[Merged] General Criticism of Islam/Islamophobia Topics

[mijopaalmc]

I merely stated that some people would regard my raising questions about Islamic religious ideology as bigoted. Do you really see this statement as an accusation that I think people are trying to silence me? I think you need to use a smaller brush.

I think that you need to understand what the "brush" is in the first place and, if you don't want to be painted as a bigot, try not to paint Islam and Muslims with such a large brush.

 

[A'isha]

More to the point, herein lies one major concern I have about Islam. In contrast with the general historical awareness, even recognition, of the manner in which the scriptures were generated in Christianity, which made textual criticism possible, there is no such recognition in Islam.

Yes, I agree that there needs to be more self-awareness within Islamic scholarship about the way their scriptures were generated, even within the standard tradition about how such scriptures arrived at their modern, final form. There's some of this already with the ahadith, but there needs to be more of it, and it needs to be applied to the assembly and codification of the Qur'anic text.

In the case of Islam, we have a sacred immovable text,

The "sacred immovability" of the text is overly exaggerated, even by Muslims themselves. 'Uthman's rescension of the codex, the entire concepts of abrogation and batin/zahir, the entire messy exegetical genre of tafsir, the usage and role of ahadith as deuterocanonical scripture and in the interpretation of the Qur'anic canon itself, and so on...

 

[MontagK505]

Are you suggesting that the method of murder has some bearing on the validity of criticism? Or that if critics could be eliminated more efficiently, the question would not arise?

Christian Crusaders did commit genocidal acts. The weapons technology does increase the scale of genocide you can commit. With modern commutations technology you can track freethinkers and heretics with greater ease. This is what makes present day fanaticism, both religious and political, much more dangerous today than it was in the 12th century.

 

[MontagK505]

I think that you need to understand what the "brush" is in the first place and, if you don't want to be painted as a bigot, try not to paint Islam and Muslims with such a large brush.

How was I "painting" Islam and Muslims with such a large brush with this statement?

Originally Posted by MontagK505:
I merely stated that some people would regard my raising questions about Islamic religious ideology as bigoted.

 

[mijopaalmc]

How was I "painting" Islam and Muslims with such a large brush with this statement?

Originally Posted by MontagK505:
I merely stated that some people would regard my raising questions about Islamic religious ideology as bigoted.

Uhhh....no, that is not originally what you said; you quite clearly stated that you thought that "Islamic religious ideology" was incompatible with "Western secular society" and then made a disingenuous comparison between the "teachings of the King James Bible" and Islam.

 

[Chaos]

I merely stated that some people would regard my raising questions about Islamic religious ideology as bigoted. Do you really see this statement as an accusation that I think people are trying to silence me? I think you need to use a smaller brush.

For the umpteenth time comes the request: Show us where "some people" are doing this.

If you actually look at what people have written, you´ll find that "some people" regard as bigot not "raising questions" but spouting ignorant, hateful BS.

 

[Chaos]

Christian Crusaders did commit genocidal acts. The weapons technology does increase the scale of genocide you can commit. With modern commutations technology you can track freethinkers and heretics with greater ease. This is what makes present day fanaticism, both religious and political, much more dangerous today than it was in the 12th century.

Then we should be more concerned about fanatical Christians than fanatical Muslims - they have by far the better technology.

 

[MontagK505]

For the umpteenth time comes the request: Show us where "some people" are doing this.

If you actually look at what people have written, you´ll find that "some people" regard as bigot not "raising questions" but spouting ignorant, hateful BS.

Do you regard me as someone who is "spouting ignorant, hateful BS"?

 

[MontagK505]

Then we should be more concerned about fanatical Christians than fanatical Muslims - they have by far the better technology.

There is another thread about what happens to atheist bloggers in Bangladesh.

 

[Belgian thought]

Yes, I agree that there needs to be more self-awareness within Islamic scholarship about the way their scriptures were generated, even within the standard tradition about how such scriptures arrived at their modern, final form. There's some of this already with the ahadith, but there needs to be more of it, and it needs to be applied to the assembly and codification of the Qur'anic text.

...

Indeed, but those pushing forward their agenda give no figs to any form of 'Islamic Scholarship'. Therein lies the true problem.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Indeed, but those pushing forward their agenda give no figs to any form of 'Islamic Scholarship'. Therein lies the true problem.

And that makes them any different from Haredi Jews or fundamentalist, Protestant preachers with reference to the more progressive strains of scholarship within their respective religions?

 

[Loss Leader]

Several threads on the general subject of a dislike for Islam have been merged. New threads on this topic should not be opened. The discussion may continue and evolve here.

As always, please take care not to personalize your arguments.

Thank you.

- Loss Leader
Moderating Team

Posted By: Loss Leader

 

[Frozenwolf150]

More to the point, herein lies one major concern I have about Islam. In contrast with the general historical awareness, even recognition, of the manner in which the scriptures were generated in Christianity, which made textual criticism possible, there is no such recognition in Islam. (After all, it was a Roman emperor who ordered that an authoritative biblical text be put together. There was no pristine single copy to pay slave to, and the essence of the faith was defined by synods and in creeds.)

In the case of Islam, we have a sacred immovable text, so 'perfect' and unamendable that only the original classical Arabic is considered valid for the practice of true Islam. (Which in turn has produced arguments regarding the perfection of classical Arabic, which gives me nausea as a trained historical linguist.) This, in my mind, this absolutism at the level of the Koran itself, is the key obstacle to the modernization of the faith as practiced, and is what threatens a return to its worst forms at any time.

Not all Muslims see it that way. Consider the scholarly movement in places like Turkey to reinterpret the Quran for modernity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam

The fact that you've got Muslims all around the world who live their lives and practice their faith very differently is proof that the Quran is not immutable. As it has been stated in this thread already, do you think the average Muslim family living in Ohio is identical to the average Muslim family living in Iran?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

There is another thread about what happens to atheist bloggers in Bangladesh.

Yes, a thread I started, and had you been following it, you'd notice there was a discussion on the nuances of Bangladeshi culture and the Islamic influence. One poster brought up the fact that there is a large Bangladeshi immigrant community in the part of the United States where he or she lives. These people retain their Muslim heritage, but not the oppressive and backwards beliefs of the Bangladeshi government and local culture. After all, like the blogger in the story, they're now living in a country that allows freedom of speech and religion. Same religion, different part of the world.

 

[Chaos]

The fact that you've got Muslims all around the world who live their lives and practice their faith very differently is proof that the Quran is not immutable. As it has been stated in this thread already, do you think the average Muslim family living in Ohio is identical to the average Muslim family living in Iran?

Maybe not identical... but the impression I got is that the general population in Iran is not all that fond of the fanaticism of their rulers.

Try Pakistan instead, especially rural Pakistan. It appears to be like the Bible Belt, minus the pretense of civilization.

 

[Belgian thought]

And that makes them any different from Haredi Jews or fundamentalist, Protestant preachers with reference to the more progressive strains of scholarship within their respective religions?

They are killing thousands is one difference I can come up with. Can you think of any?

 

[Ryokan]

Maybe not identical... but the impression I got is that the general population in Iran is not all that fond of the fanaticism of their rulers.

Try Pakistan instead, especially rural Pakistan. It appears to be like the Bible Belt, minus the pretense of civilization.

Pakistani cities, on the other hand, tend to be quite liberal. MQM, a liberal and secular party, is the largest party in Karachi - and even the third largest party in the national assembly.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Not all Muslims see it that way. Consider the scholarly movement in places like Turkey to reinterpret the Quran for modernity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam

The fact that you've got Muslims all around the world who live their lives and practice their faith very differently is proof that the Quran is not immutable. As it has been stated in this thread already, do you think the average Muslim family living in Ohio is identical to the average Muslim family living in Iran?

Note that I steer clear of classifying or discussing Muslims. This is to of course avoid sweeping generalizations, and to differentiate between core canon OTOH, and the practice of any creed by particular individuals OTO.

I do have plenty of anecdotal evidence regarding Muslims that I know, and it indicates that there are no generalizations that hold very far.

I do have issues with Islam as practiced by my many, many Pakistani neighbors, as the variant of Islam as practiced in that culture seems to be quite oppressive in general. My experiences include death threats, throat-cutting gestures, kicking my dog on the street and justifying that on the basis of an understanding of Islamic teaching, and clear statements that the country in which I reside once belonged to the Caliphate and those now here are invading interlopers to be dealt with "soon enough."

[I own a bar in the port area of a Mediterranean city. I get exposed to a lot.]

However, I also meet many sub-Saharan Muslims who are extremely sweet, kind, and unassuming, not to mention my hard-drinking, pork-consuming Muslim friends from Macedonia. No, as far as people are concerned, for me there are only two kinds: those I like, and a***s.

It is Islam, the body of teaching and traditions, that is the object of my comments.

 

[Chaos]

It is Islam, the body of teaching and traditions, that is the object of my comments.

Why bother?

Your experience already shows that this body of teaching and traditions leads to an astoundingly wide variety of behavior in its followers. Do you have any indication that, if the teachings and traditions of Islam were all flowers and fluffy bunnies, any of these people would behave differently?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Why bother?

Because the core precepts of any body of thought are predictive of potential behaviors that claim adherence to it. This is the difference between, I dunno, Home&Gardens Guide to Better Living and Mein Kampf.

Your experience already shows that this body of teaching and traditions leads to an astoundingly wide variety of behavior in its followers. Do you have any indication that, if the teachings and traditions of Islam were all flowers and fluffy bunnies, any of these people would behave differently?

My experience also indicates that that same variety of expression is directly related to the degree to which the adherent is a literal practitioner of a given flavor/sect, as it does for any body of thought.

And so my concern regards the deployment of the precepts of Islam under literalist interpretations, and that certainly includes thought I find entirely contrary to my core values, and the bulk of Western intellectual tradition.

The focus on Islam at this juncture pertains to its complete relevance to daily events across the globe. It is the topic of the thread. And as stated earlier, what is sancrosanct about mythical beliefs, if anything?

I of course find fault with the positions of orthodox/fundie anythings, but consider that at this time in the world, I needn't be overly concerned (though it is still relevant in middle America) with the faith and science debate with Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Buddhists or Jainists. Scientologists are another laughing matter altogether, however.

ETA: It is also the case that Islam, among the major religions, is singularly concerned with the ordering of civil society in explicit ways. Though this can be read into many religious texts, it is far more a core part of teachings in Islam than in any other religious body of thought.