reza@ihuxb.UUCP (08/11/83)
I saw Jimmy Swaggart ( I think I have misspelled his name, so I will call him JS ) on a religious cable network the other day. He was trying to tell the audience that supporting Israel is their moral responsibility etc. But the reasoning that he used drove me up the wall. This gentleman, who is supposed be intelligent and informed enough to preach to millions of people on tv, said what amounts to the following: "Arabs are Muslim. Do you know what Islam stands for? It stands for denying Christianity and Christ. These people hate Jesus and what he stands for. Therefore we should all support Israel" Now, I have several objections to JS's points. First of all, let's assume that Muslims do hate Jesus Christ and what he stands for, does that entitle Israel to be supported unconditionally, as JS implied. Secondly as far as I know Jews ( yes I know that I am equating being a Jew with being an Israeli, but this is accurate enough for this argument ) have more reservations about Jesus and what he stands for than most other people. Notice that I did not use the word hate, simply because I do not think that is true. These two arguments actually belong to other news groups and discussions. So I will not argue them. JS argues that Muslims hate Jesus and what he stands for. Is this true? Well, I am a ( mind you, non-practicing ) Muslim. My father was a scholar in Muslim jurisprudence and made me follow the religious rules for most of my life. I think I am informed enough to tell you what Muslims believe in. Islam is a religion based on the Judeo-Christian beliefs. It claims to have been sent to man, through Mohammad, when Jews and Christians were starting to deny the God again. That is to say Islam claims the same relationship to Christianity that Christianity claims to Judaism. If you read Quran, you will be surprised at how close it is to the old and testaments. It contains a briefer version of all the stories about Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other profits. As far as Jesus is concerned, we Muslims believe that he is one of the six major profits ( Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad ) and was born from a virgin mother through an act of God. The only difference between the Muslim and Christian views of Jesus is that we do not believe that Jesus was the son of God. You and I can argue forever about if he was born from a virgin mother through an act of God, whether he is the son of God or not. But that is not the point. The only way that I can describe the animosity, shown by many Christians towards Islam, is by the phrase "religious intolerance." Look at it this way. Who is the god that Muslims worship? Of course everybody knows that it is this cult figure named Allah. The only problem is that the word Allah, in Arabic, means "The God." Furthermore, this Allah happens to be the same God as the one Jews and Christians worship, which is one of the fundamental claims of Islam. Jews call their god with a Hebrew word, too, don't they. Does this mean that their God is different from the Christian's God? Now, this is another point that we can argue about forever, so let's leave it. Note that I am not asking for anyone's praise because I ( or rather practicing Muslims ) worship the same God as you do and believe in most of your religious beliefs. All I am saying is that spreading such non sense to people as facts is dangerous. Not only does it defame another religion for non-religious reasons, but also it provides the grounds for unneeded religious antagonism. You know what the irony of it all is? 50 years ago the fire of anti-semitism was fed by telling Christians that Jews were Christ killers and therefore should be wiped off the face of the earth. Now you are told to fight against ( Jesus hating ) Muslims for the cause of the country that represents those same Jews! Religious Intolerance. H. Reza Taheri ...!ihnp4!ihuxb!reza (312)-979-1040
smb@ulysses.UUCP (08/13/83)
I agree with Reza Taheri, with one addition: I think that folks like that are guilty of both ignorance and intolerance, not merely the latter. --Steve Bellovin
CSvax:cmh@pur-ee.UUCP (08/15/83)
There is a different view of the commodity exchanged on this network, so let me change the heading here from "Religious Intolerance" to "Exchange of opinions": If a debate on a subject is carried out between X and Y, with X starting with the assumption that his cherished book B(X) is literally true, and Y assuming that such is impossible, then X "proving" his views by quotes will not convince Y, and Y's view that B(X) is rubbish will not convince X. So they will argue forever along the same pattern and never get anywhere. There is the prevalent view that a book such as the bible is literally true. This is funny, because every preacher spends a good deal of his activities interpreting the book. Funnier yet is that people trying to shoot down the literalists are literalists themselves and cannot see beyond the surface. The examples abound on this network, but if I were to name some now we would get sidetracked by the reactions of the parties singled out. Nobody seems to consider that there is a psychological use to religion which remains effective to some degree. If net.religion is too close to home, you might like to look at net.philosophy for examples how unproductive an exchange of opinion can be when both parties cannot agree on the definition of terms. In contrast, net.space has a commonly agreed topic and unfailingly produces information. In the interest of everyone who reads this stuff not for mental spar and parry but for obtaining information, I should like to raise the question of why all of you good people argue about here? Do we want to learn something? Do we want to convince others that we are right? Do we want to become toast-masters doing mental gymnastics? Chris Hoffmann
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (08/15/83)
Why do I argue? Now *there's* a good question. Mostly, I argue over the net, not for the people I am actually addressing, but for the people out there who may be not committed. if I manage to shake some of my 'opponents', then fantastic!, but I really do not expect this very often. occasionally, however, amidst the hate mail, and the mail which says "I agreed with your every word on X" (rather nice to hear, by the way) is mail that says "i always wondered about X, and you have helped make the picture clearer". This is what makes my day. I want to further knowledge. I do not get much of an opportunity in a computing enviornment to expound on any other knowledge than technical knowledge, and I actually believe that "the C calling sequence", and "how to write a disk driver" are not the most important bits of knowledge that I have gleamed from my life on this earth so far. Laura Creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura
cng@burdvax.UUCP (08/15/83)
to: H. Reza Taheri
...!ihnp4!ihuxb!reza
re: Religious Intolerance.
It's unfortunate that a few misguided individuals who appear on television
give the wrong impression of Christianity. Jimmy Swaggart, et al,
would lead us to believe that one of the marks of a "true" Christian is
absolute support for the Jews (a.k.a. the nation of Israel). I believe
this concept grows out of a misunderstanding of a key Bible principle.
Christ told us to love our neighbors. When questioned about the meaning of
neighbor, he gave the parable of the Good Samaritan. We should all learn a
very important lesson from this story, namely, any belief that one
race is "superior" to another is racism, pure and simple.
The notion that national Israel is "God's chosen people" is completely false.
This idea is a mild form of heresy known as Dispensationalism. It's most
notable theme is that God will, one day soon, begin to deal again with the
nation of Israel. Associated with this is the idea that there will be a
future thousand year reign of Christ upon the earth. Any future thousand year
period is a complete misunderstanding of Revelation 20.
A proper reading of the Bible will lead to the conclusion that "God's chosen
people" include all those that believe in Christ for their salvation.
This includes people from every nation on the face of the earth.
The Jimmy Swaggarts and Bob Jones of this world don't have a leg to stand on
when they espouse the ideas of race separation or one nation being "better" than another.
Now I don't believe that Muslims and Christians worship the same God.
Christians worship Jesus Christ as one member of the Godhead. The concept
of the Trinity is unique among monotheistic religions. Even more important
is the belief that God cared so much for fallen mankind that He sent His
son into the world. Christ paid for the sins of His people and redeemed them
that they may glorify Him.
Christ said, "By their fruit you shall know them." If people uses the
word "Christian" to describe themselves, they better show some evidence!
Tom Albrecht
..{presby|psuvax}!burdvax!cngbch@unc.UUCP (08/17/83)
Somehow, I find the point of view expressed by Tom Albrecht to differ from those touted by Falwell, Swaggart, et. al. only in degree and not in substance. To say that there are one people, "chosen" by G-d on the basis of their religion is as racist as if it were on the basis of race, national boundary or preference in neckties -- or so I believe. Is it not possible that *all* faiths were created by the Deity as dif- fering means of knowing? That the differences between them exist to serve the differing needs of the people who would worship? That the greatest sin is the sin of Hubris, which declares that one faith is "special," above all others in its relation to G-d? The faith we choose, we choose for our own reasons, not for G-d's. It would be well to remember that someone, somewhere, might take a very dim view of our claims to be sole posessor's of The Truth.