Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Search for Moderate Islam
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(5)
Message 106 of 432 (737193)
09-19-2014 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jon
09-13-2014 7:14 PM


Ignoring the various tangents and side alleys this topic has taken.
Is there a moderate Islam? Yes, there is. It is what is practiced by moderate Muslims, who do exist, believe it or not. Is it an organized branch of Islam? Not that I know of.
Is there a moderate Christianity? Yes, there is. It is what is practiced by moderate Christians, who do exist, believe it or not. Is it an organized branch of Christianity? Yes, but only because of the influence of humanism and secularism.
Taken on their own, both Islam and Christianity are extremely intolerant of any other religions, even to the point of motivating physical violence and even genocide against those other religions. Both religions have a set of very draconian laws and punishments for all kinds of infractions, even non-existent ones invented by the religion itself. Both religions also have many peaceful and socially and personally beneficial elements in addition to the malice and mayhem.
Moderate Muslims and Christians both are able to be moderate by not taking their religions so seriously. They are able to overlook or downplay the malicious negative elements and concentrate on the beneficial positive elements.
Similarly, the Muslims and Christians who really take their religions seriously are not allowed to overlook the malicious negative elements and even find that they must embrace those elements. That is when either religion becomes a very definite problem.
What allows Muslims and Christians to be moderate is a society that does not allow that religion any political control. A secular government, preferably based on humanistic principles such as those that the US Constitution and Bill of Rights were based on, is an ideal environment for Muslim and Christian moderates, though one must still guard against religious fanatics exerting too much influence.
Obviously, Islamic governments which exercise Sharia law are not secular governments that are needed for moderate Muslims to thrive. Moderates will still exist in such societies, but they must remain closeted in order to survive.
Similarly, any government that would implement "God's Absolute and Immutable Law", AKA "Biblical Law", would not be a secular government and as such would drive moderate Christians deep underground.
Islamic governments, Christian governments. No difference. Except that secular governments have existed and operated in the "Christian" West for far too long for the governed to readily hand control over to the implementation of "true Christianity's" "God's Law", whereas Sharia Law has a much longer history in Islamic societies.
Of course and unfortunately, even when you do have a secular government that promotes religious tolerance, you will have members of that government's society who take their religions far too seriously and who ache to impose all the malicious negative aspects of their religions on the rest of society, including the draconian imposition of their own particular "God's Absolute and Immutable Law".
Muslim extremists, Christian extremists. No difference. Except the West has far more experience keeping the Christian extremists in check.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jon, posted 09-13-2014 7:14 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 10:50 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 432 (737198)
09-19-2014 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by dwise1
09-19-2014 1:48 AM


Is there a moderate Islam? Yes, there is. It is what is practiced by moderate Muslims, who do exist, believe it or not. Is it an organized branch of Islam? Not that I know of.
Is there a moderate Christianity? Yes, there is. It is what is practiced by moderate Christians, who do exist, believe it or not. Is it an organized branch of Christianity? Yes, but only because of the influence of humanism and secularism.
Well, that's perhaps part of the issue then.
It can be very difficult to pull people from the extreme forms of Islam when there is no coherent moderate form to pull them to. Whatever the reason for Christianity (and, well, pretty much every other religion) having an organized moderate form, the fact is that a moderate form exists; it is readily accessible to new converts; it is well-enough defined that it can be set in opposition to fundamentalist forms; etc.
Is Christianity (or any other religion) perfect? Of course not. But there seems to be something fundamentally missing from Islam that other religions and belief systems do possess and can point to unanimously as 'moderate'. And you seem to agree that, in the scheme of things, there really is no moderate Islam, especially not in the sense that there's a moderate Christianity, a moderate Judaism, etc.
But when I come to look for a moderate religion, what do you think I am looking for? I can find moderate people easily enough. And I can find moderate people who believe moderate things. But moderate people believing moderate things isn't what makes a moderate religion: the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
So I think a moderate religion should in some way resemble what we know to be moderate religions, otherwise we must ask why we classify them under the same label.
Islamic governments, Christian governments. No difference. Except that secular governments have existed and operated in the "Christian" West for far too long for the governed to readily hand control over to the implementation of "true Christianity's" "God's Law", whereas Sharia Law has a much longer history in Islamic societies.
This is misleading. The west was historically run by powers within the Christian church; it was, essentially, a theocracy. It was, in fact, mostly Christians who fought to move away from such a system. It was Christians who drafted the Bill of Rights and the freedoms of religion that it granted. It was Christians who fought to end slavery. The modern ideals embraced by humanists and secularists are largely the product of moderate Christianity.
These ideals emerged as moderate Christianity came to the forefront of the religion as a whole and largely (and peacefully) suppressed or otherwise quieted the extreme forms: They are the product of an ideology revolution within Christianity.
And maybe, just maybe, Islam is going through such a revolution now. Perhaps an organized moderate Islam will appear at the top of the pile and in the majority when the dust, smoke, and blown-up bodies settle. However, even if this is the case, we live in the 21st century and no one is okay with religious ideologies battling one another on a stage where ammo consists of actual bullets and bombs instead of intellectual arguments (like we see in the debates within other religions, for example). If the world we have now is the world required for the emergence of a moderate Islam, then I think it is fair to ask ourselves whether it's worth it. Is Islam so important to the world that we must preserve it at any cost under the guise of religious freedom and diversity? Would it be wrong to say that perhaps we don't want to bother with a moderate Islam or any Islam at all given the religion's clear inability to work out its differences in ways that don't get mass numbers of people killed (notice, Muslims are mostly just killing one another)?
Typically religious freedom and respect for the concern of other religions go out the window when human life and individual liberties are at stake.
How long will we make exceptions for Islam?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by dwise1, posted 09-19-2014 1:48 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by GDR, posted 09-19-2014 2:16 PM Jon has replied
 Message 132 by Jaderis, posted 09-22-2014 3:34 AM Jon has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(3)
Message 108 of 432 (737209)
09-19-2014 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Jon
09-19-2014 10:50 AM


Jon writes:
Typically religious freedom and respect for the concern of other religions go out the window when human life and individual liberties are at stake.
How long will we make exceptions for Islam?
The problem is, how do you go about not making an exception. Do you drop more bombs? Do you send in the troops?
Ultimately the only way to beat extreme Islam is to demonstrate that there is a better way to live. You can make temporary gains with bombs and troops but ultimately the only way this form of extremism is going to be eliminated is by changing hearts and minds.
Metaphorically speaking I would carpet bomb the whole place with food and computers. Food to demonstrate compassion and caring and computers to educate and give the men and women that have no contact with the outside world access to it.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 10:50 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 5:54 PM GDR has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 109 of 432 (737211)
09-19-2014 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Coyote
09-18-2014 11:50 PM


Coyote writes:
Islam is far more in need of an Enlightenment than a Reformation.
Alleluia, you got that right Coyote! I couldn't agree more with you. All people of Islam are certifiable crazy. There are no moderates! Just take a quick look at their recent history:
1. In the 80s, Afghanistan kept providing small-weapon/arms to violent american radicals to keep the moderate Canadians from interfering with american politics. This help kept american population unstable and impoverished, and it sowed the seeds to world-wide terrorism in the 90s and ultimately 9/11
2. Iraq's sanctions on america in the 1990s caused about a half a million american children to die. Even one of the Iraqi's leaders said the cost of american children's deaths are worth it. Their so-called moderates said neary a peep. Psychopaths!
3. And then, after the Iraqi government FULLY supported the american government's war crimes using chemical weapons, the Iraqis had the temerity to invade america and cause about one million innocent civilian deaths.
Finally, to this day, the "moderate" population allows their war-criminal leaders to just walk freely among their society.
Barbaric! Simply barbaric people and religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Coyote, posted 09-18-2014 11:50 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 4:38 PM dronestar has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 432 (737219)
09-19-2014 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by dronestar
09-19-2014 3:25 PM


Pop-Culture History: A No-Go
Your attitude is nothing but the pop-culture bastardization of modern western thought: to view all motives as economic or political and believe that this is true across time and throughout the world.
But this is not the case. Not all people are so motivated, especially in different cultures where economic and political concerns may play no roles whatsoever in decision making.
The Middle East has been at war with itself since before the Americas were even discovered. Pretending that the West is responsible for these conflicts is just a veiled attempt to inflate your own sense of importance in the world.
The West did not cause the instability of the Middle East, even if its attempts to fix the problem have often failed or even made matters worse.
It might be chic to pretend that the Crusades never 'really ended', but it is by no means factual.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by dronestar, posted 09-19-2014 3:25 PM dronestar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 5:31 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 111 of 432 (737221)
09-19-2014 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Jon
09-19-2014 4:38 PM


The Middle East
The Middle East has been at war with itself since before the Americas were even discovered. Pretending that the West is responsible for these conflicts is just a veiled attempt to inflate your own sense of importance in the world.
The West did not cause the instability of the Middle East, even if its attempts to fix the problem have often failed or even made matters worse.
It might be chic to pretend that the Crusades never 'really ended', but it is by no means factual.
Well it was the Crusades (and the Reconquista). Then the Ottomans. The Ottoman Empire wasn't 'at war with itself', just a few conflicts with Persia and the like. But they collapsed around WWI and their former territory was divided up by France and Britain (Sykes—Picot Agreement) and some of it promised to the Jews (Balfour Declaration). Some Arabs tried to assert independence but Europe's superior position gave them the power. Jews were given the all clear to start moving into the region of Palestine.
Then came the revolutions and struggles for independence, some worked out (eg., Syria, Egypt) others didn't (eg., Iraq, 1941 (courtesy of the British (Saddam was about 4 years old at the time))).
As WWII built up and took place, the rest of the nations declared independence. Afterwards the British left the area completely leaving behind the new State of Israel in a social context of Arab Nationalism vs Zionism resulting immediately in the 1948 war. Mini-Hitlers were being spawned all over the place as people started to promise to destroy the now hated Israel and well.... the rest is modern history.
What makes you think the West don't have responsibility?
Did you get chance to look at the Moderate Islam I pointed you towards yet?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 4:38 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 6:05 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 432 (737222)
09-19-2014 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by GDR
09-19-2014 2:16 PM


Inequality of Beliefs
My point was that we need to make sure we are not becoming complacent with human-rights violations simply in the name of religious freedom.
Not all religions are created equal. Not all systems of morality and justice deserve the same respect or even tolerance.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by GDR, posted 09-19-2014 2:16 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by GDR, posted 09-19-2014 6:38 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 133 by Jaderis, posted 09-22-2014 3:49 AM Jon has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 432 (737223)
09-19-2014 6:05 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Modulous
09-19-2014 5:31 PM


Re: The Middle East
Well it was the Crusades (and the Reconquista). Then the Ottomans. The Ottoman Empire wasn't 'at war with itself', just a few conflicts with Persia and the like. But they collapsed around WWI and their former territory was divided up by France and Britain (Sykes—Picot Agreement) and some of it promised to the Jews (Balfour Declaration). Some Arabs tried to assert independence but Europe's superior position gave them the power. Jews were given the all clear to start moving into the region of Palestine.
Then came the revolutions and struggles for independence, some worked out (eg., Syria, Egypt) others didn't (eg., Iraq, 1941 (courtesy of the British (Saddam was about 4 years old at the time))).
As WWII built up and took place, the rest of the nations declared independence. Afterwards the British left the area completely leaving behind the new State of Israel in a social context of Arab Nationalism vs Zionism resulting immediately in the 1948 war. Mini-Hitlers were being spawned all over the place as people started to promise to destroy the now hated Israel and well.... the rest is modern history.
What makes you think the West don't have responsibility?
Don't be ridiculous, the Islamic world has been at war with itself since the death of their prophet.
Did you get chance to look at the Moderate Islam I pointed you towards yet?
I'm still looking for the common thread.
Is there a common thread?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 5:31 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 6:30 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 114 of 432 (737225)
09-19-2014 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jon
09-19-2014 6:05 PM


Re: The Middle East
Don't be ridiculous, the Islamic world has been at war with itself since the death of their prophet.
So which of those ancient conflicts do you think is most responsible for the modern day instability of the region?
I'm still looking for the common thread.
Is there a common thread?
Whose work have you studied so far?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 6:05 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 10:33 PM Modulous has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 115 of 432 (737226)
09-19-2014 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Jon
09-19-2014 5:54 PM


Re: Inequality of Beliefs
Jon writes:
My point was that we need to make sure we are not becoming complacent with human-rights violations simply in the name of religious freedom.
Not all religions are created equal. Not all systems of morality and justice deserve the same respect or even tolerance.
OK. So we don't respect or tolerate Islamic extremism. We can do something about it in our own countries. In my country specifically we have avoided acts of terrorism by Muslims opposed to terrorism. However, what can or should we do in foreign countries?
It's a given by everyone on this forum that we don't respect militant Islamic extremism. What do you propose we do. The response of our governments has mostly been to drop bombs and arm and train those that are currently our allies in this situation. (There has been some humanitarian responses as well in terms of food etc.) This may hold things back temporarily and maybe we're doing the best thing for now but ultimately just as ISIS has largely replaced al qaeda, ISIS will simply be replaced by a different militant group when the strength of ISIS is diminished.
It seems to me that we in the west seem to think that issues like this can be dealt in one leader's term of office. We want results now. This problem has been around for generations and there are no quick fixes. It is largely about changing attitudes one person at a time. Our big mistake would be to lump them all in together.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 5:54 PM Jon has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 432 (737235)
09-19-2014 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Modulous
09-19-2014 6:30 PM


Re: The Middle East
Whose work have you studied so far?
I don't think 'studied' is the right word. But I browsed through a few and have come up without much.
If you see a common thread, it might be better to just point it out instead of presenting me with long lists of names to spend countless hours reviewing in search for some commonality.
I have been reading the Wikipedia page on liberal movements in Islam and have not been too impressed so far. There seems little agreement on anything.
Might we say that there are Muslims attempting to reform Islam and that no agreeably reformed stage has been clearly reached?
So which of those ancient conflicts do you think is most responsible for the modern day instability of the region?
Conflict and instability in the Middle East are equal symptoms. There is something else that causes both of them and has been causing both of them for many centuries now.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 6:30 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 11:21 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 117 of 432 (737236)
09-19-2014 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Jon
09-19-2014 10:33 PM


Re: The Middle East
I don't think 'studied' is the right word. But I browsed through a few and have come up without much.
If you see a common thread, it might be better to just point it out instead of presenting me with long lists of names to spend countless hours reviewing in search for some commonality.
Ah! You want me to do a thematic analysis of the collected works of Reform Islam and present the common themes that run throughout? No. No thanks. You want to find moderate Islam, by which you mean Progressive Islam? There it is. Enjoy learning about it. Let me know what you think. I don't see any rhetorical requirement that I find 'common threads', as I am here only to assert existence.
Now, in the meantime, rather than trying to do a wide study of a large body of work to find the commonalities, which is obviously a burdensome demand in this context, let's discuss just one of them.
Nasr Abu Zayd:
quote:
From the beginning of his academic career, he developed a renewed hermeneutic view of the Qur'an and further Islamic holy texts, arguing that they should be interpreted in the historical and cultural context of their time. The mistake of many Muslim scholars was to see the Qur'an only as a text, which led conservatives as well as liberals to a battle of quotations, each group seeing clear verses (when on their side) and ambiguous ones (when in contradiction with their vision). But this type of controversy led both conservatives and liberals to produce authoritative hermeneutics.
This vision of the Qur'an as a text was the vision of the elites of Muslim societies, whereas, at the same time, the Qur'an as an oral discourse played the most important part in the understanding of the masses. Nasr Abu Zayd called for another reading of the holy book through a humanistic hermeneutics, an interpretation which sees the Qur'an as a living phenomenon, a discourse. Hence, the Qur'an can be "the outcome of dialogue, debate, despite argument, acceptance and rejection". This liberal interpretation of Islam should open space for new perspectives on the religion and should account for social change in Muslim societies.
That is why Abu Zayd's analysis can find in the Qur'an several insistent calls for social justice. For instance, when Muhammad was busy preaching to the rich people of Quraysh, and did not pay attention to a poor blind fellow named Ibn Umm Maktūm who came asking the Prophet for advice, the Qur'an strongly blames Muhammad's attitude (chapter 80:1—10).
As well, he found a tendency to improve women's rights, arguing that the Qur'anic discourse was built in a patriarchal society, and therefore the addressees were naturally males, who received permission to marry, divorce, and marry off their female relatives, hence, it is possible to imagine that Muslim women receive the same rights. The classical position of the modern ‘ulamā’ about that issue is understandable as "they still believe in superiority of the male in the family".
Here is something he wrote:
quote:
Now, the urgent question is how we can spread this knowledge to the wider public. This problem is the same for Muslims living in Muslim countries as for Muslims living in the West. We must consider how we should transmit this information to children and adults. The majority of Muslims are not aware of the historical background and the temptation is to quote texts and explain them literally, thus, understand them out of their historical context and interpret them as being universal rulings of God for believers in every time. That is a simplistic way of reading the Qur’an, but not a historically correct one. It comes from ignoring the fact that the Qur’an is a message and a revelation.
An English language interview:
Does that sound like the makings of a moderate Islam?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Jon, posted 09-19-2014 10:33 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Jon, posted 09-20-2014 12:39 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 432 (737246)
09-20-2014 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Modulous
09-19-2014 11:21 PM


Re: The Middle East
Ah! You want me to do a thematic analysis of the collected works of Reform Islam and present the common themes that run throughout? No. No thanks. You want to find moderate Islam, by which you mean Progressive Islam? There it is. Enjoy learning about it. Let me know what you think. I don't see any rhetorical requirement that I find 'common threads', as I am here only to assert existence.
There are reformers; I won't deny that. But that has never been the issue of this thread. The issue has been whether there is a moderate Islam.
It seems like your source finds the same problems with Islam as I've mentioned:
quote:
Nasr Abu Zayd (emphases added):
The majority of Muslims are not aware of the historical background and the temptation is to quote texts and explain them literally, thus, understand them out of their historical context and interpret them as being universal rulings of God for believers in every time.
This seems to fit the impression given by a quick read of the Wikipedia article I cited earlier:
quote:
Wikipedia on Liberal Movements within Islam (emphases added):
Muslim liberals focus on individual autonomy in the interpretation of the Qur'an and ethics rather than focusing on the literal interpretation of the Qur'an. This thinking may have a precedent in the traditions of Sufi and Islamic mysticism[9] although different in many ways, including the purpose of interpretation. The reformists, however, are often criticized by more traditional scholars, as some of the beliefs are seen by the 4 traditional Islamic madhahabs as "kufr" or unbelief. As such, many Muslims believe this phenomenon to be the result of culture and individualistic philosophical ideas, rather than being based on the textual evidence of the Qu'ran and the Sahih Hadith. Those Muslims thus conclude that the Islamic reform movement has no place in the Islamic Shariah.
...
It is also accepted by most liberal Muslims that a woman may lead the state, and that women should not be segregated from men in society or in masjids. These views are generally rejected by traditional Muslim scholars, including scholars from the four schools of Islamic thought, as they have been in the past.
Or Ayaan Hirsi Ali in her discussion with Sam Harris (also cited earlier):
quote:
Ayaan Hiris Ali from Lifting the Veil of Islamophobia (emphases added):
Muslims who do not want to live under sharia law are attempting to separate religion from politics. But they won’t be able to do that unless they address these doctrinal issues. They won’t be able to win the argument against the Muslim Brotherhood, for instance, because like every other Islamist or jihadist organization, the Brotherhood is delivering a message consistent with what’s really in the Koran and the hadith. If you want to stand up to these people, you have to address the doctrine. You have to look at the Koran and say that there are parts of it you don’t consider moral anymore.
People arguing for a moderate Islam, such as Nasr Abu Zayd, seem to be working on their own; they are reformers not backed by a coherent moderate Islam or moderate Muslim community.
Does that sound like the makings of a moderate Islam?
Sure. But the 'making of' implies that it is not yet made and so does not yet existmaking cookies is not the same as having cookies.
Similarly, the existence of reformers shows the need for reform and that reform has not yet come (otherwise there'd be no need for reformers). This means that today, as the matter stands, reformers such as Nasr Abu Zayd have not been successful in creating a moderate Islam, and so it is not unreasonable to say that, for now, moderate Islam does not exist. It is, instead, in the process of coming into existence, and whether its emergence is successful or notwhether it will emerge as the dominant form of Islamonly history and many, many lost lives, will tell.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Modulous, posted 09-19-2014 11:21 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Modulous, posted 09-20-2014 1:46 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


(2)
Message 119 of 432 (737248)
09-20-2014 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Jon
09-20-2014 12:39 PM


liberal Islam
There are reformers; I won't deny that. But that has never been the issue of this thread. The issue has been whether there is a moderate Islam.
And I've shown you moderate (and even more liberal) Islam. All it takes now is for you to acknowledge its existence rather continuously finding ways to move the goalposts around.
It seems like your source finds the same problems with Islam as I've mentioned
Yes, reasonable and educated people had noticed this before you pointed it out, funnily enough. But this is not a thread about the problems of Islam, it is a thread about the existence of liberal Islam.
People arguing for a moderate Islam, such as Nasr Abu Zayd, seem to be working on their own; they are reformers not backed by a coherent moderate Islam or moderate Muslim community.
So at first, I gave you too many names now we're quibbling by how many backers they have. Why don't you do some research and give me some numbers about how many people support Al-Qemany or Abu Zayd? Why do you keep asking me to do more and more work? Why haven't you done any for yourself? Do you care about finding what you are looking for - or did you just want to gloat about how civilized you are compared with the ignorant primitive extremist Muslims? Are you still going to deny liberal Islam exists? That things like this are actually happening and they can only even be attempted if there is a community that agrees. That books on liberal Islam are selling, and it isn't just the critics making the purchases?
If your OP was 'liberal Islam seems to be in the minority', I wouldn't be arguing with you. But moderate Islam - Islam that does not believe in flying planes into buildings or murdering people on the streets, that's everywhere. Yes, they have different moral standards than you do (community standards being more important than individual liberties, punishments may vary, the normal right-wing conservative obsession with 'clean-living' and modesty, different ideas of social roles and how to bank etc., etc.). Liberal Islam takes courage to promote, as liberal Christianity used to.
Similarly, the existence of reformers shows the need for reform
It's an Abrahamic religion. It'll need reforming until it doesn't exist. There are reformers in Christianity trying to get homosexuality more accepted, for instance. When you are looking for moderate Islam, you are going to find reformers. What the hell else were you expecting? That's what a moderate version of a religion requires.
This means that today, as the matter stands, reformers such as Nasr Abu Zayd have not been successful in creating a moderate Islam
So what is the Islam that they have created to be called? What should we call the people that follow this religion?
so it is not unreasonable to say that, for now, moderate Islam does not exist
Yes it does - it's right THERE!
I'm sorry that in order for a religion to exist it needs to be publicly spoken about by a certain number of people in English before you'll acknowledge it. Trust me, there are plenty of Muslims that feel this way about their religion. Rather than denying their existence, how about you amplify their voices so we're not just hearing about the extremists?
It is, instead, in the process of coming into existence
It exists right now. I've lead you to the water. I've dipped your nose to the water. I've pulled your tongue into the water. The rest is up to you.
whether its emergence is successful or notwhether it will emerge as the dominant form of Islamonly history and many, many lost lives, will tell.
Which is what the rest of the educated world has been saying for a long time. I'm glad you finally caught up with this - but you aren't going to help it emerge by denying its existence and reinforcing that Islam is all about the 8th Century morality and social views.
For someone who didn't seem to know about the existence of the Five Pillars, the Six Articles, the Hadith of Gabriel - it seems a little rich for you to pontificate on this subject don't you think? Perhaps its time for me to give up and just let you believe that you have something new and true to say on the subject despite literally not knowing the first thing about it a few weeks ago . Deny the existence of something that exists if you like, it just kind of makes you look like a dick.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Jon, posted 09-20-2014 12:39 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Jon, posted 09-20-2014 3:52 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 432 (737255)
09-20-2014 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Modulous
09-20-2014 1:46 PM


Re: liberal Islam
You still seem incapable of grasping the difference between moderate Muslims and moderate Islam.
Yes, they have different moral standards than you do (community standards being more important than individual liberties, punishments may vary, the normal right-wing conservative obsession with 'clean-living' and modesty, different ideas of social roles and how to bank etc., etc.).
I suppose it's easy to view the oppression of women as a 'conservative obsession with "clean-living" and modesty' when you are not a woman who is being oppressed by those obsessions.
community standards being more important than individual liberties
Oh come on, Mod! The concern for individual liberties is the definition of liberalism. The goal of maintaining 'community standards' is the same nonsense behind all the conservative attempts to restrict free expression, sexual freedoms, etc.
Such crap has no place in a moderate or liberal society, culture, or religion.
It's an Abrahamic religion. It'll need reforming until it doesn't exist. There are reformers in Christianity trying to get homosexuality more accepted, for instance. When you are looking for moderate Islam, you are going to find reformers. What the hell else were you expecting? That's what a moderate version of a religion requires.
This thread isn't about other religions.
Rather than denying their existence, how about you amplify their voices so we're not just hearing about the extremists?
Because I am not a Muslim. It's not my religion to fight for.
This statement of yours should be directed at Muslimsmoderate ones.
Which is what the rest of the educated world has been saying for a long time. I'm glad you finally caught up with this - but you aren't going to help it emerge by denying its existence and reinforcing that Islam is all about the 8th Century morality and social views.
Do you honestly think that I have any obligation to defend someone else's religion? I'm here to find moderate Islam, not to fight for it. You shouldn't be surprised that I am scrutinizing your points, because that is how a debate is conducted.
Implying that I am uneducated because I refuse to simply accept your arguments outright is to take a pretty low road.
For someone who didn't seem to know about the existence of the Five Pillars, the Six Articles, the Hadith of Gabriel - it seems a little rich for you to pontificate on this subject don't you think? Perhaps its time for me to give up and just let you believe that you have something new and true to say on the subject despite literally not knowing the first thing about it a few weeks ago . Deny the existence of something that exists if you like, it just kind of makes you look like a dick.
More on the low road, I see.
I guess I will have to be content with being seen as an ignorant American Islamophobe. Your spottings of moderate Muslims are simply not going to convince me of the existence of a moderate Islam.
The truth is that I really hope that a moderate Islam can emerge swiftly in the Islamic world and put the fundamentalist Muslims out of business. That peace can prevail over violence.
But if that cannot happen then I will settle for just getting rid of Islam all together.
I have no feelings for the religion and I care more about keeping people alive than keeping them faithful.
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Modulous, posted 09-20-2014 1:46 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Modulous, posted 09-20-2014 5:11 PM Jon has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024