• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What exactly is Islamophobia?

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
There are indeed ways they do belong to a larger group, that being they are subservient to Abraham's God and claim the prophets such as Moses and Isaiah. And in this regard it's to demonstrate lots of them don't take their holy book literally. A flying horse? That isn't literally believed by all Muslims.
Fair enough. But it does little to reassure me that you understand how unique (for better and very much for the worse) Islam is.

It is no coincidence that in Muslim countries alone there are actual violent punishments for so-called religious "crimes".
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Fair enough. But it does little to reassure me that you understand how unique (for better and very much for the worse) Islam is.
Well, that's not what I referring to but the idea a Muslim must literally believe the Quran. I mentioned the other two as examples that show that broadly speaking, that isn't really true and literalist interpretations aren't universally held. For Christianity, today this tends to be unique among American Evangelicals. Of course there are literalist here and there, but they aren't a norm and aren't influencing local and national politics as a general trend.
But when we look at the Bible it's no different from the Quran that it contains fantastic stories of supernatural events and presented as the revealed words of their god. Amd even during the so-called "Dark Ages" it doesn't seem unusual if someone didn't accept parts of the Bible as literal from the evidence we have.
An interesting point in history in initially Heinrich Kramer's infamous Malleus Malificarum was rejected by the Church as superstitions rubbish and nonsense and belief in witchcraft widely rejected. But with shifting attitudes it became the the go-to witch hunters manual.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Fair enough. But it does little to reassure me that you understand how unique (for better and very much for the worse) Islam is.

It is no coincidence that in Muslim countries alone there are actual violent punishments for so-called religious "crimes".

It is a bit more complex than that.
First off, historically that is actually not the case. Secondly I seem to recall a current case of a person being killed by Christians for being a witch.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Others already have.

This is not about Islam as such or even atheism in the end.
The problems I have with a certain class of analysis, is that in effect treat religion as a special negative. In effect if we treat the world as natural, then religion is natural and in the end an effect of biology as per the standard reduction used in science.
So that religion is bad/wrong, is not science. That is politics/morality.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Spoken like someone who has nothing of substance to say.

Let me try something. Any given book is not in itself able to do something, because words are not magical. The actions and behaviors happen in humans and that includes all humans capable of using texts and that is also us 2.

So a given book is not wrong or dangerous as such. And that the Qur'an claims objective truth is not unique to that book. You can e.g. find the same in say Objectivism by Ayn Rand and that is philosophy/science.
So to me, the problem is not the Qur'an as such.
 
Islam is NOT a "complex living tradition". It is what it has been for 1400 years, and what it will be 1400 years from now. The Qur'an exists for the purpose of creating and defining Islam. Nothing that you or anybody else says can ever change that.

You claim to have studied Islam for decades and you still don't understand that the Quran requires human interpretation, such interpretations vary and there are and always have been many different approaches to defining the nature of Islam.

Earlier I said:

Imo there are 2 intellectually honest approaches:

1. Try to analyse Islam from a secular historical perspective
2. Making a good faith attempt understand what Muslims believe and why

Your approach tends to be to decide how you personally think Muslims should interpret their scriptures


Your historically and theologically illiterate diatribe above further demonstrates you care nothing for either, are actively resistant to learning anything about the topic and just want to attack some straw-Islam of your own creation.

Islam is defined by exactly 6,236 passages of scripture

Not for 99.9% of Muslims both now and in the past, but if after studying Islam for decades you are still unaware of this then perhaps it might be more productive to start studying things you have a greater aptitude for.

The Quran is the most important text, but Islam is far more than the Quran.
 
Last edited:

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
The Qur'an tells Muslims to treat others differently - "Do not take unbelievers for friends and allies". Negativity towards unbelievers is expressed hundreds of times. The Qur'an is built on differentiating believer from unbeliever.
So do other religious texts or rules. Just as a random example, Exodus has "Never suffer a witch to live". My Wiccan friends would be legitimately concerned if we're to assume that Christians and Jews all take that statement literally.

It seems there are question about the interpretation of that Qur'anic line, and that it doesn't actually mean friends, but regardless, it is obvious that is not how many Muslims interpret it given they routinely have non-Muslims as both friends and allies.

You have the cause and effect backwards. I didn't have a negative opinion of Islam until I read the Qur'an. The verses I quote do not "support" my position - they created it.
What inspired you to read it in the first place though?

Define good. When 9:29 tells them fight the unbelievers until they surrender, they call doing so 'good' because their god demands it of them. I don't call it good.
That is for then to do if they care to. Again though, all of this applies equally to the scripture of pretty much any religion.

I only know what they're told to believe and do.
Well, you know what you've read and interpreted from the scriptures. You don't know what people have actually been told nor what they end up believing because (or in spite) of that teaching.

For example, I considered a Muslim co-worker a friend until he told me that he admired Hitler for what he did to the Jews. Until he said that, I had no idea he felt that way.
That isn't really about him being a Muslim though. There are all too many people who might feel the same way, either based on their religion beliefs or not.

If you're honestly not treating people differently when you learn (or think you learn) of their being Muslim, consciously or subconsciously, you're not being Islamophobic. The problem here is that you appear to be making an argument in favour of doing that, because of these negative quotes you can take from the Qur'an, there is reason to have some level of default doubt about anyone you perceive as being Muslim. That is where you can fall in to the kind of undue discrimination that would commonly be labelled Islamophobic.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Well, yes. Yet you will still find different understandings with Muslims.

hmmm. I agree there are different understandings. But are you saying that there are absolutely no universal beliefs in Islam? I believe there are two:

- the Quran is the perfect, timeless word of god
- Muhammad was god's messenger and lived the perfect life.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
You claim to have studied Islam for decades and you still don't understand that the Quran requires human interpretation, such interpretations vary and there are and always have been many different approaches to defining the nature of Islam.

Earlier I said:

Imo there are 2 intellectually honest approaches:

1. Try to analyse Islam from a secular historical perspective
2. Making a good faith attempt understand what Muslims believe and why

Your approach tends to be to decide how you personally think Muslims should interpret their scriptures


Your historically and theologically illiterate diatribe above further demonstrates you care nothing for either, are actively resistant to learning anything about the topic and just want to attack some straw-Islam of your own creation.

There is another important perspective here: Everything you said above is true ONLY as far as the conscious MIND is concerned. But MOST of what guides us is our subconscious BRAIN. The subconscious brain is not swayed by theology or interpretations. The subconscious brain is quite susceptible to attacks like advertising and marketing and propaganda. And the Quran is a brilliant example of propaganda. So the more you study it, the more you'll create a schism between your conscious theological interpretations, and the propagandistic messages in the book.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
hmmm. I agree there are different understandings. But are you saying that there are absolutely no universal beliefs in Islam? I believe there are two:

- the Quran is the perfect, timeless word of god
- Muhammad was god's messenger and lived the perfect life.

Yeah, but even that is not all there is to Islam.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
No ..that statement is propaganda. ;)

Actually, the Quran is propaganda, AND any criticism of the Quran that is repeated often enough and with emotions is ALSO propaganda.

Propaganda is everywhere. It takes discipline to minimize your exposure to propaganda. For example, we do not have a TV in our house, because we understand that our subconscious brains are helpless when confronted with advertisements.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
You're correct. But at this moment, all I'm trying to establish is that there are at least a few common beliefs held by all Muslims.

But that means nothing in practice, because you can find 2 Muslims who agree with you, yet disagree when comes to what it means in practice as for what the correct version of Islam is.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
But that means nothing in practice, because you can find 2 Muslims who agree with you, yet disagree when comes to what it means in practice as for what the correct version of Islam is.

I would say that belief and action are related, but not the same.

Again, the word Muslim has to have some meaning correct? You seem to be saying that when a person DECLARES THEMSELF to be a Muslim, no meaning whatsoever can be gained from their declaration. That's not true.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
I would say that belief and action are related, but not the same.

Again, the word Muslim has to have some meaning correct? You seem to be saying that when a person DECLARES THEMSELF to be a Muslim, no meaning whatsoever can be gained from their declaration. That's not true.

No, but you can find the case that one Muslim will declare that another Muslim is not a true one and so in reverse. We are doing a variant of no True Scotsman.
 

Gargovic Malkav

Well-Known Member
I've been called an Islamophobe too many times to count. Can someone please tell me what that means?

It means one who fears, dislikes, or hates Islam.
The word tends to have negative connotations, as people are often being called such when their opinions are found to have a negative bias.
 
Top