APOLOGIA: Appendix 2 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments

March 26, 2024

Appendix 2 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments

Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Appendix 1. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks.

Appendix 2: Criticizing Islam is Islamophobic? (Part 2 of 2)

Objection: Pointing to the Islamic beliefs of Hamas terrorists is Islamophobic.

Reply: No, my drawing attention to Islam’s negative view of Jews (and women and non-Muslims) and my encouraging careful thinking about Islam (especially its founder whom radical Islamists take very seriously) are not instances of Islamophobia. Rather, these are reason-able, evidence-based concerns.

To make this clear, what follows are some of my thoughts about Islam and Christianity.

Before I begin, please know this: Vandalizing Mosques or otherwise treating Muslims with hatred and disrespect is wrong, period.

But know this, too: Thinking carefully about Islam is NOT Islamophobia. One can have non-phobic, reason-able concerns.

Let's proceed.

The focus of Islam is the Qur'an and Muhammad. Muhammad, according to the Qur'an, is the “seal of the prophets,” i.e., Muhammad is God’s latest and greatest prophet. He calls us to submit to God and His Messenger (Muhammad).

According to the Qur’an, Jesus is to be respected. But, although born of a virgin and doer of miracles, Jesus is merely a prophet. Jesus is not God in human flesh, contrary to the New Testament.

According to the Qur’an, and contrary to the New Testament, Jesus didn’t die on the cross (somebody else did) and Jesus didn’t resurrect bodily after death.

About the Qur'an: Its revelation about Jesus comes to Muhammad via an (alleged) angel, 600 years after Jesus’ life, 1000 kilometers away, in a cave.

About the New Testament: It contains historical testimony for Jesus’ life that is close to the events temporally and geographically (i.e., it contains accounts of eyewitnesses and close associates of eyewitnesses).

The Qur’an’s chapters are ordered from longest to shortest, not chronologically. Chronologically, the Qur’an’s peaceful verses occur before Muhammad gains power, whereas its calls to jihad (war on unbelievers/ “infidels”) occur after Muhammad gains power. According to the Qur’an, the later verses abrogate (cancel) the earlier verses.

According to the Qur’an’s last revelation, Muhammad orders his followers to kill infidels, i.e., those who don’t agree with his views about God.

According to Islamic tradition (hadith) and biographies of Muhammad (sirah), Muhammad is a warlord, responsible for hundreds of murders plus the enslavement of men, women, and children.

Also, according to Islamic tradition and the Qur'an, Muhammad has a low view of women (their testimony is worth half that of a man, more women than men will be in hell, they can be beaten) and Muhammad married a girl when she was six, consummating the marriage three years later.

Yes, the Bible has calls to war in the Old Testament. But the Bible’s calls to war are specific and limited to particular times and places, whereas the Qur’an’s call for jihad is Muhammad’s latest revelation and is open-ended—and continues.

According to the New Testament, Jesus promotes his message by allowing his blood to be shed on a cross. But Muhammad, according to the Qur’an and tradition, promotes his message by shedding the blood of others.

Yes, most Muslims don’t follow the violent Muhammad, which is good. They elevate his peaceful traits above the violent.

But why do this, if Muhammad’s call to violent jihad is his latest revelation and this latest revelation abrogates the earlier peaceful revelation?

If Islamic “reform” means (at least in part) getting back to basics, what are those basics?

We live in an open society. Surely we should encourage investigation of the evidence of competing religious truth claims, while showing respect to those who hold them.

Such investigation isn’t a sign of disrespect, nor is it, in the case of investigating Islam, a case of Islamophobia (just as investigating Christianity isn’t a case of disrespect to Christians or Christophobia).

Let’s welcome Muslims to Canada, especially if they are fleeing persecution. Let’s also encourage careful thinking.

Love and truth-seeking can co-exist.^1,2,3

NOTES

1. A version of this article appeared in my column/blog APOLOGIA in The Carillon, March 16, 2017. I have edited it to include Hamas (the original version only mentioned ISIS). I include this and the previous appendix in this book because it seems to me (as I noted in the previous appendix but add here for emphasis) that atheist philosopher Sam Harris is for the most part correct when he states the following:

There are many things to be said in criticism of Israel, in particular its expansion of settlements on contested land. But Israel’s behaviour is not what explains the suicidal and genocidal inclinations of a group like Hamas. The Islamic doctrines of martyrdom and jihad do. These are religious beliefs, sincerely held. They are beliefs about the moral structure of the universe and they explain how normal people, even good ones, can commit horrific acts of violence against innocent civilians on purpose, not as collateral damage, and still consider themselves good. When you believe life in this world has no value apart from deciding who goes to hell and who goes to paradise, it becomes possible to feel perfectly at ease killing non-combatants or even using your own women and children as human shields. Because you know that any Muslims that get killed will go straight to paradise, for eternity. If you don’t understand that jihadists sincerely believe these things, you don’t understand the problem that Israel faces. The problem isn’t merely Palestinian nationalism or resource competition or any other normal terrestrial grievance. In fact, the problem isn’t even hatred, but there’s enough of that to go around. The problem is religious certainty. (Sam Harris, The Bright Line Between Good and Evil [Episode #340], Making Sense podcast, November 7, 2023.)

I would add (again) that the problem is not merely religious certainty but a religious certainty in a particular religion that is dubious in terms of historical evidence, philosophical reasoning, and morality—a religion that is a death cult. Hence, there is a need to engage in careful, truth-seeking investigation concerning religion, especially Islam.

2. Concerning Islamic Jihadism (as manifested via Hamas, ISIS, etc.) and the just defensive war(s) against such aggression, it is sometimes said that we cannot destroy an idea but we can remove it from power. With this I agree. But I would add some nuance. Definitely we should remove Islamic Jihadism from political power. This takes military force. But we should also weaken Islamic Jihadism by exposing it to the light of truth, reason, and evidence. This takes intellectual force—i.e., sustained careful thinking.

For some recommended resources relevant to careful thinking about Islam, see my list at the end of the previous appendix.

On why there is such an intellectually odd alliance between radical leftist academics (many students and professors in the West) and hard-right Muslims (e.g., Hamas), see Winston Marshall’s important interview with James Lindsay: Uncovering The Rise of Woke Islamism with James Lindsay, The Winston Marshall Show #005, February 14, 2024. In this 52-minute interview Marshall and Lindsay explore the influence of poor thinking—as found in Critical Theory, Postmodernism, and Marxism—on those in the West (especially university professors and students) who support Islamic Jihad. It turns out that the common goal of radical leftists and hard-right Muslims is to destroy the West’s hegemony, i.e., destroy Western liberal democracy and freedom. (James Lindsay is co-author with Helen Pluckrose of the fine book Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody [Durham, North Carolina: Pitchstone Publishing, 2020].).

3. Please excuse this shameless plug: For an easy-to-read and important look at why Christianity (instead of Islam or Atheism or other competing worldviews) is the way to go intellectually (in terms of truth and careful reasoning), see my book APOLOGIA: The Columns: A Defence of Mere Christianity (Amazon KDP, 2023).

Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?