Interfaith: a new dialogue between Muslims and Catholic

[MaxRosen]

Hi men0wjv,

People’s opinions are of no consequence in terms of what Islam is

People’s opinions are of enormous consequence in terms of how “Islamic Law” is likely to be applied which, as I explained, is my primary interest.

The aim of Islam is not to form an Islamic State, but rather one in which Muslims can practice their religion,

In Australia, the UK and the US Muslims seem able to practise their religion. Some European countries have imposed restrictions such as burqa bans and minaret bans. Still Muslims enjoy greater freedoms in the West than they do in most Muslim majority countries and infinitely more freedoms than Christians and Jews do in Muslim majority countries.

Anyhow I think we’ve both stated our points of view on this issue. To go on would be repetitious.

I think there are going to be some interesting times in Europe as the Muslim proportion of the population rises rapidly. Even I was surprised by the success of the Sweden Democrats in the last election.

 

[men0wjv]

People’s opinions are of enormous consequence in terms of how “Islamic Law” is likely to be applied which, as I explained, is my primary interest.

Yes we may have come to the end of our discussion I can really only speak for Islam in the ‘normative’ case; any question you ask me will always be referred to the classical works, with maybe just a hint of a modern twang. Individual people are a law unto themselves. It is difficult to know what might happen. The Muslims are currently in a reformation; the old order has gone and new religio-political movements are popping up to fill the void. Exactly how these groups will grapple with the modern World, is an unknown. In ‘Muslim’ countries we have seen aggressive secular governments give rise to militant Islamist regimes, so the pendulum is in swing. Like the reformation of Europe, it is quite likely to be chaotic and bloody Modern times have seen the death of the expert and so Islam is less and less in the hands of the ulema (those traditionally charged with it’s care) but the people. I understand then where and why you have your interest. I think Esposito of Oxford Uni has written a really good book on the future of ‘Islam.’

One thing that may interest you is to know that I am an indiginous white Brit. As such I belong to a sub culture of ‘new Muslims.’ Not all are as familiar with classcial Islamic scholarship (some may be totally opposed, due to historical bagage), many have been influenced heavily by modern norms and generally have problems with cultures from Pakistan and Gulf Arabia. In some ways it has promise in that it removes all the cultural bagage and allows Islam to manifest itself correctly in a British kind of way (how it organically grew in the past), but in other ways the lack of knowledge and the incorporation of the darker side of modernity with it’s ‘isms’ may be a cause of concern. People are a product of their society

Muslims here (and really the West in general) enjoy much freedom and thus we’re quite happy here - I love my country - far more rights than back in their indigenous lands (infinite a bit of an exaggeration ). That said there could be recognition of Islamic family law to protect people (mainly women), but that may well be on the way. Of course far right groups like the BNP are growing to sort of compensate, as many Brits feel like foreigners in their own land! I also feel some of my Muslim brethren are not respectful enough to my British culture and this causes tension. Primarily this is due to a completely inappropriate education system for the laity.

Its time for engagement! See ‘the radical middle way’ website.

Peace

 

[men0wjv]

Regarding the instant islamic state, I thought muslims believe that islam goes back to Adam, how can it be an instantaneous religion at it’s inception at the time of muhammed and yet go back to the time of Adam at the same time?

Sorry, realised how my comments may have sounded
As any Catholic knows authroity is really important and it certainly is when it comes to deciding on a particular matter. As such the history of Islam has an advantage over many faiths in that the authority was put in place by the founder, so heresy was identified as heresy etc. When Islam spread, Islam was what went not little organically grown Islam influenced groups.
This does not mean that the Church has not maintained ‘the truth’ of course, but there are unanswerable questions regarding its formation, chiefly because there was no recognised authority to preserve such information. Knowing a little on the early formation of the Church we see a lot of disagreement and turmoil before it settled, something peculiar to Islam.
I’m not trying to pull the childish ‘my religion is better than yours’ card, but just saying ‘mistakes’ such as the Qur’an actually being in Syriac and not Arabic are really quite ridiculous. That said, I would like to read this Prof’s work and it may give us more understanding and meaning, but it won’t superceed the Arabic or the original understanding, simply add a subsidury meaning.

 

[men0wjv]

But read down a little more.

For the [Muslim] believers, the Jews, the Sabians, and the Christians- those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good deeds- there is no fear: they will not grieve. [5:69]
Having read the chapter, you may be thinking that the Jews are damned, this verse is clarifying that it makes no difference from where you come from as long as you are sincere in true belief then you shall be saved. It applies especially to the people of old. It also applies to those now, but of course there is a condition: ‘those who believe in God and the Last Day and do good deeds’. The first and last articles of faith of Islam are mentioned which is a figure of speech for all the articles of faith and the ‘good’ deeds can only be what has been described as good in the Qur’an right, i.e. the Shariah. So like I said before only Islam saves (not that funny Arab religion, but what conforms to it, lit. submission) anything that disagrees with it is not, however people who do not know or have a distorted view of Islam may be saved by Divine amnesty for their ignorance.

Thou hatest all the workers of iniquity: Thou wilt destroy all that speak a lie. The bloody and the deceitful man the Lord will abhor. - Psalm 5:7

And although ‘hate’ seems to be more of a ‘human characteristic’, it is used throughout the Bible. And by the way, love also is a ‘human characteristic’ too.

Are we not made in God’s image? Of course we (and I think you do to) believe that love is Divine whereas hate (its opposite) is from non-existence, like light (exists) and darkness (doesn’t exist). So hate really is a lesser degree of love.

But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” - 5:72

I’m not really sure by this whole next bit I’m happy with what the Catholic Church teaches as Christianity. To start again would be impossible (Protestants take note). However I do not see what came to Rome is entirely true and thus do not recognise its teachings as fact per se, unless they are of course in conformity to Islam. So I’m not sure what you are trying to prove?

Also, all of the verses you have given are vague, there is nothing definitive about them. I would like to comment on them all (I think someone already did Bwtby), but I donot have the time.

‘I and the Father are one’. Could easily mean we are close, for example. Or ‘For neither doth the Father judge any man, but hath given all judgment to the Son,’ on Earth the son (did also mean closeness back then, see CCC) judges, we certainly do not believe he will judge on the Day of Judgement or at the end of the World (where did you get this?). ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone,’ isn’t this a counter argument??? ‘Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.’ Jesus replies ‘…to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.’ And again? To explain the people saved (right) and not (left). Like I said, not sure what you’re trying to say or if any of what you said really confirms it… of course its what you believe and fine

 

[scipio337]

People’s opinions are of no consequence in terms of what Islam is. The six imams may have never studied the details of the law courts - they just lead the prayers. You need to go and ask a Qadi, because they are the ones that apply the law (I refer to them, hence the answer). Its a bit like asking a GP about the finer points of hystology. Of course Muslims may vote for something else, but that is the nature of democracy and freedom to act on a whim rather than a particular code of conduct.
Like I said, a Western Country with some Shariah allowance such as family law would not in any way legitamise ridda laws, at all!

But personal opinions aside, doesn’t Sunni and Shi’a Islam have the Fiqh Councils to give “correct” interpretation of Shar’ia?

I know its not as binding as the Catechism is to Catholics, but isn’t it a similar principle?

Thank you for your honest answers.

 

[4Horsemen]

Sometimes there will be things that are part of our religion that require specialist knowledge to understand and may be beyond my scope, it doesn’t mean that its not true however.
Thankfully this is quite an easy one: The hadith is a commentary on 3:36, showing that all babies are touched by Satan, however because of Mary’s Mother offering the prayer her children (both Mary and Jesus) were protected. The reason (illa) behind their protection is then the prayer and this is why in the compilation in Muslim it also exhorts you to make that same prayer to protect your children.

O.k., but it still seems strange that only Mary or Mary’s mother was able to know this special, esoteric prayer which kept their children ('both Mary and Jesus") protected, in that Jesus did not have to die (if I’m understanding) while on earth. What about Mary then? Since she had the benefits of the prayer of her mother, did she die on earth?

What I’m trying to get at is finding a logical argument for Islam that fits reality, and so far, I don’t see reason playing a role in understanding the Qur’an or ahaddith. Not to minimize your faith, but God is a God of reason. He wouldn’t allow anything outside of His established laws of nature. Islam doesn’t appear to be based on reason but Mohammed’s strange “insights.”

 

[men0wjv]

O.k., but it still seems strange that only Mary or Mary’s mother was able to know this special, esoteric prayer which kept their children ('both Mary and Jesus") protected, in that Jesus did not have to die (if I’m understanding) while on earth. What about Mary then? Since she had the benefits of the prayer of her mother, did she die on earth?

They weren’t the only ones that knew it??? It has nothing to do with dying, but to do with the touch of the devil. Yep she tasted death.

What I’m trying to get at is finding a logical argument for Islam that fits reality, and so far, I don’t see reason playing a role in understanding the Qur’an or ahaddith. Not to minimize your faith, but God is a God of reason. He wouldn’t allow anything outside of His established laws of nature. Islam doesn’t appear to be based on reason but Mohammed’s strange “insights.”

??? Explain? Is God constricted by His ‘laws’? God has a superior intellect, a rationality above ours, so if we find it difficult to understand does that make it false? Does it make it irrational?

 

[men0wjv]

But personal opinions aside, doesn’t Sunni and Shi’a Islam have the Fiqh Councils to give “correct” interpretation of Shar’ia?
I know its not as binding as the Catechism is to Catholics, but isn’t it a similar principle?
Thank you for your honest answers.

Interesting signature :ehh:

Always happy to answer questions from sincere people

The authority in Sunni Islam has taken a beating in the last 100 years. Al Azhar, what used to be the light of the Muslim World, is not anything like it was; the government now elect the principle and its waqf (funding) was taken away. That said we do have fiqh councils to discuss modern matters. Certain elements like acts of worship are pretty much agreed, however, in areas like new medical procedures or modern financial systems that require a decision, brings a collection of scholars to come together. In Damascus recently The respected Sheikh Zuhayli sat with a council and concluded that intellectual copyright is recognised by the Shariah. Of course without state authority then these may fall on deaf ears.
It is often said that fatawa (legal rulings) are not binding, this is sort of true and sort of not true. In a traditional state the appointed Grand Mufti would have legislative authority and would have authority in the organisation of the teaching institutions. A country would also only have one madhhab (rite) and thus would teach the mu’tamad (relied upon) position in that madhhab, unless one came into difficulty and then a Mufti (one able to give a ruling) could be consulted. Its not like today where people can access hundreds of positions (authoritative or otherwise) online and window shop on a whim etc hence why the Ottoman Empire (like the Church) rejected the printing press for a long time; to stop the ill educated printing whatever they want.
So yes we do have something like the CCC and the laity have no say in this until they have reached the pre-requisite knowledge (rather like no-one can practice or write a research paper on medicine until they are a registered medical practitioner). Unfortunately the modern age has stated that all opinions are equal and Islamic education is either hardly there or very poor and thus people feel confident to question the scholars of the present and the past, like I have seen Catholics question the Pope??? We hear the slogan ‘we are men and they are men,’ but the reality is that ‘they are men and we are little boys.’ My friend studied in Damascus, he’s been studying continuously for some 12 years, when he finished in Damascus his teacher congratulated him on finally becoming a student Oh how we have returned to jahiliyyah (ignorance)

 

[4Horsemen]

They weren’t the only ones that knew it??? It has nothing to do with dying, but to do with the touch of the devil. Yep she tasted death.

And the quote said that Jesus was the ONLY Prophet not touched by the devil. So it was the grandmother of Jesus who said the prayer, according to a post by Elwill, I believe. So Mary, mother of Jesus is bestowed with the same favor of being sinless.

??? Explain? Is God constricted by His ‘laws’? God has a superior intellect, a rationality above ours, so if we find it difficult to understand does that make it false? Does it make it irrational?

No, God is not constricted by His laws, but He made them to put order into the universe. Anything out of the ordinary is a miracle, such as the miracles of Jesus. Btw, if Jesus is a Major Prophet, why aren’t the Muslims celebrating Christmas along with the Christians?

 

[4Horsemen]

Sometimes there will be things that are part of our religion that require specialist knowledge to understand and may be beyond my scope, it doesn’t mean that its not true however.

Thankfully this is quite an easy one: The hadith is a commentary on 3:36, showing that all babies are touched by Satan, however because of Mary’s Mother offering the prayer her children (both Mary and Jesus) were protected. The reason (illa) behind their protection is then the prayer and this is why in the compilation in Muslim it also exhorts you to make that same prayer to protect your children.

men0wjv,

Sorry, but I’m still not getting it. You are assuming that Mary and Jesus were brother and sister when Mary is the mother of Jesus. (Where in the Qur’an does it say that?) In Catholic tradition, the mother of Mary is Elizabeth and her father is Joachim. So it was Elizabeth who said the special prayer.

 

[4Horsemen]

Hi men0wjv

MaxRosen: If the aim of Islam is to establish a state in which Islam forms the “constitution” then it is definitely not compatible with democracy as that word is understood in most Western countries. The secular state is an intrinsic aspect of Western democracy.

 

[4Horsemen]

Doesn’t apply to Prophets

No people are dead, but their souls ‘live in their graves,’ but Prophets are alive both body and soul.

I would think that what you mean by “live in their graves” is symbolic for another dimension, perhaps? Or Purgatory?

Muhammad (pbuh). How is loving the most striking disclosure of God idolatry?

Since Muslims say, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet,” how can one love Muhammad to the point of “dying of love”? I can see that would be true for Allah but not Muhammad, who admitted he was just a man.

I do not believe the authors are trying to be fair at all! The only thing they missed was Jaws type music! Will start a thread when I get a min. Just to ask a simple question; the image they portray of Islam is a very dull one, so why on Earth would anyone be part of this religion? Let alone one of the Worlds most important civilizations? I have studied Islam seriously for 10 years and sat with some great Muslims and it does not tally with what they spout at all… not even close. I’m surprised you can’t pick that up? Its quite clearly got an agenda, rather than just an objective study.

You must consider that the book is from the Catholic point of view, but the authors try to do justice to Islam, in my humble estimation. You must admit there are contrary ideas in the Qur’an and ahaddith. From the very little bit I know, it seems evident to me, particularly from the discussion on this thread, another one I was on and one I read (all 15 pages last night). However, if there is a logical explanation, I’d be glad to listen.

Thank you for your patience.

4Horsemen

 

[Lucy26]

MaxRosen;7372898:

And . . . “The Prophet said, ‘Angels do not enter a house which has either a dog or picture in it…’”

I wonder. . . don’t Muslims have pictures of their families?

Most Muslims I know keep their pictures on the computer.

I, however, have a Great Pyrenees and a cocker spaniel who both sleep on my bed… generally they stretch out and get nice and comfy while I huddle in the corner and try to keep what little blankets they allow me to have LOL. And I have pictures of my husband and I all over my house. Just a few of the many, many reasons I never did quite fit in with the other Muslims LOL.

 

[KathleenGee]

God bless you, Lucy!!! you are in my prayers…

 

[4Horsemen]

Most Muslims I know keep their pictures on the computer.

I, however, have a Great Pyrenees and a cocker spaniel who both sleep on my bed… generally they stretch out and get nice and comfy while I huddle in the corner and try to keep what little blankets they allow me to have LOL. And I have pictures of my husband and I all over my house. Just a few of the many, many reasons I never did quite fit in with the other Muslims LOL.

Pictures on the computer are no different than pictures in albums, and pictures in albums are no different than pictures placed here and there in the house. So many things in Islam just don’t make sense to me.

If I couldn’t have a dog, I’d be awfully unhappy. My beautiful Golden Retriever died almost a year ago at the age of 14 1/2 yrs. old. She was the smartest dog I’ve ever known and beautiful–sired by a champion. We’re going to get a new Golden puppy in January when she will be about 8 weeks old. We have a huge picture of our former dog on the mantel. A son-in-law, who is Muslim, just tolerates the religious pictures and animal pictures and my cat. He’s very kind about it, but he won’t allow any pets in his home and required that my daughter convert or he wouldn’t marry her. Of course, I was heartsick. Maybe I’m going off on a tangent, but I couldn’t help adding to what you had to say.

A Great Pyrenees must be a big dog.

 

[MaxRosen]

Hi 4Horsemen

I agree with you about “Shariah Law creep” in Turkey. Something similar seems to be happening in Indonesia.

Europe is interesting. Fertility rates among indigenous European populations are all below replacement level. Indigenous European populations are all either shrinking or will start shrinking within a few years.

However if you look more closely, religious Europeans, mainly Christians, tend to have more babies than secular Europeans. Thus what you could see is a rising population of Christian Europeans even while the indigenous European population as a whole declines. The demographer, Eric Kaufmann, summarises these trends in “Breeding for God”.

Kaufmann’s book, Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth?: Religiosity, Fertility and Politics, is well worth reading.

You can see a debate on the topic here.

Personally I think atheists are a threatened species.

I am not an atheist. I have no idea whether there exists a being or entity who could be described as the creator of the universe. Nor do I ever expect to know because I cannot think of any experiment or observation that could settle the matter.

However I am what might be called a “scriptural sceptic” which is to say I don’t think any of humanity’s “sacred” books are the direct “word” of the creator of the universe.

The koran can be disposed of easily enough. It is a central tenet of Islam that an angel, Gibril, transmitted a message from “Allah” verbatim to a seventh century merchant-warrior called Muhammad over a 22 year period. Muslims believe that the koran available from any Islamic bookshop, when correctly recited, reproduces the exact message, word for word, syllable for syllable, phoneme for phoneme that “Allah” allegedly transmitted to Muhammad via Gibril 1400 years ago.

However this is a creator who flunks science 101. He cannot even get the basic facts about mammalian reproduction and geology right.

Muslims, of course, will say that we poor uneducated kafirs cannot understand the koran on our own. Only “scholars” who have devoted decades of their lives to studying the “science” of the ahadith and the discipline of koranic interpretation can truly explain the meaning of each passage. Once the correct rules of interpretation are applied, so Muslims assert, we see that the koran actually anticipated the results of western science. They even trot out a few tame “scientists” such as Keith Moore to back up their claims of “scientific miracles” in the koran.

The trouble with this approach is that with enough clever “interpretation” I can make even the Harry Potter stories sound like profound scripture. All it needs is about 100 words of “interpretation” for every word in the stories. Only people determined to believe in Islam could find this approach credible. Anyone with an open mind sees immediately that this is mumbo-jumbo.

I also cannot imagine the creator of the universe saying something along these lines?

[5.33] The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,

The bible is different. The Catholic Church does not assert that the creator of the universe dictated the bible verbatim. Rather the Church teaches that the texts were written by humans who were in some sense divinely inspired. That is at least possible whereas the Muslim claims about the koran are not credible.

The Old Testament is interesting because in it we see how the Jews’ understanding of the nature of the divine evolved over the millennia. The deity described in the first five books (the Torah) comes across as a stern, unyielding, unmerciful taskmaster interested only in unquestioning obedience.

But by the time of Isaiah we see this:

11 “The multitude of your sacrifices—
what are they to me?” says the LORD.
“I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.

…]

17 Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.[a]
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
plead the case of the widow.

According to Isaiah this is God saying “ritual obedience and meaningless sacrifices are not enough. I want justice”.

The entire book of Amos is a passionate plea for what we would today call “social justice”. Atheists, fundamentalist Christians and ultra-orthodox Jews are all remarkably good at not seeing how the Jewish understanding of God evolved from the time of Abraham to the time of Amos.

Notice that Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Habakuk and all the rest are Jews telling Jews how they are falling short in virtue. That is what makes them real prophets. A real prophet speaks truth to power. A real prophet is not afraid to break with his own people.

The New Testament then takes us in a new direction. It is the idea of God as a “suffering servant”.

If you look at the bible from the time of Abraham to the time of the Apostles you see a stunning evolution of understanding.

Is this text divinely inspired?

I don’t know. Personally I doubt it. But it is certainly inspired and inspiring. It cannot simply be dismissed as claptrap.

 

[John_Paul_Jones]

Sorry, realised how my comments may have sounded
As any Catholic knows authroity is really important and it certainly is when it comes to deciding on a particular matter. As such the history of Islam has an advantage over many faiths in that the authority was put in place by the founder, so heresy was identified as heresy etc. When Islam spread, Islam was what went not little organically grown Islam influenced groups.
This does not mean that the Church has not maintained ‘the truth’ of course, but there are unanswerable questions regarding its formation, chiefly because there was no recognised authority to preserve such information.

Yes, a lot of things are lost to the ages, but what is retained is the “witness” of the early Church fathers. Like Saint Irenaeus, who was a “witness” to Polycarp who in turn is a “witness” to St. John the Evangelist, he was an apostle of Jesus Christ. St. John is the only apostle to personally witness the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. All the Truths that are needed to achieve heaven were given to the Apostles. And the Church today comes from Early Church that was guided by the Early Church Fathers who were connected by faith to the Apostles.

Yes, I know going back in history the closer you get to the time of Jesus the less there is written and recorded, there is less that is tangible evidence and more has to be taken on faith. Christians have to admit their faith comes from humble beginnings. But moving forward from the time of the Apostles, there are certain aspects of the faith becomes more defined and focused, and the understand of the faith has grown but there was always a continuity between the Church (Catholic & Orthodox) today and the Early Church.

Knowing a little on the early formation of the Church** we see a lot of disagreement and turmoil before it settled, something peculiar to Islam.**

You see no turmoil and disagreement within islam during the whole history of it, now or then? OK I’ll take you word for it.

I’m not trying to pull the childish ‘my religion is better than yours’ card, but just saying ‘mistakes’ such as the Qur’an actually being in Syriac and not Arabic are really quite ridiculous. That said, I would like to read this Prof’s work and it may give us more understanding and meaning, but it won’t superceed the Arabic or the original understanding, simply add a subsidury meaning.

Well it’s not that the whole koran was written in Syro-Amaraic language, but certain words were loan words from that language that became to be misinterpreted through time. I think the worse idea he proposes from the veiw-point of the muslim is that the koran is not a book from all eternity but something that took shape over time.

 

[men0wjv]

Pictures on the computer are no different than pictures in albums, and pictures in albums are no different than pictures placed here and there in the house. So many things in Islam just don’t make sense to me.

Everyone: :sad_bye: Thanks for making this thread interesting. I’m going to start a new thread entitled ‘Who has read ‘Inside Islam’ by R Spencer and D Ali?’ Should you wish to contact me then please write a private message

There are many things over the last couple of posts that need answering. I cannot give the time to all of them. I have to say that I’m quite shocked by some people assertions. Also some have become Muftis and give fatwa on a single shred of evidence??? Surely to speak about something, you must understand it first otherwise your not understanding is just ignorance isn’t it? Also comparing X in one book to Y in another book, ignoring that X and Y also exist in the others respectfully, and then saying since they’re different the X in the first book is all clearly wrong??? So logic is no longer useful in scientific research??? Which brings up the next illogical argument, because I don’t like it its wrong or because I haven’t understood it its wrong? Lets be fair and intelligent otherwise the alternative is (ego driven) argumentation and hatred.

I have quoted you 4 horsemen because I think this all sums it up. It is contradictory, of course! Does Islam promote this… no! Photographs are allowed, its the picture making that is the problem - the former being like a reflection, so should we ban mirrors? Some scholars have not looked too brightly on photos either out of precaution; when you’re in love you wish to go that extra mile for your beloved.

Also with dogs there is generally a problem with cleanliness and so many scholars have said they shouldn’t be kept in the house. However in the Maliki rite they are pure and so there is no problem; my teacher in Morocco sat in a lecture where the Scholar was rubbing a dogs belly whilst speaking on purity! Heck the companions kept dogs and all Muslims used them for hunting!?! As Muhammad (pbuh) said ‘the cure for ignorance is to ask.’

There is no accounting for human folly, however. People from the sub-Continent particularly are just crazy in their paranoia of animals??? They often do not like cats too, which is weird since barakah (blessing) descends on a house with a cat in it? I remember some Pakistani women and my wife were in a swimming pool and a workman walked past the pool as anyone would. My wife - uncovered - simply dropped a little in the water so as not to draw attention to herself (the main principle of modesty). The Pakistani women went crazy and splashed in the water drawing the workman’s attention!?! Not only drawing attention to themselves, but forcing the workman into sin; the sin falling on the onlooker. Its like the man who sleeps around, but wont wear a condom because the Church doesn’t approve.

We live in a time of great ignorance and yet people are arrogant enough to say we are evolved!?! The only thing we’re evolving is our own desires and egos. As you can see I’m a traditionalist

Anyway, I best get started on this new thread, may God’s blessings be with all those that read this… and those that don’t

 

[Lucy26]

Pictures on the computer are no different than pictures in albums, and pictures in albums are no different than pictures placed here and there in the house. So many things in Islam just don’t make sense to me.

If I couldn’t have a dog, I’d be awfully unhappy. My beautiful Golden Retriever died almost a year ago at the age of 14 1/2 yrs. old. She was the smartest dog I’ve ever known and beautiful–sired by a champion. We’re going to get a new Golden puppy in January when she will be about 8 weeks old. We have a huge picture of our former dog on the mantel. A son-in-law, who is Muslim, just tolerates the religious pictures and animal pictures and my cat. He’s very kind about it, but he won’t allow any pets in his home and required that my daughter convert or he wouldn’t marry her. Of course, I was heartsick. Maybe I’m going off on a tangent, but I couldn’t help adding to what you had to say.

A Great Pyrenees must be a big dog.

Yeah I never did see the difference either regarding the pictures. Sometimes I think I’d be happy if I DIDN’T have dogs but… my Pyr is a 90 lb puppy, she just turned 9 months old yesterday. She’s pretty destructive. Instead of eating just a shoe here and there, she’s pulled up carpet and linoleum, eaten through walls, and cost me a small fortune in vet bills due to her penchant for swallowing inedible objects. Have you seen Marley and Me? That’s basically my life right now LOL, but it’s getting better as she gets older. She drives me crazy but I love her dearly and even though sometimes I say I don’t want dogs, I can’t imagine life without her.

That’s odd that he won’t allow any pets in his home. Cats especially are highly regarded… was your daughter a Christian? Requiring that she convert is odd too, as Muslim men are allowed to marry Christian and Jewish women as long as they are willing to raise the children Muslim. Muslim women however aren’t supposed to marry non-Muslim men as the religion is passed down through the father. It happens anyway, but technically that is a no-no. There’s nothing religious to prevent him from marrying your daughter without her converting though.

 

[KathleenGee]

I have a devout Catholic Nigerian friend who told me the plight of Nigerian girls who marry Muslims.

Now we are hearing in Great Britain that the Muslims are now wanting the silencing of the Salvation Army’s bells calling for aid to the poor.

As this thread is ending, my basic problem is that I do not trust the Muslims in Europe…because of this picture we have here in USA that once they are the majority, the rest who do not convert will be dhimmi.

Some how, I see the good will and benevolence of Men0 as a reflection of his Catholic baptism, the inner life of Christ…it can’t be washed away. And I wonder if there are other Muslims in Great Britain, but who generational Muslims from the Middle East who have the same benevolence as Men0.