Comparing religions

[invictus0972]

Originally Posted by Tacitus

Like you, it gets my hackles up when I hear Christians lamenting all the violence in Islam. Have they ever read Joshua? Methinks not. If that is an accurate portrayal of the will and actions of God, then He is a God to be feared and dreaded, not loved. Sort of like a kidnapper pointing a gun at your head telling you that if you don't tell him you love him, then he'll kill you. Sure, you'll tell him you love him (anything to get him to put the gun away), but you won't really mean it down deep inside. And you will be awfully uneasy about His presence.

Tacitus,

If an alien were to land from another planet and read only the book of Job, would they have a comprehensive understanding of Christian theology? I don't think they would. If the same alien expanded his knowledge by reading the book of Job and excerpts from every example you provided in your previous post, would they then have a comprehensive understanding of Christian theology? Even with the added information from your excerpts, I submit they still would not have a comprehensive understanding of Christianity. The point I am making is that religions should be criticized and judged in total, which is why I was asking Sarajevo for some insight. At no point did I insinuate that the history of Christianity is devoid of any evils. I was comparing one of its many teachings, Christ's command to love one's enemy, with any similar texts in Islam. In the responses I have read so far, I have yet to find, though I believe it exists, one example of this kind of dictate emanating from Islam. I have only seen attacks on inquisitors, crusaders, and Christianity in general, none of which have anything to do with my original inquiry. Sarajevo did offer examples of the kind actions of individual Muslims, but I am looking for doctrinal teachings that can be used in an IO campaign against radical salafists, for they use theology to justify much of their violent actions. It is their appeal to theology that gives them strength and resilience in the ideological arena. They justify their acts in the same way that Eric Rudolph used Christianity to justify his violent actions. However, because I am from a Christian background, I better understand, though I do not agree with, Rudolph's actions. Anyway, I just wanted to clarify those couple of points.

Also, in reference to your comments on Christianity and suffering, there are several people a lot smarter than you and I who have lucid and logical explanations for this apparent contradiction. C.S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain is a good start. I mention this knowing that you probably have already this book.

[skiguy]

Originally Posted by marct

Hi Skiguy,



I really don't think looking at the "dark side" of various religions is necessarily a case of trashing them although, I will admit, it can appear that way . I think it is important to look at both the good and the bad in them - if for no other reason that to establish the commonalities and differences between them.

Marc, I have no problem looking at the "dark side". We should. I don't think anyone's trashing..YET...but the thread seems to be going in that direction.
My only "problem" (and, no, I don't have a problem with you..I'm just using that word) is when people start looking at religion too academically. I'm trying to look at it more from the POV that religion, God, the holy texts are a very real and important part of many people's lives. Critisizing it can be construed as an insult (I'm not saying I'm insulted). Faith and God can't be proven, so why bother to try? I just wonder why so many try to disprove it.

Stan, thanks!

[invictus0972]

Here is a quote that sums up my point better than I can:

"The Quran and other Muslim sacred scriptures, like those of other religions, are long, complex, and open to wide-ranging interpretations. Emphasis on details such as presumed rewards in Paradise for people who di in Jihad are, frankly, irrelevant and insulting to most educated Muslims. Muslims are not religiously motivated in any way to harm or kill non-Muslims. As with any body of sacred scripture, a selective choice of quotes can "prove" anything, including completely opposite ideas."--Margaret Nydell, Understanding Arabs: A Guide for Modern Times, 4th Edition

I would like to exchange ideas, without the theological rancour, about Islamic scriptures that confirm the bolded statements. There is a lot of talk about the scriptures that invoke violence; but from an IO perspective, I am curious to know some scriptural quotes that confirm the nonviolent aspects of Islam vis-a-vis non-Muslims. In traditional terms, I feel that truly understanding the theological presuppositions of Islam is an "decisive operation" for IO professionals.

Respectfully To All,

Invictus

[Sarajevo071]

Originally Posted by goesh

I'm not invoking a false collective here when I say we are not "attacking Muslims" per se. That point has been reiterated in this forum many times. The considerate and intelligent discussion that has evolved on and around Islamic issues clearly demonstrates this and any racist, bigoted commentary is quickly deleted and I would imagine such people would be banned from further commentary. The Monitors and participants of SWC pretty much represent a small but solid slice of a larger collective that manages and directs our nation. Lastly, there is no common data, no readily availble facts and observations to support your contention. I refer specifically to post 9/11 when attacks against Muslims, their property and Masjids was almost non-existant. Blood-lust was running high after 9/11 but there was no civilian retribution against innocent Muslims under the protection of our Constitution and Law Enforcement agencies. That fact cannot be ingored and I contend it is not ignored by Muslims througout the world. As we are at home, we are abroad and belive me when I say, we have elements here at home that differ from Muslim terrorists in language and location only. We will assault any forces or elements that threaten our national security and who visit slaughter and mayhem upon innocents, regardless of the ideology they espouse in so doing. Our history bears this out and we will continue to act accordingly for generations to come and we will continue to die in so doing. There is no more I can say to you regarding your assertion that America is waging war against Muslims.

While they WAS attacks and retaliations against Muslims and masjids, you are completely right that they was not revenge en-mass against Muslims in America. And I was not talking about U.S. I am talking of all those INNOCENT Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan (particularly) and all those innocents Muslims in U.S. jails and concentration camps, and torture chambers of your allies.

Second, your statement that you will "assault any forces or elements that threaten our national security and who visit slaughter and mayhem upon innocents, regardless of the ideology they espouse in so doing" is (for me) a big lie. Did you go and bomb Christian militia camps for providing support and shelter for Timothy James McVeigh!? Or Eric Rudolph? No, you did not. But on Muslims people and they cities you did unleash hell.

That also is not ignored by Muslims throughout the world.

And third, you reasoning such "We will assault any forces or elements that threaten our national security and who visit slaughter and mayhem upon innocents, regardless of the ideology they espouse in so doing" is excatly reason why Muslims hating and fighting you. You came in they homes and kill them, rape them, occupy they land and homes...

You don't need to agree or disagree with me. I really don't care. You president, your security advisor's (to the president) and your generals all ready declared crusade on Muslims. And that's all I have to say to you.

[Sarajevo071]

Originally Posted by marct

Hi Sarajevo,

Umm, I'm not trying to "forget" the misuses of religion in the Balkans so much as trying to contextualize them and note some of the structural reasons why religions tend to be misused in these areas. BTW, another good example, in similar terrain, is the Turkish, Armenian, Kurdish interactions.

Oh, I didn't mean to sound like I disagree with you, on the contrary. You are completely right about misusing religions and people passions for this or that. But then again, people are just bunch of sheeps.

[skiguy]

Sarajevo, some questions. Why are you calling it crusades? Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and all those other right-wing idiots who do are wrong. I think most, if not all, of us here know this. We've declared war on those who kill innocent people, not Islam. And if the United States is so bad as you're saying, then why are so many of your Muslim brethren joining us in fighting these people and speakng out against terrorism?

About McVeigh, we did sentence him to death. Doesn't that count for something? And by the way, he was no Christian, he was a terrorist.

[Sarajevo071]

Originally Posted by skiguy

Sarajevo, some questions. Why are you calling it crusades? Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and all those other right-wing idiots who do are wrong. I think most, if not all, of us here know this. We've declared war on those who kill innocent people, not Islam. And if the United States is so bad as you're saying, then why are so many of your Muslim brethren joining us in fighting these people and speakng out against terrorism?

About McVeigh, we did sentence him to death. Doesn't that count for something? And by the way, he was no Christian, he was a terrorist.

But, that's exactly my point! He is NOT Christian but terrorist and you put ONLY him on death... In mean time you are waging war on ISLAMIC/MUSLIM terrorist (why that big label in this case while you never label McVeigh or IRA Christian terrorists!?) and attacking and destroying all countries instead small groups and individuals.

I believe your President called Crusade first, General Boykin picked up... In mean time Wolfowitz came out that reason are oil... And there are some others who are not duds like Limbaugh and they beliefs shaping (our) destiny here and today.

BTW, talking about killers of innocent people, remember those U.S. sanctions that killed 500,000 Iraqi kids and for which Albright said it was "worthed"!? Do you really believe your "side" don't kill innocent people? "Funny" how killed Americans are always "innocent people" and all others living on open range and when they died it's they own fault.

No, I do not say that majority of people here think that way but some do. But we are talking in general terms and about this "side" and that "side". I never accused anyone here of being this or that, I do not know anyone nor I know what you or others did in this war/wars (if anything). But we have labels and alliances and we are talking about them.

One more thing, I never said that Americans are so bad or that all Americans are evil and murderers. And I will never say such thing. I am living here and I know people around me. But your foreign (imperial) politics sucks, and you do have same lunatics and bad seeds (like everybody else!). Plus, you have president with 23% approval rating who said that he do not care what other people think since he "knows" he is right. God told him, I guess.

BTW, how you feel bad being put it in same group with those yahoos and labeled badly it's kinda makes you close to me/us when americans labeling all other people together and treating them in same bad way.

Talking about "muslims allies"... There are Muslims and "muslims" and they have they own free will and souls. Let's just hope they will not end up like many of your allies you used and betray on the end. Or maybe even worst then that... Like this latest:

US accused of killing Iraq allies
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7096755.stm

[goesh]

Now there was a guy who knew how to roll over enemies and he had extra time for repentance and redemption believing in reincarnation as he did, what with more lives coming down the line allowing him to become a better general the next time around - it's sort of like being able to run a stop sign and you never get a ticket because you can stop twice the next time. 'Atta boy, George! This reincarnation thing seems to be the way to go - no need to invoke Divine wrath against enemies, just surge ahead, no pun intended here, and refine your tactics the next time around. Of course the problem is, we don't all get to be generals. Sarajevo probably was Saladin in a past life but isn't remembering it, otherwise he wouldn't need to be constantly calling on God to back him up. Who were you in a past life?? It's show 'n tell time - Stan, you go first......

[invictus0972]

Originally Posted by Sarajevo071

BTW, talking about killers of innocent people, remember those U.S. sanctions that killed 500,000 Iraqi kids and for which Albright said it was "worthed"!? Do you really believe your "side" don't kill innocent people? "Funny" how killed Americans are always "innocent people" and all others living on open range and when they died it's they own fault.

Talking about "muslims allies"... There are Muslims and "muslims" and they have they own free will and souls. Let's just hope they will not end up like many of your allies you used and betray on the end. Or maybe even worst then that... Like this latest:

US accused of killing Iraq allies
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7096755.stm

You make some valid points, Sarajevo. However, the two claims you make above are not accurate. Sanctions were a result of Hussein not abiding by the UN mandates he agreed to at the end of Operation Desert Storm. This is true of any country that may be suffering under the burden of sanctions. So, in actuality, it was Hussein who caused his people to suffer. Also, it is true that American military actions have killed innocents; however, it is a mistake to equivocate terrorist actions, which intentionally kill innocents, with U.S. actions that unintentionally kill innocents. I don't think you have necessarily done this in your posts, but your comments triggered these thoughts in my mind. Anyway, there have been instances where the U.S., as a state decision, has targeted innocents for killing, but this is another lively discussion altogether. In those instances, your charge is much more valid, but it has been years since this has occurred. Remember that I am only referring to state sanctioned actions, not the actions of people who commit crimes. The point is that in modern days there are never any U.S. military operations in which the U.S. intentionally targets innocents. Intention is a key point here. Of course this discussion revolves around the discussion of the definition of terrorism, a frustrating and difficult discussion.

Also, it is not useful to refer to allies "betrayed" when discussing international relations issues. These are moral terms that do not apply in the conduct of international relations. The only thing that matters in international relations is to secure the interests of the state (raison d' etat), and the moral imperatives that apply to individuals are not extended to the actions of the state. This is the nature of international relations, and it does not matter whether a country is Islamic or Western. Every state operates toward securing its own interest. So, allies come and go depending on their usefulness in any given circumstance. Has not the United States been used and discarded by other countries? YES! It is just the way things are, and to say the United States is singularly bad for doing what every other country does is really quite ridiculous and disingenuous. In order to have a real discussion on U.S. foreign policies, it would be much better to do away with the moral invectives and the emotions because they just don't matter.

[Sarajevo071]

I am sorry but to agree that ONLY Saddam is in fault over sanctions I can not. U.S. government have they blame there too. Big time. Book titled "The Fire This Time: US Crimes in the Gulf" by Ramsey Clark it's amazing read on this subject.

I understand your references on state sanction killings and your attempt to distance your self (U.S.) from killings that I was referring too, but when we talk about those "others" who killing your civilians, they are also NOT state sanctioned but rather singular soldiers in broad war. Instead to fly planes and drop 1,000 lb bombs on everyone under them, they going heads one with they bodies or cars.

So, my point, we are here talking about individuals who are committing atrocities and states/leaders that do not punishing them. In grand scale of life, murder is murder. Simple. At least for me.

I do agree with you about selfish state/nation interests and there is nothing new or strange there. My answer was not emotional but exactly on target and with same irony, bias and underlying insults I am reading from some people here (when I am in case). Also, I never said that "the United States is singularly bad" for doing this or that. You are right. Everyone else is doing same for them self.

That's why I think politics and governments (majority of them) sucks big time.

[Sarajevo071]

What does the Qur'an say about Christians?


In the Qur'an, Christians are often referred to as among the "People of the Book," i.e. people who have received and believed in previous revelation from God's prophets. There are verses that highlight the commonalities between Christians and Muslims, and other verses that warn Christians against sliding towards polytheism in their worship of Jesus Christ.

"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve" (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses).

"Truly, the religion with Allah is Islam. Those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) did not differ except out of mutual jealousy, after knowledge had come to them. And whoever disbelieves in the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah, then surely, Allah is Swift in calling to account.

So if they dispute with you (Muhammad SAW) say: "I have submitted myself to Allah (in Islam), and (so have) those who follow me.

"And say to those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and to those who are illiterates (Arab pagans)

"Do you (also) submit yourselves (to Allah in Islam)?" If they do, they are rightly guided; but if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the Message; and Allah is All-Seer of (His) slaves (3:19-20).

Say (O Muhammad SAW): "O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians):

Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah. Then, if they turn away,say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims." (3:64).

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers will you find those who say, 'We are Christians,' because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant" (5:82).

"O you who believe! Be helpers of God -- as Jesus the son of Mary said to the Disciples, 'Who will be my helpers in (the work of) God?' Said the disciples, 'We are God's helpers!' Then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved.

But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed" (61:14).

"Oh People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion, nor say of God anything but the truth. Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a messenger of God, and His Word which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. Say not, 'Trinity.' Desist! It will be better for you, for God is One God, Glory be to Him! (Far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs" (4:171).

"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is but a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them; how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of God, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him! (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)" (9:30-31).

[skiguy]

Good verses, Sarajevo. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Sarajevo071

"Do you (also) submit yourselves (to Allah in Islam)?" If they do, they are rightly guided; but if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the Message; and Allah is All-Seer of (His) slaves (3:19-20).

What are ways that Muslims are commanded/allowed to convey the message?
And is 3:22 the consequences of rejecting Allah? "They are those whose works will bear no fruit in this world and in the Hereafter nor will they have anyone to help." (I notice, unlike what we've been hearing on radio and TV the past few years, there isn't any type of 'if they don't believe, kill them' in this passage.)

To compare with Christianity:
Matthew 28:19
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations" (this is what the resurrected Christ commanded His disciples to do. He didn't tell them to force it on anyone)

[marct]

Originally Posted by johanmin

no i don't think that there is any similarities in this case. but there are many other similarities between these two religions.

Which two religions? You seem to be making a whole series of comments in all of the threads on religion (in general), but no specific points.

[graphei]

Holy Exegesis Batman!

As I've done textual work on both, I'll offer some observations.

First and foremost, the Qur'an as it is known today was not written down until after Muhammad died. If it was written down, there would be no need for those fantastically talented men who've earned the title of Hafiz! A Hafiz is someone who has memorized the Qur'an in its entirety. You can give them the number of any verse and they will recite the correct verse back to you in beautiful medieval Arabic. Verbatim. Although it is written down, it's meant to be recited. In fact, Qur'an is a verbal noun of qaraʾa which means "he recited". How fitting!

Second, I'll offer a different viewpont of thinking about the Qur'an and the Bible. In Christianity, Christ is said to be 'The Word of God made Flesh." While the Bible contains the Word of God, the book itself is not 'The Word of God." Christ is. In Islam, the Qur'an IS the 'Word of God'. The physical object and contents are one in the same. Therefore, it is more analogus to compare Christ to the Qur'an, than to compare the Qur'an and the Bible. The two texts are similar in that both are available from your local book retailer in either hard or soft cover. That's it. The Qur'an does retell stories that are found in the Bible and Old Testament, and certain imagery and word phrases are repeated through all three, so it is possible to compare those specifics. However, any comparisons beyond that are highly problematic.

Third, to be perfectly honest Christians have been called both dhimmi (People of the Book) and kufir (Infidel). That in large part depends on a little known principle called naksh, or abrogation. Naskh is a highly controversial technqiue that has been applied sporadically and unequally throughout Islamic history, and is a method of determining which source will be applied in cases where the Qur'an and the Sunnah conflict (which is often). Unless you're up-to-date on your tafsir and history of each verse, to include its isnad, chain of transmission, it can be like attempting to naviagate a minefield blind-folded.

Fourth, comparing Islam and Christianity- or any two religions, is a broad topic. So broad, Comparative Religious Studies is a field unto itself and scholars focus specifically on a particular point of commonality. If you have questions, I'd be glad to try and answer them, but you've got to give me something more specific to work with or else you're going to get a very general answer.