{"id":554,"date":"2009-06-11T01:46:32","date_gmt":"2009-06-10T20:16:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/mohamediqbalp.wordpress.com\/2009\/06\/11\/are-judaism-and-christianity-violent\/"},"modified":"2009-06-11T01:46:32","modified_gmt":"2009-06-10T20:16:32","slug":"are-judaism-and-christianity-violent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/2009\/06\/11\/are-judaism-and-christianity-violent\/","title":{"rendered":"Are Judaism and Christianity Violent?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam?<\/h1>\n

<\/p>\n


\nby Raymond Ibrahim
\nMiddle East Quarterly<\/i>
\nSummer 2009, pp. 3-12<\/b><\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.meforum.org\/2159\/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam<\/b><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
Print<\/a><\/td>\n Send<\/a><\/td>\n RSS<\/a><\/td>\nShare: \"Digg\"<\/a> 
\n\"del.icio.us\"<\/a> 
\n\"Facebook\"<\/a> <\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
\n

“There is far more
\nviolence in the Bible than in the Qur’an; the idea that Islam imposed
\nitself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time of
\nthe Crusades when, in fact, it was Western Christians who were fighting
\nbrutal holy wars against Islam.”[1]<\/a>
\nSo announces former nun and self-professed “freelance monotheist,”
\nKaren Armstrong. This quote sums up the single most influential
\nargument currently serving to deflect the accusation that Islam is
\ninherently violent and intolerant: All monotheistic religions,
\nproponents of such an argument say, and not just Islam, have their fair
\nshare of violent and intolerant scriptures, as well as bloody
\nhistories. Thus, whenever Islam’s sacred scriptures\u2014the Qur’an first,
\nfollowed by the reports on the words and deeds of Muhammad (the
\nHadith)\u2014are highlighted as demonstrative of the religion’s innate
\nbellicosity, the immediate rejoinder is that other scriptures,
\nspecifically those of Judeo-Christianity, are as riddled with violent
\npassages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n

Medieval times:<\/i>
\nThe Crusades were violent and led to atrocities by the modern world’s
\nstandards under the banner of the cross and in the name of
\nChristianity. But the Crusades were a counterattack on Islam. Muslim
\ninvasions and atrocities against Christians were on the rise in the
\ndecades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

More often than not, this argument puts an end to any
\ndiscussion regarding whether violence and intolerance are unique to
\nIslam. Instead, the default answer becomes that it is not Islam per se<\/i>
\nbut rather Muslim grievance and frustration\u2014ever exacerbated by
\neconomic, political, and social factors\u2014that lead to violence. That
\nthis view comports perfectly with the secular West’s “materialistic”
\nepistemology makes it all the more unquestioned.<\/p>\n

Therefore, before condemning the Qur’an and the historical words
\nand deeds of Islam’s prophet Muhammad for inciting violence and
\nintolerance, Jews are counseled to consider the historical atrocities
\ncommitted by their Hebrew forefathers as recorded in their own
\nscriptures; Christians are advised to consider the brutal cycle of
\nviolence their forbears have committed in the name of their faith
\nagainst both non-Christians and fellow Christians. In other words, Jews
\nand Christians are reminded that those who live in glass houses should
\nnot be hurling stones.<\/p>\n

But is that really the case? Is the analogy with other scriptures
\nlegitimate? Does Hebrew violence in the ancient era, and Christian
\nviolence in the medieval era, compare to or explain away the tenacity
\nof Muslim violence in the modern era?<\/p>\n

Violence in Jewish and Christian History<\/h3>\n

Along with Armstrong, any number of prominent writers, historians,
\nand theologians have championed this “relativist” view. For instance,
\nJohn Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for
\nMuslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, wonders,<\/p>\n

\n

How come we keep on asking the same question, [about violence in
\nIslam,] and don’t ask the same question about Christianity and Judaism?
\nJews and Christians have engaged in acts of violence. All of us have
\nthe transcendent and the dark side. \u2026 We have our own theology of hate.
\nIn mainstream Christianity and Judaism, we tend to be intolerant; we
\nadhere to an exclusivist theology, of us versus them.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

An article by Pennsylvania State University humanities professor
\nPhilip Jenkins, “Dark Passages,” delineates this position most fully.
\nIt aspires to show that the Bible is more violent than the Qur’an:<\/p>\n

\n

[I]n terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim
\nabout the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong.
\nIn fact, the Bible overflows with “texts of terror,” to borrow a phrase
\ncoined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains
\nfar more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and
\nbiblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more
\nindiscriminate savagery. \u2026 If the founding text shapes the whole
\nreligion, then Judaism and Christianity deserve the utmost condemnation
\nas religions of savagery.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Several anecdotes from the Bible as well as from Judeo-Christian
\nhistory illustrate Jenkins’ point, but two in particular\u2014one supposedly
\nrepresentative of Judaism, the other of Christianity\u2014are regularly
\nmentioned and therefore deserve closer examination.<\/p>\n

The military conquest of the land of Canaan by the Hebrews in about
\n1200 B.C.E. is often characterized as “genocide” and has all but become
\nemblematic of biblical violence and intolerance. God told Moses:<\/p>\n

\n

But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you
\nas an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive,
\nbut you shall utterly destroy them\u2014the Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite,
\nPerizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite\u2014just as the Lord your God has commanded
\nyou, lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations
\nwhich they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your
\nGod.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

So Joshua [Moses’ successor] conquered all the land: the mountain
\ncountry and the South and the lowland and the wilderness slopes, and
\nall their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that
\nbreathed, as the Lord, God of Israel had commanded.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As for Christianity, since it is impossible to find New Testament
\nverses inciting violence, those who espouse the view that Christianity
\nis as violent as Islam rely on historical events such as the Crusader
\nwars waged by European Christians between the eleventh and thirteenth
\ncenturies. The Crusades were in fact violent and led to atrocities by
\nthe modern world’s standards under the banner of the cross and in the
\nname of Christianity. After breaching the walls of Jerusalem in 1099,
\nfor example, the Crusaders reportedly slaughtered almost every
\ninhabitant of the Holy City. According to the medieval chronicle, the Gesta Danorum<\/i>, “the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles.”[6]<\/a><\/p>\n

In light of the above, as Armstrong, Esposito, Jenkins, and others
\nargue, why should Jews and Christians point to the Qur’an as evidence
\nof Islam’s violence while ignoring their own scriptures and history?<\/p>\n

Bible versus Qur’an<\/h3>\n

The answer lies in the fact that such observations confuse history
\nand theology by conflating the temporal actions of men with what are
\nunderstood to be the immutable words of God. The fundamental error is
\nthat Judeo-Christian history\u2014which is violent\u2014is being conflated with
\nIslamic theology\u2014which commands violence. Of course, the three major
\nmonotheistic religions have all had their share of violence and
\nintolerance towards the “other.” Whether this violence is ordained by
\nGod or whether warlike men merely wished it thus is the key question.<\/p>\n

Old Testament violence is an interesting case in point. God clearly
\nordered the Hebrews to annihilate the Canaanites and surrounding
\npeoples. Such violence is therefore an expression of God’s will, for
\ngood or ill. Regardless, all the historic violence committed by the
\nHebrews and recorded in the Old Testament is just that\u2014history. It
\nhappened; God commanded it. But it revolved around a specific time and
\nplace and was directed against a specific people. At no time did such
\nviolence go on to become standardized or codified into Jewish law. In
\nshort, biblical accounts of violence are descriptive, not prescriptive.<\/p>\n

This is where Islamic violence is unique. Though similar to the
\nviolence of the Old Testament\u2014commanded by God and manifested in
\nhistory\u2014certain aspects of Islamic violence and intolerance have become
\nstandardized in Islamic law and apply at all times. Thus, while the
\nviolence found in the Qur’an has a historical context, its ultimate
\nsignificance is theological. Consider the following Qur’anic verses,
\nbetter known as the “sword-verses”:<\/p>\n

\n

Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters
\nwherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in
\nwait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform
\nthe prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way.[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day, and do not
\nforbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden \u2013 such men as practise
\nnot the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book
\n\u2013 until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.[8]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As with Old Testament verses where God commanded the Hebrews to
\nattack and slay their neighbors, the sword-verses also have a
\nhistorical context. God first issued these commandments after the
\nMuslims under Muhammad’s leadership had grown sufficiently strong to
\ninvade their Christian and pagan neighbors. But unlike the bellicose
\nverses and anecdotes of the Old Testament, the sword-verses became
\nfundamental to Islam’s subsequent relationship to both the “people of
\nthe book” (i.e., Jews and Christians) and the “idolators” (i.e.,
\nHindus, Buddhists, animists, etc.) and, in fact, set off the Islamic
\nconquests, which changed the face of the world forever. Based on Qur’an
\n9:5, for instance, Islamic law mandates that idolators and polytheists
\nmust either convert to Islam or be killed; simultaneously, Qur’an 9:29
\nis the primary source of Islam’s well-known discriminatory practices
\nagainst conquered Christians and Jews living under Islamic suzerainty.<\/p>\n

In fact, based on the sword-verses as well as countless other
\nQur’anic verses and oral traditions attributed to Muhammad, Islam’s
\nlearned officials, sheikhs, muftis, and imams throughout the ages have
\nall reached consensus\u2014binding on the entire Muslim community\u2014that Islam
\nis to be at perpetual war with the non-Muslim world until the former
\nsubsumes the latter. Indeed, it is widely held by Muslim scholars that
\nsince the sword-verses are among the final revelations on the topic of
\nIslam’s relationship to non-Muslims, that they alone have abrogated
\nsome 200 of the Qur’an’s earlier and more tolerant verses, such as “no
\ncompulsion is there in religion.”[9]<\/a>
\nFamous Muslim scholar Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) admired in the West for
\nhis “progressive” insights, also puts to rest the notion that jihad is
\ndefensive warfare:<\/p>\n

\n

In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty,
\nbecause of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to
\nconvert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force … The
\nother religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy
\nwar was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of
\ndefense … They are merely required to establish their religion among
\ntheir own people. That is why the Israelites after Moses and Joshua
\nremained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g., a caliphate]. Their
\nonly concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the
\nnations] \u2026 But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other
\nnations.[10]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Modern authorities agree. The Encyclopaedia of Islam<\/i>‘s entry
\nfor “jihad” by Emile Tyan states that the “spread of Islam by arms is a
\nreligious duty upon Muslims in general \u2026 Jihad must continue to be done
\nuntil the whole world is under the rule of Islam \u2026 Islam must
\ncompletely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread
\nIslam] can be eliminated.” Iraqi jurist Majid Khaduri (1909-2007),
\nafter defining jihad as warfare, writes that “jihad \u2026 is regarded by
\nall jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of
\nthe whole Muslim community.”[11]<\/a> And, of course, Muslim legal manuals written in Arabic are even more explicit.[12]<\/a><\/p>\n

Qur’anic Language<\/h3>\n

When the Qur’an’s violent verses are juxtaposed with their Old
\nTestament counterparts, they are especially distinct for using language
\nthat transcends time and space, inciting believers to attack and slay
\nnonbelievers today no less than yesterday. God commanded the Hebrews to
\nkill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and
\nJebusites\u2014all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At
\nno time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by
\nextension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the
\nother hand, though Islam’s original enemies were, like Judaism’s,
\nhistorical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the
\nQur’an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims
\nwere (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book\u2014”until they
\npay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled”[13]<\/a> and to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them.”[14]<\/a><\/p>\n

The two Arabic conjunctions “until” (hata<\/i>) and “wherever” (haythu<\/i>)
\ndemonstrate the perpetual and ubiquitous nature of these commandments:
\nThere are still “people of the book” who have yet to be “utterly
\nhumbled” (especially in the Americas, Europe, and Israel) and
\n“idolators” to be slain “wherever” one looks (especially Asia and
\nsub-Saharan Africa). In fact, the salient feature of almost all of the
\nviolent commandments in Islamic scriptures is their open-ended and
\ngeneric nature: “Fight them [non-Muslims] until<\/i> there is no persecution and the religion is God’s entirely. [Emphasis added.]”[15]<\/a> Also, in a well-attested tradition that appears in the hadith<\/i> collections, Muhammad proclaims:<\/p>\n

\n

I have been commanded to wage war against mankind until<\/i> they
\ntestify that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is the Messenger
\nof God; and that they establish prostration prayer, and pay the
\nalms-tax [i.e., convert to Islam]. If they do so, their blood and
\nproperty are protected. [Emphasis added.][16]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This linguistic aspect is crucial to understanding scriptural
\nexegeses regarding violence. Again, it bears repeating that neither
\nJewish nor Christian scriptures\u2014the Old and New Testaments,
\nrespectively\u2014employ such perpetual, open-ended commandments. Despite
\nall this, Jenkins laments that<\/p>\n

\n

Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize
\nsegregation, to hate and fear other races and religions \u2026 all are in
\nthe Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency than in the Qur’an.
\nAt every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and
\ncertainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But
\nthe fact remains that the words are there, and their inclusion in the
\nscripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in
\nthe Muslim scripture.[17]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

One wonders what Jenkins has in mind by the word “canonized.” If by
\ncanonized he means that such verses are considered part of the canon of
\nJudeo-Christian scripture, he is absolutely correct; conversely, if by
\ncanonized he means or is trying to connote that these verses have been
\nimplemented in the Judeo-Christian Weltanschauung<\/i>, he is absolutely wrong.<\/p>\n

Yet one need not rely on purely exegetical and philological
\narguments; both history and current events give the lie to Jenkins’s
\nrelativism. Whereas first-century Christianity spread via the blood of
\nmartyrs, first-century Islam spread through violent conquest and
\nbloodshed. Indeed, from day one to the present\u2014whenever it could\u2014Islam
\nspread through conquest, as evinced by the fact that the majority of
\nwhat is now known as the Islamic world, or dar al-Islam<\/i>, was
\nconquered by the sword of Islam. This is a historic fact, attested to
\nby the most authoritative Islamic historians. Even the Arabian
\npeninsula, the “home” of Islam, was subdued by great force and
\nbloodshed, as evidenced by the Ridda wars following Muhammad’s death
\nwhen tens of thousands of Arabs were put to the sword by the first
\ncaliph Abu Bakr for abandoning Islam.<\/p>\n

Muhammad’s Role<\/h3>\n

Moreover, concerning the current default position which purports to
\nexplain away Islamic violence\u2014that the latter is a product of Muslim
\nfrustration vis-\u00e0-vis political or economic oppression\u2014one must ask:
\nWhat about all the oppressed Christians and Jews, not to mention Hindus
\nand Buddhists, of the world today? Where is their religiously-garbed
\nviolence? The fact remains: Even though the Islamic world has the
\nlion’s share of dramatic headlines\u2014of violence, terrorism,
\nsuicide-attacks, decapitations\u2014it is certainly not<\/i> the only region in the world suffering under both internal and external pressures.<\/p>\n

For instance, even though practically all of sub-Saharan Africa is
\ncurrently riddled with political corruption, oppression and poverty,
\nwhen it comes to violence, terrorism, and sheer chaos, Somalia\u2014which
\nalso happens to be the only sub-Saharan country that is entirely
\nMuslim\u2014leads the pack. Moreover, those most responsible for Somali
\nviolence and the enforcement of intolerant, draconian, legal
\nmeasures\u2014the members of the jihadi group Al-Shabab (the
\nyouth)\u2014articulate and justify all their actions through an Islamist
\nparadigm.<\/p>\n

In Sudan, too, a jihadi-genocide against the Christian and
\npolytheistic peoples is currently being waged by Khartoum’s Islamist
\ngovernment and has left nearly a million “infidels” and “apostates”
\ndead. That the Organization of Islamic Conference has come to the
\ndefense of Sudanese president Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, who is wanted by
\nthe International Criminal Court, is further telling of the Islamic
\nbody’s approval of violence toward both non-Muslims and those deemed
\nnot Muslim enough.<\/p>\n

Latin American and non-Muslim Asian countries also have their fair
\nshare of oppressive, authoritarian regimes, poverty, and all the rest
\nthat the Muslim world suffers. Yet, unlike the near daily headlines
\nemanating from the Islamic world, there are no records of practicing
\nChristians, Buddhists, or Hindus crashing explosives-laden vehicles
\ninto the buildings of oppressive (e.g., Cuban or Chinese communist)
\nregimes, all the while waving their scriptures in hand and screaming,
\n“Jesus [or Buddha or Vishnu] is great!” Why?<\/p>\n

There is one final aspect that is often overlooked\u2014either from
\nignorance or disingenuousness\u2014by those who insist that violence and
\nintolerance is equivalent across the board for all religions. Aside
\nfrom the divine words of the Qur’an, Muhammad’s pattern of behavior\u2014his
\nsunna<\/i> or “example”\u2014is an extremely important source of
\nlegislation in Islam. Muslims are exhorted to emulate Muhammad in all
\nwalks of life: “You have had a good example in God’s Messenger.”[18]<\/a> And Muhammad’s pattern of conduct toward non-Muslims is quite explicit.<\/p>\n

Sarcastically arguing against the concept of moderate Islam, for
\nexample, terrorist Osama bin Laden, who enjoys half the Arab-Islamic
\nworld’s support per an Al-Jazeera poll,[19]<\/a> portrays the Prophet’s sunna<\/i> thusly:<\/p>\n

\n

“Moderation” is demonstrated by our prophet who did not remain more
\nthan three months in Medina without raiding or sending a raiding party
\ninto the lands of the infidels to beat down their strongholds and seize
\ntheir possessions, their lives, and their women.[20]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In fact, based on both the Qur’an and Muhammad’s sunna<\/i>, pillaging and plundering infidels, enslaving their children, and placing their women in concubinage is well founded.[21]<\/a> And the concept of sunna<\/i>\u2014which
\nis what 90 percent of the billion-plus Muslims, the Sunnis, are named
\nafter\u2014essentially asserts that anything performed or approved by
\nMuhammad, humanity’s most perfect example, is applicable for Muslims
\ntoday no less than yesterday. This, of course, does not mean that
\nMuslims in mass live only to plunder and rape.<\/p>\n

But it does mean that persons naturally inclined to such activities,
\nand who also happen to be Muslim, can\u2014and do\u2014quite easily justify their
\nactions by referring to the “Sunna of the Prophet”\u2014the way Al-Qaeda,
\nfor example, justified its attacks on 9\/11 where innocents including
\nwomen and children were killed: Muhammad authorized his followers to
\nuse catapults during their siege of the town of Ta’if in 630
\nC.E.\u2014townspeople had refused to submit\u2014though he was aware that women
\nand children were sheltered there. Also, when asked if it was
\npermissible to launch night raids or set fire to the fortifications of
\nthe infidels if women and children were among them, the Prophet is said
\nto have responded, “They [women and children] are from among them
\n[infidels].”[22]<\/a><\/p>\n

Jewish and Christian Ways<\/h3>\n

Though law-centric and possibly legalistic, Judaism has no such
\nequivalent to the Sunna; the words and deeds of the patriarchs, though
\ndescribed in the Old Testament, never went on to prescribe Jewish law.
\nNeither Abraham’s “white-lies,” nor Jacob’s perfidy, nor Moses’
\nshort-fuse, nor David’s adultery, nor Solomon’s philandering ever went
\non to instruct Jews or Christians. They were understood as historical
\nacts perpetrated by fallible men who were more often than not punished
\nby God for their less than ideal behavior.<\/p>\n

As for Christianity, much of the Old Testament law was abrogated or
\nfulfilled\u2014depending on one’s perspective\u2014by Jesus. “Eye for an eye”
\ngave way to “turn the other cheek.” Totally loving God and one’s
\nneighbor became supreme law.[23]<\/a> Furthermore, Jesus’ sunna<\/i>\u2014as
\nin “What would Jesus do?”\u2014is characterized by passivity and altruism.
\nThe New Testament contains absolutely no exhortations to violence.<\/p>\n

Still, there are those who attempt to portray Jesus as having a
\nsimilarly militant ethos as Muhammad by quoting the verse where the
\nformer\u2014who “spoke to the multitudes in parables and without a parable
\nspoke not”[24]<\/a>\u2014said, “I come not to bring peace but a sword.”[25]<\/a>
\nBut based on the context of this statement, it is clear that Jesus was
\nnot commanding violence against non-Christians but rather predicting
\nthat strife will exist between Christians and their environment\u2014a
\nprediction that was only too true as early Christians, far from taking
\nup the sword, passively perished by the sword in martyrdom as too often
\nthey still do in the Muslim world. [26]<\/a><\/p>\n

Others point to the violence predicted in the Book of Revelation
\nwhile, again, failing to discern that the entire account is
\ndescriptive\u2014not to mention clearly symbolic\u2014and thus hardly
\nprescriptive for Christians. At any rate, how can one conscionably
\ncompare this handful of New Testament verses that metaphorically
\nmention the word “sword” to the literally hundreds of Qur’anic
\ninjunctions and statements by Muhammad that clearly command Muslims to
\ntake up a very real sword against non-Muslims?<\/p>\n

Undeterred, Jenkins bemoans the fact that, in the New Testament,
\nJews “plan to stone Jesus, they plot to kill him; in turn, Jesus calls
\nthem liars, children of the Devil.”[27]<\/a>
\nIt still remains to be seen if being called “children of the Devil” is
\nmore offensive than being referred to as the descendents of apes and
\npigs\u2014the Qur’an’s appellation for Jews.[28]<\/a>
\nName calling aside, however, what matters here is that, whereas the New
\nTestament does not command Christians to treat Jews as “children of the
\nDevil,” based on the Qur’an, primarily 9:29, Islamic law obligates
\nMuslims to subjugate Jews, indeed, all non-Muslims.<\/p>\n

Does this mean that no self-professed Christian can be anti-Semitic?
\nOf course not. But it does mean that Christian anti-Semites are living
\noxymorons\u2014for the simple reason that textually and theologically,
\nChristianity, far from teaching hatred or animosity, unambiguously
\nstresses love and forgiveness. Whether or not all Christians follow
\nsuch mandates is hardly the point; just as whether or not all Muslims
\nuphold the obligation of jihad is hardly the point. The only question
\nis, what do the religions command?<\/p>\n

John Esposito is therefore right to assert that “Jews and Christians
\nhave engaged in acts of violence.” He is wrong, however, to add, “We
\n[Christians] have our own theology of hate.” Nothing in the New
\nTestament teaches hate\u2014certainly nothing to compare with Qur’anic
\ninjunctions such as: “We [Muslims] disbelieve in you [non-Muslims], and
\nbetween us and you enmity has shown itself, and hatred for ever until
\nyou believe in God alone.”[29]<\/a><\/p>\n

Reassessing the Crusades<\/h3>\n

And it is from here that one can best appreciate the historic
\nCrusades\u2014events that have been thoroughly distorted by Islam’s many
\ninfluential apologists. Karen Armstrong, for instance, has practically
\nmade a career for herself by misrepresenting the Crusades, writing, for
\nexample, that “the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a
\nWestern fiction, fabricated during the time of the Crusades when, in
\nfact, it was Western Christians who were fighting brutal holy wars
\nagainst Islam.”[30]<\/a>
\nThat a former nun rabidly condemns the Crusades vis-\u00e0-vis anything
\nIslam has done makes her critique all the more marketable. Statements
\nsuch as this ignore the fact that from the beginnings of Islam, more
\nthan 400 years before the Crusades, Christians have noted that Islam
\nwas spread by the sword.[31]<\/a>
\nIndeed, authoritative Muslim historians writing centuries before the
\nCrusades, such as Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri (d. 892) and Muhammad
\nibn Jarir at-Tabari (838-923), make it clear that Islam was spread by
\nthe sword.<\/p>\n

The fact remains: The Crusades were a counterattack on Islam\u2014not an
\nunprovoked assault as Armstrong and other revisionist historians
\nportray. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis puts it well,<\/p>\n

\n

Even the Christian crusade, often compared with the Muslim jihad,
\nwas itself a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also
\nan imitation. But unlike the jihad, it was concerned primarily with the
\ndefense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory. It
\nwas, with few exceptions, limited to the successful wars for the
\nrecovery of southwest Europe, and the unsuccessful wars to recover the
\nHoly Land and to halt the Ottoman advance in the Balkans. The Muslim
\njihad, in contrast, was perceived as unlimited, as a religious
\nobligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted
\nthe Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule. \u2026 The object of jihad is
\nto bring the whole world under Islamic law.[32]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Moreover, Muslim invasions and atrocities against Christians were on
\nthe rise in the decades before the launch of the Crusades in 1096. The
\nFatimid caliph Abu ‘Ali Mansur Tariqu’l-Hakim (r. 996-1021) desecrated
\nand destroyed a number of important churches\u2014such as the Church of St.
\nMark in Egypt and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem\u2014and
\ndecreed even more oppressive than usual decrees against Christians and
\nJews. Then, in 1071, the Seljuk Turks crushed the Byzantines in the
\npivotal battle of Manzikert and, in effect, conquered a major chunk of
\nByzantine Anatolia presaging the way for the eventual capture of
\nConstantinople centuries later.<\/p>\n

It was against this backdrop that Pope Urban II (r. 1088-1099) called for the Crusades:<\/p>\n

\n

From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a
\nhorrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to
\nour ears, namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians [i.e.,
\nMuslim Turks] \u2026 has invaded the lands of those Christians and has
\ndepopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part
\nof the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by
\ncruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or
\nappropriated them for the rites of its own religion.[33]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Even though Urban II’s description is historically accurate, the
\nfact remains: However one interprets these wars\u2014as offensive or
\ndefensive, just or unjust\u2014it is evident that they were not based on the
\nexample of Jesus, who exhorted his followers to “love your enemies,
\nbless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for
\nthose who spitefully use you and persecute you.”[34]<\/a>
\nIndeed, it took centuries of theological debate, from Augustine to
\nAquinas, to rationalize defensive war\u2014articulated as “just war.” Thus,
\nit would seem that if anyone, it is the Crusaders\u2014not the jihadists\u2014who
\nhave been less than faithful to their scriptures (from a literal
\nstandpoint); or put conversely, it is the jihadists\u2014not the
\nCrusaders\u2014who have faithfully fulfilled their scriptures (also from a
\nliteral stand point). Moreover, like the violent accounts of the Old
\nTestament, the Crusades are historic in nature and not manifestations
\nof any deeper scriptural truths.<\/p>\n

In fact, far from suggesting anything intrinsic to Christianity, the
\nCrusades ironically better help explain Islam. For what the Crusades
\ndemonstrated once and for all is that irrespective of religious
\nteachings\u2014indeed, in the case of these so-called Christian Crusades,
\ndespite them\u2014man is often predisposed to violence. But this begs the
\nquestion: If this is how Christians behaved\u2014who are commanded to love,
\nbless, and do good to their enemies who hate, curse, and persecute
\nthem\u2014how much more can be expected of Muslims who, while sharing the
\nsame violent tendencies, are further commanded by the Deity to attack,
\nkill, and plunder nonbelievers?<\/p>\n

\n

Raymond Ibrahim<\/b> is associate director of the Middle East Forum and author of The Al Qaeda Reader<\/i> (New York: Doubleday, 2007).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

[1]<\/a> Andrea Bistrich, “Discovering the common grounds of world religions<\/a>,” interview with Karen Armstrong, Share International, Sept. 2007, pp. 19-22.
[2]<\/a> C-SPAN2, June 5, 2004.
[3]<\/a> Philip Jenkins, “Dark Passages<\/a>,” The Boston Globe<\/i>, Mar. 8, 2009.
[4]<\/a> Deut. 20:16-18.
[5]<\/a> Josh. 10:40.
[6]<\/a> “The Fall of Jerusalem<\/a>,” Gesta Danorum<\/i>, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[7]<\/a> Qur. 9:5. All translations of Qur’anic verses are drawn from A.J. Arberry, ed. The Koran Interpreted: A Translation<\/a><\/i> (New York: Touchstone, 1996).
[8]<\/a> Qur. 9:29.
[9]<\/a> Qur. 2:256.
[10]<\/a> Ibn Khaldun, The Muqudimmah: An Introduction to History<\/i>, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958,) vol. 1, p. 473.
[11]<\/a> Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam<\/i> (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), p. 60.
[12]<\/a> See, for instance, Ahmed Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi’l-Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina<\/i> (Cairo: Al-Azhar University, 2003).
[13]<\/a> Qur. 9:29.
[14]<\/a> Qur. 9:5.
[15]<\/a> Qur. 8:39.
[16]<\/a> Ibn al-Hajjaj Muslim, Sahih Muslim<\/i>, C9B1N31; Muhammad Ibn Isma’il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari<\/i> (Lahore: Kazi, 1979), B2N24.
[17]<\/a> Jenkins, “Dark_Passages<\/a>.”
[18]<\/a> Qur. 33:21.
[19]<\/a> “Al-Jazeera-Poll: 49% of Muslims Support Osama bin Laden,” <\/a>Sept. 7-10, 2006, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[20]<\/a> ‘Abd al-Rahim ‘Ali, Hilf al Irhab<\/i> (Cairo: Markaz al-Mahrusa li ‘n-Nashr wa ‘l-Khidamat as-Sahafiya wa ‘l-Ma’lumat, 2004).
[21]<\/a> For example, Qur. 4:24, 4:92, 8:69, 24:33, 33:50.
[22]<\/a> Sahih Muslim<\/i>, B19N4321; for English translation, see Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader<\/i> (New York: Doubleday, 2007), p. 140.
[23]<\/a> Matt. 22:38-40.
[24]<\/a> Matt. 13:34.
[25]<\/a> Matt. 10:34.
[26]<\/a> See, for instance, “Christian Persecution Info<\/a>,” Christian Persecution Magazine<\/i>, accessed Apr. 2, 2009.
[27]<\/a> Jenkins, “Dark_Passages<\/a>.”
[28]<\/a> Qur. 2:62-65, 5:59-60, 7:166.
[29]<\/a> Qur. 60:4.
[30]<\/a> Bistrich, “Discovering the common grounds of world religions<\/a>,” pp. 19-22; For a critique of Karen Armstrong’s work, see “Karen Armstrong<\/a>,” in Andrew Holt, ed. Crusades-Encyclopedia<\/i>, Apr. 2005, accessed Apr. 6, 2009.
[31]<\/a>
\nSee, for example, the writings of Sophrinius, Jerusalem’s patriarch
\nduring the Muslim conquest of the Holy City, just years after the death
\nof Muhammad, or the chronicles of Theophane the Confessor.
[32]<\/a> Bernard Lewis, The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years<\/i> (New York: Scribner, 1995), p. 233-4.
[33]<\/a> “Speech of Urban\u2014Robert of Rheims<\/a>,” in Edward Peters, ed., The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials<\/i> (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998), p. 27.
[34]<\/a> Matt. 5:44.<\/p>\n

Related Topics:<\/b>  History<\/a>, Islam<\/a>, Jews and Judaism<\/a>  |  Raymond Ibrahim<\/a>  |  Summer 2009 MEQ<\/i><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing list<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

To receive the full, printed version of the Middle East Quarterly<\/b><\/i>, please see details about an affordable subscription<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

This
\ntext may be reposted so long as it is presented as an integral whole
\nwith complete information provided about its author, date, place of
\npublication, and original URL.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam? by Raymond Ibrahim Middle East Quarterly Summer 2009, pp. 3-12 http:\/\/www.meforum.org\/2159\/are-judaism-and-christianity-as-violent-as-islam Print Send RSS Share:       “There is far more violence in the Bible than in the Qur’an; the idea that Islam imposed itself by the sword is a Western fiction, fabricated during the time…
Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-554","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/554","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=554"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/554\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=554"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=554"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/venusimportexport.com\/wordpress\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=554"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}