Question for Christians and Jews

Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by Amica, Jun 29, 2012.

  1. Amica

    Amica Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    7
    Peace to all!

    Why are Jews and/or Christians so quick to judge prophet Muhammad pbuh and attack his character, when both peoples believe in the truth of the Old Testament? The OT prophets are described as war like men who committed crimes of large proportions (e.g. genocides). Yet, if you were given option to judge a character you would attack Muhammad, citing character flaws as your rejection of the Message Muhammad pbuh delivered?

    Please no insults. Just open discussion. Thank you.
     
  2. Dream

    Dream New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,677
    Likes Received:
    1
    Amica, hello. Modern Christians in the southern USA frequently try to identify (that is to label) the 'Wolf' as mentioned in Matthew 7:14. I think that many 'Wolves' are already mixed in with the 'Sheep'. Wolves stir people up and look for things to scare them to draw attention away from themselves. Muslims are just one of the groups who are convenient for the wolves to label as wolves (to draw attention from themselves). Also, Muslims have no problem visiting Christian churches and disagreeing about things, and currently Christians are not fond of considering other points of view about trinity and other doctrinal items. What happens is the Muslim visitor is mistakenly labeled as a 'Wolf' as mentioned in Matthew 7:14 In reality a Matthew 7:14 wolf isn't someone who thinks differently, but a wolf is someone who divides people by hardening them through entangling them in arguments with each other. The wolf tends to pull people away from the group, and here in the USA the wolves have run unchecked for a long time. If you were to visit here you would find many churches in which the members won't fully accept other Christians or Catholics either. These are people that have been scared by wolves and are divided by arguments about everything from the trinity to the price of the pews. The leaders are paid to keep everyone happy and so feel threatened whenever discussions arise. If you, a Muslim, were to visit a church here on a regular basis you would feel no small pressure to convert, rather than to express what you thought.

    Additionally, people here don't 'Get' Muslims at all. I'm sorry but before I began to visit this interfaith site I had little or no respect for your religion. I had not been to college. I knew some Muslim people but not very well. I only knew of Muhammad [pbuh] through the history I was taught of him by southern Baptist school education systems, and that history was neither thorough nor flattering. I had no need of him or of Muslims and saw Muslims as a problem rather than part of the solution. Although throughout my life I had always thought that God would recognize any righteous person, I was constantly challenged by ministry to change my mind against that. I was given the huge responsibility (like some kind of Atlas) to save the world. I call it a 'Save the world complex' where instead of feeling part of something big, I had to become larger in order to control the outcome. As you can imagine this created a lot of guilt, since nobody is good enough to do all of that. My guilt at not saving the world found many ways of expressing itself, and criticizing Muhammad [pbuh] was occasionally one of them. I don't blame myself for it, however and I hope you don't.

    On top of that, I heard news reports about the various Islamic extremists; such as Qaddafi. I was told that a Christian would be shot in various countries, such as Morocco "because you have to be a Muslim there." The only thing countering this was that I met nice people from Afganistan, Iran, Egypt and Dubai.
     
  3. radarmark

    radarmark Quaker-in-the-Making

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    2
    Not all of your Abrahamic cousins feel that way at all. I look at the sense of justice, the dedication to science, the actual humanity (look at the difference between the captures of Jerusalem or the wholesale massacre or exile of Jews, and lack thereof at the time of Muhammad pbuh).

    The real problem (I think) is that the extremist elements can relate the extremism of the other two to themselves. Salafists cannot see themselves as the same sort of person as a member of Aryan Nation (a Christian cult in the USA) or Kach-Kahane Chai (a cult in Israel). The Aryan bother cannot see him or her self as a Salafist or Kahanist. The Kahanist cannot see him or her self as a Salafist or an Aryan brother.

    In all three religions, these extremists are the real threat. But they are tolerated within each religion and fuel the “us versus them” mentality.
     
  4. NiceCupOfTea

    NiceCupOfTea Pathetic earthlings

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    0
    perhaps its because islam markets it's self as a religion that abrogates or supersedes Judaism and Christianity, this is clearly an insult and Jews and Christians and people tend to re-act negatively to insults.
     
  5. Amica

    Amica Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    7
    Christians claim similar thing in a sense when it comes to Judaism. Many Christians believe that with Jesus' coming all previous laws and restrictions Judaism preached was abolished, yet Christians still accept OT prophets.

    What I am asking is: why do you accept all the war mongering and genocides attributed to prophets in the OT, but claim character flaws for Muhammad pbuh? Take Moses pbuh for example. He ruled with iron fist, called and waged wars, and implemented lots of laws that you may not agree with today. Yet, many Christians are still quick to compare Jesus with Moses, claiming Jesus is a prophet like Moses foretold. Makes no sense to me at all.
     
  6. NiceCupOfTea

    NiceCupOfTea Pathetic earthlings

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    0
    in the Christianity that I have encountered the law was not abolished it was fulfilled, but gentiles were never under the law anyway.

    can you give us some examples please ?

    to most Christian Jesus is more than a prophet he is God.

    if it makes no sense a good start would be to read the New Testament
     
  7. Etu Malku

    Etu Malku Mercuræn

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    1
    The problem lies with religion itself. Religion is a meme, it's first objective is to survive, this is effectively carried out by eradicating all other 'false' religions (because there can only be one correct religion after all) ;)
     
  8. radarmark

    radarmark Quaker-in-the-Making

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    2
    Amica--

    You should see the problem now. All three religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—and you can easily add to these with Zoroastrianism, Sikhism and Baha’ism) have their own built-in definition of the others in their sacred text. Traditional Christians really do “know” that Jesus is G!D and not a prophet (they read it into the New Testament, for very valid reasons). Traditional Muslims “know” Sikhs and Baha’is are apostates. Some Jews consider Muslims and Christians as righteous people of G!D if the follow the Noachide Laws. Some Muslims consider Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians as “People of the Book”.

    It all gets quite confusing. But NCOT is correct, to communicate with the ones you want answers from, you must give examples of what you perceive as Moses’ flaws and what you see Christians see as Muhammad’s pbuh. And you must explain that the Qur’an clearly states that there is but One G!D, and that Jesus was just a prophet (as was Moses and Muhammad pbuh). Getting straight answers on those assumptions will be hard enough!

    In my opinion, the problem you are seeking an answer to (why Christians can forgive Moses for his character flaws but not Muhammad pbuh) is the same as a lot of Jews have with Christianity (why Christians can claim to worship the same G!D as Jews, but still worship a Jew).

    The problem is that the core of Traditional Christianity is both Hellenic and Judaic. It is not a simple monotheistic faith (nor are any of the others, for the most part). Most Western Traditional Christians (Catholics and “hard” Protestants) believe in the Athanasian Creed not merely the Apostle’s or Nicene Creed (look up all three on wiki), which adds (kinda-sorta, in my opinion) “unless you believe as I so you are not saved but will dwell in everlasting fire”.

    As a non-Traditional Christian (as most are today, I think) I do not agree with this interpretation of G!D’s words and believe (using logic and empathy and ethics in addition to the OT and NT), like some Jews that Muslims (all creeds mentioned above) are “righteous people of G!D” and some Muslims that (all the creeds mentioned above) are “people of the Book”.

    It is not the religion of Christianity nor the NT that teach differently, it is Religious Dogma and Ideology held by some Christian Religions.


    Peace unto thee.
     
  9. Dream

    Dream New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,677
    Likes Received:
    1
    I am not from a traditional church and am no longer evangelical-fundamentalist, but I can share non traditional fundamentalist thinking on this. This is a common question, and there are several ways people tend to answer it for themselves.

    For one that is not much used, there is the 'Iniquity' answer which posits that these nations stored up 'Iniquity', and in this instance the destruction of these nations is considered a literal historical event but was not murder. The purpose of their destruction was not to kill people but to declare God's opposition to their nefarious activities (burning their own children etc), and their bodies just got in the way. Not every nontraditional agrees with this theory, however. It has an appearance of logic but really isn't logical, because its like a football. You can tackle anyone with it, justify killing anyone as long as you find a flaw in them. For example, the French are famous for drinking too much wine as are the Italians; so why hasn't God ordered their destruction yet? There is no consistency with this theory, which is a problem since it is more logic based than belief based. You can find this theory discussed in the works of Watchman Nee and others who believe in demonic exorcisms, glossolalia and snake-handling. (yes, really) They're sincere folks, though; so don't laugh too hard.

    Most people don't follow that above logic and stick with raw belief. People tend to think of passages about slaughter as historical but nevertheless confusing passages where God told the people to do thus and such, and so they did it. This is the 'Don't ask questions' approach. Since the slaughterers were only obeying God it must have been the right thing to do despite appearances to the contrary. Despite this strange coldness, people who believe this do not believe in murder and believe quite the opposite. They would take a bullet for a Muslim. These are often the ones with 'Honk if you love Jesus' stickers on their bumpers, and not one of them would ever hurt another human being. If you asked them about Islamic killing, they would still say that all killing is wrong, and they would think that Muslims must be crazy.

    You wouldn't run into this argument much around day to day nontraditionals. Most non-traditionals (NT's ?) don't get into it that deeply. You will find some fish on the net who talk about it and try to make sense, but this is a very difficult argument to make particularly when Jewish people are in the same forums objecting to it. It doesn't attract any but the most stubborn of Bible geeks, and a paid pastor generally would regard it as a question that only stirs up trouble and should get a pat answer or else an 'I don't know and we'll find out when we get to heaven.' The easiest response is a redirect to "Jesus said thus and such about himself, and so he has to be who he claimed to be." This shuts most people up. The "I don't know" answer would be the most honest one, and a minister who's willing to say that should be given a raise and a new fishing pole. It doesn't work that way, however. What happens is that pastor's un-shushed congregation begins to generate lots of questions at an increasingly frenetic pace, until he or she finds their position in question.

    I hope that helps you, Amica. I tend to agree with Radarmark, that Christianity has some terminology borrowed from Greek culture; but I am not the one to ask about that. Its possible that Greece contained some constructs that God found useful just as you feel that special flavor of ancient Arabic had talents to support the Koran. Many non traditional Christians just generally don't care about other religions at all and are taught and think that a person must make the formulaic statement that 'Jesus is Lord', those words specifically in their own language. Since a Muslim cannot say those words, it leaves Muslims in a very grey area for them. (I Corinthians 12:3). That is not how I see it, however. My thinking on this is similar to that of CS Lews as portrayed in his book The Last Battle (a children's book). It could be difficult for Muslims to relate to that book, but it is a treatise on the mysteries of Christianity in a fictional format. He wrote a series of seven books to appeal specifically to Christians and in the last book compellingly argues for one of the mysteries that the sound of a sacred name is less important than what we do with it. In other words, he argues that Muslims should not be instantly condemned as idolaters. Currently the book series is being put into movie format, and I hope that they will finish all seven. I think they will, since it is making them loads of cash.
     
  10. bananabrain

    bananabrain awkward squadnik

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,749
    Likes Received:
    2
    er... where are you getting that from? jews were jews for 2,000 years before muhammad arrived on the scene and, besides, you're begging the question - where have "jews" been so "quick to judge"? give me an example instead of generalising.

    hang on - if that is the case, muslims should not accuse jews of "corrupting" the Torah, as has happened numerous times on this site alone (although i don't think you've ever done so) - our dear friend abdullah was good enough to lay out exactly how, in his view, there was no such thing as an "ahl al-qitab" jew these days, as by definition all the "good jews" were now muslims and were only "jewish" in their ethnic descent. either you believe that our adherence to the Torah is a genuine adherence to a genuine Divine Revelation or you don't - you can't say on one hand how we're all on the same side and at the same time attack us for "falsifications" and "corruptions" - that happens all too often and we are familiar with such tactics from the history of christianity. frankly, the only thing all three of us agree on is that the jews' Torah is a Divine Revelation!

    the question here is really whether the stuff in the Torah (and the Tanakh) really happened as described or not. if it didn't, then it's fiction and we cannot be blamed for something that didn't happen. if it did, then you also can't pick and choose - we are also therefore the beneficiaries of a Covenant with G!D and that must be respected. you cannot maintain on one hand that we eliminated the amalekites (and a nasty bunch they were too) but that we didn't receive Torah at sinai. either way, what makes the difference is how we behave as a result.

    i wouldn't say he ruled with an iron fist. he had an advisory board of 70 elders, he took advice from joshua, his brother, his sister and his wife and insofar as he "ruled", he did so within a constitution governed by Torah law - this was not arbitrary diktat. similarly, we are not pacifists; any wars that were waged under his leadership were religiously sanctioned and done for good reason.

    it is revealing, however, that muslims are (supposedly) enjoined to imitate muhammad as he was the "perfect man". however, we are not enjoined to imitate moses, but rather to imitate G!D, by resting on Shabbat and so on. moses is far from perfect, though he was the highest of all prophets. he made mistakes, he had a stutter, he got angry and so on. all our patriarchs, prophets and sages were human figures and they all have character flaws - it is not wrong to point out such things in muhammad, far from it; to do so humanises him, makes him more relevant to us - it should help us to understand ourselves. by trying to maintain that he was as sinless as jesus i think you do him no favours whatsoever.

    nor to me. jesus is a very different figure, although still clearly a teacher of genius.

    this is not our view. it is only the view of *conversionist* religions. we believe that jews should be jews, not that everyone should become jewish. it is entirely possible to be a good person whether you are jewish or not; in fact it is positively easier by some 606 less legal obligations. i cannot overemphasise the importance of the distinction between unversalist (and therefore conversionist, chauvinist and intolerant) religion, which cannot help but "share the good news" and covenantal religion, which is highly aware of its obligations, but strictly distinguishes between obligations incumbent upon those within the covenant and those without, who have different but no less critical importance. the problem comes when you think that different = special = better; this, however, is quite, quite wrong in our view.

    b'shalom

    bananabrain
     
  11. radarmark

    radarmark Quaker-in-the-Making

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    2
    Duh! BB! (sound of ice-cream cone smacking forehead)!
     
  12. bananabrain

    bananabrain awkward squadnik

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,749
    Likes Received:
    2
    eh?

    b'shalom

    bananabrain
     
  13. Menassa

    Menassa Tanna

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems like you made a very blanketed statement, surely you do not believe that all Christians and Jews attack Mohhamd's character... one reason for this is because you have probably not met all Christians and Jews.

    That being said I don't believe I've met a Christian or Jew who attacked him because he was a warrior?
     
  14. radarmark

    radarmark Quaker-in-the-Making

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,212
    Likes Received:
    2
    BB -- an obscure reference to an obscure Grateful Dead album (Live in Europe). Meaning "I am sooooooo stupid I missed my mouth with the ice-cream cone".
     
  15. Thomas

    Thomas Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    10,570
    Likes Received:
    1,552
    Hi Amica —
    Et *** spiritu tuo.

    Not all, but sadly the rule of 'empty vessels make the most noise' applies here, I think.

    There are on-going dialogues between the traditions at the higher levels, probably at every level, but of course these go unmentioned in the media. On the other hand, of course, the media is having a field-day, presenting Traditional values, especially of the religious order, in the most negative light.

    Why does everyone think a Moslem is a suicide bomber? Or a Catholic priest a pedophile? Or a Jew is some part of a global conspiracy? Because it's easier for 'everyone' to let the media do their thinking for them. (These people are usually the same ones who criticise people of faith for not thinking for themselves.)

    But you're not alone. Christianity is being eradicated in the Middle East in the wake of the 'Arab Spring', and anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe ...

    God bless us all, and preserve us,

    Thomas
     
  16. Etu Malku

    Etu Malku Mercuræn

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    1
    Point well made . . . you are quite right!
     
  17. messianic114

    messianic114 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    The reason X-tians don't believe Mohammed is a prophet is because we are told by our sacred writings:
    Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
    Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,

    Additonally it is supported by this verse:
    Mat 21:33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
    Mat 21:34 And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
    Mat 21:35 And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
    Mat 21:36 Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
    Mat 21:37 But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

    These verses tell us that the LAST messenger from G-d is his Son. Therefore Mohammed cannot be a messenger from G-d and the words of Yeshua be true.



     

Share This Page