Islamaphobia

[danieldemol]

which one did you read?? I read the King Faud Saudi edition which is considered the best and the most used at mosques, the Yusef Ali one is quite respected too

Do you have a citation for the claim that the King Faud Saudi Edition is the most used at mosques? For some reason I thought Yusuf Ali was.

 

[firedragon]

Do you have a citation for the claim that the King Faud Saudi Edition is the most used at mosques? For some reason I thought Yusuf Ali was.

Its given freely, and its an easy to read and more liberal and straightforward translation than Yusuf Ali's.

 

[danieldemol]

Its given freely, and its an easy to read and more liberal and straightforward translation than Yusuf Ali's.

But is it the most widely used in Mosques? If so please cite your claim.

 

[firedragon]

But is it the most widely used in Mosques? If so please cite your claim.

I dont know if its the most widely used in mosques because the world is a large place with 7 or more billion people and I dont think there is any research done with so many countries with a decent sample size. So I dont know what translation is most used around the world. And the main point is that mosques dont really have one translation and adhere to it like a doctrine. The mosques I have seen have many translations. Many many. I just made a statement about the translation and its personality. If you have some research that has some significance on this id like to look at it though.

 

[icehorse]

The ones that come with the books if the translations are worth anything.

Oh, got it. I read some of those, certainly not all of them.

But I don't care much about how religious scholars interpret scripture. I care far more about how "the masses" interpret scripture. to that end, I rely on ideas like using Occam's Razor to analyze how scripture will impact people.

 

[firedragon]

Oh, got it. I read some of those, certainly not all of them.

But I don't care much about how religious scholars interpret scripture. I care far more about how "the masses" interpret scripture. to that end, I rely on ideas like using Occam's Razor to analyze how scripture will impact people.

How have you been impacted?

 

[icehorse]

How have you been impacted?

I'm going to take your question as sincere, although I suspect you're hoping you can trick me:

Context matters. I read scripture from a different context than religious people do. I also don't read scripture over and over and over again. I was never indoctrinated or brain washed by scripture. That means I can read it with less bias than a religious person. Of course I have my biases as well, but in relationship to scripture my biases are less severe than those of a "believer".

For me, reading scripture from the perspective of critical thinking, I'm saddened that so many billions of people have been terrorized by these mediocre, incoherent, immoral books.

 

[firedragon]

I'm going to take your question as sincere, although I suspect you're hoping you can trick me:

Context matters. I read scripture from a different context than religious people do. I also don't read scripture over and over and over again. I was never indoctrinated or brain washed by scripture. That means I can read it with less bias than a religious person. Of course I have my biases as well, but in relationship to scripture my biases are less severe than those of a "believer".

For me, reading scripture from the perspective of critical thinking, I'm saddened that so many billions of people have been terrorized by these mediocre, incoherent, immoral books.

Let me ask a different question. If you think people are gonna trick you by default its your prerogative and you can answer or not. Your wish.

My brother won awards in a Quran reading competition when he was young. He might have read the Quran a million times (exaggerated metaphor of course).

How do you think the book has impacted him?

 

[icehorse]

Let me ask a different question. If you think people are gonna trick you by default its your prerogative and you can answer or not. Your wish.

My brother won awards in a Quran reading competition when he was young. He might have read the Quran a million times (exaggerated metaphor of course).

How do you think the book has impacted him?

I don't "by default" think that "people" are trying to trick me, but in certain circumstances - like religious debates - I'm a bit more cautious

I don't know very much about your brother, but I'm going to infer that he's a fine, moral, ethical, peace-loving person. If that's correct, then I would say that he is all of those good things IN SPITE OF what he read in the Quran. I would say that he has spent a LOT of cognitive resources figuring out how to square his positive orientation to life with the immoral, unethical, hateful things he's read over and over again in the Quran.

 

[firedragon]

I don't know very much about your brother, but I'm going to infer that he's a fine, moral, ethical, peace-loving person. If that's correct, then I would say that he is all of those good things IN SPITE OF what he read in the Quran.

You are absolutely wrong. You have made a very distant assumption based on how what ever that affects you has affected you.

My brother is a party animal, peace loving, moral, father of two, gentleman and all that BECAUSE OF what he read in the Quran.

 

[icehorse]

You are absolutely wrong. You have made a very distant assumption based on how what ever that affects you has affected you.

My brother is a party animal, peace loving, moral, father of two, gentleman and all that BECAUSE OF what he read in the Quran.

My analysis isn't based on how scripture has affected me, it's based on cognitive science. I'm happy to hear what a fine person your brother is. But cognitive science tells us that if he read the Quran many, many times, he got to where he is IN SPITE OF the Quran, and that in fact, his multiple readings of the book made his journey harder rather than easier.

This has nothing to do with me, it has to do with how human brains work.

 

[firedragon]

My analysis isn't based on how scripture has affected me, it's based on cognitive science. I'm happy to hear what a fine person your brother is. But cognitive science tells us that if he read the Quran many, many times, he got to where he is IN SPITE OF the Quran, and that in fact, his multiple readings of the book made his journey harder rather than easier.

This has nothing to do with me, it has to do with how human brains work.

Your analysis is an assumption.

 

[icehorse]

Your analysis is an assumption.

It's cognitive science

 

[firedragon]

It's cognitive science

Assumption.

 

[icehorse]

Your analysis is an assumption.

I have - within arms reach - the following books:

Information Anxiety
Deep Learning
Artificial Intelligence, a Modern Approach
Efficiency in Learning
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
Natural Language Processing in Action

I have, slightly farther away, but in my office:

Self-Determination Theory
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence
Development of Professional Expertise
Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development
Incognito
Learning and Memory
Play
Ethopharmacology of Agnostic Behavior in Animals and Humans

I have, in my library downstairs, many, many more books related to cognitive science.

So I'd say my view is just a bit more informed than an "assumption".

 

[firedragon]

I have - within arms reach - the following books:

Information Anxiety
Deep Learning
Artificial Intelligence, a Modern Approach
Efficiency in Learning
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
Natural Language Processing in Action

I have, slightly farther away, but in my office:

Self-Determination Theory
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence
Development of Professional Expertise
Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development
Incognito
Learning and Memory
Play
Ethopharmacology of Agnostic Behavior in Animals and Humans

I have, in my library downstairs, many, many more books related to cognitive science.

So I'd say my view is just a bit more informed than an "assumption".

Great. Honoured to know someone who reads to that extent.

But you made pure assumption.

Nevertheless, that list of books, is a good list and I will recommend myself to read them all. I shall thank you for that.

 

[icehorse]

But you made pure assumption.

Where was my assumption?

Nevertheless, that list of books, is a good list and I will recommend myself to read them all. I shall thank you for that.

If you really want to learn about this stuff, let me know, and I'll tell you which ones you ought to read and which ones would be less helpful. Some of those titles are more closely related to our discussion than others.

 

[firedragon]

Where was my assumption?



If you really want to learn about this stuff, let me know, and I'll tell you which ones you ought to read and which ones would be less helpful. Some of those titles are more closely related to our discussion than others.

Thanks brother. I shall consult you for sure.

Peace.

 

[j1i]

I think we need to be having a much more intelligent and constructive dialogue about what Islam is and isn't. On the one hand there is hatred and a distorted understanding of Islam. On the other hand, there is naivety about some of the less pleasant aspects of Islam such as Sharia law. Many Muslims hold strong ideas about Sharia law. I was naïve until it was recently highlighted to me by this Pew Survey. There are aspects of Sharia law that are abhorrent to Westerners such as myself.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

Is that Islamophobia on my part?

Islamaphobia

The reason I dont like this word is because I think its wrong. I was told that a phobia is when someone has an irrational fear of something and they know that the fear is irrational but they still fear it. Its a psychological condition.

But what this word represents is not that. Because people dont know that this fear is irrational. They actually believe that this fear is rational. So being a scientific or a medical term it’s wrong.

But then again one must admit that there are many wrong words that have been established now and you cant take them back so we have no choice but to go along. Like the word Jihadist. Everyone knows what a Jihadist means. A Jihadist is a person who identifies himself as a Muslim and uses his theology to fight for something in his country or for a cause. But this word doesn’t make sense to many people if you look at it scientifically.

If you look at the Quran which is deemed the textbook of the arabic language, the word Jihad means “to try”. So what does the word Jihadist mean? So this word is a problem in its essence. But it’s established and one cant change what it represents.

And the word “awful”. Sometime ago if a person says “my king is awful” it would have meant “full of awe”. Now it’s the exact opposite. If I say “you as a thug are awful” to a drug lord I will get killed. Awful now means the opposite of Awesome. Strange world isn’t it?

So bottomline is this word is now established and one cannot change it.

Does Islamaphobia exist? Yes it definitely does. It exists mostly in the hands of writers and speakers who make a career out of it. There is no easier way to come to the limelight by speaking nonsense than to use Islamaphobia.

Recently I read a comment about an article that read “woman burns Quran in protest against rape”. She alludes that Muslims are rapists. She is American and there are only 1% Muslims in the country. Its a illusion she is trying to create but I’m sure she will get famous or at least this is an attempt to.

It is common to see many people associate terrorism with Islam. Islam is the motherload of bad ideas says Sam Harris. Hitler picked up his ideas from Islam says Ali Sina. Many people make a lot of claims like this and sell books. Robert Morey, Robert Spencer etc. If one analyses the history of the world, there has been thousands and thousands of wars between people. If you read the Encyclopedia of Wars by Charles Phillip and Alan Axelrod you will see they have data filling over 1,400 pages as if the world was at war more than governance. Religion is a language that people use to identify themselves. Buddhism teaches us not to hate anyone because hatred cannot be mulled by hatred but the lack of hatred alone. That didn’t stop Buddhist monks in Myanmar from promoting violence. Jesus is quoted to have said to give the other cheek, but that didn’t stop the church from the inquisition as henry Charles lea, the American historian, civic reformer, and political activist remarked in his most famous book A History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, “Christendom seemed to have grown delirious and Satan might well smile at the tribute to his power in the endless smoke of the holocaust which bore witness to the triumph of the Almighty.”

Religion
man named Robert A. Pape, PhD and founder of Chicago Project on Security and Terrorism, a very well-known political scientist from the United States of America compiled a database of all suicide attacks from 1980 to 2003 with an extensive research of news in all available media outlets. His book was called Dying to Win, The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism and in the introduction section he says

“The data show that there is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world’s religions. In fact, the leading instigators of suicide attacks are the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a Marxist-Leninist group whose members are from Hindu families but who are adamantly opposed to religion. This group committed 76 of the 315 incidents, more suicide attacks than Hamas. Rather, what nearly all suicide terrorist attacks have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider to be their homeland. Religion is rarely the root cause, although it is often used as a tool by terrorist organisations in recruiting and in other efforts in service of the broader strategic objective. Three general patterns in the data support my conclusions. First, nearly all suicide terrorist attacks occur as part of organized campaigns, not as isolated or random incidents. Of the 315 separate attacks in the period I studied, 301 could have their roots traced to large, coherent political or military campaigns.”

Robert Pape goes to explain various levels of terrorism while suicide terrorism is the most extreme. He gives an example “One LTTE suicide attacker was motivated by the thought that the Sinhalese Buddhists would destroy the Hindu temples near her village, even though she had never visited them.”

He says “Two main explanations have been offered thus far. The first argues that local competition between the LTTE and other Tamil guerrilla groups encouraged the LTTE to use the extreme tactic of suicide to distinguish itself from its rivals. The second explanation stresses the “cult-like” behaviour of the group in which the Tamil Tigers separate their fighters from the general population and brainwash recruits to follow the leader’s orders without conscious choice.”

Follow the leader’s orders without conscious choice. Sounds like a sane explanation of the insanity.

Religion is used as a language to achieve certain goals a state or a group has as foundation to further their cause. Their root 'cause' is made of secular goals but their communication takes the language of religion. Even secularism has been used in the past as the language that leaderships have used for their cause. Take Joseph Stalin for example. He was a secular atheist with a secular state and he butchered Christians, Christian pastors and people who had a Bible at home during his reign. He was instrumental in the deaths over 15 million people and is deemed only second to Mao Zedong in the number of human deaths caused by them and their regime. And it may come as a surprise to many when they learn Joseph Stalin persecuted homosexuals by jailing them up to five years and that’s in the 20th century while the so called Muslim khalifate, the Ottoman Empire gave them full rights way back in 1858. The scale of totalitarianism tips this way and that way but what we remember top of mind is what we see every day on TV.

Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod compiled the comprehensive book on wars in history called “Encyclopedia of Wars”, a great read, clearly shows that only 7% of all wars ever recorded in history were motivated by religion.

Murder in the name of God

In a nutshell, the Islamic scripture directly tells you never to take an innocent life. So says the Quran in chapter 5 verse 32 - “It is because of this that we have decreed for the Children of Israel: “Anyone who kills a person who has not committed murder, or who has not committed corruption in the land; then it is as if he has killed all the people! And whoever spares a life, then it is as if he has given life to all the people. “

Now notice that this verse says as a blanket statement that a person who has not committed murder should not be killed or even as a government give a death sentence. But there is a phrase here that many people misunderstand that says “or who has not committed corruption in the land” which is open for interpretation. The Arabic phrase “Al Fasadhu Fil Ardh (الفساد في الأرض)”, or corruption in the land has a definition which a lot of people have ignored. This maybe the boring part for the reader, but this also maybe a piercer of faith to the fanatic. Read further.

So says the Quran in chapter 27, verses 48 to 50, - “And in the city were nine ruffians who were causing corruption in the land, and they were not reforming. They said: “Swear by God to one another that we will attack him and his family at night, …... “

Notice that it says “Swear by God”. This is what the Quran is saying by the phrase “Spreading corruption in the land”. These are the people the verse 5:32 above is speaking about and they are very clearly explained.

So it should be evident, that their claim of murdering innocents shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’, calls for Gods wrath on them, and the penalty is nothing but death. You murderer, your Quran is mandating a death sentence to you purely for murdering people using Gods name.

Bottomline: If you say Allah/God and kill an innocent human being, you are the scum of the earth according to the Quran. YOU!

Conspiracy theories aside, a firm believer in Bin Laden and Al Qaeeda’s connection to the world trade centre bombings in the USA Robert A. Pape says in his book Dying to Win, the one book that has the most extensive research and data collection on suicide terrorism, “However, the presumed connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism is misleading and may be encouraging domestic and foreign policies likely to worsen America’s situation and to harm many Muslims needlessly”.

"just Like Today: Islam must be spread by force" - Robert Spencer

How do these people make their living off this fear? Is it real? Is it an industry?

It is true that Sharia applies a strict penal system in Islam
But this law is found in the Torah (bible) and the Gospel, and we find many unforgiving laws such as Hammurabi

In the stories of Prophet Muhammad
The Prophet Muhammad opposed retribution for their mercy

When Omar ibn al-Khattab ruled the Muslims and Muslims were hungers in a year they called it the year of the hunger
A thief's hand was not cut because he was in an emergency rule

I mean that Islam deals with mercy and not from the first time

any person that changes the religion of Islam to any religion that does not get kill
But it was his incident that there were people who were fighting Islam and inciting from the inside for the treachery of the Prophet to kill him, so they were warned and did not stop until he ordered to kill them after they almost closed killed Muhammad

And this is something that is happening even in our modern world issues of secret liquidation from the rich in the West and in the East to opponents

Many of the crimes suspected of being liquidated as a result of people continuing with negative propaganda against powerful parties have been documented, even in foreign films.

There are verses in the Koran proving that many lived after turned out of Islam, but God promised them the torment of hell on the Day of Resurrection

There is a problem in the understanding of Muslims of their religion on the one hand
The exploitation of others for the gaps of Muslims for their agendas

 

[oldbadger]

I think we need to be having a much more intelligent and constructive dialogue about what Islam is and isn't. On the one hand there is hatred and a distorted understanding of Islam. On the other hand, there is naivety about some of the less pleasant aspects of Islam such as Sharia law. Many Muslims hold strong ideas about Sharia law. I was naïve until it was recently highlighted to me by this Pew Survey. There are aspects of Sharia law that are abhorrent to Westerners such as myself.

Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

Is that Islamophobia on my part?

What aspects of Sharia do you find to be abhorrent?

Some Christians believe in Old Testament laws being put in place, even with public executions for actions such as adultery and homosexuality and more.

Baha'i believes in laws from God and a quite severe penalty list.

What is the difference?