Response to Fishtroller

The following is a response I wrote to an atheist who calls himself "Fishtroller01" over at Daily Kos. This guy is one of your militant atheists. Personally, after reading many of his comments on a number of religious diaries at DKos, I have a rather low opinion of this guy. Still, I decided to respond to one of his comments tonight, and am reproducing it here as it touches on a number of topics that this blog addresses.

So you based your life's perspective on one book?

I've based my moral and religious guidelines upon the Qur'an, yes. Believe it or not, I was once an atheist like you, but I realized the errors of my ways and changed directions. I put in four years of due diligence on the Qur'an after countless years of exploring (raised Catholic, read numerous Buddhist texts), but I've never regretted my decision to become a Muslim. That was my best decision ever.

Do you follow EVERY teaching in that book, or do you just pick and choose the ones that fit your modern conception of the world?

I'm not a "cafeteria Muslim," no. I follow everything in the Qur'an that applies to me to the best of my abilities.

If you do follow all the "guidance" written in that book, you have a problem because many of the teachings are immoral and/or contradict one another.

Now you see, this is where your incredible ignorance of the Qur'an and Islam begins to show. It's very obvious you've read little, if any, of the Qur'an; not that I'm surprised.

I won't go into the numerous times that this book promises hellfire and torture for unbelievers like me...

Yeah? So? His universe, His rules, His rewards and punishments. What makes you worthy of heaven? Your good looks? The minimum requirements, according to the Qur'an, are a belief in Him, a belief in the Day of Judgment, and good works. All three, not just one or two of three. Ignoring the third, how do you qualify? How have you earned the right to go to heaven? This is either/or, not multiple choice. There's no special dispensation simply because you object.

...but it also says that those who believe in the trinity are cursed to hell.

Actually, the Qur'an says nothing of the sort; in fact, several verses (2:62, 5:69) say the exact opposite. Islam is not one of those religions that says only "we" are saved. There's no guarantee a Muslim will be saved either. You have to earn heaven, remember?

Do you agree that women are possessions of men and that men are "a step above" women?

Women as "possessions of men" is the Orientalist view, not the Islamic view. Men a step above women? No, not part of Islam either. The Qur'an does says in part: "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means..." (4:34). But that doesn't mean men are a step above. Men and women in Islam have equal responsibilities. If anything many Muslim men think that Muslim women have it easier than they do.

Do you agree that homosexuality is unnatural and to be condemned?

The underlying theme in the Qur'an is that life is most important. This is not explicitly stated in the text, but can be deduced from the Qur'an's positions regarding various issues regarding life, death and health. Thus, to preserve life and promote healthy lifestyles, sex is forbidden in all cases except between married couples. Thus, premarital sex is haram, adultery is haram, fornication between any non-married person, regardless of gender, is haram. Likewise, all anal sex, even between husband and wife, is haram as well. In Islam, two men or two women may love each other, but the relationship must be platonic. To take the opposite position is unIslamic and promotes unhealthy lifestyles. A lot of people don't like to hear that, but that's their problem and, once again, they'll have to answer for it on the Day of Judgment.

Why didn't Jesus or Mohammed condemn slavery?

I won't speak for Jesus (pbuh), but I will say that while the Qur'an did not expressly prohibit slavery, it did encourage slave owners not only to free their slaves if the latter asked for it, but to pitch in money to the slave so as to make it easier for them. If you knew the history of Muhammad (pbuh) and his companions, you would know that they freed many of the slaves in that time. Try reading the story about Bilal for a good example.

Which in my view renders the texts increasingly useless and invalid.

Your loss. Good luck on the Day of Judgment.

Camel Tracks

I had a recent discussion with an atheist, which has led to a new insight about the differences between atheists and Muslims (presumably this distinction could apply to a follower of any "Western" religion, but I'll approach this only from the perspective of Islam).

The difference is that an atheist is a literalist. They expect there to be proof of God's existence in such a way that there is no doubt in the atheist's mind. Ideally for them that proof would be tangible in nature and directly linked to God (as opposed to an indirect link, which would sow more confusion in their minds).

Muslims, on the other hand, tend to be more "metaphoralists," if there is such a word. The Qur'an, in and of itself, is a tangible, direct link to Allah (swt), which is proof enough for Muslims of His existence. But the Qur'an also has numerous verses that provide tangible evidence of His existence that are indirect; still, if one were to think more deeply upon these tangible proofs one might become convinced of His existence. The verses in question I refer to as the "nature verses," of which here are some:

It is He who sends down rain from the sky: from it ye drink, and out of it (grows) the vegetation on which ye feed your cattle. With it He produces for you corn, olives, date-palms, grapes and every kind of fruit: verily in this is a sign for those who give thought. He has made subject to you the Night and the Day; the sun and the moon; and the stars are in subjection by His Command: verily in this are Signs for men who are wise. And the things on this earth which He has multiplied in varying colors (and qualities): verily in this is a sign for men who celebrate the praises of Allah (in gratitude). It is He Who has made the sea subject, that ye may eat thereof flesh that is fresh and tender, and that ye may extract therefrom ornaments to wear; and thou seest the ships therein that plough the waves, that ye may seek (thus) of the bounty of Allah and that ye may be grateful. And He has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and rivers and roads; that ye may guide yourselves; And marks and sign-posts; and by the stars (men) guide themselves. Is then He Who creates like one that creates not? Will ye not receive admonition?
(16:10-17)

Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day,- there are indeed Signs for men of understanding,- Men who celebrate the praises of Allah, standing, sitting, and lying down on their sides, and contemplate the (wonders of) creation in the heavens and the earth, (With the thought): "Our Lord! not for naught Hast Thou created (all) this! Glory to Thee! Give us salvation from the penalty of the Fire."
(3:190-91)

The key points to take away are that:

1) Natural phenomena are signs of Allah (swt). They are indirect evidence, but evidence nonetheless, for the existence of God. They are more than just the natural world that we see every day and take for granted.

2) It takes a person with a flexible mind, a person who can think deeply, to make the connection between the natural world and God. Notice what the Qur'an says in several of the verses above, that these are signs "...for those who give thought," "...for men who are wise," "...for men of understanding." Rather than being a religion of blind faith, Islam is a religion that asks its followers to think and contemplate. This is where I think atheists stumble. They have lost the ability to reason for themselves. They expect proofs from others instead of thinking for themselves.

To put the matter another way, the signs of God are like camel tracks in the sand. It is enough for the Muslim to see the tracks to know of the camel's existence. The atheist expects to see the camel in order to be satisfied of the proof, and blames the believer when the camel is never seen. But the tracks are proof enough, if only the atheist could recognize the tracks for what they really are.

3) Finally, the Qur'an points out to men of understanding who recognize that natural phenomena are signs of God's existence, that they would (or at least should) be grateful to Allah (swt) for what He has provided. Everything, and I mean everything, comes from Him, including our lives. But are most people grateful? Do they give Him the praise He deserves?