13 doctrines of radical Islam and ISIS

[Marsellus Wallace]

None of the statements are proven by the verses. They are misinterpretations of those verses. From the first to the last.

Isn't that always the case with you ? otherwise, you wouldn't have been a Muslim till this day .

[Mister Agenda]

They aren't given the same weight as the Qu'ran, and different Muslim sects accept or reject different ones. Qu'ranists throw them out entirely.

I'm not sure where to begin with this reply. Perhaps addressing Qu'ranists first is easiest.

Qu'ranists are such a small minority within the religion that I found their inclusion in your reply to be a bit bizarre.

Is my not leaving out minorities relevant to the conversation really so bizarre?

To my knowledge, Qu'ranists have no significant influence when it comes to the current practice of Islam and how that might translate to effects on culture and Muslim state practices.

Qu'ranism has a profound influence on how Qu'ranists currently practice Islam. Oneness Pentecostals are a tiny percentage of Christianity, but if you said Christians believe in the trinity, I'd point them out.

Personally, I would like to see Qu'ranists gain more influence as I think it would be a step in the right direction if the goal is a more liberal version of Islam.

I feel the same way. That's one reason I like to draw attention to them.

Despite the primacy of the Qu'ran in the religion, Qu'ranists are severely outnumbered by Sunni, Shia, and Ibadi Muslims; all of which consider hadiths central to the practice of Islam despite the Qu'ran's primacy.

But only one of which maintain that Aisha was six years old when she married Mohammed, which was the topic at hand. The Ibadi reject a LOT of hadiths.

The hadiths being weighted less than the Qu'ran is a trivial distinction as practiced by a vast majority of the world's Muslims. Your distinction on the matter is immaterial.

You rarely seem to consider distinctions immaterial when it comes to other matters. I get the impression that there's something about this particular topic that turns you from someone who gets the importance of making distinctions to someone who lumps different things together.

Let's look at this from a practical standpoint and consider KSA's (Sunni) execution of women for sorcery and Iran's (Shia) execution of citizens for "sowing the corruption of earth" (insulting the prophet).

Are you abandoning the Aisha being six thing entirely for this new topic?

Does the Qu'ran support this? If so, Islam is fucked up simply because of the Qu'ran. If these executions are not supported by the Qu'ran, then the differing hadiths are both fucked up and we can conclude that the primacy of the Qu'ran is meaningless in this regard.

And so we should consider these executions as a trait of Islam, rather than of KSA and Iran? I'm almost positive you're aware that there are still Christians executing witches.

[Cato]

Is my not leaving out minorities relevant to the conversation really so bizarre?

I know you prefer the line by line parrying, but I find it a bit tedious. I apologize in advance if it results in me overlooking something you find particularly important or interesting.

Aisha's age was not the focus of my original tongue in cheek reply to Mystic, but rather the inference that hadiths are of little importance to the historic and current practices of Islam. Perhaps I should have been more clear. Although, you seemed to have understood this since you were arguing the same by invoking the primacy of the Qu'ran and a very small minority of Muslims that find no authority in the hadiths.

I have no problem with the distinctions in and of themselves, but with the way you are using them to suggest that the hadiths are of little consequence to the practice of Islam. I admitted that the distinctions were valid and even gave my opinion regarding Qu'ranists, which you seem to share. What I can't agree to is the idea that these distinctions somehow make the hadiths and their use as a basis for Sharia Law insignificant or non-Islamic.

I invoked KSA and Iranian capital punishment as a means of demonstrating how using different hadiths doesn't change the result. The executions are justified by the hadiths; therefore, they are most certainly Islamic and not just a characteristic of the state/culture. Citing another religion that also uses its holy texts as justification for atrocities strengthens my point.

[Mystic]

In the case of Islam, you have hadiths with teach to kill apostates while Quran explicitly says not to if they are not fighting you. Hadiths do allow you to marry children while we see in Quran there is an age of maturity for orphans to be given responsibility over their wealth which is the same age of marriage. The word use is ashadu which suggest when one is first at their prime.

My experience with Muslims is many of them are becoming aware of the contradictions between hadiths and Quran.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Islam definitely has its numerous faults. Just be glad that we don't have to put up with the old Israelites. They were homicidal maniac baby rapers. One of their favorite hobbies was to raid a place, kill all the males and then start checking to see which females were virgins. They killed all of the females who weren't virgins and so they generally ended up with toddler girls and baby girls.

The Babylonian Talmud says that Bathsheba was six when David knocked her up. And it has detailed instructions for sex with kids younger than three years old.

BTW, the age of consent was seven (7) years old here in the States in 1895 Delaware. During slavery times there was no such thing as a minimum age of consent. It was a pedophile's heaven.

[robvalue]

It makes me very sad that many of the people ISIS kill worship the same book as them.

Stop worshiping these fucking evil books!