Historical and theological Islam

[Contarini]

I

Just a hint of your falacious ways:

You demand others to be precise, when you’ve failed dismally to define core aspects of your flawed argument, you know, things like “moderate muslims”,

How are “moderate Muslims” a core aspect of my argument? My argument is simply that if people claim to be Muslims and attach themselves to the tradition, we non-Muslims are not in a position to adjudicate the question of whether they really are Muslims or not.

Specifically, I was talking about Muslims who water down or spiritualize the traditional concept of Jihad.

I still don’t understand why you are attacking me. Exactly what are we disagreeing about?

And you are the guy who has the guts to demand others to be concise and clear when you have no idea about what a “moderate” muslim is?

I have an idea what a moderate Muslim is–it’s a relative, not an absolute term, applying to those who take a less violent and intolerant approach than other Muslims.

I am not making any claims about who is a moderate Muslim–I use it as a shorthand for those whose status as “true Muslims” is being questioned because they do not hold sufficiently ferocious views. Clearly there are such people–everyone admits this. The question I’m interested in is whether they are engaging in a thoughtful reinterpretation of their tradition, or whether they are just assimilated Western Muslims who haven’t thought things through. I understand Rodrigo and some others to be claiming the latter, hence Rodrigo’s statement about one particular argument (that a violent “jihad” is only legitimate if there is a legitimate caliph) not having theological justification. I agree that as a matter of fact there are no doubt many Muslims who do not think deeply about their faith. But I deny the principle that one can automatically assume that a Muslim who doesn’t accept the doctrine of a violent, aggressive jihad against non-Muslims (simply for being non-Muslims not under Muslim rule) is therefore not thinking carefully about Islam or not really devoted to it. That, as far as I’m concerned, is what this is about–I am defending the a priori possibility that a Muslim who does not accept offensive military jihad is doing so on the basis of a thoughtful interpretation of Islamic scripture and tradition.

Since I have yet to figure out what exactly we are disagreeing about, I am hardly very impressed with the rationality of your posts.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

What would “treat” muslims with fairness" constitute, given the fact that muslims and non-muslims have very different standards of fairness.

Fairness is not one thing for Muslims and another for Christians. Fairness is fairness. It means, for one thing, treating others as we would like them to treat us, not as they treat us. It means not applying a standard to other religions that we refuse to accept for ourselves. And so on, and so forth. It’s not rocket science.

Why should we include Constatine the emperor in the discussion of whether Christians/muhhamedans are following the teachings of Christ and muhhamad respectively.

What discussion? When have I ever engaged in this discussion, let alone invoked Constantine in it?

It is relevant to discuss the actions of post-Constantinian Christianity when comparing Christianity with Islam, because Christianity cannot be reduced to the teachings of Christ (or even to the teachings of the Bible as a whole) any more than Islam can be reduced to the teachings of Muhammad. Both religions are large, complex, and varied traditions.

Your favourite scholar Contarini has left many questions unanswered

Perhaps you should try asking these questions in a clear and courteous manner.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Montalban]

Fairness is not one thing for Muslims and another for Christians. Fairness is fairness.
In Christ,

Edwin

That’s not quite true.

What is fair, is fair, for sure. But what Moslems consider fair, is not fair.

This word – equality – which many thinkers in both the east and the west advocate in various fields of life is a word which is based on deviation and a lack of understanding, especially when the speaker attributes this idea of equality to the Qur’aan and to Islam
islamqa.com/index.php?ref=1105&ln=eng

Moslems believe that if they discriminate against all Dhimmi, that’s ‘fair’.

Thus…
But if we say justice, which means giving each one that to which he or she is entitled, this misunderstanding no longer applies, and the word used is correct.
(Ibid.)

So if you treat all women as being less than a man, that’s ‘fair’ in Islam

That’s a different understanding of fairness from the Western notion

 

[fatma]

That’s not quite true.

What is fair, is fair, for sure. But what Moslems consider fair, is not fair.

This word – equality – which many thinkers in both the east and the west advocate in various fields of life is a word which is based on deviation and a lack of understanding, especially when the speaker attributes this idea of equality to the Qur’aan and to Islam
islamqa.com/index.php?ref=1105&ln=eng

Moslems believe that if they discriminate against all Dhimmi, that’s ‘fair’.

Thus…
But if we say justice, which means giving each one that to which he or she is entitled, this misunderstanding no longer applies, and the word used is correct.
(Ibid.)

So if you treat all women as being less than a man, that’s ‘fair’ in Islam

That’s a different understanding of fairness from the Western notion

Westerners believe that if they stereotype all muslims and other ‘dangerous’ minorities, that’s fair.
Westerners believe that if you portray all women as sex objects, that’s fair.
I don’t think there is much difference in the understanding of fairness!

 

[Montalban]

Westerners believe that if they stereotype all muslims and other ‘dangerous’ minorities, that’s fair.
Westerners believe that if you portray all women as sex objects, that’s fair.
I don’t think there is much difference in the understanding of fairness!

Is it inherent to being a westener?

What I stated is inherent in Islam - it’s about *rights *for and *obligations *of different groups.

So much for another of your Islamic apologies!

 

[fatma]

Is it inherent to being a westener?

What I stated is inherent in Islam - it’s about *rights *for and *obligations *of different groups.

So much for another of your Islamic apologies!

yes it is a product of the free market, capitalism etc i would say that is central to the west. I know next to nothing about Islam so I think calling me an apologist is perhaps hyperbole!

 

[nonsumd]

Since I believe I was the one who introduced the word “fairness” into this thread…

What should we do to discourage Muslims from becoming radicals?

Deal with them more fairly and justly than we have been doing, but without forgetting also to press for Muslims to deal justly and fairly with the Jews and Christians they are threatening or oppressing.

…let me explain what I meant.

I did not mean primarily fairness in representing Muslims or treating Muslims in Western countries fairly.

I mean we, the Western powers, particularly at this historical moment, the USA, should make an examination of conscience or at least make an honest appraisal of history and admit the role we have played in making much of the Islamic world a chaos that spawns terrorists. I am not saying that only Western colonialism and neo-colonialism are to blame for these problems, but that Western powers have played and continue to play a negative role (but again I would not say that their role has only been negative).

From such an examination of conscience/honest appraisal of history and only from such a starting point, can we hope to play a more constructive role in the Islamic world and reduce the resentment of populations that are now acquiescing to terrorism against us.

How can we claim to be spreading democracy to the Islamic world when we massively fund repressive regimes like Egypt’s or Saudi Arabia’s, not to mention Israel’s and one time even Saddam’s Iraq’s and the Shah’s Iran’s?

 

[Montalban]

yes it is a product of the free market, capitalism etc i would say that is central to the west. I know next to nothing about Islam so I think calling me an apologist is perhaps hyperbole!

Perhaps, but at least show some evidence in support of what you say about ‘the West’.(given that there’s laws for equality, at least in this country)

I’ve attempted to do so for Islam.

 

[nonsumd]

Speaking of Judaism, it is interesting to note that with all the alleged references to violence that the OT contains, no single jewish suicide bomber has blown himself up in Germany.

birdsong, there is a breakdown in logic here I feel should point out to someone who claims to be “rational.”

Your hypothetical anti-German Jewish suicide bomber is not comparable to the real-life anti-Israeli Palestinian suicide bomber. The post-WWII Germans present no threat to Jews or Israelis, whereas the Israeli state and Israelis such as the West Bank settlers are currently oppressing the whole Palestinian people.

I say this is not to justify Palestinian suicide bombings, just to point out that your analogy does not work.

Jews were known to retaliate against Germans after the war – there were Jews who as POW camp staff committed atrocities against German prisoners in Soviet or Eastern European Communist custody. We can no more deny this than we can deny that in parts of Poland Jews returning from the concentration camps faced bloody pogroms from Catholic Poles.

As for Jews getting inspiration or legitimation for aggression and oppression from the OT, what else do you call the dispossession of the Palestinians (though the trauma of Holocaust, more than the Book of Joshua per se, is driving the Israeli state)?

 

[Montalban]

birdsong, there is a breakdown in logic here I feel should point out to someone who claims to be “rational.”

Your hypothetical anti-German Jewish suicide bomber is not comparable to the real-life anti-Israeli Palestinian suicide bomber. The post-WWII Germans present no threat to Jews or Israelis, whereas the Israeli state and Israelis such as the West Bank settlers are currently oppressing the whole Palestinian people.

I agree that his analogy does not work.

It’s ony a matter of a few years, though…

Where were the suicide bombers in Germany in, say 1939?

 

[Contarini]

That’s not quite true.

What is fair, is fair, for sure. But what Moslems consider fair, is not fair.

Fine but irrelevant to what I was saying. Indeed, if anything, you make my point, that you and other anti-Islamic folks can’t stop and think about what is fair in itself, you are so obsessed with what Muslims do.

Edwin

 

[Booklover]

yes it is a product of the free market, capitalism etc i would say that is central to the west. I know next to nothing about Islam so I think calling me an apologist is perhaps hyperbole!

You claim to know nothing about Islam, and yet your initial posts stated that we don’t understand it! You keep defending it have called many of us bigots and Islamophobes, and yet you have never commented on the “peaceful” posts by Tawheed! Methinks thou protest too much!

Vickie

 

[dolphinlove]

You claim to know nothing about Islam, and yet your initial posts stated that we don’t understand it! You keep defending it have called many of us bigots and Islamophobes, and yet you have never commented on the “peaceful” posts by Tawheed! Methinks thou protest too much!

Vickie

oh vickie, your one of my favourite posters :clapping:

 

[Booklover]

oh vickie, your one of my favourite posters :clapping:

Thanks, Dolph, you’ve made my day!:hug1:

Vickie

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

nonsumd:

what else do you call the dispossession of the Palestinians

I’m sorry but I don’t believe the Palestinian Arabs are mentioned in the Bible or any of the historical records of the time - including the Roman records.

I think the Jews were there first and had prior claim to the land. If you are happy that the Jews were expelled from Israel then the same should apply for the Palestinian Arabs.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I’m sorry but I don’t believe the Palestinian Arabs are mentioned in the Bible or any of the historical records of the time - including the Roman records.

I think the Jews were there first and had prior claim to the land. If you are happy that the Jews were expelled from Israel then the same should apply for the Palestinian Arabs.

Can someone help clarify for me?

If Egyptians are Arabs, and Palestinians are Arabs…are Jews also Arab? Or are they all Semitic? Jews come from the same area (Egypt/Siani) and occupied the land of Canaan which was not described to be Arab but Phonecian long before Islam. Ancient Egyptians were not noted to be Arab. Algeria and Lybia were Berber.

When did all these nations of people previous to 632AD to include Lebanon, Syria, Egypt…become Arab? They only took on the Arab persona once they became Moslem. Islamification means Arabization, but a change of religious faith, forced or willing, does not change genetics.

 

[nonsumd]

I’m sorry but I don’t believe the Palestinian Arabs are mentioned in the Bible or any of the historical records of the time - including the Roman records.

I think the Jews were there first and had prior claim to the land. If you are happy that the Jews were expelled from Israel then the same should apply for the Palestinian Arabs.

If you want to talk about who was there first, then the Bible itself says that the Jews (Hebrews, Israelites) were not the first people in what would one day be named Palestine. The Canaanites were.

My own view is that the Hebrews/Israelites were for the most part a subcategory of Canaanite (indeed, Hebrew is a dialect of Canaanite, closely related to Phoenician) with some elements from other closely related Semitic peoples and perhaps also from the Egyptians.

Because of the lavish patronage of the Christian Roman emperors, Palestine in the centuries leading up to the Muslim conquest was prosperous and well-populated. The Christian Palestinians were descended from the Canaanites, whether through ex-pagan lines or through ex-Jewish lines. The influx of Arabs would not have changed the fact that the population was essentially of the same stock that had existed there for millennia, antedating even Abraham.

In any case, the Palestinians have as least as much right to the land their ancestors have been living on for centuries as non-indigenous Americans in the USA have the right to the land that their ancestors have been living on for a fraction of the time.

The problem is that the world has taken sides between the Jews and the Palestinians when it should have recognized that both have legitimate claims to the land and helped the two sides to live side by side in peace.

 

[fatma]

yes it is a product of the free market, capitalism etc i would say that is central to the west. I know next to nothing about Islam so I think calling me an apologist is perhaps hyperbole!

themonthly.com.au/excerpts/issue18_excerpt_005.html
Yet the culture war is essentially a cover for the real battle of ideas in Australian politics today: the battle between free-market fundamentalism and the social-democratic belief that individual reward can be balanced with social responsibility. Howard’s culture war is in large part an electoral strategy drawn straight from the Republican Party’s campaign manual. Its organising principle is fear, and it is deployed in two parts. The first of these is the conscious exacerbation of fear, anxiety and uncertainty – all of which are powerful (though, in effect, disempowering) emotions capable of overriding everything else in the human mind. The second part is to proffer the healing balm of “certainty” in the midst of all the anxiety-inducing “uncertainty”, by running a series of falsely dichotomous arguments in the public debate: tradition versus modernity; absolutism versus moral relativism; monoculture versus multiculture.

 

[Montalban]

Fine but irrelevant to what I was saying. Indeed, if anything, you make my point, that you and other anti-Islamic folks can’t stop and think about what is fair in itself, you are so obsessed with what Muslims do.

Edwin

You mean I stand up for what’s fair, and Moslem apologists try to pretend then that we’re all talking about the same thing, because we’re using the same word.

Same argument when we all use the term ‘god’.

 

[Montalban]

If you want to talk about who was there first, then the Bible itself says that the Jews (Hebrews, Israelites) were not the first people in what would one day be named Palestine. The Canaanites were.

You mean after the Israelites had gone into Egypt?