With the current furor over cartoon depictions of Mohammed, I’ve decided to take a step back and look at the big picture. Just how serious is blasphemy taken by some of the other major religions, and just how much respect is accorded other faiths by non-practicioners? (I figure as a repeatedly-self-declared agnostic, I am the closest thing to a disinterested party as there is around.)
Let’s look at some examples of blasphemous imagery, and see how they are handled:
First, there’s this cartoon I stumbled across a while ago. It is rankly offensive to two major faiths — Christianity and Judaism. But I have to admit I snorted at it. I even shared it with a select few (OK, just Laurence Simon), who said he was going to post it, but he never did.
How about stuff that’s pretty much guaranteed to offend Christians? How is that handled?
Luckily, we have two recent examples — Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ and Chris Ofili’s Madonna, made with elephant dung.
How did Christians react to these desecrations of their holiest symbols with bodily wastes? Yeah, there was a hue and cry. There may have been even a death threat or two. But the most extreme reaction I can recall by most people was a denouncement that these had been paid for with taxpayer money — THEIR money — and they were outraged over that. I don’t recall massive Christian riots over them, burning buildings and calling for death.
Judaism takes a bit more abuse. Partly because they’re a smaller group, partly because they’re much more in-your-face to the Muslim world, partly out of respect for historical tradition. But take a look at some of the anti-Semitic cartoons collected here, or this award-winning cartoon. Pretty extreme stuff, but again no major backlash.
Then there’s Islam.
The Ten Commandments, common to all three faiths mentioned above, says you shall not worship graven images. In Islam, this is taken to the extreme that one should not even create an image of Mohammed. And whether or not you believe in the tenets of Islam or not, they’re bound and determined that we shall all live by them.
Therefore, it is an unforgivable sin for ANYONE to draw pictures of Mohammed. Even non-Moslem cartoonists in a Western democracy, acting fully within their legal and moral rights — for the Danish government to tolerate that is, to much of the Islamic world, a declaration of war.
One of the basic tenets I learned in a class on ethics is that for any ethical system of beliefs to be acceptable, it must be universal. It must apply equally to all, or it is inherently unfair. So, by that standard, it seems that the governing principle underlying the Muslim outrage must be that one must respect a religion’s beliefs, even if you don’t ascribe to them.
And how does Islam rate on that standard?
Pretty shabby.
The Taliban, who I think we can all agree represented a very fundamentalist view of Islam, decided that its “no graven images” belief extended to two huge statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. And, with great ceremony and glee, they destroyed them — despite pleas from the world community, not just Buddhists.
In 2002, Palestinian terrorists fleeing Israeli military forces entered and occupied the Church of the Nativity. While the siege lasted, they repeatedly desecrated the Church and abused the Christian staff. And when they left, there were no apologies, no reparations — just celebrations that they had negotiated their way out, proclaiming it a great victory.
And let us NEVER forget the ongoing extermination of any signs of Jewish occupation of the Temple Mount, undertaken by the Palestinian Authority in contravention of international law and done under the color of “restoration” to the mosque built on top of the holiest site to Jews.
In Muslim nations, there is freedom to belong to another faith. As long as you don’t make a point of it. That means you can’t display any signs of your faith. You can’t build a house of worship. You have to pay a special non-Muslim tax. And if you get caught “attempting to convert” a Moslem (which could mean something as innnocuous as explaining your beliefs to a curious Moslem), you can be put to death.
That’s just for Christians. Jews have it even worse — when they’re even allowed entry into the country.
So let’s sum up: according to the Moslems, our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and all the rest are secondary to the tenets of a faith the vast majority of us simply don’t believe in.
I think not. The Golden Rule applies here: “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” If the Moslem world wants respect, it must be willing to give it.
I am reminded of a great quote from Mahatma Gandhi. When asked about his opinion of Western civilization, he replied “I think it would be a good idea.”
Modern-day Islam, I am sad to say, is reminding me more and more of contemporary gangs. So eager to answer any insult or challenge, incredibly prickly about their “rights” and “turf,” and so quick to resort to violence. The Danish cartoons were a “dis” on them, and they seem poised to go to any lengths to avenge that slight.
So what do I think of Moslem civilization? I think it would be a good idea — but I’m basing that purely on speculation, as I’ve seen damned little evidence of it so far.
Robin, at the risk of offending you, those through whom you have experienced Islam were not true Muslims. Muslims are forbidden to accept a non-Muslim as an equal. As a matter of fact, the Qur’an explicitly says that Muslims may not befriend Jews or Christians.
Many (most in fact) Muslims are lax or “moderate.” But from the perspectives of Islam’s classical sources, they are hypocrites at best or apostates at worst. Although proclaiming lax Muslims as infidels is going a bit too far, those who do such takfeer are not unjustified or out of bounds. (Muslim clerics early on decided not to judge a person’s Muslimhood. However, this decision was made because judging a person’s Muslimhood was difficult and complicated: the rule evolved out of convenience rather than doctrine.)
You say your ex-husband and ex-mother-in-law were very giving people. Was it Islam or humanity? I know many giving people who are not Muslim. One’s religion as not bearing on one’s level of charity.
(By the way, “zakaat” technically is not “charity.” It is a tax on certain goods that Muslims are obligated to give every year. Shiites add another tax, the “khums,” that is given to their “marja-e taqleed” (the expert they follow) on behalf of the Imam. If the Imam were apparent, the “khums” would go to him.)
SCSIwuzzy’s posts have been excellent. I have been very impressed. Regarding quotes from the Qur’an, many Muslims use them independent of context. However, even when used in context even they retain their militant interpretation and application. For examples, see the commentaries by Daryabadi and Mawdudi. (I’d add that by Sayyid Qutb as well.) I think SCSIwuzzy’s posts clearly demonstrates what, exactly, the Qur’an says regarding a number of issues that are germane.
I find it interesting Kashif did not answer my question regarding his expertise in Islam. There are many, many Muslims who are born into Islam, identify with Islam, but know little about Islam. This includes those who think they know a lot about Islam.
Another thing SCSIwuzzy did, that I admire, is that he provided direct quotes from the Qur’an. Many people, Muslim demagogues included, will say, “The Qur’an or the Hadeeth says such-and-such,” when, in fact, the Qur’an/Hadeeth does not say anything like it whatsoever. Like Kashif’s comment on supporting one’s non-Muslim spouse.
I don’t say this to attack Kashif but to warn non-Muslims what to watch for and to help Muslims realize the flaws in their arguments.
Kashif,
I am alarmed by your signing off of this conversation because you have made so darn many good arguements. Your history is correct and your approach has been dignified.
For the rest of you people, in particular Muslihoon, HOW DARE you say that I was not married into a “True Moslem” family. Just so you get your facts correct, Saudi law is based ABSOLUTELY 100% on Sharia law (for those of you non-Moslems, this is the accompaning law equivalent to the Koran). It is stated in the Koran that a Moslem male may marry a Christian or Jewish woman. Why is this? Because Moslems believe that all three religions are “of the book”.
Again for all you non Moslems, they believe first came the Old Testament (which is followed by the Judaic faith) then came the New Testament (which is accepted by the Christians, but not the Jews) and that God’s last revelation came through Mohammed in the Koran (accepted neither by Jews or Christians). In order to accept the Koran, Moslems
MUST accept all prophets who came before.) Since my ex-husband and I had to receive special permission from the Saudi government to be married, not because I was a Christian, but because I was a Non-Saudi, are you suggesting that the religious counsel granted us special permission outside the law of the Koran? Sorry but this was definitely not the case. Are you suggesting that the religious HOME to Islam is doing something wrong when granting permission to hundreds of foreign women who marry Saudi nationals. Sorry everyone, but Muslihoon has one Hell of a big chip on his shoulder after ridding himself of his Islaminc shackles in order to become a Christian.
As to the person who wrote that I am defending my faith of Islam, I am NOT a Moslem. I am a practicing Catholic who has an open mind and respect for the right of others to worship their God in whatever means they find meaningful. My own priest said to a large group that he could personally not find it possible that people of other religions will not reach heaven because they don’t follow Christianity but are good and kind people. But I guess he was either watering down his own faith or maybe just believing in a benevolent god who is much more loving to humans than most humans are to eachother.
Muslihoon, you really need to stop misinforming people about your former faith. This is not to say that you did not suffer some way and that is why you converted. But it certainly is unbecoming of you to try to tell Kashif what to believe and you cannot possibly go to the extent of telling me I was not married to a “true Moslem”. That’s just Bullcrap and you know it.
As for someone else saying that I was only looking at the racist issue of Ghandi or MLK, the point I was making is that unless you are going out there and doing something about making peace in the world yourselves, this was a rediculous statement. I certainly do not claim to be a world renown peacemaker, and you cannot claim these two men as your own or as an example to use against the Arabs. There are many moderates in the Arab World but the problem is simply too huge and has infiltrated too many generations for any one man to step forward and solve the issues.
Kashif, once again, I really do hope you at least read here that people are continuing this conversation. I for one am VERY SORRY to see you say “Maasalama”. You have been the reason I signed on in the first place and I hate to see you go Remember that this whole thing started with a cartoon and the title of this Blog “F–em if they cannot take a joke”. I have seen you painstakingly try to explain the other side to this story and I am sure you have not spent the rest of your time rioting in the streets. For everyone else, Kashif really is the voice of moderation but you should take the time to listen, maybe share a shisha with him and get to know a little bit about another culture.
Another note to all before you jump to conclusions:
In addition to the above information I wish to add that My ex and I were married in a Moslem ceremony (kaatbiktab-sic) Is Mulihoon suggesting that I got hold of a wishy-washy imam in Saudi Arabia, the HOME to radical Islam and Wahabiism?
I don’t think so. His facts are just not true. A Moslem male MAY marry a woman of the Christian or Jewish faith.
As for my own Catholocism, I became a Catholic three years ago. For many years, my first 48 to be precise, I struggled with making a commitment to a religion. While my daughter was raised by myself here in the United States with frequent visits back and forth, I could not commit to ANY religion which would condemn her father’s. It was while becoming a Catholic that my priest made the above statement. As for the rest of you, you are all completely entitled to your own beliefs.
Yes, Jesus belongs to Moslems also. The fact that they do not see him as God incarnate is of no threat to me as it should not be to you. Muslihoon does not have to water down his Christian beliefs in order to respect others. That is the whole problem here as I see it. No where in Kashif’s comments did he suggest that his religion is the only correct path to God. If this is all religion is good for is a fight then I suggest it’s very essence is self-destructive. Get a grip here people, there are plenty of people on this earth who believe in different ways and not any one of them is RIGHT, they are just entitled to their beliefs without condemnation or twisting of their faith practices.
Robin:
Actually, yes, any Christian who allows any postion other than that Jesus is God is indeed watering down his or her faith. If Jesus is not God there is no foundation at all for Christianity. If I accept Muslim teaching that Jesus was a prophet but is not God then I am no longer a Christian since I deny the essential truth of the Christian faith. If Jesus is not God He has no power to save. Since Jesus is God He alone has power to save.
Conflicting opinions do not indicate that none can be true, merely that all but one is false.
Getting back to the issue: If Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance, as many have proclaimed since 9/11, why then are people dying over cartoons? Where is peace? Where is tolerance?
Actually, it is Catholic doctrine that non-Catholics that lead a good life go to heaven. Being a Catholic (following the rules, not just claiming membership, which certain American priests and Archbishops have done a poor example of, IMO) makes things a bit easier, in that if you are good Catholic, chances are you followed the teachings of Jesus.
For Muslims accepting Jesus… they accept him very differently than Christians. They do not recognize him as the son of God, which is a very big difference. The idea that Jesus will come back in a wrathful manner (which many readings of the Koran and hadiths suggest) is also a departure from much of Christian thought.
Hi Robin thanks for the response.
I certainly am not shying away from any good discussion. But I can quickly get a sense when people are too entrenched in their views, so much so that they see everything outside of those views as dark, and themselves as pure (often purely on the basis that they are absolved of their sins, hence can judge others). Such people and their views are scary, and historically they are often the most manipulted of all people, used and abused by politicians and religious types. I feel sorry for them.
Most importantly some of the writers here began throwing Quranic verses, as I said out of context and with all the intentions of type-casting Islam and Muslims, nothing more. I am not an evangelist and cannot do a good job of evangelizing. In fact I made a half effort attempt to find my own Quran and could not find it in the house. Ouch.
Therefore what I propose doing is to take sayings of the prophet and put them here countering every item (numerically) everytime mentioned to typecast the Prophet or Islam. Initially I had thought I would find objectionable verses in the Bible, but then the better sense got into me. Why should I denegrate even in pure academic terms a holy scripture like the Bible. My earlier intentions to show biblical references was only to make the argument that all religious texts have items in them that can be construed as objectionable. The Bible is no exception. What is important is that we take those parts from the Bible, Torah and the Quran that bring us together, not push us further apart.
With respect to the Quran one important point I would like the readers to be aware of. The Quran was revealed in stages during the Prophet’s life. Whether you believe in it or not, do please realize this, that when Muslims read the Quran they attempt to understand the context of every Surah, and there is often a story behind a Surah. Hence when you have a verse that says things like “Fight” or something we might consider insensitive given our contemporary sensibilities we should realize that the Surah was addressing a particular issue of that time and imploring the early Muslims on how they should react to a given moment in their lives 1400 years ago. Let us not read it with the lenses of a contemporary New Yorker sipping their Caramel Macciatto at Starbucks.
Islam is no different than Christianity or Judiasm in historical terms. The early points of their genesis were difficult moments for those religions and the adherents to them. The Jews faced persecution of incredible proportions from the Egyptians and had to flee into exile in order to survive and protect their scripture. The Christians lost their Prophet who was cruxcified brutally, and though Chritianity has romantizied that act as a fundamental component to salvation, from a purely academic and historical perspective it follows a similar line of early year persecutions of religions in their moments of genesis. The Muslims were no different, the early muslims were murdered, lost their belongings, forced into exile, and even had wars initially waged against them. Hence the Quran offered through (to the early muslim) devine guidance how they should react in those moments in order to survive. If you don’t understand this, you don’t understand a fundamental aspect of Islam and that the Quran is structured in that way and why it talks to issues of War and Jihad (minimal) among a whole slew of other issues.
Anyways putting that aside here are the first 10 sayings of the Prophet that I will put here for people to read and type-cast this Prophet of Islam:
“The love of the world is the root of all evil.i>”
This saying stemmed from the disparity the Prophet saw between the rich and the poor. It was the love of worldly goods that made the rich callous to the poverty amongst them.
“Women are the twin halves of men.“
These words were spoken 1400 years ago in a society that came from tribal rituals of female infanticide. Hence hopefully you can see the incredible power in these words. Such concepts were not even openly accepted in the non-muslim world till contemporary years.
He is not of me who, when he speaketh, speaketh falsely; who, when he promiseth, breaketh his promises; and who, when trust is reposed in him, faileth in his trust.
This one is for Peter, who attempted to allude to the blogers here that Muslims can lie to “unbelievers”, hence people on this BLOG should worry about my words if they sound too good.
The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr.
I put the above because so many people love to gibe at the concept of Jihad. Well folks hate to burst your bubble on that one.
Verily God hath one hundred loving kindnesses; one of which he hath sent down amongst man, quadrupeds, and every moving thing upon the face of the earth: by it they are kind to each other, and forgive one another; and by it the animals of the wilds are kind to their young; and God hath reserved ninety-nine loving kindnesses by which he will be gracious to His creatures on the last day.
One of my favorites on animals.
No person hath drunk a better draught than that of anger which he hath swallowed for God’s sake.
An excellent saying of the Prophet above giving the current happening vis-a-vis the cartoons.
When the bier of anyone passeth by thee, whether Jew, Christian or Muslim, rise to thy feet.
His sayings on the respect we must give to other religions.
To spend more time in learning is better than spending more time praying; the support of religion is abstinence. It is better to teach knowledge one hour in the night than to pray all night.
His words on education and knowledge.
Riches are not from and abundance of wordly goods but from a contented mind.
On riches and wealth.
He is the most perfect Muslim whose disposition is best; and the best of you are they who behave best to their wives.
A finally on the topic of women, another great contemporary western myth o nhow Islam treats women (wives).
Hope I have added some postiveness to this discourse. Again I apologize if I have offended anyone. Those are not my intentions. And I hope Muslihoon and Peter forgive me if I have been too caustic or rude.
Kashif:
A few comments on your post of 2/7/6 – 7:44
I certainly am not shying away from any good discussion. But I can quickly get a sense when people are too entrenched in their views.
Compare this to:
The Christians lost their Prophet who was cruxcified brutally, and though Chritianity has romantizied that act as a fundamental component to salvation.
Apparently I am not alone in being entrenched in my view. Christians did not romanticize Jesus’ death, were in fact surprised by it and were equally surprised by His return to life. Discount the eyewitness accounts as you wish but follow that road too far and even Ceasar ceases to be real.
This one is for Peter, who attempted to allude to the blogers here that Muslims can lie to “unbelievers”, hence people on this BLOG should worry about my words if they sound too good.
If you will review this blog you will see that I never said anything about Muslims being allowed to lie to “unbelievers.” I hope that you exercise greater care in your quotations from Quaran than you do in your quotations from this blog.
One final note, on this post, if Mohammed was correct in claiming that Jesus is not God then we who place our faith in Him are sorely deceived for we believe what He said of Himself: “I and the Father are one.” If He and the Father are not one then He is not God. If He is not God then He lied in all He said and is the worst kind of evil.
The following will attempt to address several of the beforementioned comments.
Robert: I read back to one of your inflamatory comments which postured “Perhaps Islam is a religion that needs extinction”. Wow!! that’s quite a statement. WWJD? (What would Jesus do?)
That sounds pretty much like what the radical Islamists are suggesting. Imagine yourself a martian looking down on earth (just for the sake of an intellectual look at this crazy arguement).
What would you think of that comment? Better yet, try to imagine what God, ANY god, would say about that? Might he say, “YEH! someone’s finally listening to me and is going to destroy all those who worship me in a different manner?” Or would he say as he does in the Christian Bible,
“Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord”? If God is going to get them all in the end anyway for not believing the way Christians do, then we have nothing to worry about except to wait for the day of judgement.
Peter: Kashif is not willing to point out verses in the Bible that contradict your sightings. I very much respect him for that because he is showing respect for your beliefs. But again, for the sake of an intellectual arguement I quote you:
People didn’t say Jesus was God, he did”. Without challenging your beliefs, can you explain to me(who happens to not agree with your interpretation) why Jesus for his entire life prayed to his father, God, if he was God? Without insulting you this pretty much sounds like a contradiction. Even the Catholic faith, the largest of all Christians denominations does not claim Christ to be God but a part of a trinity. Maybe they got it all wrong though and we better repent of our delusions.
To all of those who claim Islam as a violent religion: Just for the sake of another intelectual conversation, have any of you seen the movie “The New World”? It is the story of Pocahontas. Remember the story, the English came here to settle Jamestown and found themselves starving to death. It was Pocahontas who befriended (and fell in love with) John Smith. She brought them food so they didn’t die of starvation. Maybe she wasn’t a “REAL INDIAN”. (this arguement goes to Muslihoon) Perhaps the story ended many years later in the sad saga of the reservation system and the demonzing of the “savage Indian”. But that does not negate the fact that Pocahontas WAS a “real Indian” and that her sense of humanity was what saved the settlers of Jamestown.
Kashif: I am so glad you did not stick with “Maasalama” and you are back. I really feel you are making an absolutely logical and dignified arguement. You are the embodiment of the Moslem moderate approach to solving this worldwide insanity which is boiling down to a Holy War on all sides. This scares the HELL out of me too. It is just so COMPLICATED and it cannot come down to “Your God VS MY God”.
FOR ALL: There are voices of moderation and respect out there. I personally would rather take the teachings of Jesus to promote peace rather that admonishing others for not believing exactly as I do. As I see it, so would all those (and there are plenty of them) moderate Moslems.
Hey all you Christians, DON”T SHOOT POCAHONTAS!
Kashif:
Just to reiterate that I am not trying to insult you when I say:
If you will review this blog you will see that I never said anything about Muslims being allowed to lie to “unbelievers.” I hope that you exercise greater care in your quotations from Quaran than you do in your quotations from this blog.
But you are basing your life on your understanding of Christianity, Islam, etc. and a decision of that importance must be carefully made.
(Add to the above) Don’t try to put her people on a reservation or turn them into Christians either. They were doing just fine before you came along and stole their land. (Please compare this to our multinationals taking the Arabs primary resource, oil, and then insisting on them
adopting all of our ways) RESPECT,RESPECT,RESPECT is all the moderate Moslems are asking for.
(Add to the above) Don’t try to put her people on a reservation or turn them into Christians either. They were doing just fine before you came along and stole their land. (Please compare this to our multinationals taking the Arabs primary resource, oil, and then insisting on them
adopting all of our ways) RESPECT,RESPECT,RESPECT is all the moderate Moslems are asking for.
Peter sincere apologizes. It wasn’t you who alluded to Muslim’s being permitted to lie. It was SCSCIWuzzy. He wrote:
Then again, there is a certain encouragement and approval in the Koran regarding lying to the infidels…
I should have found exactly who stated this, though I was certain someone did and erroneously defaulted to you since you and I have been going back and forth.
Again Peter (with respect to my quotes on Christ) you took my words out of context. When I was stating that Christian’s too lost their Prophet brutally, and romantisized that, I was making an academic analogy of the commonality of religions in their early years being persecuted. Please read my words in the context they are. You have a habbit of parsing words to suit your views.
I am sure you are not aware that in Islam, Jesus was born to a Virgin Mary, and also that in Islam Jesus did not die on the cross either. He was already ascended to the heavens by God before he was cruxified.
Finally I acknowledge that there is a possiblity (given my academic mind never accepting anything as 100% assured or disproved) that Christ was son of God, or God or part of God. However I don’t prescribe to that, only because in Islam the unity of God (afterall we are a monotheistic religion) in line with Abrahamic teachings, is the number one most important component. It is called the “Shahadah”. And it means that “I bear witness that there is ONE God”. Infact this is the simple line one must state when converting, “I bear that there is one God, and that the Muhammad PBUH, is His Prophet.”
It is also important to note that there are more surah’s about Mary in the Quran than there are in the Bible.
And finally Islamic scholars and Quran and the Prophet stated that the teachings of the Prophet Jesus, were changed and modified by different groups within Christianity. It was based upon this dilution, modifications by man that resulted in the revelation of the Quran as the final word of God. Infact people asked the Prophet once that how come as a prophet you do not have powers of Miracle like Moses and Jesus before you. He simply stated that my miracle is the Quran. The word of God that shall never change for enternity. Which is why today the same book that was revealed to the Prophet exists to this day without the slightest bit of modification in over 1400 years.
Now I don’t want to disparage anything, but I find it ironic that purely on the basis of historical accuracy you cannot acknowledge that the Bible’s of today were put together hundreds of years after Christ, and that many texts that were ancient were removed simply because they did not suit the political aspects and aspriations of the church of that time, or more importantly might have questioned certain fundamental indoctrinations of the Church. If you want to be historically accurate you cannot deny that. There are NO WORDS of Christ that survived his time. There are people who prescribe what he had said and these people came years after Christ had departed from the world and themselves had never met him (there are no records of writings from early Christians – however later stories about Christ starting emerging that form the basis of the New Testament). Christianity and Christ for the Romans themselves were small bumbs in their historical record. Infact Romans were known for their record keeping yet to-date there is no record that Christ ever existed. NOTE I AM NOT DENYING CHRIST. I CAN NEVER DO THAT. All I am saying is that if records were so paultry in those days pertaining Christ and his teachings (even with some of the best record keepers in our history), how can we be certain that the words prescribed to him as a the SON OF god, were actually his, and not an inclusion by those who came years after his departure. This is the fundamental break between Islam and Christianity, the uncertainty of the word, and this is the reason why Quran was revealed and the word in it protected for all times with no changes or dilution or modification.
BTW here were the prophet’s words:
Do not exceed bounds in praising me, as the Christians do in praising Jesus, the son of Mary, by calling Him God, and the Son of God; I am only the Lord’s servant; then call me the servant of God and His messenger.
Finally I raise these issues only because I think it is wrong to prescribe to the rigidity of certainity. There is much that questions me and makes me wonder about Islam (and when it does I attempt to find an answer) and for that matter all religions. More importantly I am very skeptical of people who use religion and state it like fact, when it is a personal issue of faith.
The reason why I prescribe to Islam is that it allows me to be personally attached to my God. I don’t need a church, I don’t need tradition, I don’t need a priest or a rabbi or a mullah. I can read the Quran myself, make my judgements on the meaning and lead my life through it, if I choose. As a muslim I shall be held accountable for my actions by God. I cannot absolve or be absolved on the basis of someone’s elses sacrifice. If I err, or show pride, or feel self-righteous, or supress, or hurt, or do anything that doesn’t become of a humane human, I loose out in the end as a muslim.
That is how I will be judged, and you know I feel very comfortable about it.
It is the ultimate MERITOCRACY. You are who you are and you will be judged for how you tread on this earth.
I leave you with the beautiful words of the Prophet:
Deal gently with the people, and be not harsh; cheer them and condemn them not. Ye will meet with many ‘people of the Book’ who will question thee, what is the key to Heaven? Reply to them (the key to Heaven) to testify to the truth of God, and to do good work.
Peter:
One final thing. I think your beliefs are beautiful. I respect them and admire your faith.
You know the first holy book I read as a Child was not the Quran it was the Bible. I attended Catholic school, and funny thing is that I never read it as someone elses religion. I read it as mine and would go through with it and its illustrations with my parents. Only thing was that every time I read the English names like Samson, Jesus, Jacob, etc., by parents would just “yes that is Shamoon, Isah, Yacub”. And yes this in an Islamic country.
I will never judge you for your faith. There is one simple reason, I cannot as a muslim. I can internalize that you might be wrong on some aspects. But I cannot condemn you in my mind to HELL or anything like that. That condemnation is reserved for GOD, and for fear of encroaching on his domain I shall never go that route.
Additionally as an academic I won’t do this either, cuz I am a skeptic. I never prescribe to absolutes. WHAT IF I AM WRONG?
In the end how we live together as co-inhabitants on this earth is how we judge each others actions here on earth.
As a human I will respect you, love you and care for you when in need.
However when there is injustice we must at the minimum feel sorrow in our hearts and minds. That is part of all our faiths be it Christian, Jewish or Muslim.
If we are stronger in faith then we can perhaps speak out against the injustices.
And finally those with the strongests of faiths should act out in means, just and appropriate to end injustice.
Hope you understand.
Kashif: As I said in an earlier post, a conflict of opinions does not negate all of them just most of them. Restricting the discussion to Christianity and Islam there is a conflict of opinion. Christians believe that Jesus is God, Muslims do not. Both cannot be correct, Either the Christian is wrong or the Muslim is wrong. If Jesus is God He cannot be not-God. If Jesus is not God He cannot be God.
As far as absolutism is concerned, at some point each of us must be certain enough of our faith that we will be willing to “bet our lives” on our faith. If we cannot, or do not, what is the purpose of that faith? If we cannot, or will not, stand on it why own it? If we are unwilling to say “This is true, all else is false!” why have a faith at all?
^Thanks for all the good posts, especially the lengthy ones.
They have all made me think, To bad you aren’t the leaders of your faiths.
This would be a great world
Peter I maybe wrong but I see what you are doing. We both are looking at the same thing, with one view “glass have empty” while the other is “glass half full”.
In your case since it is half empty you won’t drink it.
Look folks I maybe dead wrong on this, but as a student of history I sort of understand why institutionalized Christianity must segregate its “flock” in order to survive. And what better way to kill a conversation than by saying things like as in Peter’s own words:
If we are unwilling to say “This is true, all else is false!” why have a faith at all?, around the premise of Christ as son of God.
Though in Islam too it says Quran is the final word of God, it is not subject to much institutional manevouring. This is critical. No Mullah can get up tomorrow and say Christians will go to hell. They can say it, but the majority of Muslims will laugh that off or disregard it, simple because we can go directly to the Quran and see that is not the case. Or they can see the woman or man right next to them who they have married as being the Christian or Jew.
So I believe very strongly that by putting this litmus test that one (Muslim) needs to believe that Christ was the Son of god, for any chance of redemption, the institution of Church (which in 300AD was an incredibly political organization with economic interests) did a phenomenal job at killing any cross-religion dialgoue and essentially freezing out the non-muslims and freezing in for that matter their cherished followers, which I think might have been a more important component of this act.
Further more they made it into a central tenant. Since only through the acceptance of this son/god relationship and the subsequent sacrifice to absolve of all our sins can we get to Heaven and redemption. So that is what I call a double lock.
This was important since 99.9999% of christianity has nothing to do with this. 99.9999% of Christianity has a message of hope, love, tolerance, peace and justice for the oppressed. So today we religate that 99.9999% of Christianity to the sidelines, and embrace the 0.0001% as evident in this dialogue.
I beg to differ on this. For me the 99.9999% of Chrisitanity and its message is more important that the 0.0001%. The reason why it is important is because that 99.9999% of Christianity reaffirms my own religion Islam. You might find this difficult to undertstand. I see Christianity and Judiasm in Islam, and then I see how Islam as a religion (respects the other two), I also see the commonality of the message, I also see the commonality of the spirit (protect your weakest from oppression). Those elements are what make us into better humans, better Muslims, better Christians and better Jews. Not whether we believe a man was a son to god, and god sacrificed him to absolve us of the original sin, and only through the acceptance of this cruxifiction within this premise of its being, can we be guaranteed ascesion to heaven. Maybe I am just abtuse.
BTW I am sure you realize Peter that you follow what is known as the Nicene creed that started 325AD. Imagine that over 3 centuries after Christ. It thereafter put in amendments in 381AD and added terms like “son of god”, and thereby reaffirmed the creed and stated no further changes could be made. The original creed of 325 only referred to “we believe in the holy spirit”.
So I hope you understand where we come from in our judgement.
Again as always I hope you realize that I am in no way disparaging your faith. I hope by my words you can understand how Muslims accept theirs (not how we look at yours), and in our own ways re-affirm those elements of Christianity that we feel are central to the message of our Prophet Jesus.
Kashif:
Yes, present circumstances do indicate that Christianity, Judaism and Islam lead their adherents to become better humans: More loving, tolerant and peaceful. Unfortunately that merely makes one a better person than before, not necessarily a saved one. You mentioned meritocracy earlier and it is very true that members of all three faiths are encouraged to do good works. The Jew and the Christian, however, realize that these good works are the outcome of one’s faith, not the substance. It is by faith in Jesus that I am saved, the good works are ancillary.
I do know of the Nicene creed, the Apostle’s creed and a host of others and agree that these were formulated centuries after Jesus’ death and resurrection. They did not invent or insert any new thought but were simply forumlations of doctrine that had existed since Jesus’ time. He Himself referred to Himself as the Son of God, this was not an invention of His followers hundreds of years after the fact. The Bible was essentially complete within the lifetimes of those who witnessed Jesus’ ministry, the creeds add nothing to the Bible and do not dispute it.
Hi!Kashif and Peter,
Please excuse me for interupting in this discourse because I do not intend to take away anything at all from what I see as a sincere discussion between two individuals.
Kashif: I have read over and over your last response to Peter. It is without a doubt, the most eloquent response to any Christian arguement that I have ever seen. I too am a skeptic and as I said earlier, took many years to come to the conclusion that it was the time in my life to take a “leap of faith”. It was through my two years of RCIA (the Catholic classes one must take in order to convert) that I became aware of much of what you pointed out in your last response to Peter. Yes for all of you reading, there is NO historical record of Jesus, only an account made by followers many years after his death. Those words in the Gospel are words attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not actually written by any first generation apostles. And yes, there is STILL controversy over which books were accepted in the final compelation of the Bible. This DOES leave many openings for error on what now fundamentalist Christians accept as fact. Christianity though as you know, and state quite rightly is a “Faith” and not a fact. This is why I was able to become a Catholic and still be able to question. It is really amazing that you were educated in Catholic schools as a Moslem but this does not surprise me knowing your faith from first hand experience as I do. Like every single Moslem that I have ever known, you show respect for Christianity but question their worship of Jesus. Maybe I’m a “Cafeteria Catholic” or maybe just too respectful of other possibilities out there to think that I must be right and everyone who denies Christ’s divinity is going to burn in Hell. Just so Peter knows, the Jewish faith also has the same problem with worshiping anyone but the one true God. They just go one step further and call him a false messiah and don’t accept a SINGLE word he said.
In order to earn respect, one must first give it.
In my eyes the Moslems have given their due respect but they are more than deserving of respect in return. (Just a note, my EX just called as he often does and I told him about this BLOG. We are still very good friends and have a respect/love for each other born out of years of listening to one another with open hearts.)
Peter: with all due respect for you, Kashif is not asking you to accept his point of view and therefore Christianity is a sham. He (as well as I ) is pointing out that there are many different faiths in this world and that in the end we are all judged by the same God. The Christian God is not just the God of Christians, he is also the God of the Jewish faith and the Moslems. We have a whole lot more in common than say a Buddhist and a Christian (no disparage to Buddhists intended because your faith is also one of peace).
I would just like to know what your solution to Christians and Moslems getting along in this world is. If it’s that they should accept Jesus as God, I hate to inform you but that AINT going to happen. If on the other hand, you are willing to sit down as all moderate Moslems are and show mutual respect and build upon your commonalities rather than hold onto your insistance on agreement, there really is no solution. I really don’t think Jesus would want anyone to force him down another’s throat. He did not come to us to teach intolerance, but rather to teach kindness, humility and acceptance of each other as his children. Without trying to argue Kashif’s arguement for him (with ALL respect to Kashif),
I believe this is the crux of what he is trying to get across.
Kashif:
I forgot to mention in my last post that your comment (modified slightly):
We believe the man Jesus to be the Son of God, and God sacrificed Him to absolve us of our sin, and only through the acceptance of this sacrifice within this premise of its being, can we be guaranteed entry into heaven.
is about as nice a summary of the essence of the Christian faith as I have seen. It is exactly this that I believe. If it can be proved that Jesus is not God but was merely man the power of that sacrifice will be destroyed and all hope of my salvation is lost. This is why this matter is of such critical importance.
I hope my modifications are satisfactory.
Robin:
He also came to show us how to be saved:
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
Peter and John (followers of Jesus) say:
Acts 4:12 “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
I am not a hater of anyone of another faith but when it is claimed that the One I revere as my God is not God then I must take exception. Just as many Muslims around the world are currently taking exception to some cartoons denigrating their faith, although not so violently. I am trying to be respectful and hope that I am coming across that way, but I will emphatically stand firm on what I know to be true.
Peter and Kashif;
I just read your blogs that you wrote while I was writing my last discourse. As Kashif well states, Christianity and Islam have 99.99% in common. All of Christ’s teachings agree with Mohammeds teachings. All you Peter are INSISTING upon is an adherance that Jesus is God. You never did answer my question “How did Jesus pray to God his father all his life if he IS God” Let me add another question: Jesus told his followers to come to his father THROUGH him. Why didn’t he just say “I am God”? Excuse me, but PLEASE show me the passage where he said this and PLEASE don’t give me that “I am one with my father” line. I am “One” with many whom I agree with but that does NOT make us the same body. And once again, I ask this question out of sincere respect and waiting for a response. As a little tweek to this discourse, Peter would you please state your exact religious affiliation here so that we all know where you are coming from.
Robin 🙂
All I can say…and you were worried why I left the BLOG.
Folks I think much has been said on this BLOG and it should come to an end.
I just hope at the least people can see a little inside a Muslim from this BLOG, and understand that single line explanations and sound bites may be practical to consume in our busy contemporary lives, but are often antithetical to truth.
And till we empower ourselves with knowledge from a skeptics perspective we shall remain the enslaved.
I will leave you all with my favorite words of our Prophet (PBUH):
Acquire knowledge. It enables its possessor to distinguish right from wrong; it lights the way to Heaven; it is our friend in the desert, our society in solitude, our companion when friendlss; it guides us to happiness; it sustains us in misery; it is an ornament among friends and an armor against enemies.
Muhammad (PBUH) (A.D. 570–632)
Kashif,
Yesterday when I thought you left I tried an internet search for you. NO I am NOT a stalker. Just very enthralled with your arguements. I hope I have not offended you in ANY way at all. It is just so very rare that I get to express myself in this arena as it has been a very long time (1980) since I left Saudi Arabia. This is the first time that I have ever participated in a BLOG and I must say, it has been very fulfilling.
I have the utmost respect for you and your beliefs and in my lifetime have experienced much joy from my experience with those of the Moslem faith. Maybe you are right to go, but I hope from the bottom of my heart that you continue to express your opinions on this subject to all who you encounter. Someone made the comment a few comments ago that they appreciated the banter. I hope I did not become too arguementative for you. Sometimes I get very defensive when Moslems are attacked, no I’ll admit I ALWAYS get defensive. But for everyone out there who has been following, I too hope that you can go back over Kashif’s comments and learn something from them, mainly that he wishes you peace. He has shown all of you what a Moslem believes, a true Moslem, not the radical Moslem that makes for a good mockery.
On that note Kashif, since I have never done this before, I don’t know what the etiquette is so I’ll just put it out there. If you would like to contact me away from this BLOG my address is
rmclaren@charter.net. If you don’t, I completely understand. With that, unless anything catches my eye, I’ll sign off too. May OUR Lord bless us and may you go in Peace.
Robin:
I hope you’re around long enough to read the following response to your last post.
You asked for specific occasions where Jesus acknowledged Himself to be God, here are a few selections. There are many, many more but I hope that these will do for a start.
Jesus on trial before the Jewish council prior to His crucifixion:
Luke 22:66-71 – 66 At daybreak the council of the elders of the people, both the chief priests and teachers of the law, met together, and Jesus was led before them. 67 “If you are the Christ,” they said, “tell us.” Jesus answered, “If I tell you, you will not believe me, 68 and if I asked you, you would not answer. 69 But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.” 70 They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?” He replied, “You are right in saying I am.” 71 Then they said, “Why do we need any more testimony? We have heard it from his own lips.”
Jesus, confronted by demons He was casting out of people, did not deny their proclamation of His being God:
Luke 4:41 Moreover, demons came out of many people, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But he rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew he was the Christ.
Jesus, subsequent to His resurrection, accepts worshihp from His followers, amidst a Jewish community of faith that allowed worship of God alone:
John 20:26-29 – 26 ¶ And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” 28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Jesus equates Himself to God and tells His disciples to trust in Him as they trust in God:
John 14:1-6 – 1 ¶ “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. 2 In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. 4 You know the way to the place where I am going.” 5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” 6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
John, the beloved disciple, proclaims Jesus to be the Word, the creator of all:
John 1:1-14 – 1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5 ¶ And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
I would like to make one further post here to put out a question that has been nagging me since the Muslim protest over these cartoons reached epidemic proportions:
I have read elsewhere that the Muslime faith believes Jesus to be a great prophet, a lesser prophet than Mohammed but great none the less. I have also read that the current protest is a protest against potential idolatry that could be caused by the depiction of Mohammed in any form and that Muslims take very seriously the potential idolatry resulting from any depiction of any of their prophets.
My question then is this: Why have Muslims not risen in protest over the multitude of derogatory images of Jesus Christ in western culture or any of the other portrayals of the greatest prophet in Islam after Mohammed? Why do only portrayals of Mohammed result in such outrage?
Peter,
I must admit that I am only checking this blog to see if by chance Kashif checks in. A simple answer to your question might be that they respect our right to worship as we please. Get it! These cartoon were simply inflamatory. Unfortunatly the Radical Moslems around the world bit the bait. Just so you know, I as a rational and sane person do not promote violence for any reason. Read a many blogs ago, someone said the Moslem world has not produced a Ghandi or Martin Luther King. Well here’s a thought: “Would Ghandi OR MLK or any man (or woman) of peace for that matter use a method such as these cartoons to make a peaceful point?”
Now to address your Biblical citings
1) First Luke citing:” Are you the SON of God…you are saying I am” Please show me any dictionary definition which says SON=FATHER. Or for that matter, are you Peter or are you your father?
2)Second Luke passage: DITTO to the above.
3)John: “My Lord AND MY GOD” This was Jesus praying to his father. Why did he have to pray to someone else if he WAS that someone else?
4)Second John quote: “Trust in God, trust ALSO in me” Either he was using some really tricky language here or he was asking us in plain English to trust in God AND him. Remember, as a fundamentalist Christian, you absolutely must take the Bible at it’s word.
5)You quote”No one comes to the father except THROUH me. Well, maybe I’ve got it all wrong but I don’t here him saying “just pray to me and that’s fine” No, he is saying to go THROUGH him to reach the father.
6)”He was in the beginning WITH God” how can you be “with” someone yet be that someone?
7)How can a “begotten” be the same as the father. Granted, I think we both believe Jesus was begotten of the father, I just don’t see the logic in creating a Son and that Son being yourself
Peter I really DO respect your right to your “truth” but for GOSH sakes don’t you understand that if you had been born a Moslem you would be arguing Kashif’s arguement for him. You want everyone to play by your rules, The only problem is that you want others to admit they are wrong and you are right. I truly hope this is not the way you conduct all of your personal relationships. In this case the stakes are WAY higher, because without acceptance and respect for other’s deepest felt convictions, this world is going to go to Hell in a handbasket.
And PLEASE, answer my question as to your religious affiliation. Kashif put himself out there as a Moslem, I put myself out there as a Catholic, the ball is in your court
Note to Kashif: Just in case you’re still reading, just not participating. yes I totally feel your frustraion.
Peter,
I would like to add to the above response to you that I am REALLY surprised you did not quote the most famous Bible quote of all, “For God so loved the world, that he sent his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him shall have everlasting life” Who came to mankind? Jesus.
Who was he? The SON of God. Risking the chance of blasphemy, why doesn’t the passage read, “For God so loved the world that he turned himself into his son and came to mankind”. It does not say any such thing.
Robin:
Well, since you ask, I am a devout Christian, as you have already acknowledged.
You seem to be requesting my specific denomination but that is irrelevant to the point of whether or not Jesus is God. I am a Christian who believes that Jesus is the Son of God, which, as every Jew of His day understood, equated Him with God (as this was the very idea that the Jewish leaders used to substantiate their charge of heresy).
You seem to be missing the foundational point of the Trinity: The three-in-oneness of God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is echoed in an other passage that I did not quote:
Matthew 29:18-20 – 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
Jesus is here emphasizing that His disciples are to baptize in the name of each individual member of the Trinity. He is telling them to baptize believers in God the Father’s name, in the Holy Spirit’s name and in His own name and is emphatically announcing Himself as equal them.
You also say with respect to myself that “you want others to admit they are wrong and you are right” but aren’t you doing the same to me? You ask me to defend my belief that Jesus is God, which is clearly antagonistic to the Muslim belief that Jesus is not the Son of God but merely a prophet inferior to your own. So you believe, from my perspective, that my Jesus is a false prophet while I believe, from your perspective, that your Mohammed is a false prophet. Why are you allowed to say that I am wrong yet I cannot say that you are wrong? Isn’t this what tolerance is all about?
Does tolerance enable me to have free and open discussion with members of an other faith group without resorting to name-calling and violence or does tolerance demand that I agree with all faith groups regardless of my own beliefs? If this last is tolerance then I’m in big trouble for I cannot agree with any belief that runs counter to the truth.
This world is not going to hell because you and I disagree with each other. It is going to hell because of man’s rebellion against God. Jesus came to show the way out of that rebellion and back to the presence of God. Those who cannot accept this remain with the world. These are not my words but Jesus’ own. He said this at the same time as He said the words of the passage you quoted earlier which I quote here in context:
John 3:13-20 – 13 “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. 14 “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 “that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 “For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 “For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 “But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”
I hope this puts to rest your concerns about where I stand.
Peter (and Kashif if you are reading),
For the last couple of hours my conscience has gotten the better of me and I really regret arguing with you. I regret it because I am negating my own value of allowing others to believe as they wish without interferance. I also reget getting baited, because the mere fact that I like a good debate should not have sucked me into a debate over which view of Christ is right or wrong. So rather than discussing the details of our differences, I will return to my basic value of respecting other’s basic God-given instinct to seek him and the different manners in which that search can be fulfilled. Maybe though Peter you can see that even within OUR own faith of Christianity there is much disagreement.
I apologize for trying to point out what I PERSONALLY disagree with and will leave you alone. I think Kashif’s quote “And till we empower ourselves with knowledge from a skeptic’s perspective, we shall remain enslaved”says it all With that said I TRULY am signing off because I just don’t feel like arguing over religion, since in the end it is BOTH of our rights to seek our own “truth” and that really IS my last word on it.
Peter OK you got me. I’ve just got to throw your own words back at you concerning the Trinity. You say that we are asked to baptize in each “INDIVIDUAL” part of the Trinity. Are you suggesting that I don’t understand my own faith because as you said yourself, each “INDIVIDUAL” part. If Jesus has “all the power from heaven, who the heck gave it to him, according to my faith it was his father. Yes the Trinity is a tri-part concept and even Catholics refer to it as a mystery, but they are separate, co-equel parts, NOT NOT NOT one thing called God. As you refer to yourself as a “Devout Chrustian” you on the other hand say your denomomination is of no concern because it is the truth. Why are you so darn reluctant to state your exact denomination since it is in your own words, “The TRUTH” . Maybe we would all like to know so we can run on over and get our own salvation since it’s really the only game in town!
Peter-I AM DONE arguing with you and your ilk. It is absolutely useless because you avoid answering any direct question I pose to you with a direct answer. You just keep on throwing more quotes that as far as I can see only strengthen my point, my personal point. And this is another of my basic tenets, my own belief in God is my business and my business only. Just as yours is yours. So let’s stop this useless conversation because no matter what you say you’re not changing my beliefs and I don’t wish to change yours. I happen to KNOW you are going straight to heaven in the rapture and the rest of us, well we’re willing to take our chances. After all, you couldn’t possibly be so sanctimonious and wrong that your God would want you anywhere but by his side!
Robin,
This was the exact reason why I stopped arguing:
For the last couple of hours my conscience has gotten the better of me and I really regret arguing with you.
I wish Peter the best and only hope that he respects Muslims and their religion even if he feels we are wrong. I think he should continue in his passionate defense of his views and I wish him the best on it, only hope he sees that in order to believe in his faith he does not need to denegrate others’. Peter is a good man, an open book.
Robin regarding your email, I would really really like to get in touch with you. Just a bit worried of removing my anonymity. I am somewhat of a public figure in what I do and like to keep my personal beliefs very private. Maybe I’ll get the courage.
Peter I wish you the best buddy. Stay true to yourself, and maybe if you get the courage just look at things a tad bit from a different perspective if only for a little while. A fuller picture is often a truer picture.
Finally my dear friend, Robin I wish the best for you. You are truly a beautiful soul.
Robin & Kashif:
Sorry that it is over, it has been enjoyable. I would like to clarify, Robin, that I have never called my particular denomination the TRUTH and regret that you misunderstand my statements above. Kashif, I am not closed minded in my beliefs but must admit that have seen nothing in any faith that I have studied that can equal Jesus love for me.
This has been an experience and I hope that someday, maybe, we can meet again.
Kashif,
You won’t believe how absolutely overjoyed I am to see you read my offer to you and are considering it. I felt like a little kid and actually jumped when I saw your response. My ex-husband is also a prominant figure in his country and I completely understand your reluctance as I am very conscious of his desire to fly in under the radar so to speak.
Just so you know, it is the part of me that respects your beliefs that is reaching out to you. As I said before, I have a daughter who lives here in the United States and I am also VERY protective of her. It has been such a long time since I left Saudi Arabia but it has made me the person that I am today. I am remarried with two additional daughters and quite frankly am about as inocuous as you can get. I’m even a Girl Scout leader if you get my drift. It’s just my experience with those of your faith was so meaningful to me and that is why you caught my attention. Your eloquent expression is exactly what I experienced with my ex and my inlaws. As I noted to you, I am still friendly with them and speak to them often. No where in our divorce was there EVER a question of non-acceptance due to our religious or cultural differences. In fact, we celebrated them and grew as individuals by expanding our own personal horizons.
I hope you do get the courage to contact me because I really do think we could have a wonderful conversation. Just an alarming note to you, there is another BLOG going on this Wizbang thing that is dedicated entirely to discussing this BLOG. Ryan (remember the guy who had an open ear to you) is on there defending you and I posted something too but if you got nervous from this sight PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE prepare yourself if you look at that one. Maybe I shouldn’t even have mentioned this to you but I feel a certain kindred spirit with you and it REALLY upset me. Evedently this Wizbang thing is an ultra-conservative BLOG.
Boy did I get into a pickle on that one. As I told you, this is the first time I’ve ever blogged and I guess I’m just REALLY naive to the hate that’s out there. I am so very sorry if you are hurt by this because I absolutely know where you are coming from.
Again, PLEASE think about it and get the courage. Salama Alakum! and Maa’salama
Kashif,
Just another note, I went on there looking to see if maybe you might show up. This whole thing of the BLOG is really making ME uncomfortable because I’m the one who put my email out there and I had no idea what kind of people use this thing.
Peter,
Yes, indeed the arguement is over. But please let me offer my sincere apologies for some of my more rude comments to you. I was TOTALLY out of place in my last comment and I am really sorry. Kashif is absolutely right, you are a good man. I am coming from the point that since I know what joy my own faith gives me, I should in no way denegrate yours. Just please, on your own, look up Islam’s view of Jesus and realize that they respect him as a true prophet and accept his teachings. They just don’t agree with the outcome of those teachings which became Christianity. There is much for Islam and Christianity to agree about and this is what Kashif is pointing out. For goodness sake, A Moslem Imam actually presided over the Pope’s funeral. These are the building blocks of peace between our two faiths and I hope you grab on and drink that “half-full” glass because it’s alot better than going thirsty. Good luck to you and thanks for putting up with me and offering a good honest debate. Peace be with you and God Bless,
Robin:
Thank you.
Believe it or not but I do understand where you and Kashif are coming from having studied Islam for some time. I hope that someday you can understand why I believe as I do.
May God’s Truth light your way.
Peter
Peter,
Thank God, Allah and Jesus and all the prophets that we are able to come to a peaceful conclusion to this discussion. I usually have a steadfast rule about debating religion because I have been exposed to so many different faiths and have learned well to keep my opinions to myself. I broke my own rule this time and I regret that. Thank you for accepting my apology. Wow! this feels GREAT. Kashif, Peter and Robin all coming to an agreement to disagree but show respect. If any one out there is reading this, that precise outcome is what I wish for all in the world who are fighting violently to defend or attack another’s personal faith. This truly was a wonderful experience. Thank You Peter, and Thank You Kashif. It took a while, but only a few days of honest debate from some well-meaning people on all sides of the disagreement . Peace be with all of you
To All that above posting says posted by Peter but something is screwy with my computer, because it is posted by Robin. Just another note, maybe now we could all share that shisha or a cup of coffee and see what else we have in common besides agreeing to disagree. Good Luck!!!!!
There is a post above, dated February 9, 2006 10:53 PM, that claims to be from Peter but it seems instead to be from Robin. Just want to clarify that I did not post that message.
Robin, I don’t intend to offend with this post but just wanted to make sure that anyone reading this blog after we leave realizes that we do politely disagree and that they will not be confused by the apparent mix up of names.
It HAS been fun. I am just sorry that my questions regarding how to address the differences between the Christian’s and the Muslim’s perspectives of Jesus and Mohammed had not been discussed in detail. Perhaps another time.
Anticipating the the permission of the various participants I would like to post portions of this blog on my own website. Personal information and profanity will not be retained.
Peter,
I thought I clarified that above mixup in the posting stating it was from you, but thanks for doing it again.
I really don’t know how these things work, and I am nervous a bit because I put my email out there. There is a parallel blog going on on Wizbang titled “answering one Moslem” I mentioned this to Kashif above because it upset me so much. Don’t be fooled by the subtext under the heading, because it quickly spirals into a lynching of Kashif. It accuses him of leaving this blog because he does not have a basis for his discussion. If you wish to post my postings on your website, I trust you when you say all personl information will be retained by you. But in a way that might dilute my points if people don’t understand where I am coming from. I guess what I am trying to explain to you AGAIN is that it isn’t about our differences (from my point of view), it’s about our similarities and where we can find common ground on which to build. The way I see it if that’s what you want to talk about in order to promote dialog between the three of us and others, I give my full permission to you. On the other hand, if you want to only accentuate the disagreements, I think this would only lead to more of the above type arguement that Kashif and I don’t wish to participate in.
Note to Kashif: I REALLY don’t mean to speak for you at all. I have a sense this might be where you are coming from too, but if it’s not,
please correct me.
Politely I await your reply
Peter,
Just a note on the above passage, when I said
“if you want to use this to promote a dialog between the three of us and others”. I am NOT speaking for Kashif. That is my opinion and mine alone. He would definitely have to be the one to say OK to you because God only knows he’s been skewered.
On another note, I need to explain something to you about Islam. Just like we say that the US is a Judeo-Christian nation (supposedly), this is also true of Moslem countries. Particularly in a Middle Eastern country or say Pakistan, Islam is also a part of their culture. In the Bible Jesus says “and they shall know us by our deeds” this is also true of Moslems. In this case, most Westerners who have defined Moslems by 9/11 or the cartoon riots. Just imagine if someone from another country defined us by the widespread race riots of the 60’s, the Klu Klux Klan and lynchings. Much of what has gone wrong in our own country has been in the name of Christianity.
Manifest Destiny, segregation, abortion clinic bombings and more, have all been perpetrated by people claiming to have Christ on their side. But lets put that aside and imagine that you were to travel to a foreign country, or maybe even an ethnic neighborhood and you were judged by what others have done in the name of your savior. It should be a wake up call to any one who that would occur to here. I am here to emphatically tell you that if you were to travel to a Middle Eastern country as a moderate Christian, you would be welcomed in the most hospitable manner possible. The Islamic culture is one of hospitality and peace and if things have occured in the name of Allah, it does not matter one iota because those people who would welcome you have not perpetrated these atrocities. It also does not matter one even little stinking bit whether or not they believe Jesus is God to make them good people. This is the whole point of what I am trying to tell you. I do not what to make our differences more important than our commonalities and I certainly do not what to make my belief in Jesus get in the way of the good I can experience from reaching ouside of my own safety zone.
I really am not trying to offend you in any way, but this world is not going to hell in a handbasket because they are ignoring God’s direction to believe in a certain way. It is going to hell because certain fundamentalists are insisting on their own way or the highway.
Having said this, maybe I’m really not so willing to have you put this on your webpage because I think that your audience might be specific and really not care what I have to say.
KASHIF!!!!! Where ARE you? Last time I felt the needle in the haystack I was looking for jumped up at me. Now I’m just looking at a big old haystack again.
Correction to the above:
“And they shall be known to us by their deeds” (By the way, the basis of Catholocism vs. Protestantism)
Folks I haven’t ran off in the least bit. There is nothing for me to run off about. I just decided that the discussion was taking a turn for the worse, where I began to feel that in order to reinforce their faith people felt they needed to put down mine. There was no point to such a conversation and I thought it best to depart before I said something I regretted.
Also with respect to the Quranic surah’s I thought I addressed that in detail as to why I would not go down that route. I think in the multitude of the long responses in the previous BLOG people missed that one.
Look folks, weakness of faith becomes obvious when one needs to put other’s down. Your harsh and cruel words regarding Islam and Muslims don’t reflect on me or muslims for that matter but yourself and God will judge you for it, not me nor the bloggers here.
I learnt a life lesson many many years ago from a “Christian” friend of mine. Though Christianity or religion had nothing to do with that episode in my life (work related) it reinforced a sense in me that I needed to look within for answers not outside. That the challange to our problems start within us. When I prescribe blame I must look in a mirror and when I assess credit I must look out of a window to others. What good will this do in life, I don’t know, just have this nagging belief that this is the way to lead my life, and that in the end things might just turn out right.
Look I am muslim there is no shame in my heart for that. I do squirm when I see the craziness in this world and especially in the Islamic world, and I think I know the reasons (I might be dead wrong). But that is a geo-political and social discussion to have, not a religious one in my estimation.
As the second largest religious minority I also happen to be an American. I love my country and the ideals it represents (though I hate prefacing my arguments with the above statement everytime I state my religion). I have multiple generations of family members here living and working productively trying to pay that next mortgage just like any one of you. My patriotism however is entirely pegged on those ideals (foundational premise), nothing else. No personalities, no individuals, no political party (though I was a Republican before I became an independent). The constitution and what it represents is my social contract that I have with each one of you. I will live by that contract, and I hope you all do too.
Look if we are in this game to put the other down just so we can prove something about ourselves then I become a skeptic for our collective future. I have travelled the world, and though at home (here) I argue and question some of the issues and directions we find ourselves in, I find myself often feeling a weird sense of protectiveness about the US when I travel. Finding myself often in public forums and dinners in these foreign countries defending each and every one of you. Perhaps not each of you, but our citizenry in general, when people opine about the obtuseness of Americans. And this is not Muslims, this includes Latin Americans, Orientals, and believe it or not Brits (some of the fiercest critics) as well. Then I often look over my shoulder to make sure I wasn’t too loud endangering my safety.
I am going to say something very simple and I hope you understand.
Islam of today has morphed into Political/Reactive Islam, purely on the basis that the human mass of as some say 1.4-1.5 Billion people, in this world have absolutely no other vehicle to express their sentiments. I have seen this palpable progression bordering on an explosive pent up frustration, happen in front of my eyes in the course of, I would say the last 25 years. Why and where does the blame lie?
Well there is enough blame for us all to share, though given my biases I would prescribe most of the contemporary blame on the two super powers and their tier one allies during the cold war.
You see I absolutely adore the Western culture in its fierce desire to learn, to acquire knowledge, to excel in every aspect of human development. I marvel at the works of Wagner, Mozrat, Paganinni as much as I adore walking through the MET or Louvre, and seeing the Western societies mass of culturalism (I am myself a product of western culture). However having seen the world and touching the poverty with my own eyes and ears I have had to think a lot about why a part of the world that had so much yesterday has absolutely nothing today. I could walk away with the simpleton view of Islam being the cause, but it would not explain the Christian sub-saharah, the Christian Latin America, the Christian Eastern Europe, the Orient before the post-colonial boom, along with the Muslim cresent.
So let me attempt to give you my sense of the world view (simplified – to avoid writing a thesis) that I prescribe to:
All people in this world are the same. We seek to provide for our families. We all seek the same resources, under the economic fact, that resources are limited (ECON 101).
A few hundred years ago a few aspiring powers Spain, Germany, France and Britian decided to venture outside of their neighbourhood and carve out the world as their own. Fundamentally there was no moral constituency behind this effort. It was all about money as most geo-political ventures are. However to make this a reality the populace of these countries (note: contemporary linkage exists), along with diverging interests had to line up in unison. Hence for the poor slobs in Europe it was sold as a righteous effort to spread universal human rights. For the Church and religious group it was an effort to spread the word of our “lord”, for capitalists it was an enterprise both in terms of the financial component to build these powers (military ships/bases) but also be able to open up export bases in these massive population centers.
Bottomline different interests aligned to enable the colonial campaigns. No lands were spared in this effort, and this effort continued for many years, decades and centuries.
If any of you ever studied colonial policies you would understand what happened in these local geographies. Rule #1: Divide and Rule. So divisions that were minute were made more stark. Sects, ethinicities, religions, etc., all implements or tools to divide were applied artfully. Results were that millions fell to the enslavement of colonial times at the hands of a few.
Now these very colonial countries and their small populations (in comparison) to the colonies had a parasitic relationship. Local industries were wiped out, and instead goods were imported into colonial lands. Local colonial raw materials were purchased in non-open markets sent back to the colonial “master” country only to be re-processed and brought back to the colonized masses for consumption. Local taxes on production of locally consumed goods. Taxes being returned to the coffers of the Imperial powers. This also BTW fueled the industrial revolution.
Imperial powers locked in markets for their products through their colonial conquests. All the while local divisions were made more pronounced, and entities, like tribal elders, and mullahs, and divisive characters were enhanced in their stature as the primary ruling class seized to exist (kings (who fought) – were assasinated, murdered, as were their children (case: Bahadur-Shah-Zafar (last Mughal) emperor, lost both his sons, their heads were presented to him by the British thereby ending his lineage and that of the Indian Mughal Empire.) Cruel at the least won’t you say for a somewhat contemporary quasi-democratic country? You all need to know what has happened and is happening in the world today under our name.
Capitalism often has a sanitizing effect on most cultures, however during the imperial times this was avoided with great precision. It was easier to manage millions of people through a religious cleric, or a fuedal lord, than through representatives of the locals. Hence wherein European societies’ feudals either morphed into Industrialist or were passed into history (though incubated natural progressive evolution), colonial policies made certain to maintain the status quo in order to keep societies compliant and not convulse at being essentially enslaved.
Societies in these colonized nations stopped evolving (inherent evolution – which is different from externally forced shifting), stopped addressing concerns of locals, and essentially seized to function properly for decades if not centuries. Great civilizations like the Incas, the Moghuls, the Ottomons, the Chinese simply seized to exist (though they were more or less waning as well). All the while divisions both in terms of wealth and societal advances in thought (soical and political) between the colonies and the colonized became stark. Therein began this wide chasm that today seems unbelievable, this cultural seperation. Think about it guys as in the West the societies were slowly thinking in terms of universal rights and ideals that exemplified those concepts, the masses in the colonized world were still enslaved (by the same west), and bereft of these concepts. Why would you teach your slave that he has any in-alienable rights to self-rule?
So WWI came along and the Ottomons were totally done in, specific to the Islamic world the khalafat seized to exist. In its stead an alien concept of nationhood came into being. This is a very important point. For those of us who take for granted this concept of nationhood need to understand that in the pre-colonial era it simply did not exist in the Islamic world. Therefore post WWI and WWII swaths of land were arbitrailly divided into countries. Nationalism was force fed and it was hoped that the imperial powers could essentially maintain the same level of control through compliant small nations, running often under colonial code of law, managed and operated by colonial institutions now fully manned and overseen by locals.
So essentially the same class that complied (where the conversion from overt colonization to what I call implicit colonization) with the colonist now used the same implements left over by the Imperial powers to rule over their masses. Countries that should have reverted to the rule of law and democracies became police states and military dictatorships in this weird symbiotic relationship with the western powers.
Now I am not of the ilk to think this happened because some sinister Christians wanted it that way. I think the reasons were pegged in RealPolitik, and often other interests are brought into alignment. The day the second world war ended the Cold War began, and everyone scrambled the school yard picking out their team members. Thus there was no impetus to revert and convert these societies into true democracies. In its stead we in the West and for that matter Russia during the cold war, bought favors by permitting brutal dictatorships and kingdoms to rule, so as long as they paid up to their masters the two super powers and their Tier one allies.
Thus began a sad chapter of nearly half a century, where we in the West, supplanted corrupt and brutal rulers over their populations so as to control those countries in their entirety. Resources like oil came into play as western economies became more intertwined with this resource. Hence our policies became pigeonholed. As an overt subscriber to human rights, we went around the world subverting it, just so that you and I here on home side could live our lives the way we do.
Hence that journey returns back to us. To ourselves, where we begin to look at ourselves and question and wonder what we do and what is done in our name, is it right by justice, is it right by morality, and is it right as co-inhabitants of this world.
I have only covered a small portion and over-simplified many concepts here. There are other causal imperitives ((1)Islamic doctrine and its opposition to any secural system given purely on the fact that it provides through its form not just faith but a societal code of conduct and law (note for Islamic societies not for societies where Muslims happen to live (they are obliged as Muslims to follow all laws of the land they live in), (2)The ending of contextual and contemporary based interpretation of the Quran (essentially seizing further legal and moral qualifications) by Islamic scholars around 1500AD (might be wrong with the date) – Locking the code) that result in the situations we have today. The significane of the point is two folds, one don’t fall in the trap that the colonial Joe fell in centuries ago (as one of those tangential interests that are being brought under alignment in order to further another great global experiment), and two macro-politics cannot be perceived as uni-dimensional. There are many many components and linkages and interests to a story. Don’t prescibe to simple answers to incredibly complex problems. We the citizens of the West are the educated ones and it is our obligation and responsibility to not accept simple “black vs white”, “good vs evil”, explanations.
“Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong.”-Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, 1782)
and finally why I love to be an American:
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
ROBIN: I am still here 🙂
Two additional points of incredible import that I haven’t mentioned, but have incredible impact on contemporary politics.
One, the natural oppositive reaction of Muslims in muslim countries to everything western (good or bad), as an unprocessed reactive effect due to their preceived and real oppression, that they rightfully or wrongly assess as being driven by Western greed (not religion). This unfortunately freezes them out of the positive elements of Western culture that they need in order to evolve from their dysfunctional state.
Finally the artfully machination of local Muslim dictators, kings, and military autocrats that balances their complete repressive control over their populations with the controlled and stage-managed release of latent social and political energy through religious expression as opposed to political and societal expression that can potentially encompass then as well, and hold them accountable to their plundering ways.
Herein lies the conundrum. We push too hard to open up Islamic societies and the first natural reaction will be opposed to Western interests. Perhaps even rightfully based upon our past policies, people simply put are pissed. However I am convinced that over time these early democracies will come together to align with western democracies.
We in the US have a very small duration of window where we can take this risk, before the powers of China and India begin to assert their domain of control, and we fall back into the zero-sum game mentality. And if we don’t we will have a world violently opposed to us, under the dominative contorl of the ill-perceived benign powers of China and India.
This is all about the next century. Will we keep our stars bright and burning for the next century.
There is a school of thought that is arguing an overt control over people and resources harking us back to the colonial past. As I wrote in a previous entry, that is a doomed policy. Today’s world is entirely different than that where Imperial Britian operated.
Kashif and Peter,
PLEASE don’t think I’m a nut job for coming on again but I am getting increasingly uneasy about putting myself out on this BLOG. I just watched a CNN report that hackers are attacking multiple sites concerning any picturing or discussing of the cartoons. Since this all started with said subject and this Wizbang thing is VERY public and well-known, I’m rather worried. As I have stated several times, I have NEVER done this before and say what you like, I’m more than jittery.
Peter: with that, give me your website where I can contact you or else there’s no further need to communicate. It would also give me the opportuinity to decide rather or not I’m comfortable with complying with your request
Kashif: I REALLY hope you get the “courage” because I’m just too uncomfortable putting anything more on this forum.
Bye! Guys. It’s been rewarding and I’ll see you somewhere else if you want to.
Kashif:
Now you’re talking baby. FANTASTIC job! I might seem like a local yocal in my comments, but I might want to share with you that I am college educated (magna cum laude), and am just shy of my master’s degree in education. I have chosen to be a stay-at-home mom, but continue to try to educate myself in every manner possibe. I graduated college at age 35 AFTER my stint overseas. Although I was always an avid reader, it was my experience in my marriage which urged my curiosity into action. My BA was in history and poli-sci. That last passage of yours is either a short rendition of your thesis, or the workings of a quick and brilliant mind. (naybe both). In a few short paragraphs you were able to succinctly explain in real terms (minus the religious implications) Exactly what the problem is. As I said above, a culture is often defined or at least greatly influenced by its religion. With your secular definition of the problem, you have added that layer that has been missing from this dialog. You’ve upped the ante and I applaud you for that (although I couldn’t hope to keep up because I’m rather rusty)
I sent the last blog not seeing your last blog. You have piqued my interest. International relations and politics is my hobby and anyone that can put it the way you did deserves a standing ovation! I’m realy not trying to flatter you, I just appreciate your efforts so much. It might interest you to know that it was in the field of international business that my ex was involved. I too have traveled the world and was exposed to much more than just a stay in Saudi Arabia. I was VERY young, but it gave me the opportunity to see outside my own world. I too look over my shoulder as an American. I too look over my shoulder as a defender of Islam. I have also had to defend my bi-cultural daughter and teach her to seek the good in all people. As world citizens we must all seek to find the way in which to make this world a better place in each relation we have. It was my own upbringing which allowed me to be open enough to accept this challenge. But I must say, my experience in living in a different culture has taught me more than any textbook could ever have. It’s much more than “when in Rome do as the Romans do” It’s : When in Rome, drink the wine, smell the air around you for all the nuances and more importantly, share it with a Roman”
I knew you were out there somewhere Kashif. I know there are many more like you out there too who believe this way. Thanks from the bottom of my heart for sharing yourself with me and others. We all have so much to learn.
Kashif,
I just reread your posting for the third time just to make sure I followed it correctly. As a student of history and politics, I 100% agree with your synopsis. You did a wonderful job of bringing us up to the present. I only hope that those who might be reading here understand that unfortunately we are presently repeating this doomed history that Kashif alludes to. As European colonial powers asserted their power over the colonies, along with them came the missionaries. It is important to note that each had its own goal, each had it’s own method, and entertwined depended upon each other to suppress those peoples they wished to profit from/convert to christianity Sound familiar? I liked your ECON 101 quote, butI hope all others reading here understand that the quote applies to ALL peoples of the world, not just the US and Christians.
For All: Currently I feel I am witnessing yet another pairing up of those two powers (political and religious) in our efforts in the Middle East. Our current policies are quite frankly pissing people off because remember, that ECON 101 statement goes for all humankind. Unfortunatley by cloaking ourselves in the shroud of religious superiority we are again attempting to control another part of the world through conquest. This is being done in the name of the “war on terror” and the “war on radical Islam” You see if you say that all Moslems are bad you have a moral obligation to bring them into shape. Folks you cannot all be fooled here, it is the Halliburtons of this world who are using you to help promote their colonial conquests of the land and strategic resources we so need. Kashif is absolutely correct in saying that this is a doomed policy. Our deficit is soaring to unthinkable heights, foreigners own a huge percentage of our bonds, and countries such as China can achieve more than we can without dropping all these bombs. You see, China couldn’t care less about reshaping the world into a western-style democracy (just remember you better create one that we approve of). They only want to utilize their better sense in dealing with others in a manner respectful of that nation. Just remember, one in every four human beings is Chinese and they are the most rapidly developing nation on this earth.
Back to religion briefly: If your goal is to save every persons soul in the name of Jesus watch out. This whole world mess we are in is being couched as a Holy War by our own country and it scares the heck out of me
Kashif,
I just checked the other BLOG to see where it was going and I almost thought I was seeing things to see you posted there. If you notice though, there wasn’t anything for two days between my post and yours. I think they ran off and found another rock to hide under. It doesn’t really matter because hopefully the really obnoxious parties have fled and folks like Ryan might check back to read it. Good job!
I have been thinking more about your last post and I wanted just to add something for your sake. Although it HAS been 16 years since I graduated from my small Quaker liberal arts college, the one project that I refer to often is my Senior History project concerning the Balfour Declaration (are you familiar?) I chose the subject for obvious reasons but it has come in handy, one of those things you learn in school that you actually use on a regular basis. It was a rather tricky undertaking because my Professor/advisor was a Reform Jew. I’m telling you this because in order to get around the “tricky part” I had to form a strategy: 1) do VERY careful research 2) present the facts in a scholarly and detailed manner and 3) (and most important) posit a rational synopsis of the facts as I saw them. This was probably one of the most difficult of all the countless projects that I had to undertake. I did my job to the best of my ability and the result was a 98%. Since you know just how tricky this could have been, you can see that I can draw the conclusion that it is that very same tactic that should be taken in the case of this discussion and THAT is why I appreciate your change in approach.
You also talked about poverty around the world. My other Senior Project (poli-sci) was Homelessness in America. I was able to accomplish this by spending a week in Washington DC (if you’ve been there you know how bad it is). I spent my week with Mitch Snyder, a radical homeless advocate (since deceased) who had founded an organization called the Community for Creative Non-Violence. Mitch had spent time in jail prior to his founding this orgainzaion for I believe it was grand theft auto. His cell mate happened to be Daniel Barrigan. He received a revelation from his radical Catholic cellmate and went on to found the above said organization. Mitch had some pretty radical thoughts on the subject of homelessness, he never asked questions, he just fed the hungry and did whatever he could to advocate for housing and services.
The monthafter I returned from my week in DC I began my internship with the Red Cross. This involved being the assistant to a person who was establishing the —Temporary Home for Homeless Families. Her approach was quite differrent to solving the problem and she was hell bent on making all the rules. She came from a strict Assembly of God background (fundamentalist). She saw the problem in Calvinistic terms which put much of the blame on the families themselves for their predicaments. What did I learn from these similar yet unalike situations, I found that problems are usually solved less completely with the first approach but more humanely than the second.
I think that much of what we as Americans have experienced here in our country is a result of our own nation’s Calvinistic value system.
These are just some thoughts. Gotta go do some errands
There are tons of opportunities out there, but the new need to be open to spot something that’s just under your nose!
http://www.fatherdave.org/article/article_587.html