From: "F"
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 11:49 AM
To: "Yada"
Subject: RE: POD Comments

Dear "Yada,"

Sorry I didn't reply earlier. I did look through www.prophetofdoom.net, but was not too impressed, and certainly don't agree with the overall tenor of that site. Yes, there are violent texts in the Qur'an, and violent acts in the history of Islam. But the same is true of Judaism and Christianity.

I would not want anyone to condemn Christianity as a whole due to the history of the Crusades, or the Inquisition, or the many other centuries of violence perpetuated by so-called Christians. And the Bible certainly has plenty of violent words and actions, not just in the OT, but even in the NT and some of the words of Jesus. Focusing only on Mark 13, for example, would present a very distorted picture of Jesus' teachings.

So, I think it would be much better, esp. in our modern pluralistic world, to present more balanced and fairer views: showing the good sides of each religion, but also acknowledging the downsides. It's simply not fair (i.e., not just, not right!) to focus only on the negative aspects of one religion (Islam and the Qur'an), and claim or imply or presume that everything in another religion (Christianity and the Bible) is 1000% positive and peaceful.

Peace and blessings to you!

"F"

-----Original Message-----
From: "F"
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 3:45 PM
To: "Yada"
Subject: RE: POD Comments

Hello back, "Yada." I didn't have a chance to read much of the book itself, just glanced over various portions of the website to get the "gist" of it. I might not question specific portions of the author's scholarship, but might challenge him on the selectivity of the evidence. Of course there are violent sections of the Qur'an; the question is whether he takes these out of context, or focuses so exclusively on those, while ignoring other parts of the Muslim scriptures (and Muslim history) that might lead to opposite conclusions, or at least to a more balanced assessment overall.

I mention Mark 13 not as "casting a negative light on Christianity," but rather as an example of how a selective reading of only certain portions of scripture can lead to a DISTORTED picture. I could just as well have chosen Matthew 23, or other texts, in which Jesus appears very "harsh," very different from the "loving / forgiving / peaceful" image of the stereotypical view of Jesus.

You may forward my message to the author, if you wish; but I'll state in advance that I don't have time to engage in long discussions by email, esp. since I'll be out of the country for most of the next month.

Peace to you!

"F"

-----Original Message-----
From: Yada
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 9:26 PM
To: "Yada"
Subject: RE: POD Comments

"Yada,"

I have no interest in communicating with this fellow. Pretending to be wise, pretending to be compassionate, he is dangerous and deceitful. His comments are all born out of ignorance and of a refusal to be judgmental, and thus moral. Yes, I said ignorance because his statements regarding POD and the comparison of the Qur’an to the Bible both demonstrate that he forms opinions without first acquiring the knowledge needed to render a wise verdict. The professor confirmed this fact when he said that a 1000-page book covering 80% of the Qur’an, Sira/Earliest Biography of Muhammad, Ta’rikh/Oldest History of Islam’s Formation, and Bukhari’s and Muslim’s Hadith/Most Highly Regarded Collection of Reports From Muhammad and his Companions was “selective with regard to the evidence.”

I said immoral, because he lacks judgment, and without judgment it is impossible to be moral, discerning, discriminating, compassionate, or wise. He demonstrated this when he attempted to call opposites comparable. The bible and quran differ in their relative fixation on pain and violence as opposed to comfort and nurturing by a factor of over 50,000 to 1. Their core message, god, and path to him are the antithesis of one another.

This lack of judgment is a common failing among professors today. He, like so many others, doesn’t know what man’s replacement moral code of political correctness has done to his ability to think. The truth is, as a professor at any university, an especially a Catholic Jesuit school, F would be out of a job if he advocated moral judgment or the truth. His justifications remind me of Loyola’s, his mentor, and the founder of the Jesuit order: “Even the black before my eyes I will see as white, if the Catholic Church says it is so.”

This fellow’s words demonstrate that he has no tolerance for evidence which is outside his preconceived notions, so he will never be appropriately informed—nor will his students. And without the ability to be judgmental, even if we could educate him, it wouldn’t do him any good because he is too PC to be discerning.

The crusades comparison he made is as lame as his Mark 13 assertion. They demonstrate that he is unaware of reality and incapable of rational thought. As you stated, Mark 13 is not a call to arms, and the crusades were simply counterstrikes in the midst of a one-thousand-year long bloody and savage Islamic crusade against Hindus, Christians, and Jews in the East and West.

You don’t want a person like this in the forum. And neither you nor I can help him. We have made the truth available and he has chosen to ignore it.

He, and those he mimics in the name of peace, are in large part responsible for the mess the world is in today. Tolerating and excusing deceitful, deadly, and destructive dogmas isn’t compassionate, but instead merciless. Muslims will destroy America, and we still won’t understand why.

Yada