Moderate Muslims
Discussion
Leading on from a couple of other threads, I thought this particular topic deserved addressing on it's own.
There's a lot of talk about 'moderate Muslims' but it seems very little definition of what this actually means. It surely is something worth discussing if we're to have any hope of identifying and tackling extremists before they kill people. Terrorism, supremacism and systematic violence don't just come about from a few nutty outliers, they thrive in a culture of resentment and with a strong ideological underpinning. Islam appears to be providing both of these in abundance.
So what makes a moderate? And what makes an extremist?
As I see it, being truly moderate means a supporting secular laws over Islamic law. It means unequivocally rejecting hudud punishments such as stoning and beheading. It means actively accepting that people can criticise and lampoon your religion, and violence is never an acceptable response.
Especially interested to hear from Muslims on how this. Are these things difficult for a Muslim to support? Does this debate happen within Muslim communities? Are there shades of radicalism or do you see it as a switch which becomes violence when flicked? Is there a fine line between piety and radicalism? Or are they different things completely?
There's a lot of talk about 'moderate Muslims' but it seems very little definition of what this actually means. It surely is something worth discussing if we're to have any hope of identifying and tackling extremists before they kill people. Terrorism, supremacism and systematic violence don't just come about from a few nutty outliers, they thrive in a culture of resentment and with a strong ideological underpinning. Islam appears to be providing both of these in abundance.
So what makes a moderate? And what makes an extremist?
As I see it, being truly moderate means a supporting secular laws over Islamic law. It means unequivocally rejecting hudud punishments such as stoning and beheading. It means actively accepting that people can criticise and lampoon your religion, and violence is never an acceptable response.
Especially interested to hear from Muslims on how this. Are these things difficult for a Muslim to support? Does this debate happen within Muslim communities? Are there shades of radicalism or do you see it as a switch which becomes violence when flicked? Is there a fine line between piety and radicalism? Or are they different things completely?
Pork911
There's lots of ways in which parents, schools and people in general identify bad behaviour before it turns into seriously criminal behaviour. Identifying someone who drives after 2-3 pints and is probably basically quite safe is a way of stopping that same person having a skin full later and being a complete menace. Catching and punishing someone who steals a Mars bar is a way of stopping them going on to greater things.
There's lots of ways in which parents, schools and people in general identify bad behaviour before it turns into seriously criminal behaviour. Identifying someone who drives after 2-3 pints and is probably basically quite safe is a way of stopping that same person having a skin full later and being a complete menace. Catching and punishing someone who steals a Mars bar is a way of stopping them going on to greater things.
Interesting trigger, thanks for replying.
Regarding the 'taken out of context' line I'm always a bit dubious of this. The Koran seems to be very well studied by scholars and Imams, and from what I have read of it, as the direct word of God, I don't see what context can really be added. So even where the Koran itself is peaceful the practice of it across all the major denominations is anything but.
Freely confess that most (not all) of what I have read about it has been pointed out by people generally not favourable to Islam.
Conversely I have quite often found that those defending Islam are keen on taking bits out of context.
It seems to be taken out of context and twisted in a remarkably similar way across time and place.
What context am I missing for instance with 9:29:
Regarding the 'taken out of context' line I'm always a bit dubious of this. The Koran seems to be very well studied by scholars and Imams, and from what I have read of it, as the direct word of God, I don't see what context can really be added. So even where the Koran itself is peaceful the practice of it across all the major denominations is anything but.
Freely confess that most (not all) of what I have read about it has been pointed out by people generally not favourable to Islam.
Conversely I have quite often found that those defending Islam are keen on taking bits out of context.
It seems to be taken out of context and twisted in a remarkably similar way across time and place.
What context am I missing for instance with 9:29:
Koran 9:29 said:
Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
Genuine question and please don't take it as overly confrontational. I would like to hear alternative views.pork911 said:
AJS- said:
Pork911
There's lots of ways in which parents, schools and people in general identify bad behaviour before it turns into seriously criminal behaviour. Identifying someone who drives after 2-3 pints and is probably basically quite safe is a way of stopping that same person having a skin full later and being a complete menace. Catching and punishing someone who steals a Mars bar is a way of stopping them going on to greater things.
Ah I see, you compare a moderate muslim to a low level criminal who must be stopped now before their criminality becomes more serious.There's lots of ways in which parents, schools and people in general identify bad behaviour before it turns into seriously criminal behaviour. Identifying someone who drives after 2-3 pints and is probably basically quite safe is a way of stopping that same person having a skin full later and being a complete menace. Catching and punishing someone who steals a Mars bar is a way of stopping them going on to greater things.
I somewhat agree with Trigger that 'moderate' isn't necessarily the best term, but I struggle to think of a better one.
However in the sense that as far as I can tell Islam at it's core believes in an Islamic system of government and sees violence as a legitimate way of bringing this about, those who take a spiritual and cultural message from Islam without actually doing this could be viewed as 'moderates' in exactly the way you describe. Secular Muslims would be a preferable term, but I don't believe it would be as accurate because in my understanding supporting a secular system of government requires a significant departure from traditional Islamic teachings.
Dan
I don't know of any command in the bible so unambiguously calling for violence towards and subjugation of non-believers, nor does the bible claim to be in its entirety the revealed word of God, nor does it have a tradition of being interpreted as such to the same degree Islam does.
That's true, but the command wasn't revealed specifically for that context only. Was it? It is eternal. It doesn't only say fight those who have oppressed you, it says fight the non-believers, and those who don't live by the laws of Allah. I believe you're reading a bit too much into 'willing' submission if the only alternative on offer is death.
The jizya (tax only on non-Muslim) was most definitely not restricted to 7th century Arabia. It was imposed throughout much of the Muslim world and the Ottoman Empire up until the 19th century when it was abolished under pressure from European powers. It was reintroduced in parts of Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood government briefly took power.
And I suppose the point with both of those things is not actually what's in the book but how it's been interpreted and applied for 1,400 years by Islamic scholars and Imams and the governments of Muslim majority countries, and how many would like to see them applied today.
The jizya (tax only on non-Muslim) was most definitely not restricted to 7th century Arabia. It was imposed throughout much of the Muslim world and the Ottoman Empire up until the 19th century when it was abolished under pressure from European powers. It was reintroduced in parts of Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood government briefly took power.
And I suppose the point with both of those things is not actually what's in the book but how it's been interpreted and applied for 1,400 years by Islamic scholars and Imams and the governments of Muslim majority countries, and how many would like to see them applied today.
BTW, regarding quoting the full passage, well noted.
I'm not posting this to try and make Islam look like an evil religion. I would be pleased to find that I'd actually missed something and this passage is over ruled by something later, but that doesn't seem to be the case as far as I can tell from anything I have read about it.
And to declare my own interest - raised vaguely Christian (christened CofE, prayers at school, never thought much of it) with some vague Jewish connections that never counted for anything in that religion. Now an atheist, and don't feel the need for any gods at all.
I did at one time find something quite attractive about Islam. A girl for one thing. I never really gave any serious thought to converting but I admired the devotion and the passion which many Muslims clearly have for their religion, in sharp contrast to the sort of perpetual self-doubt and tepid nature of most Christians in the west, epitomised by the Church of England.
A Muslim friend gave me a copy of the Koran, which I didn't read cover to cover but I did start reading. The early passages pre Hijra are indeed tolerant and peaceful, but other parts of it just struck me as being insane, gratuitous violence.
Reading more and more about it (obsession is probably a fair description) it strikes me that the most believable explanation for this is that the koran was cobbled together much later than any actual Mohammed, as Arab rulers, surprised by their own success at annexing swathes of the territories of Persia and Byzantium (who had destroyed themselves fighting each other) found they needed a religion to hold their new empire together, encompassing as it did Christians, Jews, ZoroAstrians and others; and drive future expansion. The product is a religion which is militant by design and by evolution.
I'm not posting this to try and make Islam look like an evil religion. I would be pleased to find that I'd actually missed something and this passage is over ruled by something later, but that doesn't seem to be the case as far as I can tell from anything I have read about it.
And to declare my own interest - raised vaguely Christian (christened CofE, prayers at school, never thought much of it) with some vague Jewish connections that never counted for anything in that religion. Now an atheist, and don't feel the need for any gods at all.
I did at one time find something quite attractive about Islam. A girl for one thing. I never really gave any serious thought to converting but I admired the devotion and the passion which many Muslims clearly have for their religion, in sharp contrast to the sort of perpetual self-doubt and tepid nature of most Christians in the west, epitomised by the Church of England.
A Muslim friend gave me a copy of the Koran, which I didn't read cover to cover but I did start reading. The early passages pre Hijra are indeed tolerant and peaceful, but other parts of it just struck me as being insane, gratuitous violence.
Reading more and more about it (obsession is probably a fair description) it strikes me that the most believable explanation for this is that the koran was cobbled together much later than any actual Mohammed, as Arab rulers, surprised by their own success at annexing swathes of the territories of Persia and Byzantium (who had destroyed themselves fighting each other) found they needed a religion to hold their new empire together, encompassing as it did Christians, Jews, ZoroAstrians and others; and drive future expansion. The product is a religion which is militant by design and by evolution.
pork911 said:
how did you not compare it to criminality?
anyway, you're wedded to the idea that being a muslim is somehow incompatible with living in a secular country and are searching for a solution to that
the problem has nothing to do with anyone but yourself
I'm not.I believe there are genuinely secular Muslims such as Maajid Nawaz and Dr Zuhdi Jasser who sincerely believe in liberal, open societies. I'm fairly convinced that Islam as a whole needs fundamental reform. anyway, you're wedded to the idea that being a muslim is somehow incompatible with living in a secular country and are searching for a solution to that
the problem has nothing to do with anyone but yourself
pork911 said:
huh? why then does islam as a whole need fundamental reform?
Because it appears to be creating a culture of violence, from a core ideology of violence.The exception to that seems to be a handful of genuine reformers, and a middle/majority which is being targeted very efficiently by extremists/radicals/best label.
The western policy response seems to be very haphazard, based on no real understanding of the ideology and only a very limited willingness to grasp it, except when it shows it's most extreme colours via something like IS.
Edited by AJS- on Monday 21st December 11:22
It's not about having an agenda Trigger. I would like to believe that it is peaceful. But does this not relate directly to Quran 5:32
Pork
With the greatest respect, bigotry/racism whatever you're implying has been covered ad nauseum on the Trump and other threads. If you think I'm a horrible racist bigot just or asking these questions then feel free. Even if that is so, does it make the conversation itself wrong? If so please say so and why.
Koran 5:32 said:
Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.
Meaning that this injunction only applies to the children of Israel, i.e. Jews?Pork
With the greatest respect, bigotry/racism whatever you're implying has been covered ad nauseum on the Trump and other threads. If you think I'm a horrible racist bigot just or asking these questions then feel free. Even if that is so, does it make the conversation itself wrong? If so please say so and why.
Interesting. I have more to read on this and will return to it. Thanks Trigger.
In the mean time though, how does al-Baghdadi, also a well read scholar of Islam arrive at such wildly different opinions in your view? Is it pure cynicism and power grabbing?
And TTwiggy thank you for your amazing consistency in contributing nothing but banal insults to a potentially interesting conversation.
In the mean time though, how does al-Baghdadi, also a well read scholar of Islam arrive at such wildly different opinions in your view? Is it pure cynicism and power grabbing?
And TTwiggy thank you for your amazing consistency in contributing nothing but banal insults to a potentially interesting conversation.
TTwiggy said:
I'll stop when you stop turning this forum into a one-man crusade.
Why don't you just stop anyway? I have explained at great length that I am not racist and have nothing against Muslims as people. There is now actually an interesting discussion developing with an apparently sincere Muslim who appears happy to discuss it, and I hope doesn't feel persecuted or vilified by my questions (Trigger?) and has put forward some interesting information which I may have missed, and which may change my view.And you, as usual, try to drag it back down to idiotic slurs implying I am some sort of unhinged hate monger.
There are plenty of threads about other stuff and you're free to start your own and ignore this one.
Trigger
From what I can find it seems that Children of Israel refers to specifically the 12 tribes of the sons of Jacob.
http://corpus.quran.com/concept.jsp?id=israel
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Ja...
In my understanding this would not include the Pagans or other Arabs of the time who were not already Jewish. Was Mohammed a child of Israel?
From what I can find it seems that Children of Israel refers to specifically the 12 tribes of the sons of Jacob.
http://corpus.quran.com/concept.jsp?id=israel
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Ja...
In my understanding this would not include the Pagans or other Arabs of the time who were not already Jewish. Was Mohammed a child of Israel?
Johnnytheboy said:
Why not just call moderates "Muslims"?
And call the ones that want to kill people "Lunatics"?
And the ones in between that don't want to kill people, but tacitly approve of others doing it in their name "Islamists"?
Lunatics do things at random. There appears to be some (warped) scheme to Islamic violence. To me it seems essential that we understand this in order to effectively defend against it.And call the ones that want to kill people "Lunatics"?
And the ones in between that don't want to kill people, but tacitly approve of others doing it in their name "Islamists"?
triggerh4ppy said:
Well read scholar of islam? I dont think anyone has ever known him or called him a scholar. No one even knows where he appeared from. All the main scholars of islam have never heard of him until now. So I wouldnt call him a scholar at all
Wikipedia seems to have a fairly good ideahttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr_al-Baghda...
PhD in Islamic studies from the Islamic University of Baghdad according to Iraqi and US intelligence. They sound like fair credentials.
Alpine
Very good.
Who is the greater weirdo, the one with an interest in an important subject or the one who follows him around telling him this interest is unhealthy?
Trigger
Interesting. So all descendants of Abraham are Children of Israel?
Regarding them not being Muslims, back to the original question then how do you tell the difference before they actually commit acts of terror?
Very good.
Who is the greater weirdo, the one with an interest in an important subject or the one who follows him around telling him this interest is unhealthy?
Trigger
Interesting. So all descendants of Abraham are Children of Israel?
Regarding them not being Muslims, back to the original question then how do you tell the difference before they actually commit acts of terror?
Triger
Any sites you would recommend as an alternative to Wikipedia. I find Quran.com very well laid out but obviously only the original text.
So is it purely random lunatics? Why do they keep interpreting Islam particularly in this way? Why don't we have random Sikh, Hindu and Buddhist lunatics also misinterpreting their religion in this way?
And yes I know there was a major Sikh terrorist campaign for a period of time but it never seemed to be demanding a Sikh caliphate or its equivalent.
Allnighter
As I understand it the Koran is eternal and the commands within it are not dependent upon exactly when they were revealed. So although he may have received them at a time when they were directly applicable they are not specific to that time and place.
Regarding my perceptions of Islam you're not entirely wrong.
Drawing very heavily on Robert Spencer, though I am aware of his Syrian Christian heritage and Eastern Orthodox beliefs. I know he has made some mistakes and wouldn't put a bit of showmanship and hubris past him, but if you insist that I am parroting some beliefs then those should be your starting point.
I have also read Bernard Lewis at length. An incredible historian by any standard. I have listened to many debates and lectures by Dr Zuhdi Jasser and what I can of Maajid Nawaz. I have read much on Wikipedia and while aware of its flaws I have dug deeper into original sources where possible. I habe otherwise dived into history and theology as and when and tried to look at multiple sources and recognise the bias.
Similarly on religious texts, I was given a copy of the koran by a Muslim friend many years ago. I set out to read it cover to cover and failed miserably.
I don't claim to know everything about Islam for one minute. The more I learn the more I become aware of what I don't know and Triggers admirably patient posts have already illuminated new areas I must read more about.
I most certainly do not think Christianity is beyond reproach. My formative atheist years were spent laughing hysterically at the creation story and the idea that all thinga are guided by some ethereal tyrant who cares not a jot for millions of people born to poverty, misery and death who finds the time to worry about what consenting adults do in the privacy of theirbown bedroom.
I do think Christianity has evolved to be a relatively benign cultural backdrop to basically harmonious and tolerant societies.
I am also aware that being brought up vaguely Christian has given me some innate bias in this matter. I account for it where I can be make no claim to be perfectly objective. My true thoughts are what I post and despite how it may sometimes seem are more questions than answers.
And a very merry Christmas to you too.
Voldemort and Bob
Which race am I ist?
May the new year bring you an original thought.
Alpine
I am sorry if it feels that way to you. There are plebty of threads I haven't even contributed to here. Plenty not about Islam. And to the best of my memory it's the first I've started in a couple of months.
I find it a fascinating subject from a historical POV and I believe it will be one of the defining struggles of the coming decades. So worth talking about.
Merry Christmas.
Rscott
I did. Plenty of questions there. They damn ISIS. Are they in favour of secular laws? Are they against hudud always and everywhere? I havr more to write on this tomorrow.
Pork
Why would you take the trouble to write that without bothering to point out what it is I have actually said which you deem idiotic?
Zod
I hope it does expose my scant understanding of Islam. And I hope it continues to point towards areas I could learn more about as Trigger's posts have so far done.
BSR
I see it as one of the definitive issues of the age. And it's also one I find very interesting.
I really don't know why the vitriol is necessary from anyone. Is the whole topic somehow out of bounds? According to who? Since when? And why? It might seem odd that I am so interested in itm maybe it is.
Merry Christmas, holidays and new year to everyone.
Any sites you would recommend as an alternative to Wikipedia. I find Quran.com very well laid out but obviously only the original text.
So is it purely random lunatics? Why do they keep interpreting Islam particularly in this way? Why don't we have random Sikh, Hindu and Buddhist lunatics also misinterpreting their religion in this way?
And yes I know there was a major Sikh terrorist campaign for a period of time but it never seemed to be demanding a Sikh caliphate or its equivalent.
Allnighter
As I understand it the Koran is eternal and the commands within it are not dependent upon exactly when they were revealed. So although he may have received them at a time when they were directly applicable they are not specific to that time and place.
Regarding my perceptions of Islam you're not entirely wrong.
Drawing very heavily on Robert Spencer, though I am aware of his Syrian Christian heritage and Eastern Orthodox beliefs. I know he has made some mistakes and wouldn't put a bit of showmanship and hubris past him, but if you insist that I am parroting some beliefs then those should be your starting point.
I have also read Bernard Lewis at length. An incredible historian by any standard. I have listened to many debates and lectures by Dr Zuhdi Jasser and what I can of Maajid Nawaz. I have read much on Wikipedia and while aware of its flaws I have dug deeper into original sources where possible. I habe otherwise dived into history and theology as and when and tried to look at multiple sources and recognise the bias.
Similarly on religious texts, I was given a copy of the koran by a Muslim friend many years ago. I set out to read it cover to cover and failed miserably.
I don't claim to know everything about Islam for one minute. The more I learn the more I become aware of what I don't know and Triggers admirably patient posts have already illuminated new areas I must read more about.
I most certainly do not think Christianity is beyond reproach. My formative atheist years were spent laughing hysterically at the creation story and the idea that all thinga are guided by some ethereal tyrant who cares not a jot for millions of people born to poverty, misery and death who finds the time to worry about what consenting adults do in the privacy of theirbown bedroom.
I do think Christianity has evolved to be a relatively benign cultural backdrop to basically harmonious and tolerant societies.
I am also aware that being brought up vaguely Christian has given me some innate bias in this matter. I account for it where I can be make no claim to be perfectly objective. My true thoughts are what I post and despite how it may sometimes seem are more questions than answers.
And a very merry Christmas to you too.
Voldemort and Bob
Which race am I ist?
May the new year bring you an original thought.
Alpine
I am sorry if it feels that way to you. There are plebty of threads I haven't even contributed to here. Plenty not about Islam. And to the best of my memory it's the first I've started in a couple of months.
I find it a fascinating subject from a historical POV and I believe it will be one of the defining struggles of the coming decades. So worth talking about.
Merry Christmas.
Rscott
I did. Plenty of questions there. They damn ISIS. Are they in favour of secular laws? Are they against hudud always and everywhere? I havr more to write on this tomorrow.
Pork
Why would you take the trouble to write that without bothering to point out what it is I have actually said which you deem idiotic?
Zod
I hope it does expose my scant understanding of Islam. And I hope it continues to point towards areas I could learn more about as Trigger's posts have so far done.
BSR
I see it as one of the definitive issues of the age. And it's also one I find very interesting.
I really don't know why the vitriol is necessary from anyone. Is the whole topic somehow out of bounds? According to who? Since when? And why? It might seem odd that I am so interested in itm maybe it is.
Merry Christmas, holidays and new year to everyone.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff