Do Moslems, Christians and Jews Believe in the Same God?"

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | November 29, 2002 | Serge Trifkovic

[SJackson]

One in a series of excerpts adapted by Robert Locke from Dr. Serge Trifkovic’s new book, The Sword of the Prophet: A Politically-Incorrect Guide to Islam

One of the clichés endlessly repeated by those who would conceal the dangerous potentialities inherent in Islam is that Moslems "believe in the same God" as Christians and Jews. But this is a severe distortion of the truth, for what Moslems fundamentally believe is that they know the true nature of the God that Judaism and Christianity tell lies about. Lies for which Christians and Jews will be punished in hell. The fact that Moslems share Levantine monotheism with us thus makes them more, not less, antagonistic to us on a religious level. Hopes for reconciliation on the grounds of common monotheism, as opposed to a realistic "good fences make good neighbors" civilizational détente, are wishful thinking.

The widespread belief in the non-Muslim world that Islam accords respect to the Old Testament and the Gospels as steps in progression to Mohammad’s revelation is mistaken. Modern Muslim apologists try to stress the supposed underlying similarities and compatibility of the three faiths, but this is not the view of orthodox Islam. Muhammad’s insistence that there is a heavenly proto-Scripture and that previous "books" are merely distorted and tainted copies sent to previous nations or communities means that these scriptures are the "barbarous Koran" as opposed to the true, Arabic one. (Let’s leave aside for a minute the puzzling question of how any degree of "distortion" of the Koran could produce either an Old or a New Testament.) The Tradition also regards the non-canonical Gospel of Barnabas, and not the New Testament, as the one that Jesus taught. The Koran alone is the true word of God and sets aside all previous revelations.

While the influence of orthodox Christianity upon the Koran has been slight, apocryphal and heretical Christian legends are the second most important original source of Islam. In other words, Islam contains an awful lot that Christians have deliberately rejected over the years as religiously unsound. There are also influences of Sabaism, of Zoroastrianism, and of ancient Arabian paganism, including the divine sanction for the practices of polygamy and slavery. The reports in both the Koran and the Hadith (authoritative traditional sayings) concerning paradise, the houris, (virgins) the youths, the jinn (genies) and the angel of death have been directly taken from the ancient books of the Zoroastrians. Zoroastrianism also originated the story that on the Day of Judgment all people will have to cross a bridge stretched across hell leading to paradise on which the unbelievers will stumble and fall down to hell.

The biblical stories been passed on to Muhammad presumably from Jewish and Christian sources, but it is probable that he never read the Old or the New Testament. Those narratives had deeply impressed him, but being incomplete and imprecise, they gave his imagination free rein. Of the books of the Old Testament he knew only of the Torah or Pentateuch and the Book of Psalms, while the Scriptures he treats collectively as "the Gospels." Muhammad took these narratives as they were given to him, and their use in the Koran amounts to random, approximate and often badly misunderstood reproduction of the Talmudic traditions and the Apocrypha. Moreover, they are of course devoid of their original contexts and of the spiritual message of the original.

Many Old Testament stories are changed beyond recognition, and can be treated as a "source" only in the most general sense. Abraham did not offer Isaac, but Ishmael, as a sacrifice. "Haman" was pharaoh’s chief minister, even though the Haman known to Jews lived in Babylon one thousand years later. Moses was picked from the river not by his sister but by his mother. A Samaritan was the one who molded the golden calf for the children of Israel and misguided them, even though Samarians arrived only after the Babylonian exile. The accounts of Moses’ life are sketchy and say nothing of his character, descent, the time he was sent as a prophet, the purpose of his mission, and where, how and why he appointed Aaron as his deputy. It does not relate the argument between them and the people of Israel, which is crucial to the story. The story of Noah reflected Muhammad’s dilemmas and difficulties rather than Noah’s mission, and even the names of the idols that Noah warns against are Arabic.

The Koran makes reference to Jesus, Mary and events related to them, but with a critical distinction. It explicitly denies that Jesus was crucified: Allah made the Jews so confused that they crucified somebody else instead who had the likeness of Christ: "They slew him not nor crucified but it appeared so unto them." Muslims claim that an impostor by the name of Shabih was crucified, and he resembled Jesus in his face only. It seems illogical to those who count "proud" as one of the "99 most beautiful names of Allah" that Jesus, who was capable of raising the dead and of healing the blind and the leper, willingly submitted to the cross and failed to destroy the Jews who intended to hurt him. Islam rejects the whole concept of the crucifixion, claiming that it is against reason to assume that Allah would not forgive man’s sins without the cross: to say so is to limit his power: "He forgives whom he will, and he chastises whom he will."

The denial of the Trinity is also explicit: Allah begets not, i.e. he is no Father; and was not begotten, that is, he is no Son; and no one is like him, which means he is no Holy Spirit. "They are infidels who say, Allah is the third of three." But "Isa" is not the Son of Allah, only a special prophet, and the Christians’ contrary claim shows how they are perverted. The Christians are guilty of blasphemy because of their belief in the "trinity" of Allah, Mary, and Jesus. The "real" Jesus was a righteous prophet and a good Muslim who paved the way for the final prophet, Muhammad himself.

There is a wishful myth in circulation among liberals that Islam accords respect to all "people of the book," i.e. Christians and Jews in addition to Moslems. While Islam indeed accords them a higher standing than it does to polytheists like Hindus (pace the question of whether Hinduism properly understood is truly polytheistic) or African animists, this hardly amounts to respect. Of all the "people of the book" only Muslims can attain salvation. Jews’ and Christians’ refusal to acknowledge Mohammed as the messenger of God dooms them to unbelief and eternal suffering after death. Christians are mortal sinners because of their belief in the divinity of Christ, and their condemnation is irrevocable: "God will forbid him the garden and the fire will be his abode."

Unlike the Christian faith in God revealing Himself through Christ, the Koran is not a revelation of Allah – a heretical concept in Islam – but the direct revelation of his commandments and the communication of his law. It has been said that the Koran, to a Muslim, is not the perfected Gospel, it Christ, the Word Incarnate. This is a somewhat tenuous metaphor, however, not a valid parallel: Christian God "comes down" and seeks man because of His fatherly love. The Fall cast a shadow, the Incarnation makes reconciliation possible. Allah, by contrast, is cold, haughty, unpredictable, unknowable, capricious, distant, and so purely transcendent that no "relationship" is possible. He reveals only his will, not himself. Allah is "everywhere," and therefore nowhere relevant to us. He is uninterested in making our acquaintance, let alone in being near to us because of love. We are still utterly unable to grasp his purposes and all we can do is what we have to do, to obey his command.

The Koran claims to be the fulfillment of a religious design which was imperfectly revealed to the Jews and to the Christians. It is the crowning synthesis, the final word. But viewing the matter objectively, leaving aside for a moment the question of the actual truth of the book, it seems hard to see how the Koran is a synthesis of anything. The way in which Christianity makes sense – again, simply as a logical matter and leaving aside the truth of it – as a fulfillment of Judaism, is clear even to the unbeliever. But the Koran’s claim is singularly implausible. Non-Muslim commentators fail to see in what way is the Koran an improvement over, or advancement on, the moral teaching, language, style, or coherence of the Old and New Testament. It is looks, feels, sounds like a construct entirely human in origin and intent, clear in its earthly sources of inspiration and the fulfillment of the daily needs, personal and political, of its author.

Finally, one cannot ignore that whatever mildly friendly things the Koran may say about Judaism and Christianity in its early part, the late Surras also signify the final break with the Jews and Christians, who are fiercely denounced. The Muslims must be merciless to the unbelievers but kind to each other. "Whoso of you makes them his friends is one of them." War, not friendship, is mandatory until Islam reigns everywhere. Muslims are ordered to fight the unbelievers, "and let them find harshness in you." They must kill the unbelievers "wherever you find them." The punishment for resistance is execution or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides. By the stage in his life during which these Surras were written, Muhammad was no longer trying to convert his hearers by examples, promises, and warnings; he addresses them as their master and sovereign, praising them or blaming them for their conduct, giving laws and precepts as needed. His raw dogmatism stands, finally, naked of all pretence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Serge Trifkovic received his PhD from the University of Southampton in England and pursued postdoctoral research at the Hoover Institution at Stanford. His past journalistic outlets have included the BBC World Service, the Voice of America, CNN International, MSNBC, U.S. News & World Report, The Washington Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, The Times of London, and the Cleveland Plain Dealer. He is foreign affairs editor of Chronicles.

[ArGee]

In a sense, this transcendance is what people are really looking for in religion: a feeling which allows us to escape from the lonely prision of our own pitiful little bodies and re-integration with the magnificent cosmos from which we seem to emanate, to feel at-one-ment with it...

I'm going to pass on your suggestion that sex is the same as a little girl wanting to cuddle her mommy. You might want to examine that one more closely on your own.

What I want to know is, do we simply feel we can "re-integrat[e] with the magnificent cosmos" or is it actually possible. Do we "seem" to emanate from it or do we actually emanate from it? I'm asking you what you believe.

Shalom.

[koax]

no.

[pgyanke]

Hmmmm... Ok, but the point of the issue was whether we believe in the same God. Surely Christians and Jews do. Without the Jews, there is no Christianity (salvation is from the Jews).

If God is eternal, He did not change Himself in His sacrifice on the cross. He only fulfilled His promise. Therefore, the God of the Christians and the God of the Jews are the same.

This doesn't mean the Jews are "right" with God, though. God doesn't call us to worship Him OUR way but HIS. Jesus was very clear in His message that He is the only way.

Again, a small distinction but worth the carpal tunnel.

[jackd]

Very interesting article. Is there a contrary argument also citing Moslem scripture ? This is the first time that I have read of the section of the Koran called the Sarras. Are these the last "words of" Muhammed? I am also surprised that the author of the article did not engage the fact that the Koran was "dictated" to a scribe while Muhammed was having epilectic seizures.
The more research done on the foundations of the Koran the more apparent, at least to me, that this is a human generated religion prescribing social behavior.

[ArGee]

Are we making a distinction between whether we are worshipping the true G-d and whether we are worshipping Him as He wants to be worshipped?

For those outside your conversation, I know that the two of you presume that He cares how we worship Him.

Shalom.

[pgyanke]

I have to run for now. I'll check back tonight. Thanks for the chat.

[kinsman redeemer]

Ummm...not quite

Insightful response. Please elaborate. In your elaboration, I suggest that you give me an example of a religion that does not fit my definition.

Thanks.

[chilepepper]

Perhaps you should examine your own thoughts. You are the one who initially brought up sex. Perhaps you take Freud too seriously. I prefer Carl Jung and even Timothy Leary.

I'll stand by what I said. Love is merger, even sex, but on a different plane. I mean, come on, at least hetero sex is literally going back into the womb. How much closer can you get than that?

If there exists a plane of existence beyond what we see, then at these moments of transcendance, whether hugging, feeling solidarity, sex, or religious trance, we are in fact merging at a plane which our pitiful scientific instruments cannot yet measure. Those who have reached enlightenment, Gautama, Jesus, "Osiris" can exist in this plane, and others, at will...

[ZULU]

"While the influence of orthodox Christianity upon the Koran has been slight, apocryphal and heretical Christian legends are the second most important original source of Islam. In other words, Islam contains an awful lot that Christians have deliberately rejected over the years as religiously unsound. There are also influences of Sabaism, of Zoroastrianism, and of ancient Arabian paganism, including the divine sanction for the practices of polygamy and slavery. The reports in both the Koran and the Hadith (authoritative traditional sayings) concerning paradise, the houris, (virgins) the youths, the jinn (genies) and the angel of death have been directly taken from the ancient books of the Zoroastrians. Zoroastrianism also originated the story that on the Day of Judgment all people will have to cross a bridge stretched across hell leading to paradise on which the unbelievers will stumble and fall down to hell. "

The author of this piece REALLY doesn't know anything about what he is talking about when he equates Islam in any way with Zorastrianism, the first monotheistic and ethical faith in the world, and another of the very many victims of militant Islam.

Zoroastrians believe in one God, whom they call Ahura Mazda.
This faith began over 3000 years ago and probably antedates monotheistic Judaism. They believe in an evil spirit or force called Ahriman and the existence of demons and devils, who are enemies of God and man. They envision both the world and each one of us as the site of a titanic conflict between the forces of God and the forces of evil.

Unlike Islam, Zoroastrians are a non-proselytizing faith. They believe that all religions are equally good and that a person can achieve salavation in his or her own faith by
believing in God, living a good life and opposing the forces of evil. As a matter of fact, it is very difficult for someone who is not born a Zoroastrian to become one, and they are not accepted at all Zoroastrian congregations.


Zoroastrians believe in an immortal soul, a judgement upon death (where the author gets his bridge over fire from, and the fall into the fire is based on the evil deeds, words and thoughts a person has had during his/her lifeltime and has nothing to do with "stumbling"), a resurrection of the dead, a last judgement after a final battle between the forces of evil and goodness, after which even those who were evil will be purified in fire and saved.

They also believe in angels and a series of promised saviours. Some people theorize that the three wise men were Zoroastrian Priests.

If any of this sounds familiar, it should.

Some theologians believe that much of what the Jews included in Judaism and later trasnferred to Christianity was the product of their exposure to Zoroastrianism during the Babylonian captivity.

Once the major religion of ancient Persia, it has been persecuted and destroyed by militant Islam, some of its followers having been forced to flee to India (the Parsees) and those few who remain in Iran, practise their religion in secret, at their own peril. The religion is dying, and there are only a few thousand practitioners worldwide - thanks mainly to Islam.

There is NO connection between Zoroastrianism and Islam. On the contrary, there is a substantial connection between Zoroastrianism and Christianity and Judaism.

[ArGee]

With all due respect, most religions attempt to set a standard for proper behavior and ask the adherents to live up to that standard. While there are cads and scoundrels in all religions, most who follow one actually attempt to modify their own behavior to live up to the ideals of the religion.

There is the occasional scam artist who creates a religion to justify behaving exactly as he pleases, but even his followers will attempt to modify their behavior to conform to his new norm.

I don't think your sarcasm actually contributes to the discussion. I would enjoy a real conversation with you, though.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

If there exists a plane of existence beyond what we see, then at these moments of transcendance, whether hugging, feeling solidarity, sex, or religious trance, we are in fact merging at a plane which our pitiful scientific instruments cannot yet measure. Those who have reached enlightenment, Gautama, Jesus, "Osiris" can exist in this plane, and others, at will...

You say "If there exists..."

Is this what you believe?

Shalom.

[chilepepper]

Absolutely, but then again there is nothing absolute in this soapbubble called life that travels through time.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

Why does man obsess over religion? Either one accepts the evidence for absolute truth, or not. If not, then there is the freedom to avoid all the trouble of a search. You know, just make it up along the way.

However, if one accepts that certain truths are truer than others, then one should have a compelling need to search for their origin. Start with one truth that stands the test, is true for all men in all situations, and build from there.

If, after searching, you honestly decide that you are the center of the universe, then build a shrine to yourself and spread the good news. However, if after taking stock of yourself and the world around you, you are still convinced that no man holds the answer to this life, start investigating the various religious systems of the world. Be objective, do not be seduced by flattery or coerced through guilt. Stack them alongside each other and begin by culling the obvious frauds. Continue sifting until only the truth is left.

If, as some religious practitioners proclaim, your selection of a belief system determines your eternal abode, then take great pains to choose correctly. It seems that most people expend more labor over decisions of marriage, career, and overall pleasure, than they do on a belief system.

[Nachum]

Judaism for one.

Judaism has a code of law, replete with remedies for injured parties.

There is neither excusing, pardening, nor promotion of behavior. There is (are?) a complete set of positive and negetive precepts. Now, if you want to call all of that "excusing, pardoning and promoting", that would be fine. A gross generalization, but fine.

But then you could define traffic tickets the same way.

[ArGee]

Absolutely,

Thank you.

Now, based on your definition of religion as stated above (and please forgive my attempt at crude humor), do you think that religion is created by man or by the cosmos?

Shalom.

[chilepepper]

Most definitely created by man, although one could also argue that the Cosmos is religion by its very existence, and is that which defines what religion is, a noumena unknowable by this pitiful species...

[pgkdan]

Who knows if it is the same God. *YOU* certainly do not.

Yes I do...however I think you're lost.

[chilepepper]

Yes I do...however I think you're lost

Well, certainly you lose less sleep than I do thinking about what it all means...

[ArGee]

Most definitely created by man, although one could also argue that the Cosmos is religion by its very existence, and is that which defines what religion is, a noumena unknowable by this pitiful species...

OK, then that is why I have difficulty discussing religious issues with those of your philosophy.

For me, religion is like physics, a branch of study. It is our effort to understand what is as opposed to what is not. It is something that is open to scrutiny, evaluation of its claims, and ultimately either acceptance or rejection.

In that sense a religion can actually be said to be valid or invalid no matter how good it makes a person feel.

This is not a safe way to think, as I run the risk of being wrong even when being wrong makes me feel good. But I have a theory that life is ultimately better when it conforms to reality.

Shalom.