Jay Smith: Smashing Islam
Apr 18th, 2009 by Ben
Jay Smith is visiting Australia this month, and speaking at both SMBC and Moore College (and elsewhere) on various aspects of Islam and engaging with Muslims. Details of the events can be found at Engaging with Islam.
From what I can tell, he’s a sharp guy and a bit of a firebrand. Have a look at some of the videos at his organisation’s Youtube channel for his vlogs which seek to reach out to Muslims and combat Muslim belief.
For something a bit spicier, try the HydeParkIslam channel, where he debates a Muslim at London’s “Speakers’ Corner” in Hyde Park.
This is a form of engagement with Islam that is combative and attempts to find holes in Islam and Muslim belief, to unsettle and undermine Muslims’ faith in their religion, as well as educating Christians about Islam for the purpose of speaking with Muslims they know about Jesus.
On our recent mission to Guildford and Berala in Sydney, we were presented with another form of engagement with Islam, which uses the Quran and Islamic beliefs to lead people to Jesus. This alternative approach is propounded by Colin Chapman from the UK (formerly a missionary in Beirut) among others. Colin wrote a book for Christians about Islam called Cross and Crescent.
I’m keen to see both forms in action.
Islam is not a threat, but a perfect solution for the west. Western scholars realized that long before:
Sense of justice is on”e of the most wonderful ideals of Islam, because as I read in the Qur’an I find those dynamic principles of life, not mystic but practical ethics for the daily conduct of life suited to the whole world.”
Lectures on “The Ideals of Islam;” see SPEECHES AND WRITINGS OF SAROJINI NAIDU, Madras, 1918, p. 167.
“History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.”
De Lacy O’Leary, ISLAM AT THE CROSSROADS, London, 1923, p. 8.
“But Islam has a still further service to render to the cause of humanity. It stands after all nearer to the real East than Europe does, and it possesses a magnificent tradition of inter-racial understanding and cooperation. No other society has such a record of success uniting in an equality of status, of opportunity, and of endeavours so many and so various races of mankind . . . Islam has still the power to reconcile apparently irreconcilable elements of race and tradition. If ever the opposition of the great societies of East and West is to be replaced by cooperation, the mediation of Islam is an indispensable condition. In its hands lies very largely the solution of the problem with which Europe is faced in its relation with East. If they unite, the hope of a peaceful issue is immeasurably enhanced. But if Europe, by rejecting the cooperation of Islam, throws it into the arms of its rivals, the issue can only be disastrous for both.”
H.A.R. Gibb, WHITHER ISLAM, London, 1932, p. 379.
“I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him – the wonderful man and in my opinion for from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.”
G.B. Shaw, THE GENUINE ISLAM, Vol. 1, No. 81936.
“The extinction of race consciousness as between Muslims is one of the outstanding achievements of Islam, and in the contemporary world there is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue.”
A.J. Toynbee, CIVILIZATION ON TRIAL, New York, 1948, p.205.
“Islam is a religion that is essentially rationalistic in the widest sense of this term considered etymologically and historically. The definition of rationalism as a system that bases religious beliefs on principles furnished by the reason applies to it exactly . . . It cannot be denied that many doctrines and systems of theology and also many superstitions, from the worship of saints to the use of rosaries and amulets, have become grafted on the main trunk of Muslim creed. But in spite of the rich developments, in every sense of the term, of the teachings of the Prophet, the Quran has invariable kept its place as the fundamental starting point, and the dogma of unity of God has always been proclaimed therein with a grandeur, a majesty, an invariable purity and with a note of sure conviction, which it is hard to find surpassed outside the pale of Islam. This fidelity to the fundamental dogma of the religion, the elemental simplicity of the formula in which it is enunciated, the proof that it gains from the fervid conviction of the missionaries who propagate it, are so many causes to explain the success of Muhammadan missionary efforts. A creed so precise, so stripped of all theological complexities and consequently so accessible to the ordinary understanding might be expected to possess and does indeed possess a marvelous power of winning its way into the consciences of men.”
Edward Montet, “La Propagande Chretienne et ses Adversaries Musulmans,” Paris, 1890; Quoted by T.W. Arnold in THE PREACHING OF ISLAM, London, 1913, pp. 413-414.
“I am not a Muslim in the usual sense, though I hope I am a “Muslim” as “one surrendered to God,” but I believe that embedded in the Quran and other expressions of the Islamic vision are vast stores of divine truth from which I and other occidentals have still much to learn, and ‘Islam is certainly a strong contender for the supplying of the basic framework of the one religion of the future.’”
–W. Montgomery Watt, ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY TODAY, London, 1983, p. ix.
Thanks, Jakariya. I read over that.
A pity I didn’t see this earlier. I love Jay’s work and his interpretation of Islam, would’ve loved to have seen his lectures. I’ve gone onto look into Wansborough and Crone/Cook’s material. Interesting and definately goes against what modern Western scholars are working on.
Re:Jakariya, you’ve got some good quotes there but for every one, you could probably pull 2 or 3 quotes that would go against that..just read some from Rodinson, Guillaume, Motzki, Crone, Cook and Wansborough.
At the end of the day, Religion is a man-made interpretation of God. As it’s man-made, it’s also open to fallacies of man, deceit, ego, narcissism etc etc. Whether it’s Islam, Christianity, Judaism or Hinduism.
Well, LaniR.
Looks like you think you know my religion better than I do, and Jakariya’s better than him.
When did you get this supreme knowledge?
From being a Christian for 20 years and studying Islam for the past 3 years. It doesn’t give me supreme knowledge as such but I think gives me a good insight.
Don’t get me wrong, some of the teachings of Jesus and Mohammad are just fantastic. 1 Corinthians 13, The Beatitudes..just beauitful. Mohammad’s teachings from his time in Mecca where he advocated peace in the face of persecution from the Quaraysh/Meccans. I just happen to believe that to a large degree “Religion” has tainted the spiritual side of knowing God.
I believe Mr. Jay mith presentation of islam and prophet muhammed is biased and imbalanced. I would like to draw your attention to those following remarks of some of the western scholar of the highest eminence of the past centuries.
Michael H. Hart in his published book on the ranking of the 100 most influential men in history writes:
“My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels.”
The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, M.H. Hart, New York, 1978, p. 33
Jules Masserman, an American psychoanalyst, says:
“Leaders must fulfill three functions: 1) Provide for the well being of the led, 2) Provide a social organization in which people feel relatively secure, and 3) Provide them with a set of beliefs … People
like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Gandhi and Confucius, on one hand, and Alexander and Caesar on the other, are leaders in the second and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all time was Muhammad, who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same.”
Time magazine, July 15, 1974, article titled “Who were history’s greatest leaders?,” this quote by Jules Masserman.
“Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was Pope without the Pope’s pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life.”
Reverend Bosworth Smith, Muhammad and Muhammadanism, p. 242
“Serious or trivial, his daily behavior has instituted a canon which millions observe this day with conscious memory. No one regarded by any section of the human race as Perfect Man has ever been imitated so minutely. The conduct of the founder of Christianity has not governed the ordinary life of his followers. Moreover, no founder of a religion has left on so solitary an eminence as the Muslim apostle”
Arabia, D. G. Hogarth, p. 52
“He was sober and abstemious in his diet, and a rigorous observer of fasts. He indulged in no magnificence of apparel, the ostentation of a petty mind; neither was his simplicity in dress affected but a result of real disregard for distinction from so trivial a source … In his private dealings he was just. He treated friends and strangers, the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, with equality, and was beloved by the common people for the affability with which he received them, and listened to their complaints … His military triumphs awakened no pride nor vain glory, as they would have done had they been effected for selfish purposes. In the time of his greatest power he maintained the same simplicity of manners and appearance as in the days of his adversity. So far from affecting a regal state, he was displeased if, on entering a room, any unusual testimonials of respect were shown to him. If he aimed at universal dominion, it was the dominion of faith; as to the temporal rule which grew up in his hands, as he used it without ostentation, so he took no step to perpetuate it in his family.”
Mahomet and his successors, Washington Irving, pp. 332-334, 343
“His readiness to undergo persecution for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as a leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement – all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad … Thus, not merely must we credit Muhammad with essential honesty and integrity of purpose, if we are to understand him at all; if we are to correct the errors we have inherited from the past, we must not forget that conclusive proof is a much stricter requirement than a show of plausibility, and in a matter such as this only to be attained with difficulty.”
Muhammad at Macca, W. Montgomery Watt, Oxford press, p. 53
“It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great prophet of Arabia, who knew how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but the reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel, whenever I reread them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher.”
The Life and Teachings of Muhammad, Annie Besant, p. 4
“Four years after the death of Justinian, C.E. 569, was born in Mecca, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race … To be the religious head of many empires, to guide the daily life of one third of the human race, may perhaps justify the title of a Messenger of God.”
History of Intellectual Development of Europe, William Draper, MD., LL.D., Vol. I, p. 329-330
Jakariya, to be honest, I don’t really care what anyone says about Muhammed. All I care about is what the primary documents say he did and said. And it’s the same with Jesus.
What I recommend is reading the Injil, starting with the gospel of Luke, and investigating what Jesus is like.
What you or I think about Jesus or Muhammad is ultimately immaterial. What matters is who they were.