Posted on 03/05/2015 10:22:56 AM PST by NYer
Some time ago I posted on Facebook this criticism of that ubiquitous “Coexist” bumper sticker with the comment, “I need this in magnet form for my car.”
A friend (who, I believe, identifies as atheist/agnostic) replied, “I don’t agree that Muslims are out to get everyone else. I find that suggestion pretty offensive actually.” Upon deeper reflection, my response would be as follows:
I don’t believe that all Muslims “are out to get everyone else.” I would not presume to speak for every single person on the planet who identifies as a Muslim. I do believe, however, that some Muslims are out to get everyone else (if “everyone else” is defined as “everyone who doesn’t follow the ways they consider to be correct”).
The response I most often hear when I express my concern is either that (a) Islam is a religion of peace and does not promote violence, and/or (b) only extremist Muslims believe that non-believers should be killed.
However, the problem with this viewpoint is that Islam is only a religion of peace depending on who is doing the interpreting. Unlike Catholicism, there is no pope in Islam. There is no one person a Muslim can point to and say, “This is the definitive teaching of Islam. Anyone who does not hold to this teaching is not in conformity with the Islamic faith; they are practicing something different.”
A few years ago, President Obama spoke at St. Xavier’s College in Mumbai, and was asked for his take on jihad. Obama replied that jihad “has different meanings in Islam and is subject to different interpretations.”
The President is absolutely correct. In fact, there’s no shortage of differing opinions and interpretations on this subject. The page on the Islamic concept of tattarrus – the killing of non-combatants – at ReligiousTolerance.org acknowledges that “Opinion appears to be divided among Muslim commentators and theologians. Fatwas (religious rulings by qualified Muslim clerics) differ.”
The site recognizes that a similar difference of opinion exists regarding jihad. While it’s quick to list the passages of the Qur’an that promote peace and forgiveness, it fails to address more problematic passages, such as ones discussed in the Catholic Answers article Endless Jihad: The Truth about Islam and Violence:
The attitude of Islam toward using violence against non-Muslims is clear. Regarding pagans, the Quran says, “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful” (Surah 9:5). This amounts to giving pagans a convert-or-die choice.
Regarding violence against Jews and Christians, the Quran says, “Fight against those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe in neither God nor the last day, who do not forbid what God and his messenger have forbidden, and who do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued” (Surah 9:29). In other words, violence is to be used against Jews and Christians unless they are willing to pay a special tax and live in subjection to Muslims as second-class citizens. For them the choice is convert, die, or live in subjection.
The Quran also has stern words for Muslims who would be slow and reluctant to attack unbelievers: “Believers, why is it that when you are told: ‘March in the cause of God,’ you linger slothfully in the land? Are you content with this life in preference to the life to come? . . . If you do not go to war, he [God] will punish you sternly, and will replace you by other men” (Surah 9:38-39).
And, of course, there is the promise of reward in the afterlife for waging jihad in this one: “Believers! Shall I point out to you a profitable course that will save you from a woeful scourge? Have faith in God and his messenger, and fight for God’s cause with your wealth and with your persons. . . . He will forgive you your sins and admit you to gardens watered by running streams; he will lodge you in pleasant mansions in the gardens of Eden. This is the supreme triumph” (Surah 61:10-12).
David French, in an article at Patheos.com, writes that there is no “true Islam.” So how can anyone, myself included, definitively say that “Muslims think so-and-so,” or “Islam teaches X and not Y” when it’s all open to individual interpretation? A Muslim can interpret the Qur’an to say that it’s acceptable to kill non-Muslims, or that it’s unacceptable to kill non-Muslims, and there’s no ultimate authority to tell that person, “No, your interpretation is wrong and is not a reflection of true Islamic teaching.”
Going back to the “Coexist” refutation, I don’t believe that the author’s intent was to say that every single Muslim on the planet would eradicate all non-Muslims if given the chance. The difficulty lies in that enough of them do (e.g., ISIS, Al Qaeda) to make peaceful “coexistence” a pipe dream.
He’s wearing a pin,,
how nice.
In countries with moslem majorities (or even a critical mass of a minority of moslems), the interpretation of islam is stricter than elsewhere. In other words, most of the moslems in the most islamic countries do, actually, pretty much want to kill us all, or at the very least, make us all dhimmis.
Islam must be destroyed.
Catholics will need to answer that for themselves.
Catholics neither propose nor need to answer that question.
As shown in the quote you posted from the Catechism, the only question we propose to answer is that they (1) profess to worship the God of Abraham and (2) do indeed worship the one, true God. From that point on, great saints such as JPII have said such as the following:
Whoever knows the Old and New Testaments, and then reads the Koran, clearly sees the process by which it completely reduces Divine Revelation. It is impossible not to note the movement away from what God said about Himself, first in the Old Testament through the Prophets, and then finally in the New Testament through His Son. In Islam all the richness of God's self-revelation, which constitutes the heritage of the Old and New Testaments, has definitely been set aside. Some of the most beautiful names in the human language are given to the God of the Koran, but He is ultimately a God outside of the World, a God who is only Majesty, never Emmanuel, God-with-us. Islam is not a religion of redemption. There is no room for the Cross and the Resurrection(p. 92).
Eagleone posted a helpful link on this same issue before and I'll post it here for anyone who is interested in the Catholic view on this issue:
http://www.catholic.com/blog/tim-staples/do-muslims-worship-the-same-god-catholics-do
An excerpt:
Thus, we Catholics have to be careful to distinguish between the fact that Muslims believe in the one true God “living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,” and the fact that they get it wrong—profoundly wrong—when it comes to both who God has revealed himself to be in the New Testament, and what he has taught his people.
“Thus, we Catholics have to be careful to distinguish between the fact that Muslims believe in the one true God “living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,” and the fact that they get it wrong—profoundly wrong—when it comes to both who God has revealed himself to be in the New Testament, and what he has taught his people.”
Thus meaning in other words, there are way, way too many differences to claim it is the same God when it makes for two different God(s).
From there, there is not much we agree on, as suggested by the fact that the catechism's list, starts with Catholics (837), then other Christians (The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist" (838), then the Jews "the first to hear the Word of God" (839 and 840) then the Muslims as the first example of non-Christians and non-Jews who "acknowledge the Creator" (841) and that comes right before 842 which summarizes the rest of the non-Christian religions before adding:
844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:
Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.
Which I think answers the intial question you asked pretty well.
You really need to educate yourself on what pre-Vatican II popes and saints had to say about the diabolical sect of Mohammed/Islam and Muslims. Very different than what JPII had to say.
Anyone who believes that does NOT know the God of scripture.
And, once again, SStuff,DD... (((yawn)))
I don’t think there is a pope in Christianity, either.
“And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.”
Dear JoAnna Wahlund,
“Going back to the “Coexist” refutation, I don’t believe that the author’s intent was to say that every single Muslim on the planet would eradicate all non-Muslims if given the chance.”
This is precisely what the 12er Shiite sect in Iran believes, and why they as many nuclear weapons as possible for use against the non-believers, the Great and Little Satans, and Rome. They believe that mass blood will bring the 12th Imam out of the well he climbed into centuries ago; he will smell the scent of that blood, emerge and lead all of humanity to Paradise (aka extinction).
The Sunni, on the other hand, will leave alive only those non-muslims who are willing to be dhimmis or those wealthy enough to pay the non-Muslim poll tax. All others will be killed.
All muslims not willing to go along with either overall plan will be considered apostates and killed. So if there is some “peaceful” muslim lurking in some dark alley, he will be found and will either follow the plan or be killed. Therefore and ultimately, your attempt to defend Islam is misleading at best, taqiyya at best because it is correct to say that “every single Muslim on the planet would eradicate all non-Muslims if given the chance.”
So the male person who raised you. What did you call him?
When you introduced the male person who raised you did you ever say “I’d like you to meet my father”?
OR did you substitute something else?
Please don’t try to read my mind; you don’t know whether I have already educated myself on their writings and statements on this issue. If you have particular examples you’d like to highlight, that’s what this forum is for, but please don’t suggest that a fellow freeper is not educated.
Fair enough. Have you? And if you have, please explain how you come to the conclusion that what JPII had to say about Islam and Muslims agrees with what pre-Vatican II popes and saints had to say.
Incorrect. I stated no such conclusion.
Based on an out-of-context quote from the Catechism, which was released long after Vatican II, a commenter accused the Catholic Church of somehow being responsible for explaining divergent views of killing in Islam. In response, I put the Catechism reference in context in a manner which negated his or her claim, using the Catechism and contemporaneous staements by JPII.
If you would like to suggest a new and different topic for discussion, i.e. comparing current catholic teaching on this issue with the teaching of the Church before Vatican II, that sounds like a great idea. But I'd like to see you start the research since you suggested the topic.
I now see what your focus was in your original post. I thought the commenter was making a different point to begin with; therefore I totally missed it. Mea Culpa.
haha, indeed. And visit Photoshop so you can put a pot on his head or a rag on it or something that makes us laugh a bit.
Allah = SATAN.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.