Are Muslims disobeying the Qur'an by participating in this forum?

[Link]

Why do people argue from ambiguities made up from their own conjectures with respect to Quran as opposed to building and reflecting over what is clear in Quran and what is clear in proofs and insights, in that lies the cure, but most people don't do that.

 

[viole]

you're entitled to your opinion, but do not put words in my mouth thanks.

I do not put words in your mouth. I just draw the only logical conclusion possible.

Ciao

- viole

 

[paarsurrey]

Verse 4:140 of the Qur'an states:

Yusuf Ali: Already has He sent you Word in the Book, that when ye hear the signs of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, ye are not to sit with them unless they turn to a different theme: if ye did, ye would be like them. For Allah will collect the hypocrites and those who defy faith - all in Hell.

It seems quite clear to me that when a Muslim engages in debate with the likes of me, that he/she is openly defying Allah's command to not do so.

A cynic might even suggest that Allah is afraid of his followers being defeated in a debate and swayed away from the 'truth'.

Comments?

Please read my post #1008 in another thread, very much relevant here also. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Debater Slayer]

No assessment of the religion of billions of people ought hinge on a few verses from a book which they clearly don't take literally. Islam is a religion of peace for those who interpret it that way. It is a religion of war for those who interpret it that way. Much like Christianity, or Hinduism, or Buddhism.

It doesn't. There are 6,236 verses. I've been reading the Qur'an for 20 years, so I like to think I know which verses best sum up it's overall message.



That claim is wholly gratuitous and uninformed. You simply have no clue of which you speak.



Again. No. Clue. I assume you've spent exactly zero time reading the qur'an.

I have read the Qur'an and lived my whole life in Muslim societies. I was also brought up into the religion and practiced it regularly until early adulthood.

I agree with @Left Coast's assessment. Dismissing more progressive and peaceful interpretations of the Qur'an only gives leverage to the notion that only extremist and literalist readings of scripture are valid. This is counterproductive and doesn't aid in promoting the more peaceful voices.

Such dismissal may be a convenient means of painting the entire religion in a negative light by treating it as a monolith, but overlooking diversity and nuance doesn't help advance coexistence or do justice to the Muslims who also believe in advancing it.

 

[Kooky]

No, why would you think that?

It's the kind of thinking that assumes a cursory familiar with a sacred text confers objective and accurate understanding of all instances of the living religion based on that sacred text.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Is why I refuse to discuss with athiests anymore

Now let's look at another angle: what about the atheists who don't mock or insult your religion but who you still say, according to your specific interpretation of the religion, should be killed for leaving it?

Mocking may often be unproductive, but saying someone should be killed for changing their religion is orders of magnitude more dangerous and dehumanizing. At least most atheists who mock your beliefs don't deny that you have the right to live.

I'm not putting forward these points in order to argue with you; I'm only hoping to get you to reconsider how you view an entire group's (i.e., ex-Muslims') right to life and also to get you to see that most of us aren't some demons who are out to harm others and deserve to be killed.

 

[Kooky]

Why not instead say: sit with them! Show them the superiority of your belief, and how compelling Allah is, and ridicule them instead! For we have God the Almighty on our side, and the arguments in His favour cannot be denied!

The solution to that riddle is left as a simple exercise to the reader.

Isn't that basically what the OP has been doing?

 

[Kooky]

No assessment of the religion of billions of people ought hinge on a few verses from a book which they clearly don't take literally. Islam is a religion of peace for those who interpret it that way. It is a religion of war for those who interpret it that way. Much like Christianity, or Hinduism, or Buddhism.

You'd think so, but I've met more atheists who insisted on a literal reading of the Bible or the Quran than I've met Christians or Muslims who thought the same.

 

[Kooky]

Such dismissal may be a convenient means of painting the entire religion in a negative light by treating it as a monolith, but overlooking diversity and nuance doesn't help advance coexistence or do justice to the Muslims who also believe in advancing it.

And indeed, that is why so many people jump to these conclusions: Breaking down avenues of coexistence and peaceful communication is the entire point; the goal is to erect barriers and single out minorities as black sheep and scapegoats. It is a fundamentally exclusionary exercise.

 

[Debater Slayer]

You'd think so, but I've met more atheists who insisted on a literal reading of the Bible or the Quran than I've met Christians or Muslims who thought the same.

To be fair, I've seen at least a couple of Muslim members defend the death penalty for leaving Islam within the last few days. I'm more familiar with the diversity of Islamic interpretations than to assume such a belief represents all strains of Islam and bash it as a result, but I can see why someone could feel appalled and prompted to strongly criticize the religion if they don't have said familiarity upon encountering such an extremely violent and dehumanizing belief.

 

[viole]

Isn't that basically what the OP has been doing?

Doing what? My impression is that they want to avoid skeptics. For obvious reasons.

I would too, if I had those beliefs, and want to keep them safe.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Debater Slayer]

And indeed, that is why so many people jump to these conclusions: Breaking down avenues of coexistence and peaceful communication is the entire point; the goal is to erect barriers and single out minorities as black sheep and scapegoats. It is a fundamentally exclusionary exercise.

This doesn't entirely apply to my own experiences. I have seen many ex-Muslims and ex-Christians engage in this categorically anti-religious rhetoric due to being a heavily persecuted minority in most Muslim-majority countries. While the same rhetoric is probably more often than not used to scapegoat and demonize minorities where Muslims are a minority group in other parts of the world, this isn't the case when it stems from someone's understandable anger at religious persecution and prejudice in their predominantly Muslim country.

The idea some Western liberals have that being a Muslim necessarily implies being a minority seems to me quite Western-centric. It doesn't take into account the status quo of irreligious people in the Muslim world.

 

[Kooky]

This doesn't entirely apply to my own experiences. I have seen many ex-Muslims and ex-Christians engage in this categorically anti-religious rhetoric due to being a heavily persecuted minority in most Muslim-majority countries. While the same rhetoric is probably more often than not used to scapegoat and demonize minorities where Muslims are a minority group in other parts of the world, this isn't the case when it stems from someone's understandable anger at religious persecution and prejudice in their predominantly Muslim country.

The idea some Western liberals have that being a Muslim necessarily implies being a minority seems to me quite Western-centric. It doesn't take into account the status quo of irreligious people in the Muslim world.

Apologies, I simply wasn't aware of widespread anti-Islamic discourse in Muslim majority countries. I sympathize with people who are part of a repressed minority, and I can see why they would be predisposed towards a less than tolerant attitude towards a society that oppresses them.

With that said, I would argue that the anti-Muslim discourse that dominates anglophone forums experiences very little influence or input from people who have actual real life experience with Islam as a lived religion.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I don't either. It's fruitless.

From what I've seen, your situation is quite different: I've never seen you argue for violence or death against those who have left your religion, nor against LGBT rights.

If someone's beliefs include support for such things and then they say they don't want to debate non-believers, I think that more often than not raises a massive red flag and indicates they simply want to shelter their beliefs from scrutiny or reconsideration in spite of any ethical or logical objections to said beliefs.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I was not aware of widespread anti-Islamic discourse in Muslim majority countries.

Not widespread, but a lot of what I've seen of it bears strong resemblance to typical anti-Islamic rhetoric in the West. A lot of the same talking points circulate, but often for different reasons due to the vast difference between the situation of irreligious people in much of the Muslim world and their situation in much of the West.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Apologies, I simply wasn't aware of widespread anti-Islamic discourse in Muslim majority countries. I sympathize with people who are part of a repressed minority, and I can see why they would be predisposed towards a less than tolerant attitude towards a society that oppresses them.

With that said, I would argue that the anti-Muslim discourse that dominates anglophone forums experiences very little influence or input from people who have actual real life experience with Islam as a lived religion.

I just saw the edit. I agree with all of the above points.

Also, from my own experience as an ex-Muslim in societies that are often hostile toward atheists (at least ones not from foreign countries) and especially toward ex-Muslim atheists, I have come to firmly believe that being so categorically anti-religious is unproductive in the long run. It engenders bitterness, misunderstanding, and lack of nuance.

I empathize with those who are understandably angry due to being systematically persecuted, but it seems to me that bitterness and deep-seated anger often end up taking a toll on the person harboring them and potentially alienating religious allies due to the overgeneralizations inherent in categorically condemning diverse religions as if they were a monolith.

 

[MyM]

Now let's look at another angle: what about the atheists who don't mock or insult your religion but who you still say, according to your specific interpretation of the religion, should be killed for leaving it?

Mocking may often be unproductive, but saying someone should be killed for changing their religion is orders of magnitude more dangerous and dehumanizing. At least most atheists who mock your beliefs don't deny that you have the right to live.

I'm not putting forward these points in order to argue with you; I'm only hoping to get you to reconsider how you view an entire group's (i.e., ex-Muslims') right to life and also to get you to see that most of us aren't some demons who are out to harm others and deserve to be killed.

I totally understand what you are saying. I was born and raised a christian and fully 100% American.

But changing my belief isn't going to happen Anyone can leave Islam if they wish-majority never do. My advice is, know Islam before you enter into it, do not advertise if you leave it. The rest is between you and your Lord.

And Allah knows best

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, why would you think that?

He explains why he thinks that in the very post you are responding to.
Did you even read it?

 

[paarsurrey]

I have read the Qur'an and lived my whole life in Muslim societies. I was also brought up into the religion and practiced it regularly until early adulthood.

I agree with @Left Coast's assessment. Dismissing more progressive and peaceful interpretations of the Qur'an only gives leverage to the notion that only extremist and literalist readings of scripture are valid. This is counterproductive and doesn't aid in promoting the more peaceful voices.

Such dismissal may be a convenient means of painting the entire religion in a negative light by treating it as a monolith, but overlooking diversity and nuance doesn't help advance coexistence or do justice to the Muslims who also believe in advancing it.

Happy to note that one has been brought up and practiced Islam.
Didn't one note then that Islam is open for reformation, please? Right?

Regards

 

[Debater Slayer]

Happy to note that one has been brought up and practiced Islam.
Didn't one note then that Islam is open for reformation, please? Right?

Regards

My posts in this thread emphasize my belief that it is.