New book on Muhammed

[pro_universal]

Hi pro_universal,

We don’t care about what Muslims believe in this thread. Their belief, as is yours, are irrelavent.

We are just trying to learn about the man, Muhammed. If you are so adamant that Spencer can not teach us about Muhammed, then perhaps you can enlighten us.

There are one billion muslims in the world. If we want them to learn about Jesus, then we should set the example and learn about Muhammed. Is it wrong to ask questions about Muhammed?

Considering that questions about Muhammad are historical questions, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say that someone who has no credentials as a historian, and who is a religious evangelist, would not be the best source of information.

 

[pro_universal]

Don’t you hate it when someone outside your religion tries to tell you what your religion is about? Personally, it drives me crazy when a non-jew tries to teach me something about judaism (which hasn’t happened to me here). I own a copy of the Koran and have read just enough to know that I can’t come to any conclusions about Islam from just reading its holy book. Text is a springboard, I think. A starting point. Not a final explanation.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled debate.

Thanks Valke2

Yes, I’m sure it gets old and sometimes terrifying when people start grabbing “teachings of the Jews” to tell you about your religion.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Considering Muhammad’s biography is on public record, it is up to you to show where Spencer made errors and why those errors would change our opinion of Islam. Other than that, your posts are nothing more than ad hominems.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Valke,
You’re making some unjustified assumptions here. Some of us have actually lived under Islam. Further, it is up to Muslims to defend their religion and they have singularly failed to do so. This proves that their apologetics are weak and false. Heck, their religion is false to begin with.

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[manualman]

Pro-Universal,

You argue pasionately for your beliefs. But a good question has been asked. Mr. Spencer seems to have some personal and cultural experience of life as a christian within mostly muslim societies.

Why shouldn’t we as catholics be bothered by his observations and wonder if these experiences don’t, in fact, say something about Islam itself? Why should someone who has suffered injustice be banned from writing about it? The world would have been a darn sight better off if we had listened to Jewish writers and speakers about what was happening in Germany in the 1930’s. We might have averted the US Civil war if people had listened better to folks like Frederick Douglas about the abomination of slavery.

I’m not ready to say Islam is like fascism or slavery. But I’m also not willing to dismiss the testimony of somebody simply because he belongs to a ‘victim class.’

 

[amoxoxoma]

I will repeat: Rev. Spencer is just that, a reverend with an agenda.

We don’t know what Osama thinks of his books, but he gets even Bin Ladenite theology wrong.

He is not a real scholar. He’s not even taken seriously enough by real scholars to be a part of the debate.

He’s a reverend who writes religious tracts aimed at people who share his religion to defame another. No more.

Which of his books have you read? Try Inside Islam: a Guide for Catholics Do you know for a fact that he’s a deacon in his church? He’s certainly not a priest.

What religious tracts are you talking about?

While he may not have a PhD, he at least has an MA in Religious Studies. His website notes he "is a writer and researcher ", and also says:

"Q: Why should I believe what you say about Islam?
RS: Because I draw no conclusions of myself, and I do not ask anyone to take anything on my word. Pick up any of my books, and you will see that they are made up largely of quotations from Islamic jihadists and the traditional Islamic sources to which they appeal to justify violence and terrorism. I am only shedding light on what these sources say.

It is amusing to me that some people like to focus on my credentials, when I have never made a secret of the fact that most of what I know about Islam comes from personal study. It is easier for them to talk about degrees than to find any inaccuracy in my work. Yet I present the work not on the basis of my credentials, but on the basis of the evidence I bring forth; evaluate it for yourself…"

"…It is not an act of hatred against Muslims to point out the depredations of jihad ideology. It is a peculiar species of displacement and projection to accuse someone who exposes the hatred of one group of hatred himself: I believe in the equality of rights and dignity of all people, and that is why I oppose the global jihad. And I think that those who make the charge know better in any case: they use the charge as a tool to frighten the credulous and politically correct away from the truth. "

jihadwatch.org/spencer/

The ad hominem attacks didn’t work on WhyIslam.org ( whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13688&KW=spencer&PN=1 and whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=10904&KW=spencer )

and they don’t work here. Anyone can read what he writes for himself and judge. I doubt you have read any of his books because you’d have to buy them for yourself - you’re not likely to find them in a library. What credentials do you have to render a respected opinion? Come on now - have you been studying Islam for over 20 years like Spencer, or can you read arabic, like Spencer? But, hey, I only have a BS degree, so you can ignore me.

You know, it is just possible for reasonable people to come to different conclusions about things given the same data. But calling what he writes “Hatespeech” is just really over the top.

 

[Eden]

This is from a Wikipedia article on Robert Spencer:

On 2 September 2006 a video called “Invitation to Islam” featuring Adam Gadahn (AKA "Azzam the American) with a brief appearance also by Ayman Al-Zawahiri. In the video, Gadahn named Spencer as one of several “Zionist crusader missionaries of hate and counter-Islam consultants”, and that if he chose to “repent his sins” he would be accepted as a “brother in Islam”.

Spencer responded with an article in Frontpage Magazine (“My Invitation From al-Qaeda”, September 6, 2006) in which he publicly rejected Gadahn’s offer and responded with his own counter-offer:

I invite you [Gadahn] to accept the Bill of Rights, and enter into the brotherhood of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. My invitation does not focus on my religion, although I invite you to that also, but rather on a framework within which people of differing faiths can live in peace, harmony, and mutual respect – provided that none of the groups involved cherishes supremacist ambitions to subjugate the others.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Spencer

 

[pro_universal]

Pro-Universal,

You argue pasionately for your beliefs. But a good question has been asked. Mr. Spencer seems to have some personal and cultural experience of life as a christian within mostly muslim societies.

He is an American. He’s lived his whole life in America.

Why shouldn’t we as catholics be bothered by his observations and wonder if these experiences don’t, in fact, say something about Islam itself? Why should someone who has suffered injustice be banned from writing about it? The world would have been a darn sight better off if we had listened to Jewish writers and speakers about what was happening in Germany in the 1930’s. We might have averted the US Civil war if people had listened better to folks like Frederick Douglas about the abomination of slavery.

I’m not ready to say Islam is like fascism or slavery. But I’m also not willing to dismiss the testimony of somebody simply because he belongs to a ‘victim class.’

The real question is: Why should we believe a religious evangelist who has no credentials in history, can’t even read the sources he’s using in their original language, and who uses intentionally inflammatory titles?

 

[pro_universal]

Anyone can read what he writes for himself and judge. I doubt you have read any of his books because you’d have to buy them for yourself - you’re not likely to find them in a library. What credentials do you have to render a respected opinion? Come on now - have you been studying Islam for over 20 years like Spencer, or can you read arabic, like Spencer? But, hey, I only have a BS degree, so you can ignore me.

You know, it is just possible for reasonable people to come to different conclusions about things given the same data. But calling what he writes “Hatespeech” is just really over the top.

Pointing out that he is not someone qualified in the study of history is not an ad hominem.

If someone without an MD gave you medical advice, would it be an “ad hominem attack” to point out that the person has no medical training?

Spencer cannot speak or read arabic, and hasn’t studied Islam professionally for even one year.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Pointing out that he is not someone qualified in the study of history is not an ad hominem.

Sure it is as you were attempting to dismiss everything he wrote on the basis that he is not a historian. In other words, you didn’t even bother to disprove what he wrote and went straight for the man. Play the ball, bud, not the man.

pro:

If someone without an MD gave you medical advice, would it be an “ad hominem attack” to point out that the person has no medical training?

Unless you’re a medical doctor yourself discussing medical issues with another medico, you have just made a false analogy. Religion and current affairs affects everyone - and I will show why.

pro:

Spencer cannot speak or read arabic, and hasn’t studied Islam professionally for even one year.

This shows you are committing ad hominem. How many Muslims can speak Arabic - only a minority. Does a person have to be an expert in Islamic history, a religious scholar and a master at Arabic to convert to Islam? No. Thus, someone who has that characteristics can also discuss Islam. After all, if someone can convert to Islam he can opine about it.

Thus, your entire stance is a massive ad hominem.

Btw: how many Muslims can speak or read Arabic and how many have studied Islam professionally?

 

[amoxoxoma]

Pointing out that he is not someone qualified in the study of history is not an ad hominem.
.

If pointing out such a fact was all you did there would be no problem. Have you read even one of his books???
I would humbly point out that you are much less qualified than he to speak about what Islam is.

If someone without an MD gave you medical advice, would it be an “ad hominem attack” to point out that the person has no medical training?

Absolutely irrelevant. He makes no claims to represent Islam in the way that a Quranic scholar from al-Azhur does. I’m not placing my life in his hands as I would an MD. Phelps preaches that “God hates fags.” Show me any statement you can cull from Jihadwatch written by Spencer that is anything at all like that. You can’t because it’s not there.

Spencer cannot speak or read arabic, and hasn’t studied Islam professionally for even one year.

Hmm…it’ possible that you are right about the arabic, though I thought I remembered reading something from that he had learned arabic.

He claims to have studied Islam for some 20 years, which is certainly much more than you. Your opinion about Islam carries much less weight though. How many years have you been studying it “professionally”.

I’ve read the Quran and many of the hadith on the USC-MSA site. I’ve also read the writings of some of the radical Islamists and frankly Spencer has it right about them and their twisted up version of Islam. It’s them, and the muslims who support them, that Spencer is criticial of. And rightly so. The articles you linked to in fact agree with his critique of the radicals - that their interpretation of Islam is wrong.

"Like other totalitarian ideologies, contemporary Islamism is blindly utopian. It implies a wholesale denial of history; the Islamists’ model of an ideal society is inspired by the idealized image of seventh-century Arabia and an ahistorical view of religion and human development. It is based on anachronistic thinking that rejects modern concepts of pluralism and tolerance. "

But then you have the new Grand Mufti of Jerusalem justifying suicide bombing. You have a “respected” Islamic thinker such as al-Qaradawi justifying suicide bombers. Not only that, he

refuses the separation of church and state;

he rejects equal rights for women;

he opposes democracy because a majority vote might go against Sharia;

he refuses freedom of religion by supporting death for apostates;

and last but not least, he endorses female genital mutilation.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaradawi

If this is what a moderate-conservative muslim teacher of great reknown in the Islamic world believes then one has to wonder what the rest of muslims believe. Clearly there is a clash of values and ideals with the west. And he gets crticized by many muslims for being too liberal!

P.S. what information do you have about Spencer being ordained in the Melkite Cathoic Church? How in the world can you say he is an evangelist? Except for the book about Islam for Catholics his religion is never an issue in his writing.

 

[pro_universal]

If pointing out such a fact was all you did there would be no problem. Have you read even one of his books???
I would humbly point out that you are much less qualified than he to speak about what Islam is.

Yes, and no, I’m certainly not any less qualified than he to speak about what Islam is. But that’s beside the point, because the issue here isn’t what I know or a judgment as to his full knowledge.

The question is: Are his books credible? Maybe if you want to read them all and check every source and commentary on those sources, you might find some true statements.

The point is, no one seriously interested in the field does this, because he doesn’t have the credibility to even enter the debate. If a communications professor starts publishing papers on neuroscience, no one is going to bother spending money on experiments to debunk his claims.

Absolutely irrelevant. He makes no claims to represent Islam in the way that a Quranic scholar from al-Azhur does. I’m not placing my life in his hands as I would an MD. Phelps preaches that “God hates fags.” Show me any statement you can cull from Jihadwatch written by Spencer that is anything at all like that. You can’t because it’s not there.

Then you haven’t read his work. He claims to be exposing the “true theological roots of Islam”. If he’s not actually showing what Islam is, then his work is pointless.

He claims to have studied Islam for some 20 years, which is certainly much more than you.

He doesn’t even try to claim that he has anything remotely approaching a professional study of the subject under his belt. Someone who says “I studied this for 20 years”, yet never bothered to actually study the language of the sources is telling you that he doesn’t really care to study the field, but rather, to write tracts.

It’s them, and the muslims who support them, that Spencer is criticial of.

Wrong. Spencer claims that Muslims who support terrorism are more true to their faith than Muslims who do not.

And rightly so. The articles you linked to in fact agree with his critique of the radicals - that their interpretation of Islam is wrong.

Yes, but this is not what spencer claims. He called one Muslim who stated that Islam does not command death for apostasy a liar, and then posted on his blog to make sure the comment was published. Spencer claims that terrorists have the right interpretation of Islam.

P.S. what information do you have about Spencer being ordained in the Melkite Cathoic Church? How in the world can you say he is an evangelist? Except for the book about Islam for Catholics his religion is never an issue in his writing.

Spencer is a “Reverend Deacon”, whatever that means, in a Melkite Church in America.

That makes him an evangelist, unless he’s only a part-time Catholic.

 

[Montalban]

The Reverend-Deacon Spencer is a polemicist with a religious agenda, not a historian.

He’s a Reverend in the Melkite Church, and spends all of his time writing Chick-esque tracts against Muslims and in support of his Church.

He’s about as credible on Islam as Fred Phelps is on Catholicism.

Always ignore the facts and go for the man!

 

[Montalban]

Btw: how many Muslims can speak or read Arabic and how many have studied Islam professionally?

My country’s next-door neighbour is the world’s biggest Islamic nation, and they’re not Arabs; Indonesia.

 

[murtad]

Funny, there are no Muslims who agree with his take on their theology.

I am a Trinitarian Muslim who agrees with Robert Spencer. The father of Muslim race, Muhammad, was a violent man who spread his ethnicity by terrorising Copts, Arameans and Jews.

Who is more likely to be right about what Muslims believe? Muslims, or a Melkite reverend masquerading as a historian?

It does not matter who Robert Spencer is! Whether he is a Melkite or Copt or Maronite or Chaldean is not an issue. What matters is his writings on JihadWatch are very sound and well written.

Robert Spencer is an excellent historian too as he studied history from a Christian worldview and also from an Islamic worldview. We all know that the so-called “Arab” world was never Arab but Coptic, Syriac, and Greek (Melkite). However, Islamic racism is what made us Christians into Arabs.

This is called cultural genocide.

Islam is a very nationalistic and ethnocentric religion.

 

[pro_universal]

My country’s next-door neighbour is the world’s biggest Islamic nation, and they’re not Arabs; Indonesia.

The Sheikhs do most certainly learn classical arabic there, though.

They’re also much better qualified to speak on Islam than an evangelist.

Evangelists have an agenda, and choose facts to advance it. That’s typical of spencer’s tracts.

 

[Montalban]

The Sheikhs do most certainly learn classical arabic there, though.

They’re also much better qualified to speak on Islam than an evangelist.

Evangelists have an agenda, and choose facts to advance it. That’s typical of spencer’s tracts.

Again you seek to play the man, and not deal with the facts

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro,
I presume you don’t speak classical latin and greek, nor have you learnt Christian theology professionally, nor are you an historian on Christianity and Western civilization, yet you opine about Christianity. Why the double standards?

 

[WanderAimlessly]

After reading come of the “spirited” comments here, I think I am definitely pick up a copy of this book.

 

[pro_universal]

Again you seek to play the man, and not deal with the facts

Pointing out that a man who claims to be educating people on history, has no historical credentials and isn’t even capable of reading the sources he uses in their original language, is not an “attack on the man.”

It’s pointing out the obvious: that reading his books on history are a waste of time.