A Tribute To Nabeel Qureshi
- Thread starter Red Sky at Morning
- Start date
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
Sure thing. ; ) Lakum deenukum wa liya deen. For what it's worth, I did a bit of research as to what NQ said about Islam and from what I gather he basically claimed that ISIS has it all right about Islam. They are the true followers of Islam, while the rest of us Muslims got it wrong and/or are pretending to denounce ISIS until Islam rules the world. SMH.
http://religiondispatches.org/looking-for-islam-in-all-the-wrong-places-a-response-to-nabeel-qureshi/
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
lol - okay I clicked it for the heck of it and my goodness Red, I did not think you were so gullible.
rainerann
Star
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2017
- Messages
- 4,550
I think he was actually from Palestine and grew up Muslim. He wasn't Muslim for a second. His family is Muslim. He went to school wanting to evangelize people to Islam according to his upbringing. His parents were the equivalent of a missionary to Islam.
However the point of the thread was as a memorial and not to bring up a debate.
The debate was created by Colgate who suggested that he shouldn't have criticized Islam implying that there was a connection which would be based on superstition. He didn't get cancer for criticizing Islam. People don't need to learn this lesson as the result of his death which Colgate implied.
Otherwise, you might want to go to any hospital and judge why they are dying the way they are too.
Then things seemed to have gotten out of hand. Can't really understand how this thread is continuing.
It was just a thread that acted as a memorial for a man who died a Christian. It had nothing to do with debating Islam.
However the point of the thread was as a memorial and not to bring up a debate.
The debate was created by Colgate who suggested that he shouldn't have criticized Islam implying that there was a connection which would be based on superstition. He didn't get cancer for criticizing Islam. People don't need to learn this lesson as the result of his death which Colgate implied.
Otherwise, you might want to go to any hospital and judge why they are dying the way they are too.
Then things seemed to have gotten out of hand. Can't really understand how this thread is continuing.
It was just a thread that acted as a memorial for a man who died a Christian. It had nothing to do with debating Islam.
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 13,979
I once heard Paul Jinadu speak. He had a vision of Jesus and it changed his life. God loves even the worst warlords, with blood on their hands. If this video was some form of propaganda, it would surprise me, but regardless...
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 13,979
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
Tell that to Floss and Red lol. Etagloc made clear why he posted what he did.
You don't see it as propaganda because you don't know Islam.
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
Wow just Wow. I've looked at the comments on vids about his illness and passing and have not seen a "Allah cursed you" from any Muslim. This is really pathetic.
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
Nabeel Qureshi made his debut into the evangelical anti-Muslim apologetics market with his conversion narrative Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, published in 2014. In the past, Qureshi has professed charity towards Muslims themselves even as he accuses his former religion of having a history laced with vicious violence. But his most recent opinion piece makes us—a Muslim Qur’anic scholar and a Christian in dialogue with Islam—wonder just how much one can separate demonizing a religion from demonizing its adherents.
For Qureshi, the Qur’an is a bloody and violent text—a fact which learned interpreters of Islam today ignore, he implies, but somehow the unlearned Jihadists get right. Qureshi claims that as a young man, he was shielded from reading Qur’an and hadith on his own, and instead was taught a message of Islamic peace and love. This reading was subsequently shattered by his own independent investigation of the texts, bypassing centuries of the tradition and scholarly interpretations.
Qureshi claims to speak more authoritatively on Islam than the imams whose interpretation he explicitly ignores. He remembers as a child, “if I wanted to know about the traditions of Muhammad, I had to ask imams or elders in my tradition of Islam.” It was not until he bypassed “centuries of tradition and their imams’ interpretations” that he discovered real Islam—apparently on the internet, where young potential ISIS recruits easily find real Islam too.
Qureshi’s rejection of the learned scholars of his community in favor of the internet (maybe Reddit’s exmuslim sub) is comparable to an atheist learning everything she knows about Christianity from Richard Dawkins.
Like all fundamentalists, Qureshi’s deviation from the normative tradition begins the moment he declares the religious scholars of his tradition inept, corrupt, and unqualified to transmit the religious knowledge they’ve accumulated. Most Muslims understand and agree that reading the foundational texts of Islam (Qur’an and hadith) independent of the 1400-year interpretive tradition is inauthentic. So inauthentic that it is precisely this criticism of fundamentalism that hundreds of Muslim scholars use to delegitimize the claims of the Islamic State, calling them anything but Muslim.
Qureshi rejects the 1400-year interpretive tradition of Islam. He claims that his discovery of the Qur’an and hadith as violent stems from a “literal” reading, “interpreted consistently.” Yet his reading of the Qur’an does rely on tradition—albeit tradition he gets wrong.
“…there is no such thing as a simple, literal, consistent reading of any sacred text.”
His prime example of the Qur’an’s violence comes from Surah 9, the “Chapter of Repentance.” Why Surah 9? Because, Qureshi argues, “throughout history, Muslim theologians have understood and taught this progression, that the message of the Qur’an culminates in its ninth chapter.” Qureshi here refers to the interpretive principle of abrogation, a method in Islamic law (fiqh) ruling that the later revelations overrule the earlier. Of course, the Qur’an interpreted in Qureshi’s “literal” way neither states the principle of abrogation nor spells out which surahs were revealed earlier or later. So much for “bypassing centuries of tradition.”
This might come as an embarrassment to Qureshi, but the Quranic revelation culminates in Surah 112 “The Triumphant Succor”:
In the Name of God, the Lord of Mercy, the Giver of Mercy
When God’s help comes and he opens up your way [Prophet] When you see people embracing God’s faith in crowds
Celebrate the praise of your Lord and ask His forgiveness:
He is always ready to accept repentance.
This refers to the liberation of the citizens of Mecca then under the oppressive rule of the Quraysh tribe. Every Muslim child knows that when Muhammad’s army reached Mecca, not one inhabitant of the citizen was harmed, nor forced to convert to Islam. This episode is attested by both Muslim and non-Muslim historians. Instead, Muhammad explicitly granted absolute clemency for those who waged more than a decade of war against him and his exiled community. Clemency, not violent retribution, is the very last chapter of the Quranic revelation, reminding the believers of their Lord’s clemency for the offenders.
Qureshi tries to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to refute the Qur’an via bypassing its traditional interpretation, but then also uses that tradition to refute the Quran.
“Jihadists share Qureshi’s belief: a real Muslim is militant.”
What’s more, as the recipient of an MA in Religious Studies from Duke and a current PhD student in New Testament at Oxford, Qureshi should know better than to pretend that one can read a text without a tradition or a context. Qureshi fails to understand how sacred scriptures actually work within religious traditions. As we change, the ways we read scripture change too. When brought to bear on our own times, there is no such thing as a simple, literal, consistent reading of any sacred text. Interpreting sacred texts requires tough choices. Some exegetes choose to emphasize God’s Rahmah, or Compassion. Others choose to emphasize verses that can be used (correctly or not) to support violence. This does not mean that all choices are equal. There are bad readings.
Qureshi, by contrast, is a fundamentalist. He seems to think there must be a single meaning of a verse in the Qur’an. But unbeknownst to Qureshi, there are literally hundreds of preserved commentaries to the Quran some of which have been translated to English, mostly encyclopedic in presenting the widest range of interpretations known to their authors. Qureshi fails to acknowledge the assumptions and the contexts he brings to bear on reading the Qur’an. That is the definition of fundamentalism.
Qureshi offers his own solution to ISIS and other Jihadists:
sharing alternative worldviews with Muslims is one of the best methods to address radicalization.
He means evangelizing the Gospels of Jesus—an Islamic prophet by the way. For Qureshi, you are either a dishonest Muslim, ignorant of your own tradition—or a good Christian. He conveniently ignores the fact that the majority of Muslims, including all the imams he has rejected, do not interpret the so-called violent verses in the Quran as a call to arms or an absolute command.
Jihadists share Qureshi’s belief: a real Muslim is militant.
For a genuine dialogue between Christians and Muslims to be successful, there need to be some terms of agreement. Christians and Muslims need to read each other’s sacred texts, but they need to be careful not to ignore the authentic interpretive tradition surrounding those texts.
For Qureshi, the Qur’an is a bloody and violent text—a fact which learned interpreters of Islam today ignore, he implies, but somehow the unlearned Jihadists get right. Qureshi claims that as a young man, he was shielded from reading Qur’an and hadith on his own, and instead was taught a message of Islamic peace and love. This reading was subsequently shattered by his own independent investigation of the texts, bypassing centuries of the tradition and scholarly interpretations.
Qureshi claims to speak more authoritatively on Islam than the imams whose interpretation he explicitly ignores. He remembers as a child, “if I wanted to know about the traditions of Muhammad, I had to ask imams or elders in my tradition of Islam.” It was not until he bypassed “centuries of tradition and their imams’ interpretations” that he discovered real Islam—apparently on the internet, where young potential ISIS recruits easily find real Islam too.
Qureshi’s rejection of the learned scholars of his community in favor of the internet (maybe Reddit’s exmuslim sub) is comparable to an atheist learning everything she knows about Christianity from Richard Dawkins.
Like all fundamentalists, Qureshi’s deviation from the normative tradition begins the moment he declares the religious scholars of his tradition inept, corrupt, and unqualified to transmit the religious knowledge they’ve accumulated. Most Muslims understand and agree that reading the foundational texts of Islam (Qur’an and hadith) independent of the 1400-year interpretive tradition is inauthentic. So inauthentic that it is precisely this criticism of fundamentalism that hundreds of Muslim scholars use to delegitimize the claims of the Islamic State, calling them anything but Muslim.
Qureshi rejects the 1400-year interpretive tradition of Islam. He claims that his discovery of the Qur’an and hadith as violent stems from a “literal” reading, “interpreted consistently.” Yet his reading of the Qur’an does rely on tradition—albeit tradition he gets wrong.
“…there is no such thing as a simple, literal, consistent reading of any sacred text.”
His prime example of the Qur’an’s violence comes from Surah 9, the “Chapter of Repentance.” Why Surah 9? Because, Qureshi argues, “throughout history, Muslim theologians have understood and taught this progression, that the message of the Qur’an culminates in its ninth chapter.” Qureshi here refers to the interpretive principle of abrogation, a method in Islamic law (fiqh) ruling that the later revelations overrule the earlier. Of course, the Qur’an interpreted in Qureshi’s “literal” way neither states the principle of abrogation nor spells out which surahs were revealed earlier or later. So much for “bypassing centuries of tradition.”
This might come as an embarrassment to Qureshi, but the Quranic revelation culminates in Surah 112 “The Triumphant Succor”:
In the Name of God, the Lord of Mercy, the Giver of Mercy
When God’s help comes and he opens up your way [Prophet] When you see people embracing God’s faith in crowds
Celebrate the praise of your Lord and ask His forgiveness:
He is always ready to accept repentance.
This refers to the liberation of the citizens of Mecca then under the oppressive rule of the Quraysh tribe. Every Muslim child knows that when Muhammad’s army reached Mecca, not one inhabitant of the citizen was harmed, nor forced to convert to Islam. This episode is attested by both Muslim and non-Muslim historians. Instead, Muhammad explicitly granted absolute clemency for those who waged more than a decade of war against him and his exiled community. Clemency, not violent retribution, is the very last chapter of the Quranic revelation, reminding the believers of their Lord’s clemency for the offenders.
Qureshi tries to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to refute the Qur’an via bypassing its traditional interpretation, but then also uses that tradition to refute the Quran.
“Jihadists share Qureshi’s belief: a real Muslim is militant.”
What’s more, as the recipient of an MA in Religious Studies from Duke and a current PhD student in New Testament at Oxford, Qureshi should know better than to pretend that one can read a text without a tradition or a context. Qureshi fails to understand how sacred scriptures actually work within religious traditions. As we change, the ways we read scripture change too. When brought to bear on our own times, there is no such thing as a simple, literal, consistent reading of any sacred text. Interpreting sacred texts requires tough choices. Some exegetes choose to emphasize God’s Rahmah, or Compassion. Others choose to emphasize verses that can be used (correctly or not) to support violence. This does not mean that all choices are equal. There are bad readings.
Qureshi, by contrast, is a fundamentalist. He seems to think there must be a single meaning of a verse in the Qur’an. But unbeknownst to Qureshi, there are literally hundreds of preserved commentaries to the Quran some of which have been translated to English, mostly encyclopedic in presenting the widest range of interpretations known to their authors. Qureshi fails to acknowledge the assumptions and the contexts he brings to bear on reading the Qur’an. That is the definition of fundamentalism.
Qureshi offers his own solution to ISIS and other Jihadists:
sharing alternative worldviews with Muslims is one of the best methods to address radicalization.
He means evangelizing the Gospels of Jesus—an Islamic prophet by the way. For Qureshi, you are either a dishonest Muslim, ignorant of your own tradition—or a good Christian. He conveniently ignores the fact that the majority of Muslims, including all the imams he has rejected, do not interpret the so-called violent verses in the Quran as a call to arms or an absolute command.
Jihadists share Qureshi’s belief: a real Muslim is militant.
For a genuine dialogue between Christians and Muslims to be successful, there need to be some terms of agreement. Christians and Muslims need to read each other’s sacred texts, but they need to be careful not to ignore the authentic interpretive tradition surrounding those texts.
grateful servant
Star
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 3,150
He is from a Pakistani background (not Palestinian). His religion was founded in 1889 in British India by a man claiming to be the Messiah (Jesus).
Camidria
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 736
As far as I remember I posted the first video of him...... so what are you saying here?
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
I didn't mean you lol. And I'm not going to elaborate because talking about a specific person is not the point. I mentioned that in a larger context.
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
I am accused of starting a debate and apparently being some sort of super-secret covert Muslim. Apparently so covert even other Muslims don't know I'm a Muslim 
apparently so covert even I don't know I'm a covert agent
***orders tea, asks for it to be shaken not stirred***
apparently so covert even I don't know I'm a covert agent***orders tea, asks for it to be shaken not stirred***
Camidria
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 736
Right just checking...
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
Look..... if you spend years and years travelling to different countries and preaching against..... any religion...... and you mysteriously die out of nowhere at a very young age.......
it's.... "interesting". However you want to put it. If you're Richard Dawkins and you suddenly get struck by lightning.... it's "interesting". I didn't really say anything in particular. As I said, my post was mostly a shocked-face and exclamation points.
All I did was call attention to some strange facts. And if a whole bunch of people attack you for pointing out some facts.... I think it more than likely means there is something significant about those facts.
it's.... "interesting". However you want to put it. If you're Richard Dawkins and you suddenly get struck by lightning.... it's "interesting". I didn't really say anything in particular. As I said, my post was mostly a shocked-face and exclamation points.
All I did was call attention to some strange facts. And if a whole bunch of people attack you for pointing out some facts.... I think it more than likely means there is something significant about those facts.
rainerann
Star
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2017
- Messages
- 4,550
All the more reason to consider several of your recents post as inflammatory.I am accused of starting a debate and apparently being some sort of super-secret covert Muslim. Apparently so covert even other Muslims don't know I'm a Muslim
***orders tea, asks for it to be shaken not stirred***
Your flaming your "religious wars" because you have no real respect for either side. I seen what you posted as a status and seen you switch sides before.
This thread was not intended to debate Islam. How you didn't know implying that he had cancer for criticizing Islam was offensive is not believable. You disrespect us all with your superstitious comment.
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
People should not be scared of facts. And people rushing to try to conceal facts only call further attention to them.
“You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot as worthless.
-Matthew 5:13
“You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that. But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.
-Matthew 5:43-47
“You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot as worthless.
-Matthew 5:13
“You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that. But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.
-Matthew 5:43-47
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
You're the one disrespecting me lol. I haven't made post after post about you but here you are making a second post about me- and then saying I am the disrespectful one lol. Meanwhile, I've mostly been on here discussing ideas and avoiding discussing people. As far as Naeel, I've hardly said anything about him- all I did was point out a strange fact.
You might see my thinking as superstitious. Lots of people would see your thinking as superstitious! Whether we're superstitious or not, I have a right to my thinking that many would see as superstitious and you have a right to your thinking that many would see as superstitious.
And as far as being inflammatory.... pointing out an obvious, strange fact is not wrong. I am not wrong because I happened to mention the elephant in the room.
The fact that people want to attack me shows..... they're not concerned about the elephant in the room. That's not what concerns them- they just don't want anyone mentioning the very large, very obvious elephant in the room. You have the right to your own voice and I have the right to point out the elephant in the room.
And if people are so terrified of the elephant in the room and want to insist "how dare you mention that large elephant!" it just shows insecurity in their own position. I'm not trying to hide a blatantly obvious elephant.
Etagloc
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 5,291
And as far as my status..... if you don't like it, don't read it. The Muslims here are a credit to their religion. I think the Muslims here act more Christian than the Christians here do (I'm not saying in all cases- but I think overall). So many of the Christians here direct so much energy into being hateful and self-righteous that I think if they directed that energy into following their religion, they would be saints.