Pope Benedict on Islam

[Curious Christian]

<i>Rather than tackling the challenge of fundamentalist terrorism with a pithy remark packaged for the 9/11 anniversary or reaching for a John Paul-inspired sweeping gesture, the professor Pope went digging into his books. He went so far as to quote a 14th century Byzantine emperor´s hostile view of Islam's founder. "The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the Pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."</i>


Obvioulsy, nobody hear is going to agree with that statement. Understandably so. However, rather than just getting angry at it why not offer a rebuttal. The 14th Centry Byzantine emperor and Pope Benedict say that Muhammad brought nothing new that was good. They say that he only brought evil and inhuman things.


So. Where does the Pope err? What did Muhammad bring that was new to the world?

[Curious Christian]

As a side note...the Muslim reaction is making headlines.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5346480.stm

[Dan]

Bismillah


First that comes to mind:


A Scripture that has not been altered, not just in words but also meaning (ie, classical Arabic has been preserved) and pronounciation (ie tajweed- the science of how the Qur'an must be recited).


btw... I thought you said Catholicism was tainted, so why quote the pope or lend credence to what he says?

[Curious Christian]

Bismillah


First that comes to mind:


A Scripture that has not been altered, not just in words but also meaning (ie, classical Arabic has been preserved) and pronounciation (ie tajweed- the science of how the Qur'an must be recited).


btw... I thought you said Catholicism was tainted, so why quote the pope or lend credence to what he says?

I wasn't trying to throw this up at you to say, "Look! The Pope Is Right." This is a world leader who many people listen to. I just wanted to get an honest Muslim reaction.

[Dan]

Bismillah


Just curious...


I don't understand how the pope can feel justified in saying this anyway. Christianity believes that foretellings of Jesus' coming is all throughout the Old Testament. So Jesus is no bring anything "new" per se but just fulfilling a message.


Also, Catholicism is rife with polytheism (They consider it praying to saints but "a rose by any other name..."). Their saints have just replaced the pantheon of Roman and Greek theisms. There are even patron saints. How can a parallel between Greek and Roman polytheism not be drawn?


I mention this only to point out the fallacy of someone saying that one has bad breath when they are covered in... let's just say filth.


As for if the Prophet brought anything new... I listed one and there have been discussions on the board about the changes that he brought about. I am being brief because of my lack of time. I ask others to join in to help. If they do not then I will compile some when I have more time to spare.

[wel_mel_2]

Bismillah:

the Pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command "to spread by the sword the faith he preached".

First of all we would like to know <b>where did Muhammad pbuh say or commanded</b> to <i>“spread by the sword the faith he preached”</i>??

Obvioulsy, nobody hear is going to agree with that statement.

Not only <b>"here"</b>... but almost all well known and noted historians and great thinkers <b>"many of them are Non Muslims"</b> will disagree on this statement.


<b>EXAMPLES:</b>



<b>De Lacy O’Leary, in his the book "Islam at the cross road" (Page 8): he say:</b>

"History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated."

<b>The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book "Heroes and Hero worship", refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: </b>

"The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can."

<b>Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson rightly says:</b>

"People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day MUHAMMED (pbuh) was born".

<b>Humayun Kabir in 'The Indian Heritage,' 1955, p. 153.</b>

"Islam's democratic challenge has perhaps never been equaled by any other religious or social system. Its advent on the Indian scene was marked by a profound stirring of consciousness. It modified the basis of Hindu social structure throughout northern India.”

<b>Napolean Bonaparte as Quoted in Cherfils, ‘Bonaparte et Islam,’ Paris , France , pp. 105, 125.</b>

"Moses has revealed the existence of God to his nation. Jesus Christ to the Roman world, Muhammad to the old continent...
" Arabia was idolatrous when, six centuries after Jesus, Muhammad introduced the worship of the God of Abraham, of Ishmael, of Moses, and Jesus.The Ariyans and some other sects had disturbed the tranquility of the east by agitating the question of the nature of the Father, the son, and the Holy Ghost. Muhammad declared that there was none but one God who had no father, no son and that the trinity imported the idea of idolatry...


<b>"I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Qur'an which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness
."</b>

<b>George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.</b>

"If any religion had the chance of ruling over England , nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam."


<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="3723" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>"I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity."
"I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness:I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today."

<b>John William Draper, M.D., L.L.D., A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, London 1875, Vol.1, pp.329-330</b>

"Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia the man who, of all men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race . . . Mohammed . . "

<b>- Sarojini Naidu Lectures on “The Ideals of Islam.” </b>

[The] <b>sense of justice is one of the most wonderful ideals of Islam, because as I read in the Qur'an I find those dynamic principles of life, not mystic but practical ethics for the daily conduct of life suited to the whole world.</b>

Mahatma Gandhi, in 'YOUNG INDIA':he says

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind...I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life."

hope you enjoy this.


Salam


Wael.

</div></blockquote>

[Muslimah]

Bismillah


Here are some more:


http://www.islamsgreen.org/islams_green/20...they_said_.html


Till I dig a thread here on this same board that discusses smiliar issues INsh aAllah

[Curious Christian]

Also, Catholicism is rife with polytheism

No it isn't. That is like saying Muslims worship Mohammed when they worship Allah.


Read what Catholics have to say about praying to saints...rather then reading what anti-catholics have to say about it. That is why I am here on IslamMessage...I'd rather hear what Muslims have to say about Islam rather than what anti-Muslims have to say.


Also, you said that Jesus wasn't new? What about the teachings of Jesus? Love they enemy, help the poor, blessed are the meek etc. etc....much wisdom and human truth came from Christ.


Thanks for the quotes Muslimah. It's true that not all people think the same thing about Mohammed.

[Dan]

Bismillah


I think that I am more than qualified in speaking about Catholics because I used to be one. I went to twelve years of private Catholic school. My family is Catholic so I would not call myself "anti-Catholic."


In Cathlocism, saints are used an intermediaries to the intermediary (Jesus). People go on pilgrimages to the graves of saints. There are medallion, pictures, and prays to these saints. It is not called polytheism by them but when one devotes actions of worshp to more than one, then it is polytheism. If that is not polytheism, then what is polytheism in practice?


Love thy enemy, feed the poor, meekness is valued... sounds very similar to many eastern religions that are much older than Christianity.

[Curious Christian]

Love thy enemy, feed the poor, meekness is valued... sounds very similar to many eastern religions that are much older than Christianity.

Really? Please enlighten me.


Here, by the way, is the entire quote from the Pope.

I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both. It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor. The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between - as they were called - three "Laws" or "rules of life": the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur'an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point - itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole - which, in the context of the issue of "faith and reason", I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.
In the seventh conversation edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".


The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.

You attack Catholicism much in the same way that some would attack Islam for it's parallels with a certain pagan moon god and it's daughters. I could say that Islam, in that regard, smacks of polytheism. But I know that it isn't polytheism. You can say that Catholics are polytheists...but the they are not.


I am actually enrolled in the RCIA program to become Catholic as a matter of fact.


I'd be interested to hear how a Catholic can be lead to Islam. Maybe that is another thread for another day?