Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Eid Al-Adha
Yesterday at 11:21 PM

Jesus mythicism
by zeca
Yesterday at 10:14 AM

Qur'anic studies today
Yesterday at 06:33 AM

BBC Documentary: Searchin...
by zeca
June 13, 2024, 12:55 PM

France Muslims were in d...
by zeca
June 13, 2024, 10:52 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
June 11, 2024, 09:35 PM

New Britain
June 10, 2024, 09:25 PM

What happens in these day...
by akay
June 08, 2024, 12:12 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
June 07, 2024, 11:14 PM

ماذا يحدث هذه الايام؟؟؟.
by akay
June 07, 2024, 12:47 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
June 03, 2024, 08:08 AM

What's happened to the fo...
June 02, 2024, 06:12 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: An open letter to Atheist Muslims

 (Read 3265 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     OP - October 09, 2014, 07:40 PM

    Quote
    Dear Self Described Atheist Muslims,
    Let’s start with what I am not going to do.
    I am not going to accuse you of never knowing anything about Islam. Most of you have grown up in Muslim families, attended Muslim Sunday school, gone to Muslim summer camp, etc. You know the drill and the day to day of what many Muslims experience, especially in a communal sense. Also, I will not accuse you of being sympathetic to the bigotry and hatred projected towards Muslims. Despite your self-declared apostasy and atheism, I am sure that when you are in line in the airport, pulled over for a minor traffic violation, or opening an account at a bank, you are wholly identified as an “other” and your “Muslimy” name doesn’t help you in the least. I get it. You are still, like it or not, culturally tied to the community that you have identified with much of your life, despite now rejecting the faith that that community holds dear.

    A number of Assumptions
    There are several of you who have written on this topic. See here, here, and here. You say you want to help. I am sure you do. Your advice to Muslims that label themselves as “Moderate” can be summarized in a few bullet points:

    Muslims believe in the Quran as “God’s literal word” and this you say needs to stop
    Muslims claim that the Quran is misinterpreted, while terrorist groups around the world use the same text to justify violence; this you claim, shows that something is missing.
    Claims that the Quran contains metaphor, allegory, and is an interpreted document are just unacceptable, because unless all Muslims around the world accept these interpretations, then no one can accept them.
    The only way past all of this is to admit that the Quran is an errant document, can be changed or discarded, and for Muslims to adhere not to an ideological identity but instead to a community identity.
    I will not engage in appeals to emotion by waxing poetic on my background growing up as a Muslim. You know “as a distraught teen, I never X. Then I did, and my life changed because then I could Y, which lead me to Z…” all the while peppering the conversation with where I’ve lived and all of the random factoids on how Muslims around the world revere the Quran unrelated to the topic at hand that I know about. We get all that, because you’ve already said you identified with Muslims as a community of people.

    What I do want to talk to you about is your propensity to conflate your years, if not months, in Sunday schools around the world as some form of expertise on Islamic thought, theology, and scripture. Clearly, by mere frequency of mentioning that you’ve attended Sunday school, or that you’ve lived in a Muslim Majority country (extra points if you mention the KSA or the UAE) you are more than well qualified to speak about issues that members of other faiths reserve for clergy, subject matter experts, and seminarians. This is something that many of you are not in the least qualified to do. In fact if having lived in the Middle East is somehow indicative of your familiarity with Muslim doctrine, scriptural veracity, and its theological underpinnings, then living and studying there makes one more than qualified to comment on these issues. So at risk of sounding condescending and/or vain, I must state for the record that I am qualified to speak on issues of interpretation of religious texts. I have undergraduate degree in “Shariah and Islamic Studies” from the Islamic University of Medina. I hold a Master of Islamic Law degree from the same university. I have studied in faculty and privately with scholars, professors, and experts from around the Muslim world. I did say at the beginning that I’m not going to accuse you of never knowing anything about Islam. You do know something. But I will say that this one thing, namely Quranic interpretation, is something you severely lack expertise in to put it politely. You’ve based a lot of what you’ve said on several assumptions. Let’s talk about the assumptions above and some of the issues related to them.

    Who speaks for Islam
    Who really speaks for Islam? This is a crucial question when we talk about interpreting religious texts. We hear it all the time: Muslims do not have formal clergy. This is a true statement, well at least in part. It does not take into consideration that “clergy” is a term with considerable cultural baggage, namely the sacerdotal function of the priesthood in Christianity. By sacerdotal I mean “relating to or denoting a doctrine that ascribes sacrificial functions and spiritual or supernatural powers to ordained priests.” So yes, Muslim Imams and scholars are not imbued with supernatural powers, although they do fulfill a function in the community. Some of those functions are merely pastoral in nature, while others are scholarly and interpretive. The Muslim “Shaikh” or religious scholar is probably a lot closer in concept to the Jewish Rabbi than he is to the Catholic priest. Depending upon where he is in his studies and the role he fills in any given community, he may be a bit of a chaplain and counselor as well.

    In the end of the day, there is a broad self-regulating body of scholars that parse issues of interpretation and applicability to any given context. They are sometimes known as Muftis, Shaikhs, and as Imams (although this latter title is paradoxically reserved in Islamic circles for functional community prayer leaders as well as paragons of spiritual and juristic leadership).

    The Dilemma of Interpretive Egalitarianism
    We are faced with a dilemma when talking about interpretation: Either everyone’s interpretation is valid or it isn’t. If it is, then in reality regardless of whether Muslim’s call themselves “moderate” or not, your opinion of them and what they believe really matters very, very little in the large scheme of things. If everyone’s interpretation, on the other hand, is not valid, then there must be some qualifications for engaging in interpretation. I’d go on about the qualifications for those involved in interpretation of texts, but the details of that are beyond this article. The least we can say is that when someone makes a claim about the application of a verse to a particular context, the uninitiated will almost always ask “Is she qualified to do so?” much like when a person advises you to undergo a medical procedure the uninitiated will ALWAYS ask “Is she qualified to do so?” So if there are those that are qualified, through years of study to speak on the interpretation of the Quran and its application to a given context, then again your opinion and what they believe in reality matters very, very little in the large scheme of things.

    We seem to be at an impasse then. If we can no longer juxtapose our personal ideas of what the Quran says against the average “Moderate” Muslim, what are we supposed to do? We aren’t referencing scholarly opinion to validate our personal ideas about what the Quran says. In this case, how are we to know if the root cause is as stated again and again: the moderate Muslim’s inability to recognize scriptural inerrancy? In other words, the Quran makes people “Kookoo for Cocoa Puffs” crazy, so why won’t they just give it up?

    Is the Quran a “violent text”?
    Before we talk about reconsidering the infallibility of the Quran, let’s talk a little about the idea that the Quran justifies violence and is the catalyst for violence in the Muslim community. A recent Pew study showed that when asked about violence against individual civilians is justified, about 23% of respondents in 15 Muslim majority countries said that it can often or sometimes be justified. Crazy right! I know, it a shocker. But what is even more shocking, is when respondents from the US, Canada, East and Western Europe were asked a similar question, 24% of all respondents said the same thing. What is that allows a large segment of the Western world to allow (even if only sometimes and in certain situations) violence against individual civilians? Is the Quran? Certainly not. Is it the Bible? Highly doubtful. Is it popular media? Not sure. Could it be some other combination of factors? Possibly, but let’s leave that to statisticians and political scientists. We can only judge based on results. So far, violence and/or support for violence against individuals among all populations regardless of religion or region seem roughly split 25%/75%.

    “God’s literal word” and the Quran as an errant document
    Do Muslims believe the Quran to be God’s “literal” word? Yes and No. Yes, in the sense that the Quran is seen as representing the exact words of the original text as revealed by God. And No, in the sense that the Quran is not a book that is devoid of metaphor and allegory. What would be more correct then is to say that Muslims believe the Quran to be “God’s immutable word” because they believe it to be unchanging over time and unable to be changed.

    I know, I know. You say that even this change in definition is not enough. You say the Quran is used by violent terrorists, and “Moderate Muslim” claims of the Quran being misinterpreted just don’t cut it. Even if “Moderate Muslims” accept their own interpretations, until all Muslims around the world accept these interpretations, then they are useless. But the Quran is written in a human language, and languages do not work the way that you want them to. They are ambiguous, equivocal, and indefinite at times. One word may have several meanings. One sentence may mean numerous things when read in or out of context. A group of sentences may be stated in a certain context or time, then no longer be applicable. The author of those sentences may include them for historical value, but not make them effective or part of the story line. All of these topics are included in the disciplines studied to interpret the Quran, because all of these topics are inherent to understanding language.

    “Strike [them] upon the necks”
    Therefore, when I read in the Quran “so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip” I naturally say “Wow that sounds really bad!” But when I back up and read the ENTIRE verse, and see that the verse begins with a conjunction

    “When your Lord inspired to the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip”

    then immediately calls the reader’s attention to God’s command to a group of angels, not men. For the rational, fair-minded individual who understands what function language plays in speech, he should immediately realize that

    A) this verse is not speaking to me or any other human, and
    B) the conjunction is for “…tying up words and phrases and clauses. (here’s a link if you forgot)
    Because of the conjunction, he will read a few verses before this to see what the overall context is, and find out what this is referring to. Earliest exegetes of the Quran state that this is referring to Angelic assistance to the Prophet and Believers during the Battle of Badr.

    Yes, you don’t have to believe that this took place. And you certainly don’t have to believe in Angels, God, Angelic military forces, or anything of the sort. However what you do have to do is allow language to function the way it is supposed to. Allow texts to speak without projecting a particular meaning on to them detached from the text and the context. You claim that Moderate Muslims aid bigots by not accepting the Quran as fallible, and thus fall into the same category as the “extremists” who also believe the Quran to be immutable.

    Perversion of Texts for Political Gain
    What you fail to recognize is that you have projected an extra-textual meaning (the general use of violence in this case) onto a verse revealed about and speaking directly to an incident in medieval history (angelic hosts attending a medieval battle). Even if we do not accept the exegesis provided in the link above tying this to the Battle of Badr, the language of the verse is clear. This is not a general exhortation to commit violence in the name of religion. None of us are angels (literally or figuratively).

    The problem here is two-fold: You have not contextualized. You have not interpreted. You have not even allowed language to function as it should. Because the plain language composing this verse and surrounding it does not denote general, wanton violence against individuals. What you have done is misrepresented and perverted a text by injecting shallow meaning into a verse which aligns itself with your preferred construing of this text. In this case, that objective would be the necessity to reject it due to a perceived command to commit violence. This is outside of what the text and context actually denote, but if that allows you to appeal to your idea of the Quran as errant, so be it. This is not only disingenuous, it is the same thing that extremists do to bend texts to justify their use for violence. This is but one example of why the words we use, how we use them, and how we read them matter. There are many, many other examples of this, not just in the Quran but even in our own expressions and speech.

    What Is The Problem?
    Immutability is not the problem. Unqualified interpretation is. Those that take dichromatic stances as to what the Quran means are extremists. To solve these problems we need to let languages and interpretive disciplines function as they are designed. I find it telling that the shallow misinterpretations of religious and irreligious extremists almost always lead to one thing: the escalation of conflict and the promotion of violence, instead of leading to dialogue and mutual understanding.


    http://www.joebradford.net/an-open-letter-to-atheist-muslims-or-is-the-quran-a-violent-text-or-is-your-reading-a-tad-off/

    "Who really knows?
    Who will here proclaim it?
    Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
    The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
    Who then knows whence it has arisen?"- Rig Veda, 10:129-6
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #1 - October 09, 2014, 07:43 PM

    Quote
    The problem here is two-fold: You have not contextualized. You have not interpreted.


    ah yes, the old out of context and interpretation thing, of the inerrrant word of god, and that is the issue, not the actual hateful bigots and extremists that take it literally.  

    Same shit, different day, the only thing that matters is defending the perfection of the Quran, with sophistry and dissimulation

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #2 - October 09, 2014, 07:47 PM

    From bible thumping Christian to quran thumping Muslim. Don't seem much difference was made.

    "Blessed are they who can laugh at themselves, for they shall never cease to be amused."
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #3 - October 09, 2014, 07:51 PM

    Quote
    I have undergraduate degree in “Shariah and Islamic Studies” from the Islamic University of Medina. I hold a Master of Islamic Law degree from the same university.


    cool story bro

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #4 - October 09, 2014, 07:52 PM

    Verses dealing with war can often be put in the context of defensive war. Stoning,chopping of limbs,murder of ex muslims, violence towards women and inequality etc, those things don't have a context which can put them in a good light.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #5 - October 09, 2014, 07:54 PM

    Quote
    This is not only disingenuous, it is the same thing that extremists do to bend texts to justify their use for violence.


    aye, there it is, the money shot. Critiquing Islamic scripture makes you exactly the same as those who kill and hate and oppress in the name of scripture  wacko

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #6 - October 09, 2014, 08:04 PM

    Billy,

    But have you considered his argument about 47:4 ? He says it's meant for angels to smite the necks, not to believers.  Huh?

    "Who really knows?
    Who will here proclaim it?
    Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
    The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
    Who then knows whence it has arisen?"- Rig Veda, 10:129-6
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #7 - October 09, 2014, 08:06 PM

    dude, its sophistry and bullshit of the highest kind

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #8 - October 09, 2014, 08:50 PM

    Really, this is so condescending. If I were an ex-muslim things like this would really piss me off. Well.. it pisses me off anyway. People can make up their own minds without other people telling them they've got it all wrong.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #9 - October 09, 2014, 08:55 PM

    Well Ali A. Rizvi will perhaps create a response as this piece is built over his recent article in The Huffington Post:

    An Open Letter to Moderate Muslims

    (In case you wasn't aware)


    Danish Never-Moose adopted by the kind people on the CEMB-forum
    Ex-Muslim chat (Unaffliated with CEMB). Safari users: Use "#ex-muslims" as the channel name. CEMB chat thread.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #10 - October 10, 2014, 12:15 AM

    Context, context, context, that dried-out old chestnut. Live life as a Muslim and you'll get all the context you need to become an ex-Muslim.

    If the <insert holy book> was really a divinely-sourced document, there wouldn't need to be room for interpretation. It would just be a continually updated list of do's and don'ts in all the languages of the world. Otherwise we're all victims of a trickster God or a supremely ill-tempered one who deserves not worship, but a middle finger.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #11 - October 10, 2014, 08:33 AM

    Quote
    Otherwise we're all victims of a trickster God or a supremely ill-tempered one who deserves not worship, but a middle finger.


    Isn't God mad?

    How would one go about sectioning God?

    Quote
    Being sectioned means being admitted to hospital whether or not you agree to it. The legal authority for your admission to hospital comes from the Mental Health Act rather than from your consent. This is usually because you are unable or unwilling to consent.
     
    The term ‘sectioned’ just means using a ‘section’ or paragraph from the Mental Health Act as the authority for your detention. A better word is 'detained'. You are detained under the Mental Health Act. The paragraph or ‘section’ number is often used so a patient may be told they are on a section 2 or section 3.
     
    How often does this happen?

    The Mental Health Act is used about 50,000 times a year in England and Wales. This isn’t 50,000 people because some people may be detained several times within a year.
     
    Why may I be detained?

    If you have, or are thought to have;
    1.      a mental illness which needs assessment or treatment which is

    2.      sufficiently serious that it is necessary for

    a.      your health or safety, or

    b.      for the protection of other people,

    3.      and you need to be in hospital to have the assessment or treatment. And

    4.      you are unable or unwilling to agree to admission.

    If you are on a section 3, that is for treatment, then the treatment you need must be available at the hospital in which you’re detained.


    http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/healthadvice/problemsdisorders/beingsectionedengland.aspx

    When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.


    A.A. Milne,

    "We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #12 - October 12, 2014, 02:55 PM

    Somebody tell this venerable scholar that there is no such a thing as Sunday School in Islam.

    He's no friend to the friendless
    And he's the mother of grief
    There's only sorrow for tomorrow
    Surely life is too brief
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #13 - October 12, 2014, 02:56 PM

     Cheesy
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #14 - October 12, 2014, 03:00 PM

    The whole thing is so incredibly bad. It's hard to choose where to begin critiquing. "No, silly atheists, God didn't tell humans to behead people and chop of their fingers, he told his loving ANGELS to do it. That makes our religion way cooler."
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #15 - October 12, 2014, 09:59 PM

    I see many muslims perpetually trying to convince non muslims that the quran isn’t violent, barbaric etc. This is simply a PR exercise of damage limitation to try and save islams reputation.

    The people who need to be convinced that islam is some hippy shit is the muslims who behave violently and barbaric and say their actions are mainly for Islamic reasons and quote tons of quranic verses, not non-believers. This would actually be a beneficial exercise that will reduce islamic terrorism rather then commenting on what Dawkins thinks of islam.

    I’ve never seen for example a Islamic Scholar who is completely against terrorism in all forms publicly debate/discuss a Islamic Scholar who is Pro-terrorism. Why is this? I can only think this is because the moderate scholar actually knows the Pro-terrorism Islamic Scholar has a more intellectually candid position on Islam on a scriptural basis.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #16 - October 12, 2014, 10:24 PM

    You're definitely forced into an, "Okay, but let's think about this logically...the Quran says God is fair, but it wouldn't be fair to lock up and beat women, so we must be understanding that wrong!" sort of apologist bullshit position that you hear all the time, and that we got an earful of with Bigmo not too far back.

    If you pit a good apologist on the side of peace and another on the side of violence, the former is going to be relying on some faulty logic and smoke and mirrors, and the latter is going to be able to say, "No, look, it says it right here." Wouldn't blame a moderate Muslim for not wanting to touch that.
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #17 - October 13, 2014, 12:34 AM

    Pick out the devils!  wooferz

    The Quran came from a man who believed that black dogs are devils.  devil girl

    Sahih Muslim Book 004, No. 1032: Abu Dharr reported: The Messenger of 'Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguish it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil.

    Need I say anymore?

    Kind Regards,
    Farside of Wikiislam.net  Smiley
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #18 - October 13, 2014, 01:10 AM

    No, farout brother, you need not say anymore  Afro Afro

    Hi
  • An open letter to Atheist Muslims
     Reply #19 - October 13, 2014, 01:12 AM

    Btw, I only wanted to give you one thumbs up. The second was caused by a spasm, bought on by tiredness. Please disregard it, kind sir?

    Hi
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »