A question for Muslim members

McMonkey

McMonkey

----Evertonian----
SLeague Staff
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
2,805
Location
Cardiff
I would like to discuss with Muslim members here their views on the parts of the Koran that it could be argued promote violence. I do not have an agenda other than trying to understand their interpretation. I am an atheist and have no religious axe to grind. I keep reading comments on You Tube saying Islam is a religion of peace and others saying it is a religion of violence. I personally think Islamist extremism is, for the most part, politically motivated as the evidence shows that this religion of 1.6 billion people must be, for the vast majority of Muslims, peaceful. I realise the old testament of the bible is full of violence and I'm not trying to start a pissing contest for who's religion is best or worst.

Of course the question is open to all members to comment on, but I would especially like a Muslim point of view if I can. I would post on You Tube but I fear the vast majority of replies would be from Trolls or extremists from one camp or the other.

EDIT: If I am breaking any forum rules with this question I apologise - go ahead and delete!
 
Where Islam exists in the West, it should be reformed to become more in line with its values and politics by training imams in the West and demanding them to preach in the local language as opposed to Arabic.

It is somewhat linked to personal religious belief that while all religions contain truths, most religions are imperfectly revealed. I think Polytheist and Dharmic religions are superior but that all other faiths should not be destroyed but evolve towards these. Most Far Asian religions have progressed best towards these religions, followed by Judaism. Islam has of all Abrahamic religions arguably least progressed towards these religions, but I think it's possible to change.
 
Here is the thing- I believe that the Quran for the most part was made by Allah for its time and place. Islam is a universal religion, but the Quran was required for it to gain traction in the society in which Islam originated, so Allah wrote what would appeal to that society. I think Allah, knowing his people, wrote mainly for an agricultural/ pastoral society with no rights for women, orphans or the poor. He improved these people's lot in the Quran, but stopped short of full equality because he knew the Arabs wold accept such a message. In response to the violent passages, when the Quran was revealed it was during a time when Islam was under attack, and being Kuffir meant enemy. That is not the case nowadays (But I'm afraid it will be). The Quran is a remnant of the time which is why I believe the Prophet's example, and my own conscious are also guides I should listen to more than slavishly pour over the Quran and use it as a guide to live my life.
 
jackelgull
I completely understand your way of thinking. Use Quran as a guide to life and interpret it for our times. I expect most Muslims in the West do the same. I was watching a debate show where this question (about whether Islam is a religion of peace or violence) was being asked and the Imam from the Islamic Council of Britain said it was all about the context. He gave this quite clever example: Today we don't have British soldiers running around Germany killing people just because of Churchill's 'We will fight them on the beaches' speech. A good example of context, even if one example is the word of God and the other the word of a politician. However, even when Churchill's speech was given people knew that it was about contemporary events and one day the war would be over so it does fall down a bit there, but I see the point he was making.

I have read that some of the versus in the Quran could be seen as more open ended and if you take the view that they only relate to the time they were written in then I can see why they can be reinterpreted. Of course the core principles would remain the same but the filler stuff could be explained in its past context. I guess the problem is that some people don't see it that way and they believe that every word must be followed to the letter.

The idea of reform is something else I would like to ask about. Do you think it would be possible for Islamic Scholars and Imams to ever re-interpret the Quran, as in do a bit of re-writing of the verses that no longer fit our times? I guess it is constantly re-interpreted in this way in Scholarly texts outside of the book itself, but I would imagine that getting a consensus amongst a religion of 1.6 billion which has a major schism and a whole range of different traditions and cultures would make this impossible without causing even more division.

I guess another problem would be that it is the final and unalterable word of god. Why do you think Allah made this his final word, bearing in mind how long the book would be followed. Not meaning to be blasphemous, but surely it would have made more sense to leave scope for revision at a future date, or are there verses that suggest that that is a possibility?

I often think it is a shame that all of the holy books have so much page filler material that is so open for interpretation. If I was god I would probably give my message in bullet points so it is nice and clear. I know the key points of most religions are fairly clear, but it seems to me the devil is always in the detail.

As an atheist I love the idea of debating religion out of existence, but I realise that is not an option so I'm interested in how we can find common ground to find a system where we can all just get along better. I started with the viewpoint that religion was the cause of all our problems, but the more I look into it the more I realise our problems are man made. Radical Islam is obviously the reason behind my questions as if it did not exist I would be about as interested in Islam as I am in Shintoism or the Quakers.

I'm a big fan of Russell brand and agree with his message that we need to re-examine things and find a lot more love and compassion in our hearts for one another. Perhaps if he had been born centuries ago he could have founded his own religion. He has the long hair and beard for it!
 
taillesskangaru
Thanks. I did look through the forum history but either missed this thread or it had fallen off the end of page 3. I'll take a look.

Edit. I did actually read some of that thread but couldn't find it again. I will go through the rest.
 
McMonkey said:
jackelgull
I completely understand your way of thinking. Use Quran as a guide to life and interpret it for our times. I expect most Muslims in the West do the same. I was watching a debate show where this question (about whether Islam is a religion of peace or violence) was being asked and the Imam from the Islamic Council of Britain said it was all about the context. He gave this quite clever example: Today we don't have British soldiers running around Germany killing people just because of Churchill's 'We will fight them on the beaches' speech. A good example of context, even if one example is the word of God and the other the word of a politician. However, even when Churchill's speech was given people knew that it was about contemporary events and one day the war would be over so it does fall down a bit there, but I see the point he was making.

I have read that some of the versus in the Quran could be seen as more open ended and if you take the view that they only relate to the time they were written in then I can see why they can be reinterpreted. Of course the core principles would remain the same but the filler stuff could be explained in its past context. I guess the problem is that some people don't see it that way and they believe that every word must be followed to the letter.

The idea of reform is something else I would like to ask about. Do you think it would be possible for Islamic Scholars and Imams to ever re-interpret the Quran, as in do a bit of re-writing of the verses that no longer fit our times? I guess it is constantly re-interpreted in this way in Scholarly texts outside of the book itself, but I would imagine that getting a consensus amongst a religion of 1.6 billion which has a major schism and a whole range of different traditions and cultures would make this impossible without causing even more division.

I guess another problem would be that it is the final and unalterable word of god. Why do you think Allah made this his final word, bearing in mind how long the book would be followed. Not meaning to be blasphemous, but surely it would have made more sense to leave scope for revision at a future date, or are there verses that suggest that that is a possibility?

I often think it is a shame that all of the holy books have so much page filler material that is so open for interpretation. If I was god I would probably give my message in bullet points so it is nice and clear. I know the key points of most religions are fairly clear, but it seems to me the devil is always in the detail.

As an atheist I love the idea of debating religion out of existence, but I realise that is not an option so I'm interested in how we can find common ground to find a system where we can all just get along better. I started with the viewpoint that religion was the cause of all our problems, but the more I look into it the more I realise our problems are man made. Radical Islam is obviously the reason behind my questions as if it did not exist I would be about as interested in Islam as I am in Shintoism or the Quakers.

I'm a big fan of Russell brand and agree with his message that we need to re-examine things and find a lot more love and compassion in our hearts for one another. Perhaps if he had been born centuries ago he could have founded his own religion. He has the long hair and beard for it!
Click to expand...

I am against any change to the Quran, because to me that would be in effect, like killing Islam. One of Allah's promises to the Muslims is that the Quran would never change. It is becoming less and less relevant, but I feel it can still function as somewhat of a cultural artifact, a unifier of the Muslim Umma, some sort of common denominator for the community as a whole, and finally, behind layers and layers of contemporary clothing, there is a universal message. One of my favorite lines from the Quran, to paraphrase it is, " Allah made woman from man's rib not so she can lord over him or be trampled beneath his feet, but she can be a cherished and protected companion." I have probably slightly mistranslated or changed the meaning, and it isn't as good, but it is there. And while I don't always agree with the Prophet, I do believe he kept many good practices.
 
I don't mean tear up the Quran or censor the inconvenient parts with a black marker pen but surely, in principal at least, there must be a way that Islamic scholars and Imams could get together and add subtext to these problematic verses to explain why they are no longer relevant today? Not just a companion book for the Quran, but actually added to the pages itself.

Sure not everyone would accept these additions, but it would make life a lot simpler of the vast majority of Muslims, especially those in the West. I have just been watching a video about the leader of the ex-leader of the EDL in Britain who has quit to join Quilliam. I know the video is not all relevant to our discussion but there are some very interesting discussions on there between him and Quilliam.

One thing that struck me about this video was when Mo, the moderate Muslim, who was the first do engage with Tommy and take him to Mosques, attend an EDL meeting, was asked about stoning as a punishment if all the requirements for Sharia were met. I was shocked when he didn't say no. I'm sure he would have liked to have said no but his belief in the Quran's absolute truth prevented him from giving an answer either way. I was very encouraged by some of the things Usama Hasan and Maajid Nawaz had to say about reform. Might be worth a watch if you have the time / interest.

One thing that strikes me about Islam is that it is so de-centralised (in worldly terms). Unlike the Catholic church where the Pope could issue edicts that all believers would be obliged to acknowledge. I guess reform would be a monumental task with a figurehead and a united religion. Without that the task will be so much more complex, even if there was a desire to do so.

I hope you don't take any of this the wrong way. I'm not bashing Islam. I'm just trying to understand it better and looking for ways we can all get along better. I know the political problems are the prime factor in a lot of the current troubles and solving them would go a very long way towards a more peaceful outlook for the future.
 
The main thing with Islam is that it really hasn't been reformed over and over again like Christianity and the other religions have been.

As for Dharmic religions being "superior", I think that is a bunch of hogwash. I wouldn't say that Islam is "inferior" but the interpretation is simply not compatible with modern western society.
 
Archbob said:
The main thing with Islam is that it really hasn't been reformed over and over again like Christianity and the other religions have been.
Click to expand...

This is complete bull. Islam is a bit like Protestantism; there is no central authority, no representative of God on earth. Anyone literate can read the Quran for themselves and interpret it and study the Sunnah and be recognised as a scholar if they're good enough.

Like any other religion with no central authority it's already in the process of continual "reform" (or reinterpretation or renewal or whatever) by virtue of there being too many damn followers to agree on absolutely everything.

It's worth barring in mind that Wahhabism and its ideas and offshoots, which most Westerners picture when they think "Islam", actually date from the 18th century, and was considered fringe until the second half of the 20th century.
 
I had a long phone conversation with my Mum yesterday where we discussed religion, something we haven't really done since I left home nearly twenty years ago. I guess you could describe her as an Evangelical Christian and she tried to bring me up in that faith but I never felt god speak to me. This is probably one of the reasons I have an active interest in Atheism and where people derive their morality from. I realised during our conversation that there was no point in trying to persuade her of my view that I'm happy not believing and even if there is a creator (something I concede it a possibility as I cannot disprove it) I don't believe he would be that interested in judging me at the end of my life and even if he did have some criteria I would hope it was just on the basis of am I generally a good or an evil person. She could not get past the religious dogma, the technicalities of the rules of membership to the afterlife.

For a while I have harboured a naive notion that it's somehow possible to solve the worlds troubles, or at least improve it, by removing religion from the equation. I now see how futile that is and I don't want to be seen as a obnoxious atheist trying to force my own vies on others, just as I object to others forcing their religious views on me.

The reason I'm concerned with Islam isn't a fear of Muslims. I live in Britain which is multicultural and I feel the different races and religions rub along together pretty well in general. I acknowledge that the vast majority of Muslim's interpret the Quran to fit their lives modern society and are happy to be part of British society. There is however a section of the Muslim community that interprets the Quran quite differently and it is this small but growing section Muslim's that is a concern to me. The whole idea of a Caliphate and Sharia disturbs me. I acknowledge that the violent extremists are a tiny minority, but there seems to be a larger section of non-violent Islamists who support the idea of bringing these principles into Britain. Can you be a good Muslim and follow the Quran whilst rejecting these principles? I assume the majority of Muslims in the West must interpret things differently, but does that mean that they reject these ideas entirely, or they are just on hold until the criteria for Sharia are met, if ever? I mean hypothetically, if everyone in Britain decided to convert would we continue with our laws and political systems or would we replace them with Sharia?

My personal understanding is that the majority of Muslims in the West don't concern themselves overly with these 'What If' questions and just get on with their lives, adapting to the society they live in. I certainly don't intend any of this to be taken as anti Islamic rhetoric. I am anti-Islamist though I can see why many disaffected youths could be swayed to it for political reasons.
 
taillesskangaru said:
It's worth barring in mind that Wahhabism and its ideas and offshoots, which most Westerners picture when they think "Islam", actually date from the 18th century, and was considered fringe until the second half of the 20th century.
Click to expand...

An important point. To the extent that any sub-categorization of Islam is discussed in Western media, it is usually the Sunni-Shia divide.
 
taillesskangaru said:
This is complete bull. Islam is a bit like Protestantism; there is no central authority, no representative of God on earth. Anyone literate can read the Quran for themselves and interpret it and study the Sunnah and be recognised as a scholar if they're good enough.
Click to expand...

But the culture around Islam hasn't largely been reformed to where its actually compatible with modern society. You really can't deny that. The dress, the lack of rights for women, and overall feel from the greater society is that it a more violent or at least aggressive faith. Honestly its a lot like what Christianity was in the 14th-17th centuries.
 
The status of women in Islam and the societal zeitgeist or whatever is significantly different in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, for example.
 
Antilogic said:
The status of women in Islam and the societal zeitgeist or whatever is significantly different in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, for example.
Click to expand...

"Christianity in the 14th-17th centuries" also has more than a bit of internal variance.
 
Antilogic said:
The status of women in Islam and the societal zeitgeist or whatever is significantly different in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, for example.
Click to expand...

Sure, but even in Indonesia you hear about things such as.. Virgin tests for women who want to become police officers.. That's right - men check their vaginas to make sure that the hymen has that fresh new hymen smell.. And perhaps this law has changed, but there you go - mistreatment of women in a (what most view to be I think) a relatively moderate Muslim country.
 
Archbob said:
But the culture around Islam hasn't largely been reformed to where its actually compatible with modern society. You really can't deny that. The dress, the lack of rights for women, and overall feel from the greater society is that it a more violent or at least aggressive faith. Honestly its a lot like what Christianity was in the 14th-17th centuries.
Click to expand...

That is where you're mistaken. Islamic society has reached the traditional 19th century attitude towards women- they are the home makers. They can't go outside without a male guardian or perform public duties without one, reminiscent of the cult of domesticity.

And reform is coming, at least to Saudi Arabia, in 2011 King Abdullah declared that women would be able to vote and run in the 2015 local elections, as well as be appointed to the Consultative Assembly. More university graduates in Saudi Arabia are Saudi women than men, and female literacy is estimated to be 91% (though lower than male literacy) far higher than just 40 years ago.
 
jackelgull said:
That is where you're mistaken. Islamic society has reached the traditional 19th century attitude towards women- they are the home makers. They can't go outside without a male guardian or perform public duties without one, reminiscent of the cult of domesticity.
Click to expand...

I still think they're a bit behind 19th century as polygamy is pretty rampant with some important males dozen a harem of dozens of women and the dress code of covering their face and such throughout much of the Muslim world. Quite honestly, they are treated like property in many of the countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Thorgalaeg
Oil!
2
Replies
29
Views
718
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
Moriarte
  • Poll Poll
Depopulation: A Threat to Civilization or Just a Phase?
5 6 7
Replies
122
Views
7K
Narz
Narz
Samson
Protests in Pakistan
Replies
15
Views
1K
Klaus Hergersheimer
Klaus Hergersheimer
T
Am I A Civfanatic?
Replies
7
Views
436
Broken_Erika
Broken_Erika
Hygro
Alternatives to hard money question mark
Replies
18
Views
545
Lexicus
Lexicus
Back
Top Bottom