Talk:Islam

I've reverted the working of the first paragraph because it conforms better to N.P.O.V. The content is basically the same. No doubt, there are many serious things to discuss here, but let's allow the facts to speak for themselves. Fr. John

Is NPOV really what we're striving for? I thought that we had a definite and distinct point of view. Of course, this is not to say that we ought to be uncharitable in expressing it.Dogface 10:33, March 1, 2006 (CST)

Hi Dogface (how can I not smile when writing that?!) - Our definition of NPOV is different from Wikipedia's, since we enshrine "A mainstream Chalcedonian bias" as the basis of neutrality. (This is a recognition that there is no true "neutral", but our understanding of truth comes ultimately through revelation.)

All that said, if I remember the issue, I think I was saying that we should generally let the facts speak for themeselves rather simply resorting to invective. Fr. John

Islam equal to religion of Pharisees

I added a small change that Islam is the religion of the Pharisees. It wants to enslave everyone under Arabic worship rites. Quite similar to the now defunct School of Shammai, an ultra-nationalist Jewish group in Palestine in the time of our Lord that seeked an earthly conquering Messiah who was violent. Any comments from others? Do you think this is reasonable to add? Mikail Abdul Rahman 04:12, March 10, 2006 (CST)

Hi Mikhail. thanks for your contribution. I think, though, that the connection to Pharisees is too speculative to include here - it is making a broad generalization based on religious typologies. It may be instructive in some respects, but I don't think should be categorized as the Orthodox view. Yours in Christ, — FrJohn (talk)

Purpose of Article

Mmatga2me99's last edit makes a good point - this purpose of this article, in my perspective, isn't to document every crime or act of persecution perpetrated against Orthodox Christians by Muslims, or even to spend much time introducing Islam to this audience (this is important, but better done elsewhere). Instead, I think the purpose here would be to outline to scope of Muslim-Orthodox interaction. History, classical apologetics (e.g. John of Damascus) and discussion of important theological similarities and differences, martyred saints, and the Coptic situation all deserve mention, as would, IMHO, mention of Islamic approaches to other religions, especially "people of the book." — FrJohn (talk)

Corruption of Previous Scriptures

"Islam teaches that parts of the Bible have been forgotten, misinterpreted, or distorted by Christians and Jews. Given this perspective, Islam views the Qur'an as corrective of Jewish and Christian scriptures."

The above is wrong. Islam itself (not Muslims) view all three scriptures to be in sync with one another. Muhammad (who had never actually read any Jewish or Christian scripture) and the Qur'an never claim the previous scriptures were physically corrupted, only misread by Jewish and Christian leaders. Some early and modern Muslim scholars (including the prophet's cousin) attest to this. The whole claim that the Bible had been corrupted was invented due to some Muslims who actually read all three scriptures were unable to reconcile the differences. Please read these pages: [1] [2] I think that section needs to be reworded. --Gabe 11:15, September 24, 2010 (UTC)