What's wrong with "cherry picking?"

[Kirran]

What's wrong with saying God is all-caring, but God doesn't make these sorts of human pronouncements about how to treat your wife, and that these are the words and views of man who was a part of his culture of the time and it reflects his opinions as a man of that culture?

The reason I won't accept the "friendlier" interpretation of this is because it flies into the face of reason, and plus what I illustrated fits the "facts" of the role of cultural values entering into these "revelations", these words of God, so to speak. To say cultural artifacts do not exist in any religion's scriptures is intellectual suicide, and dangerous as well for that matter.

Nothing's wrong with it. But I'm trying to look at this in an Islamic way.

 

[Windwalker]

Nothing's wrong with it. But I'm trying to look at this in an Islamic way.

But is the "Islamic" way a fixed set of views? That one has to accept some doctrine of infallibility of scripture, that it has to be seen as a direct dictation from God and not an expression of evolving ideas about God written at the time, even though it holds value in some places and not in others? If you have to accept the doctrine of infallibility to be "Islamic", then you are stuck with very rigid and literal interpretations (fundamentalism), or you are either committing intellectual suicide to try to make it "fit" that doctrinal view. Or alternatively, you instead become a liberal not beholden to the literal view of infallibility, who braves rejection to say this is a cultural artifact to reject, and this is a timeless truth to embrace.

So those are sort of the choices. Can a "liberal" not hold to such beliefs that fly in the face of modern knowledge and reason, and still call themselves "Muslims" following Islam. Who is it calling the shots what defines Muslims? And why are their views right over others?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

This doesn't mean you need to buy into all aspects of that religion.

You don't need to buy into any religion really. Some people develop an individual approach and don't go anywhere near organised religion.

 

[Kirran]

But is the "Islamic" way a fixed set of views? That one has to accept some doctrine of infallibility of scripture, that it has to be seen as a direct dictation from God and not an expression of evolving ideas about God written at the time, even though it holds value in some places and not in others? If you have to accept the doctrine of infallibility to be "Islamic", then you are stuck with very rigid and literal interpretations (fundamentalism), or you are either committing intellectual suicide to try to make it "fit" that doctrinal view. Or alternatively, you instead become a liberal not beholden to the literal view of infallibility, who braves rejection to say this is a cultural artifact to reject, and this is a timeless truth to embrace.

So those are sort of the choices. Can a "liberal" not hold to such beliefs that fly in the face of modern knowledge and reason, and still call themselves "Muslims" following Islam. Who is it calling the shots what defines Muslims? And why are their views right over others?

Many interesting questions. I think that to be Muslim there are certain beliefs which need to be held.

But within that, there's huge flexibility. There are many who might not agree with your idea of 'intellectual suicide'. If one says one is a Muslim, then who are we to say otherwise? But I think Qur'anic infallibility will remain a major trend within Islam for some time, although interpretations may change hugely.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No one has a copyright on God. Religions only think they do but if you find something spiritually edifying from a particular faith, why not honor it? This doesn't mean you need to buy into all aspects of that religion.

Depending on what you adopt and what you don't, as well as how you do it, whether you're "honoring" can be a matter of debate. In the worst cases, it can be seen as disrespectful or caricaturing the source religion.

I'm not sure that this applies to whatever you have in mind, but I think it does apply to some Christian denominations that have decided they're "Jewish", for instance.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

One more thing, though. I know I dislike cherry-picking; however, if or when you do, make sure your faith is still in harmony with the core beliefs of the Muslim faith and that of their community--although, I know they're probably doing the same.

For me, I still hold some Catholic views but I don't put them on the altar with pagan-oriented things since it's against their faith. So, you can still hold values of other faiths... just the customs and practices (for example, going to Mass in the morning and going to a Mosque in the evening) may be frowned upon.

I've been exploring Islam as a potential spiritual path, but like the Bible, there are things within the religion that I will not accept. I don't believe that God for example (at least my idea of him/it) would dictate for men to have dominion over women, like is characterized in the Qur'an. Unlike Christianity, where I struggle to believe the Gospels which is vital to calling one's self a Christian, I don't have issues with the core message of Islam, but take issue with how women are viewed.

I will never believe that God is punishing women for what happened in Genesis and I don't believe that men should be striking women who "don't obey" as can be found in the Qur'an. It's not taken out of context, it states that as plain as day.

So, why can't we cherry pick what makes logical and spiritual sense? God gave us a brain to think for ourselves not to become drones obedient to verses that sound like they were designed by men. But sadly, there are verses such as male circumcision that I disagree with too. Why is there always abuse of some sort as part of the Abrahamic faiths?

There is so much beauty in Islam but I can't rationalize some of these verses.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Sunstone]

Sure, but for me it does raise some questions, like: How do we know what is best? How do we distinguish essential from superfluous? How do we know we're not throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

You don't think you'd need to answer pretty much the same questions if you were asking about swallowing a tradition whole, rather than cherry picking it? How do I know this tradition is best? How do I distinguish one tradition from another? How do I know I'm not picking the wrong tradition and discarding a better one?

 

[sun rise]

No one has a copyright on God. Religions only think they do but if you find something spiritually edifying from a particular faith, why not honor it? This doesn't mean you need to buy into all aspects of that religion.

Yes.

 

[Thief]

Sure, but for me it does raise some questions, like: How do we know what is best? How do we distinguish essential from superfluous? How do we know we're not throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

and that is likely the situation in the garden, as Adam and Eve contemplated the tree of knowledge.

and I don't consider they failed.
The alleged test may have been just that...a test.
Man is a form to form spirit.
If Man has no desire of knowledge about becoming a god.....the spirit fails when the chemistry fails.

So I cherry pick Genesis.
I think I do it better than most.

 

[Deidre]

Sure, but for me it does raise some questions, like: How do we know what is best? How do we distinguish essential from superfluous? How do we know we're not throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

It's hard to get around the fact that we have our own set of values, and our 'subtraction' method of what verses 'suit' us probably come from that. I also think that religion and faith beliefs is largely built on emotion, so how I might feel as I experience a particular faith, also tells me if I feel it's right for me. There are ideas in Islam that Muhammad put forth that I disagree with, but when I read historical accounts of Muhammad, it would indicate that the time period perhaps, served as the backdrop for some of his decisions. I think we need to remember that in the Abrahamic faiths, repentance in some form or fashion always comes into play. Muhammad talks about his own repentance, and we don't know exactly what he might be asking Allah forgiveness for, but ...he does. It's a story of one man's record of who he felt God was...and we don't need a perfect vessel to deliver a pristine message. Muhammad was a messenger, he wasn't divine.

I think that the mistake many make including me, when it comes to religion...is that we place prophets on pedestals. If one believes in God...only God should be placed on high.

 

[Thief]

It's hard to get around the fact that we have our own set of values, and our 'subtraction' method of what verses 'suit' us probably come from that. I also think that religion and faith beliefs is largely built on emotion, so how I might feel as I experience a particular faith, also tells me if I feel it's right for me. There are ideas in Islam that Muhammad put forth that I disagree with, but when I read historical accounts of Muhammad, it would indicate that the time period perhaps, served as the backdrop for some of his decisions. I think we need to remember that in the Abrahamic faiths, repentance in some form or fashion always comes into play. Muhammad talks about his own repentance, and we don't know exactly what he might be asking Allah forgiveness for, but ...he does. It's a story of one man's record of who he felt God was...and we don't need a perfect vessel to deliver a pristine message. Muhammad was a messenger, he wasn't divine.

I think that the mistake many make including me, when it comes to religion...is that we place prophets on pedestals. If one believes in God...only God should be placed on high.

I don't believe prophets divine.....just better servants.

 

[Deidre]

I would disagree. If cannot cause them pain meant "no hitting" is a clever turn of phrase (which I highly doubt), then there should be no need to qualify the face is off limit. The fact that was added, says hitting is ok and no causing pain, probably means serious injury or something like this. Then to single out "leave no mark", that is of course the classic practice of systematic abusers on their victims.

So all of these together, no serious injury, no bruising of the face, and no visible marks on the body, sounds like good instructions for a classic systematic abuser to follow. Ask a social worker sometime.

I think to say it doesn't mean what it sure sounds like it is saying is itself cherry picking, rationalizing it away. Why not just say that was the custom of the time of a male-dominant society, and say you just find it repulsive by today's standards. That would not be cherry picking then.

Excellent point, I agree. We have to put some of these texts under the lens of then, and the lens of now.

This piece is well done, hope some here take time to read through it.

Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet . Muhammad and Qu'ran | PBS

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

I've been exploring Islam as a potential spiritual path, but like the Bible, there are things within the religion that I will not accept. I don't believe that God for example (at least my idea of him/it) would dictate for men to have dominion over women, like is characterized in the Qur'an. Unlike Christianity, where I struggle to believe the Gospels which is vital to calling one's self a Christian, I don't have issues with the core message of Islam, but take issue with how women are viewed.

I will never believe that God is punishing women for what happened in Genesis and I don't believe that men should be striking women who "don't obey" as can be found in the Qur'an. It's not taken out of context, it states that as plain as day.

So, why can't we cherry pick what makes logical and spiritual sense? God gave us a brain to think for ourselves not to become drones obedient to verses that sound like they were designed by men. But sadly, there are verses such as male circumcision that I disagree with too. Why is there always abuse of some sort as part of the Abrahamic faiths?

There is so much beauty in Islam but I can't rationalize some of these verses.

What are your thoughts?

I agree that we must use our God-given ability to reason, however, the problem with cherry-picking, is that it usually doesn't work with Abrahamic religions. If the holy book you profess to believe in (the Quran, in this case) has verses that you don't believe to be true, then how can you truly say that it is divinely inspired? If you are willing to throw out the parts about women being inferior, then why not throw out the dietary laws as well? Or the part about Muhammad being a prophet? Or even the existence of God itself? How many core beliefs of Islam can you throw out, and still truly call yourself a Muslim? Just a few questions to think about.

 

[Deidre]

I agree that we must use our God-given ability to reason, however, the problem with cherry-picking, is that it usually doesn't work with Abrahamic religions. If the holy book you profess to believe in (the Quran, in this case) has verses that you don't believe to be true, then how can you truly say that it is divinely inspired? If you are willing to throw out the parts about women being inferior, then why not throw out the dietary laws as well? Or the part about Muhammad being a prophet? Or even the existence of God itself? How many core beliefs of Islam can you throw out, and still truly call yourself a Muslim? Just a few questions to think about.

Good points. It's not so much throwing out the passages, but viewing them in terms of then and now. I also don't have to agree on everyday living advice of a prophet, to feel that he was still bringing a message of hope and peace to his people.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Good points. It's not so much throwing out the passages, but viewing them in terms of then and now. I also don't have to agree on everyday living advice of a prophet, to feel that he was still bringing a message of hope and peace to his people.

Fair enough. Although, you do not necessarily have to subscribe to a religion to believe in the basic message of their leader. I did the same with Christianity, ultimately. I acknowledge that the message of Jesus of Nazareth was undoubtedly a positive one, but there are many tenets of Christianity itself that I do not agree with, so I don't feel as if I can, in good conscience, call myself a Christian.

 

[Deidre]

But is the "Islamic" way a fixed set of views? That one has to accept some doctrine of infallibility of scripture, that it has to be seen as a direct dictation from God and not an expression of evolving ideas about God written at the time, even though it holds value in some places and not in others? If you have to accept the doctrine of infallibility to be "Islamic", then you are stuck with very rigid and literal interpretations (fundamentalism), or you are either committing intellectual suicide to try to make it "fit" that doctrinal view. Or alternatively, you instead become a liberal not beholden to the literal view of infallibility, who braves rejection to say this is a cultural artifact to reject, and this is a timeless truth to embrace.

So those are sort of the choices. Can a "liberal" not hold to such beliefs that fly in the face of modern knowledge and reason, and still call themselves "Muslims" following Islam. Who is it calling the shots what defines Muslims? And why are their views right over others?

This is such an insightful post, windwalker.(thank you) Very relevant.

Fair enough. Although, you do not necessarily have to subscribe to a religion to believe in the basic message of their leader. I did the same with Christianity, ultimately. I acknowledge that the message of Jesus of Nazareth was undoubtedly a positive one, but there are many tenets of Christianity itself that I do not agree with, so I don't feel as if I can, in good conscience, call myself a Christian.

Yes! Well said, indeed. I may continue exploring Islam and end up not calling myself a Muslim, but the core message, the prayer life....I connect with on a spiritual level. I really like how you worded this. Probably best said...I don't wish to do a disservice to the religion itself, but I also have to stay true to my own personal values.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

This is such an insightful post, windwalker.(thank you) Very relevant.



Yes! Well said, indeed. I may continue exploring Islam and end up not calling myself a Muslim, but the core message, the prayer life....I connect with on a spiritual level. I really like how you worded this. Probably best said...I don't wish to do a disservice to the religion itself, but I also have to stay true to my own personal values.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Whatever spiritual path works for you. Belief in a higher power transcends all religious boundaries.

 

[Deidre]

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Whatever spiritual path works for you. Belief in a higher power transcends all religious boundaries.

and on that note...I just noticed you're a Deist. How appropriate for a Deist to say.
thank you for your thoughts.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

and on that note...I just noticed you're a Deist. How appropriate for a Deist to say.
thank you for your thoughts.

Not a problem. And yes, I am a Deist, with a bit of a spiritual side.

 

[sun rise]

Excellent point, I agree. We have to put some of these texts under the lens of then, and the lens of now.

This piece is well done, hope some here take time to read through it.

Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet . Muhammad and Qu'ran | PBS

Thanks for reminding me of this PBS video (and site). It's been quite a while since I saw that program and in fact I had forgotten it. But it was good to be reminded and to see that the film makers had the good sense to set his life and what he said in the proper historical framework.