My comments on Islam in my Kingdom of Heaven review have been tweaked, politely and correctly (I assume), by an attentive reader. Thanks, Kurt! Clearly, I have more to learn on these subjects….
Jeffrey
Dear Mr. Overstreet,
I follow Christianity Today’s film discussions often, and as an Islamic historian and evangelical Christian, I have been looking forward to the inevitable discussion of the film and its depiction of the Crusades. The film just opened here in Egypt, where I am currently doing research, and unfortunately I haven’t yet had the opportunity to get across Cairo to see it — so my apologies that I am not yet able to dialogue with you on the film content itself.I agree absolutely with your criticism of the heavy-handed message of tolerance taking precedence over genuine historical grappling with issues of faith- no one anywhere in the medieval world (at least not in the land between Iran and Britain) would have dreamt of a pleasant land where all faiths could join hands and sing in perfect harmony!
However, I do want to respectfully respond to a couple of your assertions regarding the portrayal of Muslims and the Islamic “reading” of the Crusades here–not as an apologist for Islam, but rather as a historian of the region and religion.
1) You state: “We’re also steered away from the fact that Muslims believe someday their prophet will return and crush Christianity (whereas Christ’s gospel, properly interpreted, is a gospel of grace and mercy).” In fact, Islamic theology teaches that in the final days, Jesus (as beloved and revered prophet) will return to earth on the Last Day and preside over the Judgment. Islam believes itself to be an extension and fulfillment of Christianity and Judaism, and while the spread of early Islam sought to subdue and convert Christendom, it rarely did so in the rhetoric of “destruction.” War was meant to be carried out against kingdoms antagonistic to the Islamic state, and after the initial wave of conquests (completed by the late 7th century), it was very rare that Muslims would again turn to a widespread drive to overtake the world. By the time of the Crusades, the various Islamic dynasties were much too consumed with their own vying for supremacy in the region, and few states were interested in expansion into the Christian West. Furthermore, while non-Muslims were subject to extra political and social pressures under medieval Islamic rule (extra taxation, clothing requirements, occasional church attacks, restrictions on evangelism, etc.), they were generally tolerated and received far more security than non-Christian ever received under medieval Christendom.
2) “We are kept far away from Muslim women, for example, so we don’t have to wonder about how they’re treated.” In fact, the comparative state of women under medieval Islam and under medieval Europe were not that far off–in legal terms, women actually had it better in the Islamic world (in terms of inheritance and divorce laws, for example). Even today, the status of women under Islam is incredibly diverse and can in no way be described in universal terms.
3) “Instead, we see Christians staring at Muslim prayers with a mix of bewilderment and admiration, while a Muslim warlord respectfully rights a fallen cross. Hmmmm.” I presume this to be a reference to Saladin… Now, he was by no means a saint, and such an image as this is obviously overplayed. However, Saladin was in fact a tremendously complex leader, embodying the traits of a talented diplomat, shrewd politician, brutal warlord, and – yes – chivalrous dignitary. If you read through some of the Muslim and Frankish Christian sources of the Crusades, both sides had plenty of awe-struck things to say about his leadership on the battlefield as well as his generosity and mercy in person. Criticisms, likewise, were also made by other historians of both Christian and Muslim backgrounds.
There are more areas to discuss, but I feel that’s the extent to which I can contribute without having yet seen the film. I hope you accept my comments here as having been given in respect and friendship, and I look forward to your ongoing work in film criticism from a Christian perspective.
In Him,
Kurt Werthmuller
**************
Kurt J. Werthmuller
Fulbright-Hays Fellow, Cairo, Egypt
Ph.D. Candidate (ABD), Dept. of History
University of California, Santa Barbara
Speaking as someone who has spent four years of his life living in Saudi Arabia and a lifetime studying Islam both formally in seminary and informally through books, articles, and people there is only one thing I am absolutely sure of. Anyone not a Muslim who thinks they understand Islam is fooling themselves. I gave up a long time ago trying to get inside their mind and decided to simply look at their actions and respond accordingly.
In response to Kurt Werthmuller allow me to say this based on my experience as listed above. While it might be true that in the Koran Jesus is a revered prophet, in the here and now Islam is trying to destroy Christianity. September 11 was an attack by Islam on Christianity and it brought about dancing in the streets of Islam. I saw it. Israel is not allowed to be shown on maps in Saudi Arabia because to them it doesn’t exist. There is no living in harmony with people who are set on your destruction.
In terms of the Koran and written law Muslim women do have it better than western women both in medieval times and today. Unfortunetly for women we don’t live in written law. A divorced woman is still an outcast in the Muslim world. Girls as young as 8 are still sold as wives to old men. And men are stoned for adultry, women are. That is the reality.
I went to my son’s Kindergarten program at church last night. In the program they were all dressed as little Bee’s and everything they did revolved around the theme of bee’s. At one point they had a skit about a bumble bee that had just walked five miles because a physicist had proven that bumble bees can’t fly. Of course we can all see them flying. I feel the same way when I read some expert prove to me from history and the Koran that Islam is a religion of peace and harmony. I can see that it isn’t.
Not to play Devil’s Advocate or anything, but Mark, couldn’t someone say the same thing about Christianity, a religion under which all kinds of atrocities have been carried out and continue to be carried out? I’ve heard people say very similar things: “Christianity claims to be a religion of peace, but I’ve seen people wage war in the name of Jesus, and I can see that it isn’t.” Perhaps… and I say *perhaps* because I really don’t know… the problem is not in the religion, but in the way people carry it out…?
Jeffrey, no, I don’t think you have anything to learn about the way people, even PhD candidates, will ignore the facts and believe what they want to believe. But there are truths here worth standing up for, both before and after 9/11:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/118/52.0.html
http://www.historyofjihad.org/crusades.html
thanks,|
mojave
Jeffrey,
Please feel free to play devils advocate with me anytime you wish. It is a great teaching tool.
In answer to your’s or should I say, per haps, the Devil’s question, no I don’t believe you can say the same thing about Christianity. I remember the West Wing, a show I greatly admire and enjoy, doing an episode specifically for September 11th. They were talking with a group of High School seniors and they used the SAT format to make a point about Islamic Fundamentalism and terrorism. They said that the terrorists were comparable to the KKK not Fundamentalist Christianity. I am relatively certain that they meant to be complementary to Christianity with that assessment, but I think they missed the point. The terrorists were not comparable to the KKK because the KKK does not speak for mainstream Christianity. They are at best a very small splinter group and in reality a dramatic perversion of Christianity. The terrorists were comparable to fundamental Christianity because they represent a similar size segment in Islam. In fact you could almost consider them to be similar to Evangelical Christianity because they represent the dominant group in Islam. Yes there have been atrocities committed in the name of Christianity. They are, however, the exception not the rule and are not celebrated by dancing in the streets.
Plans is pretty good. The production values are upped big time and the album is mostly ballads. Whatever fault people might try and find on the band’s majot label debut they would be hard pressed to find fault with Ben Gibbard’s lyrics. Gibbard is starting to build a reputation as one his generations greatest lyricists. Briliant stuff.
I’ve heard about half of the Kanye West record. Jamie Foxx does some great Ray Charles-esque vocals on one of the songs. Jon Brion’s influence seemed subtle to me, I need to listen to rest of the record to make a better judgement though.
On the first 8 or so listens, I’m liking ‘Late Registration’ a lot — not much specific comment until I’ve listened to it more.
the new time article on Kanye was one of the most thoughtful pieces on the state of music today — the competition between art and commercial schlock — Mr. West is a lot smarter than I’d given him credit for.
Haven’t heard ’em, but I’ve blogged a bit about the critical reception that Plans has been getting: http://reveal-music.blogspot.com/2005/08/critical-condition-death-cab-for-cutie.html
as long as kanye doesn’t do a “jesus walks again as i decide to be even more carnal in his presence but that’s ok ‘cuz he’s down with me”, i’d love to hear it. especially if there were a version whereupon he doesn’t refer to his sexual prowess every flippin’ song. a wal-mart version, maybe.
i was about to say something about the relationship between west and brion (both loving music, which is rare in pop these days, apparently), but then i realized that it wasn’t on this blog that i saw the “odd couple” statement.
Avro Part’s music is stripped down, but so grand in scope. It is beautifully done, and quite frankly, more edifying than most christian music out there these days.
I’m with the Reverend… I’m definitely intrigued by the new Part. Fur Alina is an absolute masterpiece, one of the few pieces of music I can legitimately call “transcendental”.
I think both Kanye and DCFC aren’t as good as each of their previous records, though I’ve only listened to the new ones twice each. Death Cab’s “Different Names for the Same Thing” is pure Phil Collins, and AWESOME. West’s record is a lot less Jesusy than his first, which I found a little disappointing…