I was listening to a lecture by the late Ahmad Deedat, where he quoted a previous Christian missionary saying that in the past 150 years (I believe he was referring to 1800-1950) there were 60 thousand anti-Islamic books published by Christians.
Is this true? If it were, that would signal more than one book per day for 150 years, something that is unimaginable for us Muslims to do, even to only defend our religion.
25:36 And the true servants of the Most Merciful are those who walk the earth with humility and when the ignorant address them, they respond with words of peace.
I think the term "anti-Islam" is fairly easy to define. The problem is that I doubt I could find agreement on my definition. I think a book written with the intention of attacking a religion as a whole and degrading its followers is obviously an "anti" label. However, I think books that are critical of a religion aren't necessarily "anti". If a book is written with the honest purpose of criticizing certain political and social aspects of a religion, and not the faith itself or the people who practice it in general, then it isn't really "anti" religion but a critical book. I guess my definition would revolve around literature that is "attacking" and literature that is "criticizing". To many I'm sure that definition would be too nuanced, but it works for me.
"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is."
I think the term "anti-Islam" is fairly easy to define. The problem is that I doubt I could find agreement on my definition. I think a book written with the intention of attacking a religion as a whole and degrading its followers is obviously an "anti" label. However, I think books that are critical of a religion aren't necessarily "anti". If a book is written with the honest purpose of criticizing certain political and social aspects of a religion, and not the faith itself or the people who practice it in general, then it isn't really "anti" religion but a critical book. I guess my definition would revolve around literature that is "attacking" and literature that is "criticizing". To many I'm sure that definition would be too nuanced, but it works for me.
I have no problem with that definition. I do not consider differences of opinion as being anti. It is only anti if it is done as a deliberate excuse to stir up hatred. Disagreement does not have to be anti.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks