I need rich Logos resources on Moslem Religion.
There are some in the Zondervan World Religions and Cults Collection (8 vols.) which is in pre-pub (shipping in February).
There's also Islam and the Bible: Why Two Faiths Collide (which I'm unfamiliar with).
And for a fair understanding of Islam, you should probably have a copy of the Qur'an. There's an English translation in Logos: http://www.logos.com/product/2570/the-quran
I've got another book by Goldmann (of Islam and the Bible: Why Two Faiths Collide) and he seems knowledgeable and respectful of Islam. Might get that book, if it's not the same as the one I've got and only dipped into.
There's also Qur'an in Arabic, should you be interested.
There are various books on Islam as part of expensive collections.
English translations of the Koran are often slanted in order to give a favorable view of Islam, leaving out passages that would be offensive to the Western mind set.
Here is the weblink to a source that's been recommended to me. I've found it quite useful because of the extensive indexing by subject matter. It's reputed to be an accurate and trustworthy source but that's something everyone has to determine for themselves.
http://www.answering-islam.org.
I hope it helps.
Sorry, I forgot to include the weblink [:)]
http://www.answering-islam.org.'
Partly it depends on why you need the information: your own personal education; you need to witness to Muslims; you need to counter, positively or negatively, statements and beliefs of Muslims etc. And, of course, it is a bit of a minefield once you broaden out from basic texts, you need to be careful which websites you visit.
Some points:
With respect to getting familiar with the source material of Islam there are actually three books:
If you want to understand Islam, not many people do — even Muslims — read the three texts, it is hard work, and not actually that pleasant as Mohammed engages in many activities we as Christians would say were not in keeping with a 'prophet'. It will be an eye opener though, and I stress that what you will read will not be anti-muslim bias texts but their own actual texts which Muslims consider holy. It's all there in their own books — you will be shocked.
The Qur'an translation in Logos is the Yusuf Ali one which is reasonable but as with all standard Korans has the problem already mentioned. The online official Saudi translation of the Koran is a bit more spicy, updated to say in relevant verses that Muslims should use all modern weaponry — guns, tanks, planes, rockets etc. — to forcefully protect and spread Islam.
Logos does not have copies of the Hadith or Sira (that I can see).
If you want a resource for translation of three Islamic texts — http://cspipublishing.com/. They also have editions of the Koran reassembled chronologically and with notes to make it more meaningful to read. You will struggle with a standard English Koran (because it's jumbled up).
For a fairly reasoned polemic site regarding Islam — http://www.citizenwarrior.com/
_________________________________p.s. One example of a Hadith (accepted 1st person reported sayings of Mohammed) — this is in Islam's own books... the B5,59,369 is the book and verse reference.
B5,59,369 Mohammed asked, “Who will kill Ka’b, the enemy of Allah and Mohammed?”
Bin Maslama rose and responded, “O Mohammed! Would it please you if I killed him?”
Mohammed answered, “Yes.”
Bin Maslama then said, “Give me permission to deceive him with lies so that my plot will succeed.”
Mohammed replied, “You may speak falsely to him.”
Excellent CD called World of Islam, containing some excellent books by knowledgeable Christians who know and respect Islam, published, I think, by GMI. and another useful resource is an Islamic one, called The Alim, which has the Qur'an in English (various tRANSLATIONs,) and Arabic, with recitation, and the Hadith, and probably lots more that I haven't investigated. I think they are about $40 each. Very good investment.
Do you know which translations? I certainly want to know if any of my Korans are not the entire Koran.
I find http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/ to be a good online resource
English translations of the Koran are often slanted in order to give a favorable view of Islam, leaving out passages that would be offensive to the Western mind set. Do you know which translations? I certainly want to know if any of my Korans are not the entire Koran. I find http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/ to be a good online resource
For a listing of most English translations this (Islamic bias) website,
http://www.islamawakened.com/Quran/default.htm
has a matrix of chapters (Surah) and verses (Ayah) which when you click on one it gives the verse in the various translations. Here's a couple of verses to start with, I have put a link directly to the first one, the others you can navigate to from link above:
Surah 47, Ayah 4 = 47:4 (link) ; 8:12
The Oxford Islamic Studies website has as Editor, John Esposito, and he (center he runs) received funding by the Saudis ($20 Million), so I believe it will be clear what his bias is. For a refutation of his bias, and information about him one can look here and here and for an analysis document here.
Again one has to judge the bias of the website being looked at, or the person (me included) speaking. Which is why I would recommend that all Christians should read enough of the Islamic source texts to get a clear understanding of the religious and political mindset, and goals of Islam, and what they say about you a Christian (hint: it's not nice). Given that we all have busy lives, with little desire to immerse ourselves in the Muslim mindset that's where the publications of the Koran/Hadith/Sira from CSPI Publishing are helpful. They are also available on Amazon.
I believe the Shia claim that the Sunni have omitted some verses that favour Ali as the true first Caliph, but I have not found anyone who can tell me what these verses are. I think it may be a similar sort of claim to the claim that we have changed the Bible to cut out prophecies about Muhammad.
I'd be interested to know what passages are claimed to have been omitted in English translations to give a more favorable view of Islam. Until I have chapter and verse (or rather SUra!) I shall not be able to believe this. I have a (Paper) parallel text Kur'an, with English, Arabic and Arabic transliterated into English alphabet. I use this to check things like whether the Kur'an says the Holy Spirit is the Angel Xhibril. I find the explanations in brackets are traditional explanation and do not necessarily correspond with the Arabic text. e.g. Holy Spirit in Arabic Qur'an is Holy Spirit and Angel Xhibril is a gloss, and the name of Ibrahim's son that he was going to sacrifice is not given in the Arabic text, tho Muslims understand it to be Ismail.
There are digests of the Hadith which omit various parts that can be embarrassing, e.g. that there is only one version of the Qur'an because one Caliph ordered all other versions to be burnt. The Alim CD did not help me find that. It was there and I eventually found it, but only because I knew what I was looking for and looked for it!
Incidentally there is a good resource by Norman Geisler and Abu Saleeb in the Normal Geisler collection. It might be worth buying the collection as it's only about $49. I ordered it, till I found I would have to pay over half as much again for postage, so I unordered it - have been caught that way before with what looked like a cheap resource...
I ordered it, till I found I would have to pay over half as much again for postage, so I unordered it - have been caught that way before with what looked like a cheap resource...
If you talk nicely with a sales rep it might be possible to have it 'shipped' to him. He can then open the package, enter the code and throw away the disc. No shipping cost and no VAT. They've done it for me in the past. I don't know if they can do it with all products, though, or only with certain publishers, and as I understand it you have to ask for it yourself; they're not allowed to publicize the possibility.
Thanks, I'll ask. I don't think it's from Logos, as they only charge me something like $4.45 for disk AND shipping. Whereas this was about $27, which I think is extortionate when Logos can do it for under $5. Logos resources tend to be expensive (and good value with it), but they'll send you a disk for what must be only about cost price. When I first got Logos 3 and ordered CDs, I then realised I could have done is more simply with a single DVD. I wasn't in time to get a DVD instead of CDs, but the sales rep put a DVD in the post as well for no extra charge!
I think I read the original post a bit differently than you. I thought the request was for Islamic resources to understand Islam rather than Christian resources to refute Islam.
goals of Islam, and what they say about you a Christian (hint: it's not nice)
Again, this is not my experience - from the influence of Islam on the Orthodox theologian Gregory Palamas, to the Islamic interactions of Francis of Assisi to much of mainstream Islam today - including a Muslim couple who assist at Catholic-sponsored charities in order to meet. their social service obligations. My experience is that I can easily find Muslims who say not nice things about Christians, Christians who say not nice things about Buddhists, Parsee's who say not nice things about Muslims, Protestants who say not nice things about Catholics ... I am usually more interested in the mainstream than the hateful. I find that the hateful is frequently political and cultural using religion in hateful ways rather than the religion itself promoting hateul behavior.
The Oxford Islamic Studies website has as Editor, John Esposito, and he (center he runs) received funding by the Saudis ($20 Million), so I believe it will be clear what his bias is. For a refutation of his bias, and information about him one can look here and here and for an analysis document here. I think I read the original post a bit differently than you. I thought the request was for Islamic resources to understand Islam rather than Christian resources to refute Islam.
So did I, and I recommended that people really need to go to the source texts rather than second hand. You were the person who brought up Oxford Islamic Studies website, which means John Esposito, and the fact is that he most definitely has a strong, perhaps even radical, Islamic bias (which people should be aware of) and the fact is that his organisation has been given $20 million by the Saudis, that's on record. So again people should be aware of that when they read material from that website.
goals of Islam, and what they say about you a Christian (hint: it's not nice) Again, this is not my experience - from the influence of Islam on the Orthodox theologian Gregory Palamas, to the Islamic interactions of Francis of Assisi to much of mainstream Islam today - including a Muslim couple who assist at Catholic-sponsored charities in order to meet. their social service obligations. My experience is that I can easily find Muslims who say not nice things about Christians, Christians who say not nice things about Buddhists, Parsee's who say not nice things about Muslims, Protestants who say not nice things about Catholics ... I am usually more interested in the mainstream than the hateful. I find that the hateful is frequently political and cultural using religion in hateful ways rather than the religion itself promoting hateul behavior.
Well for all of those examples of 'nice' Muslims you list, people could bring out more than 100:1 against examples of 'not nice' Muslims. From the whole tribe of 600-900 Jews in Banu Quraiza who were calmly slaughtered by beheading over the period of a day by order of the 'prophet' Mohammed, to the slaughter of 21 Christians in Egypt on New Years.
Yet again though it is not the individuals we are talking about, but the ideology, the rule which they, perfectly or not, follow. For the nice Muslims you have been fortunate enough to meet one could say, as does Romans 2:14, that they are, by their (human) nature, following the law of life. But that has nothing to do with the tenets of Islam — it's the same (in reverse) for situations where a (yet another) tele-evangelist succumbs to sexual sin. Then Christians try to talk to non-Christians about conversion and people "well what about so-and-so, he's a Christian and he's doing" [name your sin here]. As much as we try to talk to those people and say "well this person may say their a Christian but they are not following what the Bible says...".
Same case here. Just because there are 'nice' Muslims (and we all know there are) that does not change the fact that their holy texts say completely the opposite — and I believe that is what we were talking about. Do you want me to list all the texts in the Koran, Hadith & Sira that say that Jews and Christians are vile infidels and will burn in Hell and it is OK to kill, abuse and misuse them, and that Jesus is not God, and that it is OK to have sex with nine year olds, and to cut off the heads of unbelievers (anyone not a Muslim)?
The texts are there, just as Luke 6:27 and Luke 23:24 are in our Bible, and I really do not think anyone who compares the spirit of the texts in the Koran with the Spirit in the New Testament would say they were in any way similar.
So this is nothing about being 'hateful' (and I sincerely hope you were not putting that epithet onto me) it is about understanding the source texts of Islam to see what they really say. Which is what the person was originally asking — and to which I said one should really read the Islamic source texts.
Clearly, there are plenty of resources out there that will confirm pre-existing anti-Muslim bias.
It's equally clear that Islam is not Christianity. Does that really surprise anyone? However, it is far from clear that Islam today is an inherently violent and evil religion. Texts must be read sympathetically and in historical context. Judeo-Christians naturally object to non-contextual atheist readings of Genesis or the violent "ehtnic cleansing" models of Joshua/Judges or the imprecatory psalms. Just as there are those within the Christian tradition who provide easy targets for those who wish to hold them up as examples of what's wrong with the entire tradition (i.e. YEC Evangelicals on the science side, or David Koresh on the crazy/violent/eschatological side or snake-handling Pentecostals on the irrational side), so are there those who look at particular Muslim groups, tie them to the textual roots of those Muslims' interpretation, and then insist that those faults and evils apply to the religion as a whole.
It is unfair to do so.
While there is an obvious violent strain within Islam that can be grounded in the text, the vast majority of the worlds 1.5 billion+ Muslims are peaceful moderate people, as are most Christians (setting aside the IRA in Ireland, the David Koresh's, the Crusades, etc.).
John Esposito is not a crypto-Muslim terrorist, nor is Oxford Press a front for propaganda. Is it any surprise that an Arabic sponsor would give money for an Islamic studies building? Should Muslims distrust any US or Christian-funded buildings at Middle Eastern universities?
I've studied Arabic, I lived in the Middle east for a few months, and my brother has lived in Egypt and currently lives in Saudi Arabia.
Sorry I'm starting to get a little incredulous with some of these responses...
"anti-Muslim bias"? Where did you get that from, yet again I am not talking about 'plenty of resources' I am specifically talking about the Islamic source texts — the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira. The books which Muslims have to accept (or they are free to be killed as apostates — it's in the book) are the literal, exact, infallible words of Allah supposedly dictated to Mohammed — the Koran, or books which give detailed, precise examples of how they are to live — Hadith, Sira.
However, it is far from clear that Islam today is an inherently violent and evil religion. Texts must be read sympathetically and in historical context.
Reading in historical context is what I am doing — for example Muhammed didn't like someone, he told people to kill that person, they did. They then recorded for all time what they did; and they say — in black and white — that Muhammed is the perfect role model for humanity. Sorry I, and thousands of people including former Muslims, have to disagree with you that Islam is not inherently — as it is directed by their source texts — a violent religion.
Judeo-Christians naturally object to non-contextual atheist readings of Genesis or the violent "ehtnic cleansing" models of Joshua/Judges or the imprecatory psalms.
We're not talking about the Old Testament, we're talking 600 years after the New Testament. I don't see records of Jesus or the Apostles going around beheading 600-900 Jews, having multiple wives or having sexual relations with nine year olds (it's in their books).
Just as there are those within the Christian tradition who provide easy targets for those who wish to hold them up as examples of what's wrong with the entire tradition (i.e. YEC Evangelicals on the science side, or David Koresh on the crazy/violent/eschatological side or snake-handling Pentecostals on the irrational side), so are there those who look at particular Muslim groups, tie them to the textual roots of those Muslims' interpretation, and then insist that those faults and evils apply to the religion as a whole.
Yes there are some loopy people who say "god told me to do it". So? Does that change the fact that the textual foundation of Islam is very clearly not breathed from the same Spirit which inspired the New Testament Christians and continues to inspire people 2,000 years later.
I'll answer you with a quote from Wafa Sultan (you can Google her, she is a person who escaped from Islam)
The problem with Christians is they aren't as good as Jesus. But thank God most Muslims are better than Muhammad.
Which is one of the points I was making in my previous post.
Where did I say John Esposito is a "crypto-Muslim terrorist"? I said his organisation was funded $20 million by the Saudis. So therefore I would take it pretty likely that he has a Saudi influenced Islamic bias — therefore I will remember that when I read anything he says about Islam. Sounds pretty sound to me.
Do you admire the Saudis?? I certainly hope not.
Don't be offended but, yes, so what? How does your personal experience change what is written in the Koran, Hadith, Sira which say all the things they say which are antithetical to our Christian beliefs and spirit and human life and dignity.
Please also note in all of the replies I have answered — I have never said we as Christians should hate or despise Muslims — of course not. In fact, as we know, we are challenged to do the complete opposite — to love the people who against as Christians are despising and killing us. I don't know about you, but I have to pray hard to enter into that sort of grace.
I have requested that this thread be frozen as it is well outside the quidelines in tone.
I disagree about the tone--I don't believe anyone is being attacked here--but it has perhaps gone off topic. The original poster wasn't clear in his intentions, and he hasn't yet posted a reponse, so I don't think it would be beneficial to him to lock the thread. I have found the thread to be beneficial in indentifying external sources from all parties, and the discussion has been helpful in judging the viewpoints of the various sources.
Perhaps Logos would do well to make works published by both CSPI and Oxford Islamic Studies available in Logos.
Deleted and moved offline
An important facet of Islam that we have not yet mentioned in this thread is Folk Islam, practised by an estimated 90% of Muslims, even orthodox Muslims, and largely communicated by oral tradition - tho I have seen the occasional book of spells. Bill Musk's The Unseen Face of Islam, and David Burnett , is helpful on this. Interestingly an experienced missionary who had worked for decades among Muslims, if I remember rightly, told me I would not need to read Musk as the Albanian Muslims among whom I would be living are Bektashi, not folk Muslims. How wrong he was! Folk Islam and exotic legends are what shape the thinking of people here. Plus anything they here. Very few of them read the Qur'an, fewer still the Hadith. Their understanding of Islam is shaped by tradition - and the media.
I've been sharply criticised by other Christians for refusing to speak against Islam, on the grounds that God called me here to proclaim Christ, not to attack Islam. I've also been criticised, and had stones thrown at my jeep on more than one occasion, for "making propaganda about Jesus in a Muslim village." In order to try to help Muslims meet Jesus, I need to love and respect them and take the trouble to try to understand what they believe. Books help, I've got shelves full of them, but listening and loving helps infinitely more.
I'd love to see Logos produce a good Islamic collection, if that's not too much a specialised interest.
"Tone" was perhaps a poor choice of words to replace what I was really thinking. If one were to judge Christianity and Judaism by the end of Psalm 137 would you consider it an attack on Christianity and Judaism? or should I judge Christianity by the Aryan sects? I try to be evenhanded in my defense of Jewish, Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, amillenists .... and other groups that a few seem to feel are fair game
There are a few points — all of us as Christians have the difficulty of trying to reconcile many of the things said and actions done in the Old Testament. Obviously we have to look to what the Lord did and went through and accept that God does love humanity (Old Testament not withstanding).
I think one difference we have is that I am not trying to defend the Islamic religion — again, reading Islamic source texts, I believe it is indefensible. Also though I keep trying to stress that that does not mean Muslims as human beings — I have to believe, and I do, that Jesus died for them as well as you and I.
Coming back to the issue of source texts — if one was to compare the Old Testament to the Koran well there are similarities in tone, but we don't live under the dispensation of the Old Testament but the New, and it was paid for with a high price.
Also I guess I get surprised to hear fellow Christians (seeming to me, sorry if I am misreading) defending the Islamic religion, especially when if we simply read the source texts written 600 years after Christ they are pretty drastic (apart from stating that Jesus is not God and did not die to save us.)
Would it not be a better analogy to compare the dispute over Canons within Christianity? After all, a Muslim can point to many different "Bibles" within Christianity without involving Muhammad at all.
I had a lengthy (and probably more sensitive) response typed up, and the browser died.
So, very briefly-
1) Reading original sources is necessary but not sufficient for understanding another religious tradition. You must also set aside your own modern western (Protestant?) worldview, and read it in cultural context, within its own world and worldview, with native interpreters; otherwise you do violence to the text and injustice to the tradition. I do not believe that is being done here, resulting in misunderstanding.
2) I believe you mischaracterize Esposito through your language. According to your documents, his building was built with Saudi money, but he does not work for some kind of Saudi-funded Islamic front company as one might surmise from your statement that "his organisation has been given $20 million by the Saudis." He is a Catholic who used to teach at a Jesuit college, now teaches at Georgetown University, and is the Islamic studies editor at Oxford press.
3) Radical Islam is not the only interpretation of Islamic texts, though it is grounded there. Similarly, Christianity has also had violence (Crusades), slavery, etc. all of which can also be rooted and defended out of the Bible. You cannot choose to make a subset stand for the whole, and you are using a double-standard in doing so. I feel you dodged most of my argument here, and your response was Marcion-like in some ways.
4) Your assertions are not in keeping with my experiences, nor my brother's, nor those of the professors with whom I studied Arabic. Islam, like other large world religions, does not offer a monolithic experience, and so I return again to say, you cannot arbitrarily choose to make a subset representative of the whole, unless one choose to do so for polemic purposes.
5) I am unfamiliar with any credible experts on Islam (Phd in Islamic studies or related field, read Arabic, spent time in Middle East, etc.) who make monolithic judgments about Islam. Those tend to come from polemicists with an axe to grind or former-Muslims.
6) Radical Islam is dangerous, no question. The solution is not to demonize all Islam through, for example, inflammatory language like "escaping from Islam", but greater understanding, dialogue, and charity, as well as moderate Muslims taking a stand. Where such fails, perhaps military solutions and defenses are all we have. But such is not necessary with the vast majority of the worlds Muslims.
I'm not a Muslim, nor an Islamic apologist. I've done very little with the topic since leaving grad school. I'm not defending Islam as much as responsible and fair study of religious traditions other than ones own.
An important facet of Islam that we have not yet mentioned in this thread is Folk Islam, practised by an estimated 90% of Muslims, even orthodox Muslims, and largely communicated by oral tradition
Very true ... and thanks for the reference
If I could make things shorter — can I ask you a question?
If 'heaven' would be defined as 'eternal and unlimited communion with the (one and only God)' do you think Muhammad is, or will be, in heaven or 'not heaven'?
Would it not be a better analogy to compare the dispute over Canons within Christianity? After all, a Muslim can point to many different "Bibles" withing Christianity without involving Muhammad at all.
I'm not sure if I have understood your comment correctly, so some of this may be totally irrelevant.
I've been told by a Christian who lived among Muslims for decades and knows what she's talking about that at least some Shia Muslims claim that there are some verses missing from the Qur'an as it is at present, which referred to Ali, whom the Shia revere, as the first true Caliph. But neither she nor anyone else has been able to tell me what the supposedly missing verses said. Similarly, many Muslims claim that we have cut out or changed verses in the Bible that prophesied the coming of Muhammad. I think this is the real reason why Muslims attack the reliability of the Bible. The Qur'an says that the Bible foretells the coming of Muhammad. The Bible does not. Therefore one of the 2 books must be wrong. I as a Christian, believe my Holy Book is right. A Muslim will obviously believe his/her Holy Book is right - and the other Book wrong. I once had tremendous dialogue with a Muslim who had been attacking the Bible till he found he couldn't prove any of his accusations and I refused to go on to another objection till he had proved the first one. Then I suggested we agree to disagree about what he described as "Clash points". Having agreed that we would respect one another's convictions, I was able to say: "The Bible says..... " and share with him many basic truths of the Gospel. He said you can keep the whole law, but if you commit Shirk, e.g. believe Jesus is the son of God, you will go to hell." I told him: "Clash point: according to the Bible, you can keep all the law, but if you don't accept that Jesus died on the Cross to save you from your sins, you have no hope of Heaven!" He accepted that the Bible teaches that. I hope and pray that the day will come when he will realise that the Bible is telling the truth!
Muslims I have spoken to have been worried about different translations of the Bible. Fortunately there is now more than one Albanian translation of the Qur'an, so I can show them 2 different translations of the same original.
They claim that there were verses in the Bible foretelling the coming of Muhammad as the final Prophet, and that the fact that there are no such verses in gthe Bibl;e today is because Christians have removed them. Some Muslims also claim that in Jesus' promise to send the Comforter (parakletos), we have changed the original, which read pErIklUtos, Glorious, which in Arabic is Ahmad, which was another name for Muhammad. I think anyway many Muslims claim that the promise of the Holy Spirit referred to the sending of Muhammad, even without the etymology.
Re Canon: I've heard the complaint that the NT was not written until whichever Council it was that decided which books would be canonical. I have to explain that the Council decided which of the existing books would be accepted as authoritative. They did not actually write the books then!
Patrick, what in the world is the relevance? I said in my original post that Islam is not Christianity.
If I see someone spreading misinformation, it is my Christian duty to correct it, even if that misinformation is about someone I dislike. (Edit: This is only an analogy...)
Or does the end justify the means? Can we mislead people about Islam if we win souls for Christ in doing so?
This is about responsible and honest interfaith study; not about the salvific status of Islam.
I've been sharply criticised by other Christians for refusing to speak against Islam, on the grounds that God called me here to proclaim Christ, not to attack Islam. I've also been criticised, and had stones thrown at my jeep on more than one occasion, for "making propaganda about Jesus in a Muslim village."
Nicky I admire and encourage you in your obvious sensitive witness.
There is one perspective I'm wondering if you considered. Could it be said, from the Muslim villager's perspective, that you were, in witnessing about Christ, to them 'attacking' Islam?
Islam states that Jesus was just a prophet, and that he (Jesus) pointed the way to the later, and much better, and final prophet Muhammad. So in elevating Christ (because as a Christian you obviously believe Christ to be above Muhammed) you were, to them, making Muhammed less valuable — and that would have threatened them?
[Y] Ben,
I think there are a majority of Logos users that do not (maybe cannot) use Logos for any purpose other than sermon preparation and evangelistic purposes. I will readily concede those are very important high callings. But there is a large minority of Logos users who are using the software for academic purposes which include gaining better understandings of other belief systems. While oral traditions are not captured much in Logos there is no reason to limit resources to the mainstream evangelical perspective.
If I see someone spreading misinformation...
Well you see from my perspective the answer is "ditto". That is nothing personal with respect to you obviously, I am simply saying that have people read the Islamic source documents? If one had then it is a pretty difficult position to hold to say that there are not issues with Islam.
What misinformation have I spread? I quote Islamic source texts and I am told that I am misrepresenting and being unkind to Islam (and Muslims)? How? By simply repeating what those texts say. Doesn't that seem illogical to you?
We as Christians quote NT texts all the time, things like "god is love", "bless those that curse you". Those texts seem pretty straightforward to me. Then I read other fairly unambiguous texts like "cut off their heads wherever you find them", "Allah hates kufars".
It is Muslims themselves who say there is no such thing as a 'radical' muslims, there are devout muslims who take Muhammad at his word.
Matthew ~~ "Would it not be a better analogy to compare the dispute over Canons within Christianity? After all, a Muslim can point to many different "Bibles" within Christianity without involving Muhammad at all."
I was only asking where the unity is in Islam. We don't need to even bring up Jesus to see there are conflicts within Islam. Ravi Zacharias mentions many different "denominations" within Islam and a lengthy history of internal persecution and wars (similar to the history within Christianity.)
I don't know if it true but I have been told many Muslims believe you must read the Qur'an in Arabic, translations being an adulterated message. (Hmm, I've seen similar beliefs in Christianity. [^o)] )
You're again asserting a unity where there is none.
As to simple citations, it's possible to be both accurate and misleading (especially in comparisons. It's not fair to cite "God is love" but talk about Mohammad killing anyone he didn't like which I find an inaccurate characterization.)
Worldview matters. Historical context matters. How you characterize things matters.
Can you guess what film is being described here?
"Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first person she meets and then teams up with three strangers to kill again."
|
That would be the Wizard of Oz. Is it inaccurate? How is it misleading?
I think you're being misleading about Islam as a whole and about Esposito.
As for the rest, it would simply be repeating my arguments above. We shall have to agree to disagree.
(Edit: Wizard of Oz description and others can be found at http://www.filmcritic.com/features/2010/11/accurate-but-misleading-movie-synopses/)
One thing this thread has proven to me is:
We need a few more resources covering Islam in Logos format.
I personally like the apologetic works because they better meet my purpose of study. I can see a need for comparative works. Could that be what the original poster meant by "rich resources?"
There is one perspective I'm wondering if you considered. Could it be said, from the Muslim villager's perspective, that you were, in witnessing about Christ, to them 'attacking' Islam? Islam states that Jesus was just a prophet, and that he (Jesus) pointed the way to the later, and much better, and final prophet Muhammad. So in elevating Christ (because as a Christian you obviously believe Christ to be above Muhammed) you were, to them, making Muhammed less valuable — and that would have threatened them?
Patrick, some of the hostility has come because, although I don't normally express an opinion about Muhammad, a very few people who came to me to learn about God have come to faith in Jesus. Others, the stone throwers, were put up to it by a national Muslim missionary. They build/rebuild a mosque in the village and then consider that village Islamic territory, where no other religion may be taught. I think they sometimes feel threatened because people want to study the Bible. Though a lot of our Bible study is OT, before the birth of Jesus. They may also feel threatened because not many people are interested in Islam.
I do sometimes, if asked, say that Islam does not accept that Jesus died on the cross because they feel God could not have allowed a holy prophet to die such a shameful death, whereas the Bible teaches that Jesus' death and resurrection are crucial, and Jesus was so holy that he could not be sullied even by the shame of the Cross. I always try to explain the Islamic viewpoint in a way that a Muslim would say was fair. I tell them the 2 views and the reasons for them and then trust the Holy Spirit to guide them into the truth. In fact most of them must know what I believe, as I'm a Christian.
I was only asking where the unity is in Islam. We don't need to even bring up Jesus to see there are conflicts within Islam. Ravi Zacharias mentions many different "denominations" within Islam and a lengthy history of internal persecution and wars (similar to the history within Christianity.) I don't know if it true but I have been told many Muslims believe you must read the Qur'an in Arabic, translations being an adulterated message. (Hmm, I've seen similar beliefs in Christianity. )
I don't know if it true but I have been told many Muslims believe you must read the Qur'an in Arabic, translations being an adulterated message. (Hmm, I've seen similar beliefs in Christianity. )
I agree about many groups within Islam, and point that out to Muslims who complain that the Church is divided!
Many Muslims feel it's enough to read the Qur'an in Arabic and doesn't matter if you understand it or not. I sympathise - I love reading the Bible in Hebrew, and it's possible to get carried away with the beauty of the Hebrew even if not fully understanding it. A Turkish Muslim told me he preferred to read the Qur'an in Arabic, tho he didn't understand it all, rather than in Turkish, which he understood.
Until recently Muslims would not talk about a translation of the Qur'an, but rather of "the Meaning of the Glorious Qur'an", and they would not recognise a Qur'an as being genuine unless it also contained the Arabic text. A few years back they did actually change that and published, e.g. a Qur'an in English without the Arabic text included.
Persecutions of Muslims by Muslims continue today - e.g. members of the Ahmadiyya sect in Pakistan get accused under the blasphemy laws. Mainstream Islam does not recognise them as true Muslims. Nor are the Bektashi, among whom I live, recognised as proper Muslims. In fact our village, being Bektashi, did not receive aid from a Muslim aid organisation. I think they also refused to help us rebuild our mosque for the same reason. It's not only Muslims that are disunited - I've been cold-shouldered by local Christians for not being Kosher!
I have been away for a bit. Regarding your last post I believe you are doing the exact thing you accuse me of. Poor Dorothy — you've done real violence to her, I'll never be able to watch the Wiz of OZ again. [:(]
I don't believe Dorothy had controls that guided her house deliberately onto the wicked witch to squash her, so to ascribe those murderous intentions to her — oh dear.
Well then Ben I'm sorry, but you have a bit of reading up to do. It wasn't just one case where Muhammed directed and approved of his followers of killing someone who annoyed him, it wasn't just two cases, or three, or four, or five — but more. Including one case where one of his followers skewered a sleeping woman (with a baby sleeping beside her) completely through to the ground. His comment on receiving the news of her (violent and cruel) death was, "two goats won't butt their heads about her". The woman was `Asma' bint Marwan — it's proudly reported in their books.
So I guess I, and many others, are going to have to disagree with your statement about "inaccurate characterization".
For me it's like this. I am looking at — intention and action — with action being an indicator of intention, the heart. As this verse says:
"The good person out of the good treasure of their heart produces good, and the evil person out of their evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart their mouth speaks." Luke 6:45
Now I believe we can be in agreement that the intention of Jesus was true love for humankind, and that intention was realised in action (of which we are the beneficiaries). He said, and He did. So, to be consistent, I apply the same methodology to Muhammad. I look at what he wrote, what 1st person witnesses reported that he said, and what he did.
Were his actions consistent with his (stated) intention? Were his intentions clearly stated? In both cases the answer is yes — his intentions were clearly stated and his actions (abhorrent as they were) were consistent with his stated intentions. Ben it's all (proudly) written down — and I'm afraid your saying otherwise will not make every copy of the Koran, Hadith and Sira disappear — or be whitewashed or be made more 'palatable' to modern sensibilities.
I don't think you are going to accept what I say, so I have some material by a number of authors you might like to read:
There are also some concepts which would be beneficial to read up on.
On the point of Dar al-Harb (territory of war) vs. Dar al-Islam (territory of peace). Saudi Arabia is considered to be a 'glowing example' of Dar al-Islam. What sort of things happen in 'peaceful' Saudi Arabia?
Not the sort of 'peace' I would like to live under, certainly not what I would call 'the kingdom of God'.
Finally — I never said that John Esposito was a paid Saudi shill, I said the organisation he runs was paid $20 million by the Saudis (it's on record), therefore, as I have consistently said, I will keep that in mind regarding his (possible) bias when reading anything he writes. Can we leave this point about him now.
Including one case where one of his followers skewered a sleeping woman (with a baby sleeping beside her) completely through to the ground.
— it's proudly reported in their books.
And proudly reported in Numbers 25:7-8 is a similar account. I doubt Moses had a problem with God, Phinehas or the end of the plague. edit: This was an account of Israel's return to affirmation of a one-God theocracy, intolerant of the other "gods" of the Midianites (similar to Saudi Arabia, No?)
I certainly side with you in preferring the God of the Christian Bible over the Allah of the Qur'an. (I am biased toward the truth rather than error.) But were I a resident of Canaan or modern Palestine I would fear Judaism whose God ordered the killing of every inhabitant of the land when He led them into the promised land. I would also question father Abraham for banishing his son Ishmael into the desert. disclosure: I've got more Jewish blood than Palestinian blood in my veins.
I have my own understanding why God did that but it must be difficult from their perspective. Logos offers several resources that deal with "difficult sayings" of the Bible.
so I have some material by a number of authors you might like to read:
In addition may I recommend (all of which I'd love to see in Logos):
This is a cross-section of books that show Islam at its best and at its worst. There are a couple of titles I'd have preferred to included but they are out of print and hard to find.
I agree with you Todd Phillips,
I have read each of the postings here and I see nothing offensive in their tone at all. If there is something I sure missed it and I have read the postings several times in an attempt to learn from them.
We can sensibly discuss Christianity, why can't we sensibly discuss Islam?
In addition may I recommend (all of which I'd love to see in Logos)
MJ - thank you for list of titles. I have had a look at most of them in Amazon to try and get an idea of the thoughts and motivations of the writers.
Hi Matthew - yes a difficult passage. I have an even (would worse be the right word?) more problematic passage. Judges 19-21 starting with Judges 19, 'A Levite and His Concubine'. If ever there was a (difficult) passage which I would like to say to the Lord "why did this story have to go into the Bible? Couldn't it have been toned down, glossed over, just a bit!" this would be it. The excuse the Israelites came up with for this sorry story was "In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes." You can say that again.
The Levite (so a 'religious' person, no ordinary Israelite) tosses his concubine out to be violently abused by (what seems like) the basest sort of men - to save himself from abuse. Then in the morning he seems to casually prod his concubine (who by this stage is lying dead on the doorstep, and who no doubt all during the night was screaming her head off) and says let's be going!
A terrible story, and one which as I said, we ask ourselves how could a loving God allow. And there are many other similar stories in the Old Testament.
But that's the key point, it was the Old Testament - and inbetween the Old Testament and us now stands the cross, and all that represents. And for me, when I look at the founder of Islam (600 years after the cross) and compare him to the Lord it seems very much to me that Muhammad is very much acting in the old dispensation. His theology definitely is.
M.J. Bill Musk has also written an excellent book called something like: Holy War, explaining why some Muslims turn to violent Jihad etc.
Patrick, I was very disappointed when I managed to get hold of Mark Gabriel's Islam and Terrorism. I was shocked that someone so naive could become a professor at Al Azhar university. There are Muslims who believe the Qur'an commands violent Jihad, and there are others who believe that the better and higher Jihad is war against our own sinful tendencies. It depends which verse you believe abrogates which, and that's a matter about which Muslim scholars disagree.
Whether ex -Muslim converts to Christianity turn against Islam or not is sometimes influenced by the church they join. In our local town Muslim origin Believers are often hostile to Islam, as is the local church. In our village they see Jesus as surpassing what they used to believe, but they still have respect for the faith of their Muslim ancestors and family members. Probably partly because we don't go in for polemics.
Incidentally Mark Gabriel has 2 inconsistent accounts of his mistreatment at the hands of the police within the covers of the one book.
P.S. I am inspired by Stephen Massoud's books, e.g. Toward the Light and ??Why Believe in Jesus?. The story of the search of an originally loyal Muslim who starts comparing Qur'an and Bible. He's beaten up and his father, I think, tries to murder him, and he's mistrusted and cold-shouldered by the church at one point. He writes about terrible mistreatment, without bitterness, and always with respect for those who oppose and insult him. The books contain helpful, respectful answers to Muslim objections.
I have an even (would worse be the right word?) more problematic passage.
My father has been a minister and missionary longer than I've been alive. My parents both taught me to respect and believe the Bible. I am familiar with many "hard sayings" and grapple with them for a better understanding. This does not cast any doubt on the Bible in my heart.
My curiosity is piqued whenever something sounds "strange." I use my background commentaries and similar resources to gain a deeper understanding. It rarely is a matter of importance to effect salvation. But it builds a stronger faith in me to understand.
Just this morning it occurred to me God commanded Noah & his sons to "be fruitful & multiply" when they left the ark. Why is there no record of Noah ever having more sons & daughters? Certainly it was God's will since he commanded it, right? And why did not Shem, Ham & Japheth have any children before the flood? That is another of the "strange" accounts and I have every confidence in it being truthful.
Thanks alot for your priceless informations on the subject matter I have raised. I always encounter with moslim people @ my work place. They always raise topics and say the only true religion is ours. This thing has compelled me now to conduct a deep research or study about this religion for instance; its point/s of deviation/s from the Bible and the contradictions within it and etc. just for the sake of evangelism. Thus, I have really appreciated your feedbacks
I also have been motivated to learn more about Islam and how it differs from Christianity and Judaism. Some of my Muslim colleagues at work are very surprised at my knowledge of their faith. I think some of them are also challenged by it because they themselves have a superficial knowledge of their faith, just as many Christians do.
It would be nice if Logos would produce an Arabic-English lexicon and put the Koran (Quran / Qur'an), at least the Ali translation, in an interlinear form. maybe they could throw in a few Islamic textual criticism books (Ie. "The Origins of the Koran" [http://www.amazon.com/Origins-Koran-Classic-Essays-Islams/dp/157392198X/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_t]) and a few other apologetic references (Like "Answering Islam"). I am learning that textual criticism of the Quran is still in its infancy due largely to the lack of sources and the violent reactions from Muslims against questioning the Quran.
While it is still incomplete, you might want to check out the reading list "A Common Word documents"
