Ensign Article on Muhammad

[ChinoCoug]

Since I'm ticked off at some of you for the example you've set in Islam-bashing right in front of a devout Muslim (days like this I wish Jefe were here), I've decided to post this article on Muhammad.

I know this will only marginally effective, since authority means next to nothing to some of you.

http://lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/me...____&hideNav=1

As early as 1855, at a time when Christian literature generally ridiculed Muhammad as the Antichrist and the archenemy of Western civilization, Elders George A. Smith (1817–75) and Parley P. Pratt (1807–57) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles delivered lengthy sermons demonstrating an accurate and balanced understanding of Islamic history and speaking highly of Muhammad’s leadership. Elder Smith observed that Muhammad was descended from Abraham and was no doubt raised up by God on purpose” to preach against idolatry. He sympathized with the plight of Muslims, who, like Latter-day Saints, found it difficult “to get an honest history” written about them. Speaking next, Elder Pratt went on to express his admiration for Muhammad’s teachings, asserting that “upon the whole, … [Muslims] have better morals and better institutions than many Christian nations.”

Muhammad’s sayings clearly teach the practice of charity:

“None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”

“Each person’s every joint must perform a charity every day the sun comes up: to act justly between two people is a charity; to help a man with his mount, lifting him onto it or hoisting up his belongings onto it is a charity; a good word is a charity; every step you take to prayers is a charity; and removing a harmful thing from the road is charity.”

“Charity extinguishes sin as water extinguishes fire.”

“Smiling to another person is an act of charity.”

“He who sleeps with a full stomach knowing that his neighbor is hungry [is not a believer].” 20

In a recent meeting with Muslim dignitaries, Elder Neal A. Maxwell of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles focused on the common spiritual heritage of Mormons and Muslims. After quoting a verse from the Qur’an, he observed:

“God is the source of light in heaven and on earth. We share the belief with you. We resist the secular world. We believe with you that life has meaning and purpose. … We revere the institution of the family. … We salute you for your concern for the institution of the family. …

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Since I'm ticked off at some of you for the example you've set in Islam-bashing right in front of a devout Muslim (days like this I wish Jefe were here), I've decided to post this article on Muhammad.

You're probably right that many of us were over the top in our criticism of Islam. The difficulty of Islam is that it is a theology that seems to require an exclusive theocracy. Therefore criticisms of a system of government, which wouldn't ordinarily be terribly insensitve, have to become criticisms of a religion.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by YOhio

You're probably right that many of us were over the top in our criticism of Islam. The difficulty of Islam is that it is a theology that seems to require an exclusive theocracy. Therefore criticisms of a system of government, which wouldn't ordinarily be terribly insensitve, have to become criticisms of a religion.

Islam has no central authority, so speaking of it as a monolith, is wrong.

However, because it lacks a central authority it is subject to the vagaries of the tyranny of minorities.

If it had followed its philosophy of adopting the Greek philosophy, it would have moderated much sooner.

To speak insularly of Islam's virtue without acknowledging its weaknesses is to ignore its whole.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Islam has no central authority, so speaking of it as a monolith, is wrong.

However, because it lacks a central authority it is subject to the vagaries of the tyranny of minorities.

Protestants have the same problem. But the Qu'ran/Muhammad's teachings/Muhammad's life is central, just as the Bible is authoritative for the Protestants.

To speak insularly of Islam's virtue without acknowledging its weaknesses is to ignore its whole.

Apparently that's enough for devotional purposes.

At least we now know no charity in Islam is false.

I have faith these caricatures of Islam will pass once the war with jihadism is over. When will that be? I don't know.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Protestants have the same problem. But the Qu'ran/Muhammad's teachings/Muhammad's life is central, just as the Bible is authoritative for the Protestants.


Apparently that's enough for devotional purposes.

At least we now know no charity in Islam is false.

I have faith these caricatures of Islam will pass once the war with jihadism is over. When will that be? I don't know.

Once Islam is secularized, the war will be over. Secularization of Islam is our only hope.

Read the Qu'ran, look at the Fifth Surah.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Protestants have the same problem. But the Qu'ran/Muhammad's teachings/Muhammad's life is central, just as the Bible is authoritative for the Protestants.

I've read that for Muslims, the Qu'ran is their "Jesus Christ" in the sense that they worship this book similarly to the way an average Christian would worship Jesus.

I also think that you're correct when you suggest that some protestants have a special place in their hearts for "Bible worship," but I don't think this is quite the same as "Qu'ran worship" for Muslims. In any cases, there is reasonable proof that the holy books were not magically received and mystically perfect, so worship of either book as a "perfect, divine record" is silly.

I suppose one could say that we have an element of "Book of Mormon worship" in our own religion that also might seem unreasonable.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

I suppose one could say that we have an element of "Book of Mormon worship" in our own religion that also might seem unreasonable.

I disagree. The concept of continuing revelation via the prophets and personal revelation is such a big deal in our Church I don't think our reverence for scripture even comes close to what a lot of Evangelicals have towards the Bible.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

I disagree. The concept of continuing revelation via the prophets and personal revelation is such a big deal in our Church I don't think our reverence for scripture even comes close to what a lot of Evangelicals have towards the Bible.

It is so far different, the comparison is ludicrous.

In proper handling of the Qu'ran, the Arabic one, you must be very careful and a menstrating female may not touch it. When I was given mine from my friend, he requested that I observe that formality. Out of respect to him, I have done so.

The comparison loosely applies insofar as we both use our book to bind us together with special nomenclature, to create an insular feel so that you only become an insider through the use of special terms, unique to the book, but we regard books as books. There are to be studied, marked, used and not worshipped. Even the words of the BoM, though revered are recognized as the words of men, not God. God, despite Islamic claims to the contrary, has not personally written any book read by man.

In one respect, Islam follows the Hebrew path of respecting the Hebrew Bible, which orthodox Jews believe must be read only in Hebrew. Mohammed and his followers apparently copied an extant path taken by Jews of Mohammed's time.

There are many parallels between the Muslims and the Jews, even if they are reluctant to recognize them.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

It is so far different, the comparison is ludicrous.

In proper handling of the Qu'ran, the Arabic one, you must be very careful and a menstrating female may not touch it. When I was given mine from my friend, he requested that I observe that formality. Out of respect to him, I have done so.

The comparison loosely applies insofar as we both use our book to bind us together with special nomenclature, to create an insular feel so that you only become an insider through the use of special terms, unique to the book, but we regard books as books. There are to be studied, marked, used and not worshipped. Even the words of the BoM, though revered are recognized as the words of men, not God. God, despite Islamic claims to the contrary, has not personally written any book read by man.

In one respect, Islam follows the Hebrew path of respecting the Hebrew Bible, which orthodox Jews believe must be read only in Hebrew. Mohammed and his followers apparently copied an extant path taken by Jews of Mohammed's time.

There are many parallels between the Muslims and the Jews, even if they are reluctant to recognize them.

When I was in the MTC a speaker told us not to let our scriptures touch the ground.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

When I was in the MTC a speaker told us not to let our scriptures touch the ground.

What MTC did you attend, one for Baptists? You went to a strange Church.