The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Thursday, October 15, 2015

The canon of Muslim-haters

Some commenters have said that Islam and its adherents have provided nothing useful to the store of world knowledge, or at least not enough useful to reckon against the damage they have done. I'll not argue that point here. Here instead I will offer a canon of texts to which those commenters resort for evidence:

  • Emmet Scott, Mohammed et Charlemagne Revisited
  • Robert Spencer, Did Muhammad Exist
  • Bill Warner, Political Islam
  • Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire [asterisked, as too pro-Islamic]
  • Karl-Heinz Ohlig, The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History [+ the rest of Inârah, + by Norbert G. Pressburg's interim status-quaestonis What the Modern Martyr Should Know]

The commenters further name-dropped:

  • John Julius Norwich
  • Henri Pirenne

But I have not read this far, myself. I know even Gibbon only from excerpts. So I won't hazard to what degree they agree with the extremists.

As far as my thoughts on those books I have read: I rated Scott and Nor'burg 2/5 apiece, Inârah so far 3/5. Spencer (here) would be 3/5 (his book on ISIS and his Muhammad biography were 4/5 IMO).

I got the feeling that Robert R. Reilly, The Closing of the Muslim Mind was too milquetoast for this lot; but I also got the feeling that some of the aforementioned commenters had read this one too. I expect that Wright's read it. But Wright's not always honest. So if Wright has read it, he skipped over what it had to say about the Mu'tazila - deliberately.

As a general rule, I prefer knowing to not knowing; the texts noted here wobble uncertainly on that fence. If most of these commenters are confronted with a Muslim who knows what he's talking about, I expect they will be defeated.


posted by Zimri on 19:48 | link | 0 comments

On this site




Sophia



Politics



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved