Let's see if we can define 'Islamophobia'.

[stevecanuck]

Scholars of English and Arabic, or scholars of Islam? That's relevant. How do you know, anyway?

Google Yusuf Ali. His CV with assure you of his credentials. I rely heavely on the 7 translations in corpus.quran.com

I suppose we could be optimistic that the best of them give as accurate sense as possible. But that doesn't mean they give an accurate sense to begin with. One difficulty in translating the Quran is that many words in the Arabic language can have a multitude of meanings.

Same as in English. Take the word 'head'. After running the options through my head, I decided it would be best to head toward the head of the trail. It's obvious what each usage means.

You can't make a sensible translation by giving all of them, even if all of them are known to be correct. Instead, the translator will choose one of them and then might mention the others in footnotes, or not.

We're not looking for word-for-word translations. The difference between English and Arabic grammar and sentence structure makes that impossible.

Consider the phrases "I am entirely to blame" and "It's all my fault". They mean the same thing without duplicating so much as one word. The gist of each verse is easily articulated by scholars such as Ali.

 

[stevecanuck]

Have you ever seen an Hybrid image? A double image? If not then google the words "hybrid image". In an Hybrid image - depending on the distance you are looking from - you see a different image.
Now, I am NOT comparing Quran to any hybrid images but what I am trying to say is - depending on - where your heart is when you are reading the Quran and depending on what you are expecting to find - your eyes will show you what your heart desires!
Read Quran chapter 2 verse 6-7. Unless you surrender yourself to the one true God - it is difficult to understand the doctrine because your heart won't be in it!

The Quran can be divided into two parts.
1) A historical document
2) A book of rules
Don't confuse historical parts and believe it applies to all times! Historical parts are just narrations to what happened. You can learn something from the examples but don't try to apply it to all scenarios. If someone is wrongly trying to apply it then say so - but don't say their understanding is correct or justified!

Context is paramount! Sometimes it may be difficult for you to understand the context because you don't know when a particular verse was revealed - so you cannot connect the historical significance of the verse to anything - thus you feel it applies to all times when it doesn't!

So, next time when you stumble upon such a verse that confuses you - you should seek help from someone who understand the language and has good background knowledge rather than coming to your own wrong conclusion and declaring or implying that Quran advocate violence, when it doesn't! It is all about self defense and it is all about preventing the complete annihilation of the truth in its early stages of declaration and establishment. Now truth has been delivered. You have a choice to believe it or not. So, no need for similar defense!

So, next time you come across a verse like 9:111 you should seek help to understand it or at the least - you should look at other good teachings and look at verses where it says..."killing one innocent is like killing the entire humanity"... and quickly realize your conclusion that Muslims are asked to fight, kill or be killed - must be flawed!



You asked about verse 9:111. Incidentally, September 11 is around the corner! Let me first give you a 9-11 reference! Maybe you will understand the importance of historical context!
After the attack on 9-11-01 then President Bush gave a speech. Let me paraphrase what he said... "There is no cave deep enough for you to hide in, we will smoke you out, we will find you and kill you".
We all knew what he meant! We knew he was talking about a specific group of people who were behind the 9-11 attack. We know it because we are from this era!
But imagine 1400 years in the future - someone (without knowing the background of events and issues in the middle east) reading the transcript of his speech might think President Bush was talking about killing all Muslim everywhere on earth!
In your particular scenario - that someone is you because you don't have the background knowledge.

Regarding the verse 9:111 - of course there is historical significance. I am not here to give you a history lesson. Just google "campaign of Tabuk".
When you are facing threat from at least a 35 times bigger army and when believers were having doubt about prevailing and as a result "truth" was in danger from not getting it roots established - encouragement was needed for the believers to stay the course and protect the truth from getting lost and overrun! In the past - the "truth" was corrupted repeatedly after the departure of other prophets! It was corrupted after Moses left, it was corrupted after Jesus left. It was our last chance. Truth had to prevail among at least some believers so that it could be passed on to the future generations!
Now Islam is well established. It will prevail whatever is thrown at it. So, no more worries!

You are not only failing to find the context - you are also reading between the lines and making your own assumptions. Why don't you read the good and clear-cut teachings of the Quran? If and when you acknowledge the numerous good teachings of the Quran - you will understand the problem was YOU and not the verses you are having problem with!

You have been told that killing one innocent is like killing the entire humanity - but you want to ignore that verse and try to say - killing is encouraged based on a verse you don't properly comprehend? Is that smart? Think deeply and think again!
Remember the entire Quran is delivering a message too and that is the ultimate context! So, one or two verses should not derail you if you look at all the good teachings!



If someone is living in the past and interpreting the Quran in a wrong light then say it as it is.
Tell them they have hijacked a good religion and that they are wrong. President Bush used to say that - terrorist have hijacked a good faith system! So, do that but don't indicate to something improper and say they are doing it because the Quran said so!

Don't think and interpret like the terrorists. Give some rat's*** to the proper context and allow the truth to prevail.
Otherwise - what is the difference between you and the terrorist? You are both complicit. One actively involved and one interpreting the same way!

You completely ignored my point that when the Qur'an doesn't give historical context, it's not needed. So, why should I bother trying to communicate further with you?

 

[Augustus]

You completely ignored my point that when the Qur'an doesn't give historical context, it's not needed

Perhaps it’s simply a fallacious assertion rather than a meaningful point.

Are you aware of any Islamic sects or schools of thought that consider historical context not to be important for interpreting the Quran?

If almost all Muslims think it is relevant, your personal opinions add little of substance to the discussion.

 

[stevecanuck]

Perhaps it’s simply a fallacious assertion rather than a meaningful point.

Perhaps it isn't.

Are you aware of any Islamic sects or schools of thought that consider historical context not to be important for interpreting the Quran?

If almost all Muslims think it is relevant, your personal opinions add little of substance to the discussion.

This from the guy who claims early Islamic history can't be known because it relys too heavily on unverifiable hadiths. Did you think I would forget your posting history?

Pick a lane.

 

[Augustus]

Perhaps it isn't.

That would be up to you to demonstrate by making a rational argument that it reflects the views of actual Muslims.

So far you have repeatedly failed to do so.

This from the guy who claims early Islamic history can't be known because it relys too heavily on unverifiable hadiths. Did you think I would forget your posting history?

Come on Steve, is it really that difficult to comprehend?

There are 2 meaningful areas of discussion depending on what you are interested in at any given point:

1. The real world history of the movement that became Islam

2. What Muslims of varying kinds actually believe on various issue.

Do you understand that theology and history are not the same things?

You do not have to limit yourself to one “lane”.

If you need more help, think of it like this: you can try to understand what Christians believe even if you don’t actually agree Jesus walked on water and came back from the dead. Simple enough yet?

What is generally not massively relevant to anything is “how Steve off the internet thinks Muslims should practice their religion even if he can’t actually identify any group of Muslims who do or have ever practiced it in that way.”

 

[BrightShadow]

This is the closest you've come to saying something useful. I'm sure you didn't mean to, but you've actually hit the nail on the head. My whole point in providing quotes from the Qur'an is to, as you put it, "think and interpret like the terrorists". Do you really not see that?

I'm showing EXACTLY why terrorists do what they do by showing the verses they read. Seriously, how is that not the bleedin' obvious?

So you are admittedly and gleefully accepting that you think like the "terrorists"!

I assume you are living in a free world with internet access to the ocean of knowledge and yet you are comparing yourself to politically controlled, intellectually deprived, mentally manipulated folks who are brainwashed from pre-school into believing these false narratives and misinterpretations because it is what their leaders want so that they could be recruited by these organizations to further their cause. A "cause" that has nothing to do with Islam but all about oppression, occupied territory (basically all about land)!

The terrorists are brainwashed from childhood so that they could be recruited - what reason do you have to think the way they do?

Do you agree that ruling party in those countries where your "terrorists" are from - control what their children should be expose to in school?

Even in a country like good old USA - who decides what is taught in Govt run schools? It is NOT the parents who decide what their children are taught. It is usually the administrators within the relevant govt agency who decides what should be taught. In other words - it is the ruling party who decides because they appoint the administrators.
Very little you can do to change anything regarding what should be taught to your children in school! If your children are exposed to nudity in the name of sex education with graphic pictures of sexual positions and sexual acts with explicit details - you can do very little to stop it. If your children are exposed to homosexuality with graphic pictures - you can do very little to stop it. You can protest with other parents or you can take your children out of public school (if you can afford it) but you cannot stop the govt from deciding what your children should learn at their school. The school can support your boy to identify himself as a girl - and as a parent you cannot do anything about it.
If you can influence children in a school in such a way in a country like USA - then imagine what they can do to their children in countries where your so-called "terrorists" are from. It is an open secret that children are manipulated and are taught to hate Israel and hate USA from an early age and this is not because the Quran teaches any such things - it is because of political reasons.

So, if you trying to find correlation between the Quran and the way the terrorists think then you are looking at the wrong place! You are considering wrong reason!
I guess what I am trying to say is - the "terrorists" have their reason to misinterpret the Quran because it serves their purpose. They are in a war with Israel and they hate anyone who is helping Israel. What reason do you have to misinterpret the Quran?

You completely ignored my point that when the Qur'an doesn't give historical context, it's not needed. So, why should I bother trying to communicate further with you?

You don't have basic knowledge how Quran supposed to be interpreted. You are choosing to be blind. Very little can be done to bring you out of darkness. I am assuming you have personal reasons to have a grudge against Islam but it has nothing to do with the Quran or its teachings!

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck... it is 3 steps closer to a duck!

 

[stevecanuck]

So you are admittedly and gleefully accepting that you think like the "terrorists"!

Ya know, if you're going to pretend to miss the point by that much, there's just no reason to keep going.

 

[stevecanuck]

What is generally not massively relevant to anything is “how Steve off the internet thinks Muslims should practice their religion even if he can’t actually identify any group of Muslims who do or have ever practiced it in that way.”

Read 9:111.

Now, check your news feed.
Read the 1988 Hamas charter.

Every mujaheed and every one of their supporters are in perfect compliance with 9:111, and have been for 1400 years.

 

[Augustus]

Read 9:111.

Now, check you news feed.
Read the 1988 Hamas charter.

Every mujaheed and every one of their supporters are in perfect compliance with 9:111, and have been for 1400 years.

What a surprise, you have failed to support your argument yet again.

Thank you for again accepting that you cannot support you claim that Muslims think historical context is irrelevant to interpreting the Quran.

We can agree that your claim is indeed wrong.

Now why should anyone care about your personal opinion given you accept it is not based on how any actual Muslims interpret the Quran?

 

[stevecanuck]

What a surprise, you have failed to support your argument yet again.

Thank you for again accepting that you cannot support you claim that Muslims think historical context is irrelevant to interpreting the Quran.

We can agree that your claim is indeed wrong.

Now why should anyone care about your personal opinion given you accept it is not based on how any actual Muslims interpret the Quran?

You just keep adding more straw. I never said one way or the other about whether Muslims think historical context is relevant to interpreting the Quran. That's been your strawman from the start. Please show me where I said that.

I've said that I don't think it's relevant. I've also shown very clearly that 9:111 is the perfect blueprint for 1400 years of jihad.

But, mission accomplished for you. By shouting "SQUIRREL" over and over, you have successfully avoided actually discussing the verse in question. Good job.

 

[Augustus]

I've said that I don't think it's relevant. I've also shown very clearly that 9:111 is the perfect blueprint for 1400 years of jihad.

Unfortunately, Muslims do indeed think it is relevant.

As such, your opinion is complete worthless given it is not based on how actual Muslims practice their religion, but instead on a figment of your own imagination unconnected to the real world.

 

[GoodAttention]

Read 9:111.

Now, check your news feed.
Read the 1988 Hamas charter.

Every mujaheed and every one of their supporters are in perfect compliance with 9:111, and have been for 1400 years.

Is there a difference between Islamaphobia and Mujaheed-a-phobia?

 

[stevecanuck]

Unfortunately, Muslims do indeed think it is relevant.

As such, your opinion is complete worthless given it is not based on how actual Muslims practice their religion, but instead on a figment of your own imagination unconnected to the real world.

Thank you for admitting that your previous accusation was a strawman.

 

[stevecanuck]

Is there a difference between Islamaphobia and Mujaheed-a-phobia?

I see two distinctions in that question. By 'Islamophobia' do you mean:

1. Hatred of Muslims for no other reason than that they are Muslim? If so, then yes. That would be bigotry.

2. Hatred of Islam as a religion, independent of those who claim to adhere to it? I have been reading the Qur'an for over 2 decades, and based on nothing other than the tenets defined therein, I can assure that there is nothing 'phobic' or irrational about my loathing of it.

Btw, I'm sure that about 1200 people in Israel on October 7 would like to answer the 'Mujaheed-a-phobia' question if they were still alive to do so.

 

[GoodAttention]

I see two distinctions in that question. By 'Islamophobia' do you mean:

1. Hatred of Muslims for no other reason than that they are Muslim? If so, then yes. That would be bigotry.

I take the term phobia to be fear, not so much hate, although both are related mindsets. It's not like you are advocating for the genocide of Muslims.

2. Hatred of Islam as a religion, independent of those who claim to adhere to it? I have been reading the Qur'an for over 2 decades, and based on nothing other than the tenets defined therein, I can assure that there is nothing 'phobic' or irrational about my loathing of it.

So you are anti-Quranic or, others would say Quran-a-phobic? Have you looked into Shariah law and jurisprudence?

Btw, I'm sure that about 1200 people in Israel on October 7 would like to answer the 'Mujaheed-a-phobia' question if they were still alive to do so.

Any Israeli who lives next to, has befriended, or served with an Arab-Israeli in the IDF knows the answer to that question.

 

[Augustus]

Thank you for admitting that your previous accusation was a strawman.

“It’s a strawman because I know I’m attacking an imaginary version of a religion that I made up myself” is not exactly a devastating argument in support of your position.

Also somewhat ironic given you have built your entire schtick on repeatedly attacking what you happily admit is a straw-Islam unconnected to any concern about how Muslims actually practice their religion.

Hatred of Islam as a religion, independent of those who claim to adhere to it?

Also independently of factual reality.

You just acknowledged you hate a version of Islam you created and that doesn’t relate to any attempt to accurately describe the religion as actually practiced by Muslims.

 

[stevecanuck]

I take the term phobia to be fear, not so much hate, although both are related mindsets.

The suffix 'phobia' is a mental health term that has been repurposed by propagandists to imply hatred.

It's not like you are advocating for the genocide of Muslims.

Thank you for noticing.

So you are anti-Quranic or, others would say Quran-a-phobic? Have you looked into Shariah law and jurisprudence?

Only to the extent that I realize sharia is based on the Qur'an and hadiths.

Any Israeli who lives next to, has befriended, or served with an Arab-Israeli in the IDF knows the answer to that question.

Sounds like to beginning of a story.

 

[stevecanuck]

“It’s a strawman because I know I’m attacking an imaginary version of a religion that I made up myself” is not exactly a devastating argument in support of your position.

Yawn. It's a strawman because you accused me of saying something that I in fact did not say. That's why it's called a strawman. Google it.

Also somewhat ironic given you have built your entire schtick on repeatedly attacking what you happily admit is a straw-Islam unconnected to any concern about how Muslims actually practice their religion.

Wow, a strawman about a strawman. That's creative.

Also independently of factual reality.

You just acknowledged you hate a version of Islam you created and that doesn’t relate to any attempt to accurately describe the religion as actually practiced by Muslims.

What? Is giving marching orders to a strawarmy the only thing you know how to do? But, it does serve your purpose of not discussing 9:111.

 

[GoodAttention]

The suffix 'phobia' is a mental health term that has been repurposed by propagandists to imply hatred.

I would have said psychological term, but sure. No propagandist wants to admit to fear when hatred is empowering.

Thank you for noticing.



Only to the extent that I realize sharia is based on the Qur'an and hadiths.

So are you anti-Quranic?

Sounds like to beginning of a story.

With an ending that would surprise you.

 

[Augustus]

What? Is giving marching orders to a strawarmy the only thing you know how to do?

That you are incapable of grasping your own fallacious reasoning does not make it fallacious to point it out.

Your argument: "when the Qur'an doesn't give historical context, it's not needed"

This is objectively false per all significant Islamic schools of thought (as you well know).

Therefore, it is simply an assertion of your personal opinion on how you think Muslims should practice their religion, even though you are aware that it is not how Muslims themselves actually practice their religion. You are thus attacking something that you invented - a straw-Islam.

Your entire line of reasoning is based on a false premise that renders it totally irrelevant when discussing the beliefs of Muslims as opposed to discussing the personal beliefs of Steve off the internet.

But, it does serve your purpose of not discussing 9:111

What about it?

"God has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of God; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon God in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than God? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph."

Fighting and martyrdom in a suitably just cause is noble and one way to heaven (the idea that fighting and martyrdom in a just cause is noble is hardly unique to Islam or even religion in general)

Your point being?