I do think that it is useful for us to be aware of organisations like this one that Barnabas fund have brough to our attention.
I'm not on reflection surprised to hear of it and it is worth noting that we have arguably seen the effects of its work in the kind of apologetics we hear from Muslims and Muslim organisation. The have every right to do this. The interesting thing is to note that there are Christians and Christian organisations of various stripes with parallel aims. In fact, I imagine most ideological groups, religious or otherwise, have similar groups.
Because of that, I am a little less happy about the feel or tone of this report; it has a sense of militancy, perhaps of scare-mongering as if they have no right to be doing this. Perhaps I'm being a bit oversensitive. Of course, it is useful to know, but it's not as if we don't have Christians doing the same and aiming to counter the propaganda (for that is what it is).
I'd be happier too, if Christian organisations would be as concerned by the messages of TNC's and the like who have well-funded departments to do just the same kind of thing for MacDonald's, Exxon, Nestle etc etc and probably have more malign influence on public awareness than this group.
That said, I'm not a Christian living under an Islamic regime. So if you also look at this article from BF, then you should get an idea that some concern is warranted because at the other end of the process that the above organisation is engaged in may be the kind of thing that we are seeing in Iraq at the moment as it fragments into religiously affiliated cantons.
It is worth recalling this when you hear in debates or presentations on Islam about Islamic tolerance in, say, Al Andalus. It came at a price, and often it was not as benign as presented (and to be fair, being other than Roman Catholic at that time in the rest of Europe was no cake walk either, I actually think that Islam learnt its worst habits from the worst of Christofascist' medievalism; so 'we' are hoist by our own petard, in a sense). It is worth looking at pages 8 and 9 of the magazine. In it we are told of some of the kinds of claims being made by some Muslims, and we are given another perspective. So,
The other day I was having a look round the university's ISoc exhibition for Islamic Awareness week. It's an interesting exercise to do to help Christians not only find out about what Muslims want us to know and what they think are the important things to get over, but also because it can expose us to the way it feels to be on the receiving end of some of the tactics we Christians use in similar circumstances. Very salutary. Anyway, we were approached and ended up talking for some time. I was interested in what we were told from the point of view of knowing more about Islam than our interlocutor assumed. So he presented us with the notion that the Qur'an is not changed and its message is consistent even though it was 'revealed' over several years. I mentioned abrogation because I said I felt that it contradicted what he'd just said. A bit of backpeddling and we ended up with a recognition that actually the the Qur'an did have to be interpreted according to the times and circumstances ... hmmm not quite the impression we were being sold earlier in the conversation. And that was without me getting onto the supposed textual consistency and invariance ... I wonder what he'd have said about the discoveries from that Mosque in Yemen of copies of the Qur'an which had significant variations from the official versions today. And what differences would we have seen in the ones surpressed by one of the Caliphs in order to come up with a unified text ... ?
As always I came away also thinking about the Christian parallels, I'm only too aware that there is a degree of throwing stones in, if not a glasshouse, at least the conservatory...
Copyright © 2007 Barnabas Fund | White Ants
Technorati Tags: religion, propaganda, Islam, Christian
In 1981 the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) was established and registered in the USA. Working in the worlds of publishing and academia, the IIIT has three objectives, which are set out below in the Institute’s own words:
1. To provide a comprehensive Islamic outlook through elucidating the principles of Islam and relating them to relevant issues in contemporary thought.
2. To regain the intellectual, cultural and civilizational identity of the Ummah [worldwide Muslim community] through the Islamization of the humanities and social sciences.
3. To rectify the methodology of contemporary Islamic thought in order to enable it to resume its contribution to the progress of human civilisation and give it meaning and direction in line with the values and objectives of Islam.
I'm not on reflection surprised to hear of it and it is worth noting that we have arguably seen the effects of its work in the kind of apologetics we hear from Muslims and Muslim organisation. The have every right to do this. The interesting thing is to note that there are Christians and Christian organisations of various stripes with parallel aims. In fact, I imagine most ideological groups, religious or otherwise, have similar groups.
Because of that, I am a little less happy about the feel or tone of this report; it has a sense of militancy, perhaps of scare-mongering as if they have no right to be doing this. Perhaps I'm being a bit oversensitive. Of course, it is useful to know, but it's not as if we don't have Christians doing the same and aiming to counter the propaganda (for that is what it is).
I'd be happier too, if Christian organisations would be as concerned by the messages of TNC's and the like who have well-funded departments to do just the same kind of thing for MacDonald's, Exxon, Nestle etc etc and probably have more malign influence on public awareness than this group.
That said, I'm not a Christian living under an Islamic regime. So if you also look at this article from BF, then you should get an idea that some concern is warranted because at the other end of the process that the above organisation is engaged in may be the kind of thing that we are seeing in Iraq at the moment as it fragments into religiously affiliated cantons.
Since the war of 2003 the anti-Christian hostility in the country has increased immeasurably, and there is no longer the strong hand of Saddam to prevent the men of violence from doing as they please. In response to raging anti-Christian violence, huge numbers of Iraqi Christians have fled their homes. A few have chosen another option and converted to Islam. It is next to impossible to continue to live in Baghdad as a Christian.
Many Christians in Dora are now facing demands for the traditional Islamic tax on non-Muslim minorities, the jizya. This is not being imposed by the government, but by Islamist insurgents who are operating freely in Dora without any intervention by either Iraqi or American forces. In keeping with the teaching of shari'a (Islamic law), Christians are offered the choice of paying money (which will be used to fund the insurgent violence), converting to Islam, leaving the area, or being killed. The demands can come as written messages delivered to their home, or from militants knocking on the door. Sometimes the option of paying jizya is not offered - it is then a choice of convert to Islam, flee within 24 hours leaving their homes to be seized by the militants, or be killed. Christians in Mosul have also been facing demands for jizya.
It is worth recalling this when you hear in debates or presentations on Islam about Islamic tolerance in, say, Al Andalus. It came at a price, and often it was not as benign as presented (and to be fair, being other than Roman Catholic at that time in the rest of Europe was no cake walk either, I actually think that Islam learnt its worst habits from the worst of Christofascist' medievalism; so 'we' are hoist by our own petard, in a sense). It is worth looking at pages 8 and 9 of the magazine. In it we are told of some of the kinds of claims being made by some Muslims, and we are given another perspective. So,
Some of the “Islamised knowledge” is easy to spot as many of the newer assertions still appear ridiculous to most non-Muslims. For example:
• Napoleon Bonaparte converted to Islam.
• Muslim explorers reached America before Christopher Columbus did.
• Islam arrived in Australia in the ninth century.
• Offa, the eighth century Anglo-Saxon king of Mercia (in
the British midlands) was a Muslim.
But other examples have been around a long time and have become widely believed. Here is a selection.
• There was interfaith harmony in Islamic Spain.
For some of the time Christians and Jews were tolerated so long as they submitted to various humiliating rules. But in some periods they were severely persecuted e.g. killing, expulsion and forced conversion of Christians and Jews to Islam.
• Muslims led the field in science and medicine during the middle ages.
While much of the learning of the time was written down in Arabic, many of the scholars were Christians and Jews. This is often not apparent because their names may be Islamised and some became Muslims for various reasons. The firs Arabic medical book was written by a Christian priest and translated into Arabic by a Jewish doctor in 683AD. ...
• Muslims founded the first hospital. The first hospital was founded in Baghdad when this city was the capital of the ruling Abbasid caliphate. However it was not started by a Muslim but by an Assyrian Christian called Jabrail ibn Bakhishu.
• Muslims invented the Arabic numerals used in the West today as well as the useful mathematical concept of zero.
The numeral 1, 2, 3, etc came to the West via the Arabs but were originally derived from the Syriac alphabet. The Syriacs [sic] are a Christian people. The numerals now used in the Arab world ... were introduced from Hindu India in the seventh century by a Syriac mathematician...
The other day I was having a look round the university's ISoc exhibition for Islamic Awareness week. It's an interesting exercise to do to help Christians not only find out about what Muslims want us to know and what they think are the important things to get over, but also because it can expose us to the way it feels to be on the receiving end of some of the tactics we Christians use in similar circumstances. Very salutary. Anyway, we were approached and ended up talking for some time. I was interested in what we were told from the point of view of knowing more about Islam than our interlocutor assumed. So he presented us with the notion that the Qur'an is not changed and its message is consistent even though it was 'revealed' over several years. I mentioned abrogation because I said I felt that it contradicted what he'd just said. A bit of backpeddling and we ended up with a recognition that actually the the Qur'an did have to be interpreted according to the times and circumstances ... hmmm not quite the impression we were being sold earlier in the conversation. And that was without me getting onto the supposed textual consistency and invariance ... I wonder what he'd have said about the discoveries from that Mosque in Yemen of copies of the Qur'an which had significant variations from the official versions today. And what differences would we have seen in the ones surpressed by one of the Caliphs in order to come up with a unified text ... ?
As always I came away also thinking about the Christian parallels, I'm only too aware that there is a degree of throwing stones in, if not a glasshouse, at least the conservatory...
Copyright © 2007 Barnabas Fund | White Ants
Technorati Tags: religion, propaganda, Islam, Christian
No comments:
Post a Comment