IslamChrist must be in conflict within their own crossbred theology, cause Islam believe Christianity is worthy of death, and if they believe both, then they must also believe that they should kill themselves, not for the virgins but because Allah says Infidels are worthy of death.
Quran never said that, as that's one of the common accusations that get brought up whenever people say that all Muslims must automatically seek to kill Christians---no different than others saying that all Christians hate Jews/are anti-semitic because of teachings developed in the church from scripture (like Replacement Theology amongst others) that blamed the Jews for the death of Christ and led to a lot of anti-semitic views/persecution of them sadly by others in the name of Christ. Many Muslims have often noted directly how there is never a claim nor reason for others to either hate Christians (whom they're told to listen to since they're People of the Book) or Jews....and that the texts had a historical context.
2:256 says "There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. ..."
ibn Kathir said: There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the right path has become distinct from the wrong path. لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ (There is no compulsion in religion), meaning, "Do not force anyone to become Muslim, for Islam is plain and clear, and its proofs and evidence are plain and clear. Therefore, there is no need to force anyone to embrace Islam. Rather, whoever Allah directs to Islam, opens his heart for it and enlightens his mind, will embrace Islam with certainty. Whoever Allah blinds his heart and seals his hearing and sight, then he will not benefit from being forced to embrace Islam.
With that it mind, it should also be noted that what needs to be considered whenever it comes to the discussions of Muslims and the tax dynamic is actually examining what other Muslims in the U.S and abroad have noted...and lived out. For whenever people bring up talk of the Muslims seeking to "force" others to believe as they do in all settings, it ignores the extensive amount of times many Muslims have not sought to enforce anything on non-believers .
There's an excellent book on the issue that did a good job of addressing the issue, entitled
Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam (
more here ). This book argues that the law of apostasy and its punishment by death in Islamic law is untenable in the modern period. Apostasy conflicts with a variety of foundation texts of Islam and with the current ethos of human rights, in particular the freedom to choose one's religion. Demonstrating the early development of the law of apostasy as largely a religio-political tool, the authors show the diversity of opinion among early Muslims on the punishment, highlighting the substantial ambiguities about what constitutes apostasy, the problematic nature of some of the key textual evidence on which the punishment of apostasy is based, and the neglect of a vast amount of clear Qur'anic texts in favour of freedom of religion in the construction of the law of apostasy.
Examining the significant challenges the punishment of apostasy faces in the modern period inside and outside Muslim communities - exploring in particular how apostasy and its punishment is dealt with in a multi-religious Muslim majority country, Malaysia, and the challenges and difficulties it faces there - the authors discuss arguments by prominent Muslims today for an absolute freedom of religion and for discarding the punishment of apostasy.
For more:
As said best in the article:
In Freedom of Religion, Apostasy, and Islam, Hassan Saeed and Abdullah Saeed argue that apostasy laws were formulated in a religio-political landscape that differs dramatically from its contemporary counterparts. Thus, these laws have, in effect, been rendered obsolete. For example, during the pre-modern era when religious identity and political identity were practically synonymous, rejecting or leaving Islam was roughly equivalent to high treason, for both were seen as rejecting the Muslim ruler’s political authority. In addition, it was assumed that such people would likely join the enemy’s armed forces. But today, political and religious identities are considered largely independent of one another and leaving a religious tradition does not connote military desertion, political subversion, or potential armed rebellion. Recognizing this fact, most Muslim countries have abandoned the death penalty for apostasy.
Some Muslim countries have adopted a progressive approach toward abolishing apostasy laws; others maintain laws against what is considered blasphemous, hateful, or defamatory speech regarding Islam and Prophet Muhammad. As will be detailed below, the vagueness and over breadth of such laws leave them open to abuses, and they are often used to intimidate or silence political opponents...
There are other good places for review on the issue of religious tolerance within Islam, as seen in
Misconception: No Freedom of Religion in Islam and
Religious freedom in Islam. No punishment for apostasy and
Appendix E: Qur'an 2:256 - Answering Islam. Additionally, there are other groups that should be considered in what they've advocated on the issue many times before...such as the Sufi Muslims (more here in #
14). Many assume Islam means all for it are for militant takeover, yet they're largely unaware of the differing camps in Islam and how they differ---with Sufis being peaceful. Despite the long and well-known history of conflict between Christians and Muslims, their mystical traditions--especially in the Christian East and in
Sufism (more
here,
here,
here,
here,
here,
here ,
here,
here,
here ,
here,
here,
here and
here/
here / )--have shared for centuries many of the same spiritual methods and goals.
That said, seeing that there're already Muslims involved in politics within American culture as well as grassroots organizations and they work with Non-Muslims often (more
here,
here,
here,
here ,
here,
here ,
here and
here/
here), it's bananas to see the ways others react to Muslims/assuming they're all out to conquer you and take over. I truly
do feel sorry for the many Muslims who feel very isolated within the U.S and
living in fear, but I am glad for others working on their behalf (just as with other groups) to ensure that they're well connected.
One thing I've often seen people do is claim that all Muslims are meant to be violent--with the narrative being that believers are not and have never been in the scriptures....and yet they forget on how the scriptures, for anyone studying them honestly, have had an EXTENSIVE history of vioolence. Elisha himself called down a curse on others for making fun of his bald head and had 2 bears kill over forty-youths ( 2 Kings 2:23-25/ 2 Kings 2 ). FOr others saying that Mohommad was vindictive and Biblical prophets were not, I think there's a big lack of honesty in seeing how others responded.....and there's a reason that others often chose to become Zealots for the Lord.
The same thing goes for Samson in Judges 14-16 when the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he went to war with the Phillistines....with Judges 15 being interesting after seeing how he had a riddle he made solved and the Spirit of God empowered him as he took vengence upon them by killing their own people to pay the winners what was agreed on. Again, anyone studying the prophets and OT Israel in how they did things will see that it wasn't anywhere close to being a pretty narrative or something where violence wasn't at times praised/celebrated.
As it is, the example of Elisha is interesting when seeing how he responded to mocking with the Lord's approval in shutting things done.
And all in the OT who followed God were believers, just as it is with believers today....be it Moses when it came to the slaughter of the Midianites for enticing Israel into sexual immorality after Balaam taught them how to seduce them, or David in his conquest of Jerusalem/wars---or Josiah in II Chronicles 33-34 who wiped out all of the idolators in the land/put them to death...and many others. The account of Maccabees also is another to consider as well as Phineas (more shared
here ). In the new book
Laying Down the Sword: Why we Can’t Ignore the Bible’s Violent Verses, Philip Jenkins brilliantly
compares and
contrasts the Bible and the Quran in terms of sheer violence.
For other good reviews:
__________________
: this thread is going down hill too. Can't we just praise God that more are coming to know Him rather than try to weigh whether or not they actually count as Christians?! We all have screwed up theology! We're human trying to interpret the Divine!!! We can't all get it right all the time!
I'd wonder the same on you with journalists as it concerns politics/being against Romney
