptic Christians…is this the same people in Egypt whose churches were protected by Muslims so they could attend Mass on Sundays and during Christmas? The same people who’ve lived alongside Muslims for centuries without problem?

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.

Nothing of what you’ve typed here, about stoning adulterers (which is in the Bible anyway) or killing apostates, or anything else, is anything I’d personally endorse according to what I believe Islam teaches. I’m a British Muslimah and I follow BRITISH laws and customs. So why attack me personally?

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.

Please tell me why I personally happen to be the target of your rant? Is it because I’m an easy target? You might want to remember the things Catholicism has done over the centuries, from burning Jewish texts and actively exiling/killing Jews to killing thousands of innocent Muslims and forcing conversions. Those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

I’ll say this though: just because something has the ‘Islam’ label slapped on it doesn’t necessarily make it so. People have justified much evil on the basis of a cause which is actively against it.

 

[AdamP88]

You might want to remember the things Catholicism has done over the centuries, from burning Jewish texts and actively exiling/killing Jews to killing thousands of innocent Muslims and forcing conversions. Those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

I’ll say this though: just because something has the ‘Islam’ label slapped on it doesn’t necessarily make it so. People have justified much evil on the basis of a cause which is actively against it.

Can we please stop the random insults. Thanks.