Did Mohammed have a sense of humour?
As a wave of Islamic fury encircles the globe in response to a film (yes, a film; and a rubbish one at that), it is worth considering what it means to 'offend' a religion or 'insult' a prophet. Not least because Terry and Sam, the two individuals specified in the banner above, are clearly about to be hunted down and murdered after the fashion of Theo van Gogh.
'Sam' is Sam Bacile (or Bassiel), the pseudonym of the film’s distinctly untalented and manifestly ignorant writer, director and producer, identified as Egyptian Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. And 'Terry' is Pastor Terry Jones (he of Qur’an-burning fame), who has probably had it coming for a while (and would have known precisely what he was letting himself in for).
The bizarre thing is that this film was made in America by someone obscure living in LA, but the rampaging Islamist hordes are attacking not only US embassies, but British and German ones, too. Any excuse, it seems, to tear into 'the West'. So flags are torn down, buildings torched, and an ambassador brutally murdered along with his staff, all in the name of the 'Religion of Peace'.
Apparently, the film portrays Mohammed as a womaniser, paedophile, warmonger and a fool. Thankfully, there are many Muslims who, while undoubtedly offended by this, are exhorting their co-religionists to respond reasonably and graciously. The considered reaction of the MCB in particular is to be welcomed.
And His Grace would exhort the mature and reasoned Muslim intellects of the world urgently to develop a 'Prophetology' - after the fashion of centuries of Christology - in order to investigate the true nature and person of Mohammed as recorded in the Qur'an and Hadith(s). Then we might discover, or come nearer to understanding - as we have with Jesus - who Mohammed was; what manner of prophet he claimed to be; what his relationship was with Allah; how he was born and raised; and what he means not only to the diverse world if Islam but to non-Muslims the world over.
Did Mohammed laugh? Did he have a sense of humour?
If so, wouldn't he simply smirk at Sam and Terry, tell them to grow up, and then get on with preaching his message of Allah and salvation through submission? Or are the thugs and violent hordes emulating another prophet; a different prophet; a false prophet?
There is an unbridgeable gulf between the God who laughs (Ps 2:4) and the one in whom there is no humour. According to Islamic scholars, Zabur is the holy book of King David - the Book of Psalms of the Old Testament. They anthropomorphise God, and state quite clarly that He laughs. If God has a sense of humour, so must his prophet.
But protests over the Danish cartoons which satirised Mohammad, combined with images of Muslims criticising frivolous aspects of Western culture, leave the distinct impression Islam and comedy are incompatible – it is haram. The most concerning thing for Muslims is that those who dare to express humour or satirise aspects of their religion are invariably derided by their co-religionists who hold to the Ayatollah Khomeini rather trenchant school of Islam. He once said: "An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humour in Islam. There is no fun in Islam."
It is time for Muslims to laugh in the face of this, and to greet Sam and Terry not with bloody threats and hatred, but a beer, a joke and a smile.
posted byArchbishop Cranmer at 1:17 pm Permalink
72 Comments:
Cranmer said, "It is time for Muslims to laugh in the face of this, and to greet Sam and Terry not with bloody threats and hatred, but a beer, a joke and a smile."
...what, and perhaps a pork pie?!
What have you been smoking, Cranmer? Muslims grow up? Do you mean like leave the 7th century? Never going to happen in this life! Best they all pass on to the next life and give it a try there where they will find it much warmer than the sand box in arabia.
Cranmer I fear for your dhimmification. The MCB statement is absolutely worthless because it is perfectly acceptable for muslims to lie to non-muslims: taqiyaa. If you never know when someone is lying to you, as their religion permits it, then anything they say has no value. See: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2012/09/the-muslim-brotherhoods-doubletalk for a good example of taqiyaa in action.
Remember Matthew 7:16
His grace wrote,
If so, wouldn't he simply smirk at Sam and Terry, tell them to grow up, and then get on with preaching his message of Allah and salvation through submission?
Possibly, but he didn't always act like that. For example (and there are others), see number 369 here
http://www.sahih-bukhari.com/Pages/Bukhari_5_59.php
with more details summarised here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ka'b_ibn_al-Ashraf
I do not know Islam well enough to know whether this sort of behaviour is more typical of its false prophet than simply smirking, but it does suggest that the answer to your question is not as simple as you imply. And some Muslims, such as those holding the signs above, clearly believe that his treatment of this particular critic is something that should be emulated.
I wonder what the MCB would be saying if there was an Islamic Majority in the UK. Islam sounds very different once it is in power. Is this statement then just a beard presented to the West? Much like the Palestinians talk about co-existing with Israel only when useful idiot westerners are listening? But let's assume good faith on their part. Does the MCB actually speak for anyone? Do the mobs in Libya actually care what the MCB is saying? Does MCB have any influence, or is it a soothing placebo to western ears desperate for a reformed Islamic religion?
It's nice that a Muslim group in the UK has issued such a statement. But such statements are meaningless. They will only mean something when they come out of Islamic countries in the Mid-East. That is where the practice of Islam is actually being defined. There you will find the center of gravity of Islam. The dog wags the tail. The tail does not wag the dog.
carl
His Grace. Did Mohammed have a sense of humour?
Most likely he did. But one can think of two attention seekers who will probably never laugh again...
Wishing you a swift end fellows. Let's hope it will be as humane as possible under the circumstances... {AHEM}
Unfortunately as you know, a lot of Muslims do not want to know the truth about their religion. When this was explored recently in a C4 documentary,which was very objective,the programe presenter received death threats ,and the programe was not repeated,which was what was originally intended.
So it is not OK to offend muslims but is is perfectly OK to offend Christians in a Christian Country, what hypocrisy.
Yes, Mrs. King.
Now that they (and their euro patrons) are here, this is no longer a Christian country.
Presently, I've also noticed that, when the medja choose to photograph her with clothes on, Di's daughter-in-law is wearing mozzie costume. Now that's presumably a mark of respect because she's visiting one of their kingdoms. But how come the ones who've chosen to live here don't doff their headdresses in respect of our culture and customs?
Naomi King: "So it is not OK to offend muslims but is is perfectly OK to offend Christians in a Christian Country, what hypocrisy."
Hardly Christian. You're a minority, a small one at that. Our State has a religion wrapped up in it; a legacy of our history and held in place with a cleverly distributed form of constitution. That's the extent of it no matter how much you may want to have a tyranny of the minority, so to speak.
I don't know about Mohammed's sense of humour but if the members of the MCB have one then the lyrics of the song My Sharia Amour should raise a smile. The song was inspired by the Moslem protests against the Miss World contest in Nigeria 10 years ago.
My Sharia Amour
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3584668/My-Sharia-Amour.html
Many years ago in the late 50s or early 1960s there was a song entitled "Itsy, bitsy, teenie, weenie, yellow polka-dot bikini."
Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka Dot Bikini
Lyrics - Brian Hyland
http://ww.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/lyrics2/nov_itsybitsy.html
I wonder if there is a Middle-Eastern equivalent of the Eurovision Song Contest? If so perhaps someone should write a song about a girl wearing a tent-sized, flapping, black burka. Since there is nothing in the Qu'ran about wearing burkas there could not possibly be any objections to such a song, could there?
Naomi, this has never been a Christian country in the sense that Christians have ever been the majority of the population.
However the majority of many middle eastern countries are Islamic and unless there is a big change in our immigration policies and unless our native population start to have a lot more children then it coming here and then perhaps our grandchildren will all be subject to the peace of Islam!
I though Muhammeds idea of chopping off the hand they eat with, in order to make them eat with the hand they wipe their arse with, shows a wicked sence of humour
For all those saying that it is impossible for Islam to develop and become more tolerant and reasonable over time perhaps they should consider where Christianity was just 1300 years after its commencement.
Much as I dislike the Islamofascists and believe they need to be dealt with firmly. I very much doubt that the way to do so is to declare war on the whole of a major world religion if only because this has been tried before and didn't work. Perhaps a rather more subtle Plan B may be required.
Oh yes, ‘the peace of Islam’. Our reward from our duplicitous politicians it now seems. They can't identify with Christianity no longer apparently.
Must say the MCB seem well behaved. WHY comes to mind...
Incidentally, most amusing bone...
I say, that’s damn decent of you Tory Lad, giving Islam the eternal ‘another chance’...
Could'nt agree more tory boys. Some Christians, especially the leadership of the established church 700 years and even less ago were the worst enemies of Christianity.
Trouble is the real Islam have always and still use those same tactics.
I once heard from a well respected Christian friend of mine in the States, that he had a conversation with a muslim friend of his, that went like this.
Christian. "How would it affect our friendship if jihad were called against the United States".
Muslim friend. "I regret that I would have to kill you"
Paul T: Naomi, this has never been a Christian country in the sense that Christians have ever been the majority of the population. That is a very sweeping, omniscient statement. Why do you expect your audience to take your point seriously?
Could you offer any firsthand evidence about the history of Christianity in Britain? Have you knowledge of any of the surviving primary sources? Indeed, have you knowledge of any of authoritative sources that explicate Christianity in Britain, be they primary or secondary?
Otherwise....
My apologies to the Muslim friend, I misquoted him. He said. "Unless you convert to Islam, I regret I would have to kill you"
This comment has been removed by the author.
In the Geert Wilders trial, Professor Jansen, an eminent Arabist, was a defence witness. The judge, who had insisted on the prosecution against the advice of the regular prosecutors, tried to nobble him by an engineered meeting at a private dinner party. Jansen's evidence was so explosive of the multi-culti myth.
In short, he said that there were moderate Muslims (i.e. Muslims who were not fully observant of all the faith's requirements). But there could never be such a thing as moderate Islam because the faith was scripturally determined and any divergence from that was apostasy, meriting death.
The attempted perversion of the course of justice by a judge in a normally law abiding, neighbouring Western democracy, was hardly reported here. The trial was stopped and re-started with a new panel of judges.
Some years ago, I had a long conversation with a very well-spoken Muslim missionary. When I said that he ought to respect the law of the land, he said "For a Muslim, that is oppression". When I made the point again, he said "It is not your country, it is Allah's".
With the collapse of Christianity to the extent that even His grace's present successor advocates the acceptance of Shariah law as the law of the land, we don't stand a chance.
This film is dire indeed but the best thing for Muslims to do is ignore it. By working themselves up into screaming mobs they just play into the hands of those who will say "I told you so". Far better to keep quiet and ignore the moron who made the film.
BBC radio 4 news. Number of deaths ‘attributed’ to the film, 20
Inspector...
Surely that should read 'attributed' to Islamic hate 20 ?
"Paul T: Naomi, this has never been a Christian country in the sense that Christians have ever been the majority of the population. "
Paul T if this was so can you explain why Churchill so proudly recorded, God had brought us to that point in our history when "there was no kingdom in the realm where heathen religions and practices now prevailed. The whole Island was now Christian."
I suspect this statement, though somewhat overdue, will carry rather more weight with many Muslims than that of the MCB.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iMVUBNAEb5gyYaruZTf2d33h1Tcg?docId=CNG.a99026c3455803d7421133e213c566d2.3a1
Humor must have an element of truth or irony to make people laugh.
Among themselves Muslims must laugh at the everyday situations in life like the rest of humanity does when we hear something amusing or ironic. They simply must. Humans are the only creatures that I know of who can laugh.
Do monkeys laugh, AVI? They sometimes look like they do when they are screaming and chattering happily on Tarzan movies and in National Geographic movies about the jungle on cable TV.
I did know a dog that smiled a lot once.But I don't know why he did this.
Are there comedy clubs in cities in Iran, Afghanistan, Saudia Arabia, and other places where Islamic Law of Sharia is the law of the land. If so I would like to know and learn exactly what makes crowds of radical Muslims or average Muslim laugh. Are there comedy shows on TV in the Islamic world? If so will someone please tell me and discribe the acts.
I've often thought since 911 some Muslims, like al Qaeda and the Muslim brotherhood Fanatics, a fun filled evening full of laughs is sitting on a Turkish carpet with family and friends, eating hummus and other Middle Eastern goodies for a snack, and watching DVDs of the WTC towers crashing down on 911 over and over and over. When the little Muhammeds and Fatimas get sleepy watching that and cheering people jumping from the 110th floors they are sent to bed so the adults can watch a juicy video of the American journalist Daniel Pearl or some other poor Western victim being slowly beheaded. They really get a belly laugh at the Daniel Pearl beheading DVD because he was Jewish.
Al Quaeda or Muslim Brotherhood fanatics having a beer at a pub? Never happen. They can't drink alcohol as we all know and as far as I can tell they can never relax. Say something to offend them and you will be picking your head up off the pub floor.
If you could ever lure al Quaeda members to a pub make sure it's not called called the "Boar's Head".
Inspector
So long as these retrogrades kill themselves that's fine by me.
I know that's not a Christian thing to say but Jesus never dealt with Muslims. If he had the tone of his message might have changed somewhat.
His Grace asks, 'Or are the thugs and violent hordes emulating another prophet; a different prophet; a false prophet?'
Indeed. But the thugs and violent hordes are merely perpetuating the behaviour of Mahommed himself; acting the image of their idol, as it were. It follows that in the eyes of the Ummah they are acting righteously.
In the view of this communicant, we are doing ourselves a favour by provoking Islam in such a way that the Muslims are forced to confront their own demons. Only then will the best of them see the need for change.
I can only shake my head and recommend that his Grace talk no more of Islam. In is unseemly to speak from total ignorance of a subject. Still your Grace could seize the day yet and inform and educate himself about the heavy burdens Allah lays on his charges. The information is easy to find and it is sadly surprising how many are too weak to delve in the dark tomes of the Qur'an the Haddith and the Sunnah. Your Grace would be shocked to know that the atrocious film trailor that was so disturbing and untrue is based on the Sunnah and if shoddily made in accuratly portrays the life of the Phofet. Now smiling Muslims and smiling Muslim apologists will tell you wonderful things about Islam and the gullible and dhimmified soul will be very happy to believe them. That is usually the first mistake an enquirer will make. Don't be lazy your Grace , you need to dig it out yourself. I remember the icy chill that ran down my spine when I realized what is being hidden from the people. It is a tough slog and you need some preparation to attack the texts. There are many web sites that can help you approach it. You won't have to cover everything as the darkness is straight forward and your soul will be sickened relatively quickly if you have half a mind.
If you persist in your fantasy of an Anglican Islam you are doomed. But on the plus side, a good Muslim mob would never burn you as Mohammed forbids the burning of Islams enemies. They might however give you the American Ambassador in Libyas fate and rape you before during and after your death.
@tory boys never grow up said...
"For all those saying that it is impossible for Islam to develop and become more tolerant and reasonable over time perhaps they should consider where Christianity was just 1300 years after its commencement."
@Paul T said...
"Could'nt agree more tory boys." [sic]
What complete pants you two, that is absolutely no defence at all for the backward destructive nature of Islam. May I suggest you two look at the ways of the world 1300 years after Christianity's commencement and the present...a tad different.
@John Magee said...
"I know that's not a Christian thing to say but Jesus never dealt with Muslims. If he had the tone of his message might have changed somewhat."
Good point! he may have said 'do unto them as they want to do unto you, but do it harder and do it first'.
John Magee
I did see a TV comedy show in the Middle East once.It was in Arabic but I mostly watched the channel with English language programs.
I noticed on his visit to Lebanon, the Pope calling for a separation of church and state in middle eastern states.
In response to Naomi and non mouse regarding the question, "Has this ever been a Christian Country".
It all depends on how you are going to define the term.
If you mean that the majority have been baptised as infants into one of the leading denominations, some of whom live their lives exactly as they please, then perhaps there has been a time when indeed this has indeed been a Christian Country.
If you mean that the Laws of the Land have been developed in such a way as to try to follow the teachings of the Good Book, by leaders intent on doing the same, then there have no doubt been times when you could call this and many others, Christian Countries.
However, if you would define it more narrowly as a place where a good proportion of individuals try to follow the teaching of Christ when He summarised the Law and said, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and your neighbour as yourself", then that also might be classed as a Christian country.
Manfarang
Can you explain the gist of the comedy shows you watched on Middle East TV? Do they laugh at the same silly things in life the rest of us do?
Are the capable of laughing at themselves?
Would Muslims in the Middle East find Laurel and Hardy, W.C Fields and Mae West, Benny Hill, Keeping Up Apperances, Eddie Izzard, Dame Edna Everage, or Allah forbid....Jerry Lewis funny?
I wish Dame Edna Everage could have interviewed Osama bin Laden before his trip to visit 72 virgins. Perhaps she could have a humerous interview soon with Iranian President Ahmainejad and play a few jokes on him?
Correction: Ahmadinejad
Span Ows
I think that you will find that what is stated as one ridiculous generalisation can be dismissed by similar generalisations. That said there are not a few here whose Christianity deos appear to have progressed much beyond the 1300s and the days of the Crusades. If you want modern day evidence that Islamofacists attacking embassies are not the whole of Islam you might wish to look at what the Saudi Mufti has said on the matter - see my previous link. Quite frankly, I wish both sides would drop all this God stuff which clearly has just led to wars between two "peace loving" religions for many years - but I'm enough of a realist to see that this will not happen, so I reserve my right to laugh at both sides and just condemn unacceptable violence whatever its quarter.
There are no jokes in most religions, actually ....
Think of murdering bastards like Dominic, for instance....
@ John Magee said...
I know that's not a Christian thing to say but Jesus never dealt with Muslims. If he had the tone of his message might have changed somewhat.
Do you think he would have said "Love your enemies, as long as they are not Muslims"?
Indeed, the Holy Prophet (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) would laugh and joke often. He enjoyed playing with children, especially his grandsons Hasan and Husayn. The Prophet allowed his grandson to climb atop his back while he was in prostration as reported by Abu-Na’im on the Authority of Abu Bakr saying,
“The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) was leading us in prayer. Hasan, who was still a child, would come to him while he was in prostration, and sit on his back or sometimes on his neck. The Prophet (s.a.w.) would lift him tenderly. When the prayer was finished, they (the Muslims) asked him: ‘O Messenger of Allah! You are doing to this boy what you do not do to another person?’ ‘He is my basil,’ he replied.”"
The Prophet’s playfulness was also coupled with a beautiful sense of humor. He smiled often and would make jokes with members of his community. For example,
“Once, an old woman came up to him and asked for paradise. He said, “Old women do not enter the paradise.” The woman started crying. As she started leaving the room, the Prophet, showing his subtle sense of humor, stopped her and said, “Old women will become young before entering the heaven.” (Tirmadhi)
Another recording of the Prophet’s life describes him laughing and joking with another man. Thehadith says,
“A man broke his fast (intentionally) during Ramadan. The Messenger of Allah (saws) commanded him to emancipate a slave or fast for two months, or feed sixty poor men. He said, “I cannot provide.”
The Apostle said, “Sit down.” Thereafter, a huge basket of dates was brought to the Messenger of Allah. He said, “Take this and give it as charity.” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, there is no one poorer than I.” The Messenger of Allah thereupon laughed so that his canine teeth became visible and said, “Eat it yourself.”
The Prophet brought an uplifting spirit that penetrated the hearts of people. There is a story mentioned about the Prophet and a common merchant that tells us just a little about the spirit he carried,
“One of his companions was Zahir, who used to trade in metal objects. Once the Prophet was passing by the bazaar, he saw Zahir and playfully grabbed him from behind and said, “Will anyone buy this slave?” Zahir laughed and said, “O Messenger of Allah, whoever buys this slave will be in loss.” The Prophet smiled and said, “In Allah’s eyes, your value is high.”
On another occasion,
“Abu Bakr [radi Allahu 'anhu] went to do business in Busra, and with him were Nu’ayman and Suwaybit ibn Harmalah [radi Allahu 'anhum], both of whom were present at Badr. Suwaybit was in charge of the food on the journey, and Nu’ayman said to him, “Feed me!” Suwaybit said, “Not until Abu Bakr comes.” Nu’ayman was a fun-loving man with a sense of humour, so he went to some people who had brought livestock with them, and said, “Will you buy a sturdy Arab slave from me?” They said, “Yes.” He said, “He has a big mouth, and he may tell you that he is a free man. If that means that you do not want to take him, then forget the matter, and do not cause trouble for me with him.” They said, “No problem, we will buy him.” So they bought him for ten young she-camels. Nu’ayman brought the animals back, and told the people: “There he is!” Suwaybit said: “I am a free man!” They said, “He has already told us about you,” and put a rope around his neck and led him away. Then Abu Bakr came, and was told what happened. He and his companions went and returned the animals and took Suwaybit back. They told the Prophet [salla Allahu 'alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam] what had happened, and he and his Sahabah would laugh about the story for a year afterwards.”
In summary, the Holy Prophet, the perfect man (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) was an image of admiration. He was clear and resolute in matters of importance and obtained the highest character as the Qur’an tells us,
“Verily you are of a high and nobel character.” (68:004)
But he also was a dear friend and beloved companion. His sense of humor brought warmth and love to those who were around him. He never passed someone without a smile and his high achievement of good manners have become the example and traditions of Muslims the world over. This is the Prophet Muhammad (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and his tradition of good humor.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Good Lord. Mohammed made out to be almost human. What damn trickery is this ?
tory boys never grow up said...(16 Sept 09:17)
Agreed!
@ OIG
What damn trickery is this ?
Damn trickery is what it is! I'm sure you could put together almost half a book of such niceties...tempered by blood, death and destruction in the other half.
Tory boys
The Crusades were one of the few times the Church put steel in it's spine and defended it's self interests in the face of the onslaught by the armies of Islamic Jihad. These armies of the "prophet" Mohammed conquered the Middle East in the centuries after 700's AD destroying thousands of churches and shrines including almost of the ones in Jerusalem. Most importantly the Church of the Holy Sepulcre in 1009. All Christian pilgrimages to Jerusalem ended.
Christians were given the choice to die, convert to Islam, or pay the jizya tax (Islamic extortion "tax" of Jews and Christians) and remain 3rd class citizens in the new majority Muslim nations of the Middle East
We have over and over apologized to Muslims in modern times for any excesses during that era. How about Islam's representatives start apologizing to us as a gesture of good will for the crimes against Christians in the last century. Never mind the last 1,400 years our people have endured persecution and death from Islamic Jihad. I'm talking about the 2 millions Armenian Orthodox Christians and almost 1 million Greek Orthodox Christians the Muslims Turks killed between 1919 and 1922. Then there are the almost one million Orthodox Christian Serbs the Muslim Nazi SS divisions (yes they existed, Muslims from the Balkans fighting for the Nazi's in WW II) helped the Nazi German SS kill in Serbia in 1944. Those are just a few examples from the last century of Islamic genocide of Christians and others and Jihad continues today in the Southern Sudan, Nigeria, Egypt, Paksistan, Kosovar, etc.
Do you live in a majority Christian Western country? If so is life there still like it was in the 12the century? I doubt it.
The reality today is most of the Islamic world still exists in the mindset of the 7th century. We are watching the latest installment of endless Muslim hatred of us "infidels' on our TV's this past week.
Inspector
I agree. It's damn tricky of those Muslims to make it seem like a mere man, a total nobody, they call the "prophet" Mohammed seem like he's the Son of God by the way they carry on when they imagine he has in any way been "insultd" by "infidels".
Islam is the biggest magic act and bag full of tricks in human history.
John Magee
As you have demonstrated the Crusades clearly didn't work - what is you Plan B?
I have no intention of apologising to anyone who commits genocide what ever their religion - but not all Muslims are guilty of genocide and there have been long periods of history where Muslims co-existed relatively happily with other religions e.g. a third of the population of Baghdad used to Jewish - while now only 7 remain, and even they are in danger since being named by Wikileaks ( a crime for which Assange should be held for account).
The fact that the Saudi mufti is now clearly condemning the writers should at least demonstrate that matters in Islamic countries are not quite as one sided as you like to make out. What is seen as progressive in Islamic societies may not be as progressive as we like here in the West - but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be acknowledged and encouraged (at the same time as stamping on the clearly regressive) - that way might lie some progress, given that I very much doubt that elimination of a major world religion is on the cards - much as you (or I for that matter) would like to see it happen.
Tory Lad. History shows that ‘progression’ is purely a western concept. The West progresses and other races are carried along, but only if they wish. For example, much of Africa still exists in the stone age, ‘progression’ we find there is wearing Indian cotton clothes rather than running around naked. If India stopped trading in them, the population would revert to nakedness. There has been NO progression in Islamic countries worth speaking of, has there not ? Take the west our of the equation, and the rest of the world will be like it is now, a thousand years in the future...
I see that in the media and blogosphere there are a lot of people blaming various atheists for not shutting up about Islam, and hence inflaming the mobs.
However, when one thinks someone's beliefs are both wrong and dangerous then there is no necessity I can see to let them pass over in silence, particularly, as HG so effectively points out, there is a lot of hypocrisy about.
Claiming that people should not criticise Islam to avoid hurting feelings, while so many Islamists, including many in power, claim the right to be maximally insulting regarding other beliefs, religious or otherwise?
Nah!
Nor should threats of violence be a deterrent to freedom to criticise.
David B
Paul T @15 September 17:45
"Christian. "How would it affect our friendship if jihad were called against the United States".
Muslim friend. "I regret that I would have to kill you""
"Multi-Faith Culture - The sin of Solomon".
"Solomon brought back into the land the heathen gods and forms of worship which Almighty God had long since driven out and in so doing, Solomon undid what God had done, all down the centuries in the history of the country to ensure that the nation worshipped Him, the one true God and Him alone.
God was exceedingly angry, for by bringing back these heathen religions, Solomon caused his country to change its outlook and attitude towards religion entirely. This was a terribly retrograde step which Solomon took which had dreadful consequences.
The Holy Bible is quite specific that God called this sin, it was evil in the sight of the Lord. The danger was that the people would turn their hearts away from the living God after other gods and that is precisely what happened.
Solomon deliberately disobeyed God's first two commandments, so serious did God consider this disobedience that he said behold I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and hand it over to others !
Do we see parallels ?
Jesus Christ came that we might have life and life to the fullest,He said...'The thief comes only in order to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have and enjoy life, and have it in abundance (to the full, till it overflows)..." - John 10: 10.
Mohammed seems to do exactly the reverse of Jesus Christ ..every where Islam exists there is death.
There is no 'humour' in senseless death.... only loss, grief..despair.
Naomi, did Solomon exist? The archaeological record suggests not, at least as reported.
Does it matter to you whether he did or not?
David B
This comment has been removed by the author.
David B:
I'd be very wary about overly relying on an absence in the archaeological record to prove anything. So often with both history and archaeology it's the great yawning gaps and silences in the records that get academics weak at the knees, precisely because they can be made to do all kinds of work.
The issue with Solomon usually comes down to an absence of evidence regarding an empire the scale recorded in the Bible - but made murkier by the fact that many of the central avenues of criticism focus on what might loosely be called the economic data in Scripture, by pointing out that the sums Solomon is described as receiving are unrealistic given the (patchy) archaeological record - not least because many of the sites remain unexplored due to their ongoing religious significance.
I've always thought that rather like the records of the rich men "rebuilding" the walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah - that it is perfectly possible to maintain that the records are genuinely related to original chronicles but nevertheless work on more than a literal level. Rather like Government White Papers. Alarm bells should surely be ringing on that regard when one notes the remarkable number of religiously-significant numbers used to describe Solomon's gifts.
That's really my problem with many of the lines of anti-Biblical history that variously assert the non-existence of figures (up to and including Christ). It's about as reductive, and in many ways as naive as a literal reading of political documents and chronicles. And so often, it's simply used as a lazy way of discrediting the faithful rather than actually engaging with a historical question of substance (Dawkins loves this tactic).
Wouldn't want to have a scepticism of the gaps now would we? :)
John Magee
I only watched one show so I cannot say much about Arab comedy shows other than to say they exist.
Humour tends to be very cultural depending on the nuances of language other than slapstick which is of course visual.
Charlie Chaplin and Mr Bean have worldwide audiences.
Inspector
Which African and Middle Eastern countries have you lived in?
Tory boys
Hip Hip Hooray for the Christian Crusaders !!!!
The Crusades kept Islamic Jihad at bay in the what is now Lebanon, Israel, and parts of Syria. The Knights Templar built a series of castle fortresses that protected the Holy Land for centuries. That was a good thing.
Their protection allowed the renewal of Christian pilgrimages to the Holy land and the rebuilding of the churches and shrines destroyed by the armies of Jihad. Another good thing from a Christian point of view.
I am a Catholic Christian and I care about all Christians and our interests. I could never hate my own faith and Western Civilization so much that I would lower myself, like so many on the left and even some stupid Christians today, to make excuses for Islam's never ending brutality and hatred. Islam and Islamic Jihad's endless hatred is based on the Koran and the Hadiths. It has, since the life of Mohammed, sworn to kill or convert all Jews and Christians and others.
Jesus's message in the Gospels is love (caring unselfishly for others. Especially strangers)), forgiveness, and redepmtion. He wasn't a warrior and killer like Mohammed.
Why was it wrong for Christians to stand up and fight Islamic Jihad back then for our self interests? The armies of Islamic Jihad were attacking Christian nations, Christian Egypt is the first example, after Mohammed died in the 700's AD not vice versa.
They still are.
Are you aware Egyptian Army officers who supported the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated the one truely great Egyptian politician of modern times the Coptic Christian Anwar Sadat in October 1981? Sadat, along with Israeli PM Manachem Begin, signed the Egypt - Israel Peace Treaty in 1979 which created a period of peace between Israel and Egypt until this year when the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt.
Hosni Mubarak, Sadat's successor, may have been a dictator. He supressed the Muslim Brotherhood and honored the Egyptian - Israel Peace Treaty for 32 years.
That has all ended.
Manfarang. Firmly located in England.
If you go back far enough, the ‘west’ was Greece and Rome. Thus, the inhabitants of this country were direct beneficiaries of the progression that came from those places when everyone here lived in hill forts. The latest beneficiaries of western progression being the far East. Before that Africa, but the indigenous there didn’t want to know…
Inspector
The difficulty today is that most people under 50 can't imagine a world beyond their own lives that existed before 1970. Even with access to the internet and the wonderful cable TV channels that offer them history programs to watch at their leisure 24/7/365 most are clueless about the past. This makes the left happy because the less people know the easier they can be re-educated by the media and the Marxists at our universities on how to hate their own culture and history. At least the leftist versions.
You and I remember the WW II generation because they were our fathers and mothers time frame as adults over 25 years old before 1945 and we even knew those from the WW I generation. I do. All of my grandparents were born in the 1880's so that is part of my perspective of history from real people I knew personally who were alive before the First World War. I assume you must have the same perspective too.
I hope we are not alone here with this living past as part of our lives.
Inspector
Part of that progression in the West was the use of paper and maybe gunpowder.
Where did these and many other inventions come from? China.
John Magee
I always watched All Our Yesterdays on TV and I have spoken to some Boer War veterans.
Manfarang
You have a living link with past.
To know or meet these people and ask them to share their memories about their experiences is a sort of time travel.
It is important for all of us to meet and talk with and have our children and grandchildren meet the WW II hero's who are dying at the rate of thousands each day. By 2020 few will be left.
Manfarang. You are confusing invention with progression. The Arabs invented glass.
Naomi, did Solomon exist? The archaeological record suggests not, at least as reported.
Does it matter to you whether he did or not?
David B @ 21:57
Of course he did, who else built the Temple
Mrs King:
What David B refers to is a large gap in our archaeological knowledge - particularly regarding the Temple Mount, which has never properly been investigated. Mostly because it is a politically and religiously sensitive site. But one only has to have a cursory knowledge of the site's history to realise that there have been successive and deliberate attempts to efface the Jewish presence there (first by the Romans, later by the Christianised Romans, and then by the Muslims). Consequently, added to the fact that very little investigation has even been attempted, it is uncertain how much will actually have survived.
This means that most of the historic and archaeological inquiries into the period have had to focus on the rest of the city and the surrounding region.
Thinking about suggestions for Islam and Muslims to reform reminds me of Rowan Atkinson's classic discussion with Tony Robinson as Badrick about the origins of world war 1 in the final episode of Blackadder. Perhaps the finest moment in British TV comedy.
Discussing the failure of the 'balance of terror' plan to prevent the outbreak of war, Blackadder says 'There was one teensy weensy little problem with the plan'
'What was that sir?'asks Baldrick
Atkinson's character replies 'It was bollocks.'
There is a teensy weensy little problem with Islam. It is a false religion based on a false revelation by a false prophet. He may or not have been a sex maniac, he was certainly an organiser of violence and an antichrist. Read Galatians 1:8 where Paul wrote 'even if we or an angel from heaven came with a different gospel, let them be accursed!' Then Muhammad comes along with a different gospel he said he got from an angel. That 'gospel' denies all the key specifics of the Christian faith wether Catholic, Orthodox or Reformed. Muhammed is therefore by any possible evaluation an antichrist. How can we say that politely? Silence=dhimmitude.
Islam teaches its adherents to blame their failures on the success of others (no wonder socialists like it!) and works relentlessly for world domination. Our ancestors understood this, if they hadn't fought the Crusades to restrain Jihad then Europe would have been fully Islamicised centuries ago-no Reformation, no Enlightenment, no Renaissance, no Industrial Revolution. Just Allah O Akbar.
That's our future unless we wake up and wise up to the stealth Jihad. The secularisers who say there is no difference between religions are in fact anti-Christian Jihad enablers. They need to read some history and look at the demographic trends.
But maybe the innocent blood of seven million abortions has finally overwhelmed God's patientce and he has placed a strong delusion on our rulers to cause them to invite in the nemesis of their corrupt society. Watch and pray.
Your Grace,
Wouldn't the laughter in Psalm 2:4 be considered a derisive laugh, more like "What fools these mortals be" rather than a good old belly laugh?
If so, then I can picture Muhammed deriding the current crop of his followers, but if I publish the sketch, they might come after me!
I know God laughs.
He laughs when we make plans.
"Behead those who say Islam is a violent Religion...'
Perhaps apocryphal... But such a legend was reported as being seen as a placard at a Muslim rally...
I wonder if Muslims go in for irony?
Do you perhaps mean this?
Peter and Anonymous – very funny indeed, though I doubt the individual carrying the placard is on his way to the Comedy Club.
Where is Omar Hussein, who quoted so eloquently the fun filled and peace loving nature of his prophet? Does he not have anything to say about what is happening in the world now, rather than 1500 years ago?
Elwin Daniels
Your post is disturbing on a number of levels. It is certainly food for thought.
How does a Christian confront and overcome modern day Islam? You seem to be suggesting physical violence against all Muslims because Islam is a false religion of violence. I agree it is false and at its core preaches violence. However, such a policy would escalate violence, harden all Muslims against the 'West' and, after all the inevitable killing, I'm not sure it would succeed.
A reasoned, rational and objective look at Muhammed and his message is surely more likely to be successful. That said, this cannot be sponsored by those outside of Islam. Look what happened when Pope Benedict attempted!
Islam has to examine itself internally. Whilst the Muslim mob are united around a common cause - their perceptions of Zionist Israel and the hostile Christian West - this is unlikely. Openly insulting and belittling their 'Prophet' incites Muslims and strengthens rather than weakens their religion.
Maybe your right and God is running out of patience with humanity. Nevertheless, we still have to do our best until Christ returns.
Islam has been restrained over the centuries by the Hand of God and human resistance to its spread Westward.But as God is increasingly rejected by the West Islam will grow and spread.The last line of resistance is the true church of Jesus Christ who alone can wield the spiritual weapons necessary for survival.A 'picture' of this is revealed in the Bible.Exodus 17:11-13
'11 As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. 12 When Moses’ hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up—one on one side, one on the other—so that his hands remained steady till sunset. 13 So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword.'
The weapons of our warfare are not carnal!.
We must 'attack' spiritual forces with' spiritual weapons'.That is why the Crusades failed to do anything but cause needless death and suffering. We must learn the lessons of History for our battle is NOT against flesh and blood.
When we enter this spiritual battle we must don' spiritual armour'this is described in 'Ephesians 6.'
The Armor of God
10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.
Most of the armour is for defence but the weapon of attack is the Sword of the Spirit The Word of God we must Preach and Pray the Word of God anything else is is liable to cause more problems than it solves.
Post a Comment
<< Home