It is common knowledge that there are thousands of religions globally. Most of the religions worldwide start with difficulties and several misapprehensions. Just like other beliefs, Islam is one of the prominent convictions that begun with conflicts amongst different viewpoints of worships. Nonetheless, Islam is continuously facing terrific approaches from the world, especially from the West. For instance, two well-known authors, Bernard Lewis, and Nicolaas J.E van der Zee’s articles, The Root of Muslim Rage and The Root of Muslim Rage Revisited, portray the tension amid Muslims and the West. Sorrowfully, there are horrific happenings that are done by Muslims, which predicts that Islam is a religion of violence. Moreover, the clash of civilizations
…show more content…
The fact that this sentence could be said insouciantly is inconsolable. The definition of Islam in Arabic is submission, which derives from the word peace. Clearly, Muslims who commit crimes are going in contradiction of their faith. Thus, interpretation is what promotes violence, and not religion.
Lewis addresses of a clash of civilizations, which is a concept that politics and faith are the source of problems. In the world we live in today, there are political issues in almost every country. The interference of belief with governments will only make the matter worse. For instance, the relationship amongst Islam and the West could be understood as a clash of civilizations. As a result, the connection between the parallel hemispheres is turning into a catastrophe. Inclusively, religion and politics should be separated. In addition, a clash of civilizations lead to the delusion that Nicolaas believes, which Islam is a monolith. Muslims believe in tawhid, meaning that there is only one Allah, with no other association. Lewis quotes, “The Koran is of course strictly monotheistic, and recognizes one God, one universal power only” (48). Thus, misunderstanding statements of Islam will lead to fallacy assumptions of the overall religion. Likewise, one cannot shape and simplify an entire religion, based on individuals’ words or …show more content…
For example, Lewis specifies in his article, “Suddenly or so it seemed, America had become the archenemy, the incarnation of evil, the diabolic opponent of all that is good, and specifically, for Muslims, of Islam” (50,52). There is nothing in Islam that mentions any hate towards the West, or other countries. The Muslim population does not think America is an enemy to them. In fact, some Muslims look up to America; if a few think that the West is evil then that reflects their persona, and not their religion. Therefore, Lewis’ saying is incorrect because oversimplifying a community is
The fact that this sentence could be said insouciantly is inconsolable. The definition of Islam in Arabic is submission, which derives from the word peace. Clearly, Muslims who commit crimes are going in contradiction of their faith. Thus, interpretation is what promotes violence, and not religion.
Lewis addresses of a clash of civilizations, which is a concept that politics and faith are the source of problems. In the world we live in today, there are political issues in almost every country. The interference of belief with governments will only make the matter worse. For instance, the relationship amongst Islam and the West could be understood as a clash of civilizations. As a result, the connection between the parallel hemispheres is turning into a catastrophe. Inclusively, religion and politics should be separated. In addition, a clash of civilizations lead to the delusion that Nicolaas believes, which Islam is a monolith. Muslims believe in tawhid, meaning that there is only one Allah, with no other association. Lewis quotes, “The Koran is of course strictly monotheistic, and recognizes one God, one universal power only” (48). Thus, misunderstanding statements of Islam will lead to fallacy assumptions of the overall religion. Likewise, one cannot shape and simplify an entire religion, based on individuals’ words or …show more content…
For example, Lewis specifies in his article, “Suddenly or so it seemed, America had become the archenemy, the incarnation of evil, the diabolic opponent of all that is good, and specifically, for Muslims, of Islam” (50,52). There is nothing in Islam that mentions any hate towards the West, or other countries. The Muslim population does not think America is an enemy to them. In fact, some Muslims look up to America; if a few think that the West is evil then that reflects their persona, and not their religion. Therefore, Lewis’ saying is incorrect because oversimplifying a community is