The Copts Daily Digest reported on July 5 that the US Copts Association’s website was hacked by a Muslim hacker only known by the name Muhammad. Michael Meunier, president of the US Copts Association, received on July 14 a warning from a person called Tamer claiming that he knew of Islamic groups eager to hack web sites against Islam. Tamer sent a list of websites, which according to him are offensive for Christians. [See RNSAW, 2002, week 27A, art. 10]
Meunier didn’t make any effort to discover Muhammed’s motives. For him Muhammad was nothing else but an ’extremist’ targetting a Christian site. That was the end the discussion.
An extremist? Muhammad writes "Let me tell you something about myself , as i told u, my best friend is a Copt, his girl friend is a Russian Jew , and I am a Muslim, and we usually hang out together, enjoining our lives, both of them hate politics, we don’t talk about religion, may be from time to time, in some situations, like ordering
special food for me , coz u know i don’t eat pork, she also supposed not to, but she dont give a damn, she is a cool girl :) and although I am not supposed to drink, I am not supposed to smoke weed stuff, but I do that every week end!, hoping someday, I
will grow up, and be a wise guy :)"
Muhammad was surprised Tamer found so many Islamic sites offensive "only one is insulting the Copts. The others are just talking about Christianity and Judism in general." Well, not exactly, they are speaking about Christianity and Judaism from an Islamic perspective with the intention o convincing Christians and Jews about Islam or defending Muslims against Christian efforts to convert Muslims.
Muhammad found only one site on Tamer’s list offensive for Copts.
http://barsoom.cjb.net
"this site is the only one, that insulting the Copts , but honestly , i kept laughing , the owners of this site are just making fun of everything that belongs to the copts ... well ,
there is a famous Coptic character known as "Barsoom el-arian" which means "the naked Barssom " , i dont know why the Copts gave him this name, but this site is using this, and some other things the Copts do, to make fun! I added it to my
favourites to check it agian .. "
Muhammad later responded with a list of Christian sites he found offensive for Muslims:
http://cy-estates.com/coptic
http://www.islamreview.com
http://stmarychurch.org
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/suralikeit/original/index.shtml
www.truthcalls.4t.com
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/4559/
http://www.light-of-life.com/
www.allahsassurance.com
http://www.maarifa.org/
http://www.arabic-club.de
http://members.tripod.com/waterlive/index.htm
http://www.letusreason.org/Islamdir.htm
Tamer found Muslim missionary sites making an effort to explain Islam to Christians offensive and Muhammad found Christian sites that explain Christian faith to Muslims offensive.
It is obvious from the comments of both Tamer and Muhammad that the problem is how Islam and Christianity are preached. Preaching is quickly seen as offensive by the other - a fact which both Muslims and Christians should realize but often do not.
Is it possible to avoid being offensive to those who differ with you when preaching your religion?
The websites Tamer and Muhammad listed make claims of superiority over the other. They also state explicitly that the other is wrong - which makes it difficult for the criticized party not to feel offended. A Muslim saying that crucifixion is nothing but a fiction says what his religion teaches him. He may state this out of his belief without the intention to be offensive to Christians. Nevertheless Christians will feel offended because this is their faith.
Is it possible for a Muslim to explain his faith without being offensive? Nirmeen Fawzy, our dedicated translator and an active member of the Plymouth Brethren, a conservative Protestant Christian group in Egypt, believes that Muslim and Christian believers should preach their faith without making comparisons. "The best way is to introduce Islam without saying ’unlike Christianity’ and to introduce Christianity without saying ’in contrast to Islam.’"
Nirmeen argued that both the Holy Bible and Qur’an reject arguments that are created by offensive language criticizing the other. The Holy Bible says, "Avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless" [Titus 3:9]. The Qur’an says, "Argue not with the people of the scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better" [Sura 29: 46].
"What profit could a Christian gain from attributing bad qualities to Prophet Muhammad, while knowing very well what he means to Muslims?" Nirmeen asks [see the example of Rev. Jerry Vines in RNSAW, 2002, week 25A, art. 13,14 and 15]. "Is not that a "foolish controversy" that is better to be avoided? Also, what could a Muslim gain from describing Christians as "bull dogs" and claiming that monasteries are places for practicing obscene sexual activities - - as Http://barsoom.cjb.net does- - Is this really a good way of arguing with Christians, who are among the "people of the scripture" [people of the book]?"
"It is the right of a Muslim not to believe in the Holy Trinity, but it is not his right to say, "We Muslims, unlike the Christian kufar, believe in so and so…" Is he preaching religion or judging and evaluating the beliefs of others? Shouldn’t he introduce the teachings of the Qur’an and let his audience draw their own conclusions?"
"The same applies to Christians. When Saint Paul went to Athens to preach Christianity, he found that the city was full of idols. People there asked him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting?" [Acts 17:19]. His answer was that he worships the God who created the world and everything in it, the Lord of heaven and earth who does not live in temples built by hands nor is He served by human hands, as if He needed anything."
"Paul introduced God to the people of Athens without offending them by saying bad things about their gods, which are simply idols. He preached his beliefs and let people decide for themselves. Is not St. Paul, a good example to be followed by Christians who honestly want to preach their religion?"
"When one is advertising his goods" Nirmeen Fawzy concluded, "he has the full right to enumerate all the advantages of his goods. However, he is not at all allowed to promote his own goods by focusing on the bad sides of other products. Should not this be also applied to preaching Islam and Christianity?"
Tamer criticized Muslim sites and Muhammad criticized Christian sites. Shouldn’t both realize that they should apply one standard to Christian and Muslim writings. That is generally not done by those who criticize the other. Not only this. The application of double standards and the criticism of one side only leads to polarization. That’s dangerous!
