With regards to 'academia', this type of anti-Christian pronouncement by one of the world's leading Islamic authorities is what our overly cautious scholars and clergy typically avoid when discussing the "nuances" of Islam. In fact, they prefer neither to hear of it, nor comment on it, and often seek to silence those of us who do dare to report and comment on Islam's civilizational and theological jihad.
In my estimation, holding to the meme of "developing a nuanced understanding of Islam" is just an excuse to give Islam a pass and avoid confrontation with adherents of the 'Religion of Peace'. "Nuance" is a codeword which should alert the reader that the author is likely willing to gloss over the extensive Koranic passages and rulings of Islamic jurisprudence which command Muslims to wage jihad until Islam rules the earth, passages which condemn Christians and Jews and other infidels as "the worst of all created beings," passages which are taken very seriously by devout Muslim jihadists. 'Nuance' means ignoring Muhammad's barbarous example and the Islamic imperative to consider him as the ideal man and most perfect pattern of conduct. 'Nuance' means willful blindness and self-censorship when it comes to honest criticism of Islam. 'Nuance' means prevarication and withholding of the truth. Thus, when scholars speak of holding a "nuanced understanding of Islam," they are likely engaging in the Islamic practice of taqiyya, that is, knowingly concealing and obfuscating the truth about the religion of Muhammad.
Here is Raymond Ibrahim's article:
by Raymond Ibrahim
March 14, 2012
March 14, 2012
According to several Arabic news sources, last Monday, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, declared that it is "necessary to destroy all the churches of the region."
Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti confirms Islamic hostility for churches.
The Grand Mufti made his assertion in response to a question posed by a delegation from Kuwait, where a parliament member recently called for the "removal" of churches (he later "clarified" by saying he merely meant that no churches should be built in Kuwait): the delegation wanted to confirm Sharia's position on churches.
Accordingly, the Grand Mufti "stressed that Kuwait was a part of the Arabian Peninsula, and therefore it is necessary to destroy all churches in it."
As with many grand muftis before him, the Sheikh based his proclamation on the famous tradition, or hadith, wherein the prophet of Islam declared on his deathbed that "There are not to be two religions in the [Arabian] Peninsula," which has always been interpreted to mean that only Islam can be practiced in the region.
While the facts of this account speak for themselves, consider further:
Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah is not just some random Muslim hating on churches. He is the Grand Mufti of the nation that brought Islam to the world. Moreover, he is the President of the Supreme Council of Ulema [Islamic scholars] and Chairman of the Standing Committee for Scientific Research and Issuing of Fatwas. Accordingly, when it comes to what Islam teaches, his words are immensely authoritative.
Considering the hysteria that besets the West whenever non-authoritative individuals offend Islam—for instance, a fringe, unknown pastor—imagine what would happen if a Christian counterpart to the Grand Mufti, say the Pope, were to declare that all mosques in Italy must be destroyed; imagine the nonstop Western media frenzy that would erupt, all the shrill screams of "intolerance" and "bigot," demands for apologies if not resignation, nonstop handwringing by sensitive politicians, and worse.
Yet the Grand Mufti—the highest Islamic law authority of our "friend-and-ally" Saudi Arabia—gets a free pass when he incites Muslims to destroy churches, not that any extra incitement is needed (nary a month goes by without several churches being bombed and destroyed throughout the Islamic world). In fact, at the time of this writing, I have not seen this story, already some three days old, translated on any English news source, though "newsworthy" stories are often translated in mere hours.
Likewise, consider the Grand Mufti's rationale for destroying churches: it is simply based on a hadith. But when non-Muslims evoke hadiths as authoritative—this one or the countless others that incite violence and intolerance against the "infidel"—they are accused of being "Islamophobes," of intentionally slandering and misrepresenting Islam, of being obstacles on the road to "dialogue," and so forth.
Which leads to perhaps the most important point: Islam's teachings are so easily ascertained; there is no mystery in determining what is "right" and "wrong" in Islam. The Grand Mufti based his fatwa on a canonical hadith, which Muslims and (informed) non-Muslims know is part of Islam's sources of jurisprudence (or usul al-fiqh). All very standard and expected. And yet the West—with all its institutions of higher learning, including governmental agencies dealing with cultural and religious questions—is still thoroughly "confused" as to what Islam teaches.
All of this is nothing short of a scandal—a reminder of just how deep the mainstream media, academia, and most politicians have their collective heads thrust in the sand.
Meanwhile, here is the latest piece of evidence of just how bad churches have it in the Muslim world, for those who care to know.