Ask Your Favorite Muslim

[RobertE]

How do you feel about visual depictions of the prophet?  Are they always offensive, or does it depend on the context?

I guess it doesn't just have to be visual depictions of the prophet in Islam. This can be any figure in the Islamic world where statues are in fact interdit. In fact, tattoos are formely interdit in Islam unless someone has converted to Islam and already has tattoos.

[cactus]

Yeah, I believe in a literal Hell. In short, it's a place for sinners and disbelievers.

Ok, cool
I'll start choosing to be more convinced by the unverifiable claims made by the Quran, now, so I won't be punished for not being convinced enough.  Thanks

^Hmm, I forgot that picture thing applied to other people, too.  I think some Muslims are against taking photographs of people (and other animals?), too.

[Rayaan]

How do you feel about visual depictions of the prophet?  Are they always offensive, or does it depend on the context?

It is offensive indeed, but in no way does it justify acts of violence against those who draw such pictures. Rather, the Quran itself points to the opposite direction.

In some verses God tells us that when we hear some evil or offensive speech, we should simply ignore them and walk away. We should avoid getting into arguments and instead just turn away from them peacefully, with calm and dignity.

"And when they hear vain speech, they turn away from it and say, 'For us are our deeds, and for you are your deeds. Peace be upon you; we seek not the ignorant.'" (Surah 28:55)

"When you hear those who engage in vain discourse about Our signs, then turn away from them until they enter into another theme. And if Satan causes you to forget, then do not sit, after the remembrance, in the company of the wrong-doers." (Surah 6:68)

"So leave them to plunge in vain talk and amusement until they encounter that Day of theirs which they have been promised." (Surah 70:42)

The verses are talking about "vain speech," but the same can be applied to images of that nature (i.e. offensive).

[abaris]

There are numerous parts in you holy books asking for acceptance and consideration of competing lines of thoughts. There are also nuerous parts calling for violence. But on the other hand, wars are only allowed to defend yourself and hurting women or children is considered taboo. How do you think about that?

[Rayaan]

There are numerous parts in you holy books asking for acceptance and consideration of competing lines of thoughts. There are also nuerous parts calling for violence. But on the other hand, wars are only allowed to defend yourself and hurting women or children is considered taboo. How do you think about that?

I don't think these are competing lines of thought, actually. They are perfectly consistent.


"As for such [of the non-believers] who do not fight against you on account of your faith and neither drive you forth from your homelands, God does not forbid you to show them kindness and to behave towards them with full equity. For indeed, God loves those who act equitably." (Surah 60:8)

"Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, God does not allow you to harm them." (Surah 4:90)

"Invite (all) to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious." (Surah 16:125)

[abaris]

I know all of that. But in my understanding it's just the same cherry picking contest as it is with any other religion. How do you personally think of that?

Especially in lights of muslim scholars of old having a pretty outspoken position towards violence and tolerance.

[cactus]

Does the Quran have an explicit definition of what it means for people to "fight against you" or is that left up to personal interpretation?

[Rayaan]

I know all of that. But in my understanding it's just the same cherry picking contest as it is with any other religion. How do you personally think of that?

Especially in lights of muslim scholars of old having a pretty outspoken position towards violence and tolerance.

Well, I've noticed that those who cherry pick the Quran in order to justify their violence do not quote (or read) the relevant verses that come right before or after what they quoted, because that would disprove their position.

Does the Quran have an explicit definition of what it means for people to  "fight against you" or is that left up to personal interpretation?

No, but scholars agree that the main point is to be able to defend yourself against physical harm.

[cactus]

What things are left open to personal interpretation in the Quran?

[abaris]

Well, I've noticed that those who cherry pick the Quran in order to justify their violence do not quote (or read) the relevant verses that come right before or after what they quoted, because that would disprove their position.

But you know it's as ambigous as the bible. You can make your pick if you're a nice person as well as being an entirely bad person.

What impressed me are the scholars who were pretty outspoken about only taking the well intended passages. But don't let that distract you. I have the same number of old christian scholars not riding the train of violence.