CONTRIBUTIONS OF ISLAM

Thomas: Good article. It is unfortunate that the vast majority of Christians cannot appreciate this. Of course, the deplorable actions of Muslims (or those who call themselves Muslims) these days only contributes to this problem. Which illustrates anotherl aspect of the religious phenomenon... to wit, the further away in time from the origin of a religious revelation (that of Moses, Christ, Muhammad, Baha'u'llah, etc.). the more degraded is the understanding of that revelation, the more politically corrupt, and the greater need there is for a divine re-revelation to occur.

Another thing which has contributed to Christian oriented disappreciation of the value of Islam's contributions, is not only ignorance but deliberate misrepresentation by those with their own political axes to grind, specifically, the Christian clergy and theologians. My only reaction to this is, "Wake up, people... and smell the roses."

Your assertions are interesting and worthy of discussion, but your delivery is adversarial. Islam and Christianity are indeed branches of the same tree, as is Judism. Look outside; do you see the Oak or the Maple fighting itself, seeking to determine who it's roots love best. Perhaps the loving discourse of brothers would foster an understanding that armed debate never can?

Well-stated.

Donald: Yes, you are right. I sincerely hope that people understand that the religion as revealed by its Founder, whether it be Moses, Jesus, Mohammad, etc., is definitely not the religion as it has become after centuries of corruption by its followers. Islam made a great contribution to civilization during the first few hundred years of its existence, then it began to wither and die, which is the course of all religions. Now its followers are trying to revive a dead horse and restore Islam to its former glory. This is impossible; the world must move on. There are bigger and better things on the horizon. God guides - we must follow.

Michelle: Thank you for your wise comments. I did not mean to be adversarial. I merely intended to present the facts often overlooked by non-Moslems. The bottom line is that religions are born, flourish then die in a never-ending progression. We must all move on - together.

Elizabeth: Thank you. I would be delighted to hear your views on this matter.

Michelle R.: I certainly don't advocate being adversarial but in the face of an otherwise adversarial climate (we have had huge wars between all these "religions") one might seem to be adversarial by simply pointing out that the covering up the truth in the name of being "nice" is not good either. The purpose of religion (as a whole and as revealed by the Great Messengers) was to advance us as a species and lead us out of the dregs of our animal-past limitations. Unity is crucial but being willing to learn from our past mistakes, correct our mistakes and move forward is critical also.

Well put, Donald.

There is no doubt that arabs in different intervals over earlier periods held superior knowledge over many different people of the world be it astronomy, maths, medicine (perhaps alchemy too; not too sure) and architecture (arabs were even called to work over several early churches) (There were not leading in commerce though & it is also important to note however that the assertion/claim that mecca was the center of trade is grossly unsubstantiated.) There is a danger though in that such contributions by Arabs may be inappropriately be attributed towards or be incorrectly perceived by some as contributions of islam, instead of those by arabs. If such were to be the case, then we would probably be thanking the greek gods for Pythagoras theorem today & for the works of other greeks.


"Islam …… is closely and historically related to Christianity."

It is very true that islam is closely related to Judeao-Christian beliefs, but we tend not to understand this relationship as it stood back then & as it stands today. We appear to have an oversimplified view of both Judaism & Christianity today as 2 well defined separate beliefs, but wasn't the case despite the fact during the early century (right upto & perhaps mohammads time). There were first century + Christians (many of whom would have seen themselves not as Christians but jews who had come to realize an additional truth in christ) who used the gospels & perhaps some of the other new testaments & based their beliefs upon these texts. Then there were 2nd century+ Christians who followed Gnostic gospels & later apocryphal writings. But neither were these texts called by such names nor was the distinctions between Gnostics & canonical Christians loud & clear. They all considered themselves rightful owners to the same faith & perhaps all preferred to be called by the same name (Christian or otherwise). The dispute over distinguishing one from another based on texts(textual grounds)/canon did arise among Christian leaders (who began to see this as a threat) but the settlement of this issue did not take place until much later (taking a over a period of centuries in gaining separate identities & yet not doing so completely). The same applies to some 2nd century jewish groups who in addition to the torah began to engage in mystical (kabbalistic) beliefs which also saw the rise of the Talmud. The point is although a large part of what we have today(those that have prevailed) exists in relation to belief systems that were built on early texts as opposed to later ones, during the earlier centuries there were several Jewish/Christian off shoots that existed (although in smaller in numbers compared with mainstream one.)

We also observe that after the roman church was established, we notice that many of these kinds were labeled as heritics and I think I remember that some of them were exiled. Some went to other lands & settled there and there were those who went to Arabia as well. Now when we speak of relationship between Christianity & Islam, it is important to keep in mind the existence of these then prevailing groups/factions. For instance, Which christiany/Christianities are we speaking about? This is a pretty valid consideration when taking note of several stories in islam. For instance, the story about jesus talking in his cradle & another where jesus makes a bird out of clay. These do actually appear earlier in Gnostic writings such as the gospel of Thomas & the infance of jesus Thomas documents, but are absent in the earliest 1st century canonical stories.


"Islam succeeded Christianity, and it was therefore a logical progression for Christians to accept it as steadfastly as they had the religion of Christ"

I feel that is actually not very logical. If such were the case, why not accept other belief systems that succeeded islam too such as Ahmedis, the nation of islam etc. I believe the most logical argument for acceptance of any belief should be the truth.


"Due to the historical order of its appearance, and because of the obviously more advanced character of its teachings, Islam constitutes a fuller revelation of God's plan for mankind."

This appears to be an extension of the earlier point and I don't seem to agree here on the same grounds except for the relationship between historical order & fuller revelation which makes sense. There is no reason to imply one is more advanced than the other, unless it can proves itself though its teachings


"There are infinitely more laws and institutions in the Qur'an (Koran) than in the Gospels."

Oh yes undoubtedly. In fact Jesus appears to distance himself from laws that were already exiting while not ignoring the principals upon which these were built. There are several cases that demonstrate this fact, one being the love the "love your lord your god…and your neighbor as yourself" which is an abbreviation of the Ten Commandments. Then there was the incident where he condemns the Pharisees & law givers for burdening followers with ritualistic laws while principals & spirituality were being totally ignored. Jesus observed the existing & prevailing dangers of ritualism (it wasn't as though people didn't follow all their holy obligations its just that it had lost its meaning) & therefore did not teach by law(there were enough of those) but instead by principal.


"When carefully and impartially compared, the Qur'an marks a definite advancement over the Gospels, from the standpoint of spiritual and humanitarian progress."

That's a matter of interpretation so I need not comment except to suggest that such needs to be examined on merits to see whether or not this is true

Lyla: That's what happens to religion after centuries of abuse and contamination by its followers.

Dar R.: Good idea to examine the Koran to see if it is indeed an advancement over what God provided previously (i.e. Judaism and Christianity). Yet how does one go about this in a manner that requires "study?" For the most part, objective "study" as if making a "scientific evaluation" is totally inappropriate because one has to eventually make a value judgement through a thick cloud of inherited prejudice and presumption. Jesus's fellow Jews at the time of His revelation certainly did not see His teachings as an advancement. Indeed, for the most part they made judgements of His "value" based solely on things having nothing to do with the value or worth of His teachings. They judged Him solely on whether or not He fulfilled certain easily contradicted and misinterpreted "prophecies". That is why they put a crown of thorns on His head on the way to His execution. Only a very few judged Jesus on His message more than His rather irrelevant "fulfillment of prophecies".

And so I ask current day Christians the question, "What would you say if you found out that Jesus was not of virgin birth? Would that change your opinions of or respect for His teachings as being from God?" I have not found one yet who admitted that it would not. To a person they simply say that such could not be the case and was not the case. They criticize Jesus's fellow Jews for not "seeing Him" and yet do precisely the same thing as they did in their present attitude.

Plus the fact that any "improvements", "advances spiritually", etc. must inevitably be purely a value judgement by each individual according to his or her spiritual receptivity at the time. And the fact is that these "advances" may be not completely "new" or "revolutionary" but be more one of emphasis in future life style. So the skeptic is always left "the door ajar" by God for denying that it is an advance even when it is. This is God's way of sifting the wheat from the chaff.

The main thing "different" (and not completely "new") of Islam is that God "wills" and man "obeys or follows." It is not some minor aspect or "aside" of God. It is a primary rule. And that everything which happens is in accordance with the Will of God. Thus, the success of the Twin Towers attack was according to the Will of God, not contrary to it. Also, the American victory over the Iraqi army was according to the Will of God. Do these seem contrary to each other? Yes, perhaps, if seen with your or my eyes. But we do not know the whole picture, the eventual outcome of all the chaos that follows or the motivating reasons behind them. And again, not only this but according to a good Muslim, it is not our position or "right" to demand of God an explanation, especially an explanation satisfactory to us. He commands and we obey. This is Islam.

Well, Lyla L., another aspect of Islam that is unique is that the Koran forbids having a clergy. Those that now operate de facto as clergy are in violation of the Koran Itself. They call themselves Mullahs, which means "doctor". But they are no different from a conventional clergy than those in Christianity. Just like any old and established "religion", Muslims are distorting Islam for their own convenience and political power.

Very perceptive. Lyla. I believe that will happen. Are you making a prediction?

Donald: A wise observation; thank you for sharing.

"Islam succeeded Christianity, and it was therefore a logical progression for Christians to accept it... Due to the historical order of its appearance, and because of the obviously more advanced character of its teachings, Islam constitutes a fuller revelation of God's plan for mankind."

Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc, i.e., a classic logical fallacy. Momons, Jehovah's Witnesses and the Jonestown cult were 'closely related' and historically followed, but just as devoid of truth as Islam.

No religion should be judged by the character of its followers, or by their contributions to culture. The best test is that of the founder's character and the consistency of his teaching.

If this is the standard, Jesus stands alone.

Muhammad isn't just barbaric by 21st century standards, he was so in comparison to his contemporaries. Islam's teachings did not become more corrupt with time; they were so from their inception. Muhammad could not keep his 'fuller revelations' - as you call them - straight and had to invent the concept of abrogation. He rationalized that Allah is too omnipotent to be constrained either by his previous dictums or the rules of logic. That is more capricous than the myriad gods of the Greeks, Romans and those of the Arabian penninsula.

Refer to http://blog.y-factor.net for valid comparisons between Christianity and Islam.

Liam: Thank you for your input. I assume you are a Christian looking at a rival religion through somewhat biased eyes. I am neither Christian not Moslem trying to be impartial.

Yes, I am, and I recognize the risk of bias. In my book The Y Factor, I include many of the points that are found on my blog.

In the past year, I came to realize that I have never had any close association with Muslims and therefore could be unduly influenced by my faith. So - I've spent an enormous amount of time getting acquainted with, and learning from Muslims who grew up in Pakistan, Morocco, Pakistan, the United Aram Emerates and Egypt. Some of them were Imams and sheiks. One was a professor at Al-Azhar University in Cairo - the most prestigious school of Islam in the world.

What I have found is quite different than I had previously assumed. None of them are glazed-eyed fanatics with scimitars under their robes. They are decent people and willing to engage in dialogue. But I did notice a common theme. All of them grew weary of the oppressive requirements imposed by the religion/government/culture of Islam. They came to grips with the violent basis of their religion and were forced to leave their home countries. One is not allowed to question the Qur'an or its prophet without serious repurcussions. This is regardless of whether one embraces Christianity. Open-mindedness is punished with loss of career, ostracizing, banishment from one's family, imprisonment and death. As Ravi Zacharias has noted: "…any religion not willing to examine itself will gain a following only through intimidation and fear. It then evicts itself from the public square of honest and truthful debate. Graves are the legacy of such beliefs… The coercion of religious faith is an oxymoron. It is then no longer a religion but an ideology of compulsion."

This is exactly what I have found. It is the way of Islam. It has been so from the beginning. Islam is only the fastest growing religion in the world due to the compulsion within Islamic states. Those who convert to Islam do so without fully 'counting the cost' and do so at their peril. They will not be allowed to turn back when they discover the true face of Islam.

Liam: Thank you. I, personally, make a very clear distinction between the original teachings of the Founder of the religion (all religions), and what the religion has become after centuries of add-ons and misinterpretations by its followers.

"I, personally, make a very clear distinction between the original teachings of the Founder of the religion (all religions), and what the religion has become after centuries of add-ons and misinterpretations"

A very good distinction to folloow indeed, i believe in doing the same myself. Its the only way to find out what stems from the source & what doesn't. The case with apostay is conclusive though & it has its origins in islamic sources themselves. Here is but onesuch example:

'Bukhari, volume 9, #17

Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims." '

And yes, a large number of muslims are real good people and i dont mean that while trying to sound politically correct (i'm not that kind of person to please anyone at the expense of the truth, as some here should know), i know this first hand from the muslim population i interact with on almost a daily basis (to which extent has nothing to do with my personal awareness of islamic material/research).

Its just that muslims(like people of other religions) do not have a a significant degree of awareness of the material presented in islamic sources & are bound by traditional understandings & cultural practices from births to their deaths. On the other matter, quite contrary to most common western perceptions, not all muslims wear burkas, turbines or grow beards or for that matter even pray 5 times a day. Undoubtedly though, religion is a very touchy sensitive subject for them & no matter what the topic of discussion, they are likely to bring out a religious connection almost anywhere. Its just the religious (& i dont mean spiritual practice, but religious talk in the air which oushes its way into every debate) culture these guys have mostly grown within that is the reason why many muslims (again not all though) think & talk that way.

Dar: Thank you for your comments. You made some very good points.

Islam is worse than nazi ideology. It teaches superiority, hatred of women, lying, and murder. In addition, there are so many "true belivers" that the world would be far better off without Islam, which will soon destroy the world with nuclear terrorism.

Robert: You sound very angry. When I speak about Islam I am referring to the teachings given to the world from God by the Prophet Muhammad. I am in no way talking about what is practiced today in the name of Islam. They are two different things entirely. Just as what is practiced today in the name of Christianity is not the same as the teachings given to us by Jesus Christ two thousand years ago.

I am talking about Islam the way it really is. Didn't Muhamed rape a four year old girl and wasn't Muhamed a murderer and a liar ?

How come Muslims win so few nobel prizes, and how come Muslims are bereft of democracies, and how come there are super rich Muslims but most are destitute? And how come Islam treats women like Garbage?

You can defend Islam all you want, but I think it stinks and as an ideology, it is on a par, maybe worse than naziism.

Robert: Islam was, for a time, a mighty religion which brought mankind to a pinnacle of greatness, a height never before achieved in history. But, like all religions before it, it declined and eventually died. It is now nothing more than a rotting cadaver. There is no life left in it. It does not meet the needs of mankind in the 21st century. It will be replaced.

Thomas et al...I would start going after the medieval animals that have hijacked this pure religion of yours if you want any thinking person to understand your point of view.

"Islam was, for a time, a mighty religion which brought mankind to a pinnacle of greatness, a height never before achieved in history."-Millington

Thomas, this is where you go wrong; all religions will NOT be replaced. Islam reached its "pinnacle" in the 7th Century. Where it remains.

You speak of "Religion" as though it is a malleable "object." TRUTH is not. There is a distinct difference between "religion" and TRUTH. TRUTH does not change, nor CAN it be changed. Islam is a "religion" of men, and can THEREFORE be refuted by men. Mr. Roberts is correct.

Truth has not "changed," and cannot be "replaced." THAT is what makes it TRUTH.

Mark-John, I believe Thomas is making a distinction between truth and religion.

Well Mark-John, I do know that Thomas is committed to the truth, and I believe the crux of his article deals with religious practices and their incompatibility with God's enduring message.

I am sure Thomas will correct me if I am wrong. He has done so in the past! :)

I don't believe he is, Kay. One cannot distinguish between the Christ, and Christianity.

This could be a fun discussion.

Mark-John, one can distinguish between Christ and the practice of Christianity.

If you are saying that, for example, those who "claim" the Christ, but see infanticide as "just one of many issue's," is the "practice" of Christianity, then I would not call that the "practice" of Christianity, but malpractice.

But then, that is not Christianity. Understand my point?

Oh, I understand your point, Mark-John. My point is that you should not be deceived by the false practice of religion, any religion, thinking it is the true message of God. God has a way of revealing the false "messengers" over time.

The challenge always is to see through the veil. God provides the vision for those who want to see. However those blinded by their own self interests and prejudices never understand the true meaning of His truth.

AGREED! Which is why I was compelled to write "Christian" Infanticide."

Thank You for discussing this with me, Kay.

Mark-John, I enjoy these kinds of conversations. Faith is very important to me.

Being imperfect, we can never know the perfect. I find that re-assuring somehow.

Hey Thomas,

Consider this chronology:

Abraham and God form a covenant which leads to the development of Israel, God's chosen people... The laws, rituals and rules of Judaism form as a tool God's people used to express their devotion and repentance.

Israel was God's chosen people, so violence in God's name made sense.

Over time many of God's people enter into their religious practices in order to find a way to manipulate God - to earn His favor. What started as a good honest opportunity to worship God became perverted by many (how many is impossible to know).

The books refered to as 'the prophets' in the Old Testament repeat the idea that God desires to see his people 'honor him with their hearts, not just their lips (paraphrase).' God was inviting his people to return to sincerity. The law was not the important thing - it was always about sincerity -

The law was simply a tool meant to aid people in honoring God, but when it became corrupted to the degree that it did, it became a proof that this kind of system does not work.

The Bible refers to the time of Jesus as "The culmination of the ages." Its like everything was leading up to His arrival. He came on the scene for the purpose of turning things in a new direction, to show us the freedom God intends for us to enjoy...

In the garden of Eden, it was a tree that ended the intimacy between God and humanity. Jesus, crucified on a tree, came to call us back into intimacy with God. In both scenarios Satan is lurking, tempting, trying to get the upper hand, but God prevails.

As Jesus' time on earth was coming to an end He tells His disciples that the Holy Spirit is coming to lead humanity, to be a comforter and teacher, to living in us and be with us always (John 14-16) - this is a pretty intimate relationship. It is what God created for us to enjoy when He first put Adam and Eve in the garden.

Jesus opens the way for all of humanity to come to God - each person is invited to come to God and accept Him as their father - the invitation is no longer just open to Israel. God's people are, the people of the entire world - we are all brothers and sisters belonging to God...

... in this way Jesus deligitmizes violence: Violence in God's name is no longer an option because we all potentially can become His. In a sense we all have a place in His Kingdom - we all belong to Him if we want to - so we can't be fighting and killing each other. Through Christ we are all brothers and sisters as far as God is concerned.

600 years later Islam emerges and leads people back into a law based system. The rules of Islam oppress the people, shutting down any possibility of freedom for people who accept Islam.

Islam rejects the way for peace provided by the life, death and ressurection of Jesus. In Islam we are not all brothers and sisters. Islam considers non-muslims to be infidels and worthy of being murdered. Islam responds to difficulty with fear and violence in order to control non-muslims.

I am not talking about all muslims. Many Muslims are not like this. THe Qur'an and Muslims who really follow it and follow the footsteps of Mohammed are the ones who I am talking about.

Many Muslims are wonderful people. Many of them are generous and kind, compassionate people - this doesn't come from Islam. It comes from the goodness within them that God put there as part of His creation and in those Muslims, Islam has not yet snuffed out that goodness...

Who was the angel in the cave? Mohammed thought it was Gabriel.... Many people I know including converts from Islam, believe the angel, if it was real, was Satan.

The Bible warns that Satan will come disquised as an angel of light. Islam and the Mormons both start with visits from angels of light.

Has Islam contributed anything?

It has led people away from the freedom God created them to enjoy.

My prayer is that people will read these words and they will protect them from the evil of the religion and trap of Islam.

Through Jesus, love wins. Hatred, violence and oppression are not His way.

Many people have done things out of hatred, violence and a desire to oppress and they did it in Jesus' name, but they were not operating in His way of living. They were operating in Satan's way of living.

Jesus liberates. Its not complicated if you want to be free. Pray. Ask for God to guide your steps, invite the Holy Spirit to lead you. God will open the way even where there seems to be no way. Regardless of what you believe, God loves you and wants to lead you back into intimacy with Him - to walk with Him in the garden.

Thank you Jeni: You are open-minded. I wish more people were like you.

Due to Islam, physicians were performing brain surgery in Alhambra, Spain when the kings of Europe (my personal ancestors) were abominably backward.