Weep for slaughtered Christians, not for dialogue with Islam

Hey everyone. I came across this interesting article by the Catholic Culture website. I thought I would post it here for discussion.

Faced with the savage violence of the Islamic State (ISIS), Christians can be tempted toward two unhelpful emotional reactions.

On one extreme is the thirst for vengeance. If Muslims extremists kill innocent Christians, intemperate voices suggest that we should kill innocent Muslims. Then we, too, would be terrorists. I trust that rational readers recognize the problem here.

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1049

I can’t really think of a comment to post right now so I will wait for others to post their comments and thoughts on the article before I choose to chime in.

The ISIS is killing ALOT more faithful, innocent Muslims than Christians right now, but we only hear about the Christians because we are largely a Christian country.

To put this in perspective, imagine if we Catholics had some kind of a “Catholic extremist group” form in the United States that made up their own rules and rejected all the Vatican II teachings completely. Imagine this pretend Catholic extremist group going out and beheading all Jews, Protestants, and any Catholics who followed the Catholic Church’s teachings according to Vatican II. This is what is happening in the middle east. This extremist group is killing almost EVERYONE. By hating ALL Muslims, we are only contributing to the problems, not helping the situation. This was the point of the article you read.

I would like to know where all the " peaceful , " " loving " Muslims are, why don’ t we hear from them? There stunning silence speaks volumes.

Linus2nd

Actually, the Muslim response to ISIS has been pretty well documented and publicized. Not only have western Muslim groups denounced this, but many middle eastern leaders and scholars have as well. Maybe it says more about you that you didn’t notice, and that you would make such disparaging statements about Muslims.

A quick google search showed many examples. Here’s an article about the leaders of some very prominent groups:

en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/07/25/worlds_muslim_leaders_condemn_attacks_on_iraqi_christians/1103410

Amen.

Quite true. It does us no good to deny that there are certain people in the community who do speak against the atrocities. We shouldn’t ignore reality, and we should accept these denouncements happily.

There is a certain inclination to deny that there are Muslims who are good people because that would seem to lend some validity to Islam as a religion. This isn’t necessarily true, as we know that God’s will is written on our hearts, and all people can know what is right and good even if they’re not a direct part of the body of Christ.

Maybe it says more about you that you didn’t notice, and that you would make such disparaging statements about Muslims.

Or, you know, it could just point to the fact that it’s rarely reported in standard media outlets…

The muslims I know and have spoken with all say something like this:

“I don’t support these terrible acts… BUT if America would stop interfering…etc.”

I have yet to encounter one who just decries terrorism without adding that it’s our fault.

That’s not a disparaging remark, it’s my personal experience.

And in Islam it only means something if the denouncing comes from the Islamic clerics. Non-Muslims care what the “scholars” say, but it means nothing to a Muslim. If Islam is a religion of peace, the majority of Muslim clerics in the world should be publicly saying that ISIS members are not true Muslims and are going to Hell if they don’t repent of their murders, rapes, and robberies. And this should also be preached in Arabic inside of the majority of mosques to Muslim congregations if it is a religion of peace. But is this happening?

The problem is that a literal reading of the Qu’ran does seem to mandate a lot of what ISIS is doing (read Surahs 9 and 49). OK, you could argue that the Old Testament contains some quite cruel things, but the difference is that the Bible is not viewed by Christians as being the literal, direct word of God, whereas the Qu’ran is viewed by Muslims as being the literal word of God, not an interpretation or something within a particular historical context, or an allegorical text. How can man interpret the literal word of God? Either Mohammed made a mistake transcribing what Allah said to him, or Allah was wrong in what he said.

That is why although some leading Muslims have criticised what ISIS are doing they are reluctant to say categorically that what ISIS are doing is evil because what they are doing does not appear to be unislamic and can be justified through a literal reading of certain parts of the Qu’ran. Innocence or guilt is determined by whether a person is a believer or an infidel. There may be a great many peaceful, good Muslims in this world, but the Qu’ran does not oppose violence in such circumstances.

I also noticed many Muslim leaders condemning ISIS, but it is too little too late. They sat there silently when terrorists were confining their killing to Jews and Christians. Now that the chickens have come home to roost, they are rightly worried. ISIS is going after the Muslims now, and the “old guard” does not like it one bit. They allowed Frankenstein’s monster to grow out of control. You can’t put this genie back in the bottle without a full-scale war.

I’m very disheartened after reading that from an influential christian site. I think the author would do well to think that there might be muslims who are just as outraged as anyone else. It will be a cold day in Hell before I apologize for things I don’t do and do not endorse, though. I’m not the least bit intimidated by ISIS and its followers or by persons who expect me to defend ISIS.

It’s not going to stop me from coming here, though, nor will it stop me from allying myself with christians [and other people] in fighting against the evils of abortion, homosexuality and other things.

Nice to have you on our side Drac…“fighting against the evils of abortion, homosexuality and other things.”

But please explain this:

"God-consciousness [or ‘taqwa’] will fill the world, so all the false religions will be no more."

Does that mean that all will align themselves with Rome…under the Pope…as one Holy Catholic and Universal Church?

You’re taking that excerpt from a post I made about the End-times, the destruction of the Dajjal and the reign of Jesus [peace be upon him]. That has nothing to do with this thread; I just want to be clear about that.

…but I will respond to it anyhow. What you presented to me is a very loaded question because it assumes that the Catholic church is holy, universal and is the arbitor of spiritual truth. What makes you think I would ever say that? It would be utter sacrelidge for a muslim to attribute any of that to the Church, so no, that is not what I meant. What I meant was that when Jesus Christ [peace be upon him] returns, he will destroy the Dajjal [the false messiah] and Islam will reign supreme because Jesus Christ will proclaim Islam, just as he did in his first lifetime.

I don’t know who the pope will be at that time, but I think he’ll convert to Islam.

The problem is that the article assumes that Islam is automatically militant Islam. Although, that may have been true in the previous centuries, it was also true for much of Christendom. As Western society evolved, Christians became less willing to use force to spread doctrine. In a way, we were going back to our more pacifistic teachings. I cannot speak for Islam because I am not a Muslim but Muslims have told me that they do not want anything to do with ISIS, Hamaz or other terrorists. If they believe we can coexist why can’t we? There are countries with (mostly) peaceful coexistence like in Mindanao of the Philippines.

But there is a difference. Such violence is not commanded by Christianity. Some Christians may act in such a way, but this is not mandated and by our Faith.

The Qu’ran, on the other hand has several passages which would appear to support at least some of what ISIS is doing.

Surat 47:4 "So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command].

Surat 9:5 “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

Now it could be argued that the Old testament contains some cruel things, but the difference is that the Bible is not viewed in its entirety as the actual verbatum word of God. The Qu’ran is viewed by Muslims as being the literal word of God transcribed by his prophet. Yes, Muslims who are good, decent people (and there are a great many of them) but a literal reading of the Qu’ran means that such passages are actual commands from God.

If Muslims viewed the Qu’ran as being divinely inspired, but written by humans in their own words , then yes, such passages could be interpreted as being est within certain historical contexts, be open to interpretation etc., but everything that is written in the Qu’ran is viewed by Muslims as being the actual word of God.

I’d be interested if any of our Muslim friends who post on here could explain a way around this conundrum?

Excuse me, Drac, while weep for my fellow Christians who are being slaughtered…

The pope will not convert to Islam…but he will be happy to accept all muslims, who desire salvation, into the true Church.

And if he didn’t convert, what would happen to him?

If everyone is SOOO outraged by these recent actions, then why is the US the only nation planning something to fight back? Why does it always have to be the US? When was the last time some other nation decided to take the lead on something to fight terrorism, or really ANY kind of injustice? It doesnt always have to be the US, not imo anyway.

Let’s say that the U.S. decided to quit being the World’s superpower “police force”.

Would you be more comfortable with Russia or China taking over the job?

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.