Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World book. Happy reading Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Through Her Eyes: Perspectives on Life from Christian Women Serving in the Muslim World Pocket Guide.

Um… He kind of left out about years of evidence. If we looked only at the whole 20th century, the data would flip his thesis on its head, not to mention the 19th and 18th centuries. If one simply looks at the historical record anytime before , Christianity and Judaism do not at all appear more tolerant, reason-based, and less violent than Islam. In fact, one would reasonably find the exact opposite.

In fact, not only did the vibrant Muslim corpus of philosophy and science influence Enlightenment thinkers, but there are many Enlightenment thinkers that developed a great affinity for Islam as a religion of reason. That being said, one of the most negative products of the Enlightenment was a Euro-Christian-supremacist worldview that is exhibited in the thoroughly intolerant post-Enlightenment ideas and polemics that espoused the inferiority of Africa, and the Muslim world.

Arrogant orientalism was essentially born with the Enlightenment, and we, today, operate off of many of the falsehoods about Islamic belief and its absence in civilizational history crafted in that time. You criticize Mr. Shermer over two points, and yet both of those points came from an academic study. Both of your objections should have been directed at them. To define terrorism in a particular way generally accepted, by the way , and then to provide data based on that definition is clear, transparent, not misleading in any way, and allows you to agree or disagree with the conclusions as you wish.

through her eyes perspectives on life from christian women serving in the muslim world Manual

You have to evaluate the evidence at face value, however. The evidence is presented as facts, and you have to have strong reasons for disputing those facts. Do you have contrary evidence? You certainly have a right to your own conclusions. Shermer for anything other than bringing a valuable study to your attention. Ken Farnsworth is technically correct in saying that Shermer was citing statements from a University of Maryland study.

But I must take exception to his admonition that I should not be criticizing Shermer but directing my comments to the authors of that study. There are at least two problems with this position. As to supporting my critique with facts, I was only challenging Shermer, not the accuracy of the study he cited, and thus have no responsibility for factually refuting it.

What Islam really says about women - Alaa Murabit

Accepted by whom? You are simply ignoring much of history, the considerable threats and violent actions by governments to intimidate their citizens, which is the point I was making. Get over yourself and help us clean up this country. I wonder what Dr Schermer has to say about Catholic terrorists from Ireland who so plagued England with attacks for over a century?

Sure, things have died down for now but they were most active after the so called age of enlightenment so, to be fair, he has to explain them away. Is that a meaningless distinction? Indeed I invite you watch the video of the cruel burning of the Jordanian pilot inside a metal cage — it is overtly religious. The IRA were Catholics, but what drove their violence — they clearly stated, was the situation and lack of representation of the Catholic community — not the Bible or Catholic doctrine per se.

I never recall Jerry Adams or others quoting from the Bible to justify the killing of Protestants or British soldiers. A point about your reference to the Navy Seals — are they not targeting those involved in violence — who consider themselves to be soldiers, rather than taking random civilians and just killing them to engender fear in others?

Radical Pedagogy (2006)

Are the Navy Seals killing people just because they are not Christian? Indeed, are the Navy Seals even Christians? Diamond notes that the geography of Europe made it possible for many states to exist as separate political entities. Therefore, when one kingdom failed to accept a new idea, another would. The advantages of accepting the new idea forced those reluctant at first to embrace it to change their policy and grudgingly allow it in. However, the Jewish Enlightenment hit in the nineteenth century.

Their failure to embrace modern technology can be seen in the sea battle of Lepanto in , in which an allied Christian fleet consisting of about , mainly Spanish and Venetian, ships met the Ottoman fleet of similar strength. The outcome of the battle was that the allied Christian fleet lost 20 ships, while the Ottoman fleet lost ships. The difference between the two fleets was that the Europeans relied far more heavily on cannon, Their galleys had five cannons mounted on their bows, compared to the three cannons mounted on the bows of the Turkish galleys.

In addition, the Spanish introduced galleons, three-masted ships with rows of cannon on their sides and galleasses, ships midway between galleys and galleons. Aboard the ships, the European troops were armed with arquebuses, primitive firearms, while the Turks were armed with bows.

The new technology of cannons and firearms was available, known and used by both the Europeans and the Turks, but embraced far more enthusiastically by the Europeans. The crushing defeat inflicted on the Turks at Lepanto shifted naval power from the Mediterranean to Sea to the Atlantic seaboard. While the Turks remained a threat to central Europe until they were crushingly defeated by the Austrians, led by Prince Eugene, at the Battle of Zenta in ; the shift of geographical power from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic was the beginning of the end for Muslim power and influence in the world.

Eventually, the shift in power to the Europeans led to the occupation of much of the Islamic world by European powers.


  • Your Eight OClock Is Dead (The River City Mysteries Book 1).
  • The Border Terrier Good Food Guide;
  • STARGATE ATLANTIS: Blood Ties?

Thus, the Islamic nations not only failed to go through the Enlightenment, but entered the twentieth century feeling humiliated. For example, in the English civil war, after the Battle of Naseby , the victorious parliamentary forces, raided the royalist camp.


  • Site Navigation;
  • Astro Boy Volume 3;
  • An ignored reality of alliances;
  • Jong Baes Christmas Wish.

Not only did Islam fail to go through the Enlightenment, most Islamic countries are today, ideologically, where Christianity was in the s. Unfortunately, their religious ideology is abetted by modern technology. Arabic culture largely Islamic was responsible for preserving much of Classical math and science during the period when Europe largely Christian was going thru the Dark Ages. I feel you are in error. The numeral system is originally from Hindu India.

'They weren't even good tippers'

The origins of algebra can be traced to the ancient Babylonians, who developed a positional number system that greatly aided them in solving their rhetorical algebraic equations. He was also catigated by the Muslim leadership on many occasions. It is the patriarchy that uses tenants of Islam to justify their privileged position. Some of it is fear, justified in many ways, of the corrupting moral influence of the West. Their response is a reactionary, romantic turn to some purer era. That explains why all those overtly atheist regimes have been such shining successes.

But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. The Islamic peoples defined as those living in the lands dominated by the religion, history and culture of Islam without presuming necessary doctrinal allegiance DID seek out the Enlightenment, motivated above all by the desire to meet the challenge of Western power so painfully impressed on their society.

The liberties, prosperity and power of the West, without remote historical precedent, were predicated on ideas, ideals and values of the Age of Enlightenment e. These were ideologically driven catastrophes. The mother of ideology is philosophy. It was this latter intellectual milieu Middle Eastern scholars studying in the Western humanities found, assimilated and imported so hopefully as the vanguard of Western thought.

But these ideas and ideologies were no more successful implemented in the Middle East than elsewhere. Ultimately they undermined its every effort at political, economic and social reform in the region, as they did the drive to decolonize and modernize worldwide. That failure armed the most reactionary elements of Islamic society with rationalizations for their agendas.

For though the world has stood up and stopped the bastard, the bitch that bore him is in heat again. Brecht, a Marxist, penned his powerfully acerbic words thinking of Adolf Hitler. That root has not been extirpated and continues to sprout new shoots, most alarmingly in the West itself. It could be argued that Islam did actually go through a sort of enlightenment under the Ottoman Caliphate, in whose later years a more benign kind of Islam held sway across the Middle East, but that this has been — to a significant extent — replaced by the Saudi-backed Wahhabi and Salafi doctrines. These doctrines are becoming increasingly popular, and if the author was to name them specifically then I would have no problem at all with the article.

The above the problem I have then is this: accuracy matters. Rather, as history clearly demonstrates, there are multiple competing Islams, each of which share a broadly similar set of symbols; but they very crucially interpret scripture variably and consequently act very different ways. After all, Wahhabism and Salafism were conceived neither in Palestine nor poverty. No, instead they came from an extremely wealthy Saudi elite, who continue to serve as both the economic and ideological engine for these doctrines.

Terrorists don’t kill for their religion. It’s something else entirely

Look, in the US we voted Bush into office, a man who never ceased to insinuate his Christianity into his views on policy and international relations, he even claimed that God had told him to go into Iraq. Their flag is the star of David. This is why organized religion is just a paved road to pervasive elitism and death and no religion is better than the other or more evolved because they all presume to know the will of the universe and all of reality God. While what you are saying is true, do you really think that Bush was sincerely a Christian or was it just politically expedient when leading the GOP to pretend to be so?

Unfortunately these days it is always like the saying that the one eyed man being king in the kingdom of the blind, your article is so myopic and dry without clear conviction and reason and it is either that you are ignorant or deliberately trying to misguide some other ignorant people like yourself. We Muslims are caught in between some unknown people dressed up and infiltrating our religion and committing crimes in the name of the religion and biased writers like yourself who instead of investigating like real journalists do you just went ahead to write rubbish. Just yesterday i shares a picture from a muslim brother showing ISIS fighters pretending to perform salat and each one of them was facing a different direction, every Muslim adult and child knows that we face the same direction.