The term "religion of peace"

[KWED]

My impression has been that the phrase was initially intended as a defense by Muslims and their rhetoric allies against the usual Islamophobic rhetoric focusing on the issue of jihad and Islam's reputation in the West as a religion for fanatics and terrorists.

Since then it has naturally been appropriated by Islam's worst critics; these days, the only time I see it come up is when people try to back-handedly insert Islamophobia into an argument without coming out and honestly expressing their disgust and hatred towards Muslims.

You seem to be making the same basic error that many apologists make, conflating reasonable criticism of an ideology with dislike for individuals.
I suppose it makes it much easier to cope with being unable to reasonably answer the criticism.

 

[Kooky]

You seem to be making the same basic error that many apologists make, conflating reasonable criticism of an ideology with dislike for individuals.

Somebody who snarkily calls Islam "the religion of peace" has long abandoned any semblance of "reasonable criticism".

I suppose it makes it much easier to cope with being unable to reasonably answer the criticism.

What prompted this response?

 

[Link]

Leaving aside the facetious replies, what is the real reason Islam is sometimes called a "religion of peace"?

To try to pacify us like punks. Quran teaches to fight, but where it's needed and just.

 

[England my lionheart]

This is fairly clear from reading the Quran in chronological order (the published version seems to be arranged by chapter length, for some reason).
He starts off fairly conciliatory and respectful, but as he gains more military and political power, the tone changes and towards the end becomes outright belligerent and intolerant. Entirely understandable and pragmatic.

Yes,some call it "the two qurans",neccessity is the mother of invention,he basically needed money and a base and even let his followers fight in the forbidden month which as you say is understandable.

 

[paarsurrey]

This is fairly clear from reading the Quran in chronological order (the published version seems to be arranged by chapter length, for some reason).
He starts off fairly conciliatory and respectful, but as he gains more military and political power, the tone changes and towards the end becomes outright belligerent and intolerant. Entirely understandable and pragmatic.

Quran is what is in our hands these days and was recited in the days of Muhammad. It has never been read by the Muslims (of any denomination of Islam) in the chronological order and there is no need to do it. Right?

Regards

 

[KWED]

Somebody who snarkily calls Islam "the religion of peace" has long abandoned any semblance of "reasonable criticism".

If apologists continue to refer to Islam as a "religion of peace", it seems reasonable for a sceptic to reuse the term ironically if they see fit.

What prompted this response?

Repeated observation of apologists using terms like "Islamophobia", "hate", "bigotry", "ignorance", etc. in response to reasonable criticism.

 

[KWED]

Quran is what is in our hands these days and was recited in the days of Muhammad. It has never been read by the Muslims (of any denomination of Islam) in the chronological order and there is no need to do it. Right?

Regards

It makes more sense to read it in chronological order in pretty much any context. In your opinion, what are the advantages of arranging it by chapter length?

 

[Daniel Nicholson]

Leaving aside the facetious replies, what is the real reason Islam is sometimes called a "religion of peace"?

Doublespeak

 

[England my lionheart]

Quran is what is in our hands these days and was recited in the days of Muhammad. It has never been read by the Muslims (of any denomination of Islam) in the chronological order and there is no need to do it. Right?

Regards

Why is that?.

 

[stevecanuck]

Somebody who snarkily calls Islam "the religion of peace" has long abandoned any semblance of "reasonable criticism".

Your only response to clearly stated, fact-based criticisms of Islamic doctrine is to make an accusation of Islamophobia. Not once, to the best of my recollection, have you actually debated the point being made.

 

[firedragon]

Leaving aside the facetious replies, what is the real reason Islam is sometimes called a "religion of peace"?

Because the word Islam has the meaning of seeking peace in it.

 

[stevecanuck]

It makes more sense to read it in chronological order in pretty much any context. In your opinion, what are the advantages of arranging it by chapter length?

Having also read it in chronological order, I can see why they jump straight to the 87th surah, but call it surah 2. It skips past the first, fruitless 86 surahs from Mecca, which would put any reader to sleep with it's endless repetition of nothing more than warmed-over OT stories.

 

[shunyadragon]

Leaving aside the facetious replies, what is the real reason Islam is sometimes called a "religion of peace"?

The common claim by many diverse conflicting ancient tribal religions including Christianity and Judaism including divisions within the religions in conflict.. Those outside Judaism, Christianity and Islam do not consider them 'religions of peace' today for obvious reasons.

'By their works you will know them.';

 

[Kooky]

If apologists continue to refer to Islam as a "religion of peace", it seems reasonable for a sceptic to reuse the term ironically if they see fit.

Of course, it is reasonable to use terms of mockery when one's goal is to convey hostility towards an idea or a person.
I never questioned that.

What I questioned is that mockery and displays of hostility constitute "reasonable criticism".

Repeated observation of apologists using terms like "Islamophobia", "hate", "bigotry", "ignorance", etc. in response to reasonable criticism.

I still have no idea what you are talking about. Could you elaborate on what you consider "reasonable criticism" of Islam, perhaps by offering an example of "reasonable criticism" being attacked as bigotry, like you claim to have observed?

 

[Kooky]

Your only response to clearly stated, fact-based criticisms of Islamic doctrine is to make an accusation of Islamophobia.

I have not responded to any such criticisms in this thread - nor have I found any to begin with, to be fair - so I have no idea what you're talking about.

Not once, to the best of my recollection, have you actually debated the point being made.

The best of your recollection must be exceptionally poor, then.

 

[Clara Tea]

Leaving aside the facetious replies, what is the real reason Islam is sometimes called a "religion of peace"?

Rest in peace.

 

[stevecanuck]

I have not responded to any such criticisms in this thread - nor have I found any to begin with, to be fair - so I have no idea what you're talking about.


The best of your recollection must be exceptionally poor, then.

Nope. Still waiting for a response here: Are Muslims disobeying the Qur'an by participating in this forum?

 

[firedragon]

The more this absurd falsehood is repeated the
worse Islam looks.

May as well be Putin saying " we wont invade".

More respectable to just say the truth.

The more you repeat your "absurd falsehood", the worse all atheists look. So much falsehood and so much kindergarten level lack of knowledge but the complex of superiority that has a false narrative of being a superior being. Its more respectable to just say "the truth".

 

[Audie]

The more you repeat your "absurd falsehood", the worse all atheists look. So much falsehood and so much kindergarten level lack of knowledge but the complex of superiority that has a false narrative of being a superior being. Its more respectable to just say "the truth".

You seem very confused, grammatically and otherwise.

 

[firedragon]

You seem very confused, grammatically and otherwise.

You seem very ignorant in the topic so all you can do is make some random comments and insult subtly.