I. Civil discourse
I assure you that I never intended to harm or offend you with my earlier comments.
I did intend to prick your pride (Luther calls it “sharp mercy,” I think), because you entered the discussion at Steve’s with “There is only one God . . . Allah, YHWH, God the Father, Waheguru . . . I doubt she gives a stuff.” Couple that with claiming that all “moral” people worship the same god and that sincerity saves, and I recognized someone putting a stumbling block before others.
You might notice my first reply to you there began with, “On the chance that your comment is offered in good faith . . . ,” because what you wrote was not something that would be welcomed by anyone who believes Christ’s Word is true. What you posted subsequently did not indicate a desire for dialogue either. All of that is more appropriate to a place like belief.net.
Would you admit my “Doorman-Priest (Saddam Hussein? Walt Disney? Diana Ross? What does it matter? There is only one Man, and she doesn’t care what we call it, does he?)” was funny?
II. All gods are the same god
You’ll have to forgive me if I thought you meant all gods were the same god, since you wrote: “There is only one God . . . that God is Allah, YHWH . . . Waheguru and so on.”
There are several problems with saying that all religions worship the same God, however imperfectly:
1) YHWH doesn’t say that. Can you show us where He does?
2) YHWH speaks of many false gods, describing them as “demons.” Is it rude of God to call others’ sincere, if flawed, efforts at knowing Him, “demons”?
3) Saying that, “all who do the best they can, God will accept,” is contrary to Scripture, and leads to people’s destruction, for salvation is in Christ alone.
4) If people can be saved by the sincerity of their effort, then Christ died for nothing.
Unbelievers need to hear (just as we believers do) that their sin is great and leads to Hell (Law), but God has forgiven their sins in Christ (Gospel).
(By the way, have you noticed your supporters arguing for NOT trusting the Word of Christ? Do you support that?)
III. Freedom of speech
As to free speech, its only limitation should be where truth ends (and even then, you have to be careful). Freedom of Speech is one of the first unalienable, God-given rights to be curtailed and then extinguished by tyrants (along with the Right to Bear Arms). If you don’t have the freedom to say something that offends someone, then you don’t have freedom of speech at all.
I agree that we should not “incite hatred.” That phrase, though, raises a red flag, for I hear it used most often by Muslims and their Useful Idiots to silence criticism of those aspects of Islam that promote the enslavement or slaughter of all non-Muslims, the abuse and degrading of women, the violation of children, and the denial of freedom of speech and conscience to all.
So, is it “hatred” to point out error that leads to Hell? Is it “hatred” to warn others that an ideology which has warred against non-Muslims for 1400 years is coming to town (or, in the case of Europe, is now mayor)? Is it “hatred” to expose the fact that Islam’s god and founder require or endorse genocide, murder, rape, slavery, pedophilia, theft, and deceit against non-Muslims, apostates, women, and little girls?
Wouldn’t it be “hatred” toward God and Man to remain silent in the face of all this?
IV. Christ is Allah?
You’ll have to forgive me for thinking that you said Christ is Allah. It might have something to do with your writing, “God is Allah, YHWH . . . .”
V. Interpreting Scripture
Being a Lutheran, you understand the Analogy of Scripture. We use Scripture to interpret Scripture as its authors (and Author) intended. In this, we use our God-given Reason and our knowledge of language, culture, history, etc.
It would be misinterpreting the Word of God to take literally a excerpt intended as symbolic. It would be wrong to understand poetry as history (though there may be historical content within it). It would be heresy to take a portion of the Old Covenant and apply it to those under the New.
(And since you are a teacher and minister, you must be familiar with my understanding of Revelation, for what’s in a name?)
I would make one more point about the Old Testament: Jesus said that all of it testifies of Him.
VI. Xenophobic Islamophobes
You write that I “generalise and give the impression that all Muslims are fundamentalists who act as one.” I disagree strongly.
I have quoted Allah. I have noted Mohammed’s words and deeds according to Islam’s own authoritative documents, those very texts on which Islam is founded.
The fact that citing Qur’an and Sunnah sounds to you like demonizing all Muslims says more about those texts and your reaction to them than it does about my words.
I would ask again, where have I erred? These documents are easily available to the Infidel with an ISP. And I wouldn’t rely on Muslim friends. Just like Christians, there is much variability among Muslims in terms of their knowledge, zeal, and veracity.
Because it is unfair to paint with a broad brush, I do not attack all Muslims; I do expose their prophet from Hell and his Allah.
I’m curious. You repeat many of the propaganda points jihadists and their apologists use to deceive non-Muslims (not intentionally, I believe; President Bush did this all the time). Have you never investigated these texts for yourself?
As to your friend, I will not accuse her of taqiyya (did you look that up yet?). It is notable that she uses several of the same “arguments” that jihad’s apologists do. I’d like to share with you what she didn’t say . . .
“Jihad” is Arabic for “struggle.” It is true that one use of jihad refers to the struggle against sin, unbelief, etc. What those Muslims Who Know (I’m not saying your friend is one of these) never tell non-Muslims is that this particular teaching is based on one hadith of questionable authority and that “jihad” is used usually to describe warfare against non-Muslims using any means necessary, including “qital” (combat) to establish the rule of Allah.
Are you aware that no major school of Islamic jurisprudence rejects warfare against non-Muslims?
As for “Christian fundamentalists,” what do they have to do with jihad? A Christian who thinks dancing is a sin is a far cry from a Muslim who carries out his Allah-given duty to separate your head from your body. Neither is a “Christian fundamentalist” who interprets literally even the symbolic parts of the Apocalypse going around blowing people up for Christ.
I notice also that you’re using (I don’t think intentionally) a common ad hominem attack used by Muslims to try to demonize those exposing their god and prophet: I must not know any Muslims.
This is a variant of the: “I’m not a racist because I have a [insert non-Caucasian ethnicity here] friend.” Who I know makes no difference to the truth of what I write, since I am not talking about people I don’t know, I’m talking about texts and history and current events that are available for study to all with the courage to examine them honestly.
And no, it isn’t pretty.
Again, I ask, where have I erred? Please show me from Qur’an, any of the ahadith collections considered most reliable by mainstream Islam, or Sirat Rasul Allah (I have a copy here in my bookcase; do you?).
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Sincerity saves, civil discourse, and xenophobic Islamophobes
More from here: