B
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
M
Montalban
Guest
Ta. It’s just the chronology of the OP is all weird, to start off with.Great response!
Vickie
Even if we look at time since the NT came into being I’ve yet to hear of an example of Catholics being ordered by God to kill innocents.
B
Booklover
Guest
That’s correct! Why would a loving God do that?Ta. It’s just the chronology of the OP is all weird, to start off with.
Even if we look at time since the NT came into being I’ve yet to hear of an example of Catholics being ordered by God to kill innocents.
Vickie
J
Jim_ov_Cov
Guest
Maybe this question should’ve been posted on an Islamic website. That is if you want to know what Muslims believe about Jihad, we here are not really qualified to answer.
The issues surrounding Jihad and Martyrdom are much more complex than we would like to believe. A Muslim Holy War might equate to a Catholic Just War, maybe they use the same justifications, I don’t know. Also, we should get rid of the false idea that Christianity has been floating around in the ether, for 2000 years not daring to even step on the daisies. Blessed Pope Urban preached the Crusades, and Indulgences were given for participation in some circumstances. Before you leap to the defence of the Pope, just imagine how that sounds to Muslims and non-Catholics,**
“Pope preaches Religious War; Gives Indulgences to Combatants. Same Pope is Later Beatified.”
**Pope St. Pius V formed the Holy League to fight the Turks, his famous declaration began with something like, “I will raise arms against the Turks…” Moreover, the Church had for centuries Military religious Orders. The Tuetonic Knights were given their own land in order to facilitate the conversion of the pagan tribes of the Baltic states. And they didn’t use dialogue neither. Countries were invaded, people were killed.
Now I personally do not have a problem with any of this for many and varied reasons. But we should be aware of the fullness of Catholic history before we start assuming positions of moral superiority.
The issues surrounding Jihad and Martyrdom are much more complex than we would like to believe. A Muslim Holy War might equate to a Catholic Just War, maybe they use the same justifications, I don’t know. Also, we should get rid of the false idea that Christianity has been floating around in the ether, for 2000 years not daring to even step on the daisies. Blessed Pope Urban preached the Crusades, and Indulgences were given for participation in some circumstances. Before you leap to the defence of the Pope, just imagine how that sounds to Muslims and non-Catholics,**
“Pope preaches Religious War; Gives Indulgences to Combatants. Same Pope is Later Beatified.”
**Pope St. Pius V formed the Holy League to fight the Turks, his famous declaration began with something like, “I will raise arms against the Turks…” Moreover, the Church had for centuries Military religious Orders. The Tuetonic Knights were given their own land in order to facilitate the conversion of the pagan tribes of the Baltic states. And they didn’t use dialogue neither. Countries were invaded, people were killed.
Now I personally do not have a problem with any of this for many and varied reasons. But we should be aware of the fullness of Catholic history before we start assuming positions of moral superiority.
M
MugenOne
Guest
If the Popes decided not to stand up against Islam, do you think we are all free by now? The West was fighting for its survival. Yes, there were evils, but people who did evil things would have to answer God when they died. The crusades were justified. How times did the Mohammedans try to invade Europe? You think, they just invaded southern Italy or Europe without enslaving women and children. Think again. Islam spreads through conquest and enslavement. And that’s a fact.
Maybe this question should’ve been posted on an Islamic website. That is if you want to know what Muslims believe about Jihad, we here are not really qualified to answer.
The issues surrounding Jihad and Martyrdom are much more complex than we would like to believe. A Muslim Holy War might equate to a Catholic Just War, maybe they use the same justifications, I don’t know. Also, we should get rid of the false idea that Christianity has been floating around in the ether, for 2000 years not daring to even step on the daisies. Blessed Pope Urban preached the Crusades, and Indulgences were given for participation in some circumstances. Before you leap to the defence of the Pope, just imagine how that sounds to Muslims and non-Catholics,**
“Pope preaches Religious War; Gives Indulgences to Combatants. Same Pope is Later Beatified.”
**Pope St. Pius V formed the Holy League to fight the Turks, his famous declaration began with something like, “I will raise arms against the Turks…” Moreover, the Church had for centuries Military religious Orders. The Tuetonic Knights were given their own land in order to facilitate the conversion of the pagan tribes of the Baltic states. And they didn’t use dialogue neither. Countries were invaded, people were killed.
Now I personally do not have a problem with any of this for many and varied reasons. But we should be aware of the fullness of Catholic history before we start assuming positions of moral superiority.
J
Jim_ov_Cov
Guest
Thank you. That is a justification for a religious war, and I don’t have a problem with it. What is worth fighting for? Well my faith would be top of the list, so I hope you haven’t missed my point, in fact you make it for me. What would you prefer, a Christian dictator (like Franco) or a Muslim democrat (like…well there must be someone, the president of Indonesia for example)? What if a Muslim democracy invaded a Christian dictatorship in order to ‘liberate’ the people? Would the Christians there be justified in fighting against the puppet regime installed by those Muslims, who by the way have killed hundred’s of thousands of your countrymen? It’s not as easy as we think to generalise and condemn when you try and look at it from another angle. Did the Spanish invade and conquer Latin America in order to install Christianity?If the Popes decided not to stand up against Islam, do you think we are all free by now? The West was fighting for its survival. Yes, there were evils, but people who did evil things would have to answer God when they died. The crusades were justified. How times did the Mohammedans try to invade Europe? You think, they just invaded southern Italy or Europe without enslaving women and children. Think again. Islam spreads through conquest and enslavement. And that’s a fact.
D
dignity
Guest
Sacramentalist,
The following two articles may be helpful
The first one is ‘UNDERSTANDING AND REACHING MUSLIMS”
by Abdul Saleeb & Norman L. Geisler (Parts One and Two)
apologetics101.net/free/DM809.pdf (note: I don’t know how good this website is I am only referring to this article by Abdul Saleeb & Norman L. Geisler)
see page 8-9 on ‘Islamic View of Jihad (Holy War)’ especially page 9 ‘Jihad Contrasted with Israel’s Kil ling of the Canaanites.’
The second one is “Allah and God at war: Worlds apart” by James M. Arlandson answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/allahs_wars.htm
The following two articles may be helpful
The first one is ‘UNDERSTANDING AND REACHING MUSLIMS”
by Abdul Saleeb & Norman L. Geisler (Parts One and Two)
apologetics101.net/free/DM809.pdf (note: I don’t know how good this website is I am only referring to this article by Abdul Saleeb & Norman L. Geisler)
see page 8-9 on ‘Islamic View of Jihad (Holy War)’ especially page 9 ‘Jihad Contrasted with Israel’s Kil ling of the Canaanites.’
The second one is “Allah and God at war: Worlds apart” by James M. Arlandson answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/allahs_wars.htm
S
Sacramentalist
Guest
Scottvhm:
I’m not buying it.
In the Old Testament, God orders his servants, on numerous occasions to murder innocent men, women, and children. yes, even children.
How is this any worse than that the Muslim God purportedly orders his followers to do?
Note: I am not equating Islam with Christianity. I’m simply asking why it’s intrinsically impossible that God can order the Muslim doctrine of jihad, when after all he sanctions the murder of children in the Old Testament. No one seems to be grasping this aprt of my question. The posters on here, with the single exception of Scott, are simply regurgitating stock-apologetics to a question that’s not even being asked!
I’m not buying it.
In the Old Testament, God orders his servants, on numerous occasions to murder innocent men, women, and children. yes, even children.
How is this any worse than that the Muslim God purportedly orders his followers to do?
Note: I am not equating Islam with Christianity. I’m simply asking why it’s intrinsically impossible that God can order the Muslim doctrine of jihad, when after all he sanctions the murder of children in the Old Testament. No one seems to be grasping this aprt of my question. The posters on here, with the single exception of Scott, are simply regurgitating stock-apologetics to a question that’s not even being asked!
M
Montalban
Guest
As Moslems are allowed to lie for the spreading of their faith, that’s not always a good idea.Maybe this question should’ve been posted on an Islamic website. That is if you want to know what Muslims believe about Jihad, we here are not really qualified to answer.
The best way to hear them is how they talk to their own. NOT how they talk to others.
Indeed. It is unfortunate that the media calls some Moslem terrorists “Suicide Bombers” because Moslems can quite rightly point out that *suicide *is against Islam. However these people are not committing suicide but martyrdom, which is acceptable in IslamThe issues surrounding Jihad and Martyrdom are much more complex than we would like to believe.
A Just War is not central to Christianity, nor Catholicism. The first to begin with such concepts (I believe) was Augustine some 300 years after Christ. Whereas the idea of Jihad is in the Koran, and Hadith, and was practiced under MuhammedA Muslim Holy War might equate to a Catholic Just War, maybe they use the same justifications, I don’t know.
I am a non-Catholic, and have debated against the fourth crusade. But I realise it’s not central to Chrisitanity.Also, we should get rid of the false idea that Christianity has been floating around in the ether, for 2000 years not daring to even step on the daisies. Blessed Pope Urban preached the Crusades, and Indulgences were given for participation in some circumstances. Before you leap to the defence of the Pope, just imagine how that sounds to Muslims and non-Catholics,
C
Contarini
Guest
I think you mean the other way round–how is the Muslim concept worse. Actually the OT is worse, because the Islamic hadith explicitly forbid the killing of non-combatants (this is a respect in which Bin Laden is a non-traditional Muslim, just as those Muslims who want to explain away violent Jihad are).Scottvhm:
I’m not buying it.
In the Old Testament, God orders his servants, on numerous occasions to murder innocent men, women, and children. yes, even children.
How is this any worse than that the Muslim God purportedly orders his followers to do?
This is a very difficult issue. The more conservative answer has been given on this thread already–the OT is different from the NT. The problem is that implies that God can change basic moral principles. Most of us do not think that killing innocents (which would include all children, no matter how wicked their parents) is just a matter of our current standing orders from God–we think it’s a basic principle of natural law. (The best way to tackle it from a conservative point of view would be to say that killing is wrong primarily because it usurps God’s privilege–God has given human governments a permanent license to kill certain criminals and unjust aggressors, and uses humans as instruments to kill on certain other specified occasions, none of which will occur after the Incarnation; but I find this view to be radically deficient morally.)
For me, there is no way around the conclusion that God did not in fact command these murders, but that the OT is recording the imperfect understanding of God possessed by the ancient Hebrews. I know this will get me called all kinds of names, but try as I might I can’t be satisfied with any other solution, except perhaps Origen’s view that these things are allegory.
Edwin
M
Montalban
Guest
False comparison.I think you mean the other way round–how is the Muslim concept worse. Actually the OT is worse, because the Islamic hadith explicitly forbid the killing of non-combatants (this is a respect in which Bin Laden is a non-traditional Muslim, just as those Muslims who want to explain away violent Jihad are).
Firstly, the Moslem model has not end-date. The OT did.
Secondly, non-combatant simply means that one can enslave women and children and raise them as Moslem, perhaps you think this is humane?
A
An_Agnostic
Guest
No. We can’t blame them.
Not all Muslims are to blame for jihad, just as not all Christians are to blame for the Crusades.
Not all Muslims are to blame for jihad, just as not all Christians are to blame for the Crusades.
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
We cannot blame all Muslims for violent jihad, but we can blame them all for supporting and promoting the ideology of jihad. It’s in their Quran - which they believe is the literal word of Allah - and hence they cannot deny those jihad verses but must accept them to be true and to be taught to the next generation, some of whom will have the conviction to put the jihad verses into action.
M
Montalban
Guest
That makes no sense.No. We can’t blame them.
Not all Muslims are to blame for jihad, just as not all Christians are to blame for the Crusades.
Jihad is integral to Islam. Crusades are not to Christianity.
A
An_Agnostic
Guest
Jihad is just another word for holy war is it not?That makes no sense.
Jihad is integral to Islam. Crusades are not to Christianity.
Just as a jihad is a holy war for Muslims… so were the Crusades for Christians.
P
paarsurrey
Guest
HiNow, I don’t believe, as a matter of history, that God actually did command Muhammad to spread the true religion by the sword.
I agree with you.
You are absolutely correct.
Islam is a religion of peace and Muhammad a Prince of Peace.
The West, as I understand, due to certain disinformation has seen only MullahIslam or MullahShariah; the true face of peaceful and human loving Muhammad and his religion Islam and Islam of PromisedMessiahImamMahdi is yet hidden from their eyes, which is truly speaking moral and peaceful.
Thanks
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
Jihad actually means ‘struggle’. There are 2 types of jihad - internal non-violent jihad and external violent jihad.
The one that concerns disbelievers is the second one - the violent one. Muhammad mentioned this form of jihad numerous times (about 50-100 times) and even gave instructions how to carry it out - by arraying in battle formation, with weapons, to forfeit live and property. The implication is that it is a violent struggle against the infidels for the sole reason that they disbelieve him.
In contrast, Jesus Christ NEVER ONCE mentioned the word crusade.
Jihad was formulated and applied from the days of Muhammad. He commanded his troops to JIHAD the infidels.
In contrast, the word crusade was invented in 1095 by Pope Urban II almost 11 centuries after the life and death of Jesus Christ.
Hence Jihad is an integral doctrine of Islam but the Crusade isn’t.
The one that concerns disbelievers is the second one - the violent one. Muhammad mentioned this form of jihad numerous times (about 50-100 times) and even gave instructions how to carry it out - by arraying in battle formation, with weapons, to forfeit live and property. The implication is that it is a violent struggle against the infidels for the sole reason that they disbelieve him.
In contrast, Jesus Christ NEVER ONCE mentioned the word crusade.
Jihad was formulated and applied from the days of Muhammad. He commanded his troops to JIHAD the infidels.
In contrast, the word crusade was invented in 1095 by Pope Urban II almost 11 centuries after the life and death of Jesus Christ.
Hence Jihad is an integral doctrine of Islam but the Crusade isn’t.
A
An_Agnostic
Guest
Ok. Well I suppose the word “jihad” is defined more than one way. A jihad, today, seems to be a struggle toward more political ends rather than religious (faith being used as an excuse).
I’m not really seeing the difference here, however, pertaining to the history of the word. An “integral” part? Christian’s declared Crusades in the name of God, just as (some) Muslims declare jihad in the name of Allah. This is the crutch. Does it matter who coined the term?
I’m not really seeing the difference here, however, pertaining to the history of the word. An “integral” part? Christian’s declared Crusades in the name of God, just as (some) Muslims declare jihad in the name of Allah. This is the crutch. Does it matter who coined the term?
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
An integral part of Christianity means that it is essential and unchanging. The crusades were instruments dreamt up by the pope a long time ago and no longer applies. It only applied for a short history. You make it seem as if the crusades still went on today.
Popes may have declared crusades in the past. Different popes have different aims and different rulings - some of which are contradictory. We have passed that stage long ago. The last crusade was in 1291. That’s more than 700 years ago. Time to let it go, buddy.
In contrast, jihad is an integral part of Islam because it was formulated and applied by the founder of Islam. It has been going on for 14 centuries.
You say that the jihad is now applied for political reasons. Islam is both a religion and political. There is no separation in Islam between religion and politics.
Don’t give Islam a free pass because the aims of jihad today are “political”. It is just as religious as it is politics.
Popes may have declared crusades in the past. Different popes have different aims and different rulings - some of which are contradictory. We have passed that stage long ago. The last crusade was in 1291. That’s more than 700 years ago. Time to let it go, buddy.
In contrast, jihad is an integral part of Islam because it was formulated and applied by the founder of Islam. It has been going on for 14 centuries.
You say that the jihad is now applied for political reasons. Islam is both a religion and political. There is no separation in Islam between religion and politics.
Don’t give Islam a free pass because the aims of jihad today are “political”. It is just as religious as it is politics.
M
Montalban
Guest
That’s simply not true.Jihad is just another word for holy war is it not?
Just as a jihad is a holy war for Muslims… so were the Crusades for Christians.
Jihad is *essential *to Islam. It is not for Christianity.
All you have to do to prove your point is to show that the Crusades, that took place 1,000 years after Jesus were an essential part of Christianity.
Jihad happened under Muhammed.
I agree that Christians approached the idea of ‘holy war’ (aka Crusade), but why is it that the crusades took place 1,000 years later, and 400 years after Islam attacked Chrisetendom IF they’re essentially part of Christianity?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.