OK. Let’s pull that thread. What is “peace” to you?
In the context in which I was using it? Less violence and hate. Such things are perpetuated by paranoia of Islam which, as I have argued previously, leads to the social isolation of Muslims and their inability to successfully integrate into Western society.
These Islam lovefest threads make me sick.
I don’t think anyone reading this thread would label it a lovefest. If it nauseates you, no one is telling you to read it.
Imperialism
You write: “European imperialism following the decline of the Ottoman Empire has led to widespread resentment of the West in many Arab countries”. This may be true, but the Ottoman Empire’s earlier expansion into southern Europe and its conquest of the Balkans inspired fear and trembling among half the population of Europe at that time, not to mention the bloodbath involved. The recent violent wars in Yugoslavia are but an episode in that cycle of violence.
I think you are misunderstanding my intention in the last post. I am not trying to place the blame for instability in the Middle East on any particular party, be that the West, Islam, or anything else in particular. I was rather responding to the previous poster’s question by saying that no single factor can explain it… certainly the nebulous concept of “Islam” can’t explain it, given how differently it is understood by different people and how imperfectly, half-heartedly, or variously implemented by different governments in Muslim-majority nations. There are in fact a myriad of factors which lead to the present instability, and there is no doubt that the legacy Western imperialism in the region is one of them.
You mention that “The creation of Israel led to the widespread migration of Jews from Arab nations to Israel thus decreasing the previous religious diversity of many Muslim countries”. This is also true, but you neglect to point out that the “widespread migration” was not always voluntary. In fact, Jews and Christians were thrown out of many Arab countries in the 1950’s and 60’. My personal experience suggests that “religious diversity” is not a desired solution in many Muslim societies.
You are absolutely correct that there were forced migrations in several countries, and I apologies for neglecting to mention this.
However, I think you are again misunderstanding my intentions… you seem to think that I am trying to lay the blame on one party or another. I am not. I am suggesting that looking at the problems in the region and claiming that “Islam” can somehow explain them is a narrow and ultimately inaccurate view. Specifically with regard to migration, forced migrations occurred for precisely the same reason I suggested in my previous thread… the creation of Israel and ensuing antagonism with that state (as you said, these force migrations occurred in the '50s and '60s).
In other words, FEAR of Jews and Israel led to the driving out of Jews from Arab lands, which led to less diversity, which led to greater polarization and more hate.
Can you see the parallel here with what I fear is happening in American and Europe?
There is global wide-spread Muslim violence against Christians. It is taking place right now. This must be stated without any disclaimers. We can argue over which specific Muslim sects or terrorist groups are claiming responsibility for these acts, but we can’t just brush them under the rug.
And why should we say that “Muslims are perpetuating violence against Christians” without any disclaimers? Why should we lump an entire religion into that category? If someone said, “Catholics were perpetuating violence against Protestants,” how would you respond? Well, you’d probably say “Catholics are perpetuating violence against Protestants in Ireland and this has been condemned by the Holy See.” Or if someone said “Christians practice sex-slavery.” You’d probably say, “No, a small Christian fundamentalist terrorist group is practicing sex-slavery in Africa.” And you’d be angry that someone would lump you in with terrorists.
I’m not trying to brush anything under the rug. I am attempting, as I have said before, to avoid generalizing and citing a nebulous factor such as “Islam” for all the problems in the world. Doing so simply creates more problems and is harmful to your understanding.
Take East Timor in the Far East, Nigeria in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East.
See everything I posted above. Look for other factors that cause civil conflict and violence… history of imperialism, high unemployment, etc.
Are you suggesting that marginalization of Muslims is somehow different than marginalization of Christians?
Quite the contrary, I believe they are crimes perpetuated under similar circumstances.
I would add that Christianity doesn’t make sense to a Muslim either.
If our challenge is to establish a dialogue, the situation seems a bit difficult. So far, your answer is for us to study the Quran. This is a bit one-sided. It will help us understand them, but how does that help the Muslim come to the table with an open mind?
Right. Where is the corresponding notion that Muslims should reciprocate by reading the Bible?
As usual, these “touchy-feely” encounters require every concession by Christians and none by Muslims. :nope:
A few things to say on this matter:
- This is a Catholic web-forum. I am obviously speaking to Catholics. If I were speaking to Muslims, I would have similar things to say. In other threads I have posted about how I explain Christian modes of revelation to my Muslim friends. There is no doubt that Muslims misunderstand Christianity just as much as Christians misunderstand Islam… but if we are to rectify that misunderstanding, we must first understand Islam such that we can understand where it differs from our own beliefs, and then how best to explain our own beliefs.
- When he sent missionaries to Anglo-Saxon England, did Pope Saint Gregory the Great instruct them only to evangelize the pagans provided they already had an extensive pre-existing knowledge of Christianity? Of course not. He instructed them to respect and learn about local customs (Source, the famous “instructions to missionaries” are in the middle of the page).
- “Touch-feely” encounters… Gentlemen, I implore you to remember that the original post in this thread pertains to how the Popes and a Saint treat(ed) Islam. And on that note, I will leave you the following thought:
If a Muslim came onto this forum and posted something like “Hi, I’m a Muslim, and I want to know what the differences are between your religion and mine,” how many people on this forum would post responses like this:
-“We belong to the one true Church. Your religion is professed by a violent, psycho, false-prophet.”
-“Our religion doesn’t advocate the slaughter of Jews for no reason, yours demands that you kill all the non-believers.”
-“Your prophet was a liar, a murderer, and founded an inherently violent religion which is a force for evil in the world.”
-“Your religion is responsible for the persecution and murder of Christians world-wide. Ours is peaceful.”
I bet a lot of people would post some things very much along those lines.
On the other hand, if JP II, B XVI, or St. Francis of Assisi were members on these forums, how would they respond?
I direct you to my first post for that answer, and implore you to consider what I am actually suggesting in this thread.
I feel like we’re veering far off topic. The last few paragraphs of my previous post (starting with "A few things to say on this matter: ), I believe, are most relevant to what this thread is driving at.
Seriously, knock it off please. I have posted nothing on this forum that could possibly indicate that I am Muslim, and unsubstantiated denials of my Christianity smack of a lack of charity. I am a faithful churchgoing cradle Catholic, as I have said many times before.