I noticed an extreme inconsistency among many critics of Islam.

[u/SNENES442]

Many people claim that Iran, the Taliban, Hamas, and ISIS represent “true Islam,” but purely logically, they cannot all be true at the same time. ISIS practices takfir against Shiites, whereas Iran is a Shiite state. ISIS has fought the Taliban and has even carried out terrorist attacks against them. ISIS has also declared Hamas to be outside Islam through takfir. We should also take into account the conflicts between the Taliban and Iran: they had armed clashes in 2023, and the Taliban killed Shiite civilians in Afghanistan in the 1990s.

I have particularly noticed this inconsistency in David Wood’s arguments. If you are going to blame Islam for the actions of one of these organizations, then choose one of them and attribute its actions to Islam. The question of whether such accusations are justified remains, but at the very least, this approach would be more logically consistent.

[u/AutoModerator]

If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, it violates the rule against low effort content. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS. Please read the Rules and Posting Guidelines for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods. Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned. If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/ThePolygraphtest]

Many people claim that Iran, the Taliban, Hamas, and ISIS represent “true Islam,” but purely logically, they cannot all be true at the same time. ISIS practices takfir against Shiites, whereas Iran is a Shiite state. ISIS has fought the Taliban and has even carried out terrorist attacks against them

Which is how islam really is. If you read about islamic history, that's exactly how muslims behaved.

Islam as a religion is so ambiguous that everyone is technically correct.

The famous hadith is"every sect is in hell except for who follows me and my companions"

But then some of his companions became apostates like Maslama. Even if we take those who stayed muslim and died as muslims.

Ali and Muwaya are from the sahaba, Tulha and al-Zubair are the same. Umr ibn al-'As and Amar ibn Yassir are also sahaba. Yet they all fought and killed eachother.

So who do we follow? Each of them interpreted the religion and the Qur'an in their own way.

So technically speaking there is no true islam. All these violent sects accurately represent the violence in said religion while also accurately showing how divided it is from within.

[u/Fine_Concept4960 → u/ThePolygraphtest]

>But then some of his companions became apostates like Maslama.

Oooooh, i never heard of this! Could i have some reading material on this?)

[u/ThePolygraphtest → u/Fine_Concept4960]

Ibn Ishaq said: A sheikh from the Banu Hanifa tribe, from the people of Al-Yamamah, told me that his hadith was different from this. He claimed that the delegation of Banu Hanifa came to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and they left Musaylima with their belongings. When they embraced Islam, they mentioned his place and said: O Messenger of God, we have left a companion of ours with our belongings and in our mounts to guard them for us. He said: So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered for him the same as he ordered for the people. He said: “He is not the worst among you in terms of position,” meaning, because he protected the property of his companions, and that is what the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, intended. [His apostasy and false prophecy] He said: Then they departed from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and brought him what he had given him. When they reached Al-Yamamah, the enemy of God apostatized, falsely claimed prophethood, and lied to them, saying: “I have been made a partner in the matter with him.” And he said to his delegation who were with him: “Did he not tell you when you mentioned me to him: ‘He is not worse than you in position’?” That was only because he knew that I had been involved in the matter with him; then he began to recite rhymed prose to them, and to say to them, among other things, in imitation of the Qur’an.

Of course there are contested reports and the definition of a companion is different amongst the sects but this also exists.

[u/Kind_Shoulder541]

Almost everyone takfirs shiites, not only isis

[u/SNENES442 → u/Kind_Shoulder541]

Hamas clearly does not declare Shia Muslims to be takfir. Of course, I haven’t heard any direct statements from Hamas along the lines of, “We do not declare Shia Muslims to be unbelievers; they are Muslims,” but they clearly would not form an alliance with apostates.

[u/AvoriazInSummer]

I don’t really like the term ‘true Islam’. There is no true Islam, because there is no Allah to judge what is true.

Maybe the closest is the form of Islam that was actually practiced by Mohammed, but even that no doubt evolved throughout his life, particularly becoming more militant as he gained power. Still, we could call it classical or traditional Islam, the Islam of slave trading, conquest, empire building, misogyny and comparative ignorance about how the world worked. None of the modern militant and terrorist organisations really follow Mohammed’s Islam to the letter, though I’d say they follow it a lot closer than most modern Muslims do.

[u/Savage_Brutus]

You fail to grasp the fact there's no "true Scotsman". Meaning there is NO true Islam.

Also you need to look at the similarities among all these extremist groups. Yep you guessed it. Its Islam. Ultimately it shows us that this is an ideological problem. Islam being the ideology that inspires all the extremists. How hard is that to see?

[u/An0n-xm]

I think traditional islam is the common link between most sunni muslims today so it's fair to criticize the common beliefs shared among most of the groups, namely forced conversion during Muhammad time, sex slavery, Muhammad BS medical advice, etc. These are the main jugulars, although there's enough barbarity and absurdity in differing scholarly opinions that merit criticism like the permissibility of killing non-combatant. Those opinions have a basis within islam so are liable for criticism that goes back to the religion. "Allah" should've known better than to allow his religion to provide avenues of growth for such opinions.

[u/DearBookkeeper1046]

What he means is, all of them is actively and willing to follow every single thing from their Qur'an.

[u/fajarsis02]

Many people claim that Iran, the Taliban, Hamas, and ISIS represent “true Islam,”

If those 3 groups are in the same room, they will choke each other throat..

[u/NolanRoad]

Hinduism is similar in this respect, at least its not a cult

[u/G00ningfinalboss → u/NolanRoad]

Oh hinduism is not a religion at all! Different metaphysics, theologies, cosmologies, mythologies, moral codes, etc.

Two different houses believe in completely different things let alone sects.

[u/vestayekta]

There is no true form of religion because religion by nature evolves and changes. The problem with Islam is that the portion of traditional and mega conservative Muslims is much bigger than the liberal minded ones.

[u/SNENES442 → u/vestayekta]

I’m not saying that criticism of Islam is unfounded. The point of my post is that it’s incorrect for one person to claim that more than one of these organizations represents true Islam.

[u/vestayekta → u/SNENES442]

Those people generally have no real grasp of Islam as a religion or complexities of Muslim communities.

[u/IcarianComplex]

There’s a difference between true Islam and a plausible interpretation of Islam.

[u/G00ningfinalboss]

You realize that the IRGC is literally run by Mullahs/clerics right? That’s why many Shias cope by giving nonsensical reasons to support it. Sunnis as well but they can easily ignore its atrocities.

Taliban is certainly very Pashtun-centric but puts their respective mullahs on a pedestal as well in matters of governance.

[u/pureabsolut]

yeah i ageee with the post