Why I'm not a terrorist

[WinterHold]

You said it yourself Atlas, you would discard the book if it disagreed with your internal morals. So you don't need to keep making excuses and finding hidden meanings in your religious text. You're a "good" human because of other natural factors.

Since you already rejected the hadith parts you mention, most will agree that you rejected islam. So basically you just invented your own religion and are hanging onto it for some reason. Quoting the quran like it even makes any difference, in todays world it is outdated and incorrect logically and scientifically. Just admit you're atheist

I found a pretty good haven in it. For the morals I already obtained before dwelling in the faith, it supported them or corrected them.
Take this example: I tended to pay verbal insults with physical reaction when I was so younger than this. But the Islamic "Eye for an eye" law made me cease, and disciplined my actions. If somebody cursed me now, I treat an eye for an eye: I curse back. But never fight words with fists, unless words caused a physical damage; of course.

If Muslims practiced this moral for example; Charlie Hebdo and similar incidents would not find justifications.

So many morals were derived too; and my list kept growing. Some Muslims from the past did the same, and that's what made the Quran so popular.
If I follow the Hadiths; I will chop heads of apostates, stone people who commit sex with other mates while married, throw homosexuals from mountains, and more.

A wide gap there exists between the Quran and the Hadith. So why would I throw away the only book that ordered and commanded people to be good to each other, said men are from women and women are from men, prevented paying words with killing, and so.

---

Or stay atheist as in your case.

But when somebody take out a sword to chop my head when I preach my views; which don't hurt him or call to hurt him; I know something is totally wrong.

Muslims did not invent that either, Atlas.  Xtians did.  The suppression of heretics began virtually as soon as one group of xtians gained enough political power to get away with it.

What is sad is the Muslims doing exactly what Christians and Jews did before them.
Read about the Sicarii before?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicarii

The Sicarii (Modern Hebrew: סיקריים siqari'im) were a splinter group of the Jewish Zealots who, in the decades preceding Jerusalem's destruction in 70 CE, heavily opposed the Roman occupation of Judea and attempted to expel them and their sympathizers from the area.[1] The Sicarii carried sicae, or small daggers, concealed in their cloaks.[2] At public gatherings, they pulled out these daggers to attack Romans and Hebrew Roman sympathizers alike, blending into the crowd after the deed to escape detection.

The Sicarii were likely one of the earliest forms of an organized assassination unit of cloak and daggers, predating the Islamic Hashishin and Japanese ninjas by centuries.[3][4]

This is the same tactic Islamic terrorists carry on today, literally the same. It's sad and frustrating, because it's just a chain of copy-cats; Jihadists exist in every religion, they all do the same filthy acts, and they all torture and twist their faiths and religions.

Jews did so; Christians did so; and now Muslims are doing so by following the Hadith.

---

Muslims did not invent that either, Atlas.  Xtians did.  The suppression of heretics began virtually as soon as one group of xtians gained enough political power to get away with it.

Long before Jews and Christians and Muslims you had Terracotta Warriors, whom were trained to kill and show no mercy to enemies.

Point is Atlas, I don't attack any religion out of spite or revenge. Humans have always been tribal. Islam didn't invent brutality either. But until that part of the world faces it's own backwoods thinking, it will be stuck in the past.

And Atlass, in saying this, the sane are not giving Jews or Christians a pass either. 

Christians didn't invent human cruelty either Minn. They got their mythology from Hebrews, whom got their mythology from the Canaanites. 

But in all of antiquity worldwide, most humans lived under local ruling families/tribes, and since the mortality rate was far higher back then, and considering nobody had our modern understanding of evolution, most humans were fierce in defending their local rulers.

Aren't these the men the Chinese statue army represented?
Never knew they were brutal in wars; I saw a documentary about the statues and their Emperor.

Brutality is a resort of so many humans to treat difference. Difference for some -especially dictators- is a source of frustration, and to achieve the goal of enforcing one's idea on the rest, brutality takes place.
Like when some parents start to get physical with their kids if they don't support their views.

Yes, Christians and Jews and Muslims didn't invent that. We have it with us since the dawn of humanity

---

It should be a lesson to you too, that Sunni religion and Shiite religions are beliefs so different from Islam. Their holy book is a composition between Quran, Hadith and ancient Sunni/Shiite opinions.

So you simply dismiss millions of Muslims that don't interpret Koran as you do. How does this help your argument? That's the "beauty" of religion: you can have "scholars" that spend their whole life studying some book and interpreting it, even convincing millions of people that you're right and then some other person comes along and he is just "Nah, you're wrong" and you can't prove either of them is wrong or right to interpret it.
Muslims see in Koran what they are brought up to see in Koran. As any holy book you can see what ever you want to see in it.

Not like "I" do; but as "language rules" dictate.
Who has language on his side wins the argument about the verse. I dismiss the opinions of so many Muslims, because when they say the Quran "cannot be understood probably". Literally.

That's mainly why it's discarded; and the Sunna (in both Sunni and Shiite forms) replaces it.

Numbers of people mean nothing, if the whole world believed earth is flat; then being the only individual going against them is quite an honor.
Language rules can draw the line between different interpretations, if any showed up. The book is very obvious in its core.

I never saw the Quran like I was brought up to see it: I grew up in Wahhabi schools.

[WinterHold]

A terrorist is a person who uses terrorism as means to reach a goal.
Which is a bad thing because usually people die due to this terrorist act.

In here; I'm not discussing terrorism practiced by parents as a raising tactic; neither am I discussing terrorism practiced by humans to discipline kittens into obedient pets.
I'm discussing fatal type of terrorism, that take place through "armed attacks", with intention to spread fear through murder.

An example for this type of terrorism, is the American nuclear bombing of Japan, also the ancient Jewish "Sicarii" who used to kill Roman citizens,  also the Ottomans who used impaling as an execution method.

Here; I cite why I'm not a terrorist.

I believe in the religion of Islam. In the Quran; the source book of the religion that contains the literal word of God, I'm ordered to be peaceful towards any person peaceful towards me:



By the Godly command in verse 61, Sura 8, I must incline to peace with anybody inclining to peace.
It's forbidden on me, to fight that who doesn't fight me.

For example, the normal mainstream citizens of the city of New York. I don't see them fighting me; actually I'm even allowed to pray in their city.

Making terrorism, by verse 61 in Sura 8, a forbidden act. You can ask any terrorist justifying his/her terrorism through Islamic reasons: what is your answer to verse 61, of Sura 8?

The people who died in 9/11 for example. Were they fighters? to my knowledge it's a civilian place that even had Muslims inside it !
But, a Muslim should "PREPARE" whatever he can, to keep attackers and foes away from harming him/her; "PREPARE"; not attack with daggers like the Sicarii. "PREPARE".

That's why I'm not a terrorist.
Islam NEVER calls for terrorism against the innocent.

Sura 8, Verse 61.

But what about Sura 9 Verse 41? I belive it is considered the latest of the suras in the Quran and therefore the most important. and it pretty much states that you are supposed to go out and fight for Allah. For me that is the definition of condoning terrorism and it is ijn the heart of muslim faith: the Quran!

The verse is below:

Sura 9, The Quran:
( 41 )   Go forth, whether light or heavy, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the cause of Allah. That is better for you, if you only knew.

To understand it, let's look at the context right from the start:

Sura 9, The Quran:
( 1 )   [This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.

( 2 )   So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

( 3 )   And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah. And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.

( 4 )   Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term [has ended]. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].

( 5 )   And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

( 6 )   And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

( 7 )   How can there be for the polytheists a treaty in the sight of Allah and with His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at al-Masjid al-Haram? So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].

( 8 )   How [can there be a treaty] while, if they gain dominance over you, they do not observe concerning you any pact of kinship or covenant of protection? They satisfy you with their mouths, but their hearts refuse [compliance], and most of them are defiantly disobedient.

( 9 )   They have exchanged the signs of Allah for a small price and averted [people] from His way. Indeed, it was evil that they were doing.

( 10 )   They do not observe toward a believer any pact of kinship or covenant of protection. And it is they who are the transgressors.

( 11 )   But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, then they are your brothers in religion; and We detail the verses for a people who know.

( 12 )   And if they break their oaths after their treaty and defame your religion, then fight the leaders of disbelief, for indeed, there are no oaths [sacred] to them; [fight them that] they might cease.

( 13 )   Would you not fight a people who broke their oaths and determined to expel the Messenger, and they had begun [the attack upon] you the first time? Do you fear them? But Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are [truly] believers.

.
.
.
28 )   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.

( 29 )   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.

( 30 )   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?

( 31 )   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.
.
.
.
( 34 )   O you who have believed, indeed many of the scholars and the monks devour the wealth of people unjustly and avert [them] from the way of Allah. And those who hoard gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah - give them tidings of a painful punishment.

( 35 )   The Day when it will be heated in the fire of Hell and seared therewith will be their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, [it will be said], "This is what you hoarded for yourselves, so taste what you used to hoard."


.
.
.

( 40 )   If you do not aid the Prophet - Allah has already aided him when those who disbelieved had driven him out [of Makkah] as one of two, when they were in the cave and he said to his companion, "Do not grieve; indeed Allah is with us." And Allah sent down his tranquillity upon him and supported him with angels you did not see and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowest, while the word of Allah - that is the
highest. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.

( 41 )   Go forth, whether light or heavy, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the cause of Allah. That is better for you, if you only knew.

It's a skyscraper of text,  but you know reading books like the Quran are just like that: fetching the context is just like that.
My point, is that there's a context. Seeing your reply, without reading the above, gives me a totally different idea !

So, following the verses, we obviously have this scenario:

1-Mohammed was banished out of Mecca
2-The Polytheists used to break their oaths to insane levels. They were historically known for that; you can search.
3-They used to torture Muslims on sight
4-Mohammed was ordered also to fight the hypocrite Christian and Jewish institution in Arabia. You can revise Christian history.

Your argument fails in front of this context; TBH.

[bennyboy]

The problem is that by supporting your book of fairy tales, you are indirectly supporting those who take it literally enough to do harm to others.

Drop the fairy tale book please, we have enough real problems in the world without contributing to crazy people thinking murder is a holy venture.

[ShirkahnW]

The hiszorical context is irrelevant. The Quran claims to be the true and unchangeable word of God. So the only thing that matters is whats in the Quran and not what historical context it was written in. You are right in saying that muslims were not treated well and that some polytheists broke thier contracts. But that is no excuse to say that you should fight all people of different believes just because they didnt treat muslims very well in the past. The people of today can not be punished for mistakes their ancestors made over a thousand years ago. And I have read the Quran btw. and it is a good book to learn about what was going on at the time and what mohammed rrally thought. But it is a horrendous book to life your life after.

[WinterHold]

The problem is that by supporting your book of fairy tales, you are indirectly supporting those who take it literally enough to do harm to others.

Drop the fairy tale book please, we have enough real problems in the world without contributing to crazy people thinking murder is a holy venture.

I don't agree; no.
You are throwing me with stones, while your house is made out of glass. You share the same religious views with Dahmer and Stalin. But that doesn't make you a serial killer, or a mad dictator.

Your concept is not right.
Furthermore; the world's problems are produced from the immorality of steps and actions like the creation of atomic weapons and WMDs. Religion is not the main problem here; money and economy is.

---

The hiszorical context is irrelevant. The Quran claims to be the true and unchangeable word of God. So the only thing that matters is whats in the Quran and not what historical context it was written in. You are right in saying that muslims were not treated well and that some polytheists broke thier contracts. But that is no excuse to say that you should fight all people of different believes just because they didnt treat muslims very well in the past. The people of today can not be punished for mistakes their ancestors made over a thousand years ago. And I have read the Quran btw. and it is a good book to learn about what was going on at the time and what mohammed rrally thought. But it is a horrendous book to life your life after.

No; it is.
Also the "linguistic" context. The meaning of the author is a must. Even in science and entertainment.

In my reply; I quoted to you the Quran itself. Not a history book, or a historical opinion. When put in the original context, the verse means something totally different than what you suggested.

What about the other verses that advocate peace?

( 6 )   And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

and this?

Sura 2, The Quran:
( 190 )   Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.

And so many other verses?
Muslims weren't ordered to fight everybody. Instead they were ordered to fix the earth:

Sura 7, The Quran:
( 55 )   Call upon your Lord in humility and privately; indeed, He does not like transgressors.

( 56 )   And cause not corruption upon the earth after its reformation. And invoke Him in fear and aspiration. Indeed, the mercy of Allah is near to the doers of good.

Choosing the verses of self-defense, and strip them off their context, is the same ignorant way Sunnies and Shiites invoke to justify their religions.
It's the same cherry-picking.

[ShirkahnW]

The problem is that by supporting your book of fairy tales, you are indirectly supporting those who take it literally enough to do harm to others.

Drop the fairy tale book please, we have enough real problems in the world without contributing to crazy people thinking murder is a holy venture.

I don't agree; no.
You are throwing me with stones, while your house is made out of glass. You share the same religious views with Dahmer and Stalin. But that doesn't make you a serial killer, or a mad dictator.

Your concept is not right.
Furthermore; the world's problems are produced from the immorality of steps and actions like the creation of atomic weapons and WMDs. Religion is not the main problem here; money and economy is.

---

The hiszorical context is irrelevant. The Quran claims to be the true and unchangeable word of God. So the only thing that matters is whats in the Quran and not what historical context it was written in. You are right in saying that muslims were not treated well and that some polytheists broke thier contracts. But that is no excuse to say that you should fight all people of different believes just because they didnt treat muslims very well in the past. The people of today can not be punished for mistakes their ancestors made over a thousand years ago. And I have read the Quran btw. and it is a good book to learn about what was going on at the time and what mohammed rrally thought. But it is a horrendous book to life your life after.

No; it is.
Also the "linguistic" context. The meaning of the author is a must. Even in science and entertainment.

In my reply; I quoted to you the Quran itself. Not a history book, or a historical opinion. When put in the original context, the verse means something totally different than what you suggested.

What about the other verses that advocate peace?

( 6 )   And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

and this?

Sura 2, The Quran:
( 190 )   Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.

And so many other verses?
Muslims weren't ordered to fight everybody. Instead they were ordered to fix the earth:

Sura 7, The Quran:
( 55 )   Call upon your Lord in humility and privately; indeed, He does not like transgressors.

( 56 )   And cause not corruption upon the earth after its reformation. And invoke Him in fear and aspiration. Indeed, the mercy of Allah is near to the doers of good.

Choosing the verses of self-defense, and strip them off their context, is the same ignorant way Sunnies and Shiites invoke to justify their religions.
It's the same cherry-picking.

As I said there is a reason why I picked that sura. It is considered the last and therefore most important sura. And there is no verse in said sura i know of which advocates peace.

[WinterHold]

I don't agree; no.
You are throwing me with stones, while your house is made out of glass. You share the same religious views with Dahmer and Stalin. But that doesn't make you a serial killer, or a mad dictator.

Your concept is not right.
Furthermore; the world's problems are produced from the immorality of steps and actions like the creation of atomic weapons and WMDs. Religion is not the main problem here; money and economy is.

---

No; it is.
Also the "linguistic" context. The meaning of the author is a must. Even in science and entertainment.

In my reply; I quoted to you the Quran itself. Not a history book, or a historical opinion. When put in the original context, the verse means something totally different than what you suggested.

What about the other verses that advocate peace?



and this?




And so many other verses?
Muslims weren't ordered to fight everybody. Instead they were ordered to fix the earth:


Choosing the verses of self-defense, and strip them off their context, is the same ignorant way Sunnies and Shiites invoke to justify their religions.
It's the same cherry-picking.

As I said there is a reason why I picked that sura. It is considered the last and therefore most important sura. And there is no verse in said sura i know of which advocates peace.

ShirkahnW Said:
The hiszorical context is irrelevant

[Brian37]

The problem is that by supporting your book of fairy tales, you are indirectly supporting those who take it literally enough to do harm to others.

Drop the fairy tale book please, we have enough real problems in the world without contributing to crazy people thinking murder is a holy venture.

Atlass33 ^^^^^^^^^^^

Keep re-reading this, but trust me, I have the same problem with every single religion worldwide.

EVERY RELIGION in the world, as umbrella labels have competing sub sects, whom cannot agree on how to follow the writings or which holy leader to follow. There is a liberal  non violent left, and a conservative "all or nothing" right, IN EVERY RELIGION, to greater or lesser degrees. Not even Hindus or Buddhists escape this.

I really wish my well intended liberal non violent theists friends would try to see what I see, that our ability to do good and be non violent is not in old writings, or in people in funny robes and hats, but in our GENES.

I DO NOT expect religion do go way,no, but this planet is too damned small now, to give so much time and attention to our differences and not enough time to solving global issues of pollution, famine, poverty. 

Atlass33 it still remains others under your same umbrella label DO read the same Koran and justify violence with it. But the same can be said for Christians and Jews.

Religion is a HORRIBLE way to conduct national, much less global diplomacy. But we can seek to make governments less dogmatic with the principle of protecting all humans equally.

[DodosAreDead]

 Take concepts like charity, I'll know that religion affected somebody if I saw them giving.

Wait, so atheists don't give?    Rather confused.

[WinterHold]

The problem is that by supporting your book of fairy tales, you are indirectly supporting those who take it literally enough to do harm to others.

Drop the fairy tale book please, we have enough real problems in the world without contributing to crazy people thinking murder is a holy venture.

Atlass33 ^^^^^^^^^^^

Keep re-reading this, but trust me, I have the same problem with every single religion worldwide.

EVERY RELIGION in the world, as umbrella labels have competing sub sects, whom cannot agree on how to follow the writings or which holy leader to follow. There is a liberal  non violent left, and a conservative "all or nothing" right, IN EVERY RELIGION, to greater or lesser degrees. Not even Hindus or Buddhists escape this.

I really wish my well intended liberal non violent theists friends would try to see what I see, that our ability to do good and be non violent is not in old writings, or in people in funny robes and hats, but in our GENES.

I DO NOT expect religion do go way,no, but this planet is too damned small now, to give so much time and attention to our differences and not enough time to solving global issues of pollution, famine, poverty. 

Atlass33 it still remains others under your same umbrella label DO read the same Koran and justify violence with it. But the same can be said for Christians and Jews.

Religion is a HORRIBLE way to conduct national, much less global diplomacy. But we can seek to make governments less dogmatic with the principle of protecting all humans equally.

I personally think, and actually have an evidence from the book I speak about, that the religion called Islam is not calling for violence, but as means to deter aggression or similar violence.

Kill the killer; don't kill his people.
Punish the thieve; don't punish his family.

The Quranic verses prove this; only when taken literally.
It is Shia and Sunna across history, who worked to destroy this concept, and make broad, wide interpretations to replace precise, accurate verses.

The sects of Islam are not Islam. But an ugly mutation of the faith.

---

 Take concepts like charity, I'll know that religion affected somebody if I saw them giving.

Wait, so atheists don't give?    Rather confused.

Where did I say that????

I said "religion is what influenced charity".
Everybody gives. But fear God, fear hell, and you shall feel hunger even if full.

Moreover; charity in its current forms is always related to religion. Imagining a Church without a charity center is quite...dosn't make sense?