I just had someone trying to yank my chain, baiting me to criticize someone for being a Muslim Fundamentalist.
Rest assured, the bible does not advocate anyone to hate other people. God mentions the fact that He hates a few things — all of them actions and attitudes, but not people. And, He specifically instructs his followers to “love your enemy.”
Love, by the definition used in the Greek of that passage, is an action word — a verb. It means that those who call themselves Believers and seek after God are to act in the following manner when dealing with God, others, and themselves:
They are to be patient, kind, not envious, not boastful or proud, not rude, not self-seeking, and not easily angered. They aren’t supposed to think about or plan how they’re going to hurt or do wrong to others, nor take any delight when wrong befalls others. They’re supposed to be happy when honesty and sincerity result in the protection and preservation of someone’s dignity. And they’re supposed to hold fast to the belief that all things work for good.
A true Christian knows he or she can never live up to such high standards, and so does God. But true believers know they are to strive toward these things.
Sadly, because Christians will always fall short of these things, those that don’t understand the grace and mercy of God will mock and criticize true believers. They simply don’t “get” what God is all about.
Yet, because people don’t like to be perceived as not knowing something, these same people will insist that they DO understand God. They, like everyone else, naturally want to feel good about themselves, not deficient in some form of understanding.
Believers certainly can’t (and shouldn’t) fault them for that. Believers want to feel good about themselves, too. The difference between the two is that Believers know God accepts them in spite of their shortcomings. The non-Believer does not know this – at least not in the depth of his or her being. Cognitively they might give assent to it (and often do), but in the depths of the Affective realm, that deep relationship isn’t there.
I can speak with experience on this, as I did not seek out and establish that depth of relationship until later in life. It was easy to say I had a relationship with God. But, like skiing, parasailing, snorkeling, riding a bike, or driving a car, you can say you understand it without actually doing it. But, after you actually do it, you look back and realize how very litle you knew, despite whatever braggadocio occurred beforehand.
Now I will wholeheartedly agree that many who call themselves Believers act in hateful ways. They may even actually hate. But let it be known that they are falling prey to a shortsightedness, and not at all acting in accordance with God’s instruction to “love your enemy.” I know, because I am guilty of not following the above commands when I get shortsighted.
It is when this happens that the non-Believers mock.
But, to readers who are Believers, I would challenge anyone to show me in the New Testament where God instructs us to retaliate or verbally blast against such actions.
And herein lies the bait that some set up between Christians and Muslims. A true, bible-believing Christian is supposed to love his or her enemy. And with tolerance, live among those who do not believe the same way as them. It is our instruction.
To the best of my knowledge, the Muslims that I know do the same for me. I have had none try to kill me, nor blow up my car, nor anything else. In other words, so long as ”love” (that patience and kindness thing described above) is at the core of the relationship, everything is fine. Fundamentalist Muslims can be fundamentalist Muslims.
What creates the controversy is when people who are MILITANT Muslims start to kill those who are not Muslim. This killing of innocents is what is unacceptable for any human being, yes?
What “religion” or “form of government” (Islam is both) advocates the general population start killing off those who do not believe the same? (Please don’t get me started on any rabbit trail here — I will save my criticism of the American government for another post.)
Armed conflicts that are classified as “war” are to involve uniformed soldiers. The Geneva convention addressed that. War between formal armies is war. But what is being baited before Believers, however, is that they “hate” the Muslims who kill innocent lives.
Two points here:
#1. I’m curious why those who bait Christians never taunt the Militant Muslims about their hate for Christians.
My personal belief as to why they don’t is because the Militant Muslims are living according to their code: To hate and to kill. Therefore, there is no contradiction — so no need for a taunt.
But the Christian who displays a violent outburst at seeing innocent people killed (non-military / non-uniformed people) is taunted because they have become shortsighted. Their angry is justified, but they act in ways contrary to God’s instruction (be angry and sin not). Again, they are acting against their code. As a result, non-Believers see hypocricy and they mock and taunt.
Oh, that the non-Believers would come to realize the depth of the grace and mercy of God. Their mocking and taunting would fade and their heart would become like the heart of God; sorrowful for the one choosing to act out of line with God’s instruction.
#2. I’m curious why those who taunt Christians don’t get equally upset with Militant Muslims who think it’s okay to keep killing innocent people. Just because it’s in their code to kill the infidels, is that supposed to make it okay – because they’re living up to their code?
Such logic would be unstable.
In closing, we often see true Believers speaking out to correct those who call themselves Believers but act antithetically to the instruction from God to love Him, our neighbors, and ourselves. But it’s WE, the Believers, who see it, not the non-Believers. It’s often done quiety, and respectfully, as instructed above. But the news media will never pick that stuff up and broadcast it because it’s not controversial and sensational enough to attract viewers, listeners, and readers.
I could only hope that Fundamentalist (non-Militant) Muslims are striving to correct those who are Militant, and kill innocent lives just because someone believes differently. I can only hope and pray that someone is trying to talk sense to them about the value of human life.
By the way, in case you’re curious, I do not consider myself to be a Fundamentalist Christian. Such a term has so many different meanings to so many people, and yet we do not see it in the Word of God. Therefore, to me it is nothing but a label used to invoke controversy.
Following the Greatest Commandment of God, to love Him, and the second greatest commandment, to love my ‘neighbors’ as myself, is what will define me. I invite you to return to the clear definition I outlined above if you would like clarification of what that means.
There’s a little problem. We don’t see you as enemy, you Christians.
We see political enemies, not religious. And the difference is very important to most of us, Muslims.
[...] things like this are reassuring. Powered by Gregarious [...]
To Manas,
I appreciate your comment that you do not see Christians as enemies. Two points in response:
#1. I do not see Muslims as an enemy, either. But I will assume, then, that when you say ‘”we” do not see you as an enemy,’ you are implying that you are non-militant.
Reason: My observation of MILITANT Muslims is that they seek to kill infidels (anyone who is non-Muslim).
If that is not the case, and you see the enemy as being a political one, then why the targeting of innocent people instead of the politicians themselves?
I refer back to the definition of war – uniformed armed conflict. Granted, if the “commanders” of such armies are not uniformed, they are still publicly acknowledged commanders and would be considered viable targets in a time of war.
It is when innocent civilians are directly targeted — not just collateral casualties as the result of an attack against a genuine military target — that non-Muslims wonder about the foundation of the Muslim mindset.
#2 – Regarding political positions, I personally cannot agree enough that the US Government’s actions against innocent people in this world has been an atrocity.
Examples:
- President Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkin incident (later proven to be fabricated) to build up the Viet Nam war and enhance the financial wealth of his defense contractor friends.
- President Bush 41 baiting Saddam Hussein, saying he would not interfere if Iraq started trouble with Kuwait, but then doing a 180 and creating Gulf War I which resulted in tens of thousands / hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths. All in a manipulative effort to keep the price of oil propped up.
- President Clinton’s meddling in mineral-rich Bosnia, built around the paranoia of one single fabricated photograph, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents — all for someone’s financial gain.
- President Clinton’s cruise missle attack on the Sudan and Afghanistan based on the lie that chemical weapons were being manufactured there — all as a diversionary tactic to take the press’s attention away from Monica Lewinsky’s testimony. How many innocents died so he could cover his sorry rear end?
- President Clinton’s meddling in Kosovo, again based on fabricated evidence, but this time to cover his blunder in the Sudan and Afghanistan. How many innocents died there?
- President Bush 43’s invasion of Iraq because Saddam Hussein started accepting Euros instead of US dollars for payment of oil. Hundreds of thousands of innocents killed because the leaders of the US Government are trying to prop up the value of the dollar instead of dealing with it honestly and ethically.
You will get no argument from me that the political leaders in this country have committed unspeakable atrocities against people outside this country.
As a matter of record, they have done the same within this country as well. Invading the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. Blowing up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Blowing off a bomb at the US Olympics as a diversionary tactic to draw press coverage away from other news they didn’t want covered.
Innocents have died in this country, too. The government acting against its own people.
How this plays out I do not know. The powerful are simply trying to control the masses. This is what make them feel important. I will tell you I have very little respect for what they do.
Additionally, my son is currently in Iraq, serving in the US armed forces. We both have mixed feelings about his work there. He meets Iraqis that sincerely want freedom from oppression, but the political power struggles even among the Iraqis make them nervous to take a stand.
We both wish that people would just stop trying to kill each other.
This brings me back to my original question of why some Muslims target innocent civilians. I think we can agree that the US Government has been flexing its muscles in areas of greed and ego for those at the top, resulting in the deaths of many innocents.
But for everyday common people –like myself but who happen to be Muslim– to target innocent civilians in retaliation? Two wrongs do not make a right.
I can only hope and pray that somewhere in the Muslim community common sense is being sought…. and Militants who seek to target innocents will see that such killing might make them feel better in the short term, but only destroys innocent life while doing nothing to fix the problems they seek to solve.
Believe me, most muslims do not support attack on civilians and the proportion is far more than that in the US.
The suicide attacks are results of frustration. If the governments of Muslim countries could fight the occupiers, suicide attacks would not have been there. It comes from a sense of helplessness, frustration and the drive to do something. They end up being devil’s food.
We don’t want to kill all infidels. If that was the case, Hindus would not have survived in India.
By the way, Christians are not infidels. Nor are Jews. We consider you as people of the Book.
Please have a look at the history of Al-Andaluz, and you will know us better.
If you want to understand suicide attacks, read this.
Why do the suicide bombers don’t target politicians?
Good question. It should be difficult to grasp. Because of centuries of conflicts and occupation, we have become so fragmented that we can’t take on the politicians.
They are heavily guarded. Anyone, who decides to suicide bomb a politician, finds that it is impossible to do. So he bombs those who ‘he’ sees as the politicians’s allies: the civilians.
Unfortunately he ends up making even those who otherwise have been friend, an enemy.
Havn’t heard from you for long time. Is everything okay?