Archbishop Ieronymos said that Islam was not a religion but a political party. As I said here, it’s actually both. Are these Muslim leaders in Greece actually denying that Islam has a political aspect? Note that they make no effort to refute anything that Archbishop Ieronymos said, even the erroneous part about Islam not being a religion; instead, they just claim victim status because he said it. It’s the easiest way to silence those whose speech is inconvenient these days.
Meanwhile, virtually every day some Muslims around the world contravene the idea that “one of Islam’s basic beliefs is to have life based on peace between religions. It can never be accepted to have grudge and hostility against other religions’ members.” Why do they misunderstand their own religion so resoundingly?
An update on this story. “Greek Muslims condemn Ieronymos II of Athens for Islamophobic remarks,” Daily Sabah, January 17, 2021 (thanks to David):
Greek Muslims condemned Archbishop Ieronymos II of Athens for attacking Islam on Saturday, stating that a more “constructive” rhetoric is needed for a peaceful environment, especially in contemporary days plagued by the pandemic.
“We condemn the statement of the Archbishop of Greece, Mr. Ieronimos,” said Western Thrace Turkish Minority Consultation Council (BTTADK).
In a statement shared on the council’s Twitter account, the council said: “We hope a more peaceful language to be used instead of anti-Islamic discourse in such difficult times of pandemic.”
Xanthi Turkish Union, on the other hand, said that Ieronymos’ remarks are not only an “Islamophobic attack” but also a “hate crime.”
“The fact that these statements, filled with insults, came from the number one name in the Greek church increases the gravity of the situation,” the union said in a statement shared on their website.
“We see this move as one of the typical examples of the rising Islamophobia and xenophobia in Greece in recent years,” the union continued, adding that Ieronymos needs to correct his words and apologize sincerely.
Similarly, the Western Thrace Imam-hatip Schools Graduates and Members Association (BIHLIMDER) referred to the archbishop’s words as an outcome of “ambition and jealousy.”
“We are leaving the examination of the psychological state of this person, who uses words that even the most ordinary people wouldn’t use, to the experts. We are condemning such a hostile attitude,” the association said, calling on Ieronimos to apologize to not only Muslims but also all of humanity for his hate crime.
The Association of Western Thrace Minority with High Education (BTAYTD), in their statement, highlighted that the archbishop’s remarks have no relation to any theological or historical facts.
“We would like to express that the fact that such a thought was mentioned by a man of critical and important position, especially a man of the clergy, created sadness and surprise among us,” the association said.
Ahmet Ibram, deputy head of the province of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, also reacted to the statement, referring to them as “unacceptable.”
“One of Islam’s basic beliefs is to have life based on peace between religions. It can never be accepted to have grudge and hostility against other religions’ members,” Ibram underlined….
mike says
Just like the Mu$lims lie and lie and lie until the world be leaves you
they be USEFUL idiots
mortimer says
Somewhat agree with mike. None of the above critics of Archbishop Ieronymos mentioned that Islam’s ‘ummah’ (community) is political in nature. So they were indeed CONCEALING (kitman) the facts about Islam’s political agenda.
The ‘community’ of Muslims (Arabic: ummah) certainly has many political connotations.
One of the best definitions of ‘ummah’ is found at: https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/11312/concept-of-ummah-in-islam/
“The definition of Ummah is a community of believers bound together with a common purpose, to worship God and with a common goal to advance the cause of Islam.”
The above definition refers to ‘common purpose to advance the cause of Islam’ which is political.
The Koran says Muslims should change society politically: “You (Muslims) are the best community (Ummah) raised up for (the benefit of) humanity; enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong and believing in God…” (Koran 3:110)
About 51% of the source texts of Islam (Koran, Bukhari and Sira) are political, 18% is about Allah and the rest is about Mohammed. In these texts, POLITICS is more important than religion.
Ed of Ct. Usa says
FOUR Places in versions of ALL Koran promote Kidnaping- sex slavery of females and Kidnapping All of the children that result. This is how the Horrible Janissaries and Mamluks were formed.
william carr says
I often wonder if many Moose Limbs ever read the Quran, of course many are illiterate but they listen to their clerics in the Mosque every Friday. Robert Spencer has listed many times the many
extracts from the Quran that call for hostility to non Moose Limbs.
mortimer says
Robert Spencer warns anyone who is tempted to speak about Islam that is both religious doctrine and a state(Arabic:’dawah wa dawla’). It is important to GET IT RIGHT.
Archbishop Ieronymos has now learned that almost ANYTHING that a dirty KAFIR says about Islam is ‘IMPERMISSIBLE’ (haram), thus making the KAFIR susceptible to a blasphemy death sentence.
The distinction that interest Muslims are in Sharia law:
Punishment of Blasphemers from Sharia manual Reliance of the Traveller’:
“The (DHIMMI) agreement is also violated (A: with respect to the offender alone) if the state has stipulated that any of the following things break it, and one of the subjects does so anyway, though if the state has not stipulated that these break the agreement, then they do not; namely, if one of the subject people:
-5- mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), or Islam.” – Reliance of the Traveller’ Chapter ‘O’ 11.10.05.
Sharia also permits anyone to kill those who verbally oppose Islam, since they are ‘at war’ (harbi) with Islam:
“There is no indemnity (blood money) obligatory for killing a non-Muslim (harbi) at war with Muslims.” -Reliance of the Traveller, o4.17, p.593
Much of the material in Sharia law manuals speaks about civil law and the role of the CALIPH (emperor). Thus, Sharia law is highly political and provides the basis of a ‘constitution’ for the Islamic state.
Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi behaved as both the head of Islamic religious authority and head of secular authority. His reign over ISIS was 100% guided by Sharia.
Archbishop Ieronymos should consult Robert Spencer about this public relations disaster he inadvertently caused.
Raja says
Thank you, Mortimer the great for the useful piece on pol islam
born saturday says
the archbishops comments were given great emphasis by the turks as they want to raise tensions and do so by various militant statements as well, before the 25th jan negotiations with greece. that in order to claim their maximalistic requiremenets…. the archbishop briefly mentioned only that islam is expansionist and the religion of war…it is an attitude change from him as greece is celebrating 200 years from the beggining of the revolution that liberated us from the slavery of the turks……
mortimer says
Reply to B.S.: a senior religious leader should be particularly careful to ‘GET IT RIGHT’ in order to avoid unnecessary contention. Archbishop Ieronymos emotionally blurted an over-generalization … that’s what caused the problem. He should have consulted an expert on Islam such as Robert Spencer before speaking his GENERALIZED OPINIONS of Islam which are off of dead center.
Western leaders who understand Islam’s hostility towards kafirs often get in trouble by speaking GENERALLY about Islam without specifying the source.
Archbishop Ieronymos would have created fewer waves if he had said, ‘Political Islam is an inseparable part of the Islamic religion’.
But, let us remember that the Patriarchist church has also been HIGHLY POLITICAL … much too political … in the past and some of its leaders continue to promote politics today … the archbishop’s remarks are somewhat in the order of psychological projection. He is a highly political bishop himself.
born saturday says
political is more for the patriarch not so much on our archbishop who retreats to whichever government we have…. but again to talk about political christian leaders such as the patriarch is against american interests dear to speak of for you….. the archbishop indeed answered the relevant question incompletely but i assure you he will complete his speak about islam soon…. also the view that you have that a christian church is political is that of an atheist probably…. respected but we dissagree on that one.. particularly this archbishop is not political in anything for all the years he served…. he is more neutral politically..
mortimer says
Liberation from tyranny is wonderful, but getting along with neighbors is a matter of wisdom.
born saturday says
so if you lived in a muslim ghetto you would convert to islam to have good relations with your neighbours??? liberation from that same slavery that is now expanding all throughout the world and it will be repeated….. at list fo us….
mortimer says
Robert Spencer’s observation is astute: “Note that they make no effort to refute anything that Archbishop Ieronymos said, even the erroneous part about Islam not being a religion.”
It is too complicated for them to refute that Islam’s Ummah actually DOES OPERATE as a political party.
Refuting that Muslims are always trying to encourage one another to work together to defeat the kafirs would merely draw attention to their political activities.
All acts of jihad are political. Jihad is a PILLAR OF ISLAM, thus all Muslims are required to be political.
mortimer says
Ahmet Ibram (a Muslim leader from Thrace) out and out lied by denying Islam’s doctrine of hostility and hatred (AL WALAA WAL BARAA).
Ahmet Ibram misrepresented Islam’s attitude towards dirty KAFIRS:
“One of Islam’s basic beliefs is to have life based on peace between religions. It can never be accepted to have grudge and hostility against other religions’ members,”
In fact, Islam ENCOURAGES hostility ‘against other religions’ members’ and that hostility is CANONICAL ISLAM and a religious duty incumbent upon all Muslims:
-Imam Abdul-Latif ibn Abdur-Rahman Rahimullah said, “It is not possible for someone to realize Tawheed (Islamic faith) and act upon it, and yet not be HOSTILE against the mushrikeen (i.e. wrong worshippers). So anyone who isn’t HOSTILE against the mushrikeen, then it cannot be said that he acts upon Tawheed nor that he realizes it.” [ad-Durar as-Saniyyah 8/167]
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE them because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
-“The doctrine of al Walaa wal Baraa is the REAL IMAGE for the actual practice of this faith.” – source “Al Walaa wal Baraa According to the Aqeedah of the Salaf”, by Sheikh Muhammad Saeed al Qatani, authoritative Saudi Sharia lawyer and imam at the Abu Bakr and Al Furqan Mosques in Mecca.
– Dr. Muhammad Saeed Al-Qahtaani said: “Thus, it is clear that Al-Wala’ Wal-Bara calls on Muslims to “love” their fellow Muslims and HATE the non-Muslim (or Kafir).”
– from ibn Taymiyya, “Book of Emaan”: “… true believers show ANIMOSITY and HATRED towards disbelievers and NEVER support them.”
– “The Muslim should regard the Kuffaar as ENEMIES and HATE THEM because of their kufr (wrong belief), just as he hates their kufr (disbelief) itself.” – from Umar Sulayman ‘Abd-Allaah al-Ashqar, “Belief in Allah”
– Obligation to Hate Kufaar: “With regard to matters of love and HATE in the heart, the Muslims’ attitude towards non-Muslims is based on the latter’s attitude towards Allaah. If they worship Allaah and do not associate anything in worship with Him, then they love them. If they associate others in worship with Him, or disbelieve in Him, or worship others alongside Him, or are HOSTILE towards His religion and hate the truth, then it is obligatory to HATE THEM them in our hearts.” – Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid
-Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab said: (The profession of) … “Islam of a man can never be accepted, even if he abandons polytheism, unless he shows ENMITY towards the disbelievers and polytheists, as Allah says in Surat al-Muja’dila 58:02”.
– In 2019, Mufti Muhammad Ibn Muneer of New York said, “The general principle is to love and to HATE for the sake of Allah. Which is simply summed up as, loving the Muslims and HATING THE NON-MUSLIMS.”
born saturday says
seems to many the archbishop realised the lust for islam makes you little less than a slave of islam eventually and decided to change his stance…. most of the hierarchy is people who get easily blackmailed…..
mortimer says
Where did he say that? Quote, please.
born saturday says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4u0UUIc-X8
born saturday says
this archbishop god bless him has had a different stance on migration formally so far. his statements are a change of character. he is my archbishop..
born saturday says
the archbishop is coomonly known in greece as the organiser of the church to feed the muslims….
Michael Copeland says
Oh dear,
“peace between religions”. That is an easy one. In Islam’s view there are no other religions. There are just “remnant cults bearing the names of formerly valid religions such as ‘Christianity’ and ‘Judaism'” (“Reliance of the Traveller”, w4) and paganism and idolatry. No problem there.
“filled with insults”: like “apes and pigs”, and “the vilest of beasts” for instance?
“no relation to any theological or historical facts”: Oh no? Not like “between us and you enmity and hatred forever” (Koran 60:4)?
“It can never be accepted to have … hostility against other religions’ members”: see above, there are not any other religions.
spiro says
The archbishop may have not given a complete answer but what he said is true
And nothing gets a lost soul .muslim more. Fired up than the truth
Michael Copeland says
Special memo to the upset muslims:
“The standard narrative has holes in it.”
Yaser Qadhi, Islamic scholar, Texas
Walter Sieruk says
When that archbishop said that Christians shouldn’t’ criticize Islam he was showing that he really doesn’t know the Bible . For the Bible instructs Christians to refute error and likewise expose the works of darkness ,Second Timothy 3:16. Ephesians 5:11. For Islam really is part of of that darkness, Isaiah 8:20.
Likewise ,when he said that Islam forbids Muslim to have hostility towards non-Muslims he was showing his own ignorance that the Qu ‘ran does actually instruct Muslims to have hostility towards people who are not Muslims . As found in the Qu ‘ran in Surah 2:191. 4:89. 9::123. 47:4.
tim gallagher says
Islam forbids hostility towards non-Muslims. What a load of bullshit. So far, in its bloodthirsty, murderous, miserable history, from what I have heard, Muslims are estimated to have slaughtered around 270 million victims, with around 80 million victims in India alone. I’d say that qualifies as quite a lot of hostility. I believe Islam is nothing but hatred, hostility and viciousness towards non-Muslims and also of one mob of Muslims towards other, less pure, Muslims. That is all that Islam has ever been. That “Islam forbids hostility” has to be the biggest lie ever told, or bloody close to it. But Muslims continually tell the most outrageous, ridiculous lies. The problem is that there are still some fools out there who seem to buy their outrageous bullshit, which is something that amazes me.
Crusades Were Right says
Let’s not be too hard on the Mohammedans of Greece, folks. Consider how the Mohammedans of “Turkey” (or, more accurately, Turkish-occupied Greece) expressed their annoyance with another Greek prelate of yesteryear:
“On 10 September (Julian style – 27 August) 1922, soon after the Turkish army had moved into Smyrna, a Turkish officer and two soldiers took Chrysostomos from the office of the cathedral and delivered him to the Turkish commander-in-chief, Nureddin Pasha. The general decided to hand him over to a Turkish mob who murdered him.
According to French soldiers who witnessed the lynching, but were under strict orders from their commanding officer not to intervene:
‘The mob took possession of Metropolitan Chrysostom and carried him away… a little further on, in front of an Italian hairdresser named Ismail … they stopped and the Metropolitan was slipped into a white hairdresser’s overall. They began to beat him with their fists and sticks and to spit on his face. They riddled him with stabs. They tore his beard off, they gouged his eyes out, they cut off his nose and ears.’
Bishop Chrysostomos was then dragged (according to some sources, he was dragged around the city by a car or truck) into a backstreet of the Iki Cheshmeli district where he died soon after.”
[Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysostomos_of_Smyrna%5D
“one of Islam’s basic beliefs is to have life based on peace between religions.” Indeed! lol
Crusades Were Right says
I have no idea where that %5D at the end of the link to the Wikipedia article came from – it isn’t part of it. Here is the correct link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysostomos_of_Smyrna
Ira Dotson says
Generally, most comments from Muslim apologists are laughable. A high school student could review the history of Islam and the Koran to come to the conclusion that Islam was established with violence. Islam was spread by violence form seventh century AD until the early part of the twentieth century. Finally, Muslim historians record the jihads against Europe, Africa, Persia and India with great delight.
This organization that cries Islamophobia is another expression of Islam. There are commands within the Koran, Haddith and Sharia law that teach Muslims to lie in order to protect Islam. The other tactic that they employ is to assume the role of a victim. They look for sympathy from uninformed individuals and cry out for mercy. It is simply another ploy to spread Islam.
I was glad that this Greek Christian leader presented a historical review of Islamic hegemony and warfare. It was accurate and substatiated by numerous eyewitnesses, historians and Islamic scholars. At this point, how stupid does this organization think the West is? Do they believe that we have not read the historical accounts from Muslim historians and scholars?
Perhaps it is the infactuation the West has with reality television that emboldens these individuals. It is true that Western culture has declined and embraced personal promotion rather than providing service, knowledge and creativity to our culture. Nevertheless, there are many of us that have our eye on the ball. We are not going anywhere.
unbeliever1 says
The sanity of anyone critical of Islam is always questioned. I am waiting to hear Erdogan threaten Greece.