In the days, months and years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Professor Muqtedar Khan of the University of Delaware found himself grappling with an unrelenting question of faith and identity: “If al-Qaeda, ISIS, and all the human rights violations committed in the name of Islam are not my faith,” he would ask himself, “then what is?”
His answer, we learned last week, came in the form of a book:
The University of Delaware professor of international relations calls his most recent book, Islam and Good Governance, “my much-delayed response.”
“Islam and Good Governance: A Political Philosophy of Ihsan” was published in April 2019.
Simultaneously an endorsement of religious and political freedom and an academic reinterpretation of the Quran, the book seeks to reclaim the beauty, mysticism and virtues of Islamic teaching through a concept Khan said he believes, “Muslims have not yet understood — or simply ignored.”
Where in his book does Khan endorse “religious and political freedom”? Does he believe that Muslims who apostatize should not be punished? Does he think that Muslims should not be proselytizing among the Unbelievers? Does he really think that Islam endorses religious freedom, given that historically, in Muslim-dominated lands, non-Muslims were allowed to remain alive to practice their faith only if they accepted the onerous conditions of the dhimmi status? As for political freedom, what does Muqtedar Khan mean by that? Does he oppose, for example, the ruling families who reign in the Arab Gulf, in Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain? In what Muslim country has Western-style democracy ever taken root? Or does Muqtedar Khan not wish to be confronted with too much reality?
That concept is Ihsan, taken from the Quran passage that says, “God is with those who do beautiful deeds.” In Islamic tradition, it also lives in the words of the prophet Muhammad, who was asked by the angel Gabriel to define Ihsan: “To Worship Allah as if you see him; and if you can’t see Him, know that He sees you.”
Rethinking the Muslim religion through this lens will require a fundamental philosophy shift, Khan said. Ihsan goes against how many economies and institutions have evolved over centuries. It stands in opposition to how the Muslim world is perceived and understood.
“An Islamic State is currently one where Islamic Law is enforced — and these are laws that come from the medieval understanding of Islam. Until we change that, we will never have good governance,” he said. “It is unfair of Muslims to demand non-Muslims bypass realities like ISIS and al-Qaeda and discover true Islam. Muslims must manifest what it is. The Prophet has said three times that you’re not a Muslim if your neighbor is afraid of you.”
On what basis does Muqtedar Khan claim that the Islamic Law – Sharia – derives from what he describes as a “medieval understanding of Islam”? There is no “medieval understanding” of Sharia; there is only the understanding that has lasted for 1,400 years, that has not varied over time. The ability or desire of Muslims to impose the rules of Sharia may vary, depending on their circumstances, but the contents of the Sharia itself do not vary.
While Muqtedar Khan insists that Muslims not try to convince non-Muslims to ignore (“bypass realities”) ISIS and al-Qaeda, he nonetheless suggests that both groups distort the “true Islam.” He refuses to admit that the members of such groups differ from other Muslims only in the degree to which they take to heart, and are willing to act upon, the Qur’anic commands to “fight,” to “kill,” to “smite at the necks of,” and to “strike terror in the hearts of” the Unbelievers. He then claims that Muslims must “manifest” what the real Islam is – the reason for his book – a faith that he insists is peaceful and non-threatening. He quotes the Prophet as saying three times that “you’re not a Muslim if your neighbor is afraid of you.” But in what Hadith, of what authority, is Muhammad quoted as saying this? It is in the collection of Bukhari, that most authoritative of Hadith scholars, that one finds Muhammad claiming “I have been made victorious through terror.” Was Muhammad not intent on making his non-Muslim neighbors “afraid”?
But Ihsan could help reframe a global and collective understanding of Islam. Khan said, “The word ‘worship’ in “Arabic literally means, ‘to serve.’ The service of humanity is the purpose of Islam.”
The purpose of Islam is not to “serve humanity” indiscriminately, but to spread the faith until Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere. Of course Muqtedar Khan may be thinking to himself that the best way to “serve humanity” is to ensure that everyone convert to Islam, the True Path. It’s unclear what he really believes about his faith, and what is merely taqiyya designed to protect and promote the faith. He has to ignore so much of what is in the Qur’an and the Hadith to make such a claim as “the service of humanity is the purpose of Islam” that deliberate taqiyya, and not mere mental confusion, most likely explains his claims.
His book has already attracted wide interest, from Mennonite Christians to fellow Muslims. The American Federation of Muslims of Indian Origins plans to recognize the publication for “excellence in scholarship and interfaith outreach” — an honor that speaks to his very goal.
His book does not display “excellence in scholarship,” given how much of the Qur’an he deliberately overlooks, but certainly it shows a deep interest in “interfaith outreach.”
“Muslims could carve a niche for themselves as the minority that cares, serves and loves everyone,” Khan writes in Islam and Good Governance. “Muslim states and societies can advocate a culture of volunteerism. There are volunteer movements in the Muslim world whose explicit goal is to gain closeness to God by service to humanity. What we need to do is globalize them, make service as valued and desirable as is worship, and make Muslims take pride in service as they do in their ritual devotions, especially in the month of Ramadan. It will require a sea change in attitudes, but the pursuit of Ihsan demands nothing less.”
Should one laugh, or cry, at Khan’s suggestion that Muslims, after 1,400 years of Jihad carried out against the Infidels, can now “carve a niche for themselves as the minority that cares, serves and loves everyone”? In what place, in what time, have Muslims ever showed themselves ready to “care, serve, and love everyone”? They are not even permitted to make non-Muslims the object of their charitable giving, Zakat. Seventeen times a day, in saying their five canonical prayers, they curse the Kuffar – the Christians and the Jews. Will Khan’s book convince Yusuf al-Qaradawi or the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahmed El-Tayeb, or any other Muslim cleric, that Muslims must no longer distinguish between Believers and Unbelievers, but should care, serve, and love everyone equally? Isn’t Muqtedar Khan’s book really aimed at non-Muslims, one more example of that deeply dishonest interfaith outreach that has been such a feature of Muslim writing since 9/11?
Westman says
Imagine a Western nation in which there had never been a New Testament, trying to be relevant in the modern world; executing all the directives of an Old Testament which claimed to be the final world of God.
This is the kind of mess Muhammad left for his followers without even a prescribed method to succeed him at his death while Jesus had previously reformed Judiaism into Christianity, and created a leadership organization that would benefit all of humanity for the future.
Muhammad further handicapped Islam with a required apartheid against unbelievers which isolates Islam and makes it into the “other” – just as it views unbelievers. Until it stops the doctrine of Al-wala’ wa-l-bara’ it will always be the “other”.
Because Muhammad dictated the Quran and declared it the final word of Allah, Islam can have no reformer or new scripture. Jesus was killed by those wishing to keep their gravy train rolling, however, there were prophecies in the Old Testament of a coming Messiah that permitted reform. Islam has no such opening for reform and is locked in a Luddite state.
Professor Muqtedar Khan may write all the apologies and reforms that he wishes, yet, it will not reform Islam because he has no authority to abrogate or delete instructions of the Quran and Sunnah. Ask a Baha’i in Iran how that reform is working out.
Kay says
Lack of reform is a problem in Mohammedism, but it is only one of many.
gravenimage says
Israel is very civilized–and Judaism has concepts like treating your neighbor as yourself that is completely missing from Islam.
But I take your basic point–you can’t set up actual good governance based on Islam. Of course, it is doubtful that this is what Khan actually wants to see.
Muqtedar Khan says
The reviewer says this: “Where in his book does Khan endorse “religious and political freedom”? Does he believe that Muslims who apostatize should not be punished? Does he think that Muslims should not be proselytizing among the Unbelievers? Does he really think that Islam endorses religious freedom” .. the entire second half of the second chapter is a criticism of “death for apostasy” ruling. I examine the case of Asia Bibi extensively and provide my critique. The book advocates four freedoms, if the person writing this had read the book, he would not have asked where. I actually wrote an article excerpting the four freedoms you can see here and it argues for freedom of religion: https://www.themaydan.com/2019/08/islam-and-four-essential-freedoms/
The author has clearly not read the book, and is basing his entire critique based on the article and assuming things. that is why for those who actually read the book it is an eye opener.
And graveinmage perhaps you would like to read this hadith which has been quoted by Obama once:
لَا تَدْخُلُونَ الْجَنَّةَ حَتَّى تُؤْمِنُوا وَلَا تُؤْمِنُوا حَتَّى تَحَابُّوا
You will not enter Paradise until you believe and you will not believe until you love one another.
Source: Sahih Muslim 54, Grade: Sahih
لَا يُؤْمِنُ أَحَدُكُمْ حَتَّى يُحِبَّ لِلنَّاسِ مَا يُحِبُّ لِنَفْسِهِ وَحَتَّى يُحِبَّ الْمَرْءَ لَا يُحِبُّهُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ
None of you has faith until he loves for the people what he loves for himself, and until he loves a person only for the sake of Allah the Exalted.
Source: Musnad Ahmad 13463, Grade: Sahih
https://abuaminaelias.com/parallel-sayings-in-the-bible-and-islam/
gravenimage says
Muqtedar Khan wrote:
The reviewer says this: “Where in his book does Khan endorse “religious and political freedom”? Does he believe that Muslims who apostatize should not be punished? Does he think that Muslims should not be proselytizing among the Unbelievers? Does he really think that Islam endorses religious freedom” .. the entire second half of the second chapter is a criticism of “death for apostasy” ruling.
……………………………..
Islam clearly calls for the murder of apostates:
Qur’an 4:89: “They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliya’ (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allah (to Muhammad). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them..”
Then there are the Hadith:
Sahih Bukhari (52:260) – “…The Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’ ”
Sahih Bukhari (83:37) – “Allah’s Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate.”
Sahih Bukhari (84:57) – [In the words of] “Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”
Sahih Bukhari (89:271) – A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to “the verdict of Allah and his apostle.”
There are many more. Does Muqtedar Khan reject these orthodox tenets of his faith? I doubt it.
More:
I examine the case of Asia Bibi extensively and provide my critique.
……………………………..
Does Muqtedar Khan reject the death penalty for blasphemy in general? The Prophet Muhammed himself has his critics assassinated.
Note that Asia Bibi had to be given asylum in Canada–a non-Muslim country–to escape the threat of being murdered in Dar-al-Islam.
More:
The book advocates four freedoms, if the person writing this had read the book, he would not have asked where. I actually wrote an article excerpting the four freedoms you can see here and it argues for freedom of religion: https://www.themaydan.com/2019/08/islam-and-four-essential-freedoms/
……………………………..
In this article Muqteder Khan cites Qur’an 88:21-22–not mentioning that the following verses threaten apostates. This is not exactly freedom of religion.
He also cites Qur’an 5:48 as an example of religious diversity, not mentioning that this is cited as a test for Muslims and that the following verses warn Muslims against listening to unbelievers.
Likewise, Qur’an 10:99 is cited as an example of religious freedom, but the following verse says that Allah prevents some people from believing, and says the defilement is placed on them.
All of the above is obvious omission and dishonesty.
For Muqtader Khan to posit the oppression and persecution of the Qur’an as the same as freedom as civilized Westerners use the term is appalling–but hardly surprising. Other Muslim Taqiyya artists such as Feisal Abdul Rauf’s mendacious “What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right With America”, which posits that the Constitution is “Islamicly compliant”.
The fact is that there is no freedom of worship under Islam for any unbeliever, nor is there freedom of expression.
And if Muqtader Khan *really* believed that Islam taught such things, he would be preaching this to his oppressive coreligionists, instead of trying to snow good Infidels here.
More:
The author has clearly not read the book, and is basing his entire critique based on the article and assuming things. that is why for those who actually read the book it is an eye opener.
And graveinmage perhaps you would like to read this hadith which has been quoted by Obama once:
لَا تَدْخُلُونَ الْجَنَّةَ حَتَّى تُؤْمِنُوا وَلَا تُؤْمِنُوا حَتَّى تَحَابُّوا
You will not enter Paradise until you believe and you will not believe until you love one another.
Source: Sahih Muslim 54, Grade: Sahih
……………………………..
This appears to refer only to other Muslims–not to unbelievers.
More:
لَا يُؤْمِنُ أَحَدُكُمْ حَتَّى يُحِبَّ لِلنَّاسِ مَا يُحِبُّ لِنَفْسِهِ وَحَتَّى يُحِبَّ الْمَرْءَ لَا يُحِبُّهُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ
None of you has faith until he loves for the people what he loves for himself, and until he loves a person only for the sake of Allah the Exalted.
Source: Musnad Ahmad 13463, Grade: Sahih
……………………………..
Same here.
https://abuaminaelias.com/parallel-sayings-in-the-bible-and-islam/
……………………………..
In fact, the same is true for most of these citations from Islamic texts.
This is, in fact, amply covered by the Qur’an itself.
Qur’an 48:29:
Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are harshg against the unbelievers and merciful to one another…”
Angemon says
+1
LB says
What makes you think that Muhammad “handicapped” islam or that he “made a mess” of it?
Islam, as Muhammad preached and practiced it, instructs its followers to kill, enslave or convert all non-muslims and to never rest until the whole world is under islamic rule. That goal is still being pursued to this day and that’s EXACTLY what Muhammad wanted. Which means that his islam is working just the way he intended it. If he was alive today, his heart would be full, like a father watching his child taking its first steps.
Even if we imagine a fictional scenario where islam reforms and becomes an actual peaceful religion, that would be due to either:
A) the pressing influence of the rest of the world’s major religions (Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.), and adopting what those perceive to be good and evil (for example, killing and enslaving people is evil and you will go to hell for it)
or B) the entire world declares war against islamic countries and they get pounded hard, like Ottomans in early 20th century, which makes them think that maybe islam is not the way (like Kemal Ataturk did).
But such reforms will not come out of islam itself because it is fulfilling the intended purpose for which it was created — world domination by the sword.
JM says
Excellent post.
Jule Bacal says
But how to educate mainstream?
gravenimage says
We just have to keep at it. Jihad Watch is part of this.
PRCS says
“The ability or desire of Muslims to impose the rules of Sharia may vary, depending on their circumstances, but the contents of the Sharia itself do not vary.”
Muslims who lack the ability or desire to impose the Sharia here are under pressure from those who do to ‘get with the program’ and work toward changing ‘their circumstances’.
JW_Reader says
Hugh Fitzgerald is a bad boy! You poured water over Professor Muqtedar Khan’s nearly twenty years of musing about Islam and violence. He was really hoping that this book will revolutionize the way infidels think about Islam. He was not aware of you. It took you only a day and a few paragraphs to put a kibash on his book. Try again Professor Muqtedar Khan! May be next time you will get it right. Oh yeah! When the HuffPo guys call, pretend that you did not read this blog.
James Lincoln says
JW Reader,
The professor could have saved himself a lot of time had he run his ideas by Robert Spencer before he started his book.
If he had, he may have never written it…
James Lincoln says
Or, of course, the feature writer Hugh Fitzgerald…
Carol the 1st says
I think he ran his ideas past Sinead O’connor. They could form a duet and sing a song on Good Morning BRITAIN…”Imagine Islam’s people, it’s easy if you try…you may think I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one…fa la la.”
jarmanray says
I would certainly like to observe some of his classes of international relations and even more I would like to see what courses he, himself, enrolled during his undergraduate studies concerning political science. Did he read only Machiavelli’s “The Prince” or did he also read “Discourses”. Did he read Socrates, Plato, Descartes through Hegel? I would also like to view some of his syllabuses to understand what principles of international relations does he provide. If his understanding of the subject he teaches is as limited or simply inaccurate, then his students are certainly achieving very little academically for as Hugh Fitzgerald points out how little he seems to understand his own religion.
gravenimage says
I don’t think Khan misunderstands Islam–he is just whitewashing it for foolish Infidels.
JM says
Agreed.
JM says
Or perhaps, remembering that “Allah is the best of deceivers”, he understands his religion only too well and his book is taqiyya and kitman,
gravenimage says
+1
Michael Copeland says
“Allah does not love the unbelievers.”
Koran 3:32, part of Islamic law
gravenimage says
Khan himself hates Jews:
“The Only Good Jew is a…Muslim [on Muqtedar Khan]”
https://www.meforum.org/campus-watch/17508/the-only-good-jew-is-amuslim-on-muqtedar-khan
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
“His book has already attracted wide interest, from Mennonite Christians to fellow Muslims.”
Really? Who said this, a blurb writer? And what kind of Mennonite Christians does he refer to? Anabaptists? Or maybe the neo-Hindu followers of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmananda_Krishna_Menon
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
By the way, the phrase “from … to …” only makes sense when an ordered sequence is involved, such as “from February to May”, or “from age 18 to age 25”. What does “from Mennonite Christians to fellow Muslims” mean? Please list all the people who lie between Mennonite Christians and Muslims. Do these “between” people include Scientologists? Buddhists? Mormons? Urantians? Pinky Lee worshipers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWbweOyYLEE
SteveA56 says
A splendid deconstruction Mr Fitzgerald.
All I might add is ‘Dear Muslims, you need to recognise that you are not alone in being trapped in a faith that has no moral virtue; is pursued for gain and for fear of facing a challenging reality, and is based on nothing more than myth. More than a billion of you need to wise up and adopt atheism. Shame the rest of them.
gravenimage says
Yes–fine piece by Hugh Fitzgerald.
Angemon says
Is “slaying infidels wherever you find them” a beautiful deed?
mortimer says
Response to Angemon: JIHAD IS THE “HIGHEST” DEED in rewards in Islam. Jihadic slaying is ‘BETTER’ than Islamic prayer.
The Prophet said, “The head of its matter is Islam and its pillar is the Salah and its highest peak is the Jihad.” – Sunan At-Tirmidhi 2616
– The prophet said, “Shall I not inform you of the head of the matter, as well as its pillar and the apex of its hump? … The head of the matter is Islam.” He compared the matter to a male camel and made Islam the head of this matter since no animal can live without its head. Then he said, “Its pillar is salat.” The pillar of something is what keeps it upright and no matter can be kept upright or steady without a pillar. Then he said, “The APEX OF ITS HUMP IS JIHAD.” The apex of anything is its highest point and the highest point of a camel’s hump is the tip of its hump. Of all deeds, there is nothing that rivals jihad in importance. Abu Hurayrah reported that a man came to Allah’s messenger, and said, “Tell me something equivalent to jihad?” He replied, “I cannot find any.” Then the prophet said, “When Muslims embark on jihad, can you go to the mosque and pray without stopping and fast continuously?” The man replied, “Who can ever do that?”
– Ibn-Daqiq’s Commentary on the Nawawi Forty Hadiths
gravenimage says
*Spot on*, Angemon and Mortimer.
mortimer says
Does MUQTEDAR KHAN know Islam better than Caliph Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi (PhD Islamic Studies)?
WHO KNOWS ISLAM BETTER ? Let’s find out !!
Caliph Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, who is the ISIS chief and the caliph of the Islamic State, is apparently the first Islamic Studies PhD from a Muslim background who has no idea about Islam.
Al-Baghdadi, who has obtained BA, MA and PhD degrees in Islamic studies from the Islamic University in Baghdad, has been condemned as a person who knows nothing about Islam, and as the head of an organization that has nothing to do with Islam.
The professors from the Islamic University of Baghdad, however, do not agree. They taught the caliph and believe his credentials and doctrines are sound.
“If a person who has a PhD in Islamic studies and does nothing but study the Islamic scriptures knows nothing about Islam, then who does?” questioned al-Baghdadi’s main teacher from the Islamic University, preferring to remain anonymous since the fatwa against ISIS and its chief puts his reputation into jeopardy.
“The wine-sipping Muslims, those hedonistic adulterers will tell the world what true Islam is? Obama and Cameron know more about Islam than the faculty of Islamic studies at the Islamic University in Baghdad?” the professor bellowed with rage, while talking to a journalist.
Another professor, who had taught al-Baghdadi for his BA, said off the record that the ISIS caliph was an ardent student.
“He had this obsession with Islamic studies. I used to tell him to go out and have some fun sometimes. But his idea of fun wasn’t too human friendly,” the professor said. “In any case he was a top student. One of the best I’ve ever had. Had the entire syllabus on his finger tips – to be honest, he knew more about Islamic studies than most of the professors.”
“While you can question whether they are humans or not, there is no doubt that ISIS, including Abu Bakr (al Baghdadi), are indeed bona fide Muslims,” concluded the ISIS caliph’s PhD professor.
– A LEADING SAUDI CLERIC ENDORSES ISIS DOCTRINES – Sheikh Adel al-Kalbani
– Sheikh Adel al-Kalbani (former imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca), has said that the Islamic State (ISIS) group follows the same brand of Islam as officially espoused by Saudi Arabia.
tim gallagher says
What an exercise in futility by this man, and by all the other Muslim clowns who seek to “reform” Islam and turn it into a non-violent and less hate- filled ideology. Just leave the foul ideology behind, you fools. Do what people like Ibn Warraq, Nonie Drawish, Wafa Sultan and many others did. Just dump the hideous ideology, which is what it deserves to have done to it. Seriously, what a waste of time by this man. Then again, he is probably only out to muddy the waters and fool us, the enemy infidel, with lying garbage.
gravenimage says
Tim, I don’t think this is an exercise in futility by Khan–it is an exercise in Taqiyya.
tim gallagher says
I’m sure you are right, gravenimage. Muslims lie to us all the time. I only have the time of day for the ex-Muslims. The problem is that there do seem to be plenty of gullible people who do believe the lies from people like this man.
gravenimage says
All too true, Tim.
gravenimage says
Muqtedar Khan’s Feelgood Religious Narrative
“Islam and Good Governance: A Political Philosophy of Ihsan” was published in April 2019.
……………………….
Too bad the concept of “good governance” in Islam means the horrors of Shari’ah law.
More:
Simultaneously an endorsement of religious and political freedom and an academic reinterpretation of the Quran, the book seeks to reclaim the beauty, mysticism and virtues of Islamic teaching through a concept Khan said he believes, “Muslims have not yet understood — or simply ignored.”
……………………….
Muslims do not fail to understand this, nor to ignore it–they simply reject it, per orthodox Islam.
More:
Where in his book does Khan endorse “religious and political freedom”? Does he believe that Muslims who apostatize should not be punished? Does he think that Muslims should not be proselytizing among the Unbelievers? Does he really think that Islam endorses religious freedom, given that historically, in Muslim-dominated lands, non-Muslims were allowed to remain alive to practice their faith only if they accepted the onerous conditions of the dhimmi status? As for political freedom, what does Muqtedar Khan mean by that?
……………………….
Let’s keep it vague for the optimistic Infidels…
More:
That concept is Ihsan, taken from the Quran passage that says, “God is with those who do beautiful deeds.”
……………………….
Unfortunately, in Islam such “beautiful deeds” include raping, robbing, persecuting, and mass slaughtering Infidels; oppressing women, and crushing any resistance to Islam.
More:
“An Islamic State is currently one where Islamic Law is enforced — and these are laws that come from the medieval understanding of Islam. Until we change that, we will never have good governance,” he said. “It is unfair of Muslims to demand non-Muslims bypass realities like ISIS and al-Qaeda and discover true Islam. Muslims must manifest what it is. The Prophet has said three times that you’re not a Muslim if your neighbor is afraid of you.”
……………………….
There is no modern understanding of Islam–it is the same today as it was during the Dark Ages.
And who is a neighbor in Islam? Muslims only, and then only of the same sect, or else they can be treated like Infidels.
In fact, the whole of Islam makes it clear that Infidels are *supposed* to be afraid of Muslims. This is a major part of the persecution of dhimmitude.
More:
His book has already attracted wide interest, from Mennonite Christians to fellow Muslims. The American Federation of Muslims of Indian Origins plans to recognize the publication for “excellence in scholarship and interfaith outreach” — an honor that speaks to his very goal.
……………………..
Actually, all the enthusiasm over this book I have seen has been from hopeful Infidels–*not* from Muslims. This should not surprise.
More:
His book does not display “excellence in scholarship,” given how much of the Qur’an he deliberately overlooks, but certainly it shows a deep interest in “interfaith outreach.”
……………………….
Yes–that is what this is all about–whitewashing Islam to the Kuffar.
More:
“Muslims could carve a niche for themselves as the minority that cares, serves and loves everyone,” Khan writes in Islam and Good Governance. “Muslim states and societies can advocate a culture of volunteerism. There are volunteer movements in the Muslim world whose explicit goal is to gain closeness to God by service to humanity…
……………………….
Not really. The fact is that most real charities in the Muslim world are run by Infidels, and most of the aid during natural disasters and other catastrophes comes from Infidel nations.
As for the idea that Muslims *could* change everything about their 1400 years of history–well, they *could*–but there is no indication that they ever will, since it goes against everything Islam teaches.
Steve Meikle says
His question has only one honest answer. that he did not give it means his asking was not honest.
If terrorism is not his faith yet terrorists act in the name of Islam and do so according to Islam itself then his faith IS NOT ISLAM.
there! that was not hard was it?
well , yes for a deceived cultist such is agonizing, and i know this as i had to re interpret Biblical Christianity to get out of my “fundamentalism” – I think the term a misnomer as pertain to Christianity.
But then theological liberals whether they call themselves Muslims or Christians, are not true adherents of their respective religions. Instead they are cowards for not having the integrity to reject the religion outright if they deny it score doctrines