[Can Islam be "fixed" and still be Islam?]

On 4/14/2017 at 7:16 PM, Chauncey Tinker said:

There is a lot of talk about reforming Islam these days.  Unfortunately it seems that all this talk is only taking place in the West, and its a subject that is much more popular among non-Muslims than Muslims, and indeed more popular among MSM pundits than people in the real world.

 

These non-Muslims rarely seem to mention two very real previous attempts at reform - the Ahmadi sect (or non-Muslim religion according to most Muslims), and the Bahai faith.  Neither of these attempts ever had much impact and both have suffered much persecution.  In Pakistan you have to sign a declaration that states that the Ahmadis are not Muslims in order to obtain your passport.   An Ahmadi shopkeeper was murdered in Glasgow a little while ago by a devout Sunni Muslim purely because of his faith.  There is much incitement against the Ahmadis in the UK today.

The only ways you could reform this religion would be to either take all the incitements out of the Koran (and hadiths), or to claim to be the messiah, the Mahdi (as in the Ahmadi faith).  To edit the Koran (and hadiths/sura) you would have to declare yourself to be a later prophet with new divine revelations.  The Mahdi's teaching of peace overrides/abrogates the warlike incitements of Mohammed, which is why in general you could describe the Ahmadi sect as a true reform movement.  Why these reformers never suggest to mainstream Muslims that they should become Ahmadis is a question worth asking.  In truth making such a suggestion is a very dangerous thing to do, which is why you can discount the reformers as not having serious intentions.

The idea of a reform of Islam is not only wishful thinking, it is also in fact an idea that lends weight to those who wish to abolish freedom of speech in favour of Islamic blasphemy laws.  Try arguing those points you made here against someone who is pushing the reform agenda, and they will often get quite verbally aggressive towards you - I am speaking from first hand experience here.  In one debate I was accused of wanting to deport all the Muslims from the West, an idea which I have in fact argued quite forcefully against.  In another I was accused of being a useful idiot of the jihadi groups like IS.  The argument goes that if you point out that Islam incites violence against the disbelievers, you are agreeing with the jihadis, and pushing "moderate Muslims" towards more extremist actions, and thereby undermining the "reform" movement.

It is also this kind of thinking that causes any truth-telling about the true nature of the religion to be blocked out of a large amount of media debates (especially in Europe).  It is those who would silence critical analysis of the religious texts in this way who are the true "useful idiots" of the jihadis, because the jihadis also want to stifle all criticism of the religion.  In reality they are partly motivated by cowardice, by fear of being physically attacked.

 

This is how Islam spreads, by instilling fear into people's minds.  The "reform" movement is just the advance guard of the intolerance, it must be opposed.  The best way to oppose it is to point out that there is already a true reform movement, the Ahmadi sect, and ask why these fake "reformers" are not urging mainstream Muslims to turn to the Ahmadiyya faith.

What most people miss is that Islam is a political movement with the clear goal of being the only ruler of the Earth. 

What philosophy or science is there in the teaching of Mohammed? 

What's frightening to me, is how the people want to dream that the teaching of Mohammed is the same as the teaching of Jesus or Buddha, and the jihadis are fringe crazies only. 

I listen to Dr. Bill Warner, Robert Spencer, etc and try to learn more about the actual teaching and history of Islam.