“Make peace with us”. Or else;
Prominent Muslim scholars are warning that the “survival of the world” is at stake if Muslims and Christians do not make peace with each other.
In an unprecedented open letter signed by 138 leading Muslim scholars from every sect of Islam, the Muslims plead with Christian leaders “to come together with us on the common essentials of our two religions.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, and Pope Benedict are believed to have been sent copies of the document which calls for greater understanding between the two faiths.
The letter also spells out the similarities between passages of the Bible and the Koran.
The Muslim scholars state: “As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them – so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes.”
The manager of a Christian bookstore in the Gaza Strip who was found dead last weekend was first publicly beaten and tortured by Islamic gunmen accusing him of spreading Christianity, according to witnesses and Palestinian security officials speaking to WND.
The body of Rami Ayyad, who managed the only Christian bookstore in Gaza, reportedly was found Sunday riddled with gunshot and stab wounds. Ayyad had been abducted the previous night as he closed his shop, according to a local Christian group.
Ayyad, a Baptist, was accused by Gaza-based Islamic groups of engaging in missionary activity. His bookstore, owned by the Palestinian Bible Society, was firebombed in April after which he told relatives he received numerous death threats from Islamists.
You can’t accuse them of inconsistency.
I won’t be surprised if the Rome and the Church of England do indeed enter into such talks, even with successfully results. In fact, it would seem that Rome has agreed with their main premise already:
‘The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”‘ – Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 841
However, no mater what diplomatic efforts ensue, there is still an unbridgeable gap between the 2 faiths. At its core, Islam is just another works-base religion; if your good deeds outweigh your bad you might make it to heaven. Christianity is unique of all religions in that it teaches that our good works can’t get us to Heaven, only Jesus’ work can; so we must put our faith in Christ alone to get us there.
Those who truly grasp this essential difference (though this isn’t the only difference) will never be able to acknowledge any “common essentials” between Islam and Christianity.
valster, your F-grade slur is sophomor[on]ic. Yes, I did make a put down in your direction, but I also provided plenty of evidence for my assessment. How about making an effort to PROVE me wrong by actually addressing the points I made?
bzloki,
Originally, I wasn’t going to post this, but since you recently commented that you are “willing to learn” I thought it couldn’t hurt.
The text you quoted (Exodus 22:20) is accurate, but you are making a huge interpretive mistake if you are implying that this passage is to be taken as a command for believers today. This command was active for a specific people (the theocratic nation of Israel) at a specific time (the Old Covenant period). As we do not meet these conditions the command is not for us.
If you want more info, the follow article may be helpful (the topic is different, but the principle is the same): http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5624
It says, in part: “This doesn’t justify throwing out the entire Old Testament. Rather, it informs our hermeneutic so that when we look at the Scripture we have to ask if our interpretation needs to take this disjunction [Old/New Covenant Period] into consideration.”
I think these guys have something to say about Canadians and religion
http://handsacrossoceanministry.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/god-hates-canucks-and-with-good-reason/#comment-1468
ET,
“your quite violent hatred of anything Islamic has moved you out of any reasoned debate and discussion.”
Really? That’s quite a pompous statement to make don’t you think?
If you aren’t equipped to counter my argument, as you’ve proven over and over, then you’re certainly not equipped to reposition my POV, or exclude me from debate.
Who, may I ask, appointed you moderator?
I’ve consistently pointed out that violence is foundational to Islam and that Muslims are the first victims. This is a fact, it is not hate (unless you’re a muslim, where any criticism is construed as hate). However, I do hate the violence that Muslims perpetually do towards others as commanded and rewarded by allah in the Quran and taught by mo’s life example.
Therefore, it cannot be reformed without editing out the calls for perpetual violence in the Quran and removing mohammad as the perfect example to follow, altogether.
Now, once again, prove me wrong. And saying “I’ve disagreed with you before and will continue to do so” is not an argument.
I stand… half corrected? haha.
To me, that’s more confusing that it needs to be. I am aware that most christians do not follow the OT. Though, It still is considered the bible.
I’m not willing to die over it, thats forsure.
Irwin Daisy,
I’ve been reading some of Robert Spencer’s stuff and have to say I’ve been pleasantly surprised. His position on the state of Islam and Jihadism isn’t nearly so far from that of most Muslim reformers as I’d thought. From jihadwatch.org:
I encourage any Muslim individual or group who is willing to work publicly for the reform of the Islamic doctrines, theological tenets and laws that Islamic jihadists use to justify violence. But this must be done honestly and thoroughly, confronting the texts of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira that are used to justify violence against unbelievers, and decisively rejecting Qur’anic literalism.
Belisarius, I’m talking those who wrote the letter, not Muslims working with our allies in the ME. I think the context made this quite clear.
I’m in full support of our military helping the Muslims in the ME to help themselves overturn the Muslim thugs who threaten them.
“To me, that’s more confusing that it needs to be. I am aware that most christians do not follow the OT. Though, It still is considered the bible.”
Gee, it looks like we’ve found something you’ve failed to think “critically” about. Please consider a real and in-depth examination of Christianity instead of simply “accepting things because they are the ‘norm'” (and yes, in our society parroting that Christianity is false is the norm – been there, done that).
As you have ably shown here, most of those who are opposed to Christianity are opposing something they know nothing about.
Right, irwin daisy – my point is that your conclusions have rendered any debate about Islam impossible.
Don’t try to divert the issue – to asking me about ‘who are you as moderator’. The issue is that your conclusion about Islam is that it is basically violent, that it is unreformable, that all Muslim immigration should be stopped. You’ve made these points before. Many times.
So, why are you yet again, posting them on a blog, a site which is by nature a domain of debate, when your conclusions are not open to debate?
You reject any concept that, as a man-made entity, Islam is by that nature, reformable. That would include re-interpretation of the calls for violence and so on. I’ve posted names of journals where such debate, by Muslims scholars, is going on. You aren’t interested in their discussions. eg, American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, a very good journal. Their 2005 Vol 22 issue was on Debating Moderate Islam.
But – To you, it isn’t reformable. End of debate!!
valster -Bush approved 100 million federal funding for embryonic stem cell research in 2001-06 and 250 million for research on adult and animal stem cells. Again, the restriction is only on a situation where you kill the human embryo to get the stem cells.
In 2006, Bush vetoed the HR 810 bill, that was seeking to overturn Clinton’s act that made it illegal for federal funds to be used in stem cell research where you had to kill the embryo.
You can google http..and then, stemcells dot nih dot gov
You’ll come up with the US National Institutes of Health for Stem Cell Research. Then check out Read the Eligibility Criteria (for funding). You’ll find that you are completely and totally wrong.
bzloki writes, “I’m not willing to die over it [biblical injunctions], thats forsure.”
Well willing or not, bzloki, you may well die over it. Not because Christians are out to get you but because Muslim fanatics disapprove–with some justification (our slack morals)–of the fact that the Western world is non-Muslim and they believe they have the duty to vanquish us.
So, even if you’re not Christian, you’re part of the dispensation the Muslim fanatics feel compelled to subdue. Too bad, eh? (But don’t blame the Christians.)
“Christianity is quietly killing thousands of people daily…..the Vatigan’s middle ages stand against the use of condoms is wiping out countless Africans,…” by valster
Right, and I guess it has nothing to do with these Africans having sex with multiple partners, which is okay, right? If the Vatigan is speaking to Christians within their fold, it should be unlikely these Christians are having multiple sexual partners, and I would think the non-Christians could give a rat’s ass what the Vatican thinks. I know many Catholics, and they all have a mind of their own, and if they want to use condoms, they will, with or without the Vatican’s blessing.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L01594991.htm
“The Vatican on Monday issued a strong defence of its controversial position against condoms, saying fidelity, chastity and abstinence were the best ways to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS in a “pan-sexualist society.”
Lookout – actually, your context wasn’t clear. When you referred to useful idiots will be among the first ones to be steamrollered by “that nice group of Muslims who just wanted to be our friends”.. It’s unlikely that a handful of scholars would steamroll anything, so it came across as a generic reference to all Muslims.
It’s no more appropriate to fail to differentiate between these religious scholars and Hamas thugs than it is to fail to differentiate between Iraqi Muslim soldiers and al-Qaeda terrorists.
It’s impossible think critically 100% of the time.
Although, we should all do our best to do so.
I suggested I would rather think critically than be humble, if you want to get specific.
If it makes you feel better, I am in the process of examining all religions, and will continue too untill I die.
You also suggest I oppose christianity. Which is wrong, I think anyone has the right to practice it if they choose. I think of religions as private clubs… that get a break from TAXES.
Sure, I opppose the belief in an omnipotent being that controls my destiney. That’s against my religion!
I won’t kill over it though, or even get mad if you disagree.
sorry for my speling arrrrors.
i suck.
Belisarius,
I agree with Robert Spencer. We might agree yet.
ET,
“Right, irwin daisy – my point is that your conclusions have rendered any debate about Islam impossible.”
Well, then say uncle.
“Don’t try to divert the issue – to asking me about ‘who are you as moderator’.”
As bright as you may be, you unfortunately display a pompous attitude at times. Further, your accusation is absurd.
“The issue is that your conclusion about Islam is that it is basically violent, that it is unreformable, that all Muslim immigration should be stopped. You’ve made these points before. Many times.”
Actually, no. I have said that it is only reformable if the commands and rewards for perpetual violence are edited out of the Quran and Mohammad, as the one to emulate, is permanently excluded. Otherwise, the violence problem is chronic.
Until then, if ever, yes Muslim immigration must be stopped. It is without benefit to the host culture. On the contrary, it is suicidal.
“So, why are you yet again, posting them on a blog, a site which is by nature a domain of debate, when your conclusions are not open to debate?”
My conclusions are fact. Not speculation, or in your case, opinion. If a counter argument is made based on fact, then I suppose we have a debate.
“You reject any concept that, as a man-made entity, Islam is by that nature, reformable.”
From what I understand, Muslims don’t believe their religion is “man-made”, so therefore your opinion is moot.
ET…seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)needs to be saved at the cost of the potential of curing millions of people of any disease or injury…..Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture
ET…seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)needs to be saved at the cost of the potential of curing millions of people of any disease or injury…..Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture
Posted by: valster
If you’re trying to convince everyone you’re an idiot you can stop now.
bzloki, you sound like a nice person. But you’re very glib.
Of course, you won’t get mad if people disagree with your religious position: you’ve invested nothing in it: easy come, easy go. Poor you.
Re the tax bit. Imagine society without churches (your imagination is probably hindered in this regard by lack of knowledge or experience): the abundance of community activities and services is HUGE, and often provided “for free” because of the free will offerings of the congregants of church COMMUNITIES.
People of all ages, backgrounds, and abilities, and from all walks of life join together: they give and receive all kinds of benefits, material, artistic, emotional, spiritual, etc. The state is unable to provide this kind of experience or support, and, ALL of society, either directly or as a spin off, benefits from the multitude of goods provided by faith communities (at a fraction of the cost of government-run programs). E.g., I know of one young man from a single parent family, who received a classical music education–for free–and male mentoring at his church. He’s now a graduate of a major Ivy League university and making his living as a singer in Europe. This is just one of millions of examples of largesse and grace provided by churches.
You have a right to your opinions, bzloki, but they’re often so embryonic that I think humility–a trait you’ve said you’re averse to–might be a quality you should consider cultivating.
Not all religions are equal. Neither are opinions.
appollyon…At least I’m open minded….as opposed to you….but I’m enjoying the Christian love that you’re sharing….want to date?
appollyon…At least I’m open minded….
You have such an open mind your brain has fallen out. You’re a fool but the fool is always last to know.
You’re so tolerant of free speech that you and your demented retrograde leftist ilk throw pies in the faces of Conservative speakers at college campuses. The tolerant little wannabe fascists.
valster,
What moral imperative gives you the ability to make that distinction?
Furthermore, Bush is a universalist, by his own admission.
appolyon…keep up the good work…you’re converting us by the millions!…Christian you say ?…..sorry you would NOT be welcome in the Christian church I attend…but hey you have a good day eh?
Atheism is a death cult. Charles Darwin would take one look at the Musilm birth rate and a look at the atheist birth rate and conclude, correctly, that Muslims are superior to atheists, and that atheists and their societies perish and are QUANTIFIABLY AND MEASURABLY unsustainable because they are inferior.
Inferior. Get that? Inferior.
You atheists are always running your mouths off about science: HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT SCIENCE??????? HOW DO YOU LIKE BEING QUANTIFIABLY INFERIOR YOU LOW SPERM COUNT SHE-MALES??????????????
valster, I’m a Jew.
The only “church” that you attend is in your basement with your propeller beanie and diaper wearing friends taking shots of cough medicine trying to get a buzz.
Andrew,
Admit yourself while there’s still time.
appolyon…I love you too
you’re converting us by the millions!
Um, stupid, I’m not here to convert anyone, I’m here to voice my opinion like everyone else. It bothers you that Conservatives have a voice, doesn’t it you little fascist?
I am all for peace with the muslims. But first,they have to go a year without blowing the shit out of innocent people of any religion before thier proposal should even be given a second thought.They cannot get along with different sects of muslims,does anyone really think that da joos or any other religion or absence of religion will be tolerated? there is a website called thereligionofpeace.com that gives a daily update on thier peace-loving ways. I suggest that any who would consider them to be just like the rest of the world to check it out.
appolyon sweetie: my opinion…You’re in here because you can”t get a job… or a life
valster, unlike you who runs to the mail box hoping the welfare check arrived, I’m self-employed and have been since 2004. Ive had two businesses before the age of 30.
Sorry loser, and I’m not hiring.
“YOU LOW SPERM COUNT SHE-MALE!!”
Oh, andrew, how could you tell the world! Folks, this is nothing but sublimated anger aimed at me. The sordid truth is that andrew and i have being trying to have a child…so far, no luck, i’ve been keeping my cell phone in my pants pocket.
Apollyon,
A suggestion:
Don’t argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Astounding how the discussion degenerated into nothing but arguments in moral equivalence between the morning and the afternoon.
Islam as practiced and preached for the last 1400 years the little paranoid Mohamed’s cult has pursued the destruction of civilization and the builders of civilization.
Nothing has changed for them … the goal of destruction in the name of God is the only end of Islam ….. there is nothing to discuss.
Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture
valster – you need to return to the dark underside of your rock, human embryos trump research animals when assigned ethical considerations unless you can’t figure out in the hierarchy where to place yourself above an amoeba. And, you stupid putz, trust me, no one is mourning the monkeys that died in the cause of curing polio worldwide. There is nothing noble is protecting animals above humans. It’s sheer Darwin Award stupidity.
The front page of your national newspaper features a galling attack on Christians in your own country, and you’re still on about Muslims in countries twelve time zones away?
Andrew – it’s real obvious you’ve got mommy issues. Kate can’t be held accountable, she’s not omniscient, for tracking the MSM before she posts. Your whine and bogus strawman is kind of stupid, isn’t it. Oh, and, potty mouthed responses subtract from IQ points. So, you aren’t looking real bright, Andrew.
Don’t argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Very well put Irwin; I’m done with the ignoramus.
Apollyon: 10! valster: 0. Not a sustained thesis from this toddler anywhere on this thread.
As I said, not all opinions are equal.
valster, I’m still waiting for you to comment on my rebuttal of your moronic views about Christianity and moral high ground on this thread. (Psst . . . If you have nothing intelligent to say, I understand. ‘Just let us know and then I’d actually PREFER to hear nothing from you.)
May your God be with you….you so obviously need Him/Her…keep spreading the love in your little blinkered dark little world…and oh yes…have a real good day….morons
valster, I’m still waiting for you to comment on my rebuttal of your moronic views about Christianity and moral high ground on this thread.
Lookout, don’t hold your breath for anything substantive to come from valsters scribblings. Lowlife ingrates like this have no credibility especially when they make such contradictory statements, [of course when you’re lying about everything you say consistency is the least of you concerns]:
seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)…….The Village Idiot
…in the Christian church I attend….The Village Idiot
That must be some church that preaches this babble.
Again, andrew – you aren’t being factual or logical.
Darwin referred only to biological properties. A belief system is not a biological property. Therefore, you can’t, factually or logically, compare atheism with any religion, and claim that that belief system had anything to do with its capacity to survive.
No, the religion of a society has nothing to do with its sustainability as a society. What counts, far more, is its economic and political capacity to sustain its population. And that sustainability also includes an acknowledgment of the constraints and resources, of its biome.
The reason I, as an atheist, promote science, is because its conclusions rest on facts and reason. Not personal opinions.
Also, birth rate doesn’t translate into survival rate. I’m sure you know that a turtle lays thousands of eggs, but only a few survive to adulthood. Have you ever noticed the number of seeds, eg acorns, etc, from various trees? Do all of them become trees?
valster – try to be consistent. Your original complaint was that Bush wasn’t funding stem cell research. You yourself stated that it could “be the breakthrough in saving millions of lives”. Then, when I showed you that Bush WAS funding stem cell research, you are now arguing for a particular type that requires embryonic death, with the utterly stupid argument that an embryo is ‘tiny’. The fact is, valster, that an embryo, unlike your false analogy of the fly, doesn’t remain that way but right from the start, is programmed to develop. You don’t seem to know that. I suggest a few beginner books on biology.
irwin daisy- I maintain that your claim that Muslims reject change is wrong. The journal I pointed out, has Islamic scholars openly claiming that the Koran requires interpretation and this act of interpretation opens the text up to change. You reject this – and you aren’t a Muslim scholar. Your opinions are not facts but opinions. I don’t think that you give any credence to those Muslims who are attempting to reform and change Islam – because, you, who are not a Muslim, declare that it is ‘unreformable’. That has to be an opinion; not a fact.
Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact. I have a different opinion; equally, it cannot be a fact. Neither you nor I can, factually, make the claim that immigration of Muslims will harm/not harm us. You have not provided us with any facts that Muslim immigration to Canada is ‘without benefit’ and is ‘suicidal’ (to the host culture). These are your opinions; not facts.
I don’t have time to thoroughly catch up, but I’d like to offer a few things.
1) I spent a little time in philosophy and agree that a lot of it is pretty useless. (the comedienne Joan Rivers said once, “I majored in philosophy, so I can go to the butcher and prove to him that the meat doesn’t exist.)
Still, some useful things came out of it, and one of them would be that Muslims would necessarily have to define what they meant by “God”, and Christians would have to define what they mean by “God” before any conversation could possibly take place.
I could dig out one of my theology textbooks and the word “God” would sound very different than most would imagine.
2) Both Christianity and Islam have a problem with who is the bona fide agent that can speak for the religion as a whole.
Dietrich Bonhoffer, the famous Protestant theologian who went to his death for conspiring against the Nazis, was a Protestant who was well thought of by Catholics.
Because he also raised the issue of “who speaks for Christianity.” Obviously, the Pope speaks for a huge segment of Christianity, but the Pope does not speak for Protestantism.
Still, Catholics and Protestants on the theological level are not conspicuously different. (Remember, Martin Luther was himself a priest.) And so it would be possible to get a dozen or so people together who more or less speak for Christianity. The Pope, head of the Southern Baptist Convention, Archbishop of Canterbury, the patriarch of the Easter Orthodox communions, the head of the Presbyterians, Methodists, one or more spokesmen for evangelical Christians…
But who can speak for Islam? Every imam with a loud mouth can bloviate, and as a consequence, you can’t really round up a small aggregate of people who can speak for the religion. Furthermore, all the imams could say something, and radical Islam may pay less attention to them than they do to the Pope.
3) Who speaks for ET? A lot of people in the West have no religious affiliation. Islam is not at war with Christianity. Islam is at war with a bunch of nations that are largely derivative of Judeo-Christian-Greco philosophical traditions.
So every Christian leader can say, “Sure, we’ll talk with you.” And Western governments might very well keep shooting at them, because Islam is at war with governments, not religious leaders.
This demonstrates how completely naive Islam is in respect to understanding the western world.
4) Islam is probably too psychologically immature to deal with the psychological maturity that Judeo-Christian-Greco thought has achieved. Islam has projected “the evil other” onto Western society and does not realize that psychologically they are seeing a quality that they possess and suppress in someone else. Kind of like someone with a phobia of spiders sees a terrifying spectre in a harmless creature.
All of their suppressed values regarding sin and eros are things that they see in us because they are completely unconscious on the level of their egos with their own capacity and desire for what they see in us.
They would have to somehow achieve some great feat of maturity and psychological awareness before the dialogue between us could start to make sense to them.
vester@713…that’s very noble of you wanting to save ‘millions’…but there is no proof that embryonic cells are necessary for the ‘miracles’ you would promote.Funny how people who don’t want to believe in God would try to do god-like acts. There are stem cells available from other sources.
And ET is right about George Bush investing in stem cell research…so wow you agree with Bush . Does that make you feel better now?
Like some others here, I am curious as to which Christian denomination vester belongs to.
The level of venom and invictive is totally shocking … and I’m a hard person to shock.
In God I trust … the hateful vester I don’t.
valster – try to be consistent. Your original complaint was that Bush wasn’t funding stem cell research. You yourself stated that it could “be the breakthrough in saving millions of lives”. Then, when I showed you that Bush WAS funding stem cell research, you are now arguing for a particular type that requires embryonic death, with the utterly stupid argument that an embryo is ‘tiny’. The fact is, valster, that an embryo, unlike your false analogy of the fly, doesn’t remain that way but right from the start, is programmed to develop. You don’t seem to know that. I suggest a few beginner books on biology.
ET, to add to your points here……….
Valster The Idiot, almost without exception all strides and advancements in stem cell research has come from ADULT stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells have had negative effects and all funding has been steered towards ADULT stem cell research because that’s where the positive results are. You know why the liberal puppet masters peddle this trash? To financially strenghten the abortion Billion do
Secondly ignoramus, Bush did not ban funding for embryonic stem cell research, he banned TAX PAYER dollars from being used. If you and your welfare lefties want to fund this research you are free to do so. With that said, there has been money [tax payer $$] put towards embryonic research by the federal govt.
***To financially [strengthen] the abortion Billion do[llar industry].
Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact. I have a different opinion; equally, it cannot be a fact. Neither you nor I can, factually, make the claim that immigration of Muslims will harm/not harm us. You have not provided us with any facts that Muslim immigration to Canada is ‘without benefit’ and is ‘suicidal’ (to the host culture). These are your opinions; not facts.
ET, you merely have to look to the test case in France; the north African muslims are not assimilating, they’re rioting and demanding handouts. Hyper-multiculturalism has been an unmitigated disaster.
This demonstrates how completely naive Islam is in respect to understanding the western world………Greg
I would say it is naïve to say Islam is particularly interested in understanding the various denominations of Christianity. Walk into Saudi Arabia with a Bible and they’ll tell you what they think, of course if you’re a Jew you’re not allowed to enter.
Islam is not at war with Christianity…….Greg
Do you think the jihadists would be at war with the West if we were Islamic? Islam is trying to impose itself on the West and their cohorts in seditious anti-Christian organizations like the ACLU will see to it that they get their way.
Well said, Greg in Dallas.
The Muslims are connected through Arab cultural imperialism. The (now so-called) Arabs connect themselves through Mohammad. Mohammad connected himself through Ishmael.
Ishamel was a bastard. And born of an Egyptian. Not an Arab.
Muslims, in attempting to legitimize themselves through Islam are necessarily paranoid.
Therefore, supremacy is the result, rather than reconciliation.
———————
“irwin daisy- I maintain that your claim that Muslims reject change is wrong.”
Some do embrace change. Although, they’re usually called apostates.
“The journal I pointed out, has Islamic scholars openly claiming that the Koran requires interpretation and this act of interpretation opens the text up to change.”
I admit. I have not read this journal. The problem that I have is that it seems every imam is called a scholar. I don’t think they have the same definition of the word as we do. Especially given some of the stuff in their religious writing.
“You reject this – and you aren’t a Muslim scholar.”
Don’t think you can be, unless you’re a Muslim imam, in their opinion.
“Your opinions are not facts but opinions.”
You’re becoming boring. Prove me wrong, as I’ve challenged you ad infinitum.
“I don’t think that you give any credence to those Muslims who are attempting to reform and change Islam – because, you, who are not a Muslim, declare that it is ‘unreformable’. That has to be an opinion; not a fact.”
Do I really need to state the facts again?
Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact.
This is true. It is my opinion, based on what I gleen from history.
Although, I might be wrong the double bastard bit:
‘Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, bore him no children. She had an Egyptian slave girl whose name was Hagar, and Sarai said to Abram, “You see that the Lord has prevented me from bearing children; go in to my slave girl; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her slave girl, and gave her to her husband Abram as a wife. He went in to Hagar, and she conceived. . . .
And the angel of the Lord said to Hagar, “Now you have conceived and will bear a son; you shall call him Ishmael, for the Lord has given heed to your affliction. He will be a wild donkey of a man, with his hand against everyone, and everyone’s hand against him; and he will live at odds with all his kin.”
apollyon. I don’t know what hyper-multiculturalism means.
I was referring to Canada and immigration to Canada.
As far as France and its Muslim immigrants, the problems there are far more complex than simply assuming that the religion is causal. Causality has to include the fact that the French society has isolated these immigrants economically and socially, rather than insisted on integration. As impoverished dead end enclaves – they’ve turned to a fascist Islam.
Irwin daisy- my view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. Just like yours is an opinion and not a fact. I cannot prove your opinion wrong or right – because it has not moved into facticity. That is, your claim that immigration is without benefit to the host culture and is suicidal – is an opinion. With regard to Canada – is your claim factually valid?
I suggest that you might want to consider that not all Arab scholars are imams – and that some of them are trying very hard to enable Islam to reform. Again – I suggest that you take a look at that journal. I think you are from Toronto; you can find it in the Reference Room of the Robarts Library; 4th floor; and you don’t need a library card to access that Journals Room.
greg in dallas – very nice post. I’ve done a reasonable amount of philosophy; I’m a fan of Aristotle and Charles Peirce and find their work extremely useful in thinking about modern day realities.
I agree that Islam is psychologically immature but I’d rather say it is economically immature. Remember, Islam is heavily a sociopolitical and economic mode, defined as a religion. I won’t go into my outline of its origins within a pastoral nomadic reaction to the expansion of agricultural Christianity (within the Roman empire) of the 5th, 6th, 7th c into the Arabian Peninsula.
Nor, the current Islamic fascism, which is a result of the political tribalism of the ME states.
And I agree – Islam is not at war with Christianity; that War of Cultures/Religions is a diversion; the real problem is within the ME states.
; Islamic fascism is an externalization of its internal problem – which is the dysfunctional tribalism that has frozen the Arab states into a medieval mode of governance. The ME states, as industrial, require a middle class, and tribalism rejects a middle class. The war against the West is an externalization of this internal war – and the US was absolutely right to move it back into the ME. That’s where Islamism and tribalism have to be confronted and dealt with.