Pope Francis: “Intensify” Catholic “dialogue” with Islam

I am all for dialogue between Muslims and Christians when it is honest and not based on false pretenses. There doesn’t seem to be any use to dialogue that ignores difficulties and points of disagreement rather than confronting them. They won’t go away if ignored. I discuss the genuine prospects for dialogue and its pitfalls at length in my book Not Peace But A Sword, which will be published next week by Catholic Answers.

One thing that must be recognized is that for many Muslim spokesmen and leaders, dialogue with adherents of other religions is simply a proselytizing mechanism designed to convert the “dialogue” partner to Islam, as the Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb explained: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.”

In line with this, 138 Muslim scholars wrote to Pope Benedict XVI, inviting him to dialogue. The title of the document they sent to him was A Common Word Between Us and You. Reading the entire Qur’anic verse from which the phrase “a common word between us and you” was taken makes the Common Word initiative’s agenda clear: “Say: “˜People of the Book! Come now to a word common between us and you, that we serve none but God, and that we associate not aught with Him, and do not some of us take others as Lords, apart from God.” And if they turn their backs, say: “˜Bear witness that we are Muslims– (3:64). Since Muslims consider the Christian confession of the divinity of Christ to be an unacceptable association of a partner with God, this verse is saying that the “common word” that Muslims and the People of the Book should agree on is that Christians should discard one of the central tenets of their faith and essentially become Muslims. Not a promising basis for an honest and mutually respectful dialogue of equals.

“‘Intensify’ dialogue with Islam: Pope to Roman Catholic Church,” from PTI, March 22 (thanks to Milad):

Vatican City: Pope Francis on Friday called for the Roman Catholic Church to “intensify” its dialogue with Islam, echoing hopes in the Muslim world for better ties with the Vatican during his reign.

“It is important to intensify dialogue among the various religions and I am thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam,” the new pontiff said in an address to foreign ambassadors at the Vatican.

Francis’s predecessor Benedict XVI was seen by some Muslim leaders as hostile to Islam and the change at the top had been welcomed by the 57-member Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and Al-Azhar, Sunni Islam’s highest seat of learning. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, head of the Saudi-based OIC, said earlier this month that he hoped “the relationship between Islam and Christianity will regain its cordiality and sincere friendship”.

Mahmud Azab, adviser for inter-faith affairs to Al-Azhar imam Ahmed al-Tayyeb in Cairo, also told AFP earlier, “As soon as a new policy emerges, we will resume the dialogue with the Vatican”. Al-Azhar broke off ties in 2011 after Benedict called for the protection of Christian minorities following a suicide bombing at a church in Egypt.

So apparently the new policy that Azab wants is for the pope never to criticize the Muslim persecution of Christians. Then we’ll all be great friends — and what’s a few burnt churches and dead bodies when we’re getting on so famously?

Benedict was also heavily criticised early in his reign when he recounted a Byzantine emperor’s description of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed as a warmonger who spread evil teachings.

In his address on Friday, Francis also called for the Church to dialogue more with non-believers — returning to an effort begun during Benedict’s reign amid rising secularism in the Western world.

“It is also important to intensify outreach to non-believers so that the differences which divide and hurt us may never prevail but rather the desire to build true links of friendship,” he said.

True friendship cannot be built on false pretenses.

U.S. "Palestinian" non-profit accuses Jews of using Christian blood in Passover
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint


  1. says

    “… Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb explained: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.”

    BUT Shrillary Clinton (2nd video) will “build bridges” to Islam with the 16/18 UN Resolution. She will mix oil (Islam) with water (democracy) … it doesn’t work!


  2. says

    Noticing that the new pope wears glasses I might suggest he exchange his rose-colored lenses.

    His statement is not a good sign.

    Islam needs to be confronted, not coddled.

  3. says

    A dialogue with the muslims means you must praise Islam and its prophet, you are not allowed to link any crime done in the name of Allah by the jihadists or any halal thing such as pedophilia, women beating etc to Islam.

    You also can not mention that Jesus is God (for Christians) or Budha is the way of salvation (for Budhists) etc, as it will offend the muslims.

    And certainly any money contribution to the muslims as part of dialogue is very much expected as it will strengthen you relationship with the muslims, so that you will be spared if there is a riot.

    That is what a dialogue with Islam is.

  4. says

    Pope Francis, from all appearances, seems to be a very good man. Unfortunately, when dealing with Islam, goodness alone hardly cuts it, anymore than it did with Nazism or Marxism. So, I can only hope that Pope Francis is more than “merely” good.

    The path is clear for those who can see the path clearly (a declining number, to be sure, in this world in which we live). Clarity in this regard entails fully comprehending that no totalitarian ideology should be treated as an equal in negotiations or in any assessment of the human condition. Such an ideology must be treated for what it is—an aberration, a deep negative, in man’s history. Doing so will allow any astute negotiator who understands this verity to act accordingly and wisely.

    Islam is clearly, for those who see clearly (again a diminishing number of the percentage of most any population) a totalitarian ideology. Therefore, the Catholic Church, understandably being allowed to consider the fate of its brethren in Muslim-dominated lands, must nonetheless bargain hard-like, not soft-like, and take the consequences of such an approach in stride, not just for its own preservation but for something even larger.

    The alternative is capitulation and loss of most everything, both life itself and, what is more important, pride and honor. All these wonderful things are in jeopardy in our world because Islam is evil to its core and yet is passed off as a “good something.” A greater lie would be hard to find.

    Islam was founded by an narcissistic, wicked, sociopathic man and it has only shackles to place upon humanity (particularly women) if only it can get its way. Now is the time, if ever the time, to defeat Islam’s sordid, control-freak goals.

    I can only hope that Pope Francis has some sense of this. I fear he does not. If so, greater human beings than Pope Francis, truly great human beings, will be needed in the near future to defeat yet one more awful attempt by the baser element of mankind, this time hiding under the cloak of religion, to enslave the human race.

  5. says

    I read about the M-Brotherhood infected the White House – I am beginning to think they have also infected the Vatican City State.

    That is consistent with the treatment Robert had with the Diocese of Worcester.

  6. says

    Pope Francis can litmus tests the Muslims by inviting Imams of Saudie Arabia to Rome – and he should wait for an reciprocal arrangement to visit Mecca. Of course that will never happen.

  7. says

    I think it depends on what you mean by “dialog”. If dialog is supposed to mean lying friendly about one’s non-existent differences, then I am against dialog. If dialog means to say like it is, then I am all for it.

    Se German Pope Benedict was ostracised for saying se trus and he was called a Nazi for saying se trus. We will se weser friendly lies are better san unfriendly honesty.

    In German we have a word for sese kind of dialogs. We do not call sem dialog, we call sem dialüg – dia for dialog and lüg für lie – dialie, i.e. two persons smiling at each oser while lying srough seir tees.

  8. says

    Is this “dialogue” supposed to lead to reform? tolerance of the infidel (because, of course, evil is forced to tolerate good–not the other way around)? the cessation of the campaign at global domination that is inherent in Islam?

    Yeah, nice try. What a waste of time.

    Incorrigible: (Philosophy) Philosophy (of a belief) having the property that whoever honestly believes it cannot be mistaken

    That is Islam. Reformation is an infidel fantasy.

    Dialogue with Islam is like the politician’s claptrap–if you buy into that crap, you’re a fool.

    Islam: where freedom ends and slavery begins.

  9. says

    Seems like a lot of people are scratching their heads without having assimilated two important pieces of data about the new Pope. If they read my blog once every other blue moon, they might find those two pieces of data.

    Otherwise, I’m tempted to take a Rip Van Winkle nap and ask kindly to be awoken when something other than the Same Old Same Old occurs (which includes Muslims mass-murdering us).

  10. says

    I hope Pope Francis has spoken or will speak to Pope Emeritus Benedict to learn what Benedict knows about genocidal islam.
    May God guide Pope Francis to learn the truth about islam and the atrocities that continue to be committed against Christians and other non-muslims by muslims for islam, and give him the courage he will need to stand up for the innocent people who are oppressed, brutalized, and slaughtered by genocidal muslims for islam every single day.

  11. says

    An interesting opening dialog could be……

    “What is the role of War in a modern world when both sides are not holding back in using ‘every means of war’ at their disposal?”

    “Can any Muslim country build a tank?”

    Respectfully yours, TS

  12. says

    Mr Spencer

    you are a Catholic.

    Send the new Pope an autographed set of your books – especially the latest one – as a gift for the Papal library, and with them, a polite letter requesting an audience.

    Brigitte Gabriel, who is also Catholic, could do the same.

    Magdi Cristiano Allam could do the same. Indeed, he could probably get in touch with any number of former Muslims within Europe, now Christians, and Catholic Christians to boot, and get them to sign up, with him, to a letter requesting that the Pope give a hearing to the ‘church of the catacombs’ – those many ex-Muslims, now Christian, who *within Europe* barely dare to practise their new faith in public for fear of being assassinated by …Muslims.

    And there’s that ‘Catholic agnostic’, Geert Wilders. He too could request an audience.

    Further thought:

    If no answer is received, perhaps it’s time for a pilgrimage to Rome, and for a sit-in on the steps of St Peter’s; for representatives of all the Christians – Catholic and non-Catholic, born-Christian and also those who have converted from Islam to Christianity – who are being mercilessly persecuted, exploited, abused and slandered throughout the dar al Islam, to sit down on the doorstep of St Peter in sackcloth and ashes, and fast, and pray, in relays, and hold up banners and hand out leaflets to passersby, with the names of the recent martyrs – ALL Christians known to have been murdered or imprisoned by Muslims in the past ten years – and refuse to move until the Pope comes out and talks to them himself.

  13. says

    Dialogue with Islam is the biggest joke I’ve ever heard it’s just as good as the dialogue that Chamberlin had with Hitler and ended with the Munich accords and we all know how that ended I believe that John the 23rd was extremely foolish for trying to Pursue talks with Muslims in the first place back in the mid 1960s and every Pope since then has made the same mistake. This is why we shouldn’t rely on the Church to help us it’s far too weak for that role now we should rely on Secular humanism instead to help us from the Islamic savages that’s not to sat there shouldn’t be dialogue with individual Muslims this is is important as it may help them see the light and leave this evil cult.

  14. says

    The Pope advocating “dialog” with Muslims does not sound good. Kinda reminds me of Bush declaring Islam a “religion of peace”. Still, I would like more information before drawing conclusions.

    The Catholic Church may be clueless on Islam, but regarding secular humanism as the salvation of mankind, please recall that it was this particular belief system that brought us Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and sundry other stalwarts of human Liberty.

  15. says

    Dialogue between two sides with differences is supposed to lead to compromises. That means both sides give up certain things in return for compensations in other areas.

    ‘Intensifying’ the process signals a lack of progress toward these supposedly commonly shared goals. So, intensification should speed things up.

    Oh, how naive! Islam is the template for the inflexible, merciless pounding of all opposition. Dialogue is just one way to suspend any final judgement because to do so would be to anticipate the result of the ‘dialogue’ without good reason.

    Dialogue is fine with Islam. It provides a cover for Islam’s relentless attempt to fulfil its agenda of global conquest.

    ‘Dialogue’ should be replaced by an ultimatum – with teeth!


  16. says

    Wait, Pope! You forgot Scientology! Or are we only kissing up to certain, um, excitable religions religions? (Lutherans, to the back of the bus, please).

  17. says

    Holy smoke, holy moly…’Intensify’ dialogue with Islam…

    Familiarity with Islam breeds contempt…
    Sounds good, does nothing…What is the hoped for result? Better understanding? ‘In all your getting, get understanding’, is that it?
    ‘O ye of little understanding’? Ever try an
    intense dialogue with a drunk or out of control liberal? It can be done, but it takes years of practice…It’s an interesting thing that after 1400 years of painful interactions with Islam, the Church still does not understand it…

  18. says

    Oh the dialogue is going to “intensify” alright! Great choice of wording from the Pope, whether he realises it or not. We are on a collision course with dialogue and and interfaith meetings of the most intense kind. The Nigerian church can brief us on the the nature and outcomes of their dialogue. They can offer us a primer on what does NOT work when engaged in interfaith discourse with the global jihad.
    If by intensifying the dialogue, he means ratcheting up the church’s criticism of the crimes against humanity that are continuous all over the globe and calling the leaders of the many sects and warring factions to drop their weapons and come to King Jesus Christ in submission to Him, then I’m all for it.
    I fear that may not be what he means. I think he may mean to flatter them with lies about how we are all children of Abraham. Their Abraham is a false Abraham anyway. Their whole scripture is a gross evil heresy. Popes used to care about that stuff.

  19. says

    “My hope for all of us is that the Holy Spirit, that the prayer of Our Lady, our Mother, might grant us this grace: to walk, to build, to profess Jesus Christ Crucified. So be it.” –from Pope Francis’s first sermon as Pope

    If “dialogue” with the Mohammedans includes this much, plainly spoken and with no apologies, it will be much indeed. It will put the lie to everything Mohammed stood for.

  20. says

    Dialogue is fine with Muslims as long as those representing the Catholic faith are well aware of the practices of taquiya and kitman and do not fall into the trap of appeasement as so many have and do everyday.

    Islam prides itself on dawa deception to draw the dhimmi World into Islam.

  21. says

    I hope good Pope Francis is not swayed by smooth taqqiya in his outreach dialogues with Islam. I was no fan of Benedict and like this humble Pope better, but his predecessor got Islam and its bitter history right. The fact is Mohammed’s war doctrine for Allah is a failed religion, one that only succeeded in enslaving nearly a fifth of the planet into cowed submission to  an imaginary god of 7th century Arabia, as often by brutal force and guile as conversion, taking children into slavery, using women captives for sex, raping and pillaging through the centuries, murdering on massive scale, wiping out cultures where it rampaged for Allah. There is no Caliphate with which to dialogue as ‘equals’ so it leaves the Church of Christ to discourse with a motley rabble of Allah’s ‘chosen’, most of whom had forgotten their forebears were forcibly converted to Islam.  

    Let Islam start with an apology for the slaughter of victims seeking sanctuary in Haj Sophia at the fall of Constantinople, 1453, where blood ran in the streets, and for all the other slaughters of humanity where Islam tread. Then maybe we can talk, not lies but the truth of what Mohammed’s brutal conquests had brought into the world. The love of Christ is an eternal force for the good. I hope Pope Francis remembers that when across the table from the ‘chosen’ of Allah’s demonic wrath against all the goodness in the world. Mohammed brought not love but a 1400 year scourge of mankind. Never forget this.

  22. says

    As for Francis being a “decent” man and meek and humble. I’d rather have a Pope who was rude, indecent, arrogant and ostentatious who was appropriately hard on Islam, than some wonderfully humble decent pastor who’s as soft (and timid) as jello with Muslims, as Bergoglio seems to be.

    That’s my Crusade.

    What’s yours?

  23. says

    I have to say that I find most of the comments here disturbing especially in light of Robert Spencer’s recent interview of Stephen Coughlin on his ABN Jihad Watch program.


    Notification of that interview was posted by Mr. Spencer only a couple of days ago. It looks to me as though nobody posting here watched that video.

    Coughlin went to great lengths to make it obvious that the Catholic Church had been infiltrated by Alinsky leftists and he went to great lengths to impress the listener with the fact that this infiltration goes pretty high up in the Church hierarchy. He also made it clear that other Christian denominations were equally compromised by these plants.

    The gist of Coughlin’s thesis is that the ‘Interfaith Outreach’ that is going on now among the various Christian denominations and the Muslim Brotherhood is part of a manifest agenda by the Brotherhood to subvert Christianity. He maintains that the dialog is intended by the Brotherhood to go nowhere except to get concessions to Islam while giving nothing in return. A secondary strategy is to keep the dialog going and keep the Church’s attention redirected while thousands of Christians die at the hands of the Islamists.

    In the second half of the interview Coughlin maintained that Pope Benedict understood this duplicity and consequently was against any Interfaith Outreach projects. Unfortunately, there was too much push-back from within the Church (by the Alinkyists)for him to prevent the Outreach projects.

    Above all, Coughlin made clear the incredible danger we are now facing because some of the Church leaders are actually acting in a treasonous way (my words) in their interactions with their Muslim Brotherhood counterparts. The treason has got so bad that many Church leaders are attacking their own in defense of Muslim Brotherhood operatives with whom they deal.

    Now we have Pope Francis in his first major pronouncement stating that the Church has to intensify its Outreach to Islam!

    This is scary stuff as far as I’m concerned and it doesn’t speak of a naivete on the part of the new Pope. Even if the Pope is naive, or just well-intentioned, he has well-trained experts to advise him on this matter; so, he is aware of the issues one way or another.

    The Pope’s pronouncement suggests something dark and I have to wonder if Pope Benedict abdicated because he knew something was afoot within the Church. Something that was beyond his power to stop.

    I suggest everyone have a listen to Robert’s interview of Mr. Coughlin. It will be one of the best hours you’ve ever invested in studying things related to Jihad and it just may give you a new perspective on the meaning of the Pope’s statements.

  24. says

    You are welcome A.O.W. I’m glad you found the link of value.

    YouTube appears to have all of Robert’s ABNSAT Jihad Watch shows on line and they are all terrific.

    What follows is a list of links to what’s available at YouTube.

    1) Introduction to the Qur’an

    2) The Bible and the Quran

    3) The Bible and the Quran Part 2

    4) The Leftist/Islamic Alliance

    5) Egypt Behind the Headlines

    6) The Origins of the Qur’an

    7) Jews in the Qur’an

    8) The Qur’an Teaches War

    9) Psychology of Islam and Muslims (with Dr. Nicolai Sennels)

    10) Women in the Qur’an

    11) From Mohammad to Jesus

    12) The War for Free Speech (with Pam Geller)

    13) Interview with Ibn Warraq

    14) Did Muhammad Exist? (With Anjem Choudary and Sheikh Omar Bakri)

    15) Christianity in the Qur’an

    All of the above shows are worth watching and worth downloading for permanent preservation and permanent access. (YouTube could pull any or all of these videos without notice)

    If there is anyone who doesn’t know how to do this, you can go to the following link which allows you to download and install the FREE version of YTD (YouTube Downloader). This program allows you to download videos and MP3’s from YouTube and several other Internet sites. It also allows you to convert the videos you download to other file formats.

    The download site CNET is very conscientious in ensuring that its downloads do not contain viruses so you can expect a clean download from this site.


  25. says

    Wellington, “Pope Francis on Friday called for the Roman Catholic Church to “intensify” its dialogue with Islam, echoing hopes in the Muslim world for better ties with the Vatican during his reign….”

    I mean no offense by this question. As a Jew, Prime Minister Netanyahu should know better than to try to appease an evil-doer (an inveterate enemy) like Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan. Netanyahu can find no justification for what he did today in the teachings of Moses.

    Often my Christian neighbors remind me, Jesus associated with sinners; not with the righteous or the upright. Is there something inherent in Christian doctrine that impels Pope Francis and other Christian leaders to seek an accommodation with Islamic killers; with evil-doers? Is it Christianity to do so?

  26. says

    Indeed Pope Francis seems to be a great and very sincere man who lives what he’s preaching poverty and charity. He seems to renew the church in a wonderful way.

    But as for Islam he doesn’t have a clue. It’s exactly what I feared and I had a conversation with my mom about it and I told her, I’m afraid the guy won’t be hard enough about Islam. This is exactly what happened.

    Being a Jew I’m dreaming of a united front of Jews, all Christian denominations, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Animists and agnostics and atheists fighting against the plague of Islam. But I’m afraid the vision of all the religious and political leaders is blurred somehow.

    What we need is a lot more revealing or disclosing, however you put it. Anyway blogs like JW with all the precious information they provide don’t reach enough people. Start spreading the news. But it’s so hard to convince people who’ve got no idea and think Islam is peace. The media is definitely against us all over the Western world.

    Hope you’re doing fine my friend. G’d bless you.

  27. says

    You ask a good question, wildjew, about the noticeable proclivity of Christianity to seek accommadation, if not downright love, with evil doers—turn the other cheek and all that stuff.

    I see Christianity here as the antithesis of Islam in this regard. Islam is only too ready to use violence to further its religious goals, while Christianity seems often times pacifist to the point of being suicidal. Indeed, it has been deuce difficult for great Christian thinkers through the ages (like Augustine) to justify any kind of war or even self-defense. The fact that Christiantiy has produced pacifist groups aplenty, e.g., the Quakers, functions as partial testimony to the inherent pacifist element found in New Testament doctrine.

    Nonetheless, Christianity, very much unlike Islam, has found a common sense way “through” its doctrine, one which has allowed for many “muscular” Christians (even some Quakers) to defend family, home and country. But what this does reveal for me is that so many religious doctrines, taken in the abstract, are so very often out of sync with reality. In any case, I’m quite glad modern ultra-Orthdox rabbis no longer want to stone adultresses, contra millions of Muslims who very much want to do this (thus revealing in microcosm the theological brittleness of Islam).

    As for Netanyahu and his “understanding” with Turkey, as I already opined on another thread, perhaps there is more here than meets the eye. I think so. I hope so. Still, I can understand your distaste with reaching agreement with such a character like Erdogan, not someone I would ever welcome into my home.

  28. says

    I hope too, David, that the right man or woman will arise to defeat one of the greatest threats to liberty the West has ever faced. I speak here, of course, of Islam, which knows nothing of freedom but so much of, let’s see, submission, control, inequality and many other negatives. There are a few things like Marxism and Nazism which I despise as much as Islam, but nothing more. I would argue Islam deserves such opprobrium from untold millions of human beings.

    And, like you, I almost relish the confrontation. Got to keep mankind on its toes, so to speak, so that it doesn’t get too comfortable. In this respect, I suppose it could be argued that Islam serves a purpose.

    From the city of Brotherly Love, the birthplace of America and, for the little that it’s worth, my birthplace, I wish you and those whom you hold most dear my best. Take good care, my friend.

  29. says

    Wellington, you wrote: “Nonetheless, Christianity, very much unlike Islam, has found a common sense way “through” its doctrine, one which has allowed for many “muscular” Christians (even some Quakers) to defend family, home and country….”

    Doesn’t Christianity have at least one important doctrine in common with Islam? The law of Moses on the other hand defines the wicked (the ancient Canaanites for example) by their behavior; by the abominable things they did. For example, Moses wrote of the wicked peoples living in the land:

    “…beware that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, “How do these nations serve their gods, that I also may do likewise?’ “You shall not behave thus toward the LORD your God, for every abominable act which the LORD hates they have done for their gods; for they even burn their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.”

    Yet Christianity, like Islam, designates the wicked as those who simply do not “believe.” In Christianity’s case the wicked are those who do not believe in Jesus or do not accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior. In Islam’s case the wicked are those who do not believe Allah is God and Muhammad is his prophet. Thus, much of the violence done in the name of Christianity historically was committed against the wicked, i.e., “unbelievers.” No matter how righteous or decent a human being might be, if a person is an “unbeliever” he or she is “wicked,” and will be judged or condemned both by man and by God. Christianity and Islam put unbelievers to the sword. Islam still does.

  30. says

    “Seems like a lot of people are scratching their heads without having assimilated two important pieces of data about the new Pope. If they read my blog once every other blue moon, they might find those two pieces of data.”

    Could you please just state what’s on your mind – without the invitation to the Easter egg hunt?

  31. says

    “Can any Muslim country build a tank?”

    Iran is busily spinning itself a Nuke, as we speak – and the Pakis already have one.

    Just because they’re savages doesn’t mean they’re stupid.

  32. says

    Greetings Davegreybeard,

    I share your concern about Iran and the Pakistani nukes and sense a lack of urgency about them in Washington.

    At the same time, while a few nukes can cause a
    “very bad hair day (and worse)”, they could not achieve a Muslim conquest of the planet.

    A nuke by itself is a can of energy, at issue is the will to do something with it? Here there is a place to challenge directly and powerfully, as is being done on JW, what are Muslim intentions for the future which are more clearly understood than ten years ago?

    Respectfully yours, TS

  33. says

    “This is why we shouldn’t rely on the Church to help us it’s far too weak for that role now we should rely on Secular humanism instead to help us…”

    The problem is church leaders are reading the wrong part of their Bible. If they would read Moses (the law of Moses) they would not be far too weak; they would not engage in dialogue with wicked peoples. Moses does indeed give church leaders marching orders which are valid today.

  34. says

    The problem is church leaders are reading the wrong part of their Bible. If they would read Moses (the law of Moses) they would not be far too weak; they would not engage in dialogue with wicked peoples. Moses does indeed give church leaders marching orders which are valid today.
    “…Then Jesus MADE A WHIP out of cords and drove them out and overturned their tables…” John 2:15
    Christ (that other wild Jew) is not pacifistic when it comes to religious bullies and charlatans who pervert the sacred and holy things of his Father (and ours) for power and profit.

  35. says

    PCPCP, I have talked religion and doctrine with many Christians over the years. Religion is one of my favorite subjects. Christians see different things in the New Testament. Not so for Christians that are rooted in the Hebrew Bible, the “Old Testament.”

    Robert Spencer often says, Jews and Christians do not take passages in the Old Testament as marching orders today. I would submit that Spencer does take some of the passages in the Old Testament (Torah, prophets, etc.) as marching orders today otherwise he would not be as clear-sighted as he is, recognizing or identifying the enemy. I would submit the reason Christians and Jews are not acting on several of the commandments in the Torah (mandating death) is because of the nature of God described in the law.

    God proclaimed to Moses: “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished…”

    The law was meant to warn us so that we would not sin. The God of the Bible is a merciful God, even to “non-believers.” Not so Allah.

    My experience has been, Christians who are rooted in the New Testament (exclusive of the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament) have difficulty recognizing the enemy. It is pervasive in the leadership of today’s church.

  36. says

    Believing is indeed, wildjew, a major element of both Christianity and Islam. However, Christianity in its theological blueprint does not condone human beings using violence to smite the wicked or unbelievers in this world (except in self-defense and even here, as I’ve mentioned before, Christians have to jump through a few metaphorical hoops for even self-defense reasons). That’s up to God. When Christians have done this, they are in violation of their own religious tenets. By contrast, Islam very much enjoins its believers to use violence in this world against the unbeliever and blasphemer. Huge difference here between these two faiths I would argue.

    I like your theory about Christians who only focus on the New Testament, all other things being equal, as more likely to be naive about enemies in this world. A good dose of the Old Testament along with the New Testament makes it more likely, following your hypothesis, that “muscular” Christians will emerge. It’s only a theory you have, but not a bad one and worth considering.

  37. says

    “Could you please just state what’s on your mind – without the invitation to the Easter egg hunt?”

    I already put Bergoglio’s eggs — two plump ones filled with the marshmallowy nougat of Soft PC MC dialogue with Muslims with the eggshells he’s so timid to step on nearby — in the previous report on St. Francis here on Jihad Watch:



  38. says

    “It looks to me as though nobody posting here watched that video.”

    My comment above yours contains a link to a previous comment I made in that Spencer-Coughlin comments thread, in which I explicitly drew the comparision between what Spencer said in his interview with Coughlin, about the problem of Christian “dialogue” with Muslims.

  39. says

    Hi L.L. My apologies to you. I didn’t check out the two links you provided so I was unaware of the what you were driving at in your comments. Mea culpa. In the future, I will endeavour to avoid making blanket statements (unless they are warranted, of course).

  40. says

    That might be the case, if Islam were not 1,000 times worse, more fanatical, more deranged, and dangerous even than Soviet Communism was. I think it’s a big — and stubbornly persistent — mistake to try to think of Islam as somehow not sui generis, with its uniqueness mired in darkness, depravity and deadliness.

  41. says

    I left out a critically crucial fourth “D” in my list:

    “I think it’s a big — and stubbornly persistent — mistake to try to think of Islam as somehow not sui generis, with its uniqueness mired in darkness, depravity, deadliness, and deception.

  42. says

    Greetings LemonLime,

    I would agree that the penetration of the “Islamic Ideology” goes deeper into the hearts and minds of 1.2 Billion Muslims on the planet, given its engagement with daily prayer and beliefs surrounding the World has been created and our eternal destiny. Communism could never be that far reaching.

    How then do we move from “darkness” to light?

    – Shining the light of truth and rational investigation on the planet’s developmental processes?

    – Exploring the power of new truths?

    – Global visioning of how our foundational thinking could be harmonized?

    – (And on the far other extreme) All out global religious war?

    Respectfully yours, TS