Fitna : An Australian Christian Response

Richard Schumack wrote this piece, questioning the truthfulness and validity of the portrayals in the movie. He also raised some questions like, "Does the Qur’an indeed promote violence in the name of Islam?" as portrayed by Geert Wilders?

He also mentioned briefly about how the task of interpreting some difficult verses like 47:4 has been something of which the Muslim world grapples with. Ibn Kathir explained the verse not as an injunction to everyday violence, but rather a verse rooted in the military context of the Battle of Badr.

For we cannot read the first part of 47:4,

"If you encounter (in war) those who disbelieve, you may strike the necks...",

without considering the overall context of the subsequent part

"...If you take them as captives you may set them free or ransom them, until the war ends. Had GOD willed, He could have granted you victory, without war..."

Schumack also raised some other interpretive issues as well,

Is this Qur’anic injunction situational in application? Is this verse tempered by other teaching? Has it been ‘abrogated’ by other verses?  Is it metaphorical or symbolic? Are the interpretations taken by teachers in the movie representative of the Muslim scholarly community?

At the end, he advised non-Muslims

For the non-Muslim encountering any anti-Islamic polemic such as Fitna, it is important to be slow to adopt the rhetoric without first questioning your understanding of Islam and the Qur’an.

Ask whether an "Islamist" reading of the Qur’an is authentic. Pick up a Qur’an and read it for yourself. Ask your Muslim neighbour how they read these verses in the Qur’an.

Importantly, don’t judge Islam by its worst advocates. Comparing the worst evil perpetrated in the name of Islam with the best good done in the name of Christ (or vice versa) achieves nothing.

The argument of Fitna must be established or dismissed by the Qur’an.

May peace and goodwill  be with us all.