Christianity And Islam, Can We Not Find Peace Together?

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='musturde' post='1122063' date='Nov 17 2006, 12:28 AM']
An atheist can use this same arguement for any religion. In reality, Islam is misenterpretted by many for the sake of their own political agenda or cause.
The "Christian" nation of America has never gotten into any wars either. How about Ireland? England had a bad history as well. Very many Lebanese Christians went to war with eachother and still hate eachother because each side stupidly follows their political leader as if he was God. The people themselves are what need to be changed, it is not the religion.
Even if you wanted to convert them, you should at least try to learn about their religion correctly so you could present Christianity to them.
[/quote]
your last point is a good one, yes.

But there is only so much misinterpretation you can do when the Muslims are violent in action, not just rhetoric. If they aren't acting like Christians, then that's what is wrong to me. I think everyone should be Catholic, and those that aren't are mistaken in their beliefs.

[Socrates]

[quote name='musturde' post='1122063' date='Nov 16 2006, 10:28 PM']
The "Christian" nation of America has never gotten into any wars either. How about Ireland? England had a bad history as well. Very many Lebanese Christians went to war with eachother and still hate eachother because each side stupidly follows their political leader as if he was God. The people themselves are what need to be changed, it is not the religion.
Even if you wanted to convert them, you should at least try to learn about their religion correctly so you could present Christianity to them.
[/quote]
The big difference is that most Christian countries do not make war [i]because[/i] they are Christian, but rather to counter some other agression, or for reasons unrelated to religion (or even resulting from their apostacy from the Faith).
Muslims have a tradition from the beginning of using war as a means to spread Islam.

[musturde]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1122098' date='Nov 16 2006, 09:56 PM']
The big difference is that most Christian countries do not make war [i]because[/i] they are Christian, but rather to counter some other agression, or for reasons unrelated to religion (or even resulting from their apostacy from the Faith).
Muslims have a tradition from the beginning of using war as a means to spread Islam.
[/quote]

Christians have done this too. Just because there are a couple of extremists, doesn't make the religion wrong. It makes the extremists wrong. Many of these extremists, if Christian, will be just as crazy. Also, most of the stuff going on now can be argued to be unrelated to religion. For example, why is America hated so much in the Middle East? This is mostly political.

Edited November 17, 2006 by musturde

[Mercy me]

[quote name='musturde' post='1122152' date='Nov 17 2006, 12:14 AM']
Christians have done this too. Just because there are a couple of extremists, doesn't make the religion wrong. It makes the extremists wrong. Many of these extremists, if Christian, will be just as crazy. Also, most of the stuff going on now can be argued to be unrelated to religion. For example, why is America hated so much in the Middle East? This is mostly political.
[/quote]

Christians go to war to spread Christianity? Would you please cite an example or two? Oh say something within the last 300 years?

[Pax Christi]

Okay, just a little history on the "wars" we've (The U.S.) been in and I know alot about.
How many "wars" have been declared since WWII?
I think this is pertinent as it is represented that we are a "Christian Nation". Sometimes you have to look "inward" to see the answer "outward".

I found this article interesting as well.
[url="http://www.chnonline.org/2004/2004-10-07/newsstory5.html"]http://www.chnonline.org/2004/2004-10-07/newsstory5.html[/url]

[Pax Christi]

Just a little more on the Muslim beliefs:

[url="http://itp.nyu.edu/~ai263/USAMUSLIMS/muslimjesus.html"]http://itp.nyu.edu/~ai263/USAMUSLIMS/muslimjesus.html[/url]

Very interesting.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]Given the muslim theology of jihad, I am not optimistic.[/quote]

The word jihad is derived from the term 'ijtihad'. (You can normally work out the origin of an Arabic word by looking for the three consonants that form the root.) Ijtihad can best be translated as 'autonomous reasoning'. It's a really awkward, clunky translation, but it's impossible to capture the essence of the Arabic. 'Jihad' contains the idea of struggle (both mental and physical) but that struggle is a highly personal one. It's not necessarily about converting other people. It's basically the Islamic equivalent of 'conversion of the heart'. Since the Western press have adopted the word jihad to mean 'holy war', some Muslims have taken to calling their spiritual quest for perfection jihad-an-nafs. (An-nafs means 'of the soul'.) This is tautology in my opinion, but they have to phrase it this way now if they don't want to be misunderstood.

[As an aside, I do speak quite good Arabic - I haven't just lifted this from a website.]

[quote]all this politically correct coddling of the Muslims is lame. They should be accountable for what they do, then we can talk about peace. If they hit us, I say we hit them back. We keep seeing this double standard where Muslims aren't criticized for their history that began in violence, and continues in violence to this very day.[/quote]

Who are 'they'? Muslims shouldn't be perceived as a monolithic mass of people who all think alike. When I was living in Saudi Arabia, I would never have dreamed of holding the local people accountable for the person who tried to bomb our school or target my family's car when we were at the supermarket one day. Following September 11th, strange Saudi women (Muslims) whom I didn't even know would come up to me in the street, shake my hand, and say, "Hello sister," or, "Welcome to Saudi Arabia." (I'd already been living there for fourteen years, but never mind - they were trying to be kind.) It's impossible to hold one billion Muslims accountable for the actions of a few.

[Pax Christi]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1122234' date='Nov 17 2006, 06:41 AM']
The word jihad is derived from the term 'ijtihad'. (You can normally work out the origin of an Arabic word by looking for the three consonants that form the root.) Ijtihad can best be translated as 'autonomous reasoning'. It's a really awkward, clunky translation, but it's impossible to capture the essence of the Arabic. 'Jihad' contains the idea of struggle (both mental and physical) but that struggle is a highly personal one. It's not necessarily about converting other people. It's basically the Islamic equivalent of 'conversion of the heart'. Since the Western press have adopted the word jihad to mean 'holy war', some Muslims have taken to calling their spiritual quest for perfection jihad-an-nafs. (An-nafs means 'of the soul'.) This is tautology in my opinion, but they have to phrase it this way now if they don't want to be misunderstood.

[As an aside, I do speak quite good Arabic - I haven't just lifted this from a website.]
Who are 'they'? Muslims shouldn't be perceived as a monolithic mass of people who all think alike. When I was living in Saudi Arabia, I would never have dreamed of holding the local people accountable for the person who tried to bomb our school or target my family's car when we were at the supermarket one day. Following September 11th, strange Saudi women (Muslims) whom I didn't even know would come up to me in the street, shake my hand, and say, "Hello sister," or, "Welcome to Saudi Arabia." (I'd already been living there for fourteen years, but never mind - they were trying to be kind.) It's impossible to hold one billion Muslims accountable for the actions of a few.
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing your personal experience. As scarey as the situations sound, you came away a more enlightened individual through the efforts of good people. I think this is what it's really all about, remembering and building upon the peaceful things.
If Our Mother truly is the "Magnificant" I highly doubt that she will stand by and let the only two religions that revere her to be at war (not that we are). My own personal feeling is that we're in for something "special" to occur between Muslims and Catholics.
Justice and peace go hand in hand. I think that there has been a lacking in the first which has led to the second.

Just a little info, in this video you'll see the CIA building.....and a lot of young Catholics. Hope for our future. A good example of not "fearing"....if you know what I mean.

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ApTCenNeOg"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ApTCenNeOg[/url]

[Pax Christi]

[quote name='Pax Christi' post='1122186' date='Nov 17 2006, 01:09 AM']
Okay, just a little history on the "wars" we've (The U.S.) been in and I know alot about.
How many "wars" have been declared since WWII?
I think this is pertinent as it is represented that we are a "Christian Nation". Sometimes you have to look "inward" to see the answer "outward".

I found this article interesting as well.
[url="http://www.chnonline.org/2004/2004-10-07/newsstory5.html"]http://www.chnonline.org/2004/2004-10-07/newsstory5.html[/url]
[/quote]

I figure I'll answer this one before it gets lost in the posts.
We, that is the U.S., hasn't declared war on anybody since WW II. According to the Constitution, Congress is the only branch of government that has this power. Congress, in fact, has not declared any "wars" since WW II and has been "voting" to allow the executive branch to conduct military actions.
This may sound a bit "off topic" but I assure you that it has a lot to do with how the Muslim nations view us.
How many "military actions" have we been involved with since WW II? One government official has put the number at 32. How many have reached their "goals"? One, and it remains to be seen if it'll stay that way. We've been in a perpetual state of war if you think about it. So if you ask yourselves "Why?" you may find the answer to why the M.E. has become so violent.
Again, if you want "peace" work for "justice".

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='musturde' post='1122054' date='Nov 17 2006, 03:16 AM']
Muslims venerate Mary more than prots. Whenever I'm in Lebanon and go to a pilgramage to our Lady, I always see Muslims there. I saw the same thing in Syria too last summer.
[b]I have a feeling that a book written about Islam by Catholics may seem a bit biased and may unintentionally distort facts. Isn't it better to read about Islam from a Muslims scholar or just to read the Koran?[/b]
[/quote]

How can you possibly justify saying that, especially without reading the book? By your logic all books written by Christians about other religions should be disregarded because of their Provenance. Inspite of the fact that Daniel Ali was a Muslim his whole life before converting you're going to dismiss his testimony simply because now he's a Catholic?

According to what you're saying would we then be fully justified in ignoring what people like Jimmy Akin, Scott Hahn, Peter Kreeft, Richard John Neuhaus and so on have to say about Protestantism simply because they are no longer Protestants now? In which case Protestants who refuse to listen to their arguments/justifications in becoming Catholic should not be blamed for doing so given that one should learn about a religion only from the sources of that religion?

In actual fact I do own a Koran but you know full well in the main Islamic traditions that Koran alone is only thought as containing the keys for its own interpretation when properly understood. For Sunnis there are hadith and verdicts of muftis to be factored in and for Shi'ites the ruilings of the Ayatollahs. There are passages that insist on freedom of religion in the Koran and others that give a contrary view (cf. Surah 2:256 and Surah 9:29). So then we must ask ourselves, historically, how have these passages been interpreted? What judgements were made upon them by Islamic scholars and how have they been applied by the dar-al-Islam?

I understand that Islam is a diverse spectrum and that not all groups of Muslims have the same beliefs. I also understand that the system of authority does not parallel to that of Catholicism. Moreover, I will give you the fact that what we do share in terms of authority however is that not all believers in either faith follow what those who hold positions over them say. However, you cannot change that the most representative voices of the most populous groups of Muslims have taught and continue to teach an interpretation of Islam that makes a clash of civilisations inevitable.

If you cannot convert a Muslim by Shariah law and you cannot convert from Islam by Shariah law surely a religion like Catholicism which seeks to evangelise the entire world will always be in conflict with Islam.

[Pax Christi]

[quote name='Myles Domini' post='1122258' date='Nov 17 2006, 10:16 AM']
How can you possibly justify saying that, especially without reading the book? By your logic all books written by Christians about other religions should be disregarded because of their Provenance. Inspite of the fact that Daniel Ali was a Muslim his whole life before converting you're going to dismiss his testimony simply because now he's a Catholic?

According to what you're saying would we then be fully justified in ignoring what people like Jimmy Akin, Scott Hahn, Peter Kreeft, Richard John Neuhaus and so on have to say about Protestantism simply because they are no longer Protestants now? In which case Protestants who refuse to listen to their arguments/justifications in becoming Catholic should not be blamed for doing so given that one should learn about a religion only from the sources of that religion?

In actual fact I do own a Koran but you know full well in the main Islamic traditions that Koran alone is only thought as containing the keys for its own interpretation when properly understood. For Sunnis there are hadith and verdicts of muftis to be factored in and for Shi'ites the ruilings of the Ayatollahs. There are passages that insist on freedom of religion in the Koran and others that give a contrary view (cf. Surah 2:256 and Surah 9:29). So then we must ask ourselves, historically, how have these passages been interpreted? What judgements were made upon them by Islamic scholars and how have they been applied by the dar-al-Islam?

I understand that Islam is a diverse spectrum and that not all groups of Muslims have the same beliefs. I also understand that the system of authority does not parallel to that of Catholicism. Moreover, I will give you the fact that what we do share in terms of authority however is that not all believers in either faith follow what those who hold positions over them say. However, you cannot change that the most representative voices of the most populous groups of Muslims have taught and continue to teach an interpretation of Islam that makes a clash of civilisations inevitable.

If you cannot convert a Muslim by Shariah law and you cannot convert from Islam by Shariah law surely a religion like Catholicism which seeks to evangelise the entire world will always be in conflict with Islam.
[/quote]
Okay, on this one I feel I have to challenge you.
1) "Inevitable"? Is not God's will what is "inevitable"? If so do we know God's will concerning what will happen in Muslim-Christian relations?
2) You make a claim that the "most representative voices of the most populous groups of Muslims have taught and continue to teach an interpretation of Islam that makes a clash of civilisations inevitable". Can you give some referrences for this conclusion?

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='Pax Christi' post='1122260' date='Nov 17 2006, 03:28 PM']
Okay, on this one I feel I have to challenge you.
1) "Inevitable"? Is not God's will what is "inevitable"? If so do we know God's will concerning what will happen in Muslim-Christian relations?
2) You make a claim that the "most representative voices of the most populous groups of Muslims have taught and continue to teach an interpretation of Islam that makes a clash of civilisations inevitable". Can you give some referrences for this conclusion?
[/quote]

Answering the first quesiton for me is easier than answering the second, that is, if you demand specific references. That is simply because I'm currently at University and I dont have my books on Islam or my Koran with me. Nonetheless, if you do not believe me feel free to search the web for the punishment legislated by Shariah law for those who convert from Islam to another religion. Do you not remember the cafe of the Afghan who had to be declared mentally unstable to avoid the sword earlier this year when on trial for becoming a Christian?

This is examplar of my point. When you have two religions who seek to convert everyone to their religion naturally they're not going to live in peaceful co-existence if one is going to use force to prevent the other from achieving their means. Whereas Muslims can freely evangelise in Rome, Paris or anywhere else they like Catholics cannot simply begin a mission to Medina or Cairo. The penalty for the missionaries would be severe and for anyone they converted would likewise be severe.

If it is not God's will that all men come to the knowledge of Jesus Christ then this conclusion obviously holds no ground. Nonetheless, the New Testament insists that this is the reason the Church was created and if the Church takes this directive seriously in Islamic countries it will put itself in a position to be violently opposed leading to a clash.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Cathoholic Anonymous' post='1122234' date='Nov 17 2006, 08:41 AM']
It's impossible to hold one billion Muslims accountable for the actions of a few.
[/quote]
hardly.

[Pax Christi]

[quote name='Myles Domini' post='1122352' date='Nov 17 2006, 01:17 PM']
Answering the first quesiton for me is easier than answering the second, that is, if you demand specific references. That is simply because I'm currently at University and I dont have my books on Islam or my Koran with me. Nonetheless, if you do not believe me feel free to search the web for the punishment legislated by Shariah law for those who convert from Islam to another religion. Do you not remember the cafe of the Afghan who had to be declared mentally unstable to avoid the sword earlier this year when on trial for becoming a Christian?

This is examplar of my point. When you have two religions who seek to convert everyone to their religion naturally they're not going to live in peaceful co-existence if one is going to use force to prevent the other from achieving their means. Whereas Muslims can freely evangelise in Rome, Paris or anywhere else they like Catholics cannot simply begin a mission to Medina or Cairo. The penalty for the missionaries would be severe and for anyone they converted would likewise be severe.

If it is not God's will that all men come to the knowledge of Jesus Christ then this conclusion obviously holds no ground. Nonetheless, the New Testament insists that this is the reason the Church was created and if the Church takes this directive seriously in Islamic countries it will put itself in a position to be violently opposed leading to a clash.
[/quote]
You are claiming that "most representative voices of the most populous groups of Muslims" which I fail to see as the case. Are there loud ones? Most definately. I have to ask though, where are the violent clashes in the U.S, Canada, S. America? Most of the violent clashes happen in the M.E.
Further it is erroneous to believe that all Muslims support Sharia law. There are Muslim countries that had to soften their stance just to become members at the U.N. International human rights groups have intervened in a number of cases where the toughest Sharia law cases have come to court.
Now, I would also argue Our Lady's presence in both the Catholic and Muslim religions. As revered as she is by both I find it doubtful that at some point she isn't going to intervene. That doesn't mean that Muslims will not be converted.
We also have to look at what the Church hierarchy has been doing in the area of dialogue. I don't think that it is in support of their goals, one which I feel is guided by God, to not follow their lead.
I very much believe that justice and peace are two sides of the same coin. You cannot have one without the other. I would then pose that "justice" has not always been on the side of an oppressed people which has led to the violence. I applaud Pope Benedict's efforts to extend a peacful understanding to the Mulim community and feel that in the end it will be well worth it. He's working on the common ground we both hold rather than the differences and no doubt, it will take time.

[Pax Christi]

Just something else I found interesting:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPijUH2MalU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPijUH2MalU[/url]