Continuing Islamic Studies thread from a few days ago. First, here are answers to some questions asked after I went to bed:
1. No, I don't have a gf period. I'm just as much of a robot as everyone else on this damn site. I have had a Muslim oneitis that I met through my research when I was just starting out.
2. The goat eating a Surah is not in Sahih Bukhari. It's from Sunan Abu Dawud, and typically the rule of thumb is to only look at Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. There have been a lot of Muslims who are now disregarding Hadith wholesale, as from an externalistic, historiographic point of view they're all dubious in nature.
3. No, but I am saying one should look past surface issues in Islam to better get a view of its belief system not just watch a few YT videos, regardless of if you like the religion or not.
More late answers to come, feel free to ask more!
1. Muhammad is perceptually perfect to a lot of Muslims for the following reasons:
Tautology: If god deems him perfect, his actions, regardless of what they are, are perfect.
Ignorance: They don't know Muhammad's true acts
Twisted Morals: People genuinely believe his morals are the best morals.
Mental gymnastics/cognitive dissonance: Self-explanatory
2. No, but I do think the post-truth postmodern bullshit that SJWs are a product of genuinely damages religious studies, especially Islamic studes, in the west.
Why do you like Islam? Do you actually believe in the Koran and the Allah described in it?
there is no god
all religions are evil
circumcision is a crime against humanity
you only get one life and you're wasting it living halal
1. From a historiographic perspective, Hadith are almost universally unverifiable and thusly bullshit. From a Muslim perspective, the Hadith one views a valid or strong varies from group to group. For instance, Sunnis use mostly Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, but these are viewed as false by Shias as the Hadith therein are promonently Sunni in their Isnad chains, invalidating them to the Shias.
I actually have read the Book of Moron. It's honestly the most excruciating religious book I've ever read, and one of the few religious texts that can be disproven with hard evidence in its first 10 pages. Terrible work.
Christianity is in no way compatible with Islam on a theological level, just by the nature of Islam succeeding Christianity in their eyes. Societally, they can be seen as compatible either in a very libertarian society where people can self actualize in the way they deem fit, or in a regime where one rules over the other. Look at the pact of Umar for an example.
Entitled pricks? Most are rapists and terrorists? I'd like some evidence.
>>37717680
No, I like it because I've been autistically obsessed with religious studies from a young age, and I specialize in textual analysis, which is a ripe field in Islamic studies. Plus, there's the controversy and the fact the field is going through various intellectual shifts both now and in the future.
>>37717768
Agreed. I'm not a Muslim.
For context, I'm studying to enter the academia as a professor of Islamic Studies, I forgot to repeat that in this thread, sorry.
>>37717822
I have many mormon family members and I would be interested in some of the hard evidence, would you be able to post some?
>>37717885
Does the Quran and Hadiths call for jihad/terrorism/sharia law in such a way that the only way a muslim can live in a western society peacefully is to reject/ignore fundamental teachings of Islam?
>>37717768
Tbh idgaf about 'wasting' my only life. Call me beta but here is how I see life. If there is no afterlife where I get judged on my sins then its ok, and nothing is wasted
If there is an afterlife then I know I haven't done much wrong (or good for that matter I'm lazy as fuc) so its a win-win
>>37718121
it's not win-win, you lost something, you just don't care about it because you've never tried it
>>37718054
The one I'm referring to specifically is there cannot be a Laman River. Georaphically, no river in the area discussed in the BoM flows into the Red Sea. Plus, even saying it'd take just three days for some old dude and his family to trek from Jerusalem to the Red Sea is laughable.
>>37718074
Short answer, no. This is an incredibly difficult question that has various answers depending on one's sect, views on specific texts, interpretation, etc. I tend to look at Islam as follows: Acknowledge the literalist view of the work (I typically will look at Wahhabi exegesis as a proxy), and use this as a starting point by which divergent views can be judged. With this in mind, you can point at something like Surah 9:4 or the Hadith that discuss Muhammad's views on the use of terror (he claimed it was what distinuished him from other prophets), but a very devout Muslim will claim with all their heart that you cant take something literally. To disregard this sort of defense is to disregard a major piece of Islam. Within the religion, literalistic reading is but a small part of how they look at religious texts, and though it is the most apparent to us outsiders, a lot of Muslims view this method of interpretation as limiting and ignorant of God's deeper purpose for man. I could go on about counterpoints to this argument etc. For hours. If people are really really genuinely interested, I can draft up a quick paper on the topic or link a somewhat related paper I've worked on that gives a deeper look at textual links to terrorism, specifically ISIS.
>>37718382
That would be quite interesting and useful if you could do that, thanks.
>>37717575
Why did you decide to specifically study Islam?
Is it prove that it's related to terrorism so the alt-right can kick all Muslims out of the west?
>>37718433
Alrght, I'm going go find a paper I did on ISIS and cut out some stuff. I'll be back soon. Is there anywhere online I could quicky paste a paper anonymously?
>>37718537
Because I specialize in textual studies and Islam has a plethora of primary sources to analyze and discuss. Plus, the field is going to be going through massive paradigm shifts and debate in the upcoming decades so it's an exciting time to work in the field.
People really do seem to think that all Islamic scholars do is fight over whether or not it's a religion of peace. To be honest, almost nothing I do in my day to day study even touches on that as a topic.
Do you think there will be a nu-Islam, without all the dog killing, jihad, and other crazy shit?
>>37718810
God, I hope so. I am down for an Islamic reform movement and have done a few papers on Islamic reform movements, both from an internal and an external perspective. For instance, I am currently writing a paper on how to utilize Max Muller's dichotomous conception of religion to reconcile mysticism and jurisprudence in Islam, healing what I believe to be a massive divide. It is also part of the reason I hate postmodernism in religious studies so much, as it leads to a worldview incapable of constructing solutions or righting wrongs. Islam needs reform, and people both within and outside the religion get that.
>>37718712
People like you are gonna dissect Islam and lay it out in front of everyone. The end result might either be acceptance of the way it is right now or a nu-islam>>37718810 like this which is no different from the liberal version of Christianity these days.
Dude why don't you go to /his/ they always want to discuss this. Why come to one of the boards with the least IQ?
Post this thread in /his/
>>37718433
Alright, sorry for the cancerous formatting, just copy and paste into a Word Doc and it'll be readable. This is the entirety of an old paper I collaborated with a few people in the community who will remain anonymous, that I updated about four months ago to encapsulate a few new developments in ISIS' little world. It's kinda a breakdown of ISIS' actions by their own terms, including their justification for attacking Muslims and non-muslims alike.
https://pastebin.com/PKNTMY04
>>37719175
Ooh, will do at some point, thanks.
Frankly, I was bored out of my mind and last time I did this talk was actually sorta fruitful.
>>37719224
I discuss islam on /his/ all the time and always get fruitful replies. I have a tranny thread up there right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if you're a civilization destroying Jew.
I knew Muslims were next on the chopping block.
Their culture is the next to get destroyed.
Why do you think that there is such a strong correlation between Islam and terrorism? There is a lot of poverty, there's a lot of shiftlessness, a lot of discrimination, and lot of social grievance, and lot of hopelessness in Europe. Yet there is one ingredient missing before it suddenly results in pointless, furious, nihilist, mass violence. Why?
>>37720224
Because Islam lends itself to literalistic interpretations of primary sources that call for violence. Not saying those are the only or best interpretations, just that they can occur very easily and justifiably in Islam. I linked a paper I wrote on a similar topic above.
>>37720283
Christian and Judaic scripture are also entirely amenable to this kind of interpretation, yet it is exceptionally rare that we see militant Judaism or Christianity. In your view is this a cultural difference or a scriptural difference. I.e. has Islam not experienced some kind of cultural awakening that extirpated these views from other abrahamic religions, or is it the case that the actual texts of the scripture of Islam is simply more amenable to this kind of stuff. Do you believe that the lack of any equivalent to Islamism in the other Abrahamic religions plays a roll?
>>37717575
What are your religious beliefs? Is Islam the greatest threat to the west?
>>37720458
I think that a variety of social factors can help to explain the gulf in terrorist actions between Jewish extremists and Muslim extremists. I would contest that Christianity is equally amenable to extremist interpretation due to the divide between the old an new testaments (even if Jesus claimed he didn't come to "change the old laws," it seems near impossible to really justify an equally smooth transition to extremism). Judaism is partially predisposed to a similar sort of literalism that leads to extremism, but most orthodox jews are decently wealthy, live in urban areas of Israel, and have fairly uniform beliefs making their society insular. Islam has a variety of groups with ideologies that can often clash, have far more members throughout the war, and live in positions of total governmental control to abject poverty and oppression.
Islamism does have equivalents, though the lack of extreme orthodox jews would make establishing a society based on talmudic law would be near impossible, and that christian ethics are already ingrained in much of society, and only a few fringe christian groups desire a sort of "christian caliph."
>>37720514
Islam isn't the greatest threat to the west. I'm basically an IR Realist, and see China as our biggest threat.
I'm personally an Atheist, raised in a Korean Baptist home.