Posted on 2/3/2017, 3:33:07 AM by markomalley
In keeping with ongoing revelations of just how immoral some Muslims view Christianity—to one cleric, Christian church worship is worse than murder and bloodshed—here is another Muslim cleric who appeared on an Arabic language television program claiming that the Christian God “loves”—and thus demands that his followers love—immoral behavior. This is precisely why, argued the sheikh, that Europe is so sexually liberal.
After the more sane-looking host pointed out that in Christianity, fornication and adultery are sins, and that secular Europe’s profligate attitude toward sex is not reflective of Christian teachings, the sheikh loudly protested:
No, fornication and adultery are not forbidden in Christianity. You see, God is love for them. This is one of their false teachings. The foundation for Christianity is that God is love. So what does “God is love” mean? It means that God loves everything. And why does God love everything? Because God is the source of everything. This means God is the creator of fornication and adultery. So who makes you commit fornication and adultery? God. Thus “God is love” means that God loves everything he created, and therefore we are obligated to love it too…. God is the one who created fornication and adultery; he is the one who created alcohol—so who are we to hate things that God created? God is love and so we are to love everything he created.
This sort of thinking—connecting Christian beliefs with immoral behavior—is not new for Muslims. It goes all the way back to Islam’s first encounter with Christianity, in the guise of the Byzantine empire, which withstood Islam’s onslaughts for centuries, till its demise in 1453.
According to Nadia Maria El Cheikh, author of Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs, “Byzantine women are strongly associated with sexual immorality.” In Islam’s oldest writings, European Orthodox Christian women are portrayed as the “most shameless women in the whole world,” always “prone to adultery,” which “is commonplace in the cities and markets of Byzantium.” Apparently the greatest hussies were “the nuns from the convents [who] went out to the fortresses to offer themselves to monks.” But as Cheikh concludes:
[T]he image that they [Muslims] create in describing these women is anything but beautiful. Their depictions are, occasionally, excessive, virtually caricatures, overwhelmingly negative…. In fact, in Byzantium, women were expected to be retiring, shy, modest, and devoted to their families and religious observances…. [T]he behavior of most women in Byzantium was a far cry from the depictions that appear in Arabic sources.
Several centuries later, in a written excerpt that goes to great (if not pornographic) lengths, Persian court scholar ‘Imad ad-Din (d.1201) portrayed Frankish Catholic women as “all licentious harlots, foul-fleshed and sinful.” “They dedicated as a holy offering what they kept between their thighs” and “maintained that they could make themselves acceptable to God by no better sacrifice than this.” He had particular contempt for one young woman who “walked proudly with the cross on her breast,” since this proved for the learned Muslim that she “longed to lose her robe and her honor.”
And, just as the earliest Muslims (falsely) portrayed sexual profligacy as a hallmark of Christian piety in Byzantium, so the Persian wrote, “Now among the Franks a woman who gives herself to a celibate man [monk] commits no sin, and her justification is even greater in the case of a priest, if chaste men in dire need find relief in enjoying her.”
Such is Islam’s centuries-old calumny against Christianity, because the latter teaches that “God is Love” (1 John 4:8). Of course, none of this should be surprising; for the Bible also teaches that there will always be those who “call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20).
When used the right way
Any God would say DILLIGAF to those that harm none.
Well, yeah.
the IslamoNazi guy is correct to a degree.....in this way......
that all too many “Christian” (and “Jewish”) congregations have gone (or been taken) “liberal”... AWAY from Judeo-Christian moral and ethical values... with some openly embracing and advocating distinctly immoral “lifestyles”
in brief... how can we clean things up in “our own Churches”????? We need to figure out ways of doing this for our own sakes.....even if there world were spared of the current Moslem problem
He hung out with whores and made wine, so it’s possible...
I’d say the muslim making this claim is speaking from a satanic motive.
As for your suggestion, is it based on Scripture?
How can this insanity ever adapt to the real world?
The Christian’s God’s first miracle was turning water into wine at a Wedding feast.
Guilty as charged and proud of it!
Not that any evangelical will listen, but God isn’t “Love”. A Grek equivalent of the word “love” doesn’t exist in Greek, and agape sure as hell isn’t what we mean by love.
Not that any evangelical will listen, but God isn’t “Love”. A Greek equivalent of the word “love” doesn’t exist in Greek, and agape sure as hell isn’t what we mean by love.
so, which religion offers a paradise of 72 houri to ball around with?
And what does the so-called Allah love and make his followers do? Judging from the actions Allah’s followers commit in his name (by their fruits you shall know them) Allah must love head-chopping, the mutilation and general humiliation of women, sex with your goat as long as you don’t eat the goat, the sexual abuse of boys by men, wiping your arse with a handful of dirt clods, gross lying and even grosser theological distortions, and generally neurotic behaviour.
...and the 72 virgins are all for engaging conversation and the sharing of hopes and dreams.
what?
they can make sweet love to a goat as long as the goat is not the main course for dinner later on?
Do the goats shoot dice to see who has to be dinner and the loser has to....
There is a saying that "translators always lie." Sometimes it is not possible to show distinctions in the translation. Then it is necessary to show it in the preaching and instruction.
Yes, one of their learned men issued a statement that if a goat/sheep is intimately enjoyed, it may not be slaughtered for your food. However, I think it may be slaughtered for use by an infidel.
“issued a statement” lol.
It has been known for centuries. I disagree that it has been taught much in in the US since the beginning of the Second Great Awakening. In my fairly wide denominational and non-denominational experience, the point is seldom made from the pulpit, and when it is there is no lasting impression on the congregation. This one theological failure is a significant source of rot in the Church and, in particular, is largely responsible for weak, sappy evangelicalism.
I remember reading it here, maybe a couple of years ago. It was from something like “Ask the Imam.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.