Image via ETHNews
On January 16, 2019, the Islamic Terrorist group, ISIS, claimed responsibility for another suicide bombing at a restaurant in Manjib, Syria which killed 19 people (including multiple U.S. Servicemen) according to Reuters. Over the past 2 decades, Islamic terrorism has become a real issue for the West and has led to much discrimination and intolerance of Muslims, including the peaceful and innocent in many cases. As the world becomes more and more connected, it’s no wonder why the religion has become so controversial in the West. It’s clashing with western values. Multiple politicians including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and George W. Bush have described Islam as a religion of peace in an effort to distance it from Islamic terrorism. While it’s true that a great deal of Muslims are peaceful, Islam is not a religion of peace.
To find evidence that Islam is not a religion of peace, all you have to do is look in Islam’s holy book, the Quran. If you read the excerpts, you will see that radical terrorists aren’t straying far from what their text commands of them:
“They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper” (Quran, An-Nisa 4:89).
If this is not a call for violence, then I don’t know what is. The Quran is literally calling for the murder of apostates in this verse. If your idea of promoting peace is killing people for disagreeing with you, then maybe we can give this chapter a pass. Otherwise, this verse promotes terrorism. The religion that recommends killing people because they committed the crime of not submitting to your belief system is not a religion of peace; it’s a religion of terrorization and coercion.
Image via Wired
This next verse declares that warriors who fight “in the cause of Allah” will be rewarded for their service in the afterlife:
“So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory – We will bestow upon him a great reward” (Quran, An-Nisa 4:74).
Not only does the Quran state that it’s acceptable to fight in the cause of Allah, but it also encourages it by providing an incentive that guarantees a reward for doing so. That’s not something a “religion of peace” does!
One of the most detestable sections of the Quran that I never hear anyone talking about is the part where the Quran endorses beating and oppressing women:
“Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great” (Quran, An-Nisa 4:34).
You cannot honestly say that you support women’s equality while still saying that Islam is a religion of peace. It’s just not. What kind of person who fights for women’s equality thinks that it’s OK for a man to beat their wife if they dare to commit the horrible crime of disobeying their husband? No one does. Not only is this violent and oppressive, it’s egregious.
Image via Independent
While it’s true that the Quran has many good moral teachings in it, it’s ignorant to pretend that it doesn’t speak a word of violence. I know that the amount of good teachings in the Quran surpasses the amount of violent teachings; honestly, compared to the Christian bible, the Quran isn’t so bad. However, as long as even one act of violence is supported in the Quran, Islam cannot be considered a religion of peace. It’s as simple as that.
Also, I don’t see any wiggle room for misinterpretation of language either. As presented in these English translations featured on this post, the language is pretty explicit and clear on the violence it supports.
I recognize that the toxic values showed in this post are not representative of what all Muslims believe, and I do not doubt that the majority of Muslims are peaceful people. I simply believe that the idea that Islam is a religion of peace is a lie for the reasons above.
If you disagree, let me know in the comments! All ideas are fit to be discussed in the 21st century.
I believe that if we are calling Islam a religion of violence then we should call just about every religion a religion of violence. You yourself said that “compared to the Christian bible the Quran is not that bad”. On top of that terror attacks in America actually tend to be carried out by extreme right Christian and white supremacist terrorists. In 2017 there were 65 cases of terror attacks in America, 37 of which were carried out by these groups while only seven were carried out by Islamic extremists. In a world where Muslims make up a quarter of the overall population, a radical few and choose quotes from a holy book that can similarly be found from any religion, does not make one religion violent.
oh yeah, I completely agree with you that Islam is not alone in promoting violence in its religious texts. It’s true that it’s not that bad compared to Christianity. The Christian bible is worse in its promotion of violence than the Quran. The reason this post is focused specifically on Islam is because I feel like it’s a far bigger topic of controversy these days. I will gladly write another blog post calling out the violence in Christianity for the sake of equality, however I feel like that isn’t a prevalent controversy because so many people already know there’s violence in the bible. If you think I should do it though, I wouldn’t have a problem writing about that.
Don’t mistake my criticism of Islam (the nonphysical idea) for an attack on Muslims. That’s not what I’m arguing about. I already understand that it’s the vast minority that act out in violence.
You’re right that these quotes don’t mean the religion is violent. The entire religion is not violent because it has a few violent excerpts. However it does mean that it’s not a religion of peace. How can it be a religion of peace if it contains sections that explicitly promote violence? It can’t. You can’t say that peace is a crowning virtue of Islam when it is willing to abandon the whole idea of peace as soon as it’s convenient. The same goes for any other religion. If it’s not consistently peaceful, it’s not a religion of peace.
Very, very interesting (and refreshing) read. This is the first time I have ever heard this argument from someone our age and I think you support it extremely well. The excerpts you pick from the Qu’ran are precise (and terrifying), and your own opinion and voice shines through in a way that only helps the post. I was initially going to comment about the violence promoted in tnearly all religious tests (interesting read https://timothyrenner.github.io/datascience/2015/12/02/violence-in-religious-text.html ) and the bible specifically (1 Samuel, Attack on Amalekites), but you even pulled in those arguments as well which I absolutely loved. I thoroughly enjoyed this post, agree with the vast majority of your points, and would love to talk about these kinds of things in person.
Awesome! I’m glad you enjoyed it and thanks for the feedback. If you feel like my argument isn’t very strong, don’t hesitate to poke holes in it.
and that study thing is really interesting. Unfortunately I think it would be tough to use this method as much more than a glorified “command F” button haha. great food for thought though!
As respectfully as I can put this, I entirely disagree with you. First, I want to address your broad claim that “Islam is Not a Religion of Peace”. You continue on to make claims about radical Islam, not just Islam in general. The percentage of radical muslims is menial in comparison to typical member of the religion. Comparatively, radicals exist in many religions, but that doesn’t necessarily make them a violent religion as a whole. An organization, called the Ku Klux Klan, claims to “uphold Christian morality” according to their mission statement on their webpage. Does the fact that they want to “purify” the human race and essentially rid the nation of blacks make Christianity as a religion violent? You can’t generalize an entire religion based on the actions of few. I’m a black Christian, and I’m far from wanting a “pure aryan race” and going about violent means to achieve this. Similarly, the Bible calls for women to be submissive to men, not speak in the church, or even teach. Additionally, Deuteronomy 25:11 literally says that if a women comes to rescue her husband during a fight and reaches in and touches him her hand should be cut off. Does that qualify as violence? Yes, I believe it does, but that doesn’t make the entire Christian religion violent. Furthermore, one can’t always take every single word in a religious book so literally, especially because times have changed and moral ideas have changed as well. Like you said, ideas are fit to be discussed in the 21st century. The Quran was written in 632, and the Bible was written in the 6th century. Both books are subject to a change in ideas given that it has been 1000s of years since initial publication. Either way, a few quotes in a book, regardless of religion, is not appropriate means to generalize and entire religion as violent. However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so I’m glad I could get a perspective from yours. 🙂
Thank you for the comment! I actually think the claim is pretty narrow. I’m not saying Muslims are violent; I’m also not saying that Islam is a religion of violence. There’s more on this in the comment thread above where I clarified my stance further. I think I address a lot of what you bring up in this post as well. If you want, I recommend checking that other comment out because I think you will understand what I mean much better.
You’re right when you say that having radicals doesn’t make a religion violent as a whole. Im not using the existence of radicals as the support for my claim that Islam is not a religion of peace. Rather I believe that radicals are often enabled by toxic principles in their holy books. A prime example of this is the Westboro Baptist Church, who uses hateful bible verses as direct justification for their disgusting views.
A few people have already noted, as this post says, that there are plenty of violent passages in the Bible (see 1 Samuel 15:3, or 1 Timothy 2:12 for examples of sexism). However, the idea a few select passage of scripture makes a religion on the whole violent or not peaceful is unsubstantiated. Islam cannot be viewed as such a monolithic religion, as it is deeply intertwined with culture, politics, and nationality. Persian and Arab interpretations of Islam are different, Sunni and Shiite interpretations of Islam are different, and Egyptian, Nigerian, or Indonesian interpretations of Islam are different. Additionally, there is plenty of examples showing that Islam is perfectly compatible with peace. The vast majority of Muslims peaceful and the threat of Islamic terror in the West vastly overstated when compared far left or far right terrorism. Islam is also demonstrably compatible with social welfare programs (see how the Palestinian Authority provides healthcare). Additionally, the analysis of Islam’s theology in this post ignores how one of the five central tenants of Islam is charitable giving (Zakat) and this post makes very selective choices when looking at scripture. For example the Qu’ran says that religion is not compulsory (2:256) and that taking someone’s life is a terrible, immeasurable crime (5:32). The selective quotes that suggest Islam is not a religion of peace is far outweighed by the clear, abundant evidence that Muslims abide by the most common, scripture-supported interpretation of the Qur’an which is, on the whole, peaceful.
Citation for my Qur’an passages:
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/essays/islam-on-peace-and-violence