| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Abdullah said: "With God's help we will meet our brethren from other religions, including those who believe in the Torah and in the Gospel, in order to find ways to defend humanity."
For lack of information, many people will look upon that statement and say, "Oh, how nice." The first question one should ask, however, is whether Abdullah is speaking of the Torah as it is understood and used by Jews today and in generations past, and of the Gospel as it is understood and used by Christians today and in generations past. Or, does he really mean the Taurat and Injil of which the Qur'an speaks -- Ur-Torah and Ur-Gospel books that preached Islamic monotheism before allegedly being corrupted by later generations?
Then, is this proposed "dialogue" to be with Judaism and Christianity as they are, or with the assumption that Jews and Christians, having corrupted their holy books, aren't even true Jews and Christians from an Islamic perspective? Moreover, what of the supersessionist attitude that Islam corrects, completes, and therefore overshadows Judaism and Christianity?
This issue -- "my" Torah or "your" Torah? "my" Gospel or "your" Gospel? -- and the resulting obfuscation and confusion partially underlies the frequent canard of "common values" on which interfaith discussions often proceed, and which Abdullah is again employing here. Yes, giving to charity is nice. Prayer is really nice, and believers tend to agree that God is great. But it's the differences that have a bearing on how a society functions, and they are the source of incompatibility between Islamic cultures and those with a Judeo-Christian basis: What is the nature of the deity? (And what does that deity have to say about any number of topics?) What is the nature of man's relationship to the deity, and to the rest of the human race? And what of the interaction of men and women? Believers and non-believers? What about revenge?
Civilized societies agree to disagree on differences of opinion that concern faith. The problem here is the imperative that Islam dominate and not be dominated, and Abdullah is indeed using the notion of "common values" to advance a very particular agenda: He calls it "respect among the religions." Once again, the uninformed reader might think that sounds wonderful. But we have already seen on many occasions that Islamic law is reciprocity-impaired when it comes to respect. It is not "respect" in the general sense; rather, Islam is to be respected, and will deal with other faiths according to what it believes is the divinely-ordained order of things (i.e., dhimmitude).
"Abdullah wants interfaith conference," from the Jerusalem Post:
Saudi King Abdullah's desire to convene a meeting between Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religious communities was reported Tuesday by the official Saudi Arabian News Agency.
"I invite representatives of all the monotheistic religions to meet with their brothers in faith," the king was quoted as saying. The theme of the expected conference was reported to be "respect among the religions."
The news agency reported that senior Muslim leaders authorized the idea and consultations would be made with Islamic religious authorities from other countries. The king went on to say that "with God's help we will meet our brethren from other religions, including those who believe in the Torah and in the Gospel, in order to find ways to defend humanity."
This, he said, comes after humanity has lost its morality, sincerity and steadfastness. Also, the religions were confronted by challenges such as dealing with the disintegration of the family and ever-expanding Atheism, he said.
King Abdullah revealed that he had been preparing the convention for two years and discussed it with the Pope when he visited the Vatican a year ago. Abdullah has not determined a specific date for the meeting.
Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger expressed his satisfaction over the announcement. "Our hands are extended to any peace initiative and to any dialogue that will bring about an end to terrorism and violence," he said in a statement. "I have said on numerous occasions that the true path to the peace that we long for is through interfaith dialogue."
More from "Saudi King calls for interfaith dialogue," by Donna Abu-Nasr and Abdullah Shihri for the Associated Press:
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - The Saudi king has made an impassioned plea for dialogue among Muslims, Christians and Jews — the first such proposal from a nation with no diplomatic ties to Israel and a ban on non-Muslim religious services and symbols.
The message from King Abdullah, which was welcomed by Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders, comes at a time of stalled peace initiatives and escalating tensions in the region.
Muslims have been angered by cartoons published in European papers seen as insulting the Prophet Muhammad and by the pope's baptizing on Easter of a Muslim journalist who had converted to Catholicism.
"The idea is to ask representatives of all monotheistic religions to sit together with their brothers in faith and sincerity to all religions as we all believe in the same God," the king told delegates Monday night at a seminar on "Culture and the Respect of Religions." [...]
The White House welcomed the king's gesture.
"We think increased dialogue is a really good thing," presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said Tuesday. "And, of course, when you have someone like the king of Saudi Arabia, and all of his stature, that is recommending such a dialogue, it can only give us hope that there would be further recognition of everyone's right to freedom and freedom of expression and religion. So we are encouraged by it."
Abdullah said he planned to hold conferences to get the opinion of Muslims from other parts of the world, and then meetings with "our brothers" in Christianity and Judaism "so we can agree on something that guarantees the preservation of humanity against those who tamper with ethics, family systems and honesty."
Abdullah, who said he discussed the idea with Pope Benedict XVI when they met at the Vatican in November, framed his appeal in strictly religious and ethical terms, aimed at addressing the weakening of the family, increasing atheism and "a lack of ethics, loyalty, and sincerity for our religions and humanity."
Posted by Marisol at March 25, 2008 6:19 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Taqiyya alert, taqiyya alert!
Posted by: US_infidel![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 25, 2008 6:31 PM
There is so much wrong with this "impassioned plea" by the saudi ruler, for instance
Muslims have been angered by cartoons published in European papers seen as insulting the Prophet Muhammad and by the pope's baptizing on Easter of a Muslim journalist who had converted to Catholicism.
Anything and everything seems to anger these morons.
Why should any leader of a religion wish to meet this thug, who does not allow any other religion but Islam to exist in SA. And who is he to set who is to be invited or not.
If there is to be an interfaith conference, then I would certainly like to see Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahais etc. This interfaith meeting should be among those religions that are civilised i.e., not just preach but practice tolerance of other beliefs. Islam and its devious propagandists are NOT welcome.
Posted by: DP111 at March 25, 2008 6:39 PM
You need to tell the ones who will fall for this sort of thing from the saudis.
I think that along with power must come stupid. If I was burned as many times as the Jews, and the others, you would think that maybe, just maybe, there might be something wrong. So, what would one do? Well, I cracked open a book and looked for the answer to my question - Why do they hate us? Why do they want us dead? Why do their peace agreements never last very long? etc. (I did this after 9/11 - yes, it did take me awhile to ask that question, but I finally asked it and looked for the answer - unlike these knitwits.)
Well, I found the answer - but it seems that the people who have power are running on stupid.
Posted by: R_not at March 25, 2008 6:39 PM
Wait and see. His motives may not be pure, but this can have consequences Abdullah himself can't engineer. This will highlight fissures within Dar al-Islam and among its Umma. Their are powerful jinn at work, who can't be confined once released. Good may come of this, after all; this is an opportunity to face truth.
Posted by: John C at March 25, 2008 6:43 PM
Great idea Abdullah. What country will host you, the Pope, and the PM of Israel? When will it happen?
Posted by: dentalque at March 25, 2008 6:50 PM
Typo: should read, "There are powerful jinn ..."
Posted by: John C at March 25, 2008 6:50 PM
Abdulla is worried that the Islamic project in the West is getting far too much negative attention. It is for this reason that he is calling for a dialogue between the monotheist religions.
This is just the equvalent of that notorious treaty of Hudaibiya. It is just to buy time for the islamic project in the West to go ahead, until it is too late for us to do anything about it. Granting one or two churches to be built in SA, hidden away in some back alley, and with no cross or any Christian symbol outside, would be a very small price to pay for the Islamisation of the West.
That is the way Islam works, and the reason for its success - merciless when in the ascendent, and beguilingly accomodating, when on the back foot.
at March 25, 2008 7:00 PM
>>someone like the king of Saudi Arabia, and all of his stature --from above article.
I have no respect for him! Just because he is "king?" Gimme a break! Accident of birth!
Posted by: darcy at March 25, 2008 7:06 PM
How many times has that darn bridge in Brooklyn been up for sale?
The White House welcomed the king's gesture."We think increased dialogue is a really good thing," presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said Tuesday. "And, of course, when you have someone like the king of Saudi Arabia, and all of his stature, that is recommending such a dialogue, it can only give us hope that there would be further recognition of everyone's right to freedom and freedom of expression and religion. So we are encouraged by it."
These dummies, er, dhimmis, can talk all they want. The king's proposal is nothing but a sugarcoated attempt to legitimize Islam.
Posted by: boneshack at March 25, 2008 7:06 PM
I am confident that Pope Benedict XVI and his representative know what Islam's perspective is, and know the implications and nuances of Islamspeak.
Posted by: John C at March 25, 2008 7:07 PM
A good indication that he means what he is asking for would be to acknowledge that Israel has the right to exist and open trade and business with Israel.
From a human rights point of view he could start taking in Palestinian refugees and make them citizens, give them jobs, housing.
He could also point out what is the 'end result' of dialogue he is looking for.
Can non muslims now travel to mecca and open a water park?
Posted by: alaskan1000 at March 25, 2008 7:07 PM
>>Muslims have been angered by cartoons published in European papers seen as insulting the Prophet Muhammad and by the pope's baptizing on Easter of a Muslim journalist who had converted to Catholicism. --Saudi "king"
Who of any intelligence gives a flying?
P.S. Mr. "king" - Muhammed is NOT a "prophet!"
And, Pope Benedict - Baptize Away!
at March 25, 2008 7:09 PM
This is a propaganda ploy, a World-Stage Level One Interfaith-Healing affair, with Abdullah carefully wishing to invite not representatives of all the world's religions, but those of the other "monotheisms," the other "abrahamic faiths," in which "the so much that we all have in common" will be stressed, exaggerated, much misundrestood.
Christians and Jews should refuse the ploy. Or if they decide to accept, they must insist that all the world's faiths -- especially Hindus and Buddhists, but not forgetting smaller groups, such as Zoroastrians, and Jains, and others, for in this supposed Rainbow Coalition of faiths, the odd man out is Islam, and anything that helps to undercut that "three abrahamic faiths" line of appeal and subversion and confusion is to be welcomed.
And if those Christians and those Jews insist on those Hindus, and those Buddhists, and Abdullah and other Muslims balk, well then have that meeting anyway. Yes, a meeting of representatives of all faiths willing to meet all the others -- with the representatives of Islam being the ones who stayed at home, no doubt unable to conceive of treating as "fellow faiths" anything other than Christianity and Judaism.
What? you say. That will have the effect of vitiating King Abdullah's "interfaith initiative"? Yes. I know. Tough.
Posted by: Hugh at March 25, 2008 7:10 PM
Dana Perino of the White House - what a sap.
Posted by: darcy at March 25, 2008 7:11 PM
"...and anything that helps to undercut that "three abrahamic faiths" line of appeal and subversion and confusion is to be welcomed" --Hugh
Especially since Islam is not an Abrahamic faith.
There's only 2 Abrahamic faiths - Judaism and Christianity.
Johnny-Come-Lately Hoax Islam - you just take your wishful thinking and egregious lies and go out in the garden and eat worms.
at March 25, 2008 7:17 PM
Related article
Losing Our Soul to the Islamintern
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2008/03/22/losing-our-soul-to-the-islamintern/#comment-372
at March 25, 2008 7:26 PM
Will Saudi Arabia change their law and permit Jews to enter the country in order to hold their inter faith conference?
Don`t hold your breath.
Posted by: dunkenstein at March 25, 2008 7:29 PM
It could also be seen that the Muslim leadership is in a panic because more Muslims are leaving Islam to embrace Christianity.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 25, 2008 7:46 PM
" . . . in order to find ways to defend humanity."
--Abdullah of Arabia
What do we have to defend Humanity against? Aliens from Outer space? What enemies does "humanity" (not the predatory hyenas slavering for blood and bones in human form) have here on Earth?
The only enemies of humanity that we, who have moral values derived from a code that covers all humanity, are those (enemies) who follow a code that makes us ineligible for being treated as part of humanity unless we accept their (im)moral code derived from the "visions" of a half-looney-tunes from 7th Century Makkah.
That dull Abdullah is one of the enemies of humanity that he cleverly exhorts us to join him in defending against. The cunning mind of the Islamic deals in lies and deceit, as sanctioned by the half-looney, but cunning and clever, founder of the whole-Earth system into which you can check in but not ever check out.
The evils that beset us (humans) today are generated from Abdullah's home sands--the "magnificent 19" who did 9-11, the troglodyte who over and over again calls for our destruction, the "exploding Moslems" who kill our troops in Iraq, the money that finances the "hate-America" and "hate-the-Jews" being preached in mosques--all emanate from the same source: Arabia of the Sauds.
The way to defend humanity is to take the source of power of the enemies of humanity away from them. They never found it, wouldn't know what to do with it were it not for us (humans as contrasted with followers of Islam), and use it for evil--spreading death and destruction throughout the world.
What could we--can we--do
about this? Hmmm? I wonder. So difficult to solve that puzzle that dwarfs the one set by the Gordian knot.
at March 25, 2008 7:50 PM
"The idea is to ask representatives of all monotheistic religions to sit together with their brothers in faith and sincerity to all religions as we all believe in the same God," the king told delegates Monday night at a seminar on "Culture and the Respect of Religions." [...]
I think the key to the King's invitation is "...as we all believe in the same God"
Isn't that what Abdullah is really looking for, an acknowledgement that Allah is the same God worshiped by Jews and Christians?
Legitimize Allah, and you legitimize Mohammad.
Anyone fool enough to attend such a conference as representatives of Judaism or Christianity had better be prepared to pay some form of homage to Allah and Mohammad. If there's one thing that infuriates Muslims, it is that Jews and Christians don't recognize Mohammad as a devinely inspired Prophet, and the last in a line of all the other Prophets, beginning with Abraham.
Go to such a conference, and that's exactly what they're saying, and that's exactly what Abdullah wants.
Any Jew or Christian invited to Abdullah's dialogue should reply, "Thank you for your kind invitation, but we don't believe in your God, the legitimacy of your Prophet or Islamic moral teachings, so it would be pointless trying to have a meaningful dialogue with Muslim representatives. Have a Good day"
Posted by: rational
at March 25, 2008 8:04 PM
Yes another dialog we know what these dialog end up as. Just another prolonged tactic to buy time and regroup for a ruthless attack. The spread of whabbism but never question the Islamic tenets. No! never self examination but lets talk with those others...yeah of course our brethren...please! Why not have a dialog with those who misinterpret the Koran? Why not have a dialog with those who go off and commit attacks of violence in the name of Islam? Why not go and have a dialog with those who seem to have the false meaning of the Koran? Well... I am waiting...So?
Posted by: savsiv at March 25, 2008 8:05 PM
Abdullah - there is no common ground between good & evil, so I have no interest in breaking bread with the followers of Islam.
Although I may show up and hand out copies of Robert's book, The Truth About Muhammad, just to get this party started.
Posted by: champ at March 25, 2008 8:16 PM
Only when Abdullah realizes that Islam came from the mind of a psychopathic murderer will there be any hope for him and his concerns about "ethics, family systems and honesty."
Posted by: Lex at March 25, 2008 8:20 PM
The only path to peace is - we win, they lose.
Anything else is foolish wishful thinking.
(unless one chooses the corollary - they win, we lose - not in this world)
Talk of "dialogue" from these islamists only follows killing and capturing jihadis in Iraq and elsewhere.
When we have a president as laser directed as Reagan will we again have the opportunity to win.
Posted by: dgene at March 25, 2008 8:21 PM
When Saudi Arabia permits the construction of Jewish temples and Christian churches in the Kingdom, then we can have dialog.
Posted by: GringoTex at March 25, 2008 8:25 PM
aimed at addressing the weakening of the family, increasing atheism and "a lack of ethics, loyalty, and sincerity for our religions and humanity."
How about mass murder and blood baths. I want to see a reduction in blood baths.
Posted by: Ruebacca at March 25, 2008 8:25 PM
GringoTex
Great Post..When Abdullah agrees to wear those (honorary) cowboy boots GWB gave him down in Crawford TX years ago... during such a proposed multi/culti religious meeting as that to "defend humanity"..to show his inclusiveness ie while otherwise wearing his customary Saudi outfit, well such a meeting might take place..rrrriggggggggghtt.
Posted by: nodak at March 25, 2008 8:54 PM
"The idea is to ask representatives of all monotheistic religions to sit together with their brothers in faith and sincerity to all religions as we all believe in the same God," the king told delegates Monday night at a seminar on "Culture and the Respect of Religions." [...]
Don't forget to invite Obama...
at March 25, 2008 9:44 PM
Robert, you could, probably with very little effort, write the narrative for this event of taquiyya and disingenuousness. A script, highlighting all the dhimmi-nodding platitudes with their double meanings, all the Quran-supported points that don't really support what the attendees think they mean, a real "what he said" but "what he really means" script.
Send it to the religion writers or foreign bureaus (are there still foreign bureaus?) or the AP with the note that it isn't to be opened until the conference. Watch as the reporters begin to listen and cover the disgusting event with a more skeptical and jaded perspective (what does it mean...this "respect" of which they speak?). Send it in advance to the chiefs of staff of the participants, arming them for the debate and the certain deception.
We watch as every Muslim-sculpted high profile event and pronouncement is swallowed whole and covered by writers with the sophistication of office-girl newsletter editors. Manufactured event to manufactured coverage. The perfect cycle that guarantees dhimmitude and defeat.
Tell these participants and arm these reporters with the most certain vile lies that will be told, in advance. Make it so we could take it to Vegas. It could be the chance mentioned above, and you could be the djinn in the room...
Posted by: winoceros at March 25, 2008 9:54 PM
Bought a scooter today, and I'm sitting here wondering if my attempt at thwarting the OIL MASTER will have any detrimental effect on his and his minions control over my life.
Not likely, I suppose.
I am trying.
Posted by: Aiken Bryce at March 25, 2008 9:57 PM
I'll only believe Abdullah is sincere when he allows open and free proselytizing of Christianity (and other non-Muslim faiths) in Saudi Arabia the same way his fellow Muslims can openly preach their creed in Western countries. Short of this, he's a hypocrite and a liar.
Posted by: Wellington at March 25, 2008 10:37 PM
"I am trying."
Are you a gentleman in a dustcoat trying, or are you just trying?
Posted by: Hugh
at March 25, 2008 10:41 PM
The problem here the is imperative that Islam dominate and not be dominated,
Muslims must realize there is a big difference between being dominated and treating all other religions as equals right now their attitude is very similar to that of a cult which is not surprising because originally that is what it was
at March 25, 2008 11:04 PM
I want to believe.
Please King Abdullah, support the right of return of the Jews by allowing the building of a Synagogue in Medina. You know the Banu Quraiza Memorial synagogue...
Then I believe you're honest.
Posted by: nacazo at March 25, 2008 11:28 PM
I'll happily meet my "brothers in faith" - they don't include Saudi Muslims. Just because I believe in one God doesn't make me "brother in faith" to any old monotheist, nor to anyone who claims the whole Bible has been corrupted by malicious intent of Christians and Jews. As 'rational' says, we don't believe in the same god.
King Abdullah's "respect among the religions" undoubtedly means supressing criticism of Islam, Mohammed, Muslim leaders, etc. as per the Cairo declaration.
The presidential spokesman looking for "further recognition of everyone's right to freedom and freedom of expression and religion" is fantasising. The headline is right - this spokesman is ready to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
Posted by: davidp at March 25, 2008 11:32 PM
Marisol,
Here's the update from HotAir. Appparently "dialogue" doesn't mean that the House of Sand is ever going to allow a Christian Church to be erected in the kingdom.
Not one, not now, not no how.
The shining example of tolerance, indeed.
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=57421
Regards,
awake
Posted by: awake at March 26, 2008 12:18 AM
Hm--not quite sure what happened here. About an hour ago, there was an article on JW listing over 120 Muslim Americans who have been indicted for various sorts of jihad violence. I'm not sure what happened to the article--it disappeared as I attempted to post the following. I hope I will be excused for posting this here under the circumstances.
....................................
This is quite a list--even I found it rather shocking that it was so extensive. One major omission, though, is Nation of Islam offshoot Your Black Muslim Bakery in Oakland, California. Beginning with its founder, Yusef Bey, and continuing into the second generation, it represents four decades of murder, disappearances, kidnappings, torture, rape, statutory rape of girls as young as ten--some committed with unwitting (one hopes) complicity of the state foster chidren program, real estate scams, grand theft, drug dealing, and fraud.
What is in some ways most disturbing about this case is how much uncritical support Yusef Bey and the bakery received over the years--from the State of California, Oakland International Airport, The Oakland As and Raiders, the Oakland Marriott (the city's largest hotel, where its most important conventions are held), the Oakland Unified School District, the City of Oakland, several mayors, including current mayor and long-time congressman Ron Dellums, and the current holder of his old seat, Barbara Lee.
Many of these crimes are clearly Islamic in nature, even if Nation of Islam is not considered mainstream Islam. Yusef Bey had multiple "wives", impregnated children as young as ten, many of whom were supposed to be under his care, murdered "apostates", murdered outsiders who threatened the organization, such as Chauncy Bailey, kidnapped and tortured two women to extort money from them, sold drugs to "unbelievers", Yusef Bey's son urged a young member--who may or may not be Bailey's killer, to "be a good soldier" and take one for the organization. It goes on and on.
The most recent case was the brutal murder of local journalist Chauncy Bailey, who was investigating the bakery. This was the first murder of a working journalist in the United States in over thirty years.
There is now a rare cooperation between a number of local newspapers and magazines called the Chauncy Bailey Project--more and more information is coming out, much of it unbelievably shocking. I had had growing reservations about the group, and had stopped patronizing them about ten years ago, but I had no idea how ugly this group was.
The following reference is from Wikipedia--I couldn't find another source that lists the bakery's whole history. Except for several early disappearances, it seems fairly exhaustive.
Wikipedia is not always reliable, but I have read all these references elsewhere--in the San Francisco Chronicle, Oakland Tribune, and East Bay Express--all solid sources. The article has good footnotes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_Black_Muslim_Bakery
Posted by: gravenimage at March 26, 2008 2:11 AM
Awake
I was about to post this, but you beat me to it.
nacazo
Capital idea - the Banu Quraiza Memorial synagogue... maybe it could be the equivalent to the Holocaust museum: yeah, I know the numbers are vastly different, but in one case, you had the Jews of Europe exterminated, and in another, the Jews of Arabia... exterminated.
Maybe we could take a page out of the Malays and posthomously convert Mohammed to Judaism - except that the good people of Judaism don't deserve that.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at March 26, 2008 2:16 AM
King Abdullah is concerned with defending the "family system"
You know the "system" he's referring to: The one where father has multiple wives and the children are encouraged to become suicide bombers. The family System that will kill its own female members if they bring "dishonor" to the family. The family system where the males rule and the females are chattel/servants.
Posted by: Xero G at March 26, 2008 2:35 AM
"In what manner does tyranny arise?-That it has a democratic origin is evident." PLATO, The Republick, Book V111
Posted by: james collins at March 26, 2008 2:57 AM
Howdy all you night owls!
Very, very OT, but I need your help locating a post from some time ago that lists the 20 or so steps a Muslim debater takes to make his point (from nice, descending into plain ugly). Remember this? I think is was from the Sheik.
It was posted here several times here on JW, but can't find it. Stupid me for not saving it.
Thanks.
at March 26, 2008 3:27 AM
Actually, the whole Saudi thing is a subtle accusation that *we* are refusing dialogue. That is, as far as I can tell, the whole purpose of this game.
It needs an intelligent rebuttal, that in a polite way exposes this.
Posted by: Henrik at March 26, 2008 3:32 AM
Your assessment is correct: We, the West, are not submitting to the truth of Islam/Mohammed/Allah.
If I had the power, I would tell this bastard to piss up a rope. I really hope all his "invitees" do the same.
at March 26, 2008 3:42 AM
Did you hear strains of the tune 'Imperial March'? The band of the Coldstream Guards played this at Buckingham Palace for the King's visit to the UK.
That was Darth Vaders theme tune!
Posted by: James at March 26, 2008 3:49 AM
boneshack
This might help:
http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/muslim-debate-techniques/
Posted by: Silvester at March 26, 2008 4:45 AM
Silvester,
Thanks for that link. It does help my cause.
There is, however, another list I am looking for.
Best to you in this newest day of March!
Posted by: boneshack at March 26, 2008 5:13 AM
'Humanity' for the soldiers of Allah means Muslims only.
'Interfaith crock & schlock' for Abdullah means inviting the unbelievers to accept Muhammads religion, which is the only religion.
That's all.
The only one who is deluded about this is a Jewish Rabbi who is ready to suck it all up as if it was a revelation from Allah.
Sad.
http://sheikyermami.com/2008/03/25/tiny-minority-of-extremists-update/
at March 26, 2008 5:24 AM
We do NOT worship the same God.
"What fellowship hath light with darkness?"
at March 26, 2008 5:50 AM
Here is a very encouraging and exciting article about how a certain Coptic priest and modern communications are very effectively generating enlightenment and apostasy from Islam in the Arab world. Don't miss this one.
Posted by: traeh at March 26, 2008 6:17 AM
Robert wrote:
The first question one should ask, however, is whether Abdullah is speaking of the Torah as it is understood and used by Jews today and in generations past, and of the Gospel as it is understood and used by Christians today and in generations past. Or, does he really mean the Taurat and Injil of which the Qur'an speaks -- Ur-Torah and Ur-Gospel books that preached Islamic monotheism before allegedly being corrupted by later generations?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert
Correct me if I'm wrong but it is my understanding that in some parts of the Qur’an Mohammad actually praised and recommended people to read and obey the Torat and the Injil. Such passages show that the Scriptures which the Christians were reading at the time of Mohammad were uncorrupted and were virtually identical to the originals.
For example:
2:62
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
3:93-94.
All food was lawful to the Children of Israel except what Israel made unlawful for itself before the Torah was revealed. Say, `bring the Torah and read it, if you are men of truth.' If any, after this, invent a lie and attribute it to God, they are indeed transgressors.
5:43,47
But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) law before them?- therein is the (plain) command of Allah. Yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith. ...
Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are those who rebel.
Notice the present tense in the previous command.
5:68
Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith.
29:46
And dispute ye not with the people of the book but say: We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and that which came down to you.
Robert
I have read that it was not until the 10th or 11th century that some muslims first alleged that the Torat and Injil have been corrupted. Since archaeologists have found Bible manuscripts dating back to before the time of Muhammed, and since the text in those manuscripts is virtually the same as the currently authorised text of the Bible, why do you refer to "the Taurat and Injil of which the Qur'an speaks" as though it were different to the currently authorised text of the Bible? Would it not be more accurate to refer to "the Taurat and Injil of which modern day muslims speak" as distinct to that of which Muhammed spoke in the Qur'an?
Respectfully
Zinc
at March 26, 2008 6:27 AM
James Collins,
No doubt you know that Plato believed society should be ruled by "philosopher kings." For me, that sounds a bit too much like theocracy or Marxism. I´ll take democracy any day over a "philosopher-king."
at March 26, 2008 6:33 AM
Zinc,
I´m interested to hear what Robert Spencer might answer to your question, but he´s already discussed in detail Suras 2,3, and 5 (which you quote) in his Quran Blog series.
I checked out Spencer´s discussion of the first half of Sura 5. It appears the Quran itself is a bit contradictory on the point of corruption of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. In Spencer´s discussion of verses 41-60, for example, he notes that the Quran seems to show that Muhammad thought the Christian scriptures of his day were not corrupted. But Spencer in the same discussion also points out that Sura 5 says the Jews altered the revelations they received. Spencer also notes that Sura 5 says that Jesus was not crucified. If according to the Quran, Christ was not crucified, what can a believer in the Quran conclude but that the New Testament has been altered?
Posted by: traeh at March 26, 2008 7:18 AM
Zinc,
In "The Truth about Mohammed", Robert discusses the numerous heretical "christian" groups that populated Arabia at the time of Mohammed and how he was influenced by them. (see chapters "Mohammed becomes a prophet" and "Mohammed's revelations and their sources.")
It is likely that the Quranic verses that take a positive attitude towards the "Gospels" are referring to works by these heretical groups.
For example, the Quran contains stories that trace back to the heretical Gnostic "Gospel of Thomas."
The Quran contradicts the traditional Christian Gospels on numerous points, and demonstrates that Mohammed did NOT accept the traditional Gospels.
This explains why, in some places the Quran appears to encourage Christians to read their (heretical) Gospels, while in other places it talks about the (traditional) Gospels being corrupted.
Posted by: StephenDvd at March 26, 2008 7:50 AM
Are you a gentleman in a dustcoat trying, or are you just trying?
Posted by: Hugh at March 25, 2008 10:41 PM
Thanks for reminding me of John Crowe Ransom's wonderful Italian sonnet, "Piazza Piece." I had not read it in awhile.
http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/piazza-piece/
at March 26, 2008 9:08 AM
Here it is:
*
Piazza Piece
-- I am a gentleman in a dustcoat trying
To make you hear. Your ears are soft and small
And listen to an old man not at all,
They want the young men's whispering and sighing.
But see the roses on your trellis dying
And hear the spectral singing of the moon;
For I must have my lovely lady soon,
I am a gentleman in a dustcoat trying.
-- I am a lady young in beauty waiting
Until my truelove comes, and then we kiss.
But what grey man among the vines is this
Whose words are dry and faint as in a dream?
Back from my trellis, Sir, before I scream !
I am a lady young in beauty waiting.
John Crowe Ransom
at March 26, 2008 9:11 AM
this is not a good sign.... By experience , when a Muslim asks for dialog means that he thinks he is loosing ground and the wind is going to blow in another direction.
Dont be fooled , His majesty is only buying time,he knows that Europe is almost conquered but his worst enemy is America and the king is worried about the fact that Christians and Jews seem to get the message and unite in order to defend their common values.
Starting a dialog may slow the process of unity and give the king time to rethink his strategy
at March 26, 2008 11:15 AM
traeh, StephenDvd,
Thank you for your informative replies. So it seems then that the subject of the integrity of the text of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures is an example of where the Qur'an contradicts itself. And since the Qur'an affirms those Scriptures are in tact whilst at the same time denying some of the doctrines they teach, I guess Muhammed liked to think he accepted the true Gospels but in practice he had never studied them closely, if at all, and his opinions about them were confused.
Posted by: Zinc at March 26, 2008 11:17 AM
Abdullah said: "With God's help we will meet our brethren from other religions, including those who believe in the Torah and in the Gospel, in order to find ways to defend humanity
I only assume he is referring to defending humanity against the fascist so-called religion known as Islam
at March 26, 2008 11:19 AM
There is one aspect in that offer which I find typically arrogant and which therefore devalues its stated aim straightaway:
why only invite a discussion between Judaism, Christianity and Islam - but disregard Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism?
If one wants to 'save humanity' - how can one do that when disregarding a huge part of that humanity?
Dishonest - thats what it is, from start to finish.
Posted by: Calon Lan at March 26, 2008 12:02 PM
>>Dont be fooled, His majesty is only buying time," -- Tartine
"War is deceit." --Mohammed
at March 26, 2008 12:02 PM
Dishonest - thats what it is, from start to finish.
Posted by: Calon Lan at March 26, 2008 12:02 PM
"War is deceit." -Mohammed
Hello Western dhimmi leaders -are you listening to Mohammed??
Posted by: darcy at March 26, 2008 12:04 PM
"War is deceit." -Mohammed
Hello Western dhimmi leaders -are you listening to Mohammed??
Posted by: darcy
Not only are they listening diligently - they are trying to teach us peasants that this is 'the right thing to do', and that we better start listening as well ...
Posted by: Calon Lan at March 26, 2008 1:10 PM
Abdullah's call is simply a warning to the unbelievers 'to know their place', it is a call to Islam, da'awa, nothing more.
' defending humanity' for this slave of Allah means simply to defend Islam, because 'unbelievers are the vilest of creatures' (in case you have forgotten) and only Muslims are human.
And so it continues, the delusional Rabbi Metzger who hears a completely different message, a preacher like Rowan Atkinson who talks about '3 Abrahamic faiths' and gets all exited that he might be given a chance to be taken seriously (by whom?) and some political lightweights (are there any others?) who may feel that peace is just around the corner.
A sad state of affairs, truly.
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at March 26, 2008 3:06 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)