Would you be comfortable with a Mosque built in your neighbourhood?

[GenMarshall]

That's what Styles was pointing out.

He did not specified if its a majority or a minority of Christians. When I see "Christians blow up abortion clinics", I think that he is saying that "ALL Christians blow up abortion clinics". I stated that a majority of Christians condemn the actions of a select few.

However, we should cease now and stick with the Mosque in your community argument and stay with it.

 

[Stacmon]

This is all a bit of a superficial take on it. Yes, even Arab Christians use the word "allah" for God, but there is a major difference in its usage. Muslims identify this as a personal name for God, whereas the Christians are using it as more of a title. It gets confusing.

Allah is one of 99 names attributed to God by Muslims. These names range greatly but some include:

1 Allah (الل&#1607 (The) God
2 Ar-Rahman (الرحم&#1606 The All Beneficent
3 Ar-Rahim (الرحي&#1605 The Most Merciful
4 Al-Malik (المل&#1603 The King, The Sovereign
10 Al-Jabbar (الجبا&#1585 The Powerful, The Irresistible
11 Al-Mutakabbir (المتكب&#1585 The Tremendous
12 Al-Khaliq (الخال&#1602 The Creator
13 Al-Bari' (البار&#1574 The Maker
29 Al-Hakam (الحك&#1605 The Judge, The Arbitrator
30 Al-`Adl (العد&#1604 The Utterly Just
31 Al-Lateef (اللطي&#1601 The Subtly Kind
32 Al-Khabeer (الخبي&#1585 The All Aware
61 Al-Muhyee (المحي&#1609 The Giver of Life
62 Al-Mumeet (الممي&#1578 The Bringer of Death, The Destroyer
73 Al-Awwal (الأو&#1604 The First
74 Al-Akhir (الأخ&#1585 The Last
75 Az-Zahir (الظاه&#1585 The Manifest, The All Victorious
76 Al-Batin (الباط&#1606 The Hidden, The All Encompassing
98 Ar-Rasheed (الرشي&#1583 The Guide, Infallible Teacher and Knower
99 As-Saboor (الصبو&#1585 The Patient, The Timeless

... and so on. Most Muslims simply refer to Him as Allah, but there are also examples of various names for Him in the Hebrew scriptures. Even Christianity has several names for God, including "Lord", "The Father" and so on.

To address the first statement, calling Allah Jehovah/Yahewh does not make it so. Just because Muslims say that Allah is the same as the others does not mean we are compelled to accept this answer. (I suppose we can turn that argument around, too.)

Muslims don't believe that their religion started with Muhammad (pbuh), instead, they believe that it ended with him. Adam (the first man), Moses, Jesus, etc. are all considered prophets of Islam (pbut), because they communicated or received revelation from God. That means until the time of Jesus (pbuh), Judaism and Islam overlapped. Following that, the Jews that didn't believe in Jesus as a prophet, and the Christians that believed in him as synonymous with God diverged from Islam. When Muhammad (pbuh) shared his revelation, he began to restore the belief of the Oneness and Unity of God.

Beyond the name, there are important differences in God's nature among the three, but particularly between the Judeo-Christian tradition and Islam. To say that there are only differences of prophets makes it sound more like the ancient syncretic polytheists; the Greeks and the Romans identifying their gods of war comes to mind.

I'd say there are far more similarities between the Jewish and Islamic conceptions of God than the Trinitarian Christian conception. Judaism and Islam both stress God's complete unity and reject associating any partners with Him. They also depict a more vengeful God, rather than one that does absolutely no harm. For instance, the plagues of the Old Testament take the lives of the oppressing and polytheistic Egyptians, especially the plague that claimed their firstborns. When Pharaoh's army chased the Hebrews into the sea, they weren't just prevented from reaching the Hebrews, they were drowned. There are many examples of this.

On the other hand, God as described by many Trinitarian Christians and equated with Jesus himself, is portrayed as pacifist.

I'm very interested in hearing why you think that the Jewish and Christian concepts of God are more similar than the Jewish and Islamic concepts.

The Koran portrays the Christians as polytheists because they worship the Trinity. "They do blaspheme who say: Allah is the third of three." There is evidently some sort of difference to them.

However, let me quote here from another site I found about this issue:

"Muslims believe that Allah of the Quran is the same as God the Father of the Holy Bible since they do not believe in God the Son, Jesus Christ, nor in God the Holy Spirit..."

So they do want to identify Allah as God the Father, yet they regard Christian beliefs as heretical. The real point of contention, I suppose, comes in the nature of the Trinity and the person of Christ. But beyond this there are fundamental differences in the character and nature of Allah and Yahweh, which are far too complicated to address here.

Muslims believe that Allah is the same God worshiped by Jews and Christians. Although they believe that Trinitarian Christians are misled (and blaspheming) by equating Jesus Christ with God, they don't accuse them of worshiping a different God.

Remember, Jews and Christians are recognized as people of the book in Islam, and it is forbidden to prevent them from practicing their religion.

Now, I believe you can successfully argue that the Jewish God and Christian God are, historically, the same. The difference here is that their natures (aside from trinitarian issues, though that's a very important distinction) are quite similar, and you cannot necessarily say the same thing for Allah and Yahweh. We also get into alternative histories, different kinds of involvement in human affairs, etc.

If you do believe there are strong arguments regarding the differences in character of "Allah and Yahweh" (as described in Judaism), compared to the Trinitarian conception of God and the Jewish conception, I'd be happy to hear them .

My point is that it is too simplistic to say that all are worshipping the same God. If you are going to identify "God" simply as the ruler/creator of the universe, then yes, we can say that they are all the same -- and probably half of the other religions of the world, too. (My, aren't we all just one big happy family...) But if you're going to lay out details about God's character, his personal attributes, role in the world, commandments, etc., then we start to run into problems.

Again... I'm eager to hear your arguments!

Trinitarian Christians may believe that Allah is not the same God they worship, but that doesn't make the reverse true.

What's interesting is that is the same type of comment we hear from Muslims regarding their radicals. They're not real Muslims but in the meantime Sunnis and Shias are killing each other in the name of Allah.

I'm really tired of hearing this misguided line of thinking expressed as fact. Sunnis and Shi'ites are only presently fighting on any significant scale and for "so-called" religious reasons in Iraq. This has more to do with the failure of the US occupation, the ineffective Iraqi government and the actions of small minority of disgusting people. The problem has been made worse because the government and Coalition forces have been unable to provide security for the people. The result is steadily mounting sectarianism, not because Sunnis think Shi'ites are "non-Muslims", blasphemers, or worse (or vice versa), but because people are concerned about their safety from the horrible minority that actually goes out and commits sectarian killings and crimes (like Al-Qaeda or certain Shi'a groups), they feel much more secure taking refuge with what's familiar and safe. Often that might be their religious community or their tribe (which is almost exclusively of a single sect).

The problem here is that when one family loses a father, mother, brother, sister, daughter, son, or any other member, some people are so overcome with grief and so distraught about the lack of justice in the chaotic society that they try to seek justice or get retribution themselves. Sometimes this only serves to further escalate the situation.

We're talking about a country with millions of refugees, millions of people internally displaced, hundreds of thousands of widows caring for (as many as 7 or more) children by themselves and so on. There are at least 300,000 widows in Baghdad alone.

What people should realize, if they want a more accurate understanding of Sunni-Shi'a relations, particularly in Arabic countries is that there is a large amount of intermarriage between these faith communities. This occurs wherever the groups mix, particularly in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. There is a simple solution to the question of what the children will be, they follow their father.

Lebanon is also a textbook example of intermarriage between Sunnis, Shi'as, Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Druze. I recently watched a wedding video of a Shi'a relative of mine marrying a Sunni woman he met at University. This is not something uncommon in Arabic countries.

Also, I think the majority of Mosques, especially those in the West, would never forbid a member of the other sect from praying within, or in congregation. Most Muslims agree that both Sunnis and Shi'as are Muslims and furthermore they realize that the origin of the difference is more political than theological.

Maybe they're in the process of having a reformation too and the Bahais are the only real Muslims.

I'm curious about this statement. Are you yourself Baha'i?

 

[Stacmon]

He did not specified if its a majority or a minority of Christians. When I see "Christians blow up abortion clinics", I think that he is saying that "ALL Christians blow up abortion clinics". I stated that a majority of Christians condemn the actions of a select few.

However, we should cease now and stick with the Mosque in your community argument and stay with it.

Well, the purpose of this thread was to discuss people's feelings regarding Muslims and how comfortable they would be having Muslims as part of their community.

Respectful discussion on theological points is fine. When arguments are rational and not personal, they aren't really a problem.

We just have to make sure to keep our heads cool and respect each others' differences.

In the end, the strongest argument wins, not the loudest voice, and I think we all know that.

The moderators just don't want things to get too heated, or too personal.

 

[Whomp]

I am not Baha'i but they have a beautiful temple in a wealthy northern suburb of Chicago. I understand they're considered heathens by Shia and Sunnis.

Their very existence presents a challenge to the Islamic doctrine of the perfection and finality of Muhammad's revelation.

I hear what you're saying about the United States failings administratively in the Sunni/Shia parts of Iraq. As Leon Wieseltier said in the New Republic "The justice of a cause is not a promise of its success."

However, what I find interesting is, speaking of Mosques, is there are more cranes than Mosques in Kurdistan right now.
Why would that be and not in the Sunni/Shia areas?
Could it be all of the violence accelerated with the bombing of the Imam Ali Mosque believed to have been perpetrated by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Interesting how Jordanians turned a blind eye to his escapades until he bombed his own people.

I think the rage against the war, in Iraq itself and in the wider Arab world, was the anger of a culture that America had given power to the Shia stepchildren of the Arab world (and the Kurds). This proud sense of violation has stretched from the embittered Sunni autocrats, the towns of the Sunni Triangle to the chat rooms of Arabia and to jihadists as far away from Iraq as North Africa and the Muslim enclaves of Western Europe.

If you think I'm being critical of the situation there I am. It would have been heady and right had Iraqis brought about their own liberty, had they demolished the prisons and the statues on their own. I'm also critical of my countries handling of the situation there along with our relationship with Israel so I'm equal opportunity in that regard.

I work in a results oriented business and pay a considerable amount of taxes to fund these foreign ventures so I expect results.

 

[bhsup]

There are a couple of Mosques in my county, a few Synogogues, and hundreds of Christian churches. Even if I did have issues with someone being a Muslim, which is silly as well, worrying about a Mosque here or there is ludicrious.

 

[sonorakitch]

too bad you can't compare modern christianity with modern islam.

islam is going through a phase, christianity went through it before and they're fine now.

I wonder how violent Christianity was when it was the same age that Islam is now.

So we are trying to explain Muslim aggression by the age of the religion? We are excusing and allowing tolerance for the aggression?

Nevertheless, you all seem to concur that Islam is a religion stuck in the 1600's! Boo Ya!

~Chris

 

[LucyDuke]

I'm surprised that there are still so many people bothered by this. At least they're honest about it.

Personally, I don't give a crap where you build a mosque. It's better than another damn wal-mart.

We've got an old Baptist church two blocks up the road, I went to nursery school there some 17 years ago. They do all this stuff with the bells at 6pm every day, and I'll go outside just to listen to it. I don't know if I'd like it if I were closer and could hear it inside the house, but as it is, I really like the noise.

 

[Stacmon]

I am not Baha'i but they have a beautiful temple in a wealthy northern suburb of Chicago. I understand they're considered heathens by Shia and Sunnis.

Well the majority of Muslims believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was the final prophet. Therefore, no one claiming to believe in the Qur'an and Muhammad (pbuh) while at the same time, calling themselves a prophet, messenger, etc. is accepted by the Muslim community.

Baha'is believe that the Qur'an was sent by God.

However, what I find interesting is, speaking of Mosques, is there are more cranes than Mosques in Kurdistan right now.
Why would that be and not in the Sunni/Shia areas?

By comparison, the Kurdish area is certainly a lot more stable, but it should be pointed out that the Kurdish situation is completely different.

The Kurds are majority Sunni, though some, especially in Iran, are Shi'a. What binds them together is their history of oppression at the hands of their neighbours and a strong feeling of nationalism. They see this as a rare opportunity for self determination and autonomy, something they haven't had in the past.

They're making fantastic progress and personally, I'm in favour of a Kurdish state.

Could it be all of the violence accelerated with the bombing of the Imam Ali Mosque believed to have been perpetrated by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Interesting how Jordanians turned a blind eye to his escapades until he bombed his own people.

You're talking here about the Jordanian government. That's a frequent problem among Arab rulers, whether dictators or monarchs. They're often too concerned about themselves and not concerned enough with their people, other Arabs, fellow Muslims or the greater world community.

I think the rage against the war, in Iraq itself and in the wider Arab world, was the anger of a culture that America had given power to the Shia stepchildren of the Arab world (and the Kurds). This proud sense of violation has stretched from the embittered Sunni autocrats, the towns of the Sunni Triangle to the chat rooms of Arabia and to jihadists as far away from Iraq as North Africa and the Muslim enclaves of Western Europe.

I disagree with you. Much of my father's family is Shi'a and they're as disgusted as any Sunni with what is going in Iraq or Afghanistan. Many non-Muslims seem to treat the relationship between Sunnis and Shi'a as adversarial, but many Muslims don't feel that way. Whether it's a Shi'a child that is killed or a Sunni, most Muslims will grieve.

If you think I'm being critical of the situation there I am. It would have been heady and right had Iraqis brought about their own liberty, had they demolished the prisons and the statues on their own. I'm also critical of my countries handling of the situation there along with our relationship with Israel so I'm equal opportunity in that regard.

I work in a results oriented business and pay a considerable amount of taxes to fund these foreign ventures so I expect results.

Well, I'm glad you're not blindly loyal to your country and its (in my opinion, flawed policies ). I hope people realize that it isn't patriotic to support an administration when it is doing more harm than good.

 

[Stacmon]

So we are trying to explain Muslim aggression by the age of the religion? We are excusing and allowing tolerance for the aggression?

This view has only been expressed by a few people in this thread, and I completely disagree with it.

Furthermore, what "Muslim Aggression" are you talking about? The only aggression on a state level could be argued to be the Taliban's complicity in the 9/11 attacks, beyond that, if a dictator happens to be Muslim, that certainly shouldn't be considered "Muslim Aggression." It also shouldn't be forgotten that the Taliban, although claiming to be Muslims, also did many unislamic things, like preventing education of women.

The actions of individuals can't be equated with the actions of all Muslims.

I'm interested in hearing some of your examples of "Muslim Aggression," especially considering the very recent colonial history that many Christian nations have.

Nevertheless, you all seem to concur that Islam is a religion stuck in the 1600's! Boo Ya!

Again, claiming that Islam is "not modern, stuck in the 7th century, or horribly outdated" is just a way to mislead people.

There are some who consider Muslims that pray 5 times daily, fast during Ramadan, read the Qur'an in public and so on "fundamentalists". This is just laughable.

For instance, very orthodox Jews, carrying out all of their hundreds of mitzvot (religious laws/commandments) often seem "fundamentalist" to people. The difference is, the majority of Jews do not demonstrate that level of religious observance, while Muslims, especially in predominantly Muslim countries and those that in some way enforce or apply pressure for religious observance, are much more loyal to their religious traditions.

 

[Stylesjl]

It appears Stylesjl cannot rebut this. I am not surprised.

I would think only those born after 2001 would be able to make such statments.

~Chris

Of course I couldn't rebut it. I was offline. I can now though

 

[Ramius75]

Actually, in secular states like the U.S.A, Europe, Canada,Australia, etc. we do not use a minaret, loudspeaker, megaphone, or anything like that! Just basically, everyone just goes at about 7:00.(do Sunni's do the same thing?)

I know, they are changing. I just came back from Malaysia KL actually and im surprise that i actually never really hear anything from the mosque, (probably due to im in a hotel)

I like the secular movement, as long as the religious ppl dont try to change the life or affect other ppl. Im ok with it.

 

[Stylesjl]

I call Bullcrap on that. The Majority of Christians dont blow up abortion clinics. Where did you get that pile of crap that all Christians blow up abortion clinics?

As for your propaganda statement, Bullcrap! The Majority actually DISAPROVES and CONDEMS the actions of a handful who do such acts!

I could say the same thing that Atheism seeks to destroy religion by forcing churches to close or forcing people to be religious by medical or torture like in Curt's mindset. But does that make it right to slap that ALL Atheists want to do the same thing that Curt does? No. Its the same thing for Christians as well.

Please, stop with the outrageous statements and ignoring the facts.

Perhaps Mobboss and you have been so hostile to me because of a misunderstanding.

I said Christians blow up abortion clinics, I guess what I should have said was that some christians blow up abortion clinics just like some muslims blow up people. The whole point was to refute the garbage that Christianity preaches peace and love any more then Islam does.

 

[Stacmon]

The whole point was to refute the garbage that Christianity preaches peace and love any more then Islam does.

Or in my opinion, the garbage that people completely misrepresenting a religion can be taken as examples of the broader community.

 

[El_Machinae]

The whole point was to refute the garbage that Christianity preaches peace and love any more then Islam does.

Actually, I think that it does preach more love than Islam. There are maybe five sections of the Bible which seem to be interpreted abusively
- the curse on Ham was used to justify the slave trade
- the "spare the rod, spoil the child" excuse is used in a huge number of child abuse cases (distressingly so)
- Jesus stormed the temple, and some Christians think they have the right to do the same.
- Jesus get his disciples to buy swords for some poorly defined reason
- Levitical crap is used to justify keeping certain things illegal

As far as I can tell, that's just about the total sum of what can be abused in the Bible to justify uncivil behaviour. The Leviticus stuff is hotly debated, because it's nonsensical to apply it wholesale.

That said, even with Jesus's suggestion to apply the Golden Rule, Christian history is full of violent and uncivil garbage that many people would like to evolve out of. Christians, as a whole, certainly don't act as well as their religion intends. Humans will be nasty brutes, no matter how nice their religion tells them to act.

Islam, though, has a host of Scripture that can be willfully interpreted in order to justify hurting people. Heck! They're told to kill the apostates, beat homosexuals, imprison their children, etc! There's nothing like that in the New Testament, there's no equivalent request to form secular laws that punish people for sinning.

Let's face it, there is enough wife-beating in Christian lands to sicken any moral individual. Islam expressely states that it is okay, and leaves the intensity up to the reader.

We can easily state that some religions are more loving and peaceful than others. To ignore this would be a mistake.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

If we;re allowed our churches, they should be allowed their mosques

 

[Stacmon]

There's nothing like that in the New Testament, there's no equivalent request to form secular laws that punish people for sinning.

You may not find what you're looking for in the New Testament, but remember that the Christian Bible also includes the Old Testament. No Christian (especially literalists) would argue that what is in the Old Testament, inherited from Judaism didn't take place.

You can't evaluate a religion and look at only half of its scripture. This is one reason I was putting forward the argument earlier that the Jewish and Islamic understandings of God are much more compatible, compared to the Jewish and Christian understandings.

We can easily state that some religions are more loving and peaceful than others. To ignore this would be a mistake.

The validity and truth of a religion isn't determined by the degree of "love and peace" it espouses. If one is to imagine that all current concepts of God are false, and that the "true creator" is actually evil, wants to encourage us to kill each other, to rape, pillage and destroy, saying "well, you don't demonstrate enough love and peace, you can't be real" won't suddenly change reality.

 

[Whomp]

I don't want to get too Off Topic so let me know if you'd prefer this to move to another thread Stacmon. I've read your dialogues with El Mach and feel they're healthy and constructive. So here's my thoughts.

By comparison, the Kurdish area is certainly a lot more stable, but it should be pointed out that the Kurdish situation is completely different. They're making fantastic progress and personally, I'm in favour of a Kurdish state.

Please enlighten me why it's completely different. What binds them that separates Sunnis and Shias?

You're talking here about the Jordanian government. That's a frequent problem among Arab rulers, whether dictators or monarchs. They're often too concerned about themselves and not concerned enough with their people, other Arabs, fellow Muslims or the greater world community.

The way I see it the ruling regimes in the region have displaced their troubles onto America. Their stability has come at America's expense, as the scapegoating and the anti-Americanism had poisoned Arab political life.

Well, I'm glad you're not blindly loyal to your country and its (in my opinion, flawed policies ). I hope people realize that it isn't patriotic to support an administration when it is doing more harm than good.

We can't shy away from the very history we unleashed. In the same vein, we may not be comfortable with all the manifestations of an emancipated Shiaism from the Mahdi Army in Iraq to Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut. The Shia have been given a new claim on the Arab political order of primacy and power. Good or bad.

Or in my opinion, the garbage that people completely misrepresenting a religion can be taken as examples of the broader community.

Not according to this guy.

Hassan Butt made his about face public last January at Cambridge University, at the debating union. For the first time he revealed that he had left the network and announced his strategy to confront radical Muslims.

"The position of moderate Muslims is that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. Do you buy that?" Simon asks.

"No, absolutely not. By completely being in denial about it's like an alcoholic basically. Unless an alcoholic acknowledges that he has a problem with alcohol, he's never gonna be able to go forward," Butt argues. "And as long as we, as Muslims, do not acknowledge that there is a violent streak in Islam, unless we acknowledge that, then we are gonna always lose the battle to the militants, by being in complete denial about it."

Butt’s private life is a shambles right now. His family has called him a traitor to Islam and his former friends from the network have threatened his life. He’s writing a book about his transformation and his challenge to Muslims.

He says he wants to make right what he calls the bad work he did before – bad work that may have included more direct involvement in terrorism than fund raising and recruitment.

I suggest you read the whole piece and "Google" Hassan Butt for his past commentaries before he left the "network".

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/23/60minutes/main2602308.shtml

 

[El_Machinae]

You may not find what you're looking for in the New Testament, but remember that the Christian Bible also includes the Old Testament. No Christian (especially literalists) would argue that what is in the Old Testament, inherited from Judaism didn't take place.

You can't evaluate a religion and look at only half of its scripture. This is one reason I was putting forward the argument earlier that the Jewish and Islamic understandings of God are much more compatible, compared to the Jewish and Christian understandings.

I'm not ignoring the OT: I'm stating that Christianity is a more peaceful and loving religion than Islam. By its very nature, Islam is more prone to abuses that you and I would consider outrageous.

The worship of the Jewish god lead to endemic ignorance and massive atrocities. People can think that the Jewish god really exists, if they want. But then they cannot handwave away the detriments as merely the acts of historical people. I mean, the followers of Odin did some pretty ignorant and nasty things too, but because almost no one believes in Odin, we don't need to pin the horrors of history on modern day followers.

The validity and truth of a religion isn't determined by the degree of "love and peace" it espouses.

No, of course not. The peace espoused by a religion merely determines whether or not they are decent neighbours. The truth of a religion can only really be approximated by how closely their Scriptures coincide with reality and what the results of the Scriptures are compared to their stated goals.

 

[civverguy]

Of course.

 

[ParkCungHee]

So we are trying to explain Muslim aggression by the age of the religion? We are excusing and allowing tolerance for the aggression?

Nevertheless, you all seem to concur that Islam is a religion stuck in the 1600's! Boo Ya!

~Chris

Or the 1930's if you look at the state of Shintao at that time.