Praise the Lord, you were given an awesome oportunity and you responded with the Spirit's power and leading. I rejoice as you told the only story really worth telling, may God water the seed that you planted and may the Lord Jesus receive all the glory!!

PRCalDude, not that I am in any way an expert in scripture or religion - I offer these opinions as merely an interested person:

This is very much like something I recently read about.

Regarding branches and conflicts of thought within ISLAM.

Have you heard of Sufism? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufism

This from what I am told is less of a "proscriptive" religon.

What I mean is - it's not like the world makes things now - "branded" - or formulaic(?)

And from one Muslim scholar (I admit it was on this program Abdullah Trevathan, http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/01_january/23/retreat.shtml) was claimed to be more like classical Islam - focused on a persons own view - to become closer to his/her God.

Read this for some commentary:
http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2007/02/25/bbc2_the_retreat

One comment you may be interested in:
"Salam, I have enjoyed watching the first two programmes in the series 'The retreat'. It is about time that we Muslims sought out the true meaning and nature of our Islam. Yes we must follow the prescribed path in acting upon what's in the Quran and sunnah but we must also search within our hearts and souls for connection and meaning.If we stopped to focus on perfecting our own egos instead of thinking we do enough by completing the 5 pillars of Islam ,then think of the difference it would make to own lives, that of our families and communities and indeed the Muslim world.Let's strive to make this world a better place by working on our selves first before we criticize others.Isn't that the true Jihad ?"
Coupled with the other comments - then that offers hope for the future - in my view.

Whereas what we would see as today's "mainstream" Islam is now proscriptive in every degree... apparently having to live as close to how their prophet lived in every-way. I believe this is not what was originally envisioned and has drifted.

On the Taliban... they're as close to facist intolerance as I can imagine ... (amongst others in the 20th century I won't bother listing here).

Since you are right - spreading something "by the sword" (or the gun?) obviously opens up a serious flaw somewhere in anyone's religion! (in my view). Although my view that force to maintain the peace is justifyable (depending on circumstance). I let you know that so you understand where I come from here...

At that point - I begin to see why some of the problems are being encountered like they are. I also make the point (related to all of the above - that assuming one person or one thing defines something inherently opens this up to enormous variations).

It becomes artificial - where people begin to interpret the world today as it was then 1500 years ago or in the case of Christianity 2007 years ago +/- 5ish years.

Opening this to massive interpretation. Holding scripture as being the beginning and the end with the inherent subjectivity also presents problems in my view...

I think...
It is how a person reconciles themselves to their God, (if they believe he exists).

I've what I'd class some belief in some things in Christianity and others I find it hard to.

But ultimately I can respect religion. I especially have most affiliation to Christian and Buddist viewpoints. Since I feel they put most emphasis on tolerance and sharing each others humanity. And the wonder of the world/universe around us.

That's my current viewpoint (that appears rather mixed up) as I write this, but that is since it is late here.

I think that the most beneficial thing I have taken out of my "Christianity" (I use the term like that since doing otherwise feels funny???) - is the respect (I mentioned) and the need to develop my knowledge and to think about the world / universe...

"to ask questions"... not to rush to judgement and to be open minded...

That's my view.

It needs more thought....

Cal:

Although on the Indigo Jo blog thing... there are obviously some views I do NOT agree with.

I thought it might make interesting reading - if you wanted to go "witnessing again"???

Oh my... I now see that many (extreme to my views) use the above site... looking at some of the:

"Zionist" ... "Jihadist" yadda yadda yadda comments on that site...

Accusations of racism... (coming from the usual quarters)... and so forth... enough to make the head hurt.

I say - use the site at your own peril Cal!

I particularly recommend:

http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2007/03/16/jews_muslims_and_free_speech#more

John Palubiski's comment...

"I see that the nasty bigoted troll John P is skulking around your website.

Hand on to you hijab, Su.

Would you like to meet a few of the growing numbers of ex-muslims?

Would you like to challenge their bigotry.....and get yer ass whipped?

The problemes we see involving islamic land disputes are due to the fact that islam doesn't really have any legitimate claim to these territories.

Whose fault is it if you invade someone else's land, stick a mosque on it, claim the masjid was been "ordained" by god and then discover that god doesn't quite agree?

the Greeks still beleive Constantinople is rightfully theirs 500 years after the Turkish conquest;

Uh.... Constantinople was recaptured (quite easily, in fact) by allied forces immediately after WWI. It was only handed back to the Turks on condition Turkey embrace secularism and act as a bulwark against the newly established Soviet Union.

That, in light of Turkey's current fascination for islamism, was a mistake.

And if 500 years is sufficient to legitimately possess a conquered land, then why the hell do obnoxious, backward gasbags like Bin Laden crow on about Andalus and the loss of Spain?

Wait! I get it!

The 500 year rule of thumb applies only to those lands that have fallen under islamic oppression, and never to muslim territories liberated by Christianity.....or Judaism.

Such logic is lunacy, of course, and its origins no part of any Abrahamic tradition"

It is quite refreshing to have some opinions, that one if expressed would receive claims of "racist".

But some of the points I have to say are of some strength....

(Some have not though even I have not the presumption to say they do... but it's rare to see people on level ground debating with preponents of "Islam"...)

I think your boldness is refreshing. Praise God for those who are not ashamed of the gospel!

This is an excellent post, PRCaldude.

Henry wrote,

"I rejoice as you told the only story really worth telling, may God water the seed that you planted and may the Lord Jesus receive all the glory!!"

My response to Henry: AMEN!!!

M in UK wrote:

"Opening this to massive interpretation. Holding scripture as being the beginning and the end with the inherent subjectivity also presents problems in my view...

I think...
It is how a person reconciles themselves to their God, (if they believe he exists)."

My response to M in UK:

Thank you for your comments. Here are my thoughts concerning the above.

1.) Man requires a God in order to have knowledge of anything.
2.) Man, being composed of a finite brain, yet also possessing immaterial powers of rationality and thought, must have some epistemological access to the "contents of rationality." (defined as thought processes, laws of logic, laws of morality, etc).
3.) Atheism teaches that man only has a brain, not an immaterial mind. This is called materialism.
4.) But the immaterial thoughts of man lead us to rationally conclude that man has an "immaterial mind" as well.
5.) In order to grasp immaterial things such as propositions, laws of logic, mathematical truths, laws of morality, the human mind must have an external "trigger" to "link or connect" the human mind to those immaterial, (abstract entities) necessary things. An infinite "epistemic trigger" is rationally needed because the finite human mind cannot think all propositions, nor can it think all possible modal worlds, nor can it think all truth claims at the very same time. Rather, the human mind must have an epistemic trigger to "latch onto" those immaterial abstract entities for man to have knowledge of anything.
6.) God Himself, being infinite, supplies the epistemic trigger for humans to have knowledge. Man is made in God's image.
7.) But yet in our pluralistic world with competing and conflicting religions, there are many religions that claim to be "true."
8.) Christianity not only supplies the theological foundation for point 6, but Christianity goes a step further with empirical, documented evidence for the historicity of the exclusive truth claims of Christianity.
9.) Christianity, unlike Islam, did not spread by the sword, but rather by suffering followers of Jesus who elevated the status of women, abolished slavery, and contributed some beneficial insights for the development of civilization.
10.) Christianity, over and over again, calls men to examine the empirical evidence for the historicity of its unique truth claims, for example in 1 Corinthians 15, etc.
11.) The empirical evidence for Christianity provides a competitive advantage in the "marketplace of ideas" for Christians. Christians have empirical evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
12.) The most important question for anyone to answer is the question raised by the historical person of Jesus Christ: who do you say that I am? Jesus Christ calls all mankind everywhere to ask, "who do you say that I am?"

Therefore, in matters of religion, I believe points 1-12
provide some helpful tips for believing that Christianity is rationally true. I believe that subjectivity is erased.

God must exist in order for finite human minds to have knowledge of anything.

Christianity teaches that man is made in the image of God.

The empirical (not just abstract--but empirical) evidence for Christianity "seals the deal" by providing further evidence of the truthfulness of Christianity.

M in UK: "But ultimately I can respect religion. I especially have most affiliation to Christian and Buddist viewpoints. Since I feel they put most emphasis on tolerance and sharing each others humanity. And the wonder of the world/universe around us."

It is certainly wise to respect religion and educate ourselves on different teachings.

However, we must be cautious when equating religions based on how good they appear.

We must recognize that Christianity is the only religion that teaches salvation by Grace. All other religions, including Islam, teach a form of salvation by Works. And just because many religions share certain 'goodly' aspects, they do not automatically preach the same doctrine or worship the same god.

The point is that Christianity is no more akin to Buhdism than it is to Islam in the context of salvation. Both Buhdism and Islam focus on the works of man, and both Buhdism and Islam worship something other than Yahweh/Christ/Holy-Spirit.

PRCalDude,

The reason most Muslims stop arguing at this point is because you just defined yourself as a dhimmi in their eyes. They told you what they believe and you reflected that you understand, but still reject. Since you are the one who is wrong, by choice, (in their eyes) there is no point for them to pursue the discussion further.

It's simply a matter, now, of waiting for Allah to convert you or place them or their descendants in a position of authority over you and/or your descendants.

Cal and Lawerence:

Thank you - some points for me to think on...

M in UK,
Don't take anything I say here personally...
;)

Larry,

Though that's definitely true in Islam, I understood Islam better than my cabby friend in this case. According to Islamic jurisprudence, I have placed myself under a death sentence by proselytizing my faith. I don't think he understood dhimmitude well enough in this case, but I could be wrong. He said that Somali and Ethiopian Islam was mixed with a lot of Roman Catholicism and even animism, thinking back on the conversation. I didn't recount the conversation exactly right, but I got the basics down. We did discuss other things.

M,

I have heard of Sufism. Rober Spencer reports that it still practices violent jihad. It is a lesser known form of Islam that still holds to the five pillars of Islam, the most important being jihad.

I have visited a couple of Muslim blogs before. The one I visit most often is http://inshallahshaheed.wordpress.com (inshallahshaheed: a martyr, god willing). The writer there does not allow Christians to post. He simply deletes whatever he doesn't agree with. It provides a useful insight into the Muslim mindset however. I find that trying to argue various historical facts with Muslims is pointless because they are immune to reason. Islam is unique in its grievance and pretext manufacturing. They also believe everything is the fault of everyone else, and they subscribe to a pernicious fatalism. Unless they first believe in my Saviour, it is pointless to attempt anything else.

Along the lines of what DieHard said, Christianity is the only religion that provides a Redeemer for our sins, God himself working out the salvation for us. Islam, for example, supposedly has a righteous and just god, but allah allows people into heaven regardless of their previous actions, if they die martyrs for Islam..

Fundamentally, man cannot derive independent knowledge of God. Either he is dependent on his own sinful, faulty reasoning about who the Creator is, or he is dependent upon God's Word (the Bible). Christians did not decide of themselves to become dependent on the Word of God, rather God decided for us by redeeming us through Christ. Since human reason is naturally rebellious against God, there couldn't be any other way for this to be accomplished. Sinful man, depending on his own reasoning, cannot understand God's character or how to be reconciled to Him.

I hope I'm not talking past you.

PRCalDude,

You are most likely correct in that you understand both Islam and Christianity better than your Muslim coutnerpart. However, in their eyes, it doesn't matter all that much. And as you note, for them, it is often simply a matter of martyrdom, and the details are mere academics.

As far as your final paragraph above, not sure if your speaking to both of us, or just 'M'. But I believe I am in agreement with you. I think C.S.Lewis posses similar arguments about man's incapability to understand and/or know God absent of God's influence.

All these points of ethnicity and land arguments are interesting but in the end a Muslim is a lost soul who Jesus died for. A sovereign and miraculous event is taking place in parts of the Muslim landscape.

Some Muslims are being visited by Jesus in a dream and when they awake they have embraced Him as Lord and Savior. They must keep quiet about their faith and some tell their immediate family and lead them to Jesus. A sign of the last days.

The summer is well spent and the crops are still in the field. I pray that the messengers that God has sent around the world will receive a stong anointing as they labor amidst God's fields of love.

Lawerence:

Obviously I'm not going to do anything criminal etc.

It's more for personal reflection.

I am capable of making my own mind thanks.

Hope you're having a restful day!

M

PRCalDude:

"The writer there does not allow Christians to post. He simply deletes whatever he doesn't agree with"

How much more authoritarian can you get?

Well - to be open to things and new ideas is never a bad thing. No-one should be forced to change their personal convictions.

One of the important parts of "growing up" is learning how to make someone's own decisions effectively.

If the comments/posts are not rude or overtly offensive - then the man/woman is acting very immature.

I think that what you describe could be one of the root cause for some peoples "regression" not progression of Islam....

Islam - the original home of the many forms of mathematics... amongst other things... what a tragedy.

My thought on this.... open to change....

PRCal:

I'm a (qualified) scientist.... for which we won't get into... since I'm happy that Christianity and science are reconciled in my own view in many respects.

"Fundamentally, man cannot derive independent knowledge of God"
- an interesting philosophical point... on which I am undecided.

I'm not an expert in scripture - nor WOULD I EVEN ATTEMPT TO DEBATE such with you.

My own view (different to yours) is that the bible is not the literal word of God. (I'm sorry if this doesn't agree with you but that is my personal choice).

It is the essence of the message within which is more important to me.

I don't believe "faith" can be taught like some sort of academic subject. It either "is" or "isn't".

All I will say is that if there is some plan or not I have no idea - nor would I attempt to guess.

(rather alarmed by the talk of the "end days"... above - from what I have read elsewhere... since this implies some degree of "pernicious fatalism" that you described earlier.... on another religon... coincendentally.)

All I will say is in my view the world, indeed the universe is a marvellous place...

Our debate from here could last lifetimes.... so at this point I shall once again stop as my hands are beginning to hurt from typing!

Sorry - just to qualify this point regarding Islam:
"what a tragedy"

I don't believe that the root of this is the west as often portrayed is responsible for this "tragedy" - as as has been observed - many "Islamic" nations have been far more aggressive than the corresponding other nations.... You only have to look at the rise of Islam at the expense of Buddhism in some areas of Asia.

The tragedy is infact THE MINDSET you describe PRCal... that is the tragedy.

Hey m in UK:

I am kinda curious now that Beckham is playing soccer here in the USA...

Do you think the UK could ever be open to the NFL over there, or is the UK pretty much a dominant soccer nation forever?

m,

I'm a scientist as well, though my field is RADAR. I'm more of a applied math and physics guy.

I don't necessarily agree with the eschatological (end times) views Henry espouses. It's just a disagreement amongst brothers. My own view is that "the ship is sinking, but polish the brass anyway." There are several different end times views in existence. Mine is much different.

Islam is not really a starting point for much of anything scientific. Most of the developments in Islamic countries were made by their dhimmis. Algebra was likely stolen from their interaction with the Hindus. Caligraphy is about the only thing they came up with. See 'The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades' on my sidebar. It's a realy eye-opener.

With regard to the Bible, we do believe it is the literal Word of God, but that God divinely inspired man to write it. It's a little bit nuanced. This related to the philosophical point I made earlier - if it's not the literal Word of God, it's open to sinful man's judgment as to what is true and what is not. Also, the Bible claims to be the Word of God in 2 Timothy. This has been a debate for the past 150 years or so in the Christian community. The German and French higher critics were the first to question the Bible's inerrancy. It has been answered by many theologians. I'll try to post a link later.