Food for thought for Emad Ibrahim: go back and come back as a monk.

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Jan 21, 2019 at 21:09

Dear Dr Pipes, your reader Emad Ibrahim from Egypt told us that Jews suffered a lot at the hands of Christians throughout history. He tells us that "... Jerusalem Christians insisted on excluding Jews from inhabiting the city as a condition to surrender the city to Muslim early conquerors." As a Hindu, I completely do not understand why Christians and Jews continued their fights for tens of centuries. But my thoughts got stuck at something else. I was wondering what business 'Muslim conquerors' had in Jerusalem? Why did they go there? If they had gone there as plunderers, I would not have minded it much but that they went there as 'religious plunderers' is completely objectionable to me. I hope Mr Ibrahim affords some of his thoughts on this topic.

History carries evidence that the same Muslim conquerors who brutalized Jerusalem in those early decades of Islam also reached Sindh on the East and Spain on the West within a few decades of Islam's birth. It seems that Islam introduced/adopted a culture of religious violence. When Ibrahim goes to sleep after reading this message, I would like him to think about it. As far as I am concerned, I would rather Muslims go back to where ever they came from and come back as monks.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".