Islamaphobia - Years later, I accept its a real/true phenomena and an industry

[Piculet]

Try Mustafa Khattab's translation.

Yusuf Ali's was my first translation too but it's certainly not one worthy of returning to whatsoever, I cringe at how bad he gets some ayahs.

Translation doesn't matter to me so long as it is accepted by Muslim scholars. Just saying that Yusuf Ali's translation is highly praised and popular, not by chance, but because it is good. Is there some particular ayah you think was translated wrong?

 

[icehorse]

You have no idea means you have no idea what those so called “authors” I quoted has said but you defend them saying their criticism is reasonable.

Why do you defend people you haven’t even analyzed?

ANOTHER FRIGGIN' STRAWMAN !!!! Please stop, it burns us!

I have listened to many of their arguments. As I have also said, I'm not a fan of their style.

Now it could be that there are a few of their arguments that I do not agree with. But I've listened to them across several debates and presentations, and I think they have a lot of valid points. Do I agree 100%, probably not. Never said that I did.

Now, what you've failed to demonstrate is how they're getting rich as critics of Islam? Again, book sales almost never make a person rich. Nor do speaking engagements. And they put their lives at risk to be such vocal critics of the religion of peace.

So how is this an industry again?

 

[icehorse]

Actually, it's Muslims who say you don't understand Islam.

Probably true, but not all the apologists on this forum make their faith explicit. But in this case, they are also - by definition - apologists for Islam.

To be clear, I do not see "apologist" as a negative term. It means "defender". So if you want to call me an apologist for science or critical thinking, I'm fine with that.

 

[Piculet]

Probably true, but not all the apologists on this forum make their faith explicit. But in this case, they are also - by definition - apologists for Islam.

To be clear, I do not see "apologist" as a negative term. It means "defender". So if you want to call me an apologist for science or critical thinking, I'm fine with that.

It's not that. The people who disagree with you are not just random people who want to debate you, but people who believe in Islam. Of course sometimes non-Muslims try to defend Islam, but they usually don't do a great job at that. They might even be spreading more misconceptions than they are correcting them.

 

[firedragon]

ANOTHER FRIGGIN' STRAWMAN !!!! Please stop, it burns us!

I have listened to many of their arguments. As I have also said, I'm not a fan of their style.

Now it could be that there are a few of their arguments that I do not agree with. But I've listened to them across several debates and presentations, and I think they have a lot of valid points. Do I agree 100%, probably not. Never said that I did.

Now, what you've failed to demonstrate is how they're getting rich as critics of Islam? Again, book sales almost never make a person rich. Nor do speaking engagements. And they put their lives at risk to be such vocal critics of the religion of peace.

So how is this an industry again?

So what about the argument I told you? About Muhammed penis? You agree? You said their arguments are reasonable. So please give evidence to this claim.

 

[icehorse]

It's not that. The people who disagree with you are not just random people who want to debate you, but people who believe in Islam. Of course sometimes non-Muslims try to defend Islam, but they usually don't do a great job at that. They might even be spreading more misconceptions than they are correcting them.

I agree with that so far. I'm guessing you have a follow on point?

 

[icehorse]

So what about the argument I told you? About Muhammed penis? You agree? You said their arguments are reasonable. So please give evidence to this claim.

You're being sort of cryptic here. I'm guessing that some critic once made some claims about Muhammad's penis?

I'm not aware of that episode, nor do I have to be. Everyone is right sometimes and wrong sometimes. So let's say that critic X once said something incorrect about Muhammad's penis. That doesn't mean that critic X is always wrong.

 

[firedragon]

You're being sort of cryptic here. I'm guessing that some critic once made some claims about Muhammad's penis?

Nope. Not "Some Critic", it was one of the people I quoted in the OP.

Just that you came to their defence and claimed their criticism was reasonable. So you were just making a general comment without knowing much about their criticism is not criticism but performing to the gallery.

So since you said they were reasonable, can you provide your justification or evidence to that story? After all, it was you defending them mate. Lets hear it.

 

[Piculet]

I'm guessing you have a follow on point?

I don't understand.

 

[firedragon]

You're being sort of cryptic here. I'm guessing that some critic once made some claims about Muhammad's penis?

I'm not aware of that episode, nor do I have to be. Everyone is right sometimes and wrong sometimes. So let's say that critic X once said something incorrect about Muhammad's penis. That doesn't mean that critic X is always wrong.

Mate. That was a lie one of them repeated several times even after being corrected because he knows the audience is largely ignorant ticket purchases. They will believe him. So he lied.

You were defending a liar. But well, you seem to defend everyone without knowing much about the work and the nitty-gritty. When you say something, study it first.

So please provide the justification or just candidly explain why you defended them without even studying them.

 

[icehorse]

Mate. That was a lie one of them repeated several times even after being corrected because he knows the audience is largely ignorant ticket purchases. They will believe him. So he lied.

You were defending a liar. But well, you seem to defend everyone without knowing much about the work and the nitty-gritty. When you say something, study it first.

So please provide the justification or just candidly explain why you defended them without even studying them.

In the OP you mentioned several critics including Sam Harris and Robert Spencer. I have not read every word they've ever written. I have not listened to every talk they've ever given. I'm sure that they have said some things that I disagree with. But I have read some of what they've written, and I've listened to many of their talks, and for the most part, I think they make a lot of valid criticisms of Islam.

That fact that you can find a few things to disagree with does NOT render all of their opinions invalid.

 

[firedragon]

In the OP you mentioned several critics including Sam Harris and Robert Spencer. I have not read every word they've ever written. I have not listened to every talk they've ever given. I'm sure that they have said some things that I disagree with. But I have read some of what they've written, and I've listened to many of their talks, and for the most part, I think they make a lot of valid criticisms of Islam.

That fact that you can find a few things to disagree with does NOT render all of their opinions invalid.

Okay. So now at least you tried to be a tad specific by quoting two names rather than making general negations or embracing with strong affection. The only thing you have done so far to be a little specific is quote two names. Thats it.

Anyway, ciao.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm not gonna go and see what exactly you're talking about, but this term radical jihad ideology is a made up term and it can mean different things to different people.

Some people think bombing is radical, others think niqab is radical.

It's generic terminology to refer to any form of extremist implementation / interpretation of islamic theology, specifically with religiously inspired harmfull acts. Like acts of oppression (by indeed forcing women to cover up, not attend schools, don't drive), to the even more extreme bombings, executions, terrorist attacks etc.

In that context, it isn't really an islamic term. More like terms adopted by the west to refer to such groups and organizations.

I'm aware that "jihad" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing in islamic theory. It's one of those words that if you ask X amount of muslims what it meas, you'll get multiple different answers.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Then what’s the percentage from all the Muslim.

you keep repeating this denial but you don’t substantiate. So can you?

I posted stats from a research paper which covers several islamic countries. I never claimed those specific numbers covered "all muslims". Instead, only those residing in those countries.

Not sure what you are asking of me.

 

[firedragon]

It's generic terminology to refer to any form of extremist implementation / interpretation of islamic theology, specifically with religiously inspired harmfull acts. Like acts of oppression (by indeed forcing women to cover up, not attend schools, don't drive), to the even more extreme bombings, executions, terrorist attacks etc.

In that context, it isn't really an islamic term. More like terms adopted by the west to refer to such groups and organizations.

I'm aware that "jihad" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing in islamic theory. It's one of those words that if you ask X amount of muslims what it meas, you'll get multiple different answers.

Jahada in the Quran or jihad in the Quran is a simple word that means “try” or “work towards”.

 

[firedragon]

I posted stats from a research paper which covers several islamic countries. I never claimed those specific numbers covered "all muslims". Instead, only those residing in those countries.

Not sure what you are asking of me.

I asked because you said “a lot of Muslims” but you meant some in some countries.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm aware that "jihad" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing in islamic theory. It's one of those words that if you ask X amount of muslims what it meas, you'll get multiple different answers.

​

Jahada in the Quran or jihad in the Quran is a simple word that means “try” or “work towards”.

This being one such answer.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I asked because you said “a lot of Muslims” but you meant some in some countries.

Which adds up to a lot of muslims. Numbers, from those countries alone, that put them in the league of scientology in terms of following.

I'ld say that's a lot of muslims.

 

[icehorse]

Okay. So now at least you tried to be a tad specific by quoting two names rather than making general negations or embracing with strong affection. The only thing you have done so far to be a little specific is quote two names. Thats it.

Anyway, ciao.

Two names directly from YOUR OP, which is what I've been responding to all along, jeez.

 

[firedragon]

Two names directly from YOUR OP, which is what I've been responding to all along, jeez.

Invalid.