Will those Christians who so indefatigably pursue “interfaith dialogue” with Muslim groups, despite the fact that this “dialogue” has been going on for years now and has never led one jihadi to lay down his arms and renounce the jihad, or prevented one Christian from being persecuted, or kept one church from being destroyed, study the implications of this and reconsider what they’re doing? Of course not.
“Palestinian fatwa bans Muslims from following ‘modern Abrahamic faith,'” by Khaled Abu Toameh, Jerusalem Post, January 27, 2021 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
The Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council on Wednesday condemned the use of the term “Abraham Accords” to refer to the normalization agreements between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain….
The council, the Islamic judicial body governing affairs under Islamic law in east Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, ruled that the “alleged Abrahamic religion project, in addition to targeting the Muslim faith, was a political use of the concept of the Abrahamic religion; benefits the occupier; and constitutes a clear threat to our nation’s causes, first and foremost the Palestinian cause and al-Aqsa Mosque.”…
According to the council, the decision to name the normalization agreements after the “modern Abrahamic religion is a form of deception.”
The Muslims and Palestinians, the council noted, have no problem with the followers of the monotheistic religions.
“The reality of the struggle in our land is to confront the Zionist occupation and the settlement enterprise,” the council added.
The council said that those promoting the agreements under the name of the prophet Abraham are doing so to “justify their malicious acts.”
The council warned that calls to follow the “modern Abrahamic religion are dangerous and tantamount to apostasy.”
The council ruled that it was forbidden for Muslims to follow or endorse the new Abrahamic faith, adding that they should “refute these calls and expose their true goals and dangers.”
Michael Copeland says
“the decision to name the normalization agreements after the “modern Abrahamic religion is a form of deception.””
They complain that it is deception, but the Muslim Brotherhood instruct the use of deception: “Using deception to mask intended goals” is one of the instructions in their Explanatory Memorandum.
…”the “alleged Abrahamic religion project, in addition to targeting the Muslim faith, was a political use of the concept of the Abrahamic religion”.
They complain that it is a political use, but, as Mullah Krekar has confirmed, “Our Islam is political.” Ayatollah Khomeini also, “Islam is politics or it is nothing”. Anjem Choudary said it is “an ideological political movement”. Islam seeks “Mastership of the world”, as Mohammed Badie declared.
“The Muslims and Palestinians, the council noted, have no problem with the followers of the monotheistic religions.”
In reality they do: they do not even recognise them as religions. Instead they are “remnant cults now bearing the names of formerly valid religions such as “Christianity” and “Judaism” ” (Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”, w4).
mortimer says
Agree with MC. Islam is predominantly political. About 51% of the primary Islamic source texts are political in nature. About 18% is about Allah and the rest is about Mohammed.
The point the Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council is making is that there are THREE VERSIONS of ‘Abraham’ … three distinctly different men using the same name … one is Islamic and is based on the Koranic fantasy as well as mischaracterized quotes from from Babylonian Jewish rabbinical discussions. The other two versions of ‘Abraham’ are based on the same Bible, but with two different theologies. The three versions are not a formula for ‘unity’ or brotherhood, especially the Islamic version of Abraham which calls Muslims to ‘HATE’ and have ‘ENMITY’ towards kafirs.
The Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council wants to promote that canonical hatred towards kafirs that is normative Islam, rather than an aberration.
Infidel says
I have always thought that describing islam as Abrahamic, when it totally distorts the story of Abraham, is about as fraudulent as describing it as a religion. It’s a geopolitical cult
gravenimage says
Muslims use the term to fool Infidels. But this is a different matter, meaning Muslims not hating Jews and Christians.
mortimer says
The Islamic Abraham is a Muslim who ‘hates’ all people of other religions. Is that a model for cooperation … or division?
mortimer says
One of the cardinal beliefs of Christian faith is the ‘Great Commission’ in which Christians are REQUIRED to preach the Good News of God’s love to all nations … including to Muslims. This is declared as ILLEGAL under the Pallies.
gregbeetham says
Muslims caught lying as usual, there are Greek manuscripts of the Gospel from the time of Jesus and those have not changed so the Gospel has not changed. Nobody should waste their time talking to Muslims, they worship Satan and a pagan black stone and are therefore condemned.
Rob Porter says
gregbeetham, you nailed it, “..they worship Satan and a pagan black stone and are therefore condemned.” And yet the Pope a hoards of half-wits who profess to be Christian consider the Muslim Allah as their name for God. Total nonsense! I once attended a church service in Toronto in which a female assigned to do one prayer prayed for “our Muslim brothers and sisters”. After the service I courteously tried to correct her misconception.
mortimer says
Reply to RP: People who make the assertion that Muslims see kafirs as ‘brothers’ are merely indulging in wishful thinking. Canonical Islamic writings tell Muslims not to give genuine friendship or love to kafirs. Muslims may ‘appear’ or ‘seem’ to be friendly, while maintaining ‘hatred and hostility’ (al-Baraa) towards kafirs in their hearts.
Sahih Bukhari records that Abu ad-Darda (a companion of Mohammed) said, “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.”
Ibn Kathir in his commentary on Koran 3.28 says:
“BELIEVERS ARE ALLOWED TO SHOW FRIENDSHIP TO THE DISBELIEVERS OUTWARDLY, BUT NEVER INWARDLY.”
gregbeetham says
The Roman Catholic Church is Christian in name but it has theological issues (and errors) and it seems not very much in touch with history or the fundamental teachings of the Koran. I wonder if she is aware that privately her Muslim ‘brothers’ regard her as the worst of animals?
mortimer says
The ‘common Abraham’ theology is really DHIMMI theology. Jewish Prof. Jon D. Levenson in “Inheriting Abraham” states: “Muslims begin with a different text, a different story—and, as a result, arguably a very different Abraham.”
The concept of “Abrahamic faiths” is a fallacy. Its contemporary influence was, tragically, born out of a century of Christian suffering in the Middle East and foisted upon the unsuspecting West. This DHIMMI theology is actually a theological Trojan horse designed to promote an Islamic worldview of relations between faiths. There simply isn’t a common Abraham … there are THREE different Abrahams.
Levenson says that the Islamic version of Abraham provides an example of hatred that gives the MOTIVE for violent jihad. Neither Judaism nor Christianity have anything like a ‘jihad’ doctrine.
Moreover, the Islamic version of Abraham allegedly taught the same religion brought by Muhammad, the religion of Moses, Noah and Jesus. Only, Jews and Christians say that is not true.
The ‘Abrahamic fallacy’ is just a way to let Islam have its cake and eat it. It is DHIMMI THEOLOGY meant to subjugate Jews and Christians to play along with the Islamic view and pretend to agree so that the JIHAD against them may go ahead unopposed.
mortimer says
Addendum (Dhimmi Theology coming from Islamophile and anti-Semitic Louis Massignon)
Levinson’s cogent analysis ultimately leads to the origins of the Abrahamic idea during the mid-twentieth century in the writings of the problematic French Catholic clergyman, mystic, scholar and Arabist, Louis Massignon (1883–1962) who MISREPRESENTED Abraham as a Christian saint who transcended any particular religion. In addition, Massignon was a fervent Islamophile and regarded Islam as a divine revelation and as the true expression of what he called Abrahamic faith (pp210–212). It is noteworthy that Massignon had little use for Judaism and made negative remarks about Jews. Beyond the academy, his work had great influence upon a broad spectrum of French thinkers, clergymen and civil servants. Thus, it was only a matter of several decades until Massignon’s construct morphed into the current trope of Abrahamic religion and its varied manifestations. One may speculate as to whether the revival of this idea somehow may be attributed to the present predicament of the West in dealing with the rise of radical and violent Islam. Whatever the case, Levenson debunks Massignon’s construct as unsound scholarship.
Honest Ali says
All the bleeding hearts who want to hold hands and sing “kumbaya” will learn the hard way that Islam means harm.
Michael Copeland says
The Ibrahim of the Koran expressed what is praised as “an excellent pattern” when he said,
“..between us and you enmity and hatred forever…” (K.60:4)
Giacomo Latta says
”The reality of the struggle in our land is to confront the Zionist occupation and the settlement enterprise”
‘The council warned that calls to follow the “modern Abrahamic religion are dangerous and tantamount to apostasy.”’
Plan on making up your mind what you’re fighting for anytime soon?