Teachings of the Quran

[Influenza]

I wouldn't be surprised if anywhere from 70-80% of Sunni Muslims approve of the caliphate concept, so being favorable toward ISIS isn't so far fetched, and I'd venture a guess that most Shiite ones would feel similarly if ISIS was trying to establish a caliphate according to their doctrines and practices.

I'd like to point out that ISIS is the monster that it is primarily because of the concept of takfirism, that I mentioned in my above post, which is a concept that is unique to the Sunni sect. A Shia group would never have a takfiri ideology, and thus could never be even half as bad as ISIS.

 

[Muwahid]

I did not take those verses and hadiths out of context. Ibn Kathir wrote one of the most respected tafsirs in the Muslim world. The Quran is explicit in 9:29 to fight the People of the Book, not because of any transgression against the Muslims, but because they are considered idolaters. It makes no mention of killing Muslim emissaries. This is claimed by modern Muslim writers, not medieval ones. And even if Muslim emissaries were killed, I hardly see the justice in punishing whole populations in their own conquered lands with the Pact of Umar for the actions of their rulers. Particularly as these conditions continue to this present day as seen whenever Christians try to build a new church in Egypt. (http://www.worldmag.com/2015/04/egyptian_church_honoring_slain_copts_attacked_by_muslim_extremists)

However, Ibn Kathir is clear about why the Christians were attacked.


Therefore this means what it sounds like it means:

Money. It was all about money and the Byzantines weren't there so they took the money from the Christian tribes in the area. Also, to call them to Islam. But, mostly Jizyah, methinks. After all, if they all converted, how would the poor Quraish get the money they used to get from pagans worshiping at the Kaaba?

The expeditions against the Romans were initiated after Ghassanids killed an Emissary of the Muslims. This is a clear act of war, and was justification for the battle of Mut'ah, and later wars, such as the battle of Tabuk.

There's little dispute over who the aggressor was in the Arab-Byzantine wars.

 

[Muwahid]

Hold on now, you are justifying ISIS? You are saying that besides some of the methods of execution, that it's consistent with Islam? How many Muslims would you say share this sentiment?

Sorry but I'm not fueled by sensationalism regarding conflict in the Middle East. Do you want an honest answer, or an answer to please a western audience, and we shall continue the meme that ISIS is essentially the devil incarnate.

How is this, tell me things they have done, I will tell you whether I think it's Islamic or not. That's a far more effective way to get an honest answer from an Islamic perspective.

He probably is defending ISIS, as DevilsAdvocate suggested, because he very clearly has a Sunni ideology, which has wholly been infiltrated by Wahhabi and takfiri thinkers. If you're wondering what Wahhabism is, its a super conservative Sunni branch from which we have the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Al-Nusra, and probably the majority of all their "Syrian" rebel group allies.

If we want to look at ISIS from an Islamic perspective, we can look at the history of extremism in Islam, which began at least during the reign of the 4th caliph, 30 years or so after the Prophet Mohammad had died. The first "extremist group" in Islam were called the Khawarij, and if you want to learn about them you can follow this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khawarij

There is also a hadith from the Prophet Mohammad which can be understood as a reference to extremism:

"There will come a time when a group of people will leave our ranks. They will recite the Quran with fervour and passion (lit. "With tongues that are moist") but its spirit will not go beyond their throats. They will leave our ranks in the manner of an arrow when it shoots from its bow."

What I believe this means is that Mohammad is suggesting that an extremist Muslim has actually left Islam (from the perspective of God) but will continue to act on what he believes is the behalf of Islam & Muslims.

The idea that is central to groups like ISIS is takfirism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfiri. They believe that there is Muslim and there is Non-Muslim, and those that are Non-Muslim must either be terribly subjugated, and if not, killed.

And I'd like to ask why Muwahid believes the Rashidun caliphate was a golden standard for Islam. Is it just in the name? And if there is some legitimate reason that you believe the first 3 Caliphs were in fact, great leaders, I'd like to know how you would explain Abu Bakr's act of waging war against those who wouldn't pay him allegiance... and maybe.. this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_at_Fatimah's_house ?

Throwing out Arabic terms does not faze me. These are buzz words, and people use them as weapons either without understanding their meaning, or understanding their meaning but intending to mislead their audience.

One of the most powerful tools of manipulation is marginalization of groups, that is to say, if we can simply label a group of people as "wahhabis", or "takfiris" (whether or not it's true), we can discredit them entirely, and have no need to hear their arguments. This is commonly done with labels such as "anti-semite", or "homophobe".

As for the Shi'i propaganda you throw at me, the reason for the Rashidun Khilaafa being the golden era, is not only because it was the closest thing to Islam's ideal state, but also was prophesied by the prophet when he said الخلافة بعدي ثلاثون سنة ثم تكون ملكا عضوضا (The Khilaafa will last thirty years after me, then be replaced by a kingship)

Therefore the prophet confirmed the Rashidun Caliphate as legitimate.

 

[hells_unicorn]

I'd like to point out that ISIS is the monster that it is primarily because of the concept of takfirism, that I mentioned in my above post, which is a concept that is unique to the Sunni sect. A Shia group would never have a takfiri ideology, and thus could never be even half as bad as ISIS.

Hmm, I decided to look up the Takfiri term because I hadn't encountered it before and that actually makes a good deal of sense given that the Sunni school is far more fundamentalist in their doctrinal views. Shiite Islam tends to go against the very concept by arguing for more of a hierarchical clergy system that tends to multiply doctrinal concepts rather than cut them away. The very basis of the Shiite school is founded on a divergence over rightful leadership following Mohammed's death with those that argue that Mohammed had no immediate successor.

However, I would like to point out that the famed Ḥashshāshīn cult that sprang up out of Persia and Syria and was responsible for many noted political assassinations during the Middle Ages, was a splinter sect from the Shiite school. They were also the pioneers of the whole "70 Virgins" concept that filtered down into many modern suicide terrorists on both the Sunni side and the Shiite Hezbollah. They may not be as prone to genocidal activity when they become radicalized, but they can cause a lot of damage through political upheaval and social instability.

 

[Paulbot99]

The expeditions against the Romans were initiated after Ghassanids killed an Emissary of the Muslims. This is a clear act of war, and was justification for the battle of Mut'ah, and later wars, such as the battle of Tabuk.

There's little dispute over who the aggressor was in the Arab-Byzantine wars.

Quite a coincidence that this justification was given by later historians, don't you think?

Regardless, it is quite clear that the aggressor in an invasion is the invader and the Quran and Tafsir do not say, "fight the Christians because they oppressed us." The Quran is quite clear that the reason for fighting them is that they are considered idolators.

”Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated because they are idolaters and disbelievers. Allah the Exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving Jews and Christians, who uttered this terrible statement and utter lies against Allah, the Exalted. As for the Jews, they claimed that Uzayr was the son of God, Allah is free of what they attribute to Him. As for the misguidance of Christians over Isa, it is obvious.” Tafsir Ibn Kathir (on Qur’an 9:30)

https://goo.gl/Po7tNk


Perhaps we should read more of this infamous sword verse.

O you who have believed, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after this, their [final] year. And if you fear privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Wise.
Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded.
They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.
They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses except to perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it. (Quran 9:29-32)

The solution to "extinguishing the light of Allah with their mouths" (arguing)? Jihad!

The Quran is explicit that the People of the Book must be fought on the basis of their beliefs to the extent that the Tafsir Ibn Kathir, a well-known and authoritative tafsir, interprets it that way. If the Quran meant in those verses only to fight when provoked, then the Quran is one of the most unclear books ever written!

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

http://books.google.com/books?id=uAlTysaw0PMC&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=%E2%80%9DFighting+the+Jews+and+Christians+is+legislated+because+they+are+idolaters+and+disbelievers.+Allah+the+Exalted+encourages+the+believers+to+fight+the+polytheists,+disbelieving+Jews+and+Christians,+who+uttered+this+terrible+statement+and+utter+lies+against+Allah,+the+Exalted.+As+for+the+Jews,+they+claimed+that+Uzayr+was+the+son+of+God,+Allah+is+free+of+what+they+attribute+to+Him.+As+for+the+misguidance+of+Christians+over+Isa,+it+is+obvious.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=ASJjMK3dAB&sig=aAYhmDimixLYMlSdd0bFAZ7qnng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAGoVChMIpc2qmPa_xwIVzIuSCh2L2AmG#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9DFighting%20the%20Jews%20and%20Christians%20is%20legislated%20because%20they%20are%20idolaters%20and%20disbelievers.%20Allah%20the%20Exalted%20encourages%20the%20believers%20to%20fight%20the%20polytheists%2C%20disbelieving%20Jews%20and%20Christians%2C%20who%20uttered%20this%20terrible%20statement%20and%20utter%20lies%20against%20Allah%2C%20the%20Exalted.%20As%20for%20the%20Jews%2C%20they%20claimed%20that%20Uzayr%20was%20the%20son%20of%20God%2C%20Allah%20is%20free%20of%20what%20they%20attribute%20to%20Him.%20As%20for%20the%20misguidance%20of%20Christians%20over%20Isa%2C%20it%20is%20obvious.%E2%80%9D&f=false

Try this: https://goo.gl/

 

[Influenza]

Throwing out Arabic terms does not faze me. These are buzz words, and people use them as weapons either without understanding their meaning, or understanding their meaning but intending to mislead their audience.

One of the most powerful tools of manipulation is marginalization of groups, that is to say, if we can simply label a group of people as "wahhabis", or "takfiris" (whether or not it's true), we can discredit them entirely, and have no need to hear their arguments. This is commonly done with labels such as "anti-semite", or "homophobe".

As for the Shi'i propaganda you throw at me, the reason for the Rashidun Khilaafa being the golden era, is not only because it was the closest thing to Islam's ideal state, but also was prophesied by the prophet when he said الخلافة بعدي ثلاثون سنة ثم تكون ملكا عضوضا (The Khilaafa will last thirty years after me, then be replaced by a kingship)

Therefore the prophet confirmed the Rashidun Caliphate as legitimate.

I look at the offspring of the Wahhabi ideology and it alone is enough for me to reject it. It's especially troublesome when you, who is presumably a fellow fundamentalist, seems incapable of properly denouncing ISIS, its goals and its way of achieving those goals. Your method of argumentation is laughable, as you accuse me of dismissing you due to perceived Wahhabism, while you dismiss me for using a few Shia arguments.

Also, why are you so quick to point to this 30 year hadith, when there is a much better & widely accepted hadith that refers to Mohammad's 12 successors? You don't like that hadith because it corroborates the Shia perspective?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_the_Twelve_Successors

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Sorry but I'm not fueled by sensationalism regarding conflict in the Middle East. Do you want an honest answer, or an answer to please a western audience, and we shall continue the meme that ISIS is essentially the devil incarnate.

How is this, tell me things they have done, I will tell you whether I think it's Islamic or not. That's a far more effective way to get an honest answer from an Islamic perspective.

Throwing gays off high rise buildings. Forcing Christians to convert or be killed. Systematically kidnapping teenage girls, raping them and selling them as sex slaves. Destroying historical monuments that have been standing for thousands of years.

 

[Ender]

Throwing gays off high rise buildings. Forcing Christians to convert or be killed. Systematically kidnapping teenage girls, raping them and selling them as sex slaves. Destroying historical monuments that have been standing for thousands of years.

That is not Islamic any more than US soldiers killing families and innocents and going on raping binges is Christian.

 

[hells_unicorn]

That is not Islamic any more than US soldiers killing families and innocents and going on raping binges is Christian.

Whoever said U.S. soldiers were Christian? I heard something different a while back.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/02/day-us-military-burned-bible-in-afghanistan.html

 

[Ender]

Whoever said U.S. soldiers were Christian? I heard something different a while back.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/02/day-us-military-burned-bible-in-afghanistan.html

That's my point.

Militant entities across the world call themselves or represent themselves to be this or that- but usually they are the exact opposite.

And realize that just like Americans like to think of ME extremists as "those terrible Muslims", people in the ME think of the West's invading armies as "those terrible Christians".

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

That is not Islamic any more than US soldiers killing families and innocents and going on raping binges is Christian.

Of course, it's Islamic! Muhammed did those things & much worse, & all Muslims look up to him as the model of virtue!

Would you be so considerate towards followers of Hitler, who look up to him as the model of virtue?

 

[Ender]

Of course, it's Islamic! Muhammed did those things & much worse, & all Muslims look up to him as the model of virtue!

Would you be so considerate towards followers of Hitler, who look up to him as the model of virtue?

Haters gonna hate. The OT is much more violent than the Qur'an.

We need to all be like St Francis of Assisi, who became friends with the Muslims during the Crusades and was allowed in their tents and cities because of his kindness toward them. They could have killed him, but instead befriended him.

THIS is true Christianity.

 

[hells_unicorn]

That's my point.

Militant entities across the world call themselves or represent themselves to be this or that- but usually they are the exact opposite.

And realize that just like Americans like to think of ME extremists as "those terrible Muslims", people in the ME think of the West's invading armies as "those terrible Christians".

I don't fully disagree with you on this point, and I'm not a fan of the expansionist foreign policy that developed in the aftermath of WWII, but I think a major part of understanding who is who is a combination of actions and doctrine. Naturally, if all Muslims followed the purported doctrines of Islam that call for expansion of the faith by the sword (which is in the Koran), most of the world would be covered in blood right now. However, if we are going to take measure of the deeds of past governing entities that have adopted Islamic teaching, the only comparable school when it comes to gratuitous violence and abuse of magistrate power would be Roman Catholicism.

Haters gonna hate. The OT is much more violent than the Qur'an.

That is debatable, but my concern here isn't only violence, but also doctrine. The OT is also the source for where Presbyterians like myself derive the principle that peace with heathen nations is permissible. Likewise, keep in mind that violence is often the consequence of further aggravation of sin, and that the peoples who were wiped out in the OT accounts were all militant conquerors, idolaters and morally deformed. I don't think a person is required by Christian principle to surrender and take it if he is threatened with forced sodomy simply for walking into the wrong town, and I don't think God is wrong for destroying such a people.

My biggest complaint about many "modern" Christian liberals, be they Roman Catholic or otherwise, is that they've lost the moral distinction between picking up the sword in defense of the faith and picking up the sword to subvert others, be it the individual case of capitol punishment for convicted murderers vs. murder itself, or converting by the sword (Mohammed) vs. picking up the sword to defend the church from assault (Augustine). As far as I'm concerned, you renounce the Christian faith the minute you accept the stoic idea of sitting by and letting the world fall apart in the name of peace.

 

[Paul Or Nothing II]

Haters gonna hate. The OT is much more violent than the Qur'an.

We need to all be like St Francis of Assisi, who became friends with the Muslims during the Crusades and was allowed in their tents and cities because of his kindness toward them. They could have killed him, but instead befriended him.

THIS is true Christianity.

Why are you conflating the issues? I've talked talked about Muhammed, so you should talk about his Christian equivalent Jesus; & as an agnostic-atheist voluntaryist, I think people that look up to Jesus would be more in line with liberty & modern civilization, not those who look up to Muhammed (or Hitler for that matter).

 

[Ender]

Why are you conflating the issues? I've talked talked about Muhammed, so you should talk about his Christian equivalent Jesus; & as an agnostic-atheist voluntaryist, I think people that look up to Jesus would be more in line with liberty & modern civilization, not those who look up to Muhammed (or Hitler for that matter).

Jesus Christ is NOT the "Christian" equivalent to Mohammad. Muslims do NOT believe he is the Son of God. A better equivalent would be Moses.

I would think that people that look up to Jesus would be more in line with His teachings:

Love Your Neighbor as Yourself and all that.

hells_unicorn
My biggest complaint about many "modern" Christian liberals, be they Roman Catholic or otherwise, is that they've lost the moral distinction between picking up the sword in defense of the faith and picking up the sword to subvert others, be it the individual case of capitol punishment for convicted murderers vs. murder itself, or converting by the sword (Mohammed) vs. picking up the sword to defend the church from assault (Augustine). As far as I'm concerned, you renounce the Christian faith the minute you accept the stoic idea of sitting by and letting the world fall apart in the name of peace.

I have no qualms about defending my loved ones and my own backyard if I must- however, I believe it is also wise to contemplate some of Jesus' last words:

He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

For myself, I shall try to follow St Francis' example and love my enemy- the results for him were magnificent.

 

[hells_unicorn]

I have no qualms about defending my loved ones and my own backyard if I must- however, I believe it is also wise to contemplate some of Jesus' last words:

He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

For myself, I shall try to follow St Francis' example and love my enemy- the results for him were magnificent.

But I am not talking about living by the sword, we are talking about the Old Testament sanctioned right of both individuals and entire nations and churches to defend themselves from aggressive enemies. You need to be admonishing the Muslims and the pro-war Evangelicals about Christ's words regarding "living by the sword", Mohammed actually stated it was a sacred duty to live by the sword when dealing with the enemy.

And if you are in the business of quoting Jesus, you might also consider Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Unlike some, I'm in the habit of heeding all of Christ's words and teachings, not just the ones that I may find personally agreeable.

 

[Ender]

But I am not talking about living by the sword, we are talking about the Old Testament sanctioned right of both individuals and entire nations and churches to defend themselves from aggressive enemies. You need to be admonishing the Muslims and the pro-war Evangelicals about Christ's words regarding "living by the sword", Mohammed actually stated it was a sacred duty to live by the sword when dealing with the enemy.

And if you are in the business of quoting Jesus, you might also consider Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Unlike some, I'm in the habit of heeding all of Christ's words and teachings, not just the ones that I may find personally agreeable.

Jesus also said that He had fulfilled the law.

And when was the last time you were hurt or threatened by a Muslim?

 

[hells_unicorn]

Jesus also said that He had fulfilled the law.

And when was the last time you were hurt or threatened by a Muslim?

He fulfilled the Jewish ceremonial laws that were types and shadows of his incarnation, but eternal and natural laws such as "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "thou shalt not steal" were not abrogated by his coming, despite what some whore-mongers and socialists might say to the contrary. Try not to read the bible like a fundamentalist by hanging on individual verses that are wholly divorced of context.

I haven't been directly threatened by a Muslim individually (if I was, he or I would be dead), but as a Covenanter and a believer, I am duty bound to speak out against the tyranny of the Turk and his various subsidiaries in their oppression of the Eastern Church, and likewise am duty bound to pray for the eventual destruction of the Eastern Antichrist (Islam) as well as the Western Antichrist (The Papacy). This does not mean that I am on a Crusade to make war with every person in those institutions, as many of them will eventually come out of them and learn the truth, but until that day, I do not consider either to be allies, but enemies that are to be kept at a safe distance, both out of love for them and myself.

 

[OReich]

Muwahid routinely states that its justified to tax non-Muslims for simply being non-Muslims (the jizya tax), and has stated his support for Sharia law generally. In fairness, Sharia law means different things to different ppl, but its always horrible; its always bigoted towards women and non-Muslims, and its always authoritarian. Muwahid refuses to say whether he thinks ppl should be executed (or at all punished) for leaving Islam (apostasy) or criticizing Islam. He refuses to answer this. Hundreds of millions of Muslims believe in this to this very day, which is why its the law in dozens of countries. the Islamic world never changed.

Btw, the Torah says Jews should kill former Jews, just like the Quran calls for killing former believers. But I'm still alive. Because Jews ignore it.