Book Review - Allah: A Christian Response

You might remember that last year I wrote reviews of books by Nabeel Qureshi. The latter review of No God But One covered a crucial topic for Qureshi: Are Islam and Christianity really all that different?

A friend of mine suggested my next book be Miroslav Volf's Allah: A Christian Response. In fact, he actually bought the book for me; thanks again, friend. 

I think understanding this book starts with understanding the author. Volf's Wikipedia page carries a lot of noteworthy accomplishments and glowing references. Theologian, seminary professor, author, public intellectual, White House advisor . . . the man has a long and reputable résumé. There is a strong theme throughout his work, however, of interfaith engagement, the most relevant work being his crafting of the "Yale Response" to "A Common Word." 

This book seems to have been an outgrowth of that work, though in this case, Volf's audience is fellow Christians, or at least that's what he claims in the book. The central question Volf seeks to answer in Allah is, "Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?" Nabeel Qureshi answered the question in the negative. Volf, in the course of the book, says, "Yes, we do worship the same God." (If you're interested in hearing these two debate the matter, there's audio of just that.)

Volf spends a lot of time laying his groundwork, but his basic argument follows that of "A Common Word," arguing that Muslims and Christians worship the same God because of their common ground, a faith centered in the love of God and the love of neighbor. He spends a great deal of the book unpacking these ideas. 

I really struggled to finish this book. My first inclination while reading it was to call Volf a hack. That isn't fair or charitable, but it was born out of irritation, and a sense, as I worked my way through the chapters, that Volf was not dealing with the topic in an honest manner. I can't know the process by which Volf reached the conclusions he did; I can't unpack the people he's met or the books he's read. However, I can at least respond to the arguments he's made, and they are not convincing, as far as I'm concerned.

Book Review: No God But One

A few months ago, I received a copy of Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward for review. Written by Nabeel Qureshi, it was a brief examination of jihad in Islam and the Christian response to it.

I was fortunate enough to receive a review copy of Qureshi's third book, No God But One: Allah or Jesus? as well. If his first book, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, was the story of how his heart changed in his conversion from Islam to Christianity, then No God But One is the story of how his mind changed.

In No God But One, Qureshi takes the time to unpack two primary questions central to someone seeking to know God:

1. Are Christianity and Islam really all that different?
2. Can we know whether Islam or Christianity is true?

These are both questions of profound importance. There is no sense in choosing between one faith or the other if they are not meaningfully different, but if they are different, then how can you know which one to choose? This is not a process of elimination, either; they must stand or fall on their own merits. As Qureshi says of his own experience:

For me, it's been a decade since I made the decision to leave Islam, and the fallout of my decision haunts me every day. I knew it would, well before I ever converted, but I also knew that I was sure. I was sure that Islam and Christianity are not just two paths that lead to the same God, but two very different paths that lead very different ways. I was sure that I had excellent historical reason to believe the gospel. I was sure that, though I loved Islam, I couldn't ignore the problems that plagued its foundations. But most of all, I was sure that following the one true God would be worth all trials and all suffering. I had to follow the evidence and the truth, no matter the cost.

Book Review: "Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward"

As I said before, I received a review copy of Nabeel Qureshi's latest book, Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward several weeks ago. I shared a few thoughts on the book then, but I have much more to say now.

Although Qureshi converted to Christianity several years ago, the "question" of Islam and Muslims is no less important to him. As he puts it, "Ignoring the reality of jihad endangers my nation, while responding with fear endangers my Muslim family." Helping others to understand the "how" and "why" of Islamic radicalization isn't just a religious conviction, but a deeply personal matter as well, and it shows throughout the book.

The book is divided into three parts, each addressing a general area of inquiry: The origins of jihad, jihad today, and jihad in the Judeo-Christian context. Each of these sections is then further divided into "Questions," wherein each chapter addresses a specific issue. This makes it possible to jump directly to subjects of interest, such as, "Why are Muslims being radicalized?" or "Does Islam need a reformation?" I still found it most useful to read straight through; Quereshi does a wonderful job explaining the subjects in his particular style, and he builds on each successive topic through the book. You may or may not agree with his answers on some of the Questions, but reading everything will certainly help in understanding how he came to the conclusions he reaches.

It's worth reiterating that the book was written as a primer on these things. Each Question could itself be the subject of a book. One does get the impression of only scratching the surface in each chapter, but Qureshi recommends further resources throughout the book.

Book Preview: "Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward"

I've got a review copy of a book, so some of you might find this interesting.

Two years ago you might have seen Nabeel Qureshi's book Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus. If you didn't read it, it was an American Muslim's story of finding Christ by trying to commit himself to Muslim Apologetics. Quereshi graduated medical school, but took up the path of Christian apologetics afterwards. In the entirety of his time doing so, he's been getting lots of questions about jihad and radical Islam. Apparently he's been rather demure on the topic, because it's kind of a hot issue.

The tumult of the last year was evidently too much for him, and he decided to take up the topic in writing. In fact, he wrote a book on it in three weeks, Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward.

But was it true? After years of investigation, I had to face the reality. There is a great deal of violence in Islam, even in the very foundations of the faith, and it is not all defensive. Quite to the contrary, if the traditions about the prophet of Islam are in any way reliable, then Islam glorifies violent jihad arguably more than any other action a Muslim can take. - My Fork In The Road - An excerpt from Answering Jihad.

Qureshi's target audience for this is Christians, but some of the material could be useful to wider audiences. The book is presented in three parts. In the first part, he discusses the nature and historical basis for jihad, how it relates to the Quran, the Hadiths, and Muhammad's life. In the second part, he talks about the modern development of radical Islam and the basis of Islamic violence, both against the West and against fellow Muslims. In the third part, he explores jihad in the Juedo-Christian context: Whether Muslims and Christians worship the same God, comparing the teachings of Jesus to those of Muhammad, Old Testament warfare in comparison to jihad, and so on.

The conclusion to the book, though, is a call to answer jihad the way Jesus would have: In love, even a self-sacrificing love.

I enjoyed it, although it was a very fast read. Qureshi admits the book is a primer, and he does recommend resources throughout for exploring certain topics in greater depth. Still, if someone wanted a book with good answers for various questions about Islam, radical Islam in particular, the book would be a great resource.

The book is only available for pre-order at the moment, but if you pre-order the book, you get access to bonus materials, including videos of Nabeel discussing various chapters of the book in greater depth.

This conclusion led me to a three-pronged fork in the road. Either I could become an apostate and leave Islam, grow apathetic and ignore the prophet, or become “radicalized” and obey him. The alternative of simply disregarding Muhammad’s teachings and continuing as a devout Muslim was not an option in my mind, nor is it for most Muslims, since to be Muslim is to submit to Allah and to follow Muhammad. Apostasy, apathy, or radicalization; those were my choices… - My Fork In The Road - An excerpt from Answering Jihad.

Later on, I'll have a full review of the book here, but for now you can (and should!) explore the Answering Jihad website for more info on the book.

Link Dump!

Does anybody remember those old Surge commercials? The title is supposed to sound like that.

Anyhow, I was supposed to be in Baltimore today, but we've had about 24 hours of sleet and ice pounding down on us, so I'm stranded here in SoIL. I've missed some legitimate (and not so legitimate) blogging the last few days/weeks, so I thought I'd just dump some links out on ya'll.

• The Archbishop of Canterbury called for Sharia Lite in Britain. Most sane people wondered what religion he was working for. I'd thought about writing up a detailed rant about how stupid that truly is, but then I read Big Lizards' superb analysis, and I lost heart. Read the whole thing, Dafyyd is a truly excellent writer.
  
  
• Mario Kart is finally coming to the Wii. All is right with the world.
  
  
• Also, nothing gives you a good laugh like making fun of children and their crappy science fair projects. Good times . . . good times.

Everybody was making a big deal about Michelle Obama's comments that she was proud of America "for the first time in her[my] adult life." What fewer people noticed was some of the truly creepy rhetoric she was using in the rest of the speech:

Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

Well, a Jim Geraghty noticed, although I think Ace's reaction is funnier. A lot of people are speculating that Obama's appeal is more a cult of personality than anything about his qualifications or policy positions. I'm starting to wonder if it isn't true.

It's only a compromise if both sides lose

Here's an interesting story: A Dutch, Catholic bishop as asked that people refer to God as 'Allah' in order to "ease relations" with muslims.

The bishop argues that God doesn't care what he's called, so why not pick a name that puts everyone at ease? To an extent he's right, although considering the number of names that God has given himself, I'm not sure we can just choose what to call him anyhow.

However, it's a really, really dumb way of "easing relations."

I agree with the letter writer in the article. In Islam's entire history, small compromises like those turned into big ones, and they always go in one direction. Or have the Dutch Catholics simply accepted that subjugation is inevitable?

One other note in the article that is glossed over. They note that the leader of an organization for ex-muslims was assaulted by "two Moroccans and a Somali." In other words, other muslims. What they also don't mention is that Muhammad commanded that anyone who left Islam should be killed, so things of this nature shouldn't be unexepected. At least, they wouldn't be if people had any idea what was going on.

They also mention a "populist" politician in the Netherlands who recently compared the Qu'ran to Mein Kampf, intimating that it's a poor comparison. I've never read it myself, but considering its popularity in the Middle East, it's not something I'd rule out.

On a final note, I have to agree with Ace's take on this.

When Cultures Collide

I've been mulling this post over for a while, even though there's nothing really critical in it. I've just noticed some oddities lately and thought I might share them. As much as we might complain about foreign cultures not assimilating to Western/American culture, you do see signs of it sometimes. These transitory stages of a changing culture can be interesting, even amusing, to observe. In this case, both of my observations relate to Islamic customs regarding women's attire.

As I'm sure you know, many muslim women wear the hijab, the scarf covering most of the head and neck. A while back, I saw a woman wearing the hijab talking as she walked. She was alone, so I assumed she was using a headset to a cell phone. (This in itself has become an oddity. We used to think that people talking to themselves were insane. Now we just assume they're on the phone. Sometimes I think the difference is negligible.)

However, when she came within closer inspection, I realized I'd been wrong. Oh, she was on a cell phone all right. In her case, though, she'd simply slipped the whole thing into her hijab, wrapped so tightly that it held the phone to her ear. I thought to myself, "There's something you don't see every day." Maybe it's just me, but I found it amusing.

My other anecdote could be filed in a similar category as my previous musings on "Christian cleavage."

Universal Studios in Orlando has a section called "City Walk." It's filled with restaurants, many of which become night clubs after hours, so it's not unusual to see a stream of people coming in for late night revelry.

One night, when we were on our way in for dinner, I saw a group of three muslim women also heading in, noticeable for their hijabs. As I understand it, the veil is to be worn for purposes of modesty, which is typically taken a few steps further with burkhas and nikabs (The veil covering all but the eyes). Most muslim women I've seen in America, even if they're not wearing burkhas, will still wear full length clothing all the time (pants, long skirts, long sleeved shirts, etc.).

So, I was somewhat confused by the dress of these women. Yes, they were still wearing long clothing, but it was long clothing made about as sexy as you can make it. The skirts were tight, their shirts and jackets too, and cut low enough to start showing off some skin. They were even wearing high heels, which I'd always been told were to help show off one's posterior. In all, slightly less "modest" than the head scarf might lead you to believe.

Now, I'm making no judgements on these women, nor saying I'd prefer them in that hideous amorphous bundle ubiquitous in Saudi Arabia. As I said before, I find the convergence of American culture, with its "sexy" clothing, and Islamic culture, with the hijab and its expectation of modesty, to be somewhat amusing.

Silly anecdotes, yes, but this blog is all about the silly.

A Muslim Christian or a Christian Muslim?

Perhaps you heard about this a few weeks ago: An Episcopal priest made the news because she declared herself to be both a Christian and a Muslim. Sound silly? It ought to. Such a synthesis is only possible when both faiths are stripped of everything that makes them meaningful and are reduced to banal platitudes and empty theology. Unfortunately, that's not uncommon in the Episcopal church in America, at least if the news stories are any indication.

In any event, the church hasn't descended too far into lunacy, as she's been stripped of her position and leadership roles for a year. I imagine she'll need to rethink her faiths until then. She seems a bit defiant, but a year is a long time.

Hat tip: Dr. Mohler

Islamic Compounds?

Is Canada Free Press a reputable source? I'm not sure. So, take this story with a grain of salt:

Radical Muslim paramilitary compound flourishes in upper New York state

Apparently, these compounds have sprouted up all over the country. Closed to the outside world with a gun-toting sentry at the entrance, neighbors are scared silly about these outposts and the FBI isn't appearing highly bothered.

If this is all true, it's a huge deal. Not only are these people creating sealed off communities, which creates something of a public health concern, but they're almost certainly jihadi training camps.

(On a side note, I'm surprised people aren't upset just by the sealed off communities; I incurred the wrath of readers at another blog when they were discussing an alleged Catholic-only community. Is this any better)

To follow-up, a blogger who wrote about the story has had his life threatened in Washington for doing so.

Does it validate the story at all? I dunno. If this is all true, it's pretty scary.

Update
Sorry about that. It seems my HTML ate some bad Linux or something.

Ibrahim on Armstrong

Here's an article by Raymond Ibrahim at NRO about a new book Karen Armstrong has coming out soon. Once again, she's writing about Muhammad (the founder of Islam).

If you read here regularly, you'll remember that I picked up Robert Spencer's newest book at Christmas. It's an interesting piece. Karen Armstrong has written a few books about Muhammad as well and thinks that Spencer is the worst kind of bigot and idealogue.

I've not read any of her books, but I did listen to her on CSPAN talking about one of her books. It's absolutely amazing. You'd think that her and Spencer were talking about completely different guys. I'll point out that Spencer uses citations like they were going out of style, both when writing and speaking. Armstrong doesn't when speaking. When writing? I don't know. But given what the Islamic writings say about themselves, she either has to be very ignorant of them or very dishonest about their content.

For Your Listening Pleasure

Ah, Spring Break. It's nice to have time off. Well, that's what I've heard. I'll be spending the week catching up on errands, chores, studying, and a backlog of labs to grade. Yippee.

In the meantime, I do have some interesting things I've kept track of.

I listen to a radioshow podcast by the some of the guys at Powerline, and heard a rather interesting segment a week or so ago. They interviewed Father Neuhaus, author of a new book on the intersection of the Catholic Church and American politics, and also the editor of a Catholic magazine. It was fairly interesting, to say the least.

There were a few things that stood out to me during the interview. At one point, the host asked Father Neuhaus whether he agrees that the Catholic Church in America is going to move to a smaller but more dedicated body of believers. The priest answered that saying that people are out of your "club" if you don't subscribe to a certain list of requirements is "a very protestant way of looking at things." He went on to describe this pithy analogy about the Catholic Church being the "mother" church, but I thought his comment deserved notice.

I've heard it said that a man can curse God when his dog craps in the house and a pollster will call him a Christian. Silly anecdotes aside, it's pretty true that there are a lot of people in churches today, Catholic and Protestant, who call themselves by that label but barely hold to the teachings of that church if at all. I think Father Neuhaus' position isn't very fair, because there was a time when the Catholic Church excommunicated those who didn't tow the line. That's not too common anymore from what I understand, and it just goes into a "you've excommunicated yourself" kind of an argument, which makes no sense to me at all.

Anyhow, I didn't have much of importance to say about that, but I thought his answer was weak. Yeah, a person doesn't have to be perfect to be a Christian, and nobody expects it. There has to be a minimum standard of orthodoxy, or else there's no meaningful distinction between Christian and non-Christian, and therefore no compelling reason to be either.

There was something else that was brought up that made me think. It wasn't anything they directly said, but I have been thinking. If you remember my post on Mark Steyn's new book, you remember that the prediction is that Europe as we know it will be gone in the next 50 or so years. (Incidentally, Dafydd over at Big Lizards disagrees)

The idea I had was this: If Europe becomes Islamicized (Islamated? Muslimilated?), including Italy, what happens to the Catholic Church? I can't imagine that the Vatican will exist as we know it if Italy were to become a muslim country. What would happen, both to the institutional Catholic Church and to the faith of it's people around the globe? It's an interesting scenario to me.

Anyhow, there was one other thing I saw that was interesting this week. You should watch it in its entirety. Enjoy!

Truth About Muhammad Review

I finished reading Robert Spencer's latest book, The Truth About Muhammad.

It's essentially a biography of Islam's founder, based entirely off of their own most reliable sources. Contrary to popular belief, the Qu'ran is not the only source of wisdom for the muslim; the hadith (collections of Muhammad's sayings and experiences) and the sira (biographies of Muhammad, sometimes based in part on the hadith) also form the core basis for Islamic theology.

The point of Spencer's book is to not only lay out the general consensus for Muhammad's life and most important experiences and teachings as it's found in the muslim community, but also to give a crash course in Islamic theology and show why Muhammad's life is important.

In Islamic theology, Muhammad is the "perfect man." That is, he was as holy as they come. In order to be a good muslim, one should obey all of his teachings and follow his example. After his death, Islamic theology rose around Muhammad's teachings, his example, and his silences (those things he observed but did not condemn).

That, as Spencer observes, is a huge problem for those who constantly remind us that Islam is a "religion of peace." Muhammad spent the better part of his time as a religious leader commanding armies, leading raids on caravans, ordering assassinations, and more. When Muhammad teaches that all good muslims must obey his teachings and imitate his example, this history becomes incredibly problematic.

Of course, as we're reminded, not every muslim out there is strapping bombs to their bellies and blasting off into the afterlife. Unfortunately, it would seem that in order to achieve such peacefulness, one must ignore the teachings of this religion. Peaceful muslims would seem to be the Islamic equivalent to Unitarians.

Spencer argues that the best approach for ensuring peace and security, both for the US and those in the broader world, would be to combine efforts and post-modern secularization for Islam with any international actions, including visa/green card applications. Refusing to acknowledge the danger of Islam's teachings, he argues, does nothing to stem the tide of terrorism at home and abroad.

The book is 90% history, so whether you agree or disagree with his conclusion, it's worth reading if only as a very good look at the life of a figure playing prominently in current world events.

'Honor Killings' in UK Still a Problem

More than a dozen women are killed for violating community standards each year in the U.K., according to police. While Nazir's killers were jailed for life, U.K. police ignore hundreds of ``honor crimes'' to avoid inflaming relations with Muslim enclaves as they work to head off homegrown terror plots, say lawmakers and women's rights advocates.

The whole article is worth reading.

If it's true that authorities take to ignoring this kind of thing, that is both truly sad and truly scary, reinforcing Mark Steyn's argument about the coming downfall of Europe as we know it.

The article quotes some unnamed muslim leader saying that this is a cultural problem, not an Islamic one, but I think that ignores some of the reality. For one, Islam is the cultural identification for many of these people. Additionally, note the religion of the people committing the crime. Perhaps there is no sanctioning in the religious texts for this kind of behavior. I couldn't say either way. However, when nearly all the perpetrators of the crimes are muslim, perhaps a deeper look ought to be taken at why it's happening, rather than just giving us the typical "Move along, nothing to see here" brush off.