Top Islamic scholars suspend talks with Vatican [CWN]

[dzheremi]

There’s no need for this kind of talk. Talk about bombing Al Azar is just stupid and childish.

I wonder what some young follower of Islam who is curious about Catholicism would think if he were to wander in here and read this thread? Every lie he has ever been taught about Christianity was confirmed with that one statement. There is no need for this childish idiocy.

First some Fundamentalist idiot in Florida talks about burning the Koran and then bombs go off in Christian Chruches. See the connection? Do you think that the Islamic Extremists you hate so much -don’t- read this website?

I can hear the headlines in Cairo now… “Extremist Christians on a Fundamentalist Orthodox website threatened to blow up Islamic Holy Site”

When will it end? Please, please stop.

-Tim-

What? Where are you getting this from? You’re being hysterical. Sorry I just ruined Christianity forever with my irresponsible statement that says if the shoe were on the other foot, they’d react and not be silent as they’re demanding Pope Benedict be. It’s true. We’ve seen it plenty of times, like every time that Muslims anywhere outside of Palestine demonstrate about the situation in Palestine. Funny how Al-Azar never seems to care about that. This situation is no different (foreigners “interfering” on behalf of the human rights of a persecuted minority), and is in fact much less of an actual threat to stability, as it’s not like there are a bunch of Catholics in Egypt who might listen to the Pope’s words and act on them irresponsibly (but this certainly does happen with the Muslim majority, goaded by their leaders who breed dangerous ideologies). So please don’t bother with the “you’re being immature and irresponsible” talk. I’m pointing out a fact, you don’t like it, fine. But I’m not going to stop telling the truth as I see it just because you don’t like it. You aren’t required to read my posts, and I welcome you to add me to your ignore list if you feel it is necessary. That’s why we have that option on this board.

 

[Contarini]

may be it true
but it dosn’t seems exactly like that to us

Tayyeb said the pontiff has repeated similar calls following attacks against Christians in Iraq suggesting that the Christians were facing mass persecution in the Middle East.

“But he never spoke about the mass killings of Iraqi Muslims at the hands of American and their allies,” he added.

I see. Perhaps you can point me to the places where Americans and their allies have deliberately massacred civilians at worship.

The Pope in fact has been a critic of the Iraq war from the beginning. He has not condemned it in the same way because it’s not the same kind of thing.

In September 2006, he delivered a lecture in Germany quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor that everything Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him) brought was evil and inhuman.

Yes, the way he used the quote was ill-advised. However, the point he raised about faith and reason was a valid one, and the best way for Muslims to prove him wrong would be to act rationally and non-violently.

“The Islamic Research Council reviewed in an emergency meeting on Thursday the repeatedly insulting remarks issued by the Vatican Pope towards Islam and his statement that Muslims are discriminating against others who live with them in the Middle East," Al-Azhar said in a statement.

But Muslims are in fact doing this. It’s the job of the Pope to tell the truth. He has more responsibility to innocent victims of violence than he does to inter-religious diplomacy.

actually , islam teach us to deal justly and kindly with christians , and this is enough for me to think that islam is very very good

Islam as you interpret it teaches this. Hopefully Al-Azhar agrees with you. But then whey is Al-Azhar condemning the Pope instead of condemning those Muslims who are not dealing justly and kindly with Christians?

Al-Azhar did condemn 9/11, a fact I have repeatedly pointed out on this forum to anti-Islamic Christians. I’m disappointed by its reaction in this case.

existence of some terrorism will not change the facts about true teaching of islam

What does “true teaching of Islam” mean?

For you, as a Muslim, the true teaching of Islam is what Allah intended when He dictated the Qur’an. Since I do not believe that Allah dictated the Qur’an, but see it as a human document, your “true teaching of Islam” is meaningless and irrelevant to me. I note only that Muslims differ on what that teaching is (and this is true of all religions and all sacred books, of course). What I’m interested in is
a. What scholars can discern as the probable original meaning of the Qur’an; and much more importantly
b. What Muslims have historically understood the Qur’an to mean.

I appreciate and respect your own personal faith, but I am not obliged as a non-Muslim to take your word for it as to what the “true teaching of Islam” is.

The historic position of Islamic law is that people of the Book should be allowed to practice their religions, but that they should be subjected to Muslims and should not be allowed to do anything that could possibly be construed as disrespectful toward Islam. In a time of social discontent, when Muslims are not dominant in the world and see themselves as under attack by Christians, this historic Islamic position can easily seem to justify mob violence against innocent Christians in response to any insult against Islam by any Christians anywhere. Responsibility for this vicious and irrational behavior lies squarely with Muslims.

Furthermore, some Muslims have claimed that the Qur’an’s kind words for people of the Book apply only to “true” Christians who did not believe in doctrines such as the Trinity, and do not apply to historic, orthodox Christianity.

but if you want to find excuses for yourself to condemn islam then you are free to believe that and i’m free to deny it

The freedom I’m interested in is the freedom to seek and speak the truth.

I certainly give you the freedom to repeat vapid apologetic talking points if you wish, but I will then exercise the freedom to point out that you aren’t making a lot of sense.

Edwin

 

[dzheremi]

By the way, just in case anyone is wondering, here is an example of what the proper response should be to terrorist threats of the type imagined by Timothy: “Because somebody threatens violence, it doesn’t mean they get their way”

If only the Egyptian government had the backbone that the Canadian government apparently has!

 

[elwill]

I see. Perhaps you can point me to the places where Americans and their allies have deliberately massacred civilians at worship.

The Pope in fact has been a critic of the Iraq war from the beginning. He has not condemned it in the same way because it’s not the same kind of thing.

Yes, the way he used the quote was ill-advised. However, the point he raised about faith and reason was a valid one, and the best way for Muslims to prove him wrong would be to act rationally and non-violently.

you are perfectly right , we as muslims should to prove him wrong , but from another point of veiw when two relegion decide to argue relegion affairs with themselfs , the honsty and dignity must be established , before arguing with me about my relegion you have to know about my relegion and what is my beliefs about my relegion , you have to represent my relegion in the way muslims in the fact believes in it , did pope represent the reaction of muslims in egypt after this terrorism event , for example
did he represented how the all scholars of islam and all the media and all the population condemned this act , he didn’t ? because he want to transmit specific picture about muslims , he isn’t honest from our view of point ,
talking about my relegions with lies and insults and with disrespect isn’t fair , i myself in this forum ignore specific members here and rarely when i respond to them because they seems to me ignorant and dishonest and arguing with them is just waste of time and useless
but i’m still working and do my best to correct the misconceptions with others who show some respect and intellegent in their posts

But Muslims are in fact doing this. It’s the job of the Pope to tell the truth. He has more responsibility to innocent victims of violence than he does to inter-religious diplomacy.

it was his guesses
muslims in egypt for example believe that it can’t to be work of muslims , they believe that it’s foriegn work which try to raise fitnah between christians and muslims in egypt

Islam as you interpret it teaches this. Hopefully Al-Azhar agrees with you. But then whey is Al-Azhar condemning the Pope instead of condemning those Muslims who are not dealing justly and kindly with Christians?

they didn’t condemned the trrorism acts against christians ? are you sure ?

What does “true teaching of Islam” mean?

the teaching which will you find in islamic sites and books , the teaching which you will find in quran and sunnah , the teaching which majority of muslims believes in it

For you, as a Muslim, the true teaching of Islam is what Allah intended when He dictated the Qur’an. Since I do not believe that Allah dictated the Qur’an, but see it as a human document, your “true teaching of Islam” is meaningless and irrelevant to me. I note only that Muslims differ on what that teaching is (and this is true of all religions and all sacred books, of course). What I’m interested in is
a. What scholars can discern as the probable original meaning of the Qur’an; and much more importantly
b. What Muslims have historically understood the Qur’an to mean.

i just meant that if somone appeared in the media hold quran in his hand and say jihad then go out to kill innocents , it dosn’t mean that it’s the true teaching of islam , because i think that many westerener hold this view about islam from pictures and not from reading about islam

I appreciate and respect your own personal faith, but I am not obliged as a non-Muslim to take your word for it as to what the “true teaching of Islam” is.

you can then condemns me for somthing i never believed in

 

[elwill]

i don’t think that we have such rules which called second class laws

 

[GaryTaylor]

These radical muslims which become the consistant vocal point are a problem. And “they” are a result of the “Islamic” learned bahavior, taught to them in social/religious childhoods. They didn’t happen by accident, but by intentional upbringing. Otherwise the numbers would be limited to individual behaviors in specific behavior groups. Thats not whats happening here or elsewhere.

The Pope speaks for basic Human Rights and actual Freedom worldwide with no political aganda. The Catholic Church and its teaching isn’t on trial here, nor is the Pope. What is on trail is the “behavior” in Egypt which resulted in Mass Murder. Lets get that straight first! And that freedom which the Pope stands for implies and implements the truth regarding the good. Then it becomes a good in itself. The comments made are a result of the behavior, and in the worldwide forum the Pope isn’t wrong here. He is the symbol of Good and that Good is the truth which leads man to real Freedom, not what Islam interprets as freedom then violently enforces upon its public. And then what, blasphomously announce it to be in the name of God? Wow, thats one beautiful concept. that gives one permission to act in anyway one so choose’s, in GODS NAME.

If freedom ceases to be linked with Truth and begins to make truth dependant on freedom, then the presence is set for dangerous moral consequence. Then, when this happens as we see, the abuse of freedom provokes a reaction which takes the form of a totalitarian system or similiar. Its called the corruption of Freedom. Its been experienced time after time especially last century and centurys before.

Recent history has shown the amble use and evidence of the evil use of freedom. And there is No Freedom without truth. Aristotle correctly wrote on this in Nicomachean Ethics. And thats how long its been taught. Nothing new here, just a different name of a system with either cannot work or will enslave mankind. Take your pick. There is no freedom at the end of this path, just more violence. It becomes a systematic choice to kill off that which isn’t “exactly” like you.

How one thinks this completely through and finds light at the end of the this tunnel I find amazing. It contradicts the repeated lesson learned in the history of mankind.

And Islam cannnot be turned around from the “outside” the change must occur from the inside and the “self”. How long do you think the world will watch the carnage before it then reacts as a whole?

 

[elwill]

i thought you were talking about actual laws

 

[dzheremi]

Yeah, well, the actual laws are awful, too. What do you expect when the Egyptian constitution is changed in 1980 to make the shari’a the principle source of legislation? Is anyone really surprised that the country goes down the tubes more rapidly than ever before in the ensuing decades? You may not want to recognize the elephant in the room, Elwill, but Christians certainly do, because it stomps on them every single day.

 

[JHow]

There not big on the No Speech theory here. MOF they don’t when to shut up here.

Actually, we do have a right not to speak in the form of the right not to testify against ourselves in court. We can’t be made to confess. Witnesses can be sworn to “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, but not defendents.

I wonder how islamic law feels about that right?

 

[Aramis]

And where is the Coptic Pope (Shenouda III) to defend Pope Benedict

Shouldn’t he do that and assures that Egypt should protect Coptic Christians from mob violence !!!

One must remember: while not as bad off as the Ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, His Holiness Shenouda is not in a position to speak freely. Coptic Christians in Egypt have long suffered from a case of second-class status, despite the ostensibly secular government.

Actively supporting the Pope of Rome could result in waves of anti-Copt violence in protest, in a country where it’s a small miracle the civil government prosecutes mass murderers who target only Copts.

 

[dzheremi]

The government of Egypt is not secular by any definition of the word! The constitution places Shari’a law as the primary source of legislation in the country, thereby making it a de facto Islamic state despite being somewhat more erratic in its application of those laws than some other states we’ve known. They may not have a vice squad beating women with canes like the Taliban did, but you can bet that when it comes to oppressing Christians, they’re not lax!

 

[Contarini]

you are perfectly right , we as muslims should to prove him wrong , but from another point of veiw when two relegion decide to argue relegion affairs with themselfs , the honsty and dignity must be established , before arguing with me about my relegion you have to know about my relegion and what is my beliefs about my relegion , you have to represent my relegion in the way muslims in the fact believes in it

We will never have dialogue then. Because it’s practically impossible to represent someone else’s religion the way they believe it. You can come pretty close, of course, and we should all try. But helping each other do better on this is the function of dialogue, not a prerequisite for it.

did pope represent the reaction of muslims in egypt after this terrorism event , for example
did he represented how the all scholars of islam and all the media and all the population condemned this act ,

That’s a valid point. He should have recognized this, and I should have taken the trouble to learn more about it (I did hear about the voluntary Muslim “human shields,” but I didn’t know about al-Azhar’s involvement in protests against the violence, and I should have looked).

he didn’t ? because he want to transmit specific picture about muslims , he isn’t honest from our view of point

I think you’re being overly defensive here. I don’t think he’s trying to “transmit a picture about Muslims.” It’s a bit odd to suggest that when a religious leader protests violence against members of his religion, his main concern is to “transmit a specific picture” of the religion whose members committed the atrocity. Isn’t it more likely that his concern is for his fellow-Christians who are being killed?

I agree that his message would have been more effective if he had said, “I offer thanks to Al-Azhar University and the other Muslims who have come forward to defend their Christian fellow-citizens.” That would have been diplomatic. But Al-Azhar could have responded, “We join Pope Benedict in condemning these atrocious acts and calling on our government to prosecute those responsible.” Surely the leader of a religion whose members are being murdered can be excused for being less diplomatic than he might be, and for thinking more about the lives of Christians than about good Islamic PR?

This is the root of what worries me about Muslims and violence. Sure, most Muslims don’t practice such acts. Many of you condemn them. That’s wonderful. But at the end of the day most Muslims seem to think that their primary moral concern is to make sure no one disrespects their religion.

Christians have been guilty of this too. Indeed, the Catholic hierarchy has been guilty of this attitude over and over. You can see this in the way the clergy abuse scandals were handled. And Catholics certainly aren’t alone. But there is a strong voice within Christianity that says, “We are sinners and we can’t ever assume that our prestige and honor is the same as the glory of God.” Between our doctrine of human sinfulness and the fact that we think the world was saved by the humiliating death of God Incarnate, we have resources for resisting triumphalist arrogance. God knows we need to do better. I just worry that there don’t seem to be enough resources within Islam to do the same thing. I could be wrong–my worry could be a form of triumphalist arrogance myself, and I would be delighted if you could show me that this is so.

talking about my relegions with lies and insults and with disrespect isn’t fair ,

But I still don’t get how speaking of the persecution of Christians is lying or insulting Islam. These things are happening.

it was his guesses
muslims in egypt for example believe that it can’t to be work of muslims

But do they have any reason for thinking this? This is a perfect example of the attitude I referred to above. There’s a certain disconnect from reality here. If someone attacked a mosque in the U.S., I would assume that the offenders were Christians, especially if there was a pattern of such violence often fueled by fanatical Christian rhetoric. I would be delighted if it turned out not to be the work of my fellow-religionists, but I would not take offense if someone spoke on the reasonable assumption that it was.

they believe that it’s foriegn work which try to raise fitnah between christians and muslims in egypt

I can see how it could be foreign work, but surely foreign Islamic work. And you haven’t explained why one should believe it to be foreigners, let alone foreign non-Muslims.

What seems to be the case is that Egyptian Muslims simply don’t like to face uncomfortable realities, and get mad when others make them confront them. Well, I’m afraid reality doesn’t go away because you wave nationalist and religious slogans at it.

 

[Contarini]

they didn’t condemned the trrorism acts against christians ? are you sure ?

I was wrong, and I apologize. I wasn’t accusing Al-Azhar of having supported the bombings, but rather of having the wrong priorities. I still think that’s true to some extent, but I applaud them for condemning the bombings, and I can see why they would be hurt that Pope Benedict did not recognize this.

the teaching which will you find in islamic sites and books , the teaching which you will find in quran and sunnah , the teaching which majority of muslims believes in it

Well, I find a historical Islamic teaching that non-Muslim governments should be attacked by Muslims; that non-Muslims should be subjected and humiliated; that Muslims who convert to another religion should be killed; and so on. I find passages in the Qur’an which clearly provide a basis for these later and more detailed teachings. Granted, I find passages which can be interpreted in another direction. But unfortunately the more disturbing passages tend to be in suras usually thought to have been revealed later, and traditional Islamic hermeneutics considers later passages to have precedence (because of the doctrine of “naskh,” or “abrogation”).

Now I recognize your right to interpret your sacred texts differently. I applaud you for doing so. But I’m not going to accept your claims about history when the evidence as I know it doesn’t support you. I would welcome being proven wrong on the above points (as I was wrong in my assumption that Al-Azhar had not condemned the bombings), but mere protestations and accusations of bias aren’t going to cut it.

i just meant that if somone appeared in the media hold quran in his hand and say jihad then go out to kill innocents , it dosn’t mean that it’s the true teaching of islam

Indeed. But by the same token, just because you come onto this forum and say that Islam doesn’t support such actions, that doesn’t mean that your position is the “true teaching of Islam” either. For the reasons I gave earlier, I don’t find that phrase particularly meaningful.

For what it’s worth, I recognize that traditional Islamic law condemns the killing of women and children and certain other categories of noncombatants (such as monks). I recognize that fundamentalist/militant Muslims often disregard much of the Islamic tradition.

because i think that many westerener hold this view about islam from pictures and not from reading about islam

Not from reading standard Western scholarship about Islam, anyway, which dispels such simplistic stereotypes. John Esposito, for instance, does a good job of explaining the roots of Islamic radicalism and how it differs from more traditional Islam.

you can then condemns me for somthing i never believed in

I’m not interested in condemning you. Nor do I see where I have done so.

Edwin

 

[Sam_777]

Actively supporting the Pope of Rome could result in waves of anti-Copt violence in protest, in a country where it’s a small miracle the civil government prosecutes mass murderers who target only Copts.

I personally don’t think that would lead to any violence against the Copts…
I think his duty is to support the Pope of Rome no matter what…

 

[Aramis]

I personally don’t think that would lead to any violence against the Copts…
I think his duty is to support the Pope of Rome no matter what…

Since he’s not in Communion with Rome, he’s not under any obligation. In point of fact, HH Shenouda III is probably the Pope of Alexandria most supportive towards Rome in the last 2 centuries.

And Copts applies to both the Coptic Catholic and Coptic Orthodox… and anti-Copt violence is already ongoing in Egypt. Miraculously, the civil government is actually prosecuting at least one perpetrator, and apparently going after the others in the recent attacks.

 

[elwill]

We will never have dialogue then. Because it’s practically impossible to represent someone else’s religion the way they believe it. You can come pretty close, of course, and we should all try. But helping each other do better on this is the function of dialogue, not a prerequisite for it.

may be the pop take a position against islam relegion itself not just against the terrorism acts , as if the islamic relegion encourage muslims to kill their neighbours from christians , such position be considered insults and lies about us and about our real morals and real emotions . this is my analysis for this disputes between Azhar and vatican

I think you’re being overly defensive here. I don’t think he’s trying to “transmit a picture about Muslims.” It’s a bit odd to suggest that when a religious leader protests violence against members of his religion, his main concern is to “transmit a specific picture” of the religion whose members committed the atrocity. Isn’t it more likely that his concern is for his fellow-Christians who are being killed?

i agree with you in general
but may be what happend from the pop were more than protests violence against christians ,
may he somehow accused government in egypt as if it was satisfied with what happened . or as if government in egypt limiting the rights of copts to practice their relegion , while in the fact what happened in the church were attack upon egypt itself to raise and increase the conflicts between it’s people ( at least that how entire muslims in egypt feel about it ) .

let me tell you something may be you will never read in the newspaper
i think that egyption muslims are more sad for what happened to their neighbours and friends and teachers from christians than sadness of the pop himself

I agree that his message would have been more effective if he had said, “I offer thanks to Al-Azhar University and the other Muslims who have come forward to defend their Christian fellow-citizens.” That would have been diplomatic. But Al-Azhar could have responded, “We join Pope Benedict in condemning these atrocious acts and calling on our government to prosecute those responsible.” Surely the leader of a religion whose members are being murdered can be excused for being less diplomatic than he might be, and for thinking more about the lives of Christians than about good Islamic PR?

although i agree with you entirly but i think that someone on his position should to be responsible , and should to keep himself deplomatic

This is the root of what worries me about Muslims and violence. Sure, most Muslims don’t practice such acts. Many of you condemn them. That’s wonderful. But at the end of the day most Muslims seem to think that their primary moral concern is to make sure no one disrespects their religion.

objections of Azhar happened in peacefull way , not violence one , right ?

Christians have been guilty of this too. Indeed, the Catholic hierarchy has been guilty of this attitude over and over. You can see this in the way the clergy abuse scandals were handled. And Catholics certainly aren’t alone. But there is a strong voice within Christianity that says, “We are sinners and we can’t ever assume that our prestige and honor is the same as the glory of God.” Between our doctrine of human sinfulness and the fact that we think the world was saved by the humiliating death of God Incarnate, we have resources for resisting triumphalist arrogance. God knows we need to do better. I just worry that there don’t seem to be enough resources within Islam to do the same thing.** I could be wrong–my worry could be a form of triumphalist arrogance myself, and I would be delighted if you could show me that this is so.**

read this site , and i wait your comment
islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1139318348431

islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1138109428606&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar

islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503546276&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar

But I still don’t get how speaking of the persecution of Christians is lying or insulting Islam. These things are happening.

again , what happened in the church was terrorim , not persecuation from governments or persecuation from muslims egyptions
the only truth is the event itself , not the analysis of it

I can see how it could be foreign work, but surely foreign Islamic work. And you haven’t explained why one should believe it to be foreigners, let alone foreign non-Muslims.

disunity of a country make it easy victim for it’s enemy ,
and destruction of countries always caused of disunity of it’s people

Mr Mubarak described the attack as a “terrorist operation which carries, within itself, the hallmark of foreign hands which want to turn Egypt into another scene of terrorism like elsewhere in the region and the wider world”.

What seems to be the case is that Egyptian Muslims simply don’t like to face uncomfortable realities, and get mad when others make them confront them. Well, I’m afraid reality doesn’t go away because you wave nationalist and religious slogans at it.

okey

 

[Reuben_J]

One must remember: while not as bad off as the Ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, His Holiness Shenouda is not in a position to speak freely. Coptic Christians in Egypt have long suffered from a case of second-class status, despite the ostensibly secular government.
Actively supporting the Pope of Rome could result in waves of anti-Copt violence in protest, in a country where it’s a small miracle the civil government prosecutes mass murderers who target only Copts.

So that’s the Copts dilemma, therefore be quiet and hopefully by doing that would not intensify the terror of Muslims against them. What a wretched situation indeed!

The Copts have nothing to lose. From being a majority in their own land they have dwindled to insignificant minority and to be bullied there. The longer this state of affair persist, it will be no surprise that they will be completely wiped out in their own land. One can see how little and only handful of Christians left in the land of their origin in the Muslims Middle East and that include Palestine and Iraq.

The Copts should vocally raise out their voice and their leaders should do the same so that eventually the whole world will know. It may cost lives but freedom is never free. The Christians in South Sudan have eventually seen the light at the end of the tunnel. They would still be enslaved had they did not fight for their freedom. This is not to say that Christians must fight but they have to stand up for their right. Giving statement and being vocal is more peaceful that actually taking up arms and I see no reason why they should not unless they want to perpetuate being marginalized as it is now. Of course it is easier said than done, but the Copts have as much right as the Egyptian Muslims.

 

[elwill]

I was wrong, and I apologize. I wasn’t accusing Al-Azhar of having supported the bombings, but rather of having the wrong priorities. I still think that’s true to some extent, but I applaud them for condemning the bombings, and I can see why they would be hurt that Pope Benedict did not recognize this.

thank you for your honest

Well, I find a historical Islamic teaching that non-Muslim governments should be attacked by Muslims; that non-Muslims should be subjected and humiliated; that Muslims who convert to another religion should be killed; and so on. I find passages in the Qur’an which clearly provide a basis for these later and more detailed teachings. Granted, I find passages which can be interpreted in another direction. But unfortunately the more disturbing passages tend to be in suras usually thought to have been revealed later, and traditional Islamic hermeneutics considers later passages to have precedence (because of the doctrine of “naskh,” or “abrogation”).

i doubt that you find these views in the islamic sites , may punishment of death for apostates is the only issue which you may find in islamic openions ( but i don’t believe in it personally )

Now I recognize your right to interpret your sacred texts differently. I applaud you for doing so. But I’m not going to accept your claims about history when the evidence as I know it doesn’t support you. I would welcome being proven wrong on the above points (as I was wrong in my assumption that Al-Azhar had not condemned the bombings), but mere protestations and accusations of bias aren’t going to cut it.

what claims ?

Indeed. But by the same token, just because you come onto this forum and say that Islam doesn’t support such actions, that doesn’t mean that your position is the “true teaching of Islam” either. For the reasons I gave earlier, I don’t find that phrase particularly meaningful.

if you think that my postion isn’t the true teaching of islam then you can feel welcome to convince me with your position about the true teaching of islam

For what it’s worth, I recognize that traditional Islamic law condemns the killing of women and children and certain other categories of noncombatants (such as monks). I recognize that fundamentalist/militant Muslims often disregard much of the Islamic tradition.

muslims often disregard much of the islamic tradition ?
i think that it’s common view about muslims that they are the most followers who are devout to their relegion and take it very seriously with comparison to other relegions

or are you talking about those minorities from extremists which majority of muslims condemns in the fact ?

 

[elwill]

do you refer to the fact that he criticised invasion of iraq ?
okey i got it , thank you

any other points i ignored ?

 

[JHow]

Dearborn, Michigan is full of muslims, and somehow the U.S. Army has refrained from attacking any of them. It is a mystery to me.