Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 6:38 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Extremists: a question and a talk
#31
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
(July 7, 2018 at 9:58 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Yeah, like I said, you're full of shit.  You cherry pick the verses which favor peace, but the Quran can be read in other ways that are just as legitimate as yours.  The only reason you think your ways are the right ones is because you're too blind to see.

If you didn't read what I wrote, and didn't even care to see the context of the verse told to you, it is not my problem. If you don't see an intellectual problem with the video you posted, you have a big problem that I can't help you with.

(July 8, 2018 at 4:50 am)robvalue Wrote: If you support the notion that the Quran is "the word of God", you can't also expect people to accept your personal interpretation of it. It's a dangerous idea in the first place, for exactly this kind of reason.

The fact that the book even needs apologetics shows it has failed.

It's totally ok. I'm not God, and it's not my duty to punish who defy God.
But it is my duty to seek the truth; and it is most certainly my right to believe in what I see fit.

After all, what I do here is telling the story of my personal belief, nothing more.

(July 8, 2018 at 7:04 am)SaStrike Wrote:
(July 7, 2018 at 11:44 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: If you ever took a close look to the Muslim society, Muslims are categorized into three factions:

1-Self haters
2-Extremists
3-True believers

When you yourself look into it, you come up with three factions. Another person looking will conclude something differently and so on. The thing is, to the person who is inventing these labels, they themself will always be the "true believer" category.

For example if I were to ask another muslim, you'd fall into the category "rejector of hadith and therefore not related to islam but more quranism" and they'd be "true believer" (just an example).

All I ask is for them to describe me for what I am.
And describe themselves for what they are.

(July 8, 2018 at 7:16 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: In 15 Islamic states they kill gays and they're not even extremists but just regular Muslims obedient to Koran.





And yet some bozo on the net is still convinced Koran is all about 'love and tolerance'. Talk about charging against the windmills.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/23811826

(July 8, 2018 at 8:22 am)ReptilianPeon Wrote: Allah need to send an angel to Earth to give us a Tafsir from Allah. That way all disagreement about the Quran will end. Allah should explain what the Iyah of the Quran mean and a lot of problems will be solved. e.g. Sunni VS Shia.

It being confusing is intended. Look at this verse:

Quote:Surah 3, The Quran:
Sahih International

(7) It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

(July 8, 2018 at 10:01 am)Brian37 Wrote:
(July 7, 2018 at 11:44 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: If you ever took a close look to the Muslim society, Muslims are categorized into three factions:

1-Self haters
2-Extremists
3-True believers

It is not strange for one category to carry small bits of the other categories; either. So you can see a true believer who carries some self hate or some extremism, and vice versa for every category.

In this topic I want to discuss the "extremists" in specific.

Mostly, this category feels alienated and out of society, its members also feel that everybody in the world is fighting them, anger can be seen shining from their propaganda, and vengeance is one of the main goals of their struggle. Desperation also serves their struggle and is the engine behind their signature act: suicide bombing.

The problem with this category of Muslims is the direct ignoring they do in front of direct verses from the Quran they believe in:


and:



But these verses are totally ignored by the extremist mind. Souls are being killed without a soul -the children dying in suicide bombings and the civilians-, corruption takes place with the rash acts of extremists.

But all of that opposing opinion from the same religion extremists say they believe in, does not hold any of them from pressing the trigger, bombing hundreds to oblivion.

Terrorism of extremist Muslim militias, is not at all different in evil than the tactical bombing and savage nuclear threat of non-Muslim superpowers. Actually; it's a very sad thing that a Muslim justifies the crimes they make by the evil done by other regimes and systems, it only differs in scale.

But the question asked for the supporters of Jihadi movements: don't you feel shame of going against obvious, clear verses from your own religion, like the ones above?

Do children and suicide bombing casualties know in what they were killed or because of what?

Basing your morality on the writings of antiquity  makes no sense to me. And the part religious people miss, not just Islam, but all religions worldwide, is that just because you interpret a writing one way, does not prevent someone else to read that same book to come to a completely different conclusion.

You are still pulling the "True Scotsman" fallacy, just like any other religion.

Our species ability to be cruel or compassionate isn't handed down to us from above, our behaviors both good and bad are in us. It is up to humans to choose which.

There is no fallacy in what I'm doing; many modern humans are sick of the world of today, let me not mention global warming, nuclear threat, and war and hunger, modern man humans ruined this world and the modern system corrupted the earth, Brian.

That's why I look in the writings of antiquity
Reply
#32
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
The Quran is supposed to be confusing? That's a new one! No wonder I find it so confusing. I guess Allah has decided not to guide me. That's why I'm on this website. It's all Allah's fault! Sad

It would be great if Allah could guide me. I'm waiting for Allah to send another angel down and I'd believe in an instant. Or, better yet, for Allah to be a stranger on the bus. I really would.

Do you not think that if the Quran was less confusing it would be better for everyone? There would be fewer arguments and wars and everyone would instantly know it was the truth. Can you explain why the Quran necessarily has to be confusing?

Reply
#33
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
(July 8, 2018 at 6:20 pm)ReptilianPeon Wrote: The Quran is supposed to be confusing? That's a new one! No wonder I find it so confusing. I guess Allah has decided not to guide me. That's why I'm on this website. It's all Allah's fault! Sad

It would be great if Allah could guide me. I'm waiting for Allah to send another angel down and I'd believe in an instant. Or, better yet, for Allah to be a stranger on the bus. I really would.

Do you not think that if the Quran was less confusing it would be better for everyone? There would be fewer arguments and wars and everyone would instantly know it was the truth. Can you explain why the Quran necessarily has to be confusing?

No. Follow the verse:


Quote:Surah 3, The Quran:
Sahih International

(7) It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

So I guess we got to ask ourselves: "are we among those whose hearts have deviation from the truth, or we're among the ones firm in knowledge who say all of it is from our lord" ?
Reply
#34
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
Or...maybe "we" don't have to ask ourselves that! But go ahead and suit yourself.
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!






Reply
#35
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
God gave a message to an angel to tell to this guy (who couldn't read or write) to tell other people so they could write it down, so other people could read it later.

If this isn't the most absurd, unbelievable story and the absolute worst way to try and communicate (while God is standing around silently watching people kill others due to "misunderstanding" the message), I don't know what is. The responsibility for all this stops with the instigator.

To me, only reasonable conclusions here are that either:

1) God was actually about to die or to become unable to communicate in the future

2) God is a complete idiot

3) God desires mass confusion, murder and war over his message (this doesn't go a long way towards the "peace" angle) and for it to look like complete gibberish to anyone not indoctrinated into it

4) God, if there is one, has nothing to do with this in the first place
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#36
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
(July 8, 2018 at 5:30 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:
(July 8, 2018 at 7:16 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: In 15 Islamic states they kill gays and they're not even extremists but just regular Muslims obedient to Koran.





And yet some bozo on the net is still convinced Koran is all about 'love and tolerance'. Talk about charging against the windmills.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/23811826

Atrocious!

Quote:"Gay rights in America came after women had basic rights. You don't see that in Pakistan. You are not allowed a difference of opinion here. My father is a gentleman but I wouldn't put it past him to put a bullet through my head. I'm all for being 'true to myself' but I don't want to die young," she says.

This kind of behaviour is, of course, not condoned by Pakistan's religious authorities.

Most Pakistanis view homosexuality as sinful. The vast majority of clerics interpret the Qoranic story of Lot as a clear indication that God condemns homosexual men. Some scholars go even further and recommend Sharia-based punishment for "men who have sex with men".
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Reply
#37
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
(July 8, 2018 at 5:30 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:
(July 7, 2018 at 9:58 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Yeah, like I said, you're full of shit.  You cherry pick the verses which favor peace, but the Quran can be read in other ways that are just as legitimate as yours.  The only reason you think your ways are the right ones is because you're too blind to see.

If you didn't read what I wrote, and didn't even care to see the context of the verse told to you, it is not my problem. If you don't see an intellectual problem with the video you posted, you have a big problem that I can't help you with.

I read what you wrote. The context was examined in great detail in the video. The surahs you brought in reply weren't even relevant to the argument presented in the video, so what in fuck are you even babbling about? If you had watched the video, you'd know why your arguments were irrelevant. I noticed you didn't address specific claims made in the video, you just dismissed them outright and repeated your standard defense. I don't believe you actually watched the video. Either you didn't watch the video, and you're a liar, or you're so incompetent you can't even reply coherently to an argument.

The only intellectual problem I see is yours.



I'll repeat the points for the benefit of the stupid.

(July 7, 2018 at 8:43 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: 1-All the verses that speak about "fighting", speak about "fighting" in the context of war. There was a war against Mohammed -peace be upon him-, and his followers were tortured and killed, so he fought back, with these verses being the command for him to fight back.

No, they do not. Surah 9:29, the verse in question does not. And even those verses you've presented simply give permission to fight defensively, they do not forbid fighting when defense is not an issue, as in 9:29, so your defense doesn't even work. The context of 9:29 was clear. The only person distorting context is you.

(July 7, 2018 at 8:43 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: 2-Fighting in Islam is prohibited unless to deter aggression; ironically the youtuber you quoted ignored the verses coming down below:

No, he did not ignore those verses. He responded explicitly to such claims. No, you're just lying again.
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#38
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
Quote:The oldest still-available biography of Muhammad is called the "Sirat Rasul Allah" ("Life of the Prophet of Allah"). This book was written by Ibn Ishaq a century before any of the major works of the Hadith. "Sirat Rasulallah" is considered the most authentic biography of Muhammad. On page 515, we read of an event that took place about three years before Muhammad's death. This specific narrative tells of Muhammad’s conquest of Khaibar, a large Jewish settlement with some of the best date palms in the region. The Jews of Khaibar were prosperous merchants, craftsmen, and farmers. Kinana al-Rabi, who was said to have had the custody of a certain hidden treasure, was brought to Muhammad who asked him about it. Kinana denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" he said "Yes." Muhammad gave orders that the ruin be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked Kinana about the rest of the treasure he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then Muhammad delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head.

Does Islam Promote Peace?

Quote:The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, in a speech at Ayatollah Khomeini’s Mausoleum, June 4, 2002, supports the Palestinian suicide-homicide martyrdoms that are deliberately carried out on innocent Israelis.

"Let me say to you: these stances [of American administrators on suicide bombings] will not be of any use. This quest for martyrdom is not based on emotions; it is based on belief in Islam and faith in [the] Judgment Day and faith in life after death. Anywhere Islam exists in its true sense, arrogance faces this threat."

https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/...conomy.htm

Quote:Discussions about Islam typically revolve around certain verses in the Qur’an, but such discussions are often fruitless. The reason for this is that the Qur’an is very inconsistent in its approach towards unbelievers, due in large part to Muhammad’s own inconsistency. In conversations about Islam, a Muslim may argue that, according to the Qur’an, "There is no compulsion in religion" (2:256). A critic may reply with a very different passage:

Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection (9:29).

To this the Muslim replies, "Yes, it says to fight those who do not believe, but it is referring to unbelievers who attack Islam." Thus, according to many Muslims, Islam fights, but only in self-defense. So who’s right? The solution to the debate can be found in a historical examination of Islam. It is true that Muslims are only permitted to attack when threatened, but history shows what the early Muslims considered a threat. Anything other than complete submission to Islam was regarded as a threat to Islam, and so anything other than complete submission was met with extreme hostility. Even poetry and song lyrics, when used against Muhammad, were enough to warrant a sentence of death.

Hence, the verses in the Qur’an that teach Muslims to live in peace should be examined within the historical context of Muhammad’s life, for it is this life that sheds light on an apparently ambiguous message. This historical context also sheds light on modern aspects of Islam, which ultimately derive from the life of its founder.

For instance, more than thirteen centuries ago, the relatively peaceful Muhammad fled Mecca because of intense persecution. As he fled the city, he left the path of peace farther and farther behind him. He eventually returned at the head of an army, and few were brave enough to oppose him. Islamic law was suddenly supreme, with a host of bloody tales to warn its enemies. A similar phenomenon occurs in the world today. When Muslims are in the minority (as they are in America) the message is always "Let us live in peace with one another, for Islam is a religion of tolerance and understanding." Then, once Islam has spread throughout the country, the message suddenly changes to "Anyone who stands against the Prophet is worthy of death!"

. . . . . .

...Should devout Muslims live in peace with the infidels around them, or should they follow Muhammad’s example by murdering the infidels in their beds?

I’m very happy that most Muslims are willing to live in peace with their neighbors. Yet we have to be honest here. Benevolent Muslims aren’t peaceful because they are following the example set by Muhammad. They are peaceful because they’ve chosen to do what’s right, and because they are willing to live far better lives than Muhammad himself lived....

https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/..._faces.htm
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#39
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
Quote:Hi Dr. Badawi. One of the famous quotation that Muslims use when talking about violence and peace is that Islam is a religion of peace and war in Islam is only for self-defense. However, you one day claimed: "Actual armed jihad is permissible under two conditions alone: one is for self-defense, and the other is for fighting against oppression." (cited in Diana Eck, A New Religious America, HarperSanFrancisco, 2001, p. 238).

Although, Dr. Badawi, you are quite accurate in describing the conditions of armed jihad in Islam, what you fail to say is that the definitions of "self-defense" and "fighting against oppression" are much broader than usually understood. Many Orthodox Muslims believe that if a nation's leaders do not acknowledge the rule of Islam, then those rulers are "oppressors" and thus a legitimate target for war (see John Kelsay, Islam and War, Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993, p. 35). Many Muslims argue that America is a cultural aggressor by exporting its Hollywood values all over the world, and thus any fight against Americans is done in self-defense (see the article by Mark Galli, "Now What? A Christian response to religious terrorism," Christianity Today, Oct 22, 2001). Therefore, there is no end to how a Muslim group can define "self-defense" and "oppression" and thus find an Islamic justification for violence.

Quoted in: https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/...erance.htm

Quote:Another verse says:

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief(fasadan) in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement, S. 5:33 Shakir"

The above passage threatens those who aim for mischief with execution, crucifixion, the cutting of their hands and feet, or exile. The question is what exactly does the word mischief imply or convey? For the answer we now turn to several Muslim sources:

   Fasad
   Fasad, literally 'corruption', in Qur'anic terminology, means creating disorder and corruption earth BY FOLLOWING A PATH OTHER THAN GOD’S. Islam maintains that true peace and happiness emanate ONLY THROUGH THE OBSERVANCE OF GOD’S COMMANDS and through making a conscious effort to see that His laws alone are implemented in every sphere of life. Fasad occurs when man violates God's laws and disobeys Him. Fasad may therefore be partial as well as total; partial when one disregards God's law in one aspect of life while acknowledging His sovereignty in other spheres. If a society is based on the denial of God, that society is bound to be a corrupt and exploitative society - hence full of fasad. (Glossary of Islamic Terms; capital emphasis ours)

Ibn Kathir's tafsir on Quran 5:33 says:

   The Punishment of those Who Cause Mischief in the Land
   Allah said next, ...
   <The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land.>

   'Wage war' mentioned here means, OPPOSE AND CONTRADICT, and it includes DISBELIEF, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. Mischief in the land refers to various types of evil. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Volume 3, p. 161; online edition; capital emphasis ours)

In Ibn Kathir's tafsir on Sura 2:11-12 he writes:

   Meaning of Mischief
   In his Tafsir, As-Suddi said that Ibn `Abbas and Ibn Mas`ud commented, ...

   <And when it is said to them: "Do not make mischief on the earth," they say: "We are only peacemakers.">

   "They are the hypocrites. As for, ...
   <"Do not make mischief on the earth">, that is DISBELIEF AND ACTS OF DISOBEDIENCE." Abu Ja`far said that Ar-Rabi` bin Anas said that Abu Al-`Aliyah said that Allah's statement, ...
   <And when it is said to them: "Do not make mischief on the earth,">, means, "Do not commit acts of disobedience on the earth. Their mischief is DISOBEYING Allah, because whoever disobeys Allah on the earth, OR COMMANDS THAT ALLAH BE DISOBEYED, he has committed mischief on the earth. Peace on both the earth and in the heavens is ensured (and earned) through obedience (to Allah)." Ar-Rabi` bin Anas and Qatadah said similarly. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 1, Parts 1 and 2 (Surat Al-Fatihah to Verse 252 of Surat Al-Baqarah), abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First Edition: January 2000], pp. 131-132; online edition; capital emphasis ours)

And:

   Types of Mischief that the Hypocrites commit
   Ibn Jarir said, "The hypocrites commit mischief on earth BY DISOBEYING THEIR LORD on it and continuing in the prohibited acts. They also ABANDON WHAT ALLAH MADE OBLIGATORY AND DOUBT HIS RELIGION, even though He does not accept a deed from anyone EXCEPT WITH FAITH IN HIS RELIGION and certainty of its truth. The hypocrites also lie to the believers by saying contrary to the doubt and hesitation their hearts harbor. They give as much aid as they can, against Allah's loyal friends, and support those who deny Allah, His Books and His Messengers. This is how the hypocrites commit mischief on earth, while thinking that they are doing righteous work on earth."
   The statement by Ibn Jarir is true, taking the disbelievers as friends is one of the categories of mischief on the earth... (Ibid., p. 132; online edition; capital emphasis ours)

Clearly then, mischief or fasad entails disbelief and disobedience to Islam, that those who deny that Islam is true, or that Muhammad is a true prophet, and who may call into question Muhammad’s religion, are being mischievous. They are to come under the severe punishment and penalty for refusing to embrace Islam and/or for calling its veracity into question.

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance : Addressing A Common Muslim Polemic [emphasis in the original]
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#40
RE: Extremists: a question and a talk
(July 9, 2018 at 1:29 am)robvalue Wrote: God gave a message to an angel to tell to this guy (who couldn't read or write) to tell other people so they could write it down, so other people could read it later.

If this isn't the most absurd, unbelievable story and the absolute worst way to try and communicate (while God is standing around silently watching people kill others due to "misunderstanding" the message), I don't know what is. The responsibility for all this stops with the instigator.

To me, only reasonable conclusions here are that either:

1) God was actually about to die or to become unable to communicate in the future

2) God is a complete idiot

3) God desires mass confusion, murder and war over his message (this doesn't go a long way towards the "peace" angle) and for it to look like complete gibberish to anyone not indoctrinated into it

4) God, if there is one, has nothing to do with this in the first place

Who said that the goal of God is preventing "people from getting killed", by sending the scriptures?
Actually, the goal is something totally different:

Quote:Sura 34, The Quran:
http://quran.ksu.edu.sa/index.php?l=en#a...rans=en_sh

( 28 )   And We have not sent you except comprehensively to mankind as a bringer of good tidings and a warner. But most of the people do not know.
( 29 )   And they say, "When is this promise, if you should be truthful?"

Life is a test, and the Quran preaches in that context. Killing is one of the bad things that can happen in this test, so is pain and so is any positive or negative thing.

It's even stressed on in another verse in the Quran:

Quote:Sura 67, The Quran:
http://quran.ksu.edu.sa/index.php?l=en#a...rans=en_sh

( 2 )   [He] who created death and life to test you [as to] which of you is best in deed - and He is the Exalted in Might, the Forgiving -


So this is the context of the whole thing; death is a creation of God himself with the statement of so many verses in the Quran. It is a part of this life; or in other words: a part of this test.

(July 9, 2018 at 11:45 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:
(July 8, 2018 at 5:30 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: If you didn't read what I wrote, and didn't even care to see the context of the verse told to you, it is not my problem. If you don't see an intellectual problem with the video you posted, you have a big problem that I can't help you with.

I read what you wrote.   The context was examined in great detail in the video.  The surahs you brought in reply weren't even relevant to the argument presented in the video, so what in fuck are you even babbling about?  If you had watched the video, you'd know why your arguments were irrelevant.  I noticed you didn't address specific claims made in the video, you just dismissed them outright and repeated your standard defense.  I don't believe you actually watched the video.  Either you didn't watch the video, and you're a liar, or you're so incompetent you can't even reply coherently to an argument.

The only intellectual problem I see is yours.
To be honest, I didn't complete it. I watched the first 2 minutes or something, and felt so disgusted by the childish, low method of reading 43435345345 verses in 2 seconds and expect me to answer that, a biased video made for biased people -like you-.
That is a biased man, who ignores the contexts and cherry picks to prove his biased opinion. Sorry Jormungander, but I always thought that these types of videos are made by atheists for atheists, made to bash and listened to by people who also want to bash.
Bring me the verses one by one like a real scholar, read them one by one, detail their explanation, and then maybe you'll be worthy of convincing me.
We humans do that to any other field. But we don't do it to the Quran? consider it another piece of history.
Quote:I'll repeat the points for the benefit of the stupid.

(July 7, 2018 at 8:43 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: Wrote:1-All the verses that speak about "fighting", speak about "fighting" in the context of war. There was a war against Mohammed -peace be upon him-, and his followers were tortured and killed, so he fought back, with these verses being the command for him to fight back.

No, they do not. Surah 9:29, the verse in question does not. And even those verses you've presented simply give permission to fight defensively, they do not forbid fighting when defense is not an issue, as in 9:29, so your defense doesn't even work. The context of 9:29 was clear. The only person distorting context is you.
You're sure? Let's see the verses with their context:

Quote:Sura 9, The Quran:
( 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.
.

.
.
( 25 )   Allah has already given you victory in many regions and [even] on the day of Hunayn, when your great number pleased you, but it did not avail you at all, and the earth was confining for you with its vastness; then you turned back, fleeing.
( 26 )   Then Allah sent down His tranquillity upon His Messenger and upon the believers and sent down soldiers angels whom you did not see and punished those who disbelieved. And that is the recompense of the disbelievers.
( 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.

Did you see, how he cherry picked verse 29 and ignored the other verses that prove torture and a war being the context of all of this?

(July 9, 2018 at 11:45 am)Jörmungand Wrote:
(July 7, 2018 at 8:43 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: 2-Fighting in Islam is prohibited unless to deter aggression; ironically the youtuber you quoted ignored the verses coming down below:

No, he did not ignore those verses.  He responded explicitly to such claims.  No, you're just lying again.

I just proved that he did.

(July 10, 2018 at 9:09 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:
Quote:The oldest still-available biography of Muhammad is called the "Sirat Rasul Allah" ("Life of the Prophet of Allah"). This book was written by Ibn Ishaq a century before any of the major works of the Hadith. "Sirat Rasulallah" is considered the most authentic biography of Muhammad. On page 515, we read of an event that took place about three years before Muhammad's death. This specific narrative tells of Muhammad’s conquest of Khaibar, a large Jewish settlement with some of the best date palms in the region. The Jews of Khaibar were prosperous merchants, craftsmen, and farmers. Kinana al-Rabi, who was said to have had the custody of a certain hidden treasure, was brought to Muhammad who asked him about it. Kinana denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" he said "Yes." Muhammad gave orders that the ruin be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked Kinana about the rest of the treasure he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then Muhammad delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head.

Does Islam Promote Peace?

Quote:The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, in a speech at Ayatollah Khomeini’s Mausoleum, June 4, 2002, supports the Palestinian suicide-homicide martyrdoms that are deliberately carried out on innocent Israelis.

"Let me say to you: these stances [of American administrators on suicide bombings] will not be of any use. This quest for martyrdom is not based on emotions; it is based on belief in Islam and faith in [the] Judgment Day and faith in life after death. Anywhere Islam exists in its true sense, arrogance faces this threat."

https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/...conomy.htm

Quote:Discussions about Islam typically revolve around certain verses in the Qur’an, but such discussions are often fruitless. The reason for this is that the Qur’an is very inconsistent in its approach towards unbelievers, due in large part to Muhammad’s own inconsistency. In conversations about Islam, a Muslim may argue that, according to the Qur’an, "There is no compulsion in religion" (2:256). A critic may reply with a very different passage:

   Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection (9:29).

To this the Muslim replies, "Yes, it says to fight those who do not believe, but it is referring to unbelievers who attack Islam." Thus, according to many Muslims, Islam fights, but only in self-defense. So who’s right? The solution to the debate can be found in a historical examination of Islam. It is true that Muslims are only permitted to attack when threatened, but history shows what the early Muslims considered a threat. Anything other than complete submission to Islam was regarded as a threat to Islam, and so anything other than complete submission was met with extreme hostility. Even poetry and song lyrics, when used against Muhammad, were enough to warrant a sentence of death.

Hence, the verses in the Qur’an that teach Muslims to live in peace should be examined within the historical context of Muhammad’s life, for it is this life that sheds light on an apparently ambiguous message. This historical context also sheds light on modern aspects of Islam, which ultimately derive from the life of its founder.

For instance, more than thirteen centuries ago, the relatively peaceful Muhammad fled Mecca because of intense persecution. As he fled the city, he left the path of peace farther and farther behind him. He eventually returned at the head of an army, and few were brave enough to oppose him. Islamic law was suddenly supreme, with a host of bloody tales to warn its enemies. A similar phenomenon occurs in the world today. When Muslims are in the minority (as they are in America) the message is always "Let us live in peace with one another, for Islam is a religion of tolerance and understanding." Then, once Islam has spread throughout the country, the message suddenly changes to "Anyone who stands against the Prophet is worthy of death!"

. . . . . .

...Should devout Muslims live in peace with the infidels around them, or should they follow Muhammad’s example by murdering the infidels in their beds?

I’m very happy that most Muslims are willing to live in peace with their neighbors. Yet we have to be honest here. Benevolent Muslims aren’t peaceful because they are following the example set by Muhammad. They are peaceful because they’ve chosen to do what’s right, and because they are willing to live far better lives than Muhammad himself lived....

https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/..._faces.htm

That is the saddest story I ever read!
The crimes of this man are so violent, it makes Vlad the Impaler -the Christian European- and the Cannibal medieval European knights and the American Slavers and Joseph Stalin and Hitler look like angels !

Wikipedia talks about an assassination that targeted Mohammed:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Quray...the_Trench

Quote:Tensions quickly mounted between the growing numbers of Muslims and Jewish tribes, while Muhammad found himself at war with his native Meccan tribe of the Quraysh. In 624, after his victory over the Meccans in the Battle of Badr, Banu Qaynuqa threatened Muhammad's political position and assaulted a Muslim woman which led to their expulsion from Medina for breaking the peace treaty of Constitution of Medina.[32][33] The Qurayza remained passive during the whole Qaynuqa affair, apparently because the Qaynuqa were historically allied with the Khazraj, while the Qurayza were the allies of the Aws.[34]
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza#cite_note-34][/url]

Could you read history before debating me, please?
Your sources are biased, and has nothing to do with the truth about Islam's history.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Women allowed to dive in Saudi Arabia; more talk WinterHold 2 1264 September 28, 2017 at 2:50 am
Last Post: WinterHold
  We need to talk about Muhammad mralstoner 28 3430 June 15, 2016 at 9:00 pm
Last Post: mralstoner
  At least 70 dead by Islamic extremists. downbeatplumb 15 3727 April 5, 2015 at 12:07 pm
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)