May one ask if you came from any kind of a religious background before your conversion to Islam? Since you have now come to Christianity how were you eventually convinced, if one may ask?
I came from a very strict and exacting religious background, which is why I left it at 17. My conversion to Christianity wasn't exactly an 'aha' moment, nor was it a 'road to Damascus' experience like St. Paul. The process was slow and winding, with lots of aversions and trips up and down dark alleys. I briefly thought I was athiest, but no matter how hard I tried, Jesus wouldn't let me stay there. When I discovered Buddhism, I thought I might be agnostic until I discovered Hinduism. Indeed it was my affection for Hindus that allowed me to be open to Eastern Orthodoxy, for Hinduism (which is really an umbrella term for a vast panapoly of beliefs), makes use of prayer beads, incense, and pictures of gurus. Each time I thought I found a home, Jesus would let the rains come to show me that it was built on sand. I don't quite remember what it was, exactly, that turned my focus on Christianity, but I seem to recall Kyriacos Markides' book Riding With the Lion
in which he talks about his 'mystical' experiences with both Hinduism and Eastern Christianity. I thought, 'Eastern Christianity?' I had never heard of such a thing. I began investigating and when I read his follow up book The Mountain of Silence
I knew that's where I would eventually end up. I glossed over a lot, but I trust that gives you a decent snapshot.
For a Christian believer the reason that Our Lord died for all of humanity is True. But for one who does not believe, for a devout Jew or Muslin just saying that He did is not a "reason to convert" but a statement of belief on the part of the other person. And that is not "proof" or "Truth" as far as they are concerned.
Quite right, but I still wish to point out that the original question was 'why should
they?' and not 'why would
they?', which is actually the better question to the points you are making. I'm not trying to be difficult, but that 'katana' thing works both ways.
Muslims believe that Muhammed was The Prophet and his words in Quran and Hadith are the way to believe. But I, as a Christian, do not believe that. Telling me that I should become a Muslim because Muhammed said so is not going to convince me. Is that "stubborness"? No, I don't think so.
The vast majority of Muslims believe this way, but not all. And the two major factions of Muslims, the Sunni and Shi'a, are almost
so different today so as not to recognize the view similarities they share. 'Sunni's' get their name from 'sunna', the sayings (hadith) and behaviors of Muhammad, while 'Shi'a' get their name from "Shi'at 'Ali"- the 'party of 'Ali'. They believe that Muhammad designated 'Ali as the next successor, while the majority did not. I was part of minority known for their rejection of all hadith unless it could be varified by the Qur'an (sounds like a Protestant to me
), though I had countless friends from both Sunni and Shi'a (and the mystical sect known as Sufi's). But I've digressed...You're quite right again when you say that telling
you 'a' is true when you believe 'x' to be true will not convince you. But I was trying to say (rather poorly I guess), that a well reasoned discussion coupled with
a lifetime of examples, that is, me watching you live your faith, rather than bonking me over the head with countless theology arguments, along with prayer, is the best way to go about it. And if a person absolutely refuses to listen, then the word 'stubborn' is aptly applied.
A devout Jew or Muslim or Buddhist does not think that they *are* wrong by following their religion. They believe that they are following the right way so there is nothing to "admit". How many years were you a practicing Muslim? If in those years a Christian came to you and said "Jesus died for you. Muhammed was wrong" would you have just accepted it with a kind of "Wow, I should become a Christian because you said that"? How would you react if they said "You're just being stubborn because you aren't agreeing with me about Jesus when you know that I'm right and have the Truth and you don't"?
Well, let me answer this with a personal story. I had Christians tell me, when I was Muslim, that Muhammad copied the Qur'an from the Old Testament and then made up the rest. Of coarse, this type of approach is childish and tells me more about that Christian than it does the Muslim. Then I had Christians whom never argued with me, and never asked me the ridiculous question of 'If you died tonight...". Instead, they showed me Christ by being my friend and loving me. I can say that in my case, I was being stubborn. You're quite right to say that this isn't the norm, but at least know that it is a possibility.
And if anecdotal evidence didn't work? Believing is one thing, actions are another. You say the examples are too numerous to bring up? Would you give a few that you have in mind please to back up your assertion and as an example of what you would say to a real human to try and convince them?
Well, just off the top of my head, I suppose the story of Oskar Schindler works very well here. I'm positive you've at least heard of 'Schindler's List' by Stephen Speilberg?
Yet there are those who use such examples to tar all Jewish people and Judaism as Evil, Conspiratorial and devoted to taking over the world. (I've seen far too many writings and sites with that attitude as well as some wild inaccuracies not to say out-right errors. The loathsome "Protocols" is still invoked in places both Chistian and Muslim for example and they are a lie.
Well, unfortunately, there will always be these types of examples. And I would say out-right lies. I've heard of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion', but know very little about them to comment.
And in using the Fall, you are using the Old Testament which is the Jewish Scripture. A devout Jew would know about the Creation and Fall and might have other ideas then yours on it from their religious belief and studies.
Indeed they will. But try to convince I must.
There is a difference between "arguing" and forum discussions (at least some of the time. ) When a person makes a post with some opinions or unsupported assertions, another poster asking for clarification of ideas or offering counter-information or ideas that may not agree with the first poster are not the same thing as a family or interpersonal fight ( which I also was raised that such was not a public thing.) One should not expect to be agreed with without question or other ideas. I certainly don't. But then I've been here quite a while.
Actually, I think you're just a stubborn person. Of coarse I'm kidding you now
. I must say that while I don't disagree with you here, when I read your tag line 'the katana of reasoned discussion' or something like that, I thought "This guy is nothing but an argumentative blow-hard". I don't see that as necessarily so now, and I don't wanna tell you what to call yourself, but maybe
a slightly better tag line would be "Come, let us reason together" found in Isaiah(?).