Monday, August 21st | 29 Av 5777

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
September 12, 2011 9:10 am

Why ‘Christian’ Persecution?

avatar by Raymond Ibrahim

Email a copy of "Why ‘Christian’ Persecution?" to a friend

A modern Coptic monastery.

Some are asking why my new monthly series, “Muslim Persecution of Christians,” wherein I collate and assess some of the atrocities committed by Muslims against Christians, does not include the persecution of other religious minority groups; others are suggesting I broaden my scope to include all minorities, for instance, homosexuals.

Of course other minority groups—essentially any religion other than Islam (or even the wrong kind of Islam, e.g., Shi’ism, Sufism)—experience persecution in the Muslim world. Accordingly, others qualified in the particulars of the various religions and civilizations persecuted by Islam are encouraged to collate and comment on them, monthly or otherwise.

That said, a series documenting the persecution of Christians under Islam is necessary for several reasons:

First, most religious persecution in the Muslim world is by far directed against Christians. Several reasons account for this, for starters, sheer numbers: from Morocco in the west, to Pakistan in the east, and throughout most of Africa, wherever Muslims make a majority, there are more Christians than other religious minorities; this tends to be true even along Islam’s periphery, like Indonesia, which also has a significant Buddhist and Hindu presence.

Related coverage

February 26, 2016 12:55 pm
1

Rubio Comes Out Swinging

US Senator Marco Rubio was cool as a cucumber, appropriately aggressive, and sharp as a tack in Thursday's Republican presidential debate. In...

These large numbers are not simply a reflection of proselytization, but the fact that much of what is today called “the Muslim world” stands atop land that was seized by force and conquest from Christians, whose descendants still remain, sometimes in large numbers, such as Egypt, where the indigenous Copts make millions (unlike the Jews, who managed to make it back to their ancestral homeland, these Christians are already on their homeland and have nowhere to go).

Moreover, by collating and tracing the same patterns of abuse regarding all things intrinsically Christian—people, churches, crosses, Bibles—one can better highlight and articulate the issue as a distinct phenomenon, which it is.

It is true that Muslim aggression and violence knows no bound and is regularly directed against all non-Muslims in general. But it is equally true that the wider the scope, the more the net catches, the more generic the anecdotes become, the more they are liable to be dismissed by the mainstream as a product of non-ideological factors (from poverty to politics)—even though that is not the case.

On the other hand, by focusing on one group, one phenomenon, one can more clearly and unequivocally connect the dots, present a more focused case.

For example, while Muslim animus for Israel is interconnected to Muslim animus for Christians and others, it should be, and is, highlighted as a distinct phenomenon to be acknowledged and rectified. Were one to lump Israel with the rest of the “others” on Islam’s hit list—Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sufis, homosexuals, et al—without giving it any special attention, focus would be lost on the particulars of its fight, its history, and all the other aspects that make its conflict singular.

Accordingly, even though connecting the various manifestations of Muslim aggression is useful, particularly as it provides the big picture, when certain arenas reach a fever pitch, there is no wrong that they be highlighted separately, say, through one monthly report.

There are, of course, practical issues to consider as well: a document collating all Muslim aggression and persecution would not only be too cumbersome and long to read, but redundant; better simply to visit Jihad Watch for a comprehensive survey of Islam’s daily doings.

Finally, one needs to be knowledgeable of the history and civilizations of the peoples being persecuted in order to do them justice, to demonstrate historical continuity, show past precedents, connect the dots, etc. And while I’m intimately acquainted with the particulars of Muslim-Christian interactions—historically, theologically, even personally—I’m less so with the particulars of, say, Muslim-Buddhist interactions.

I therefore leave it to others to highlight the various minority groups’ plights—ideally not merely by listing the various anecdotes, but by demonstrating continuity for that particular group’s history with Islam.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Michael Siyonne

    The inquisition is often mentioned as an argument against Christians and Christianity, but if I understand history correctly the inquisition was instigated by the roman catholics (popes) against Christians. It was a ploy to keep the New Testament from the masses. Of coarse it was also used to seize property.

  • Fred Conwell

    My Christian Bible does not order me to kill anyone, yet the Koran orders Muslims to kill (cut off head) all idolators (non-Muslims): Surah 2.191, 8.65, 9.5, 9.123, 47.4

    • Tobias

      Fred: You’d better read it again? There are HORRIBLE passages in our Scriptures as well in which God orders the slaughter of men women and children. And let us not forget the butchery of the Crusades and the Inquisition… and the countless atrocities committed by ‘Christians’ in the Colonization of the New World and their ‘bloody’ hand in the holocaust of the ‘slave trade’ and they all thought that Scriptures gave them the RIGHT to do so. Christianity has evolved: So must Islam? but it is disingenuous or ignorance when we pretend that we Christians do not have a bloody past or that our Scriptures did not provide the impetus in our Christian Crimes.

      • ER

        Tobias: no, biblical (i.e., real) Christianity has not evolved, but is the same yesterday, today, & tomorrow — based on the Bible…alone. The commands in the Bible to kill are not commands for all people for all time, but have a specific context — to the children of ancient theocratic Israel & in to governments.

      • Angels

        “which God orders the slaughter of men women and children. And let us not forget the butchery of the Crusades and the Inquisition”

        First: God is the Creator and it is His right to kill or not. If you say God is bad then it will be for you. But for me God is Good.
        Second: God order Angel of Death to do it.
        Third: Crusader are lost because they was ignited by the enemy, an Islam driven militia.
        Fourth: Inquisition is wrong, Jesus didn’t teach killing. If someone do this then that someone is not doing God order but it was doing human order.

Algemeiner.com