Afghan Christian Rejects Islam
Monday, March 20, 2006 at 10:51AM **UPDATE BELOW
An Afghan man is on trial in Kabul, Afghanistan, for converting to Christianity from Islam, a crime under Islamic law, and could be executed as a result. His family turned him in to police and accused him of converting 16 years ago. Abdul Rahman has been officially charged with rejecting Islam. The prosecutor in the case has offered to drop the charges if Rahman converted back to Islam, but he has refused.
Afghanistan’s constitution is based on Shariah law, which states that any Muslim who rejects their religion should be sentenced to death. The judge in the case, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada, said to the Associated Press:
"We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law. It is an attack on Islam. … The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty. We will ask him if he has changed his mind about being a Christian. If he has, we will forgive him, because Islam is a religion of tolerance."
Afghanistan is 99% Muslim. Wonder why?
There are several things to keep in mind. The Koran teaches no tolerance for other religions:
"Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them." (Koran 9:5-6)
"I will instill terror into the hearts of Infidels, strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip." (8:12)
"Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extend that they surrender and pay tribute." (9:29)
The list goes on and on. Islam teaches a warped view of Christianity which would, aside from the dictate to "kill all Infidels", encourage the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity as a form of justice for blasphemy and rejection of Islam. Here is some of what the Koran teaches about Christianity:
"O you who believe! Take not the Jews and Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who takes them for friends is one of them." (5:51)
"O People of the Scripture [Christians]! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" [i.e., Trinity} — Cease! it is better for you! — Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son." (4:171)
"And when Jesus perceived unbelief on their part, He said, ‘Who will be my helpers with God?’ The apostles said, ‘We will be God’s helpers! We believe in God and bear witness that we are Muslims.’ " (3:45)
"…’And as to those who believe not, I will chastise them with a terrible chastisement IN THIS WORLD AND IN THE NEXT; and none shall they have to help them.’ " (3:49)
"Abraham was neither Jew nor Christian; but he was sound in the faith, a Muslim, and not of those who add gods to God [Christians and Jews]." (3:60)
"And for their saying, ‘Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus, the Son of Mary, and Apostle of God.’ Yet they did not kill him, and they did not crucify him, but only someone with his likeness…..they did not really slay him, but God took him up Himself." (4:156)
"O you People of the Scripture [Christians]! overstep not bounds in your religion; and of God, speak only truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, IS ONLY AN APOSTLE OF GOD and his Word he conveyed into Mary….. say not, ‘Three’ [Trinity]: — Forbear— it will be better for you. God is only one God! Far be it from His glory that He should have a son!"
Islam (according to the Koran) teaches:
-Christians and Jews are enemies of Islam.
-The Holy Trinity is a Myth.
-Jesus’ apostles were self-professed Muslims.
-Christians will receive punishment in this life as well as the next.
-Abraham was a Muslim.
-Jesus was never crucified; Jews lied about it and used a proxy in Christ’s stead.
-The virgin birth is true; Mary is esteemed.
-Jesus is only an apostle and prophet, not the Son of God.
Roy Schoeman, a Jew who studied under the most prominent Rabbis in American Judaism and received his M.B.A. from Harvard Business School then taught at Harvard, converted from Judaism to Catholicism. In his book Salvation is from the Jews, Schoeman examines a difference between Judaism and Christianity from Islam:
Consider the differences between the depiction of heaven in Islam versus that in Judaism and Christianity. Heaven, by definition, entails the greatest state of perfection that God can give man; it represents the ultimate meaning and goal of man’s existence. In both Judaism and Christianity, the bliss of heaven comes from the pure joy of being in God’s presence; in Islam, it comes from base sensual pleasures—food, drink and sex. Men in heaven are rewarded with 72 beautiful, ever-young virgin "wives", which the Koran describes as "bashful and dark-eyed" (Koran 37:48), "as fair as corals and rubies" (55:58), "loving companions" (56:37), and "high-bosomed virgins" (78:33). They also receive 28 "beardless young boys described as "boys of perpetual freshness; if thou seest them, thou wouldst think them as scattered pearls, dressed in silk and brocade, and embellished with bracelets of silver." (76:10-25)
(Descriptions of the 72 virgins’ physiques get quite graphic and won’t be included in this discourse)
This is an interesting examination for several reasons, not the least of which is the contrast between temporal and eternal life between the religions. In Christianity, martyrs are willing to die and have violence done to them for their belief without rescinding it as a testament to their strength of conviction as well as a comfort in the presence of their Creator which awaits after death; death being subdued by the triumph of Christ over it. In Islam, martyrs are wiling to die to do violence to enemies (i.e., all non-Muslims); their reward is an eternal orgy of carnality. Historically, Christian martyrs have actually perpetuated the faith and caused it to grow; the opposite is true for Islam.
Hopefully more attention will be universally given to Abdul Rahman as with the case of Amina Lawal of Nigeria . She is the woman who was found guilty of adultery and under Islamic law was sentenced to death by being buried up to her neck and then stoned. She received a stay of execution because she was a nursing mother. In 2004 she avoided the death penalty because of intervening human rights groups around the world. What a sad contrast that not for committing a crime or moral indiscretion is Rahman being tried, but for living out a quite life as a Christian.
Michelle Malkin Sister Toldjah
Trackback URL:
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/416741
Amy Proctor
Afghan state prosecutor is now saying Abdul Rahman may be "mentally unfit":
KABUL, Afghanistan Mar 22, 2006 (AP) An Afghan man facing the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor and presidential adviser said Wednesday.
Abdul Rahman, 41, went on trial last week in Kabul. He was arrested last month after his family accused him of becoming a Christian. The conversion is a crime under Afghanistan’s Islamic laws, and a death sentence is possible.
But prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about his mental fitness.
"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn’t talk like a normal person," he told The Associated Press.
Could this be the way Afghan officials avoid executing Rahman while still adhering to Islamic law, while appeasing the scourging of the international community?
Prosecutor: "Do you confess that you have apostacized from Islam?"
Rahman: "No, I am not an apostate, I believe in God."
Question: "Do you believe in the Koran?"
Rahman: "I believe in the Injil (New Testament) and love Jesus Christ."
Prosecutor: "According to the article 130 0of Afghanistan Law it has been until now discussed and the concluded that the MOST SEVERE PUNISHMENT must be given and that is hanging to death."
Rahman: "Being hanged to death! I accept it, yes I do, but I am not an infidel as I am branded and I am not an apostate. I am a Jesus Follower."
Watch the video/news reel The Afghan Times, a Christian Afghan website, provided the video and also has these headlines:
-RELIGIOUS FREEDOM STILL IN JEOPARDY UNDER NEW AFGHAN GOV
By a veteran Christian leader in Afghanistan | posted 04/21/2003
"Editor’s note: For security reasons, Christianity Today is granting anonymity to the author of this article."
-FIVE AFGHAN CHRISTIANS MARTYRED
Taliban militants target converts to Christianity.
-AFGHAN CHRISTIAN LEADER RECEIVED DEATH THREAT OVER THE TELEPHONE
-TALIBAN SAYS ‘CUT THROAT OF AFGHAN CHRISTIAN
-AFGHAN CHRISTIAN WEBSITE SHUT DOWN
HOW YOU CAN HELP:
Sign a petition asking the Afghan President, President of the United States and the US Senate, Congress, State Department and the U.N. to intervene on Abdul Rahman’s behalf.
E-Mail campaign to Pres. Bush to intervene.
PRAY.
(hat tip to: Michelle Malkin) Counterterrorism Blog
Amy Proctor
The case against Abdul Rahman has been dropped:
"The court dismissed today the case against Abdul Rahman for a lack of information and a lot of legal gaps in the case," the official said Sunday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
Since Rahman confessed to being a Christian and converting from Islam, the only legal gap could be the flawed Islamic law. More likely it is simply bowing to international pressure and the ‘reason’ is an excuse to save face among Islam clerics, who are calling for Rahman’s execution.
Now prayers need to be offered up for the safety of Abdul Rahman so he can live in a more tolerant country. America certainly needs more Christians who show such bravery and devotion to God.
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (51)
"And for their saying, ‘Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus, the Son of Mary, and Apostle of God.’ Yet they did not kill him, and they did not crucify him, but only someone with his likeness…..they did not really slay him, but God took him up Himself."
I think that Islam must be fought primarily on a spiritual, scriptural basis, for in that quote lies the whole purpose of satan in introducing the false religion of Islam into the world: The aim of satan, through Islam, is to deny the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, and to stop people from believing in it. Because satan knows that this is the only thing he can try and do, to keep people away from Christ. Once Christ comes into someone's life, the work of the devil is defeated and overcome by the power of what Jesus did for us on the cross. Satan's only hope is to keep people from believing in that sacrifice.
Thanks be to God, the ex-Muslim man you refer to, was enabled by God to see through the lies of his false religion, and was enabled to accept the truth which comes from God. Such a conversion can never happen because of mere human thinking or philosophy, it takes God Himself to step into your life and turn you around like that (just like what happened to Saul of Tarsus).
It is very likely that this gentleman will have to pay with his life for his newfounded beliefs, something that we Westerners are rarely required to do. I pray that God will give him the strength to endure everything that he has been called to endure.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2013&version=31
I've looked up most of the "72 virgins" references I could find: check the source, it's not as sordid as you are led to believe.
Aimz: I don't like it either, but it isn't confusing. The Afghans are saying they are only against muslims converting away from Islam, not people who were never muslim in the first place.
Thank goodness we don't live under Mosaic law ourselves!
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?Id=12157
Afghanistan has a chance to join the world of peace in the 21st Century. Maybe some of our peace activists should go over there and become human shields.
This religion is based on confusion and manipulation, it preys on the weak-minded. These people are not allowed the grace of freedom, they are not allowed to think for themselves. Where in the Koran does it offer the gift of salvation? Where is truth and life?
It is all based on initmidation and fear, where is peace offered.
I have to agree with Jez, but will add in my own words "Thank God! For our freedom of religion in the United States!"
One day it will probably change, but for now, I can worship and praise my Lord and Savior freely and so will my children.
The Qur'ran talks about salvation btw, some translations use the word more than others. The English translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali mentions it quite frequently.
As per Deuteronomy 13, point made, but as a Christian it's clear we have a new covenant. The Jews were the chosen people whom God worked through and Israel's enemies wished to seduce Israel through other religions. Israel didn't need that much help in that regard and was always off mingling with other religions to the point where there were human sacrifices in the Jewish temple by the king of Israel. Pretty serious stuff. Those verses weren't meant to say Israel should seek out every pagan nation and destroy them, but rather if they infulrated Israel, that's what should happen.
If you're using that to justify Islam, I would point you toward the 72 virgins and "boys of perpetual freshness" as a means of paradise.
Also, Jesus said "You will know a tree by it's fruit." Look at how Judiasm has evolved. Look at how Islam is still in it's same barbaric embryonic stage. Jewish figures from Adam to Abraham to Moses were not blood-thirsty killers. When Moses killed the Egyptian in defense of abusing an Israeli slave, he was ashamed and knew it was wrong. Islam justifies this sort of behavior. Even King David who was a warrior king was only such because other nations attacked Israel and David defended her.
At any rate, thank God I'm a Christian. I'd be interesting to hear what an orthodox Jew would say about some of the more disturbing old testament passages.
It's confusing to think of a Christian convert living in 1st century Israel could have been legitimately killed under God's law.
Still, it's nice to know other people noticed that contradiction.
Jez, God commanded the Hebrews to clear the land that would eventually become Israel from a race of (historically-proven) bloodthirsty savages who, among other things, performed child sacrifice. Israel's task was for a specific assignment under specific circumstances and for a limited time. It was not to be considered official policy for Israel. That's a far cry from how the Islamic faith operates.
Someone else mentioned the Crusades as the only blight on Christian history. I'm not sure it's a blight at all. I've done some reading about it and it looks like the Crusades were fought for largely commendable reasons.
You're wrong. The whole thrust of Christianity is that man is not divine, is not perfect and is not infallible. The Bible is written in plain English (or whatever your native tongue might be), you don't need special cognitive abilities or supernatural grace to be a true Christian. In fact, the reason someone is a Christian is precisely because they *don't* have supernatural grace and perfection.
jez,
The Israelites were only targeting certain races/nations. If someone wasn't part of that nation, the Jews had no theological ground on which to wage war on them. It was not an open-ended approval for the Israelites to wage war on anybody they wanted, it was targeted and it could only last for a finite period of time against pre-determined foes.
This is a far cry from an Islamofacist strapping a bomb to his chest and walking into a Jerusalem mall.
Jesus taught this:
[L]ove your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? (Matthew 5:44-46).
But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. To him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also. And from him who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back. And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise. But if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive back, what credit is that to you? For even sinners lend to sinners to receive as much back. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil. Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful (Luke 6:27-36).
>>>"Afghanistan’s constitution is based on Shariah law, which states that any Muslim who rejects their religion should be sentenced to death. The judge in the case, Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada, said to the Associated Press:
""We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law. It is an attack on Islam. … The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty. We will ask him if he has changed his mind about being a Christian. If he has, we will forgive him, because Islam is a religion of tolerance."
So all this talk about "liberating Afghanistan" and freeing the people from the oppressive Taliban is all a bunch of smoke and mirrors? Do you think Abdul Rahman would have it worse under the Taliban? At least the Taliban would've spared the mockery of a kangaroo court before executing him.
What does our pupp..er..President Hamid Karzai have to say about this?
--Cobra
It was only a matter of time until this was Bush's fault. Bravo, bro. You get the "flaming liberal of the day" award.
You're right, one Christian on trial is a Bush failure. Much worse than, say, the Taliban and Bin Laden oppressing women, keeping them uneducated and burying them in sand and stoning them from the neck up if they walk outside unaccompanied.
Could it possibly occur to you to put aside your hatred for Bush for a millisecond and consider that perhaps there are other forces in the world that make things happen? You attribute to Pres. Bush god-like power; first he's at fault for Hurricane Katrina, a NATURAL PHENOMENON, and now for Islamic Law.
It is not President Hamid Karzai who is the puppet here. If so, he would have rejected religious law openly. It's a Muslim country. This is a problem symptomatic of Islam, not Conservatism. It is you who is the puppet of liberal demagoguery and (lack of) ethics, Cobra. I find your comment disgusting. You really ought to look into your hatred problem. It's unbecoming.
Trent: did you read deut 13? We're talking about executing unbelievers/converts, not terrorism in general.
I bought a Koran a couple years back. When Johnny was in Iraq, he noticed that Muslims thought very highly of Mary and had pictures of her in their house. Oddly, except for the bizarre story they attribute to Mary's birth (you'd have to read it for yourself... it's really odd), they have a view of her that resembles Catholicism, with some distinctions. But the Koran makes sure to distinguish Jesus as only a Prophet, although a very revered prophet. Christian teaching has been attacked since the beginning; this is clearly one of the aims of Islam.
I agree that Abdul Rahman was blessed to have converted to Christianity. He was working with a team in Pakistan that I believe was Christian, and they helped share the Gospel with him, from what I understand. The real miracle of the story is that conversions do still happen, and that Christ's message is so life changing that Christians are willing to risk their lives to have this faith. It is a real testimony to the peace one finds in Christ.
Jez, the Mosaic law is misunderstood. I am know Old Testament scholar, but there are many provisions and demands to take care of the widow and orphan, to guard and help foreigners and aliens.... The role of the Jews included a larger blessing for all mankind... "By you (Abraham) all the people of the earth will be blessed." Abraham's obedience to God should lead to the blessing of all mankind, not just one particular people over another. This was of course met with opposition along the way, caused by disobedience of the Jewish people to God's law and their fraternization with pagan countries. The Messiah could not be facilitated through these means, which is why the Laws regarding dealing with sin, other gods and joining with other pagan countries were so harsh. The Messiah had to come through the Jews; clearly idols in the temple would be problematic. I would much rather live under the Mosaic law than Islamic law.
Leticia, the Koran offers paradise as the ultimate reward for Muslims, whereas Christianity offers reconciliation with God, peace and joy, and fellowship/relationship with Christ.... PLUS paradise at the end. The dichotomy between a carnal paradise over a spiritual one is well worth noting, because it says something about the kind of "God" these religions worship.
Jez, I would recommend to you if you are at all interested the book I talked about in the entry: Salvation is from the Jews. That line comes from Jesus' meeting at the well with the Samaritan woman. It's an excellent exposition of Judaism, it's purposes and its Laws by a learned Jew who converted to Catholicism. Roy Schoeman discusses paganism, Gentiles and Jewish relations to them using Deuteronomy as a reference. I'll photo copy some pages and upload them. Very interesting reading from a Jewish perspective.
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation1.jpg
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation2.jpg
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation3.jpg
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation4.jpg
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation5.jpg
http://www.johnnyproctor.com/sqsp2/salvation6.jpg
I hope it's helpful. By the way, the friend whom I'm studying this book with just got an e-mail back from Mr. Schoeman regarding a question she had about the number of "beardless boys".... interesting..
Well of course, if you believe in the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition, all bets are off. Genocide, when commanded by Him, is OK.
Radical Islamists believe in their God too, of course. I'm unmoved by belief. I dislike radical fundamentalism even more than you guys do, but this practice of executing converted Christians was taken as evidence that Islam is sustained through intimidation, intolerent, insecure, based on confusion and manipulation etc. etc. Despite the fact that the same thing was Israeli practice (I think for close to 1000 years), Judaism gets a free pass on all of those charges. The truth is you are prejudiced against Islam, when the real problem is theocracies, fanatisism and resentment of the West. I agree that the Afghan Islamic government is insecure, but I don't blame that insecurity on Islam itself -- I'm nowhere near expert enough to make that judgement. Your criticisms of Islam are really no different from the attacks from trolls who quote a couple of verses at you, and accuse you either of not being meek enough or of being genocidal slave traders. And the Jewish/Christian/Conservative writers like Schoeman have preconcieved anti-Islamic agenda to fulfill too. They should be read, but not without dipping into the other side's literature too.
That passage refers to the course of action the Jewish nation should follow if one of their own wants to indulge in paganism. This is interior Jewish policy. This actually seems like a fairly reasonable request to me. These were the same Hebrews (or maybe a generation or two off) that God liberated from Egypt. If they saw for themselves what He did, why would they want to worship pagan "gods"? Moreover, why should they be spared, having seen for themselves God's miracles up close and personal?
That is the least of it. Every generation of Israel (to a point) had a prophet, a man who spoke for God. Until about 300 years before Christ came, God never left the Jews without some sort of Divine mouthpiece. He was a constant fixture in their lives. For any Jew to not to follow Him is inexcusable.
And who am I to tell God how to govern His people?
As far as prophets are concerned, part of Deut 13 details what ought to be done with false prophets. Again, this is for interior Jewish policy. If a Jew claims to speak for God but his predictions don't come to pass, HE CANNOT BE GOD'S SPOKESMAN. Period. God frequently urged the Jews to test Him on his word (in terms of charity, keeping of promises, etc). God's is a God of honesty, so speaking lies in His name is a capital offense.
Moreover Jez, God in the Bible doesn't ever give license to senseless slaughter. He ordered the Jews to clear that particular segment of land of pagans and sickos. As I said, it was a fixed target (those "civilizations") for a fixed amount of time for a fixed purpose (to establish Israel). There's nothing in there about waging war because the mood strikes you or to spread Judaism, etc. Those activites are forbidden.
Muslims slaughter innocent civilians as the only guaranteed Islamic means of reaching their bordello paradise.
You can either choose to see a difference or you can choose not to.
As I do that, for me the case for chapter 13 applying throughout Jewish residency in Israel grows stronger. In later chapters (but within the same discourse) laws and practices concerning kings, priesthoods and central criminal tribunals are stipulated. These institutions are irrelevent to Israel at the very beginning of her nationhood, they imply a degree of stability and maturity. Where, shortly after chapter 13, should the scope extend from two generations to closer to a thousand years?? If you're right, that temporal context is extremely important, but dangerously unclear, no?
"And who am I to tell God how to govern His people?"
Doesn't that question apply to the Muslim case?
"God in the Bible doesn't ever give license to senseless slaughter."
Does God in the Qur'ran give that license, really?
This honestly isn't a question of choice for me. Noone is more aware of my ignorence of either religion than I, so I'm not going to assert that there is or there isn't a difference. My feeling is that, in spite of your ignorance of Islam (which is probably comparable to mine), you are prejudiced to see a difference. Do you know, for example, the Qur'ranic verse which is relevent to killing converters? I don't.
But I truly believe that Islam is a religion of peace. Why? Because Muslims say it is. Maybe I'm being naive, but I think that Muslims understand Islam better than I do. On top of that, I've known several Muslims - and befriended quite a few - in my lifetime, and none of them have tried to kill me. In fact, they've been nothing but polite and rational. Yeah, you can quote some verses from the Qur'an that supposedly promote violence (and then someone else could do the same with the Christian Bible), but the verses mean nothing without context. And you can only understand context if you really immerse yourself in the religion and its history. These issues are far more complex than we'd like them to be, and simply throwing verses back and forth accomplishes nothing. If you sincerely feel the need to attack another religion, please do some serious research lest you look ignorant and intolerant.
A Salaam Alaikum!
Jez I found this site that gave most of the references with the Sura's from the Koran. Granted it is a bit biased in it's take on the presentation of Islam, However,if you google the Sura's themselves you can get your OWN idea. Not only that, you can certainly see that the trend of "paradise" is well, how else can one put it, other then, of the flesh?
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/heaven.html
Amy, can you believe it, this link says 28 young boys? I clicked on this by chance.
However no direct source for the Hadith! I will find it yet, it is the closest I have come!
it is."
Reminds me of this quote:
"We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law. It is an attack on Islam. … The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty. We will ask him if he has changed his mind about being a Christian. If he has, we will forgive him, because Islam is a religion of tolerance."
Muslims in Afghanistan are tolerant if you change your religion and do what they say. That doesn't sound tolerant. Hanging for being a Christian doesn't sound peaceful, either.
We know Muslims, too. We're in the US Army and know both Muslim chaplains and soldiers. These are American Muslims. Are you saying you're friends with Muslims in the Middle East?
In Iraq when the US first entered, this practice was common place: a Muslim converts to Christianity and his wife would be raped, his house burned down and he murdered. Peace. Tolerance.
I don't deny that there are enormous complexities.... but perhaps a Muslim can comment better than the quote given in the original entry I posted above, that they WON'T kill the Christian IF he only turns from Christianity, because Islam is tolerant. Surely you can see how confusing that signal would be. Call me ignorant, but I believe I speak for many people who notice this moral dichotomy.
Uneducated? The Bible was written by men of all stripes. The Bible was written by a lawgiver (Moses), a general (Joshua), prophets (Samuel), kings (David, Solomon), a musician (Asaph), a herdsman (Amos), a prince and statesman (Daniel), a priest (Ezra), a tax collector (Matthew), a physician (Luke), a scholar (Paul) and fishermen (Peter and John). The highest of the high, the lowliest of the low, the educated and the uneducated, the most loved and most despised from the culture. It was written mostly (if not completely) by Jews.
If you contend that the writers of the Bible are ignorant compared to modern people, well, that's not a fair comparison is it?
That notwithstanding, the Bible employs a wide range of literary styles: poetry, parables, allegory, metaphor (esp in the New Testament), similies and several songs. Hyperboles pop up once in a while and Jesus Himself could be satirical at times.
Symbolism revealed in one book might be expanded upon and reinforced in another book written hundreds of years later (and never actually commented upon by either writer).
Each of the books of the Bible showcases a fairly unique tone. Luke (because of his profession) shows a great interest in the medical aspect of his Gospel while James is a lot more practical. Paul is more philosophical than John, who tried to write with straight forward simplicity.
The Bible is quite unique and unlike any other book that's ever been written.
By any objective evaluation, you cannot say that the writers of the Bible were ignorant. Writing of that caliber doesn't just pop out of nowhere.
You know, none of the sura's actually come out with the idea that you get to boff these high-bosomed virgins. And whenever I look the passages up in a qur'ran, the language is very much toned down than on these anti-Islam websites (eg, I've never seen the phrase "high-bosomed virgin" in an acutual qur'ran). Is this just the dirty western mind being overactive?
Why DO you need Huris or perpetuly young boys in paradise? Why do you need jewels and silk, water and wine? Why would the women have to be young and beautiful, why go to such pains to decribe them? Why don't the WOMEN get awarded some men 'servants' if you will. Oh wait, because women are treated like crap even in paradise. WHERE is the mention of ALLAH, being with ALLAH? Is THAT not important? Maybe it's just my western take on Christianity and lures of the flesh in conflict here. I just read somewhere else, I wish I had saved the link. Literally, someone became a suicide bomber. albiet an unsuccessful one, because he was PROMISED 72 virgins,(BTW the fact that they are VIRGINS, MUST mean SOMETHING don't you think??) after he would complete the mission. If that is not violent bribery of the flesh what is? Also, it was written in one of the Hadiths, I sent it in a link earlier, that one should marry a VIRGIN, again significant connection to the 72 virgins. EGADS, read the history of Islam, read about the pervert Muhamad (whoops, am I going to have a hit put on me now)!
But what's the difference between an American Muslim and an Afghani or Iraqi Muslim? I don't think it's the Muslim part, since they're both followers of the same religion. But you seem to think that Afghani Muslims better represent the religion and that American Muslims are weak-kneed. Are you suggesting that my Muslim friends here in America (who, again, have never tried to kill me), are not true adherents to the religion? I'm sure they'd beg to differ. Which brings me back to my point that this is a socio-political problem...
Trent,
Of course the Bible is unique and, in parts, beautifully written. (I'll argue that the Greeks and Romans were better writers and storytellers, however.) I do contend that the writers are ignorant compared to modern man, and I think it's perfectly fair, since they claimed to have been writing the word of an omnipotent god. The stories they tell are nonsensical and full of non sequiturs, and they show a blatant disregard for all things scientific (I'd be willing to buy some of the more outlandish stories if, once in a while, the Bible would say, "It's God. He can do what He wants" or "It's magic," but no such luck). In short, the Bible, to me, is an insult to any thinking man's intelligence.
Tim,
I'm glad you've studied both the Bible and the Qur'an, but don't you think the fact that you're a Christian at Bethany Bible College makes you and your faculty a little bit biased? And citing the founding of Islam as an example of the religion's violent and hateful nature does little to help your case. Remember, I can do the same with the Bible (God drowning the entire population of the earth, save for Noah and his family, then making up for it with a pretty rainbow seems pretty sadistic to me).
"We do not presume
to come to this your table, merciful Lord,
trusting in our own righteousness,
but in your manifold and great mercies.
We are not worthy
so much as to gather up the crumbs under your table.
But you are the same Lord
whose nature is always to have mercy.
Grant us therefore, gracious Lord,
so to eat the flesh of your dear Son Jesus Christ
and to drink his blood,
that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body
and our souls washed through his most precious blood,
and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us.
Amen."
Really it's a shame these books weren't written in English to start with! I honestly can't tell how much of the sexual language is original. But, sure, the Muslim paradise is described in more physical terms than the Christian one. You might think the eschatology panders to man's base, selfish instincts, and you're right; but doesn't the idea of eternal paradise do that to start with? Who is more cynical, the guy who invents the concept of eternal punishment/reward, or one who throws in 70 virgins?
No, you can't do the same with the Bible, when you take it as a whole. The Koran, in its entirety, is a religion based and founded on violence. By the way, when reading the Bible, you'll notice that the "sadistic" God actually created man in a paradise, where there was no death or sin. MAN chose the opposite, and death was the result. This is not so with Islam. Allah dictates violence to his followers who will not convert. Jesus dictates love and relationship building ESPECIALLY with those that will not convert. You have to eliminate 90% of the Bible to see similarity between it and the Koran.
Jesus Himself said "... but with God, all things are possible". Separately, the Book of Exodus goes REALLY far out of it's way to demonstrate God's omnipotence. In plenty of other books it's both shown and spoken.
I'm not really sure what you're asking for here. You seem to think the Bible doesn't claim God to be all-powerful -- which He is and which it does -- but I fail to see how that's a stumbling block for you grasping what the Book says.
You claimed to want something from the Bible. Now you have it.
As for the ignorance of people of the ancient world, no it's *NOT* an apt comparison to measure their education to our modern era. The Bible is the Word of God, but it's written by men who recorded their observations filtered through their own perceptions and world outlooks. The best example I can give you is how the Gospels quotes from Jesus don't always match each other word for word. They quote Jesus as having said the same basic thing at times, but with slightly different phrasing between them. It doesn't alter the meaning of the statement, but the phrasing is not an exact match.
As for the Greeks and Romans being better writers, I'm not sure about that. Maybe my literary knowledge is wanting, but I'd bet Jesus Christ has inspired more books written about Him than any 50 Greek/Roman writers, thinkers, leaders, etc. Moreover, I'd say Jesus is easily the most famous person in history. That being the case, His words must've meant a lot to people, right?
The Qur'ran references the OT in the same way that the NT does, so the story of Adam stands. (It seems like a trap to me -- any curious person would do what Adam did eventually -- why not just not have the tree there??). The problem of sin is faced by Jesus and Mohammed alike. Mohammed's solution is not as nihilistic as Jesus'; in Islam, peace and balance are strived for, not mere personal salvation. As the conservatives among you are keen to point out, war is sometimes necessary in the persuit of peace.
The comparison is more entertaining if it's just between the OT and the Qur'ran.
The comparison is more definitive, however, if it's between the entire Bible and the Koran.
As for why the tree was in the Garden of Eden at all, that's actually simple. God gave man free will. In order for God to be true to that, man would therefore have to have the option to sin. Removing the tree from the equation also removes choice as well.
Islam has an unusual definition of the word "peace". All too often it seems to be synonomous with "domination" and "submission". Yeah, peace can ensue from that, but it's peace that was bought with a bloody sword.
Christianity is the only faith on the market (so to speak) which offers redemption. A Christian's motivation comes from what lies in the next life, not this temporal one. Christians know that we won't truly have peace in this world until Jesus returns.
The comparison is closer with the OT. If it was OK in a previous age, but hideous and perverted today, isn't that moral relativism? I think the OT comparison is interesting in its own right.
Christians submit to Jesus, the Prince of Peace. Christians don't kill folks who don't do that (as much of California demonstrates).
Muslims want people to submit to Islam and Islamic Law. Where the rubber meets the road, there's a penalty for not doing it. Frequently people say that Muslims in America don't seem to manifest this behavior. My only guess can be that they're willfully overlooking the fact that American Muslims are vastly outnumbered and outgunned by various law enforcement agencies as well as (depending on which state he lives in) their neighbors!
Jez, the OT says that God commanded the Israelites to attack specific targets (bloodthirsty Canaanites) to achieve a specific objective (establishing Israel). Once that objective had been satisfied, the attacks were to cease immediately. The Israelites were strictly forbidden from forcibly converting others to Judaism.
Islam, on the other hand, issues open-ended directives to attack, kill or convert infidels to Islam BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
The proof is ultimately in the pudding. Christianity spread through preaching and missionary work (while the Christians themselves were being persecuted and martyred) while Islam spread through war and violence. As Islam and Christianity are morally and philosophically irreconcilable with each other (ie, only one of the two can be true), which of those methods better fits God's character?
I know which I find easier to believe.
I guess the only question I have on this is, is this surprising? Christianity has something like a six hundred year head-start on Islam. Shouldn't we expect that, because of this, in lots of ways the religion will be different?
Can you show me the scripture where the Deuteromic code is meant to elapse shortly after founding Israel?
Christianity spread through the Roman empire.
"I disbelieve your statements about Islam. Many of the verses about jihad are only meant to apply to prophets of Allah and his generals. Other verses, meant to be lasting instructions after Mohammed's passing, are to do with self defence."
Okay. That's your issue then. I'm not going to discuss this further.
"Can you show me the scripture where the Deuteromic code is meant to elapse shortly after founding Israel?"
"When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are about to enter and occupy, he will clear away many nations ahead of you: the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. These seven nations are all more powerful than you. 2When the LORD your God hands these nations over to you and you conquer them, you must completely destroy[a] them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy."
Deuteronomy 7:1-2
Unless you're one of the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites or Jebusites, you have nothing to worry about.
"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you. But these instructions apply only to distant towns, not to the towns of nations nearby."
Deuteronomy 20:10-17
Reread that last line. It relates to the previous Deut quote.
"Christianity spread through the Roman empire."
Yes. With all due respect, is that supposed to mean something? It spread lots of places. It spread despite being under the sword.
Islam, in spreading, has typically been spread *by* the sword in centuries past.
Christianity has spread mostly when backed by the establishment. The first example is Rome. More recently it was carried around the world by the imperialist British. That's pretty much under the sword, no?
I already discussed how Jews handle apostates/pagans inside their ranks. You can call it inhumane if you like, but there was not a single Israelite who had the slightest reason to doubt the Lord since they personally witnessed him work on a frequent basis (through prophets and other means). By the time of the New Testament, it's easy to see how splintered and divided Judaism had become, so evidently that particularly passage wasn't enforced too much (unless, of course, a carpenter from Nazareth proclaimed Himself to be God incarnate).
As for the spread of Christianity, I'm sorry but you're mistaken. Christianity initially spread under bitter persecution inside the Roman Empire. The faith started with a handful of apostles and grew radically in a very short amount of time. This was while they were being killed left and right. Christianity didn't become the official religion of the Roman Empire until 312 AD. Constantine had a fairly controversial conversion to the faith. He was somewhat sympathetic to Christianity, thanks to his fairly moderate father, but even so there's no real evidence of a gradual acceptance of Christianity at work in the Roman Empire. There were active persecution campaigns until at least 180 AD.
Aside from a few occasional sympathizers, I wouldn't say the church had an easy time in the Empire prior to Constantine's conversion (be it faux or genuine).
"We do not presume
to come to this your table, merciful Lord,
trusting in our own righteousness,
but in your manifold and great mercies.
We are not worthy
so much as to gather up the crumbs under your table.
But you are the same Lord
whose nature is always to have mercy.
Grant us therefore, gracious Lord,
so to eat the flesh of your dear Son Jesus Christ
and to drink his blood,
that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body
and our souls washed through his most precious blood,
and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us.
Amen."
Betty: I will only touch lightly on this subject. To Catholics, the body and blood of Christ are not metaphors, that is literal. Regardless, I have ALWAYS contended that one of the problems with Islam is that there is no ONE authority to interpret their scriptures. Hence the chaos and confusion within. With (and I can only speak for the Catholic church here) we have that interpretive authority, so we have an understanding of what the scriptures mean in ALL their contexts, historical, literal, figurative etc. Now, IF IF and IF for the ISLAM religion the descriptions of paradise are only metaphorical as you hypothesized, then someone ought to get the word out to some of the Muslims, because there are an awful lot of them walking around who think otherwise! All this in mind, I think one of the points Amy was making, or if not her I was making, was that, Islam, compared to Christianity uses lures of the flesh to entice one to Paradise. (and in the case of at least one suicide bomber it has worked)The author Roy Shoeman also uses that comparison in his book. Only Schoeman points out that the advesary, i.e. Satan, is another who uses lures of the flesh. Again here is the quote:
"The adversary has always used the lures of the flesh to seduce men away from God and into sin: Islam does so in the eschatology of the religion itself. The effect on moral development from teaching that the highest food that God can offer to man is sexual gratification is obvious as is the kind of a spirit that would present such a picture of heaven as the ultimate meaning of man's existence.." pg 298.
I guess the only question I have on this is, is this surprising? Christianity has something like a six hundred year head-start on Islam. Shouldn't we expect that, because of this, in lots of ways the religion will be different?
Betty: So you mean we can't take advances in humanity, culture and science into consideration? Any advances in these areas can only be applied to secular areas of life? Personally, I find that difficult ESPECIALLY since in the Middle East, Religion is connected to EVERYTHING!
Early Christianity had to survive two centuries of persecution. That's only moderately remarkable, given that a religion as ridiculous as scientology can easily survive fifty years of open mockery.
Betty: Christianity has had very little to complain about for centuries. It's been the most comfortable, powerful and wealthiest religion in the world since industrialisation. What need does it have for barbarianism or to resent its neighbours? When we were poorer and more annoyed, we burned witches.
Jez, you're intellegent. I cannot believe you just said that "Christianity has had very little to complain about for centuries. It's been the most comfortable, powerful and wealthiest religion in the world since industrialisation." Christians have been persecuted since it's conception. All of the original disciples were martyred, except the apostle John who cared for the Virgin Mary after Jesus' ascension.. beheaded, crucified, stoned to death, etc. Surely you're forgetting the sport Christians were to the Romans! Christians have been ruthlessly persecuted and murdered in the former Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, India, Sudan, all over the Middle East...
You must have spoken without thinking. You're forgiven.
Amy, I said, and you quoted, "since industrialisation", which started happening in the 19th century. In recent history, all the most wealthy countries have been Christian. The vast majority of christendom is comfortable and unpersecuted... I don't think that persecution has been at such a level as to threaten it's existence since Constantine's conversion. I think most of the persecution was over by about the 4th century.
However, if you think Christians have had a cushy existence, you're misinformed. A case in point would be the story I've been following about the Afghan Christian Abdul Rahman.