Over at veiled4allah, there is an excerpt from the 10 Commandments case being argued in front of the Supreme Court. The question is about whether Muslims believe in the 10 Commandments. Al-Muhajabah’s comments are spot on, but I have an issue with CAIR’s response. CAIR argues that there are many things in the Qur’an that agree with the big 10, a statement I agree with. However, the way it is worded implies that Muslims view the Hebrew Bible as outside of the Muslim tradition. Traditionally, the Torah (Torah), Zabur (Psalms), and Injil (Gospels) are considered revelation – hence the term ahl al-kitâb, people of the book, for Jews and Christians – but revelation that has been corrupted or misinterpreted over time. It is not surprising that there is sympathy amongst the books because they are part of the same revelation, and in the early period of Islam the three books were used to help determine universal history and help fill in legislative gaps (of which there were many) when those texts did not conflict with the Qur’an. Remember that the three traditions are part of the larger Abrahamic tradition; there is more commonality than we tend to think of, and part of that is due to the loss of tradition. CAIR should know better.
Related Posts
Brad Hirschfield: My Neighbor’s Faith: The Rabbi And The Christian Cab Driver
Brad Hirschfield: My Neighbor’s Faith: The Rabbi And The Christian Cab Driver. I could feel how torn he was. His most important teacher had told him that he had a choice to make. He felt pulled in different directions by the two things that mattered most in his life: his wife and his faith. Nobody had told him that his wife could be completely with him on his journey even if they were never going to be in complete agreement. My teacher in Hebron, for whom any difference was an excuse for disconnection, expressed the same mind-set. Either the cause…
Is the Bible more Violent than the Qur’an?
NPR does the story. I am uncomfortable with this sort of comparison because it still buys into a paradigm of one religion being better than the other. Interestingly, I think the most intelligent comment comes from the critic of Islam who argues that the Qur’an is not about history, but the present. It is, in many ways, about always defining the present, which means it’s reading cannot be fixed in the past either. He does not take the argument to the logical conclusion. If the guidance is meant to be read for the present, than we as Muslims must struggle…
PAMF
Stands for Punk A$$ Mo Fo. I think a better term than hoodlums in this case. Martijn always has such interesting posts. However, on the issue of counter-identity, isn’t that essentially OBL’s point? He hates women, so he’s a man. He hates the “West,” so he’s an Arab. He hates Christians and Jews, so he’s a “Muslim.” A little more seriously, hasn’t he simply adopted Islam as an oppositional identity? Isn’t he more aligned with Elijah Muhammad’s Nation of Islam than with the Hanbali school? For OBL, it seems Islam is what others are not, and his association with Taliban,…