Reason on Faith

commenting on faith and religion through the eyes of reason

Twitter Blocked by Qasim Rashid (@MuslimIQ)

by Leave a Comment

Recently blocked on Twitter by Ahmadi Muslim Qasim Rashid, he even went as far as deleting his tweets so that I wouldn’t be able to use them in the post expounding on the innocence of my responses, and his subsequent blocking of me on Twitter. So mature.

I was recently blocked on Twitter by Qasim Rashid.

It happened moments after engaging with some of his tweets. First, I commented on this:

Notice how the above tweet has since been deleted? It happened shortly after the original publication of this blog post. I later found the image on an Ahmadi Muslim imam’s twitter feed. So here’s that original image that I was referring to:

I am a Muslim and I love Jesus

 

Here is how I engaged with Qasim’s tweet about this particular saying of Muhammad:

Moments later, I provided some additional followup:

Here’s Qasim’s earlier tweet from the day prior, in the same vein:

My tweet quoting this t-shirt was to point out that this stance, although lovely, is not a groundbreaking admission of love. It is not a bold break with the seeming herd.

If the t-shirt said something like, “I love Wahabbi Muslims. I love strong atheists. I love Mormons. #LoveForAllHatredForNone”, then I think that t-shirt would definitely be out of the ordinary.

If you go back through my Twitter timeline where I engage with Qasim Rashid’s tweets, you’ll often find tweets like this:

Hardly inflammatory or profane.

Putting it into Perspective

It is my opinion that most Ahmadi Muslims are encouraged to read Ahmadiyya Muslim literature, and not critically engage with their own beliefs.

This is true of course, for most organized religions. I suspect Qasim Rashid doesn’t want to engage with some ex-Ahmadi Muslims on Twitter because it will draw attention to his following, that other viewpoints on the theology exist. And that these viewpoints do not espouse bigotry. That these alternate viewpoints do not espouse hate.

These alternate viewpoints, such as my own, espouse the same love for humanity that believing Ahmadi Muslims do.

I also believe that the truth matters, and am willing to change my beliefs in pursuit of that aim.

A Pragmatic Use of Time

Since I know I’ll get asked, I’ll put it out there now:

I welcome engaging with Ahmadi Muslims. I too, also wish to modulate how I interact with people holding views antagonistic to my own. 

I do myself limit such exchanges on Twitter because several 1:1 exchanges are generally not as structured and as impactful as long form writing. Getting my positions formulated in writing first, is going to be a more efficient and effective use of my time.

With a much smaller Twitter following, I can afford to engage with a good number of interlocutors on Twitter and then agree to disagree and move along. I recognize that with Qasim Rashid’s much larger Twitter following, even this suggested approach can be prohibitive from a time perspective.

Still, I think an outright block is a tad over the top. Perhaps I will change my mind one day, should I be in Qasim Rashid’s shoes. I’ll keep an open mind.

Structured Positions

Representatives of organized religions have the benefit of a well formulated corpus of beliefs, doctrines and institutionalized positions on theological matters.

Those of us who have left, have our own very unique stories and positions. For meaningful dialog, I do find it necessary to provide some material espousing how I look at things. This is precisely what I endeavor to do this year. This is so that I may meaningfully engage in more direct dialog with those interested in having such conversations.

Indulging Twitter Conversations

I’ve met many kind and well-intentioned Ahmadi Muslims in person throughout my life. I also imagine that large Twitter followings can be difficult to manage.

It might feel too overwhelming to engage in every conversation. It could understandably be frustrating to feel like one has been challenged, but that one also does not have the needed time it would take to adequately respond.

Blocking me on Twitter is ironic, yes. But I won’t take it personally. I won’t hold it against Qasim Rashid (@MuslimIQ). I still plan to read his books to understand his positions and look forward to writing reviews of such books.

In truth, the friendly battle of ideas will take place with longer form writing — on all sides.

People will read the arguments from different perspectives and then decide for themselves, what makes the most sense. They will decide what is most likely.

Exploring History

In my humble estimation, the beautiful narrative of Muhammad that Ahmadi Muslims have, is a revisionist historical reconstruction. I say this because of the sheer volume of early historical material on Muhammad that paints a very different picture.

You likely won’t find Ahmadi Muslim educational literature referencing the biography written by Ibn Ishaq (Sirat Rasul Allah) as something that even exists. Yet it is the oldest biography on Muhammad in history and it differs in important ways from the biographies of Muhammad published by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at itself.

The average Ahmadi Muslim is shielded from this reality through a combination of their indifference to look at alternate beliefs and claims, coupled with their passive acceptance of the Ahmadi Muslim literature made available to them since childhood. This phenomenon is by no means unique to Ahmadi Muslims. It is common to all of us with inherited belief systems.

Most importantly, it is a universal human trait to identify with the belief systems with which we were raised. Critiques made to question the truth of those religious ideas are mistakenly perceived as an attack on our identities and our very being. This natural human reaction is of course, unfortunate. It hinders us from an objective pursuit of the truth.

I believe we (current and former Ahmadi Muslims) actually have near-identical values on many issues. At least many of us do. We just differ on which narratives of history are most likely. From those key decision points, very different paths emerge about the conclusions we come to and the belief systems that we align with (or not).

So the battle of ideas will come down to whose assemblage of historical sources seems most reasonable versus whose seem the most cherry-picked.

In the end, I do believe that we profess the same desire to arrive at similar conclusions: that we should love our fellow human beings.