RE: "ISIS is not Islamic
January 16, 2016 at 8:14 am
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2016 at 8:19 am by WinterHold.)
(January 16, 2016 at 6:42 am)robvalue Wrote: Atlas: you say they're not Islamic because they don't have the same interpretation as you. They would probably say the same about you. It's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, I assume you've heard of it? "Muslim" is not well defined as being anything other than "follows Islam". And Islam is similarly not well defined. It's just the name of a religion, and there are no rules as to what people can and can't interpret from a religion.
That's where Arabic plays its role; the language is strong & bald, very clear.
The problem is not for discussion, reasoning or reconsideration : they are ignoring that faith's basic pillar so bad, that nobody can call them "Muslims".
They lie and they know it.
Muslim is clearly well defined, and verses that prohibit what they do is so obvious, that they avoid discussing it, and simply try to kill who says it.
Tell me how this verse -for example- yields different interpretations ?
(Sura 4 Verse 90 ) Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they isolated themselves and did not fight you and offered you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.
Tell me rob, how would anybody come up with contradicting interpretations after such a verse ?
To cheat it up, they use the Hadith.
How would it be a problem of interpretation only ? it's rather a problem of "ignoring some of the book, and believing another".
It's like Charlie Sheen's winning song :
This is exactly what is happening with Islam now. Somebody would re-arrange stuff to produce violence, using the faith as blanked for their own corrupted acts.
