A sermon delivered by popular Saudi Sheikh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid clearly demonstrates why Western secular relativists and multiculturalists — who currently dominate media, academia, and politics — are incapable of understanding, much less responding to, the logic of Islamic intolerance.
During his sermon, al-Munajjid said that “some [Muslim] hypocrites” wonder why it is that “we [Muslims] don’t permit them [Western people] to build churches, even though they allow mosques to be built.” The Saudi sheikh responded by saying that any Muslim who thinks this way is “ignorant” and
wants to equate between right and wrong, between Islam and kufr [non-Islam], monotheism and shirk [polytheism], and gives to each side equal weight, and wants to compare this with that, and he asks: “Why don’t we build them churches like they build us mosques? So we allow them this in return for that?” Do you want another other than Allah to be worshiped? Do you equate between right and wrong? Are Zoroastrian fire temples, Jewish temples, Christian churches, monks’ monasteries, and Buddhist and Hindu temples, equal to you with the houses of Allah and mosques? So you compare this with that? And you equate this with that? Oh! Unbelievable, for he who equates between Islam and kufr [non-Islam], and Allah said: “Whoever desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter he will be among the losers” (Koran 3:85). And Prophet Muhamad said: “By Him in whose hand is the life of Muhamad (By Allah) he who amongst the Jews or Christians hears about me, but does not affirm his belief in that which I have been sent, and dies in his state (of disbelief), he shall be of the residents of Hellfire.”
What’s interesting about the sheikh’s zealous diatribe is that, although “intolerant” from a Western perspective, it is, in fact, quite logically consistent and reveals the wide gap between Islamic rationalism and Western fantasy (despite how oxymoronic this dichotomy might sound).
If, as Munajjid points out, a Muslim truly believes that Islam is the only true religion, and that Muhammad is its prophet, why would he allow that which is false (and thus corrupt, cancerous, misleading, etc.) to exist alongside it? Such gestures of “tolerance” would be tantamount to a Muslim who “wants to equate between right and wrong,” as the sheikh correctly deplores.
Indeed, not only does Islam, like traditional Christianity, assert that all other religions are wrong, but under Islamic law, Hindus and Buddhists are so misguided that they must be warred against until they either accept the “truth,” that is, converting to Islam, or else being executed (Koran 9:5). As for the so-called “people of the book” — Jews and Christians — they may practice their religions, but only after being subdued (Koran 9:29) and barred from building or renovating churches and synagogues and a host of other debilitations that keep their (false) religious practices and symbols (Bibles, crosses, etc.) suppressed and out of sight.
From an Islamic paradigm — where Allah is the true god and Muhammad his final messenger — “intolerance” for other religions is logical and difficult to condemn.
The “altruistic” aspect of Islamic “intolerance” is especially important. If you truly believe that there is only one religion that leads to paradise and averts damnation, is it not altruistic to share it with humanity, rather than hypocritically maintaining that all religions lead to God and truth?
After blasting the concept of interfaith dialogue as beyond futile, since “what is false is false — even if a billion individuals agree to it; and truth is truth — even if only one who has submitted [a Muslim] holds on to it,” the late Osama bin Laden once wrote that “Battle, animosity, and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel — is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them” (The Al Qaeda Reader, pgs. 42-43).
Note the altruistic justification: It is a “justice and kindness” to wage jihad on non-Muslims in the hopes that they convert to Islam. According to this logic, jihadis will always be seen as the “good guys” — meaning that terrorism, extortion, sex-jihad, etc., will continue to be rationalized away as ugly but necessary means to altruistic ends: the empowerment of, and eventual world conversion to, Islam.
All of this logic is alien to postmodern Western epistemology, which takes for granted that a) there are no objective “truths,” certainly not in the field of theology, and that b) religion’s ultimate purpose is to make this life as peaceful and pleasant as possible (hence why “interfaith dialogue” in the West is not about determining the truth — which doesn’t exist anyway — but finding and highlighting otherwise superficial commonalities between different religions so they can all peacefully coexist in the now).
The net result of all this? On the one hand, Muslims, who believe in truth — that is, in the teachings of Islam — will continue attacking the “false,” that is, everything and everyone un-Islamic. And no matter how violent, Islamic jihadis — terrorists and murderers — will always be seen as the “good guys” and supported by millions of Muslims who also believe that Islam must crush all falsehoods. On the other hand, Western secularists and multiculturalists, who believe in nothing and deem all cultures and religions equal, will continue to respect Islam and empower Muslims, convinced that terrorism is an un-Islamic aberration that has no support in the Muslim world and is destined to go away — that is, they will continue disbelieving their own eyes. Such is the offspring of that unholy union between Islamic logic and Western fallacy.
What a bigoted brainless idiot!
Yes, you are.
Are you
definetely u are the bigoted brainless idiot
Your grammar is crap. Sheikh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid is as brainless as you.
… said the retard.
A brilliant contribution from Raymond. Western liberals are cognitively egocentric, they disavow ethnocentrism in themselves and appear incapable of understanding that other belief systems can be ethnocentric towards them. As you so clearly explain Islam’s ethnocentrism springs logically from its foundations. The conflict between Islam and the free world is one of absolutism versus relativism.
I think a better way to phrase that is that other belief systems can be ethnocentric against them, but still.
Also, while the present conflict may be between “Islam” and the “free world” I have to say I don’t think, as an example, Islam must be completely removed to have peace. So far as I know, every call to violence that Islamic warmongers have turned out can be found in Christianity’s history as well. We rose above that. Is no one else capable of the same?
Christian history like Jesus christ fought battles and beheaded people to spread the gospel.
Christian history like jesus taught us to kill unbelievers , preached an eye for an eye. ??????
Please tell me what isis and other terrorists are doing that mohammed didn’t do or that quran didn’t expressly command muslims to do.
There’s nothing historical about terror and violence in Islam, bcos that is the life line of Islam through the ages.
Jesus’ practices didn’t stop the Crusaders, the Inquisition, the Witch Trials, the millions killed by Christians, quite a few of them other Christians. And Mohammed’s practices don’t inspire every single Muslim to commit violence. You should know all this. Do you honestly believe a single thing would be different if we were Islamic and they were Christian?
Individual religions don’t cause violence more than other religions. But they all excuse it. We engaged in less “religious” warfare (really all religious wars have political motives behind them) by becoming more secular, not by embracing Jesus’ values further.
Great article. Let me see now. I want to get it right. Let us answer some very basic questions in order to uncover the real problem.
Who is beheading innocent people. ?
Is it Christians? Answer: NO
Who is raping and violating women and children. ?
Is it Christians? Answer: NO
Who is destroying infrastructure and local economies. ?
Is it Christians? Answer: NO
Who is forcing death cult ideology upon others, against their will. ?
Is it Christians? Answer: NO
The answer is obvious. Islamic Extremist. This is the Problem. Plain and Simple
Is it true that Islam is connected to the Muslim Faith. ? Answer is: Yes.
Is it Christians who are running around creating madness and chaos? Answer: NO.
Get it right people. Pay attention and get involved before you and your children become the next victims of Islamic Extremism.
since we & them believe the other is going to hell & don’t really care the other is going to hell, why do they burn our places & try to force us to convert? Is it all about money (jizzya) & supremacy. because they CAN murder.
The vacuous rubes who display the, “Freedom of Religion Means ALL Religion,” bumper stickers on their cars are beyond clueless. An unfortunate fact of democracy is that these cretins can vote. Certainly, they would be among the first victims of the Islamic equivalent of what the French called the national razor.
Multi-cultis and rabid leftists notwithstanding, these 7th century troglodytes have every motivation and justification to destroy or to dominate everyone who is not them by the
dictates of their so-called “holy quran,” and haddiths. Those who declare Islam a, “religion of peace,” must show the source of motivation, the skills and the interest in religious parity or co-existence of any kind. But they cannot, because there is not.
Soft-headed, embarrassingly credulous leftists who absolve or dismiss the prodigious, centuries-long litany of atrocities and genocide of Islam are the new useful idiots. They are nothing if not shadow jihadists.
Second that. Godspeed in the just war against Political Islam.
Multiculturalism and acceptance of all religions as having an original truth connection was the basis of the new age movement. The purpose of the new age movement was
This Saudi dares talk about islam , when they are cutting of heads and whipping people and have been know to treat their slaves like crap even to the point of starving them if they do wrong. I suggest he keep his mouth shut.!!!!
I think I has read many2 things about this which Im 100% agree with it.
Question is,When will we start a REAL ACTION to those scum? They will keep coming and doing that sick behaviour,fellas…..
THE only thing is the Moslem has the WRONG religion.
We can see this as Walid pointed out if Allah say kill them and you decide not to you are showing more mercy than God??? HOW CAN THAT BE???
And all religions and beliefs that require brutal sacrifice of others do so because they do not have Jesus who sacrificed his one life so no more sacrifice is required. Yet they continue to do this because they do not accept the sacrifice of Jesus.
Thinking you (non-Moslems) have to be sacrificed for the Moslem sins and atonement! How ironic!
Great insights and observations, as always, Raymond.
And, really, at the end of the day — no matter what the claimed underlying theological or self-perceived moral rationale is for Muslim intolerance — let’s not mince words about what the underlying attitude at the heart of the ideology of “Submission” truly represents, to wit, an unabashed fascist, totalitarian mindset. “Believe as I do, or, be destroyed.”
A propósito vamos deslocar alguns padres e bispos, de preferência os que são adeptos da Teologia da Libertação, a irem até a Síria, Iraque, Palestina aqueles países onde há conflitos para que os mesmos construam Igrejas, beleza, Ok………!
Enquanto isso aqui no Brasil é permitido a construção de mesquitas, sinagogas, templos, terreiros e tudo quanto expressa a fè religiosidade credo, então …..Deveríamos colher informações para assim dizer/falar sobre tolerância/intolerância.
The difference between churches, synagogues, fire temples etc, and mosques, is that mosques are houses of sedition and blasphemy which threaten the State. Other places of worship do not.
I don’t think it is strategically wise to attack multiculturalism. The reason Islam is problematic is that it is not multicultural. Islam where it spreads will slowly destroy multiculturalism and substitute a totalitarian theocratic monoculture. Multiculturalism is good except where it tolerates even totalitarian intolerance. Multiculturalism is also good except where it elevates relativism to be an absolute. To make relativism an absolute is self-contradictory. That’s why the eminent economist and theologian Peter Berger spoke of relativizing the relativizers. Relativism is real, and everything we experience is immersed in it, but absolutes are also real, even though we can only see them through a glass darkly because we are immersed in a relativistic world. We can adhere to absolutes not with absolute certainty, but only with “mellow certainty,” another expression from Peter Berger. (See The Heretical Imperative.
Multiculturalism, insofar as it avoids the errors I’ve enumerated, is good. Given human fallibility, our chance of approximating to the objective truth is increased in a pluralistic setting. I agree with Aristotle’s view that truth is attained not through a monoculture, but through dialogue and mutual criticism and correction. To attack multiculturalism is to alienate the left unnecessarily — when what we need is unity of left and right against the Islamic assault on open societies.
Indeed. I stopped believing all cultures deserved equal respect when I read about the Taliban, but I still believe in multiculturalism. Islam isn’t some kind of insurmountable hurdle to co-existence any more than Christianity is. Pretty much everything people here say about Islam was also true of Christianity in the past – the Crusades were basically Christian jihad, for instance. The 1st Commandment tells us to have no other gods before God, and most of Christian history saw Christians enforcing that brutally. But in America, we have the 1st commandment, which proclaims that no religion should be enforced over others or suppressed over others. Because we believe the 1st Amendment is more important than the 1st Commandment, we can live in peace with other beliefs, despite our past.
Anyone who can similarly live in peace with others can be a part of Western society, but anyone who cannot has no place in a modern world. There are Muslims who can integrate, and Christians who cannot, but no one here wants to hear about them, it seems.
Multiculturalism is neccessary for a healthy culture. You need opposing views, and the ability to work with their existance, and co-exist in the same world, or else you just stagnate and polarize. I mean, look at half the comments on this site, it’s like a big circle-jerk of people jumping on the bandwagon and crying out against the evil Moon-Worshipping Muzlum Foriegn Apes. It’s like a propaganda rally or something.
Let’s stick with the 21st century, can we?
If only it were so simple. Or if I was the only one to stick to the present…
If only reality were so easily self-contained.
The LDS Church believes it is the only True Church, but that we are only allowed to bring people to The Messiah via long suffering, example, and reasoning together. G-d’s greatest gift to man is Free Agency— so precious that he won’t violate it. He wants willing people, not slaves!
We still believe in binary morality. We reare-up our young people to serve two-year missions; anywhere in the world, which they have saved-up to cover the complete cost thereof.
If I were not LDS and had ever wondered if islam were true, its need to convert— even by the sword if no other way— irrevocably convinces me, beyound all other evidence, that it is not.. cannot be true.
I’ve read the koran and surrah(?). There is no truth there.
Mohammed and the Unbelievers – Political Islam
politicalislam.com
IS is carrying out Mohammed’s commandments http://www.politicalislam.com/product/mohammed-and-the-unbelievers/ So, yes political Islam is the deadly problem. Koran 47:4; 8:39; 4:157: 3:28
Just war is our duty to protect Christian culture and our
constitutional republic. Christ’s followers must be willing to meet this
challenge. They must be willing to wage war when it is just and they
must be willing to wage it in a just manner. http://www.catholic.com/documents/just-war-doctrine
Most Muslims don’t take up jihad – yet most support sharia and IS. The
Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 51% of Muslim-Americans say that
Muslims should have the choice of being judged by Sharia courts rather
than courts of the United States (39% disagree). al-Jazeera Poll (2015):
81% of respondents support the Islamic State (ISIS). The Polling
Company CSP Poll (2015): 25% of Muslim-Americans say that violence
against Americans in the United States is justified as part of the
“global Jihad (64% disagree). http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Opinion-Polls.htm
The US enabled, and supports IS as a Satanic geopolitical inspired
global government plan. So we patriots must work to reinstall our
constitutional republic by spiritual, political, judicial, and military
means.
All Muslims are not terrorists; most terrorists are Muslim; therefore……………..
“Men never do evil so thoroughly and joyfully as when they do it for religious conviction”. Blaise Pascal
Who you gonna believe Mahomet or your lying eyes ?
brilliant. spot on