English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Isn't this what so many like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh and those on the right have been calling for? Are you satisfied with this call for peace? These scholars are considered among the mainstream within the Muslim community. They're not a fringe group or extremists, they represent the majority of Muslims who all want to see peace between Christians and Muslims.
Any thoughts?

2007-10-11 08:37:28 · 5 answers · asked by It's Your World, Change It 6 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071011/wl_nm/religion_scholars_dc_3

2007-10-11 11:00:14 · update #1

5 answers

That is not going to satisfy the likes of Coulter and O'Reilly. Anyone who looks at the facts knows the Islamic extremists are not typical of Muslims--the overwheling majority of whome are as peaceul and law-abiding as anyone else.

The pseudo-Christian right in the US, however, are just as extremist and fanatical as the terrorists. In either case, these fanatics simply hat anyone of the other faith and want to kill and destroy. The only difference between the two is the label.

2007-10-11 09:13:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I noticed that Iran, a country ruled by a theocracy was not mentioned as a signatory. This is a glaring ommision.

Khamenei is arguably the most important religious/secular leader in the Muslim world.

But at least this is a start of hopefully something a bit better. Signing their names is one thing, let's see what they preach from their pulpits before we begin the happy dance...

2007-10-11 11:35:02 · answer #2 · answered by aka DarthDad 5 · 1 0

Grace

Law Law vs Grace

Grace

2007-10-11 08:55:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The letter (amid copious Qur'an quotes) never mentions Qur'an 5:17, which says that those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers, or 4:171, which says that Jesus was not crucified, or 9:30, which says that those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God are accursed, or 9:29, which mandates warfare against and the subjugation of Jews and Christians. It would seem to me that verses like these would need to be addressed in some way, even if only to give them some benign interpretation, if there is to be any true and honest dialogue.



Dr Nazir-Ali, a leading Anglican expert on Islam, who was born in Pakistan, welcomed the Muslim scholars' deisire for a dialogue, but said that the appeal was based on the Muslim belief in the oneness of God.

"What I would say to that is that Christians uphold belief in one God vigorously but our understanding of the oneness of God is not the Muslim understanding," he told The Times. "We believe in God as source from whom everything is brought into being. Jesus is God's word and presence for us but is also human."

He added: "One partner cannot dictate the terms on which dialogue must be conducted. This document seems to be on the verge of doing that."

2007-10-11 08:46:04 · answer #4 · answered by thealligator414 3 · 0 3

are they still alive.

2007-10-11 10:12:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers