Surely, across the world each day, the word ‘peace’ is spoken more often than so many other words. In Hebrew the equivalent word is ‘Shalom’ which was chosen to be used more than other words as a daily gesture of declaring peace with God and neighbors. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, proclaimed the connection between his ministry and the ministry of Biblical prophets. He borrowed the word ‘Shalom’ (Salam in Arabic) to be a part of daily conversation among Muslims similar to its usage among Jews.
The word ‘peace’ is used copiously among Muslims in Islamic nations of the world. It is a way of greeting each other. More than a billion Muslims use the word ‘Salam’ any time they see each other, wishing peace for one another. Even the radical Muslims greet each other with the word ‘peace’.
How could intolerance, discrimination, hostility and war grow increasingly among Muslims even though the word ‘peace’ has continually been the currency of their daily conversations? Why do Muslim nations have less peace with each other in comparison to other nations who do not use the word ‘peace’ daily as Muslims do? How could this most desirable peace be hard to achieve among Muslims even though it is declared more than a billion times a day? Is there anything hidden from the eyes of Muslims that does not allow their inclination for peace to be practical?
The majority of Muslims have a familiar, standard response to these questions. Most of our contemporary Muslims are brainwashed from childhood that it is America or Israel that has deprived them of having peace among themselves. Whatever happens in Islamic countries, the blame goes on Israel and America. Some people long for freedom, but leaders accuse them of spying for Israel or America. Any opponent to any leader is accused of Zionism or Americanization in Islamic countries. Even though I hated Israel while I was a political prisoner, I was still called a Zionist since I fell out of Ayatollah Khomeini’s favor. It has become a fashion among various Muslim sects to blame each other with being Israeli or western agents.
No Muslim has a chance to think deeper and to see that Muslims wouldn’t be hostile towards each other if they had a solid foundation in peace. The enemies of peace may have been able to disturb them from time to time, but would be unable to utterly destroy the peace among them if their religion was compatible with peace. Iranians have an idiom that says, “If my dog was a good dog, jackals wouldn’t be able to hunt my chickens.” In a similar way, if the peace in Islam was an authentic peace, it would shine among Muslims and would shield Muslims from their so-called enemies. But the peace in Islam has achieved more bloodshed than actual peace in the 1400 years of its history, even in the centuries when Israel and America were not present. The problem is at the root of Islam which gives more weight to lip service than truthful words. Muslims cannot achieve peace by just announcing the word ‘peace’ without a solid standard in true peace. Peace cannot be achieved without the leadership of the Prince of Peace Instead of searching for the Prince of Peace, Muslim leaders are rather busy with lip service, speaking softer words while their hearts are preparing for and in the service of war.
In the face of hostilities perpetrated by various committed Muslim groups in different parts of the world, some Muslims have been broadcasting that the word ‘Islam” means ‘peace’. They have been trying to convince people in the West that Islam is inherently against violence.
Anybody who understands a little bit of Arabic knows that the word ‘Islam’ has in no way any connection with the word ‘Salam’ which means peace. Islam means submission or surrendering which is the central focus of Islamic doctrine, calling all to surrender before establishing their belief in Islam. As the Quran states in sura (chapter) 49 verse 14 that faith comes after surrender. In other words, the world ‘Islam’ means such a surrender which leaves no chance for anyone to make an intelligent, willing decision.
Suppose the word ‘Islam’ meant peace; wouldn’t this shock people if they discovered that more than 60% of the Quran, Islam’s holy book, was about hatred, discrimination, belittling, hostility and bloodshed towards those who do not practice Islam or reject it? Wouldn’t then people have a right to call Islamists hypocrites? Imagine that more than 60% of a religion’s principles are about ignoring or denying the rights of others while it is still called the religion of peace!
The problem with Islamists is clearly expressed in the Bible:
The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart: his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords. (Psalm 55:21, NKJV)
As long as Islam is called a religion of peace, despite encouraging immature children to fight against their guardians (sura 9 verse 23); Muslims to kill their non-Muslim relatives and neighbors (sura 9 verse 123); and to kill non-Muslims for the sake of their beliefs (sura 8 verses 38-39), Muslims can neither have peace among themselves nor with others no matter how loudly they speak about peace. Hiding the truth about Islam is against peace in itself. This is where our politicians in the West have naively adopted the Islamists’ lie of calling Islam the religion of peace, thereby closing the doorway to peace.
How can we know the authenticity of a claim without referring to the ideology, belief or motivation behind it? Do people not deserve the opportunity to weigh up someone’s confession against the primary source of his beliefs and ethics, which supplies the food of his heart and shapes his relational values?
True peace must first start in the heart, not on the tongue. The vast majority of individual people groups in the world call themselves peaceful. The leaders of Communist China, Shiite Iran, Sunni Saudi Arabia, Russia, America, Europe, Africa and others all call themselves peace-lovers or peace-makers. All beliefs, including Islam, are called peaceful. Which of these nations can be trusted? Which mouth can be believed? It is a fact that what comes out of the mouth alone is not reliable evidence for assessing truth or falsehood. The very nature of ‘the mouth’ is its propensity for hypocrisy, pretending to have something which is not true. That’s why the truth about a thing cannot be measured by the words of a person’s mouth alone, unless we know the beliefs and standards that support those words. If a person’s beliefs sanction the idea that the end justifies the means or lying and deception are legitimate under some circumstances, the words of that person cannot serve the cause of truth or peace.
To have a belief in ‘truth’ is vital for everyone so that it can unite heart and mouth for thinking, talking and acting in truth and peace. Efforts have to be made in order to discover the truth; the truth that sets one free from every sin, including the sin of disunity between heart and mouth - namely hypocrisy. That’s why Jesus said:
And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:32, NKJV)
No comments:
Post a Comment