Skip to main content

"Three Things About Islam" youtube video

This post is about the Quran, specifically a viral youtube video about how "evil" the Quran is. I am a christian, not a muslim. Since I am not a religious scholar, I probably misunderstand some things about every religion. What follows is my opinion.

--------------------------------

There are a billion and a half muslims in the world; maybe you are a muslim, maybe not. regardless of what you or I think of their book, most muslims are not terrorists, and are not trying to take over our government or create sharia law. So our options, as a society, are
1. fight against all muslims and their religion
or
2. figure out a way to stop killing each other

I think most Muslims and Christians -- and others as well -- prefer option 2.

Whoever made that video obviously thinks the Quran is evil. Well, even if this were true, what is your solution?
Should we fight a war against all 1.57 billion people who call themselves muslim (ignoring that fact that almost all of them live normal, peaceful lives, and that many of them are part of our society and even military)?
Do you think 1.57 billion muslims will watch that video and magically abandon their religion?

Right now, I teach many Iranian students. They grew up in a theocracy, being told America is "evil." Now, they tell me, the young people of Iran are muslim, but do NOT want sharia or ayatollahs. Many students have told me they love America, that it's the best place to be muslim, because the government doesn't control or interfere with religion. They do not choose to live in a place with a religious government.

Are they lying? Is this a spy network of taqiyya, as the video warns?

-----------------------------------------

It makes sense that the youtube propaganda video is trying "to inform non-muslims," because muslims would know the things it says are not true.

Now, according to that video about the Quran, all muslims want a religious government -- but I've met and taught many of them, and they do not want religious government at all. Students from Arab muslim countries generally do not like their own government. Of course, only 20% of muslims are Arab; governments of Turkey and Indonesia are a different story. These two countries are almost entirely muslim, and now have strong democracies. Fundamentalist political parties exist, but do not get many votes in either country. Turkey is constitutionally secular -- their separation of church and state is even stronger than in the U.S.

The video presents a ridiculous version of "taqiyya"; in the Quran (chapter 16 verse 106), taqiyya was for muslims who live under governments that would kill them for their main beliefs (called "pillars," see below). Muslims are supposed to profess faith, but are parmitted to deny their religion while being tortured or threatened. For centuries this has been a minor theological issue, used specifically by Shia muslims living under Sunni governments, and vice-versa; it was also used by muslims in authoritarian christian countries, such as Spain after 1492.

Taqiyyah does not permit muslims to lie in an effort to spread islam. That was in the video but was NEVER part of muslim theology or practice (Shafique 2007).

Overall, I disagree with that video about the Quran. It makes me angry. It looks professional, but the information is deceptive, different from what I have read and what muslims have told me. Somebody is intentionally making videos with false information.

--------------------------------------------------------

So the passage written later takes precedence? Take a look at these verses -

verses from the beginning of the Quran:
Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. (2:62)
O People of the Book! Let us rally to a common formula to be binding on both us and you: That we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, lords and patrons other than God. (3:64)

verse from the middle of the Quran:
O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of God: As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, "Who will be my helpers to (the work of) God?" Said the disciples, "We are God's helpers!" then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed. (61:14)

verse from the end of the Quran:
Then shall anyone who has done an atom's weight of good, see it!

And anyone who has done an atom's weight of evil, shall see it. (99:7-8)


All of these verses build up similar ideas. There are dozens more like this, they can't be superceded because the ideas are repeated later!

On the other hand, yes the Quran has contradictions. The video is right about that. And it's certainly not all peace and love. Violent verses throughout the Quran, like these:
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (9:5)

Those who reject the Book and the (revelations) with which We sent our messengers: but soon shall they know, When the yokes round their necks, and the chains; they shall be dragged along- In the boiling fetid fluid: then in the Fire shall they be burned; Then shall it be said to them: "Where are the (deities) to which ye gave part-worship- In derogation of God?" (40:70-74)

----------------------------------------

The video is talking about "naskh," which is one possible theory from islamic theology. Naskh can be translated to English as "abrogate," which is when a judge claims a previous ruling is no longer valid.
Naskh is based on a real verse of the Quran:

None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that God Has power over all things? (2:106)

Some islamic scholars (Tabari) theorized that Satan had caused interference in the transcription or interpretation of God's will (based on Quran 22:52). For example, there was supposedly a verse of the Hadith (the list of "sayings," not part of the Quran) about stoning people to death for adultery. For a long time scholars have interpreted this verse as of questionable origin. They think Mohammad never said this - they think a human or Satan chose to lie and pretend Mohammad said this. Tabari wrote that Satan could interfere and create conflict with verses, which contradicts God's will in the Quran.

Quran chapter 24 says male and female adulterers must be whipped 100 times unless they repent and ask God's forgiveness. Now, to me this is a horrible idea. I do not advocate whipping. My point is, whipped 100 times is not that same a death by stoning - so for centuries there has been controversy about it. This is why today, most muslim countries do NOT follow the saying about stoning. Even many fundamentalist muslims think stoning is unholy - not because they believe in women's rights, but just because of how they interpret the words.

Other scholars interpret naskh as referring to the previous, "imperfect" versions of God's word. Specifically, the Torah and the Bible. They claimed it was not that the Torah or Bible were wrong, or that their followers were "Satanic"; they instead said those books contain God's word, but also interference from bad interpreters or even from Satan. this interference caused people to believe imperfectly. In contrast, the Quran says that the Quran is a more accurate version of God's will. Unusual for a religious holy book, the Quran admits (within chapter 2 and 22) that even the Quran can contain errors.

The theory used in that youtube video is that the HIGHEST number takes precedence. However, this is not a popular theory among muslims. The biggest problem is the the order they were written is not the same as the order they were put in, or the order they were "revealed" in.

The bigger problem with the video's theory is that dominant muslim theology interprets Quran 2:106 as referring to the MAIN BELIEFS or "pillars" of the religion. So in controversies or contradictions, whatever verse is closer to the main beliefs takes precedence. God would "substitute" the more important verse. Not the higher number. I asked several muslims, they have never heard of anyone using the "higher number" idea.

-----------------------------------------------

In my non-muslim opinion, this DOES come down to interpretation, and it IS similar to the contradictions in other religious books. Just because some guy made a video about the Quran doesn't mean all muslims agree with his idea of what their religion is. Obviously, Muslims don't even agree with each other about the contradictions. "Jihad" is important to some muslims, but is not a pillar for any muslim; the majority of muslims learn and believe that jihad is generally internal, and means "spiritual self-perfection" (Brockopp 2003, p. 99).

Muslims who say jihad is violent and aggressive are a big problem for America and the rest of the world. Muslim terrorists are very few, but they do horrible things. Moderate muslims have not done enough to fight against these extremists. However, calling Islam "evil" does not help this situation at all.

Sunni and Shia (and groups within each!) have their own versions of the sayings. But in all cases, there are only a few core beliefs. Here is my outsider summary of these pillars:

For Sunni Muslims (the majority of Muslims), the beliefs/pillars are

  • profess faith
  • pray to God
  • fast during Ramadan
  • give generously to charity
  • visit Mecca once

For Shia Muslims (maybe 15% of Muslims?), the pillars are

  • believe in God
  • believe in the day of judgement, when
    Jesus will return and defeat the antichrist
    everyone will be judged by the good and evil deeds
  • believe in Noah, Moses, Abraham, Jesus, and finally Muhammad
  • believe in the 12 Shia imams
  • practice justice in thought, word, and action

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/



Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 19:58:07 -0400
From: ________@_______
To:
Subject: If you read only ONE e-mail today - THIS is it. (UNCLASSIFIED)

This is a little long, but take the time to LISTEN. It's important for our survival
If you read only ONE e-mail today - THIS is it.>
Check this one out, it will shock
you.....................................(Hopefully)

A group calling themselves "White Roses" created a video to inform non-Muslims about Islam.
The name of this video is "Three Things About Islam".
White Roses is headquartered in Sweden. This first version is in English.
The name "White Roses" is based on a student resistance group "Die weiße >Rose" in Nazi Germany.
The group became known for an anonymous leaflet campaign, from June 1942 until February 1943,
which called for active opposition to Adolf Hitler's regime.

PLEASE view this video. TWICE.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib9rofXQl6w&feature=player_embedded
>
>
> (NOTE: If you're at work, send this to your home computer)

Comments

t8 said…
'Write to be understood, speak to be heard, read to grow.' -Lawrence Clark Powell-

Popular posts from this blog

translation of the Manu Chao song "Me Llaman Calle"

this is about my translation of the Manu Chao song "Me Llaman Calle." [ video below ] i'm reasonably close to a literal translation, with changes to fit the rhythm and number of syllables per line. "baldosa" is like ladrilla (a brick to build a house) except flat like a tile. based on context, i translate it as "cobblestones." Chao also uses "maquinita," literally "little machine," but this implies a small device in english (a machine that does something, but does not move itself - such as a laminating machine, a blood-glucose meter, or an ATM) - so i use "little engine" instead, to imply movement. the one line i'm not happy with is the translation of "no me rebajo"; if i wasn't worried about rhythm, i would translate it as "it doesn't dig ruts into me." the tricky part is that this word, rut, is almost never used as a present-tense transitive verb in english. we generally use it as a noun (

"Our Founding Illegals"

"Our Founding Illegals" by William Hogeland New York Times, December 26, 2006 [not only are we a nation of immigrants - we are a nation of illegal immigrants. undocumented workers. including our "greatest" european ancestors.] America’s pioneer values developed in a distinctly illegal context. In 1763, George III drew a line on a map stretching from modern-day Maine to modern-day Georgia, along the crest of the Appalachians. He declared it illegal to claim or settle land west of the line, all of which he reserved for Native Americans. George Washington, a young colonel in the Virginia militia, instructed his land-buying agents in the many ways of getting around the law. Although Washington was not alone in acquiring forbidden tracts, few were as energetic in the illegal acquisition of western land... Washington harbored no fond feeling for breakers of laws that he too had recently flouted. “It is hard upon me,” he lamented without irony, “to have property which has

totino's ad campaign

totino's ad campaign - okay, there are these commercials on TV about a thing called "totino's pizza rolls." apparently it is a very tiny hot pocket. the gimmick seems to be that kids can prepare this food themselves (not sure how this is any different from every other convenience food). of all the features these cubes have, the commercial focuses on taste as a selling point. obviously, frozen cubes of bleached white flour taste great no matter what. - so this kid microwaves a bag of these things, then serves them to his friends in the middle of the night. he warns they must be quiet, i guess to avoid waking his parents. but it turns out the cubes are so delicious his friends are unable to stay quiet. "i love totino's pizza rolls!" screams the first taster. - as screams erupt from everyone, the betrayed boy-chef expresses dismay at the punishment which will surely follow. oh, i jest. his parents will probably eat the cubes themselves after they come dow