Wherever you are on the chart, you are outnumbered by the rest. Stop preaching and don't call other's religions "false" when you have no idea what you're talking about. You're just making them angry and that'a not the christian thing to do.
Posted on 12/30/2002 6:04:44 AM PST by 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.
The Mosaic Law is not practiced today. Are you a Jew? Do you have children? Did you make your sin offering at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation after the days of purification were fulfilled?
If not, then your "religion" has ignored your behavior ever since the Law itself was abandoned at the destruction of the Temple.
Indeed, there was a remedy under the Law for every sin you might have committed and a general clensing every year was supposed to excuse any sins that you may have overlooked.
Rom 8:3 "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:"
So powerful is His Truth, especially as compared to the other "false" religions listed above here, that every time one of these deceived writes a date on a letter, or looks at a calendar, or sees the date on a newspaper anywhere in the world, they are in fact acknowledging Jesus Christ, even though they may be too ignorant to know it.
You see, when the clock turns to 2003 on New Year's Eve, we won't be celebrating 600-some-odd years since "muhammed" split all of human history...
...we won't be celebrating 4,000-some-odd years since Confucius divided all time as we know it...
...the whole world will be marking with great fanfare the number of years of The Age of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
There IS no other NAME which is worthy, only Jesus Christ. You honor Him and celebrate Him despite your misused life. And you only deny Him at your own peril.
Yes, Islam largely displaced Zoroatrianism in Persia, (now Iran from Aryan, the noble.) Of course there was a short respite in this 1400 year persecution under the Shah who allowed Mazdaists to practice their religion freely. He even had Zoroastrians in his government. But of course the Islamic revolution put an end to that.
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
In the same way that scholars see an influence of Mazdaismn on Judaism and Christianity, they also see that influence on Islam. This has also been true some some Muslims. It certainly had a profound effect on the work of the Iranian Suhrawardi.
Of course the doctors of the law in Islam deny the influence of any other religion on Islam.
Ahhwhay oomtabu aklabessesessness pharp. Ibu. (Ibu.)
Ahhh. I see. How very enlightened you must be.
Exactly what "success" are you referring to? Please, feel free to enlighten us all, oh successful one.
You mistake me for a materialist. I am not. But I do demand that a worldview be able to support its own weight without collapsing on excuses and weak arguments. If the worldview is powerful enough to support the existence of all that we can know then it is powerful enough to be explored, discussed, debated, and explained. It is powerful enough to be challenged, defended, supported, and stood by. The truth is not afraid of a challenge nor is it offended by one.
Do you have sufficient courage of your convictions to give an answer for what you believe?
I'll repeat the question. I don't care whather you lable your concept of knowledge intuition, science, gut instinct, or magic. I'm not interested in discussing symbols, welltachungstang (sp?), or geshtalt (sp?).
Is the cosmos of which you speak knowable?
Shalom.
You are referring to an image bearer of G-d for whom G-d gave His life.
You don't have to respect his ideas, but you should respect him.
Shalom.
...and when adherents can't live up to the standard? What happens? Perhaps there's a penalty and suddenly you're escused! If there is no penalty then your behavior is ignored. Your message addressed the third possibility - "promotion", but examples go much further than your example.
My definition would include behaviors such as drinking to excess, pornography, and overspending. There are "religions" which promote such behavior and are just as addictive as many of the systems that we commonly know as "religion."
Trust me, I am not being sarcastic here.
Your thoughts?
So your response to me is to attack Judaism as a true religion, rather than address the essence of the argument. In other words, it is a non-answer. Whether or not you agree with the validity of Judaism or not, it is indeed a response to your gross over simplification. If your only purpose was to try and attack or convert Jews by engaging in subterfuge, you can kiss my tookhiss.
I have made it a point not to engage in ecumenical debates of FR anymore. Primarily because the arguments are always the same, there is nothing accomplished, and many times the debate (or discussion) degenerates into stereotypical name calling.
The God of the Christians and Jews are one and the same. The God of the muslims is aligned in opposition.
And who do you suppose that god, of the muslims, is...hmmmmm?
That is blatently absurd. I asked you to give me an example to work from and you did. Since the condition of your "tookhiss" (I thought it was spelled "toches") sentence is false (and I do not have to kiss anything : thank-you very much.)
In point of fact (and going to the original question), the God of Seth, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Elijah, David, Paul, Micah, Nahum, Joseph, and Jesus Christ - IS the ONE God - the Creator and author of the universe.
On that, I suppose that we might agree.
I did not attack you - If you think that I did, then I apologize, but my purpose is not to convert Jews as you allege. I am not excluding anyone.
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.
