Are most 'Conservative' Christians completely irrational?


When I first join these forums, I was an ex-Muslim who wanted to become a Catholic. But ever since I returned to Islam, I’ve been on and off these forums. I dislike arguing, because I believe it to be a sign of ignorance, but what especially puts me off conversing with people on these forums (who are essentially brick walls) is when they get hostile or passive aggressive for no reason and refuse to attempt to understand my points, or sometimes perhaps even deliberately misinterpret my points.

The reason for my last hiatus, was mostly due to someone outright refusing to read my posts, and making accusations of ‘Taqiyya’. I know that many ‘conservative’ Christians believe that ‘Taqiyya’ is a license for a Muslim to lie to non-Muslims, these ‘conservative’ Christians often make these accusations without ever providing any references. Of course, there is no point for a Muslim in explaining what ‘Taqiyya’ actually is, because these ‘conservative’ Christians already have it in their minds that the Muslims will be lying to them.

So what exactly is the point of dialogue/debate/discussion with people who believe you to be a liar no matter what? Should I assume these kinds of Christians (who ARE on these forums, mind you) to be irrational altogether?

Do you know who are the real Modernists in Islam?

Given that the Catholic Church does not have a sect called “Conservative Christians” and many of us do not have built-in biases about Muslims, I think you should just ignore anyone who acts like an impolite jerk. I’ve never heard of Taqiyya till you mention it just now. I do from time to time read comments about Muslims that to me show great bias and are just appalling, but then again I read comments (including on here) about Catholics that are also biased and appalling, so we just have to offer these things up to the Lord, ignore them and move on.


I suspect this is more an internet problem than anything else.

There have always been people who are jerks and just act like no one else is worth taking seriously. Unfortunately, they often end up being the loudest voices online.


The way I look at it I’m here for a dialogue or discussion. Debates tend to get no where. That being said most dialogues do tend to become a debate. Now which side turned it into a debate would be a debate as well. :rofl:

Anyway, I believe that what I am writing is true and to the best of my ability lines up with truth of the Catholic Church. So as far as I am concerned I don’t really care if I am considered a liar no matter what. All that is important is that I presented the truth. Whether the other person accepts it or not is not my job, that job belongs to the Holy Spirit. My job is not only to present the truth but to make sure it is out there. Every time I post, I need to remember that I am not just speaking to the person I am having a dialogue with. I am also speaking to the 1000’s of others, who might be weak in their faith, and what I say might make a difference in their faith journey.

Nope. Like I said if you believe what you say is true, the rational attitude of the other person should have no bearing on that fact.

God Bless

PS Yes their are quite a few irrational people in this world. Common sense has gone the way of the dodo bird. If you are going to let that bother you, you might as well take a sledge hammer to your computer.


the major problem as i see it is that only one belief system is true. either the Koran or Bible is true, not both.

the Koran states an impostor died on the cross and not Jesus. the Bible declares Jesus died. the Koran states christians were deceived to believe such claims

the Koran states Jesus is just another prophet. the Bible declares Jesus is God

the Koran states Allah had no children. the Bible declares Jesus is the son of God

the Koran states gabriel was the messenger and not God. The Bible declares the Holy Spirit is God

the Koran indicates man is good and not evil. the Bible declares man is a sinner and needs salvation

the Koran has no records of any miracles; it is the miracle. the Bible records numerous miracles

you can’t believe both are true. one is false and one is true. you can’t debate these statements you have to choose which you believe and follow your conscience.

i agree with @MT1926 when a person responds to a thread the intended listener isn’t always the poster being replied to.



The world is a petty, unjust, cruel, prejudiced, angry, wicked place. All sorts of people will judge you immediately and will take joy in doing it.

I was brought into the Church in the Easter of 2014. I have been here on-and-off since late 2013 (protestant at the time). I can tell you with certainty that this forum, on average, is negatively prejudiced towards non-Catholics and you will be treated with less dignity as a result. I am truly sorry for that and you are right to be upset by it. When I do catch it happening, I flag it immediately. Some people stay here anyway. Some people don’t. If you do leave, I won’t blame you for doing it.

Then again, welcome to the internet. The sins on this place are small compared to almost all other websites.

For people genuinely interested in Catholicism, it is much better to read the official apologetic material here than to get involved on the forums. The forum is supplemental.


What is Taqiyya?


True. But are you of the opinion that we should ignore history?
Are you of the opinion that we should ignore their professed beliefs?

Let him explain Taqiyya to you. And then compare it to the explanations in other Muslim sites. And then look at the historical uses of Taqiyya to gain advantage against those they consider idolaters.

I have had Muslims who were trying to convert me, explain Taqiyya to me and describe it as a virtue to lie at the right time. Even as a freedom. Certainly an advantage that they believe Islam has over Christianity.

When I’ve gone to the same Muslims again, they deny they ever said such a thing.

Yeah, before I talk to a Muslim, I make sure he knows that I’m going to check everything he says.

Trust, but verify.


This forum has many uncharitable people on it, as does the entirety of the internet. I’ve been uncharitable before, as well. I’m sorry that you’ve experienced that. I stay on this forum because aside from all the intolerance and passive aggressive behavior, I have received many good answers to questions I have asked during my search.

As for debate on this forum… I don’t know if it’s worth it. I suggest seeking out a place in your life where people are not able to hide behind the internet. That’s where healthy debate is fostered best.


No. Most conservative Christians are not completely irrational.


Oh wait…“Conservative”
(There. I added the quotes.)


It depends on their theological views. I myself am a very conservative Catholic and while I do not believe any other religion is remotely correct, I do not believe that every single member of every other religion is out to get me either. A great deal of the issue stems from the order of operations for many branches of conservative theology that puts patriotism/political views first. When a Christian should have their priorities as “I will use the lens of my faith/church teaching/bible to judge my actions including to judge my political and personal beliefs to form my unbias theology” it has has more become " I will use my lens of political understanding and personal beliefs to form my faith and then will then use the faith to arrive at my own theology". The problem with latter is that it does not factor in that our political world is not inherantly Christian and it allows for extra Biblical teachings to sneak in and become part of our personal selves. We then hear and see what we want to. This makes a counter statement near impossible for someone who does not wish to hear it to accept. Its like trying to tell a sidewalk sign holder that the end of the world is not predictable because the Bible says no one will know. Their response is always the same, look at the signs we have been sent (weather, war, America no longer following God) the big three which result from confirmation bias. It is a no win and before they will never listen. They have to want to learn, much the same as the people you appear to have met.


To keep it short, Taqiyya is dissimulation when one is under threat. When one of the companions of the Prophet (S) was tortured by the disbelievers with fire, he ended up insulting Allah and the Prophet (S), was subsequently freed, and then went to the Prophet (S) and lamented. It was then revealed to the Prophet (S) that if one is forced to commit disbelief, it does not count as disbelief (Surah 16:106).

Historically speaking, it was generally Shiahs, especially Ismaili Shiahs who practiced this to avoid persecution in Sunni territories. The Templars also practiced something similar in their initiation ceremonies, new historical research has revealed that they did indeed practice spitting on Crucifixes, but not because of their rejection of Christianity, but instead to feign rejection of Christianity should they ever get captured by the Muslims.

As for “war is deceit”, that’s not Taqiyya, that’s a common war tactic throughout history.

Of course, YOU were the person I was referring to in my opening post. So, you can ignore what I say and accuse me of lying again if you wish.


Hello SalemKhan,
For me the point of dialog on the various religion forums is a means to develop my critical thinking skills. Many of us have gone through our early years being indoctrinated with some form of religious theology. Don’t concern yourself with proving someone else is wrong but view this as an opportunity to take a look at your theology.


I know.

So, you can ignore what I say and accuse me of lying again if you wish.

No need. But I would like to investigate this idea further. It seems strange to me that so many people believe it to be true and yet, Muslims now claim that it isn’t.

Is it true that Islam teaches that Muslims can lie under three circumstances?

Yes. Lying is permitted in three circumstances :

When a person mediates between two disputing parties in order to reconcile between them, if reconciliation cannot be achieved in any other way.

When a man’s speaking to his wife, or a woman speaking to her husband, with regard to matters that will strengthen the ties of love between them, even if that is accompanied by exaggeration.

lying to enemies at times of war.

As it has been explained to me, the third circumstance, “times of war”, can be interpreted to mean even an apologetical discussion. Is that true?


Yes to the first two. As for the third one, lying in times of war, again refers to war tactics/strategies. Lying in an apologetical discussion is completely counter productive and impermissable.

There is a mutawatir (mass transmitted) Hadith, which means it is 100% beyond any doubt, in which the Prophet (S) said:

Do not attribute lies to me, for anyone who attributes lies to me will be doomed to Hell-Fire


That’s self contradicting. The first one, to reconcile between parties, can be interpreted to mean an apologetical discussion.

and impermissable.

There is a mutawatir (mass transmitted) Hadith, which means it is 100% beyond any doubt, in which the Prophet (S) said:

Do not attribute lies to me, for anyone who attributes lies to me will be doomed to Hell-Fire

Is it just me? Or does that proof text seem completely unrelated to the phrase its supposed to support?


I think this is an interesting post but one does not have to take the word of a conservative Christian to believe that Muslims may lie for the sake of Islam. Muslims, who have come out of Islam say this too. Are they lying when they say it?


It doesn’t mean that, the first and second one are more or less the same thing. The second one specifies husband and wife, whereas the first one is broader. It refers to being a mediator between two conflicting parties, and lying to bring peace between them if there is no other alternative. The meaning doesn’t extend to apologetical discussions (unless you somehow intepret it that way). Especially, since the Prophet (S) and his companions didn’t engage in apologetical discussions, it’s pretty much an innovation in Islamic Tradition which occured during the late period of the Salaf al Salihin (‘the righteous predecessors’, referring to the first three generations of orthodox Muslims from 610-830 CE), going into the period of the Khalaf al Sadiqin (‘the truthful successors’, referring to the orthodox scholars from 830-1030 CE).

Is it just me? Or does that proof text seem completely unrelated to the phrase its supposed to support?

Considering your gross (perhaps even blatant) misinterpretion of the mediator between two parties, I’d say it’s just you.


No, some of us are just very hopeful and perhaps too excited to want others to know the Joy of Christ.

And then some are also jerks, it’s the internet after all.

I also don’t understand the difference between an argument and a conversation over the Internet.

My old boss was a shia muslim, though I don’t think he was practicing, he was a nice fellow, his wife was a Catholic, and his kids were either 2 buddhists and a taoist or 2 Taoists and a Buddhist.
Either way, household was a mess. They can’t all be right, and either Islam is true or Christianity is true, or Buddhism is true, etc.

I seem to remember you had some issues with a couple of things that made you believe certain dogmas were contradicted or made up by the Church. What would be a good idea is making a forum post about each issue. I believe this can be a very quick way to bring to your attention the falsehood of what you have been taught against the Church. There are many myths about us, you know!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit