Dr. Mike Ghouse has accomplished an amazing feat. He has become the final and perfect interpreter of Islam. At least he seems to feel that way. In his view, the essence of Islam is totally in keeping with liberal Western values. Islam has become a thoroughly American religion with scarcely any connection to the traditional interpretations of Islam.
Muslim-majority societies and Muslim extremists (his term), went wrong for easily discernible reasons. He writes, “Islam is not about governance,” [i] but guidance. “Islam is not about establishing government…Indeed, Islam is about live and let live.” [ii] In one surgical rhetorical cut, he severs his American Islam from the history of Islamdom; from the days when Muhammad moved to Yathrib (Medina) until the fall of the Ottoman Empire. He jettisons all Arab-Islamic empire building since the death of Muhammad. The futuhat (conquests) from Spain to India are all un-Islamic, Ghouse claimed. Hurrah!
Dr. Ghouse does not dispute that there have been bad versions of Islamic society. But he has found the culprits.
First are the secondary authorities in Islam, all the traditional scholars who got Islam wrong in the main and in the details. Especially misleading have been ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn Ishaq in the classical period of Islam, and Hassan al-Banna, Maududi, and Yusuf Qaradawi in contemporary Islamic society. He argues that if we want Islam to be Islam—a religion of peace—we must reject interpretations that are antithetical to the pluralistic nature of Islam. [iii]
Second is the Hadith collection and anything that placed within the mouth of their prophet unloving, intolerant and misogynist sentiments, or record him as engaging in less than pacifist behaviors. Dr. Ghouse insists, “We need to rehabilitate the hadith. A new compilation of hadiths is the need of the day; it will have two sections [sic] the first section will reflect those hadiths that are compatible with the attributes of God (Just and Merciful) and the Prophet Mohammed’s nature (merciful and kind to fellow beings).” [iv] The second section will include all the questionable hadiths and scholars must prove their authenticity. He has a litmus test to determine which hadith are true and which are spurious. If it is good for Islamic public relations among Westerners, then it is true. If it does not play well with his target audience, it is not authentic. Such an approach is obviously not legitimate historiography.
Dr. Ghouse believes that Muslims can be truly religious pluralists if they follow the Quran. “Let’s stick to the Koran. We just cannot go wrong [sic] I know this frightens many Muslims; it is as if pulling the rug from under their feet in reality, [sic] you can live a moral and conscious life by only following the Quran [sic] rejecting those other so-called Islamic books will not disorient you at all.” [v] His only mention of Quranic ayat that call for violence against Jews, Christians, or pagans is to state that those passages are mistranslated.
He declares that if one reads something in the Quran is not in keeping with love, freedom, tolerance, and peace, it is a faulty translation. “It may be worth your while to see the list of the mistranslated verses and how fearmongers in the market have capitalized on those [sic] the best way to understand the Koran is to remember that if it’s not about justice mercy an creation of harmony and [sic] the translation is wrong.” [vi]
According to Dr. Ghouse, the mistakenly translated Quranic passages that Islamophobes interpret as encouraging violence and intolerance or inequality are not accidents. Ghouse said:
“The Koran has been deliberately mistranslated: The Quran is a book of guidance to live in peace with oneself and with what surrounds one — life and environment. It is designed to create cohesive societies where no human has to live in apprehension or fear of others. Most people get that right and a few don’t. If you don’t, that is the case with everything in life but Quran is never the problem [sic] it’s our understanding that is the problem. Way back in 1143 A.D. the first translation of the Quran the European leaders commissioned a hostile Koran translation to foster warfare against Muslim invaders [sic]. Later, Muslim leaders produced another translation to inflame Muslims against Christians and Jews.” [vii]
Dr. Ghouse expresses immoderate ire for Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Brigitte Gabriel, Ali Sina, Zuhdi Jasser, Wafa Sultan, and Tarek Fateh. For example, he recounts a public conflict with Tarek Fateh expressing how his intellectual depth entirely dominated Fateh in the dispute. Commenting on his victory, Dr. Ghouse wrote, “That completely shut Fatah’s a** up –sorry it was his mouth. Unfortunately, both are the same on his body they both release foul air.” [viii] “Are not cooking up things up. They are merely quoting what is written up in hadith, tafsir and Sira (Muhammad’s biography), even [sic] though they know it’s wrong, it suits them to malign Islam for bucks.”
Others he calls disgruntled former Muslims, “Who Have [sic] a personal axe to grind and take it out on Islam [sic] some organizations shamelessly pay them well for bashing Islam.” [ix] Concerning Dr. Wafa Sultan, Dr. Ghouse intolerantly wrote, ”When Wafa Sultan, another Islam basher, started to lie about Muslims, the audience not only spoke up [sic] they walked out, they did not want to hear her bull-crap and they were not gullible either.” [x]
He does express some legitimately moderate and liberal views on individual issues. He supports interfaith marriages, even for Muslim women. He opposes punishing apostates for leaving Islam. And he opposes using Sharia outside of personal matters of faith.
In sum, Dr. Ghouse expresses some liberal ideals that Muslims need to embrace if they are to truly integrate into American society. However, his buffet of Islam and Islamic history is not a convincing approach to Islam, Islamic texts, or Islamic history. It appears that his agenda is do what it takes to get Islam accepted by some naïve well-wishers as a legitimate discussion about religious beliefs and practices in American society. His book is more promotional spin than a serious evaluation of what has made it difficult for self-identified Islamic nations and Muslim majority societies to allow true religious pluralism.
Darrell Pack is an Arabist and a member of Islamic Reform Forum.
[i] American Muslim Agenda, (Dr. Mike M. Ghouse, 2019) p. 77
[ii] Ibid p. 124
[iii] Ibid p. 20
[iv] Ibid p. 23
[v] Ibid
[vi] Ibid p. 28
[vii] Ibid p. 48
[viii] Ibid pp 67-68
[ix] Ibid p. 45
[x] Ibid p. 69
TomSJr says
ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION. IT IS AN IDEOLOGY! There is no repentance, no salvation, and no GRACE AND/OR MERCY. Therefore, it is not a religion.
WITHOUT JESUS CHRIST, WHO DIED ON THE CROSS FOR ALL MANKIND, WHATEVER YOU ARE BELIEVING IN, IS NOT OF GOD.
mortimer says
Partial disagreement: 51% of the Islamic texts are political, 18% is about Allah and the rest is about Mohammed. Islam was created as a state religion to be the driving and unifying force of the Islamic State. The most accurate example of Islam in the modern world was ISIS. Islam is both din and dawla. It is a planned, ideal society which has in effect always been regimented, discriminatory and exclusive. In one word, Islam is a theocracy with a plenipotentiary caliph who is his viceroy on earth. Islamic salvation is achieved by participating in the self-sacrifice of jihad. Islam is an enemy of the cross, merely since Allah wants crosses to be broken. The reason Allah dislikes the cross is not clear. Islam is much more complicated than you imagine, Tom.
James Lincoln says
mortimer says,
“The most accurate example of Islam in the modern world was ISIS.”
BINGO!
Linde Barrera says
To Mortimer- Respectfully to you I advance this theory: Allah does not like the cross because Allah is Satan the devil with a different name.
Nate Greene says
Agreed.
David says
Dracula doesn’t like the Cross either (lol)
maria says
Exactly
darrellpackglobal says
True, but probably on in-house language to use.
David says
Jesus didn’t die for muslims, because there weren’t any!
gravenimage says
Islam is indeed a religion–it is an *evil* religion.
Tony Naim says
To understand the theology of Islam, learn about the teachings of Ebionites. The mentor of Muhamad, his distant cousin from the Qusai tribe, was an Ebionite. His name is waraka Ben Naufal. He is the paternal cousin of Muhammad’s first wife Kadija.
Waraka was fluent in Hebrew and Arabic. He narrated the Meccan Koran to Mohammad.
Waraka had nothing to do with the Koran of Medina, which came later , after Waraka’a death, and which explains the discrepancies in the Koranic teachings.
What is known today as the Koran, is NOT the actual Koran of Muhammad, but rather the MOSHAF of Osman, the third Calife, who gathered the Koranic text, modified it to serve the expansionist, imperial and colonial drive of Arabs in that era.
mortimer says
The latest research from our Western scholars suggests that Arabs were allies fighting for the Persians and Romans, but when waves of the plague came through the region, the Romans and Persians had no troops to resist the barbarian invasions. The Arabs moved into the abandoned towns and villages and created an empire in Damascus that ruled from Spain to central Asia. At this point they needed to rationalize their success and Caliph Abd al Malik developed Islam as his state religion to unify his subjects. The first three caliphs may be fictitious. In fact, the name caliph was not used until later. The first Arab leaders called themselves ‘Emir al Muminin’. Islam was created in ideological opposition to the state religion of Byzantium which gave them divine authority to rule. Much of the Koran debunks and mocks Christianity.
Tony Naim says
Wikipedia lists him as:Waraqah ibn Nawfal. It does not mention his Ebionite faith.
Ebionites are a Jewish/ Christian sect who believed in Jesus but did not consider him as the Son of God. They adopted parts of the Hebrew Bible( except the portions that speak of Jesus’ birth and his death)
In conformity with the present day beliefs of Muslims.
After Waraqa’s death, The theology ended & Muhammad reverted to being a true Arab Bedouin, hence, political Islam was born.
Nate Greene says
I’m certainly no Islamic scholar. But seems to align with something I read years ago stating that Islam was originally more a religion of reason. Not unlike Judaism and Christianity in that respect. But some centuries later took a philosophical split to what we know today. Perhaps that is what the Islamic apologist is referring to?
gravenimage says
Nate, there is nothing to indicate that Islam was ever based on reason–this is not even true of the Meccan verses–they are just somewhat less violent.
FYI says
“Let’s stick to the quran.We just cannot go wrong”
Yes,let us stick to the koran for a moment..surely we won’t be lead astray?
Can the islamic scholars explain ANY of the following?
WHY is the Golden Rule missing in islam?
{it is defined as ‘the MEANING of the Law of Moses and the teachings of all the prophets” Matthew 7 v 12:the Gospel,a book allah claims he wrote k5:46and confirms koran 3:3}
WHY does islam have a Doctrine of HATE {al walaa wal barraa} when the Bible has a Doctrine of LOVE{=2 chief LOVE commandments,the Golden Rule..which are found in Judaism AND Christianity but NOT in islam}?
HOW is it possible allah MISSED the 2 chief commandments{Deut 6:4-9,Lev19:18}since “the whole of the Law of Moses and the teachings of all the prophets depend on these 2 laws”{Matthew 22 v 40:the Gospel,a book allah CONFIRMS koran 3:3}
WHY does allah give permission to violate the Exodus 20 Decalogue Laws:permission to murder k2:191,steal k48:20 etc when that defeats the purpose of the Torah?
WHY does the koran teach the OPPOSITE to the 2nd chief commandment of YHWH
{lev19:18.In islam as a muslim you cannot love your neighbor if he is a JEW{=’to be despised and hated’ koran 2:65} or a CHRISTIAN{=’the WORST of created beings” koran 98:6}and in koran 5:51 allah tells muslims NOT to be friends with Jews and Christians?
EXPLAIN how allah gets Christian THEOLOGY completely WRONG in koran 5:116 when he insists Mary is in the Christian Trinity:But Mary is not in the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity?
EXPLAIN how and why the HELPER,the Spirit of God’s Wisdom which was manifested at the time of Christ is MISSING in islam and not found in the koran ..which is the reason the koran is full or errors?
EXPLAIN how the ‘jesus’ of the koran{a muslim,not a Jew} had the Gospel
“WE bestowed on him the Gospel..”{Koran 5:46} when the Gospel came AFTER the time of Jesus?
If you want answers to the above,just follow allah’s own advice given to muhammed in koran 10:94 and
‘question those who read the scripture that was before thee”:
The BIBLE
The koran confirms the Bible k3:3 but the Bible does NOT confirm the koran.
In fact the Bible shows the koran to be in error…
mortimer says
Ghouse is whitewashing the Koran. The text’s 164 jihad commandments ARE the problem.
FYI says
Yes.
Maybe he should join Craig Considine..that other expert in whitewashing.
The Craig Considine method of islamic apolgetics.
1.Find some nice cuddly stuff about muhammed that enables him to be painted in a friendly,positive light:mo the eco-warrior,mo the intellectual genius,mo the nice guy,mo the friend of Jews and Christians,mo the friend of the LGBT community…mo the ‘anti-racist’..
2.Deliberately IGNORE any inconvenient facts about the koran{the 164 jihad commands,the Errors in it} or unpalatable facts about muhammed{the mass-murdering of Jews ABU DAWUD 4390,the Slave trading of Africans SAHIH MUSLIM 3901 etc}or islam’s Doctrine of HATE{al walaa wal baraa} and endless Jihadist violence.Or that muhammed said ‘I have been made victorious through terror'{Sahih Bukhari 4:52:220}
3. Peddle this fabricated,deliberately whitewashed nonsense to naive Dhimmis and muslims.
4.Pretend to be a scholar.
Considine’s latest is that muhammed was ‘anti-racist’:that would come as a great surprise indeed to the TWO unfortunate black slaves SOLD by muhammed in exchange for another{Sahih Muslim 3901} and the Jews..
“And he sold him for TWO of the blacks”
And we know that the WORST insult in islam tht could be said of muhammed,worthy of execution, was to say muhammed was black.
“Whoever says that the prophet was black must be killed.The prophet was not black”
Ash Shifa of Qadi Lyad pg 387
Walter Sieruk says
The last two words of that title is fitting. Which concerning Islam in America and the words “Reform or Smokescreen “ is a good question.
The idea and quest to attempt have a “reformation of Islam” trying to do so is a waste of time and effort. This is because “reforming Islam” is not actually possible, it’s an action of futility. For It should be noted that Islam can’t be changed from violent and deadly to non –violent and peaceful because the very core essence of Islam is that of violence and killing. As found in the Quran 9:121, 5:33, 9:5, 111, 47:4. The very best that may be realistically hoped for would be a watered-down type of Islam is mild and non-violent.
This is in contrast to hard core Quran based Islam which is the violent and murderous Islam practice Muslim jihad terror organizations, as ISIS ,Al Qaeda , Hezbollah ,Hamas and so forth .
To put this in another way, the Bible informs its reader “What is crooked cannot be made straight, and what is lacking cannot be numbered.” Ecclesiastes 1 :15. [N.K.J.N.]
Therefore this verse may be understood when applying it to the idea of folly of “reforming Islam” As in, “What is crooked cannot be made straight in. “The violent nature can’t be straightened to be made non-violent” and “what is lacking cannot be numbered” may be understood as “Such a violent and hate-filled religion is lacking in love and compassion and thus can’t be numbered or counted as a truly peaceful religion.”
darrellpackglobal says
Walter Sieruk, You make the frightening point that Islam is interminably at odds with Western values in either is Christendom or Secular forms. Can we however hope for Muslims that simply choose toe create and edited version of Islam that is less ridiculous?
gravenimage says
Darrell. I don’t think many Muslims–and certainly no pious Muslims–will ever accept this. These “reforms” are often more sops to concerned Infidels than they are serious attempts at reforming Islam.
“Mike” Ghouse has been whitewashing Islam for many years.
mortimer says
Darrel Pack claims: “Islam is NOT about governance,” but guidance. “Islam is not about establishing GOVERNMENT …Indeed, Islam is about live and let live.”
The facts do not agree.
Islam means ‘SUBMISSION’ and no one is as submitted as a slave.
In fact, the Arabic word DEEN (or ‘din’) literally means ‘GOVERNANCE’ or a ‘SYSTEM OF LAWS’, and the Islamic calendar dates from the establishment of the first Islamic GOVERNMENT … in the Year of Hegira.
So much for Pack’s brazen humbug! For Pack, words are false flags in his war to soften up those who still resist the totalitarian Death Cult of Islam.
For Mr Pack’s information Islam is a DEEN and it is 100% a ‘GOVERNANCE’.
DEFINITION of DIN. ‘DIN’ or ‘DEEN’ is closest in meaning to the English equivalent ‘GOVERNANCE’. Islam is thus a GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM that regulates every aspect of life. Din or deen is an Arabic word often mistranslated as “creed” or “religion”. “Din” is a word that features heavily in the Koran and Islam. Both mainstream and reformist Muslim writers take the word ‘deen’ to mean an all-encompassing WAY OF LIFE carried out under the auspices of Allah’s purpose as expressed in the Qur’an and hadiths. As one ‘progressive’ Muslim writer puts it, far from being a private aspect of life discretely carried out in the mosque, “Islam is Dīn, a complete way of life”.
The term Dīn gained popularity in Arabia and the Greater Middle East after the advent of Islam. The term has Semitic cognates, including the Hebrew “dīn” (דין), Aramaic dīnā (דִּינָא), Amharic dañä (ዳኘ) and Ugaritic dyn. It may be the root of the Semitic word Madīnah (city), and of Midian, a geographical place and a people mentioned in the Bible and in the Qur’an. ME-DIN-A is literally ‘the place of governance’ as the founding capital of the Islamic empire in Arabia.
The Hebrew term “דין”, transliterated as “dīn”, means either “law” or “judgment”. In the Kabbalah of Judaism, the term can, alongside “Gevurah” (cognate to the Arabic “Jabaarah”), refer to “power” and “judgment”. In ancient Israel, the term featured heavily in administrative and legal proceedings i.e. Bet Din, literally “the house of judgment,” the ancient building block of the Jewish legal system. Thus, Arabic Dīn does not simply mean “religion” or “faith”, but may in a broad sense refer to “governance”.
It has been said that the word Dīn appears in as many as 79 verses in the Qur’an, but because there is no exact English translation of the term, its precise definition has been the subject of some misunderstanding and disagreement. Consequently, the term is often mistranslated in parts of the Qur’an as “religion”. However, in the Qur’an itself, the act of submission to God is always referred to as Dīn rather than as Madhhab (مذهب), which is the Arabic word for “religion”.
In addition to the two broad usages referred to so far, of sovereignty on the one hand and submission on the other, others have noted that the term Dīn is also widely used in translations of the Qur’an in a third sense. Most famously in its opening chapter, al-Fātiḥah, the term is translated in almost all English translations as “judgment”.
Facile taqiyya artists like Pack thinks we are naïve beginners in the matter of Islam. WE ARE NOT! We study Islam deeply and we are finally getting to the bottom of 1400 years of lies.
Mr Pack, this won’t work on sophisticated, modern Westerners who read your source texts.
mortimer says
Apologies: I did not mean to refer to DARREL PACK but to Mr MIKE GHOUSE.
darrellpackglobal says
Thanks mortimer, you had me worried.
gravenimage says
I knew who you meant, Mortimer. 🙂
Michael Copeland says
In simple terms, we can take “religion” to be prayers, and “state” to be government.
“Separation of religion and state is not an option” – Dr JS Idris, Sudan
FYI says
Separation of religion and state is an imperative.
It must be preserved!
Theocracies are religious tyrannies:islam’s is the worst of all possible theocracies.
It is violent,immoral,Antisemitic,AntiChristian,misogynistic,antifreedom and antidemocracy.
This is WHY islam must be opposed as it seeks to dominate and not allow for separation of religion and state.
I suspect islam is a useful tool for the Globalists:what better way to obliterate nation states and national identity than through this false religion with its false prophet{by his own admission too!Al Tabari 6:111}aided by treasonous politicians,the Leftsts and the Dhimmis?
darrellpackglobal says
Michael Copeland, You have well illustrated the core reason that Islam cannot integrate as a contributing member of Western society
gravenimage says
+1
Hesham Shehab says
Pack is quoting…he doesn’t agree
darrellpackglobal says
thanks hesham, I will be the first to admit that I am not the clearest of commuincators, but mortimer had me worried.
gravenimage says
Darrell, Mortimer is a long-time commenter here and a staunch Anti-Jihadist. This was just a typo on his part–although I can see how it would be an alarming one.
mortimer says
Dr. Mike Ghouse’s attacks on ex-Muslims (who speak out about what they don’t like in Islam) shows he is not promoting ‘pluralism’, since he has no respect for the right of others to disagree with Islam.
He wants people to blandly accept his assurance that Islam is benign and to ignore every totalitarian aspect of Islamic history!
Ghouse is whitewashing Islamic terrorism, supremacism and all its other obvious flaws.
Ghouse is GASLIGHTING his audience.
Michael Copeland says
Ghouse has the answer! Pick-Your-Own Islam.
commonsense says
Ghouse states that the Qur’an is “a book of guidance to live in peace,” but then avers that
in 1143 A.D. the first translation of the Qur’an commissioned by European leaders (tellingly, no names provided)) was an intentional distortion, portraying the book as hostile, intended to foster warfare against Muslim invaders. Ghouse just stepped in it – did you catch that? He acknowledges there were Muslim invaders. “Invaders” connotes hostility, no? So, Ghouse, explain yourself. Did these invaders have peaceful intentions, planning on coexisting without conflict with the host population? You bumbling clown. You transparent liar.
maria says
Ghose is a takiya liar that is clear. He is an under cover terrorist
darrellpackglobal says
commonsense, you make an excellent point. but we now have to guess as to whether Ghouse does not get it (i.e. he is a bit dumb) or if he gets it and obfuscates purposely.
gravenimage says
Here’s the kind of whitewash of Islam “Mike” Ghouse has slung before:
“If a thief breaks into your home … would you ask him his religion? If he says, he belongs to your faith; would you let him get away?
When a terrorist attacks and claims he is a Muslim and following Islam, would you be gullible to buy his excuse, or would you nail his ass and tell him. “Don’t give me that crap, I know your religion, it does not teach you to kill a single soul, you did it, and you are going to pay for it.
Blaming the religion is the dumbest thing you can do, because you cannot beat, kick, hack, shoot, hang, kill or bury a religion, its an intangible thing my friend! War on Terrorism is a stupid thing.”
https://theghousediary.com/terrorism-and-stupidity/
Just bald-faced Taqiyya. We all know that Qur’an 5:32 is a warning to Jews for supposedly not living up to their own standards–the Qur’an does not tell Muslims not to kill Infidels, but just the opposite, as Ghouse must know.
Note the condemnation of any attempt to defend against Jihad terror.
Dan says
Well until the Islam “Murder everybody not of the faith” rate gets down to the same level as the “Murder everybody not of the faith” rates of us Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Buddhists, Harri Krishnas, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Salvation Armiers, I want NOTHING to do with Muslims.
They churn out too many psychotic mole brats.
darrellpackglobal says
Dan,Good point. Do you think that Islam has within itself the seeds of tolerance that can actually grow into a tree of tolerance in a pluralistic society?
Martin Bernard Vink says
Islam controls the majority of votes in the United Nations. The majority of the delegates of the United Nations are willing to sell their votes . . . like prostitutes sell their services.
James Lincoln says
The clip for the pic:
“Robert Spencer debates Islamic supremacism and the Koran with Mike Ghouse on the Hannity Show”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Q64RUxSd4
darrellpackglobal says
james Lincoln, Thanks for such a useful contribution to the discussion.
Mike says
Sorry I don’t buy it
what else you got
Mateen Elass says
Will this new, improved version of Islam be accepted as the Truth? Not in my Ghouse….
gravenimage says
Very funny 🙂
Moreover, I don’t think Ghouse thinks this is the truth, either. More likely Taqiyya.
gravenimage says
“American Muslim Agenda: Muslims Together Building A Cohesive America”: Genuine Reform or Smokescreen?
……………
Ghouse is lying. Islamic rule has been hideously oppressive towards unbelievers since the days of the “Prophet”–and the Qur’an itself demands this.
The only thing that would be “cohesive” about an Islamic America is that it would persecute actual Americans.
OLD GUY says
Beware of the islamic lie that he is presenting, they will say and do anything it takes to gain control. Islam is nothing short of a “religious” ideology leading to a dictatorship that will destroy freedom as we know it now.
Bernie Pack says
I like to keep up to date with World news.
Bernie Pack says
So Islam is now going to have a New Testament. I do really think it’s a bit late for that.
Mike M Ghouse says
RE-REBUTTAL TO THE ARTICLE
at http://www.AmericanMuslimAgenda.com