To Infidel - Facts and references?

Submitted by Michel C. Zala (United States), Jan 9, 2007 at 01:02

A lot of anger, dear Infidel... take a hot bath and relax, as I am not your enemy.
I read your emotional outburst with a bit more care and can't help but respond to it in more detail..

For years now have I asked Christian preachers, priests and theologists that very same question, as I am Christian and look sincerely for an answer. A Baptist here in the USA, a seventh day adventist, a Methodist and a Roman Catholic priest have all answered me basically the same way. They are supposed to be the experts and they surely could quote you the respective paragraph in the Bible, where it says that you have to believe in the one (Christian) God to be allowed to go to paradise. They all stated that even in this extreme example of a Mahatma Gandhi, he would not be allowed in our Paradise, because he woul dbe considered as non-believer.

I do not know the answer myself. Please educate me and point me to the paragraph in the BIBLE stating otherwise.

How come, that I can not trust my spiritual leaders to know, what the truth is? To teach me correctly? How come that I experienced Bible study sessions where scholars with thousands of hours of Bible studies argued diametrally opposing positions and actually supported those with actual real references found in the Bible I was able to read black and white? I was more confused after , than before.

I am still searching for an answer......

It is my strong conviction, that The Bible like the Q'uran can indeed be (mis-) interpreted like any written text..

Allow me to give you an example out of the Communi cations Theory:

"Infidel, you and I have a problem" - this simple statement can be interpreted in many completely different ways, depending on your mindset or the situation, your demographics, your intelligence, your education or your cultural background. Since you do not see my gestures, body language, facial expression, you are completely left alone to interprete this sentence as aggressive, patronizing, offensive or even insulting.

The point I am trying to make is that every writing, every written word or statement is a ( potentially dangerous) form of code with all the decoding done on the readers side. The fact that you so offensively disagree with several so called spiritual experts of our Christian world, proves my point precisely. I dare to offer the following : 10 readers from 10 different countries of the same simple text will afterwards give you 10 differing interpretations, if the text is not purely mathematical. A fact of life. Common sense.
Can anyone of basic intelligence disagree with that?

Desmond Morris , Men watching, " the very same handgesture can mean a compliment in Italy and a serious insult in Morrocco. Interpretation based upon cultural background"

Language has long stopped to be able to truly encompass any complex matter.It is why we need experts to help us interprete especially spiritual teachings written oftentimes in an ancient, cryptic manner. How often can you see in talk shows or the religious TV stations the so called famous experts fight it out?

And that is just Christian Theology. I watched such shows for many hours and came to the conclusion that, as in politics, you can find orthodox, moderate , radical, even extreme positions within the same overall Religion. The sermon of a Southern Baptist sounds and feels so much diffferent than the sermon of a Methodist, let alone the sermons I grew up with of the Roman Catholic Church. Who is right? Who has the arrogance to claim to be the owner of the ultimate truth? The Bible leaves evidently room for co-existence of all the hundreds of shades of Christianity. The all read the basically same scripture, don't they? How do you explain that they seem to read from different Bibles?

In logical conclusion, what makes the Quran so different ? Why can we not acknowledge even the slightest possibility that this ancient writing could also be the basis for a variety of shades and interpretations within ISLAM?

You mention historical facts. Funny, as I read about WWII in Swiss, Russian as well as US History books. You would be amazed how different those books read, depending on the viewpoint of the author. Hell yes, the years and dates are the same - just the description differs, the analysis, the why not so much who and when. Please name one genocide or atrocity committed by ISLAM which tops 9 million people dead in Concentration Camps or on the battlefield of WWII. That was a Western World Product, right? Would you accept it as historical fact?

How come that Jesus is depicted in every single illustration of the western world as a white long & blonde haired caucasian, whereas he in reality may have looked much more like ....an Arab or the guy they recently executed? Culture and background determines interpretation. Simple as that.

Have you ever seen RAN by Akira Kurosawa, where several different people try to describe the very same murder they saw in front of a court? All completely different stories, interpretations of a simple straight forward story. I recommend this classic, as it widens the horizon quite a bit.

Lastly - for once allow me to quote for all of you who currently advocate to see all of ISLAM as evil force and see our western world on a pedestal:

" Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?...... first take the plank out of your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.." ( Matthew 7.3.4.5)...

Can this text be interpreted in several ways? you be the judge.

Could my personal individual decoding be acceptable ?Look inwards first and clean up your own act, before you start judging others. Before you start to condemn an entire culture, all members of another religion, one may want to first examine your own past and history. Be squeeky clean before throwing mud at others?

In conclusion, I state for the record ( again) that I do not intend to attack the BIBLE or any Christians.
All I try to point out is the possibility for different interpretations of the same script.

Just scanning the Bible I just found another rather interesting passus:" Jeremiah, 44 : 1-14
....They provoqued me to anger by worshippping other gods...therefore my fierce anger was poured out and raged against the towns of Judah....they have not followed my law and the decrees I have set before you and your fathers..".. and it continues to complete annihilation

Does that really sound like an inclusive Religion, where Mahatma Gandhi who "burned Incense for other Gods", may be allowed into our Paradise? Enough facts and references for you, Infidel?

Albeit, I feel fairly certain that you could respond with many quotes from the Bible to the contrary.
These Books, written over time by several different people contain contradictions or as a minimum leave room for contradictionary intepretation. That's all I tried to say and hopefully some contribution from the Muslim side will prove my point, as far as the Quran is concerned.

I sincerely hope that some moderate Muslijms respond to my call with peaceful 21st Century interpretations of the Quran which sounds so vicious and scary to so many westerners.

It remains to be seen, if our own acitivists would be willing to hear them out and accept such peaceful interpretations coming from individuals living within this culture.

I'd rather hear from a Muslim Expert than from a Westerner trying to tell me, how the Quran is to be interpreted inasmuch, as I would not take a Mullah seriously, trying to explain the Bible to me. It's gotta come from within.

Well, I hope some Muslim Scholars do read this blog and support my hypothesis. And yes - it is solely my own personal opinion, nothing more and nothing less. I apologize for trying to be open-minded.

---

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".