DENIAL OF JESUS REQUIRED FOR PEACE WITH ISLAM
"Do
you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I
tell you, no, but rather division; for from now on
five members in one household will be divided, three
against two, and two against three..."
Luke
12:51
"But
he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny
him before my Father who is in heaven."
Matthew 10:33
The
liberal media gushed at the so called
"unprecedented letter of
peace" from
Islam to Christians. But to those who actually
read it and understand the critical differences
between Islam and Christianity-- the letter was at
best a sham and more likely a threat to
Christians. The letter began with the following
damming preface which defined the terms of
negotiation at the outset:
"In
the Holy Qur’an, God Most High enjoins Muslims to
issue the following call to Christians (and Jews—the
People of the Scripture):
Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word
between us and you: that we shall worship none but
God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him,
and that none of us shall take others for lords
beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear
witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto
Him). (Aal ‘Imran 3:64)"
Rather
than an offer of peace it amounts to a threat--the
only way peace can be obtained is to bow down and
worship Allah. All negotiations naturally cease when
Christ's divinity is denied, and a demand is made to
worship the god of Mohammed.
A recent article in the New York
Sun by
Daniel Johnson said it quite well:
"In
the case of the letter, what appears to be a peace
offering turns out, under scrutiny, to be an implied
threat. The letter demands that Christians accept the
identity of the teaching of the Koran and the Bible
on the oneness of God and the love of neighbour.
Leaving aside the profound problem of the Trinitarian
conception of the Christian God, there is a
theological gulf between Muslim and Christian
doctrines on the relationship of faith and reason —
as Pope Benedict made clear in his Regensburg lecture
last year. But the ulema — the Islamic religious
authorities — have always been the main barrier to
any attempt to reconcile rationality with the literal
interpretation of the Koran.
"...Now these same scholars make no mention of the
many passages in the Koran that denounce Jews and
Christians — or, indeed, the entire doctrine of
jihad. Their olive branch comes with the proviso that
Christians, not Muslims, are the aggressors: "As
Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against
them and that Islam is not against them — so long as
they do not wage war against Muslims on account of
their religion, oppress them and drive them out of
their homes."
"For Christians to accept this document as the basis
for negotiation would be tantamount to accepting the
monstrous lie that Muslims are everywhere under
attack from the West.
"Fortunately Benedict XVI is too good a theologian to
be bamboozled by such rhetoric. He has consistently
said that relations with Islam must be based on
reciprocity. Without an honest acknowledgement that
Islam is not suffering persecution, that on the
contrary its adherents are everywhere persecuting
other faiths with the full support of their religious
leaders, there can be no serious dialogue.
"So the ulema's offer of reconciliation proves to be
an ultimatum — the same one that Mohammed himself
uttered in 632: "I was ordered to fight all men until
they say: 'There is no god but Allah.'" The clerics
who claim leadership over Islam behave as if their
faith had stood still since the 7th century. Those
who defy history are doomed to become
history."
