The linked article below quotes the International Islamic Conference for Dialogue that wrote, "Coexistence and cooperation do not mean concessions regarding the fundamental principles nor harmonising among religions." Well, that's a fundamental error.

Look, there are two ways to go concerning the religions of the world. You can pretend that the above quote presents the right philosophy, or you can be honest that some religions are based upon coercion and ultimately violence that is diametrically opposed to coexistence and cooperation.

Islam for instance came directly from Mohammed who clearly taught, as documented in the Qur'an, that so long as Islam dominates then Muslims can tolerate other religions. Where Islam doesn't dominate, according to Mohammed, it is the duty of the Muslims to subjugate the people. If you change that principle, you don't have Islam anymore. You don't have the teachings of its founder. You have something else.

Likewise for Judaism, it came directly from Moses who clearly taught, as documented in the Torah, that all the land between the rivers belongs to the Jews provided those Jews exterminate other peoples. "But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee" Deuteronomy 20:17. If you change this, you don't have the Mosaic Law anymore. You don't have Judaism as the Torah-believing Jews claim the name "Judaism." They didn't do it though. They left many alive.

Now, of the three, only the tenets of real Christianity oppose violence all the time. Only real Christianity will leave the others to their religions to fall of their own errors. Christianity only warns, and then it lets things be.

How then may these religions live together? Where Islam and Judaism (so-called) dominate, they fear the Gospels. They won't let it be preached openly. Many Jews say they fear a reprising of the violent reactions of those who called themselves Christians (but were not). Why though do those Jews fear the Gospel of non-violence?

Well, the answer is plain. They don't want the heads of their fellows turned from violence to non-violence, because without enough fellows, their plan to possess the land is forever thwarted.

The fact is that only non-violent religion can live peacefully on the Earth, and that's not the fault of the non-violent but the violent.

Leading clerics urge Muslims to learn about other faiths in drive to promote harmony
Riazat Butt in Mecca
Article history
The Guardian, Saturday June 7 2008 Article history

An international appeal was launched yesterday urging Muslims around the world to learn about non-Muslims and their cultures for the sake of peaceful coexistence.

The call was made in a communique issued at the end of the International Islamic Conference for Dialogue, a three-day event that brought together more than 600 influential scholars and academics.

The plea, one of many in the 18-page document, aimed to encourage Muslims to reach out to people from other monotheistic faiths in order to diffuse conflict and restore tolerance. The appeal was careful to make the distinction between integration and assimilation: "Coexistence and cooperation do not mean concessions regarding the fundamental principles nor harmonising among religions."

The initiative has the support of the Saudi monarch King Abdullah....
There were signs that dialogue with other believers, specifically Jews, would be problematic. Several clerics, including the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, said it was almost impossible to talk to them because of the situation in the occupied territories. "How can you negotiate with someone who is against you all the time? They seem to be against us in every way so I don't know how we're supposed to have dialogue."
Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi said he would only talk to Jews who denounced Zionism and he urged Muslims to talk to Buddhists, Hindus and atheists. His impromptu speech, lasting 15 minutes, garnered the loudest applause, proving his popularity among fellow clerics even if the west views him with suspicion.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.