In a previous post entitled “Russia and Islam, part eight: working together, a basic “how-to”“, I have discussed in some details the basic principles which could be applied by both Christians and Muslims to jointly take a stand against the current Empire. I don’t want to repeat it all here, especially since in that article I was discussing this issue specifically in the Russian context. What I propose to do today is to simply post a quick reminder of the general principles I am suggesting both sides abide by.
1) Recognize irreconcilable theological disagreements
The fact that the Islamic and Christians theologies cannot be reconciled is fairly obvious and yet often deliberately ignored, sometimes out of ignorance, mostly out of a misplaced desire not to offend. And yet, there is nothing offensive in the basic recognition of an undeniable fact. For Muslims Christ is a prophet, for Christians He is the theanthropos, the God-man. This is what the absolutely highest Christian theological dogma says about Him:
One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made; Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man; And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; And ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.
As far as I know – and please correct me if I am wrong – but all the segments which I have outlined in red are categorically unacceptable to Islam. But even if I got one or two of these wrong, there is plenty enough differences here to consider that the Islamic and Christian theologies are mutually exclusive (reminder: Orthodox and Latin Christians disagree only on one word and Orthodox and Arian Christians disagree on one single letter!). The best thing is therefore accept that as a fact and let each person decide in his/her conscience which of the two faiths – or any other, or none at all – he/she wants to adopt. Next,
2) Recognize that Islam and Christianity have polemicized with each other:
This really flows from point #1 above, but this is worth repeating. Because of their mutually exclusive theologies, Christians and Muslims have often polemicized with each other, sometimes resorting to name-calling. So what? Humans are humans and issues of religion can generate heated disagreements and disputes. This really proves nothing. Next,
3) Recognize that Islam and Christianity have a checkered track of coexistence:
Sometimes Christians and Muslims coexisted in peace, sometimes not. Since religion is very often used by the worldly powers of the state to justify various policies, it is often very hard to tell whether this or that bad episode was the result of tensions between the faithful or between their secular, worldly, leaders. But, again, does that matter? Neither Christians nor Muslims pretend to all be sinless saints – we all know that we are sinners – so what really matters is this: Christians and Muslims can – and have – coexisted in peace. This is possible, it happened quite often in fact. Thus, this can be repeated.
4) Christian and Islamic ethics mostly agree with each other:
Yes, there are some differences. As far as I can tell, the most acute ones are the stance on the death penalty (which Islam fully favors and Christianity opposes) and the attitude towards “apostates” (which Islam executes, while Christianity only declares them cut-off from the Church). The fact that Christianity and Islam have coexisted in peace for centuries tells me that these differences can be intelligently managed. And since most countries have abolished the death penalty anyway, this is hardly the most pressing issue for either community.
So here is again my practical recommendation:
Having accepted our differences, having accepted that we have a checkered history of coexistence but having also accepted that we can, with good will and intelligence, coexist, let us stop dwelling on these topics ad nauseam and turn to the pressing issues at hand today. I do not mean to say that these issues cannot be discussed here, or anywhere else, but only that this blog is probably not the best place to do so, if only because we are unlikely to change each other’s beliefs.
One final point: scriptural exegesis is a very delicate science which requires a lot of very complex and sophisticated methodological and even spiritual capabilities and which cannot be reduced to “this text says this or that”. For example, Orthodox Christians believe that the only correct way to understand the Scripture is within a pious spiritual life in the Church (orthopraxis) combined with the understanding of the so-called consensus patrum (the agreement of the Church Fathers) is on any given passage or topic. My understanding is that Islam teaches that the proper understanding of a passage of the Quran can only come when seen in the context of all the rest of the Quran and the guidance from the Sunna, as interpreted by recognized spiritual leader/jurist. In other words, this or that Sura or Ayat taken by itself cannot be understood any more than this or that verse of the Scripture. Yet another reasons for all of us to exercise the utmost caution when quoting the scripture of a religion which is not ours.
That’s it – I just wanted to submit these reminders to everybody as a way to keep our discussions focused and productive. I hope that the above is helpful.
Many thanks and kind regards,
The Saker
:-)
Mindfriedo
I am a Shia Muslim. The Shia Muslims consider Prince of Peace (Jesus) as Manifest of God. For this reason the Wahhabi consider Shia Muslims as heathen. To understand this one has to understand the concept of God of Shia Muslims. What is God to Shia Muslims.
Thus, I refer you to the sermon #185 in Nahjul Balagha authored by Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (First Cousin and Son-in-Law of the Prophet). He is the very first Imam of the Shia Muslims. Almost all Muslims (Sunni and Shia) consider Nahjul Balagha second only to the Holy Quran, as mostly Nahjul Balagha is paraphrasing the Holy Quran, thus explaining the Holy Quran and Sunnah.
To Shia Muslims each verse of the Holy Quran has 7 meanings, thus when one reads Nahjul Balagha one should keep in mind that since it paraphrasing the Holy Quran, it too has more than one meaning, 7 meanings. From literal to metaphorical.
The only people who don’t consider Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib the author of Nahjul Balagha are Wahhabi. LOL, what can I say
Keep up the good work.
http://www.nahjulbalagha.org/SermonDetail.php?Sermon=185
joint Cristian-Muslim
wide program…
because if a decreasing Christianity is not ‘more’ an absolutistic religion,a growing Islam is always in the old attitude
@Anonymous:absolutistic religion
Depends what you mean by that, but I would suggest that any religion worth anything, *must* be absolutistic because both God and religion are absolutistic by essence and by definition. Just saying ;-)
The Saker
Hello saker,
great blog, anyway some addition to your statement: Muslims don’t believe in the crucification of Jesus. There was a replacement. It is written in the Qoran. So this is wrong, about Pontius Pilatus.
We find some similar or virtually the same stuff among Gnostic groups before Islam.
And I write this being born to Muslim parents of your favorite Muslim denomination: If you go to Lebanon, you will see the difference between Muslim quarters and Christian quarters and the difference is that the last ones are clean and the others not. I am sorry to say, but Islamic faith and the kind of discipline modern states need are not compatible. Only those states and groups who don’t belong to the Sunni faith or adhere to it, are capable of exercising the discipline and pragmatism needed to lead and rule such states and societies.
Shia people are more disciplined as Sunni, for example it was no coincidence that a Shia organization was able to wage a long time war with Israel and to win it. Iran and its rise to an Oriental power house is another example.
Pakistan is a counterexample. The Gulf states are more or less propierties of their rulers. The only counterexample is Oman, but Oman is not Sunni.
Let’s take a look to other countries: Baathist Iraq and Syria, for all their wrongs, were effectively ruled because they learned how to organize people. The same principles were used by the Muslim Brothers, these principles were the ones of Lenin.
There are other countries as well: Egypt and Algeria ruled by their armies, organizsations of discipline. Turkey is / was a similar case. Jordan is an exception but that’s because the king received an heritage by the makers of his country, the masters of discipline: the Brits.
You won’t find out such stuff among Sunni peoples, the failure of Palestinian leadership before 48 and after that is, in my opinion, a good example. The perfomance of the Arab armies in the war of 48 and 67, too. Take another case: the FLN against the French army which surely was a better bet in the beginning of the Indepence war. But the FLN took the sense of discipline due to their occupation with European thought, either Western one or Eastern one (Communist). So in fact, they lacked all the qualities of the oriental malaise like nepotism, corruption, incompetence and a lack of responsibility for the coming tasks.
Look at the Wahabi gangs in Syria and Iraq, they are all bound by their aim and their vision. But in reality, the ones best connected and violent, that says, their leaders, are the ones who bind their groups together. So they are those different groups: ISIS, Nusra, al Qaeda (in Iraq, Yemen, etc.), no central organisation. This can be an advantage, but a disadvantage, too. Especially in the case of Syria, from the point of terrorists, where Western nations protect one side. But all these groups reflect the differences between their Wahabi backers, so not surprising, we see a quarrel among them, Saud Arabia and Qatar.
And why ? Instead in analyzing the situation and accept conclusions, those rulers accuse each other of sabotage, a Stalinist play, to hide their own incompetence. And because thieves don’t get along with each other. And greed dictated their conduct of war.
Disciplined organisations wouldn’t fight for nothing, but at least they would put differences aside and fight tother (and fight each other afterward after that) but at least we can see a concentration of wills.
So I can see no base for a general Orthodox – Islamic alliance, but only alliances between the Orthodox side and certain countries or groups influenced (strongly) by Islam. But this is a case to case alliance. You can make an alliance with Iran, but only inside certain conditions. The best would be to handle it like Russia handles its relations with East Asia or Latin American countries. The only ones that wouldn’t participate are the ones of the other American side, but these countries are no gain for Russia.
Hello saker,
great blog, anyway some addition to your statement: Muslims don’t believe in the crucification of Jesus. There was a replacement. It is written in the Qoran. So this is wrong, about Pontius Pilatus.
We find some similar or virtually the same stuff among Gnostic groups before Islam.
And I write this being born to Muslim parents of your favorite Muslim denomination: If you go to Lebanon, you will see the difference between Muslim quarters and Christian quarters and the difference is that the last ones are clean and the others not. I am sorry to say, but Islamic faith and the kind of discipline modern states need are not compatible. Only those states and groups who don’t belong to the Sunni faith or adhere to it, are capable of exercising the discipline and pragmatism needed to lead and rule such states and societies.
Shia people are more disciplined as Sunni, for example it was no coincidence that a Shia organization was able to wage a long time war with Israel and to win it. Iran and its rise to an Oriental power house is another example.
Pakistan is a counterexample. The Gulf states are more or less propierties of their rulers. The only counterexample is Oman, but Oman is not Sunni.
Let’s take a look to other countries: Baathist Iraq and Syria, for all their wrongs, were effectively ruled because they learned how to organize people. The same principles were used by the Muslim Brothers, these principles were the ones of Lenin.
There are other countries as well: Egypt and Algeria ruled by their armies, organizsations of discipline. Turkey is / was a similar case. Jordan is an exception but that’s because the king received an heritage by the makers of his country, the masters of discipline: the Brits.
You won’t find out such stuff among Sunni peoples, the failure of Palestinian leadership before 48 and after that is, in my opinion, a good example. The perfomance of the Arab armies in the war of 48 and 67, too. Take another case: the FLN against the French army which surely was a better bet in the beginning of the Indepence war. But the FLN took the sense of discipline due to their occupation with European thought, either Western one or Eastern one (Communist). So in fact, they lacked all the qualities of the oriental malaise like nepotism, corruption, incompetence and a lack of responsibility for the coming tasks.
Look at the Wahabi gangs in Syria and Iraq, they are all bound by their aim and their vision. But in reality, the ones best connected and violent, that says, their leaders, are the ones who bind their groups together. So they are those different groups: ISIS, Nusra, al Qaeda (in Iraq, Yemen, etc.), no central organisation. This can be an advantage, but a disadvantage, too. Especially in the case of Syria, from the point of terrorists, where Western nations protect one side. But all these groups reflect the differences between their Wahabi backers, so not surprising, we see a quarrel among them, Saud Arabia and Qatar.
And why ? Instead in analyzing the situation and accept conclusions, those rulers accuse each other of sabotage, a Stalinist play, to hide their own incompetence. And because thieves don’t get along with each other. And greed dictated their conduct of war.
Disciplined organisations wouldn’t fight for nothing, but at least they would put differences aside and fight tother (and fight each other afterward after that) but at least we can see a concentration of wills.
So I can see no base for a general Orthodox – Islamic alliance, but only alliances between the Orthodox side and certain countries or groups influenced (strongly) by Islam. But this is a case to case alliance. You can make an alliance with Iran, but only inside certain conditions. The best would be to handle it like Russia handles its relations with East Asia or Latin American countries. The only ones that wouldn’t participate are the ones of the other American side, but these countries are no gain for Russia.
Not to be a spoilsport here but I’d say there’s a world of difference between peaceful coexistence between various muslim/christian states/regions and peaceful coexistance within the same geographical/nationsl sphere. I’d say the latter is WAY more diffcult and that we are not ready for that endeavor.
Why should we necessarily blend? Why can’t different regions of this vast but interconnected globe be allowed to uphold their own cultures while maintaining a peaceful respect with regards to other nations/regions?
I liked it when the KSA autocrats wanted to fund mosques in Russia and Putin answered: sure, as long as for every mosque you build here we’ll build a church in Saudi. Guess what: the talk of mosques in Russia died down righ away.
I’m a westerner and an agnostic. I DO NOT wish to integrate with the Islam I see today. I can manage the western church as it’s completly toothless and more of a joke really than any religous entity.
I don’t wish muslims any harm at all, I just wish that they keep to their beliefs in their regions, and not bring it to mine. I DO NOT WANT THEM, or their dogma.
@anonymous:Muslims don’t believe in the crucification of Jesus. There was a replacement.
Thank you for this correction! I was under the mistaken impression that Islam did agree that Christ was crucified, but that He did not die. But a substitution even before the Crucifixion makes more sense. Thanks a lot for this (much needed and appreciated) clarification.
So I can see no base for a general Orthodox – Islamic alliance
It is already a fact in Chechnia and in Kazakhstan. I would even argue that Russia and Iran are de facto allies, as is Syria. Are these not encouraging models, especially Chechnia? What about the alliance between native (mostly Christian) French and immigrants (mostly Muslim) from North Africa and Africa?
@Swe: there’s a world of difference between peaceful coexistence between various muslim/christian states/regions and peaceful coexistance within the same geographical/nationsl sphere. I’d say the latter is WAY more diffcult and that we are not ready for that endeavor.
Russia is achieving this right now
Why should we necessarily blend? God forbid!
I never said a word about “blending”, did I? To use an expression of a Malian friend of mine, I oppose the notion of a “melting pot” – I want a “toss salad” – where all parts are together, but identifiable with their own identity.
I’m a westerner and an agnostic. I DO NOT wish to integrate with the Islam I see today. I just wish that they keep to their beliefs in their regions, and not bring it to mine. I DO NOT WANT THEM, or their dogma.
Fair enough! To each his/her own and we are all free of our choices. But what you are saying is that you don’t want them to *IMPOSE* their beliefs and practices on you. I am sure that they would not want you to impose your beliefs and practices on them either. So the option is not “blending or submitting” but “peaceful coexistence in mutual respect and a common stance on issues we agree upon” versus “hostility leading to conflict which only benefits our common enemies”. Which do you prefer?
As for “their” regions versus “our” regions – the fact that we are ALREADY living in the same regions is a fact. Makes no sense denying facts. Nor can either side hope to get rid of the other with some magic wand. It is not only history and geography which made us live next to each other, it is also the modern, globalism, trans-national society which neither of us chose to have, but which we now all live in. Besides being immoral, polices such as banning certain religions or kicking out all the immigrants are simple *not possible* so even if some of us can daydream about that, it’s just not going to happen. So were do we go from here?
Kind regards,
The Saker
Swe 15:12
I’m guessing you live somewhere in Europe, bc Christianity in the US (most Roman Catholic bishops, most Fundamentalist Protestant denominations) can have very long, sharp teeth indeed. They have been hard at work for the past 30 years or so imposing their version of the Bible (mostly Old Testament and things they think they see in the New) on the rest of us here, including most mainline churches.
Also, and I guess this is just from my experience, but I haven’t had any problem co-existing with Muslims whether they’re Sunni or Shi’a — they follow their faith, we follow ours and it’s really no big deal. The biggest differences I see are that Muslims in general tend to be a lot more polite than most of the people I deal with, and have a far deeper, longer sense of history, and not just in comparison with Americans but most Europeans from a Christian background.
Hi Saker,
The same Shia from the post #2. Hope by now you have read the Shia Muslims’ belief regarding God.
Since, you appreciated the correction about “Crucifixion” regarding Islamic belief.
Three more corrections:
1. Jesus is not incarnation of Holy Spirit.
2. Holy Spirit is not God, but Gabriel.
3. Jesus is not “Word” of God as in sense of Christianity, which Jesus is Message. Word of God in Islam simply means word and usually it is “Be”.
The Holy Quran explains that the Seven Heaven and the Earth a similar number were created in two ways.
1. In six period/days for our benefit.
2. “Be”. And, it is. (This is how God creates, no time is involved).
[003:059] The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was.
Best regards,
I don’t know a lot about varying cultures and religions but I do know the essence of being, which is in their domain of exegesis. So let me say that I have worshiped that essence in the Dome of the Rock, Hagia Sophia, St. John the Divine, St. Peter’s Basilica, the Wailing Wall, the Cave of the Patriarchs, and Budhhist as well as Hindu shrines in India, Thailand, and Cambodia, as well in the libraries of NYU and Columbia. In each place of reverence, I witnessed keepers of their faith united in worship of this essence of being.
So it is from this place that I would like to point to two things. First, I would ask the Saker to extend his fine principles of civil discourse to those worshipers of all faiths (including that of agnostics.) Second, with all due respect to the trashing of Sunnis, my most revered Muslim leader, Salah ad-Din, was a Kurd and a Sunni, and nominated vizier in a Shia Caliphate. He demonstrated exactly what the Saker is talking about in this post. Check this quote from Wikipedia:
“Saladin was on friendly terms with Queen Tamar of Georgia. Saladin’s biographer Bahā’ ad-Dīn ibn Šaddād reports that, after Saladin’s conquest of Jerusalem, the Georgian Queen sent envoys to the sultan to request the confiscated possessions of the Georgian monasteries in Jerusalem be returned. Saladin’s response is not recorded, but the queen’s efforts seem to have been successful as Jacques de Vitry, the Bishop of Acre reports the Georgians were in contrast to the other Christian pilgrims allowed a free passage into the city with their banners unfurled. Ibn Šaddād furthermore claims that Queen Tamar outbid the Byzantine emperor in her efforts to obtain the relics of the True Cross, offering 200,000 gold pieces to Saladin who had taken the relics as booty at the battle of Hattin to no avail, however.”
Hello Saker,
about the substitution, you should know that Shi’a consider the death of Hussein to be comparable to Jesus’ crucification, so you might say, that there is a popular belief or acceptance of such a crucification, you can also add to that the stuff about ‘Jews killed Jesus’ because to believe in such thing, you have to believe in the killing / crucification first. So there is a general acceptance of a crucification, influenced by native Christians and the perception of the Christian East and West, in different circles of oriental peoples.
It is already a fact in Chechnia and in Kazakhstan. I would even argue that Russia and Iran are de facto allies, as is Syria. Are these not encouraging models, especially Chechnia? What about the alliance between native (mostly Christian) French and immigrants (mostly Muslim) from North Africa and Africa?
First, with Saudi arabistan, there wil be never ever be a chance that such an alliance would suceed. Their money is a weapon of mass destruction.
Second, I fear for the moment the Muslim masses will come to the conclusion, that the world won’t be their prey, and even their own land will be pure Muslim. I fear for the moment the Clerics will see the loss of influence because in such cases those people most to loose may fight in such a way no one will win and benefit.
And maybe our times are such an Endsieg.
About Chechniya and Kasakhstan I must remind you that both countries went through brutal sovietization. Local nobles and clerics were elimanted. The new elites were sovietized and russified, so you can’t compare this to the other Islamic countries. And Sovietization was a brutal school of discipline to eradicate the ‘farmers’ mentality’ of the Russians, e.g.
As we can see later on, old ills reappeared in Soviet times, but at least, Islam was out of politics. In cases where we see a rebuilding of Islamic influences we can see our old Gulf bandites.
So alliances should be made little by little, no ideology, because such an ideology had to provide a better vision than the current one.
Another leak currently making the rounds on the net, this time from Turkey.
Reddit thread where translations are posted:
http://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/21i6pe/new_leaks_reveal_turkey_head_of_intelligence/
Youtube vid, poor audio quality on this one:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c-1GooSDwJ8
In “Why Marriages Succeed or Fail” and “The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work”, which are both actually about relationships, scientist Dr. John Gottman observes that many, if not most, of disagreements in a close relationship are fundamentally insolvable. That is, people would have to change/transform who they are at their core identities in order to resolve the loggerhead. And yet, men and women get married all the time, and a good percentage stay married indefinitely. Gottman’s main meta-point is you have to go along to get along.
This means fundamentally acknowledging that the other person is a worthwhile human being.
There are many distinctions and techniques that the scientist teaches, but the simplest one is to concentrate on your fundamental agreements, and give no attention to the fundamental disagreements. Relationships are about paying attention. This builds what Washington calls “political capital”. The goal is to maintain at least 5x the amount of positive strokes as you give negative strokes, with again the meta-goal of not Machiavellian manipulation but of constructing and maintaining a mutually-beneficial, healthy, long-term relationship in a very small world.
So here are some places to start:
(1) “Allah” is not a name at all, it is a mistranslation. It is a job title. The proper translation is “The LORD”. When Judeo/Christians can acknowledge that “The LORD our God is one“, and that we and the Muslims have been talking about the same LORD all along, we can start to get down to business. It is as silly as thinking that the same Sun does not shine down on the Middle East, simply because people call it by a different title. But the Arabic Bibles use “Al LAH”, literally “The LORD”, to talk about God as well. Get rid of the concept that there can be more than one God. Glory in the fact that we are all children of God. It is a key fact to remember.
(2) American Christians will be shocked to learn that Muslims believe in Jesus, and that they believe in the Virgin Mary. They will be astounded to learn that there is a special Muslim holy day to honor the Virgin Mary. Teach your fighters the truth: Every time you dishonor a Quran, you are dishonoring Jesus.
Of course, Moses is in the Quran as well.
Interfaith women are already starting Mary celebration days, to concentrate on the good values we wish to teach our children.
(3) Muslims believe strongly in tithing, and in taking care of the poor. These are values Judeo/Christians can get behind.
(4) All faiths believe in the Golden Rule. The Prophet said “Return evil with Kindness”, and “None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself”. Christ taught His followers to pray, “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us”–sadly, he wasn’t messing around, and President Bush & the national debt found this out the hard way. There is still time for President Obama to learn what profound forgiveness actually means, and why it is a gift to the giver, not to the receiver. Teaching the concept of forgiveness, with diagrams and consequences spelled out, to the One Nation Under God, would be a great place to start.
Pls read Gottman’s research on relationships, he used decades of high-speed filming of microexpressions in arguments, it is well-founded.
A couple of examples:
I’m a huge fan of Indian style food. One thing I noticed going to Indian restaurants is all but one* didn’t serve pork or beef. This was so both Hindu and Muslim people could eat there without being offended, as most of their customers were from these religions.
Years ago I knew a school teacher who a student of her’s was run over and killed right in front of the school. She helped the family with organising the funeral & memorial for the child. The kid’s family were Muslim immigrants from the Mideast, the teacher was Jewish.
People of different religions can get along provided they respect each other’s beliefs enough not to try to impose their own beliefs upon each other. Same with cultures.
вот так
I think i’ve found the glue witch could stick us all together (with no discussion needed):
Tora:
“You should love your neighbor as you love yourself.”
Lev 19,18
Jesus:
“Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”
Marcus 12, 31
Qur’an:
“None of you truly believes (in Allah and in His religion) until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself”
Hadith no. 13
Atheism:
“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”
Immanuel Kant
Yeah, and the Buddhists are nevertheless all about love and peace :)
Dwarvking
A French friend passionate about underwater fishing went for a scuba diving holiday on a beach in French speaking West Africa.
– Senegal, I think.
For some reason I dont remember he said he left his equipment on the beach at night. The local net fishermen were extremely poor so I said . ” You didn’t think they would steal you equipment?”
“No way”, he replied, “they are Muslim.”
Just saying..
Saker,
you were correct back when you stated the boundry line that would seperate Ukraine.
From anna-news Novorussia being set up.
You changed out from Geopolitics to Theology. Would never have guessed that just a few short months ago, but hey, it’s your blog and your call. :)
Good luck with that honestly,
karin
@BOT TAK
Thanks for the working link the other day here and I agree w/your comment on another blog about censure.
See you at SyrPer I guess or Pennys :)
Hi Saker,
Sometime reader, first-time commenter. You’ve got some of the best analysis of the Ukraine crisis I’ve come across anywhere on the ‘net! I also loved your series on Russia and Islam.
On religion, I’m a “Latin Christian”, as you put it, and somewhat of an amateur theologian. But I am quite fascinated by Islam.
Since you are also a Christian and student of theology who has a deep appreciation for Islam, I’d like to know your thoughts on something: How do you think Christians should judge Mohammed? We can’t accept him as a prophet, obviously, because then we would have to accept the Quran as the Word of God. Could we perhaps consider him a “virtuous philosopher” like Socrates or Confucius? But then for what reason did he find it necessary to reject Christianity, rewrite the Bible, and found his own religion? On the other hand, I don’t believe that we can judge him as a blasphemer and a charlatan, because in the founding of Islam, one can see a true intention to end pagan backwardness and transform civilization for the better(which it did accomplish).
I know you’re a very busy guy, and my comment here is already running a bit long, but I’d be very eager to get some of your thoughts on this.
–Tasio
P.S. – You posted something a while back about how you had respect for Abby Martin, even though she criticized Putin on her show. You might like this interview with her with Sean Stone (son of Oliver Stone), where she clarifies her position (she says it’s a matter of being principled in her anti-war views) and details how Liz Wahl was actually a neocon dupe recruited to discredit RT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BplWla_h1gQ
Nora
This is unrelated, but I noticed your comment at MoA wondering about Bernhard’s zionist biases. You are very correct, he is a full fledged ziofascist in phony leftwing clothing. Surprisingly DM posted some posts from last year where I clashed the 1st time with “b” over his ziofascist censorship.
“@вот так – your conflating of U.S. and Israeli interest as one and of Zionists as some rulers of the world is nonsense. Keep it away from your comments here or go elsewhere.
Posted by: b | Mar 9, 2013 3:44:58 AM | 22″
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/03/popcorn-please-while-putins-agitators-rule-in-kiev/comments/page/2/#comments (scroll to comment 146 by DM)
He banned another commenter for posting 2 MSM articles where Brit leaders professed their zionist loyalty. Presumably because it made his pro-ziofascism look obvious and idiotic. Which shows that not only is “b” ziofascist, he’s also petty and egotistical and extremely dishonest. A few days later he banned me from the site for continuing to discuss zionist influence.
If you are familiar with Gilad Atzmon’s reference to “anti-zionist-zionists”, well that’s exactly what Bernhard is. It’s a form of Jewish supremacy and covert support network (hasbara) for the western corporate oligarchy (the status quo) that these people practice.
вот так
Hey Karin
Thanks for the link from ANNA, I had not seen that article yet.
вот так
@DrJ:I would ask the Saker to extend his fine principles of civil discourse to those worshipers of all faiths
Uh?! Where did I insult worshippers of other faiths?!?!
with all due respect to the trashing of Sunnis
Oh that is so unfair! I always bring 4 Muslims as examples which I immensely admire: Hassan Nasrallah, Sayyed Qutb, Malcom X and Akhmad and Ramzan Karyrov. 4 out of 5 are Sunni. So to say that I trash Sunnis is simply counter-factual and unfair.
Are you sure you are reading my blog?!?!
The Saker
@Having accepted our differences, having accepted that we have a checkered history of coexistence but having also accepted that we can, with good will and intelligence, coexist
This is a point on which we must all agree. There are nevertheless some intractable issues, if only because we are unlikely to change each other’s beliefs as you clearly point out. It is important because to make any alliance work there should not be based on conflicting attitudes. And it is not only about beliefs and dogmas but mostly on the fact that Islam and Christianity have a checkered track of coexistence. From amost all treatments of these relations it results clearly that Muslims did not and seem willing to not give up the feeling that they are the victims at the hands of the Christians, which is far from any demonstrable truth, while denying any wrongdoings from their part, again far from any demonstrable truth.
“Even after most Muslims did not choose to follow these injunctions, Muslims have been much more tolerant of Christianity and Judaism historically than the latter have been of Islam”. This is simply not true. As long as this belief is nurtured we won’t be able to stop the seething sense of injustice that poison the life of many Muslims and push them to terrible acts.
Anyhow it should be reminded that Christianity precedes Islam, therefore it could not have wronged the Muslims before they ever existed (unless we fall in mythology – the “Abrahamic” religions etc).
WizOz
@Anonymous:Since, you appreciated the correction about “Crucifixion” regarding Islamic belief.
Not only that – I appreciate *any* correct about *any* belief and even on *any* other topic. I sincerely believe that I am immensely fortunate to have so many readers who are infinitely more informed then I am and on a much wider range of topics. This is *especially* true about Islam which, I admit, I have been very interested in for about 20 years now but about which all my knowledge has been gained “here and there” and not always at the best source. And, as we know, there is no worse idiot than the one which knows a little, so I want to avoid being such an idiot by asking for as much correction as possible.
@EVERYBODY: I feel that I should clarify my stance on the various branches of Islam as clearly some are totally misreading me.
1) I confess a special admiration and attraction for Shia Islam. I won’t go in all the details here, but I feel that this is the form of Islam which is the closest to my heart and mind.
2) I do believe that Saudi-style Takfirism is a mortal danger to all of mankind. This cult is, in *my* (admittedly subjective) opinion, satanic. I fully agree with Ramzan Kadyrov who calls its proponents “shaitans”.
3) I have a great deal of admiration and sympathy for the type of Sunni Islam we see today in Russia and Kazakhstan and I believe that Russian Islam will play a key and positive role in the future of Russia.
4) I am immensely disappointed by what I see is a cascade of terrible stances of Sunni leaders outside Russia. I am disappointed by their knee-jerk support for any form of Islam no matter what (I call that the “right or wrong – my Ummah” reflex), I a disappointed by the stance of the OIC in regards to the war in Syria, I am disgusted with the betrayal of Syria by Hamas, and I am generally horrified by how easy it has been for the Empire to use Sunni Muslims as cannon fodder for its imperial wars. This being so, I am MUCH more critical of 99.99% of so-called “Christianity” than I am of Sunni Islam. Yet this does not prevent me from being a Christian for a very simple reason: I believe that there is a tiny part of the so-called “Christian world” which has remained TRULY Christian. That is good enough for me. And while I am not competent to judge which branch of Islam is truly Islamic, my frequent criticism of modern Sunni Islam does not AT ALL imply a general critique or dismissal of ALL of Sunni Islam. Hence, for example, my very sincere admiration for not only past Sunni Muslims like Sayyed Qutb or Malcolm X, but also a living Sunni Muslim like Ramzan Kadyrov. But do I consider that there is clearly something of a problem in modern Sunni Islam? Yes – absolutely. Just as there is in modern Christianity.
I hope that I have made my personal views totally clear now.
… to be continued
… continued
Finally, and just for the record, I have respect for any faithful, even a Wahabi Muslim. My beef is with this faith, not with the person unless, of course, this person begins to manifest that which I object to in his faith. This is also true for Orthodox Jews which I have personally always treated with the utmost courtesy even though I consider that (Phariseic) rabbinical modern “Judaism” as even possibly MORE Satanic that Takfiri Islam (which, at least, and for all its other faults, is not racist). Finally, the other day my wife and I were cross country biking when I met a couple of bone-fide American Wiccans (!), all dressed with various satanic regalia from head to toe. It was quite a sight. We struck up a conversation and they told us they were collecting trash on the shores of a lake because “we have to take care of Mother Earth”. My wife and I sincerely told them that we fully agreed and were admiring their efforts and we thanked them for doing that for all of us. We parted with words of “hope to see you soon around here again”. Both my wife and I felt that we had met some rather confused, but very well-intentioned and nice people. So, please, if I can even enjoy the company of pagans dressed in Satanic gear I think that I am pretty open-minded and courteous as other religions go.
But, of course, if somebody is dead-set on getting offended….
Cheers,
The Saker
De minha parte posso afirmar que acredito num só Deus!
Sou batizado e crismado na Igreja Católica Apostólica Romana, fui seminarista, hoje não sou praticante.
Em vinte anos fui à uma missa mandada rezar em homenagem ao falecimento do meu pai.
Muitos que convivem comigo creem que sou ateu, não sou.
Vejo as coisas de outro prisma e, quando lecionava Geografia, alguns alunos questionavam sobre religião, fazia a seguinte analogia:
Deus é como um “hardware”, é onipotente e onipresente, as religiões são o “software”.
Você pode pegar um desktop e instalar vários sistemas operacionais (Windows, Linux, Kolibri, Unix, DOS etc. – isso são as religiões).
Deus, existe um só.
Em qualquer religião há princípios de boa convivência, sigo os que Cristo deixou nos dez mandamentos.
Alexandre.
For my part I can say that I believe in one God!
I am baptized and confirmed in the Roman Catholic Church, I was a seminarian, I’m not practicing today.
In twenty years I was sent to pray the Mass in honor of the death of my father.
Many who live with me believe that I am an atheist, I’m not.
I see things in a different light and, while teaching Geography, some students asked about religion, made the following analogy:
God is like a “hardware”, is omnipotent and omnipresent, religions are the “software”.
You can get a desktop and install various (Windows, Linux, Kolibri, Unix, DOS etc. – So are religions) operating systems.
God, there is one.
In any religion, there are principles of good living, those who follow Christ left us ten commandments.
Alexandre.
@Saker
Any comment on Syria? The shooting down of a Syrian plane (above Syrian territory?), Erdogan implicitly admitting to the false flag attack plans.
If Turkey starts directly fighting Syria, my prediction (of late 2013) that “2014 is likely be the year where the Western system unravels” might turn out correct.
Honk
Re: Syria
Over at strategic-culture there’s what looks like great analysis to me:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/pview/2014/03/28/decisive-turnaround-syrian-war-al-assad-victory-qalamoun-valley.html
Honk
вот так,
Thank you for affirming my concerns! I didn’t want to pre-judge him but he sure was letting some obnoxious hasbara run wild and I wasn’t sure whether it was deliberate deception or constraint due to German law. Doesn’t matter though, ultimately: enough of that nonsense!
And yes, we’re great followers of Gilad and all of his work — plus we see the same stuff here all the time.
By the way, I’ve tried to Google your moniker and still am not really quite sure what it means. But I am very curious… ;~)
Thanks again,
Nora
correction: when I said “here” at 21:56, I IN NO WAY meant this blog!!! I was talking about just about everywhere else there’s anything serious under discussion, online or not.
Many thanks to President Assad, President Putin, the brave Syrian army,Russian military and probably members of Hezbolah for protecting Syrian civilians including Syrian Christians from the liver eater “Al Qeada” terrorists.
These terrorists are backed by the Saudis, Turkey, USA, UK, EU, Qatar, Israel and the olgarchs like Soros.
The root cause of conflict between people or individuals of different religious faiths is typically not derived from the theological differences or contradictions within their faith but rather from the ILLWILL of the people themselves. People of ill will use whatever is at hand to create conflict and religious differences are a most popular tool in the hands of such people. So the real problem vis-à-vis religious conflict is people of ill will and this problem will not be corrected through the mitigation of religious differences.
Suggestion, import Chinese Hui Imans, male AND female to Russia.
@1) I confess a special admiration and attraction for Shia Islam. I won’t go in all the details here, but I feel that this is the form of Islam which is the closest to my heart and mind.
It is perhaps because:
“Shia Islam embodies a completely independent system of religious interpretation and political authority in the Muslim world. The Shia identity emerged after the lifetime of Muhammad, and Shia theology was formulated in the 2nd century AH, or after Hijra (8th century CE). The first Shia governments and societies were established by the end of the 3rd century AH/9th century CE. The 4th century AH /10th century CE has been referred to by Louis Massignon as “the Shiite Ismaili century in the history of Islam” (Wikipedia)
Needless to say that the whole question of the Shiism and its relations to Sunnism and non-Muslim societies is extremely complex, but nevertheless the forest is not so thick as not to allow us to see some trees. Shiism is much more influenced by Christianity (through Christian converts of the Middle East or Zoroastrism and possibly absorbing a large Gnostic contingent)and therefore more “tolerant” to Christians, whereas Sunnism is closer to Judaism (more exclusivist), which made easier the de facto alliance of Muslims and Jews in the exploitation of Christians. One should not lose sight of the fact that for a long period of time Byzance was still a great power which extended its protection to the Christians under Muslim rule (as later on Russia acted as the protector of Christians in the Ottoman Empire).
WizOz
Nora
“By the way, I’ve tried to Google your moniker and still am not really quite sure what it means.”
http://www.multitran.ru/c/m.exe?CL=1&s=%E2%EE%F2+%F2%E0%EA&l1=1
I nicked it from a favourite tune.
Zemfira – Kukushka (Земфира – Кукушка) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pgc0ZYDzazY
This translation probably comes pretty close to what she is singing about (it’s the feeling I get from it, anyway):
http://russmus.net/song/7270
It’s one of those songs that cause “dust to get in the eyes” upon hearing. ;)
вот так
Dear Sir The Saker.
Love your blog, have it every morning with coffee and rusks (here in South Africa).
I am a Muslim revert, age 60, and I can assure you that Muslims have no problem with the ascension and return of Jesus and the fact that he will come to judge. But not only judge, but destroy the Dajjal (anti-Christ) with a descendant of Muhammad fighting on his side to establish Justice and the Kingdom of God. I also do not believe that our differences are THAT great and that he will set the record straight upon his return.
I strongly believe that Latin and Eastern churches will be allies of the Muslims against the Anglo-Zionist empire (your term, but I prefer to call them ZioNazis) consisting of what they call the Judeo-Christian ‘civilization’!
Keep up the good work!
Akram abu ‘Abs
South Africa
I like Proftel’s use of the Harware and Software analogy, I used it before in my writing. But I need to remind him that Release 1.1 = Vedas; 1.2 = Taurah; 1.3 = Injeel (Gospel of Jesus); and 1.4 = Al-Qur’an. It is time to upgrade not only for this reason but also for the fact that it is the only of these texts that is unaltered since revealed!
Hi Saker,
have you come across this yet:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-27/here-youtube-false-flag-attack-syria-clip-erdogan-wanted-banned
Allegedly Turkish Foreign Minister was caught planning a false flag to justify a war against Syria.
Do you give it any credit?
It may be not in tune with the current topic, but I think it is relevant to the issue we have: Ukraine/Russia/USA/EU.
http://fff.org/2014/03/26/ukraine-and-the-deferential-press/
Greetings from Singapore:
There are very good reasons (rational/logical/moral & historical) to be against ‘Empire’ without the assistance from a religious position.
astabada, is it any surprise? The false-flag sarin attack didn’t work, and some revenge against Russia for Crimea is required. Mafia Bosses cannot allow resistance and non-obedience ever to go unpunished, because fear is their greatest weapon. Erdogan, whose behaviour over Syria and Libya is despicable and puzzling, is marked for eradication, because he crossed Holy Israel over the Mavi Marmara death-squad killings of Turks by sacred butchers. So he gets to play useful idiot in destroying Syria, before his end. The MSM filth, as expected, have ignored the content of the YouTube video entirely, while vilifying Erdogan for ‘censorship’. The irony is exquisite.
Abel Kotze :
Thank you !
Peace on earth to men of good will.
I try to take life under these principles :
1 – Love God above all things .
2 – Do not use the holy name of God in vain .
3 – Sanctifying Sundays and holidays guard .
4 – Honor your father and mother ( and other legitimate superiors ) .
5 – Do not kill ( or cause other damage to the body or soul , yourself or your neighbor)
6 – Save chastity in word and deed .
7 – Do not steal . (not unjustly withhold or damaging ‘s possessions ) .
8 – Do not raise false witness ( or otherwise prevaricate or defame the next ) .
9 – Save chastity in thoughts and desires .
10 – Do not covet other people’s things .
There are other versions , this is the basics .
Here in Brazil there is a serious problem about the ” do not covet your neighbor’s wife ” , many complemented with ” when” close is too close ” (not sure how will the translation but is not coveting the woman when the man is by close ) kkkkkkkkkkkkkkk !
I know that humor varies from culture to culture , which is funny to some may not be offensive to others, already ask you to take this into account .
Below the Equator , Latin Americans in general have a saying : ” if you have an orange, an orange do if you have a lemon (which is sour) , make lemonade .”
Here in Brazil I’d rather pick a lemon , squeeze , put sugar, ice and a good dose of Vodka Stolishinaia ( this is called ” caipirinha ” Vodka ) . The original formula is but with Cachaça , created after the BRICS , prefer Vodka . Kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk !
Kotze , nice to meet you.
Alexandre .
bI think you are terrific. I just learned of you today. I was born into a Shia family, but as an American, I love the religion of our Native Americans who love nature, the sun and moon, mountains, rivers and streams, and the land. Who am I to say whose God is correct or not correct. I read all the responders and for the most part they are quite human and fair.
Did not want to comment on this post. But read this today.
After all the things she and her people suffered at the hands of the Muslim Ottoman Turks, can she be considered a bigot for her views now?
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/as-the-centenary-of-the-first-world-war-armenian-genocide-nears-a-survivor-describes-how-she-still-hears-the-screams-9224585.html
Kept thinking of the Muslim Christian alliance you talked about, don’t know how far that’s possible.
Read this by Nasrallah today:
http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=143208&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1
Where he says gold will always be gold even if people call it wood. There will be few people who will get past their prejudice to accept this. There will always be us and them.
Mindfriedo
@anonymous 12:32 Who am I to say whose God is correct or not correct
If you have not already been to Karbala, Najaf, Samara, Kazmain, or Mashad then I would suggest that please make that trip. What you have is Gold, don’t trade it for less.
Mindfriedo
Some Muslims are not satisfied with a 97% Muslim country. They should be shield for the Christians. Protect what diversity they have left.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26781731
Mindfriedo
There is no common ground between biblical Christianity and the muslim religion.
Jesus said of Himself, “I am THE way, THE truth, and THE life. No man cometh unto the Father but by Me”. (John 14:6)
He also said, “He that is not with me is against me”.
Jesus Himself, as the Lord and ‘Founder’ of Christianity has declared the exclusivity of the faith.
http://www.aonoprienko.ru/?p=3455