Dialogue with Muslims

[embien]

1. It really bothers me how blind people are to what is really going on with these people. …
2. Wake up people! …
3. Am i wrong to feel this way?
4. Does anyone believe in their mind that if they had a chance they would not take over with shuria law in USA? OR take over vatican city?

1. The political system in the west is not blind. It won’t happen.
2. Even if it were possible, we have an alert defence system which would prevent this.
3. Your feelings are your own, so you’re neither right or wrong.
4. Please try to worry less and pray (more).

 

[Bakmoon]

There is a huge difference inthe way we intend on spreading the gospel from muslims spreading shuria law. If you read my post you would see what those clerics said their intentions are. The most compelling one was in the uk where their numbers are growing. Have you paid attention to world news lately and seen any of the severe problems they are having with the islamists. It would also suprise you that in dearborn michigan where they are exploding in population some christians who showed up at a festival to spread the gospel were nearly killed by the muslims as they threw rocks and bricks at them in front of the police. The police didnt even help these poor people. It was all on tape. Wake up my friend.

Can you give sources for your claims about the events in Dearborne?

 

[Trebor135]

Terrorism and suicide bombing is not Islamic, no matter how many Qur’an verses fundamentalists twist.

What solution do you propose to the problem of Muslims falling into solo scriptura (which is distinct from sola scriptura–see here for clarification)?

 

[Trebor135]

I recently watched a program on EWTN where the Catholic Bishop of Gambia (W.Africa) was interviewed. He is the spiritual Father to apx. forty thousand people which is about 10% of the overall population.
According to him the two groups live together peacefully and Catholics may evangelise but not prosletyse !
When asked how this peacefulness was achieved between the Christians and Muslims Bp. replied that the Gambians are a peace-loving people.

But West African Islam, if I am not mistaken, follows the Maliki school of Sunni jurisprudence and places a notable emphasis on Sufi practice. This form of the faith differs substantially from what is believed and lived out far away in the environs of the birthplace of Islam, the Arabian peninsula, which gave rise in the eighteenth century to the puritanical Wahhabism for which Saudi Arabia is notorious.

 

[dzheremi]

Good point, Trebor. Many places that remained largely non-Arabized like East Africa and Central Asia were largely under the influence of various Sufi orders prior to the modern era, including some places that are ironically quite infamous nowadays for their connection to Islamic extremism/fundamentalism, like Somalia and Afghanistan. It’s sad, because as recently as the 1960s or 70s, these peoples had the general reputation of being quite pragmatic. In Somalia and Afghanistan in particular, civil wars and other political disturbances (e.g., Somalia-Ethiopia war in the 1970s) radicalized many people. Lord have mercy.

 

[Hunter24]

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.
How many of you know that the presence of Islam in the US was insignificant up until the mid 1960’s when Kaddafi of Libya gave millions of dollars to the Black Moslem cult to promulgate their beliefs amongst our black population in order to foment social disorder and weaken our government. What he did not anticipate was the rise of Malcolm X and his people who became a real Moslems and this spurred changes to US immigration policies that permitted large scale immigration from Moslem countries.
However, despite all of this, as a percentage of population, Moslems are on a par with Hindu’s and Buddahists- all together no more than 15% of the total.

this may be the single most illogical statement i have ever seen on this site.

firstly, as stated before, there are 5 not 10 pillars non of which as to do with what you are saying. Nothing in the 5 pillars talks about converting others.

Quddafi did not give money to the Nation of Islam, and any idiot who thinks that Nation is truely Muslem needs to come back to reality. The nation of Islam is a black supremisist religion which teologicaly only shares the Koran with Islam, they beleave god was a 19th century black man from Detroit and that all non blacks are inherantly evil. that is not Islam, it is a religion that was spread as a means for the leaders to make money, and this is why Malcom X left it and was eventualy killed.

also, Muslems are the largest non Christian religion in the US, bigger than both Hindus and Budhists, but nowhere near 15% of the population.

i dont know where you got these “facts” but i wouldnt trust them to teach 2nd grade geography

 

[Trebor135]

then why do so many murder themselves and others in the name of Islam? No other major religion has so much blood on their hands.

Check out these books by CIA veteran Michael Scheuer: “Imperial Hubris” and “Marching Toward Hell”.

Islamist terrorism, most notoriously manifested through suicide bombing, is a modern phenomenon–as we understand it now, it was not heard of in the mid-twentieth century. (And let’s not forget George Habash: “one of the very earliest founding fathers of that movement, which pioneered armed struggle and revolutionary violence as the sole means of liberating Palestine”, this figure was “**orn in Lydda, coastal Palestine, now part of Israel’s second city Tel Aviv, to a family of Greek Orthodox grain merchants” and “became a supreme example of that disposition, always latent in the Christian minority in those days, to display a greater militancy than the Moslem majority”.)

Our best bet is to stick to talking theology with Muslims and avoid getting into current events.**

 

[TEPO]

I had dialogue with a Muslim the other day… The best way to approach such things is with humility, honesty, humor, and a positive attitude.

We just need to remember, that Muslims might be a little intimidated by Americans, particularly by Caucasians such as myself… But we need to break through the initial “fear factor”, which exists on both ends… Personally, I’m not afraid of Muslims like I used to be -were all just people after all.

 

[dzheremi]

Check out these books by CIA veteran Michael Scheuer: “Imperial Hubris” and “Marching Toward Hell”.

Islamist terrorism, most notoriously manifested through suicide bombing, is a modern phenomenon–as we understand it now, it was not heard of in the mid-twentieth century. (And let’s not forget George Habash: “one of the very earliest founding fathers of that movement, which pioneered armed struggle and revolutionary violence as the sole means of liberating Palestine”, this figure was “**orn in Lydda, coastal Palestine, now part of Israel’s second city Tel Aviv, to a family of Greek Orthodox grain merchants” and “became a supreme example of that disposition, always latent in the Christian minority in those days, to display a greater militancy than the Moslem majority”.)

Our best bet is to stick to talking theology with Muslims and avoid getting into current events.**

I’m sorry, but how can you compare the admittedly deplorable violence employed by avowed secularist George Habash to the religiously-motivated terrorism directed toward everything non-Muslim in increasingly large swaths of the world? Even the Christian right-wing militias in the Lebanese civil war didn’t fight to rid Lebanon of Muslims full stop, but rather of Palestinians, Syrians, and their allies (most of whom happen to be Muslim, sure, but that’s to be expected given the overall demographics of the region). By contrast, Islamic radicals are seeking to reshape Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, etc. religiously, that is to say, to liquidate those countries of all non-Muslims (and Muslims who are not of the dominant sect in a particular country, as in Iraq and now Syria). It’s an entirely different animal than George Habash and his ilk. Scheuer is apparently under the impression that motivation and context don’t amount to anything. See the flags in that video at c.0:20? Those are socialists/secular nationalist Arabs, for whom “Hakim” George Habash is still a hero (as you can tell by the comments on the video, if you dare read Youtube comments…ugh).

 

[Trebor135]

There are precedents for it being abolished without colonialism. I believe the Mughal Emperor of India by the name of Ackbar the Great abolished the Jizya tax during his reign, for example.

Interestingly, Akbar the Great was no orthodox Muslim. In fact, he founded and followed his own Din-e Ilahi system, to do away with religious divisions among his subjects.

It also must be noted that when viewed in the context of wider Islamic Jurisprudence, the requirement that Muslims pay one fortieth of their wealth as charity (Zakat) was actually conducted as a tax beginning in the early days of the Rashidun Caliphate, and non-Muslims were exempt from military service, so the Jizya was originally to make up for this loss of income and for the loss of the Caliphate which would otherwise be the result of having non-Muslims in the Caliphate.

Paying the jizya may have allowed non-Muslims to avoid joining the army, but the tax still symbolized the supremacist attitude of their rulers and, according to Sura 9:29, was intended to humiliate the “People of the Book”.

A society where the head of each household was expected (with concessions made for difficult circumstances) to hand over an annual sum so his family could maintain their faith is not one that will foster true intercommunal harmony in the political, social, and economic arenas. Nor is a religion that makes extracting such a tax into divine law.

Then I will use another point to illustrate. After Muhammad conquered Mecca, he only had ten people executed, and granted blanket amnesty on everyone in the city, which was mostly pagan.

To avoid speculating, I’d have to do further research into the particular circumstances.

Now to bring up a counterpoint. Where does it say in the Qur’an or the Hadith that all Pagans must be slaughered?

Later in the thread, another poster brought up Sura 9:5, and you (reasonably) argued that the commands described in that chapter had to be placed in their contemporary political-military context.

The Qur’an is regarded by Sunni Muslims as the uncreated word of God and, unfortunately, many (if I am not mistaken) hold that the book’s contents stand for all time and cannot be viewed through the lens of how the situation looked in seventh-century Arabia.

 

[Bakmoon]

Later in the thread, another poster brought up Al-Tawbat 9:5, and you (reasonably) argued that the commands described in that chapter had to be placed in their contemporary political-military context.

Unfortunately, the Qur’an is regarded by Sunni Muslims as the uncreated word of God, and many hold that the book’s contents stand for all time and cannot be looked at through the lens of how the situation looked in seventh-century Arabia.

But it is clear from the context of the text itself that the term is not a universal command. Let me quote a larger passage to make this clear.

A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances: (9:1)

Go ye, then, for four months, backwards and forwards, (as ye will), throughout the land, but know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah (by your falsehood) but that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him. (9:2)

And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith. (9:3)

(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous. (9:4)

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (9:5)

If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge. (9:6)

Verse 4 explicitly states that the peace treaty is not dissolved with the pagans who haven’t betrayed them, and commands the Muslims to honor their treaty with such pagans. Verse 5 is written in parallel to verse 4, explaining what to do with the pagans who did violate the treaty. If verse 5 were a general statement on what to do with all pagans rather than merely those who broke the agreement, then that would contradict verse 4 (which implores respecting the pagans who haven’t broken the treaty) and verse 6 (which demands that pagans who request asylum be given it.

It is also important to note that in Sunni Tafsir (Qur’anic exegesis), even though the Qur’an is held to be the eternal word of God, it is still important to examine the historical context of when a chapter or verse was revealed in order to ascertain its meaning. This aspect of Islamic exegesis is called Asbāb an-nuzūl and is actually rather important in the study of the Qur’an. For example, the Qur’an often has semantic ambiguity. Often, the Qur’an just talks about “They” without any textual clues on who is being talked about. This ambiguity is resolved through the use of Asbāb an-nuzūl by referring to what happened just before those verses were revealed. This is often indespensible in rendering a sensible interpretation of the text.

 

[Kouyate42]

I have a question for you You guys don’t believe in Jesus’ resurrection, so why do you include our Christian scriptures in your bible? And do you keep Torah laws as well? All this is so confusing imo. We Christians added our Christian scriptures to the Torah and call it bible, and you Muslims added yours to the Torah and our Christian scriptures if I’m not mistaken. Isn’t it difficult for you guys to figure out which rules to follow? I mean this is more and more scripture to study, and more and more laws to follow and things to know

You’re getting Christian and Muslim meanings of ‘Torah’ and ‘Gospels’ (Tawrah and Injiil in Arabic) mixed up, although this is understandable. The traditional Islamic explanation is that thw Tawrah of the Quran is NOT the same Torah that we know today, and ditto for the Injil or Gospels. Rather these texts have been lost to us and the present texts are corrupted, and that Qur’aan is intended in this situation to act as a guide to differentiate between correct and false religious practice as it is the final revelation and intended to act as the ultimate book.

Things like eating kosher, blood atonement by priests for sins as well as the various types of offerings/sacrifices requested in the Torah are in any case abolished by the Qur’an in any case, as Allah permitted all things to eat except pork, alcohol and carrion, and established a personal responsibility for sin, as well as permitting every single believer to speak to Him directly and ask forgiveness for sin.

 

[Marybeloved]

You’re getting Christian and Muslim meanings of ‘Torah’ and ‘Gospels’ (Tawrah and Injiil in Arabic) mixed up, although this is understandable. The traditional Islamic explanation is that thw Tawrah of the Quran is NOT the same Torah that we know today, and ditto for the Injil or Gospels. Rather these texts have been lost to us and the present texts are corrupted, and that Qur’aan is intended in this situation to act as a guide to differentiate between correct and false religious practice as it is the final revelation and intended to act as the ultimate book.

Things like eating kosher, blood atonement by priests for sins as well as the various types of offerings/sacrifices requested in the Torah are in any case abolished by the Qur’an in any case, as Allah permitted all things to eat except pork, alcohol and carrion, and established a personal responsibility for sin, as well as permitting every single believer to speak to Him directly and ask forgiveness for sin.

And who told you that the Jews before Christianity or Islam did not have personal responsibility for sin or 'permission" to speak to God directly even asking forgiveness for personal sin? The way you put your last paragraph implies wrongly that blood sacrifices and other Jewish offerings somehow hinder or exclude personal responsibility for sin and a direct relationship of prayer with God. I don’t know where you got that. It’s certainly not true of the Jews recorded in the Bible, Old and New Ts, I see a lot of direct prayer to God, done a few times a day, numerous of them recorded into whole books of the Bible or huge chunks of them. There is so much evidence of this among the Jews that the suggestion is preposterous.

 

[Marybeloved]

But West African Islam, if I am not mistaken, follows the Maliki school of Sunni jurisprudence and places a notable emphasis on Sufi practice. This form of the faith differs substantially from what is believed and lived out far away in the environs of the birthplace of Islam, the Arabian peninsula, which gave rise in the eighteenth century to the puritanical Wahhabism for which Saudi Arabia is notorious.

There’s something to this. I was having just such a conversation with others here in my home East Africa. The truth is that African muslims here simply don’t have the kinds of issues I read about in horror of other places, despite being here at least a thousand years. Things like honour killing are as shocking and foreign to them as they are to the Christian population. Even the idea of getting killed for leaving Islam for Christianity is not heard of around here. What is more likely if people come from strict muslim families and they do things that ruin their reputation, like illicit relationships or convert from Islam, then they will find themselves disowned by their families and their communities such that life there becomes innoossible. Shopping or living among people who constantly verbally attack you is hard, so you move. But losing your people is the worst that happens. I’ve never heard of people getting killed for those things like I read about some Arab lands. Apart from the attempts at enforcing sharia in Nigeria and the somali situation, its not something I hear about. The somalia of Kenya [not the refugees but the indigenous inhabitants of the northern part of kenya bordering somalia] don’t have ANY of the practices going on in Somalia under the Islamists before the Kenyan army invaded last year. Same in Tanzania, and along the coast of the Indian ocean.

In fact, the closest thing I’ve come across to those practices were the Indians of East Africa and then it had nothing at all to do with religion but mixed race marriage, and someone has had to hide for his dear life for daring to marry or impregnate an Indian girl. But that was more culture, racial, than religious based.

 

[504Katrin]

You’re getting Christian and Muslim meanings of ‘Torah’ and ‘Gospels’ (Tawrah and Injiil in Arabic) mixed up, although this is understandable. The traditional Islamic explanation is that thw Tawrah of the Quran is NOT the same Torah that we know today, and ditto for the Injil or Gospels. Rather these texts have been lost to us and the present texts are corrupted, and that Qur’aan is intended in this situation to act as a guide to differentiate between correct and false religious practice as it is the final revelation and intended to act as the ultimate book.

Things like eating kosher, blood atonement by priests for sins as well as the various types of offerings/sacrifices requested in the Torah are in any case abolished by the Qur’an in any case, as Allah permitted all things to eat except pork, alcohol and carrion, and established a personal responsibility for sin, as well as permitting every single believer to speak to Him directly and ask forgiveness for sin.

Thank you so much for your kind response! So, if I understand your post correctly, you do have Hebrew and Christian scriptures in your Bible, but believe that they’re not the original scriptures, but corrupted? Why did you add our (Hebrew and Christian) scriptures to your Qur’an at all in the first place if you think that they’re corrupted? Would it be a possible answer if I concluded that you added our scriptures so that the Qur’an kinda fullfils or corrects these scriptures and explains errors made in the Hebrew and Christian scriptures firsthand?
Excuse my ignorance, but I never had the chance to have your Bible in my hands

I’ve heard from neighbors that you also pray the psalms, are those psalms the same ones we have in Hebrew scripture?
Do you believe that the original Hebrew and Christian scriptures (that got lost) were more like (or almost identical with) your Muslim bible you have today?
Do you read from the Qur’an on holy days of obligation, or do you also read from the Hewbrew and Christian scriptures? That would be very intersting to know Not sure if you know that we Catholics read from Hewbew scriptures also in church.

Lol I know, that’s a lot of questions, but I’d be very happy and thankful if you would find some time to enlighten us

 

[kempo1]

Can you give sources for your claims about the events in Dearborne?

I seen the video on wretched tv show but you can go to WND FAITH.com outrage on mob attack in michigan. Its all over the internet.

 

[jakasaki]

Can you give sources for your claims about the events in Dearborne?

A simple Google search yielded this information plus much more.

www.inquisitr.com/264784/shocking-video-emerges-of-muslim-attack-on-christians-at-2012-dearborn-festival/

radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/muslims-pelt-christians-with-rocks-bottles-in-dearborn.html

www.infowars.com/american-muslims-stone-christians-in-dearborn-michigan/

atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/06/american-muslims-stone-pelt-christians-in-dearborn-michigan.html

 

[Trebor135]

1. Something like: I believe in God the Father Almighty etc.

Did you explain to your Muslim interlocutor that Christians don’t believe in tritheism?

Tertullian’s analogy to the sun is the best way I’ve found of understanding the trinity, and it may help you in future interfaith discussions.

1. Surah 16 verse 102: Say the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from your Lord in truth in order to strenghen those who believe …

All right. Muslims believe that the Archangel Gabriel “brought the revelation” being referred to–the Qur’an. So, this verse speaks clearly to the identity attributed in Islam to the Holy Spirit: i.e., not the third person of the trinity as in Christianity.

1. I think it helps to oil the wheels of understanding. We don’t have to buy everything they say but we do need to listen in order to understand.

Agreed.

EG the literature explains the true meaning of jihad as stuggle, not merely holy war, “…the daily struggle against one’s own ego, bad habits and negative qualities.” (page 47 of Islam a Brief Tour, WAMY UK (2010)).

The terms taqiyya and kitman are readily thrown around by anti-Islamic polemicists to insinuate that because deception is allowed–primarily in Shi’a Islam–to avoid persecution for one’s faith, Muslims cannot be trusted when discussing their religion. To investigate whether and how the branches of orthodox Islam view these notions requires access to the Arabic-language sources such as Islamic commentaries in their original or in translation. The impartial observer will be able to find definitive answers only in this way, for a Muslim interlocutor could–hypothetically speaking–engage in taqiyya and kitman with any response that downplays or dismisses the significance of the concepts.

Probably due to a subconscious influence from charges of Islam-related deception being authorized by the religion itself, I’m somewhat wary of the credibility of your cited literature. The author(s), addressing a Western audience, would design their work in such a way as to portray Islam in the best light possible. Indeed, from what you write, the literature didn’t mention the categories of the “greater” and the “lesser” jihad.

One hopes that others will chime in about the truth behind taqiyya and kitman.

 

[504Katrin]

not to hijack this thread, but if I’m not mistaken Jews are the only ones that never ever went to war against anyone.
Yet their people have had to endure so much. I read about the Babylonian war and not only did they conquer cities, but what they did was so brutal it was beyond evil spirited. What happened in Germany before and during the second World War was even more evil and a crime beyond words. Jews have always been and even remained innocent.

 

[Franciscanguy]

Just to respond to the above from 504Katrin: in recent history the forcable removal of 900,000 Palistianians to make Israel “violent” in what it did. If you mean in history in general- the old testament is full of great stories of the Hebrews picking fights. I would particularly point you to Macabees which practically reads like a slasher flick. Gotta love guerilla warfare.

As for dialogue. I was good friends with an Imam before i moved to where i am now. We would meet about once every three weeks. The most important thing we had was respect. It wsa important for both of us to be able to listen to the other. The second thing was that neither was trying to convert the other directly. It was more about understanding one another. Finally, we always had a sense of humor about each other.

If you want to talk to Muslims about Christianity learn about Islam. A Sunni is not a Sufi or a Shi’a. It’s important to know the differences. If a Muslim tried to talk to you as a “generic Christian” you would be confused and probably insulted. Learn the language they speak in. Not Arabic but the kinds of images and hermeneutics they use (which also changes from Sunni to Sufi…ect.) A great book for an Intro to Islam- especially Islamic early history- that is very readable is “No God But God” by Reza Aslan.

Good luck and rember to love your neighbor- even if they don’t love you.