Muslims: Can Islam co-exist with any other world religion?

I’m not interested in examples of where Islam has co-existed with another world religion in the past or even where it is currently co-existing with one or more religions today. The reasons for that co-existence may simply be that Islam did not have sufficient strength to overcome its rivals.

No, what I want to know is whether Islam theoretically can peacefully co-exist with non-Islamic religions even when it has the power to snuff them out.

Put another way, if you are a Muslim, and you had the means to bring an end to every religion on earth except Islam, would you choose to do so if this required conversion by force of those who did not wish to accept Islam voluntarily?

For one opinion: crisismagazine.com/2014/time-take-islamic-state-seriously

-From what I understand of Islam, any such peaceful co-existence would have to be based on a) Islam being the dominate party and b)such co-existence is based on a “keeping the peace” situation while the other faiths slowly die out.
-While I agree with Father’s overall conclusion (short answer- no), there is a lot left to be desired in his reasoning behind this conclusion and his supporting evidence.
-Why exactly did you cite Father’s opinion piece (which he admits is just an opinion piece in the article) instead of citing the opinion of a scholar of Islamic theology (preferably a Muslim scholar since your asking for Muslim opinions)?

Islam has the category of dhimmī in an Islamic state. A dhimmī in Classical Islamic law is a non-Muslim in an Islamic state who pays a tribute called the Jizya, so Islam clearly has a concept of coexisting with people of other religions.

Yes, with said co-existence based upon Islam being the dominate faith and the non-Islamic faiths being the subjugated ones. The reverse of this situation is not allowed/or allowed only until it can be reversed under Islamic teachings. Islam has to be the dominate party for any co-existence with other faiths under Islamic teachings. This is not just co-existence, which is what I assume the OP is referring to in his query.

Are you making the claim that Islam teaches Muslims must wage Jihad against non-Muslims to bring them under Muslim rule?

Can you give any direct evidence that shows that Islam teaches this?

In my opinion, the answer is no.

They can’t even co-exist with their own kind.

Look at all the killings amongst them going on right now!!

The Islamic world is waiting for Isa to return and to break the cross, kill all swine & destroy Christianity and all other world religions and proclaim that Islam is the truth and and the entire human race on the globe will all be muslims practicing Islam.

You mean outside of the fact that the basis for Dhimmi is non-Muslims being somewhat free to practice their faiths as long as they pay a special tax and acknowledge Muslim rule?

If co-existence with your own is criteria, then that would also count out Christianity.

This has only been true in a handful of Christian cases such as Anglican vs Catholic around the time of the ‘reformation,’ and Protestant vs Catholic in Ireland. Beyond these isolated examples, Christian groups have generally existed peacefully. This is not the case for Islam, however, which seems to operate off of a sort of tribal mentality, where one tribe routinely engages in acts of violence against other tribes. This is readily apparent in most Islamic countries in the form of Sunni vs Shiite Islams.

-So Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics have always had a buddy buddy relationship?
-Is the “one tribe routinely engaging in acts of violence against other tribes” due to Islam or due to tribal culture?

Have Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox cultures ever engaged in cultural genocide against each other? (Despite the snarky word combination, this is a genuine question. I am unaware of any instances of this, if I’m wrong please correct me.)

As for the question of if it’s Islam or tribal nature, I’m not sure. I suppose it could be argued from both sides rather effectively. The reason I’m more apt to believe that it’s Islam is that many of the areas that Islam invaded were not tribal at the time of the invasion, but have since become more tribal. I’m not super well versed in the Islamic portion of history in most Islamic areas, so I can’t speak to it definitively, but the Imam system seems similar in nature to Protestantism, in that people chose an Imam to follow based on their opinions of the faith. This sort of setup seems much more likely to breed a type of tribalism than Catholicism. Combine that with the more violent nature of Islamic teaching and you’d get something like what we’re seeing today.

So… I guess my answer to the second part is that Islam feeds a triablistic social structure, which makes acts of tribal genocide more likely… I hope that makes sense.

-Review the history of Eastern Europe-Russia, especially the Baltic region and the Teutonic Knights. Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics have not had a good relationship and there have been atrocities committed that have used the faith as justification for them.
-My view is that the tribal nature is a mixture of both. Tribalism and tribal/ethnic based conflict is the bane of all faiths; and Islam itself incorporates tribalism within its teachings (Muhammad and early Muslims were from a tribe based society). The problem is trying to accurately classify a conflict as being produced/encouraged/allowed from Islamic teachings or from the nature of the culture it is taking place in and Islam has just been tacked on as justification by one side or the other.

I don’t see what the problem is. How does non-Muslims having a protected status in Muslim countries equate to “…Islam being the dominate faith and the non-Islamic faiths being the subjugated ones.”?

Are you claiming that Islam teaches that all non-Muslim countries need to be conquered or something?

Hardly - Wars of Christians again Christian are legion in number and there are still quite a few contemporary examples we could cite.

That pretty much sums it up.

In addition to OldCatholicguys example look up the Ustase for a more contemporary example of Catholicism been perverted to serve an evil goal, that goal benen the forced conversion of hundreds of thousands of Orthodox and the killing of hundreds of thousands of others.

-A non-Muslim (and here it’s not all non-Muslims) only receives a protected status if he a) acknowledges Muslim rule b) abides by certain laws that only apply to non-Muslims c) pays for the right to be protected.
-Short answer is yes to the conquering the world part. There are different schools of thought on how the world is to be conquered, but the conquering the world part is a fundamental part of Islamic teachings. Hence the division of the world into different houses, the need for non-Muslims wishing to be protected to acknowledge Muslim rule, and the religious and public restrictions placed on “protected” non-Muslims (once again not every non-Muslim qualifies for dhimmi status even if he/she wanted it).

Amen! And, there is no central authority in Islam, thus the fragments are absolutely free to exercise their own interpretation of how Islam is to be spread. The anniversary of the battle of Lepanto is recently past. A sobering read, given the current situation. Turkish Muslims sought to invade the west when Christianity was weakened by corruption and the reformation. We can learn from this, if we will.

Some Serbian Orthodox accuse the Ustase in Croatia during WWII of something like this. They point to the various speeches given by the Ustase and the concentration camp at Jasenovac where a supposed Catholic clergyman Miroslav Filipovic and other Ustase sympathizers are alleged to have tortured and murdered Serbian Orthodox prisoners.
And of course, there was the fourth crusade where Roman Catholic soldiers raped Greek Orthodox nuns and looted the Greek Orthodox Churches.

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