Intelligence² Debate: Islam is a Religion of Peace?

[Rayaan]

"Islam means peace through submitting your will to Allah" - His words.

That's true because Allah cannot be excluded from a definition of peace in regards to Islam.

Submission to Allah is justice and justice leads to peace. And it is a type of peace that lives in the soul of a believer. It manifests itself internally.

8. He quotes Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256 saying that nobody is compelled to chose Islam but the path will be laid open. No surprises why he didn't read the next verse as it makes it clear that this only applies to theists (those who believe) and not those atheists and their supporters, we are destined to burn in hellfire forever and are not 'graced' with "not being compelled" like other theists.

Yeah, nobody is compelled to choose Islam. In the same way, atheists are not being compelled to believe in Hell either.

But, it's one thing to state that "atheists will go to Hell" and a different thing to state that "You must believe in Islam or you will go to Hell." Only the former is stated in the Quran but not the later. And for an atheist, neither of those statements are true and that's why it's not a contradiction. He is free to either believe or disbelieve according to his own reasoning abilities. Hence the verse that there is no compulsion in religion.

9. The next verse quoted is used to dodge this, saying that followers of Islam should reason with those who do not follow Islam.

Yes, and more importantly, the verse is putting an emphasis on the manner in which we are to reason with them:

"Invite (all) to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for your Lord knows best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance" (Surah 16:125).

However (and correct me if i'm wrong Rayaan) the later verses take precedent over the earlier ones, so if at any point two statements are contradictory the latter one is necessarily correct. That means this verse is overruled for atheists by Surat Al-Bagarah 2:256.

There are no two statements in the Quran which contradict each other because the word of God is not fallible. There are a few which are abrogated by later verses, though, but this is not a contradiction because the Quran makes it clear that the earlier one was true only for a specific situation and a specific time, and thus being over-ruled by a new law from God. He just changed his mind (for a good reason). However, neither of the statements are false because one of them is temporary and the other one is for all times.

"Whichever revelation We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We substitute something better than it or similar to it. Know you not that Allah has power over all things?" (Surah 2:106)

Abrogation in the Quran: http://www.ilmgate.org/abrogation-in-the-quran/

That video did not even come close to establishing that 1) Mohammed didn't start wars or 2) That Islam has never spread by the sword.

Let's forget about the video then.
But still, history tells us that he never started wars with those who allowed him to live peacefully.

The wars only started when he was being violently opposed by many of the tribal societies:

Muhammad was born into a tribal society where the only bond recognized was that of the tribal bond. When he preached about the unity of God and universal brotherhood between all of humankind, the powerful members of his society violently opposed him. They subjected him and his followers to relentless persecution, even to the extent of lynching some of them. They were forced to leave Makkah to immigrate to Abyssinia and then to Madinah. Even in Madinah, he was not left alone to practice his religion. The tribes from his society rallied forces to eliminate him and his followers. Numerous attempts were even made on his life.

It was in this context that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was called to take up arms to defend himself and his followers. While doing so, he never compromised the sacred principle of sanctity of life, as he and his followers were ordered to govern themselves by the firm ethics of just war and clearly defined rules of engagement.

And it was his great character and his faith in Allah that made him victorious against the enemies:

The morality of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was not restricted to just a few moral attributes, but included diverse traits and aspects of life. He was kind, compassionate, caring, generous, and humble, but he was also strong, brave, eloquent, wise, and insightful. He was a great planner, organizer, and thinker while at the same time he was also a man of faith, trust, and devotion to Allah.

More in this article: Did Muhammad Lead a Violent Life?

[theVOID]

"Islam means peace through submitting your will to Allah" - His words.

That's true because Allah cannot be excluded from a definition of peace in regards to Islam.

And you've just lost this argument, because that is the same as saying that we cannot have peace with Islam until we join Islam. That is fucking totalitarian! Join me or I'll kill you, and that's peace - The very definition of 'spreading peace' is 'spreading Islam' and as your preacher said "some times it is necessary to use war to make people submit to Islam".

Yeah, fuck off Rayaan, that's neither what peace means or a moral statement to make. Your religion is a thuggish self-righteous piece of shit that demands we follow it or suffer. Why the fuck do you respect that train of thought?

Submission to Allah is justice and justice leads to peace. And it is a type of peace that lives in the soul of a believer. It manifests itself internally.

So we are ordered to face justice or else! If justice is submission to Allah then my refusal to believe/submit to your pathological delusion makes me unjust. Injustice is punishable. Not believing in Allah is therefore punishable according to your religion.

I don't know how you did it, but you just made Islam look even worse than it already did.

8. He quotes Surat Al-Baqarah 2:256 saying that nobody is compelled to chose Islam but the path will be laid open. No surprises why he didn't read the next verse as it makes it clear that this only applies to theists (those who believe) and not those atheists and their supporters, we are destined to burn in hellfire forever and are not 'graced' with "not being compelled" like other theists.

Yeah, nobody is compelled to choose Islam. In the same way, atheists are not being compelled to believe in Hell either.

But not believing is Unjust. You've tripped over your own rope.

But, it's one thing to state that "atheists will go to Hell" and a different thing to state that "You must believe in Islam or you will go to Hell." Only the former is stated in the Quran but not the later. And for an atheist, neither of those statements are true and that's why it's not a contradiction. He is free to either believe or disbelieve according to his own reasoning abilities. Hence the verse that there is no compulsion in religion.

Bullshit. Here is Surat Al-Baqarah 2:257:

"And those who disbelieve - their allies are Taghut. They take them out of the light into darknesses. Those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide eternally therein."

Are you going to say that Allah does not torture Atheists forever in fire?

9. The next verse quoted is used to dodge this, saying that followers of Islam should reason with those who do not follow Islam.

Yes, and more importantly, the verse is putting an emphasis on the manner in which we are to reason with them:

"Invite (all) to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for your Lord knows best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance" (Surah 16:125).

But if that doesn't work threaten to kill or submit right? After all, it's some times necessary to use war to make people submit. Or do you just leave it up to Allah to torture us forever after death?

However (and correct me if i'm wrong Rayaan) the later verses take precedent over the earlier ones, so if at any point two statements are contradictory the latter one is necessarily correct. That means this verse is overruled for atheists by Surat Al-Bagarah 2:256.

There are no two statements in the Quran which contradict each other because the word of God is not fallible.

In another thread you admitted this was false.

Some examples:

Who Was the First Muslim? Muhammad [6:14, 163], Moses [7:143], some Egyptians [26:51], or Abraham [2:127-133, 3:67] or Adam, the first man who also received inspiration from Allah [2:37]?

Can Allah be seen and did Muhammad see his Lord? Yes [S. 53:1-18, 81:15-29], No [6:102-103, 42:51].

Can Angels Cause the Death of People? The Qur'an attacks those who worship anyone besides God (e.g. angels or prophets) because those can neither create, nor give life, nor cause anyone to die. Yet, the Qur'an explicitly states that one angel or several angels are causing certain people to die [Sura 4:97, 16:28, 32, 32:11].

There are a few which are abrogated by later verses, though, but this is not a contradiction because the Quran makes it clear that the earlier one was true only for a specific situation and a specific time, and thus being over-ruled by a new law from God. He just changed his mind (for a good reason). However, neither of the statements are false because one of them is temporary and the other one is for all times.

Allah cannot manage a set of rules that applies to all?

And if that is true then the verse saying that Atheists are not free from being compelled to believe is abrogated by the one that says that they can be compelled.

"Whichever revelation We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We substitute something better than it or similar to it. Know you not that Allah has power over all things?" (Surah 2:106)

Allah has the power to contradict himself! Awesome.

That video did not even come close to establishing that 1) Mohammed didn't start wars or 2) That Islam has never spread by the sword.

Let's forget about the video then.
But still, history tells us that he never started wars with those who allowed him to live peacefully.

Says who? What history is this?

The wars only started when he was being violently opposed by many of the tribal societies:

Muhammad was born into a tribal society where the only bond recognized was that of the tribal bond. When he preached about the unity of God and universal brotherhood between all of humankind, the powerful members of his society violently opposed him. They subjected him and his followers to relentless persecution, even to the extent of lynching some of them. They were forced to leave Makkah to immigrate to Abyssinia and then to Madinah. Even in Madinah, he was not left alone to practice his religion. The tribes from his society rallied forces to eliminate him and his followers. Numerous attempts were even made on his life.

It was in this context that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was called to take up arms to defend himself and his followers. While doing so, he never compromised the sacred principle of sanctity of life, as he and his followers were ordered to govern themselves by the firm ethics of just war and clearly defined rules of engagement.

That is from a source that already accepts all of the Muslim brainwashing. Big fucking deal if he agrees. It's not historical evidence either, it's just a statement of opinion. Another argument from authority.

And it was his great character and his faith in Allah that made him victorious against the enemies:

The morality of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was not restricted to just a few moral attributes, but included diverse traits and aspects of life. He was kind, compassionate, caring, generous, and humble, but he was also strong, brave, eloquent, wise, and insightful. He was a great planner, organizer, and thinker while at the same time he was also a man of faith, trust, and devotion to Allah.

Seriously, you cannot expect us to take you seriously if you are going to use quotes from someone who believes the story to justify the story. I could get a Mormon to bust out some sound-bites about the truth of the Joseph Smith story and that would do nothing to support the opinion of Mormons, so this cannot be anything more.