Pat gets mad

[Tiberius]

All the mosque protesters are missing out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfGWFtPks-Q

(Couldn't resist bringing some funny to this thread)

[Napoléon]

Well I'm sorry pad, but I think it's you who is ignorant to what Islam actually is. Are you not aware that it's every muslim's duty to wage jihad?

Nappy, have you actually read the Q'uran? I have.How much time have you spent at university studying Islam? (I spent about a year) How many Muslim countries have you actually visited,let alone lived in?

Bits and bobs. I haven't read the whole thing because those bit's I have read just seem mumbo jumbo and distorted. Don't see how this is relevant.
Why would I want to spend a year studying Islam? It's boring as hell, and again, I don't need to study every single page in it to have an opinion on it. I think I know enough. (but again, if you think I'm wrong please by all means STATE WHY, because so far we have another person asserting that I'm somehow ignorant without actually demonstrating HOW, thanks).
And seen as I see muslims on pretty much a daily basis, living in birmingham for 18 years, one of the largest muslim communities in europe, I would humorously say that I live in a muslim country (ok maybe city). Also someone in my family was in a relationship with a muslim girl for 6 years and was on the verge of muslim marraige, someone I knew very well even visiting her home country Iran. You see, I can argue from authority too. None of what you just said is relevant.

Yes, I'm an ignorant man,but less than most non Muslims about Islam.Sadly, with your fatuous comment about jihad,you show your own willful ignorance.In context that means you are unwilling to listen or learn from anyone who may know what he's is talking about if he differs from your prejudices..

Oh please. Do not take me for a fucking fool. You think somehow that what I said was wrong? Well? Fucking demonstrate it. How on earth was my comment about jihad fatuous? It IS every muslims duty to undertake jihad to the best of my knowledge, and if YOU say I'm wrong then YOU provide some reasoning as to why. You can't just throw out calling someone fatuous and not back it up, that in itself is fucking fatuous.
Then you go on to say I'm unwilling to listen and learn? HA!
Maybe if you actually provided something I could listen to with regards to the video or anything I have said then that would be good. Because like I've said, you are just asserting things without proving it. You sound an awful lot like some self righteous christian.
If you can back up what you say and prove me wrong on my jihad comment then I'll accept it. So please go ahead.

If if you ask him nicely, Rayaan may take the time to explain the meaning of "jihad" to you. I can't be bothered wasting my time .


I have nothing further to say to on this topic.

What? You're leaving? Right when we were in the middle of an argument? I win by default then
As it happens Rayaan hasn't expressed to me any contention over my use of the word Jihad. Only you. If you supposedly can't be bothered then don't put your fingers on the keyboard in the first place.

Seriously Paddy, I at least thought that if you were going to assert someone as ignorant then you wouldn't be ignorant enough to think that you could just say that, then run away and not back it up. I am dissapoint.

[Rayaan]

I do have a slight contention against your use of the word "Jihad." I just haven't replied yet but that doesn't mean that I agree with you.

In Arabic, jihad means a "striving" or a "struggle" which applies to any effort exerted by anyone. For example, a student trying to pass a course in college is a jihad. Trying to quit smoking is a jihad. Trying to quit a bad habit is a jihad. Fighting against an oppressive ruler is a jihad. Trying to lose 20 pounds through diet and exercise is a jihad. So, it's anything which require an effort over a course of time. And the list goes on.

The point is that Jihad doesn't mean "holy war," but a "struggle" toward a moral, intellectual, and a spiritual improvement. The word does include a struggle in the military sense, but it has a wider connotation and embraces every kind of striving, and Jihad doesn't have to be a violent one. There are also non-violent forms of Jihad which can be done with pen, tongue, hands, the media, internet, and in many other ways which are not necessarily harmful to society.

The Arabic word for "war" is "harb" or "qital." This is the violent form of Jihad, as mentioned in certain passages of the Quran, which is only allowed for the purpose of self-defense such as to protect our family and property from an invasion. It is not allowed against ordinary people who are living peacefully (whether they are atheists or not), as the Quran says, "Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, Allah does not allow you to harm them." (Surah 4:90). Therefore, fighting is permitted only when others are waging a war against us. We are not allowed to kill or fight anyone just to "convert" them to Islam because that is not the meaning of Jihad nor in agreement with the Quranic verses.

Now, here's a more clear and logical analysis of the issue: What Does Islam Say About "Forcing People in Religion?"

[Minimalist]

I imagine you have a reply to this, Rayaan

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/...ersion.htm

Given that people have been known to cite web sites which only support their cause I entered Quran 9: 29 into Google and at random ( literally whirling the mouse wheel until it came to rest on one) and selected this translation:

http://www.muslimaccess.com/quraan/arabic/009.asp

9:29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Qatiloo allatheena layu/minoona biAllahi wala bialyawmial-akhiri wala yuharrimoona ma harramaAllahu warasooluhu wala yadeenoona deena alhaqqimina allatheena ootoo alkitaba hattayuAAtoo aljizyata AAan yadin wahum saghiroona

It would seem that the translation given is correct.

Of course, all 'holy' horseshit means whatever the believer wants it to mean so perhaps the problem is not with the book but with people who think that god is on their side?

[Judas BentHer]

Note his address regarding "Islamic fanatics". No, not "All Muslims..." It's a particular kind of Muslim PC (PC? Oh, that's nifty. Not Political Correctness. Not by a long shot. ) talks about in his videos. And if rational reasonable peaceful Muslims and non-Muslims don't get mad about Islamic fanatics, then the problem isn't Pat Condell.

*edit*

Pat Condell - Godless Comdey Site

[Napoléon]

I do have a slight contention against your use of the word "Jihad." I just haven't replied yet but that doesn't mean that I agree with you.

No problem Rayaan, I was just suggesting to padraic that if HE isn't going to contend what I'm saying then he should shut the fuck up

In Arabic, jihad means a "striving" or a "struggle" which applies to any effort exerted by anyone. For example, a student trying to pass a course in college is a jihad. Trying to quit smoking is a jihad. Trying to quit a bad habit is a jihad. Fighting against an oppressive ruler is a jihad. Trying to lose 20 pounds through diet and exercise is a jihad. So, it's anything which require an effort over a course of time. And the list goes on.

The point is that Jihad doesn't mean "holy war," but a "struggle" toward a moral, intellectual, and a spiritual improvement. The word does include a struggle in the military sense, but it has a wider connotation and embraces every kind of striving, and Jihad doesn't have to be a violent one. There are also non-violent forms of Jihad which can be done with pen, tongue, hands, the media, internet, and in many other ways which are not necessarily harmful to society.

I was never under any illusion that jihad meant anything other than what you said. Please demonstrate where I said otherwise. I'm not sure why you think I meant that jihad means exclusively holy war.

The Arabic word for "war" is "harb" or "qital." This is the violent form of Jihad, as mentioned in certain passages of the Quran, which is only allowed for the purpose of self-defense such as to protect our family and property from an invasion. It is not allowed against ordinary people who are living peacefully (whether they are atheists or not), as the Quran says, "Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, Allah does not allow you to harm them." (Surah 4:90). Therefore, fighting is permitted only when others are waging a war against us. We are not allowed to kill or fight anyone just to "convert" them to Islam because that is not the meaning of Jihad nor in agreement with the Quranic verses.

Now, here's a more clear and logical analysis of the issue: What Does Islam Say About "Forcing People in Religion?"

Really?
Here's a couple of verses which go against that.
-Qur'an (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

This would basically be saying that if you don't submit then you must be fought. Seems like conversion tactics to me. What is your interpretation?

-Qur'an (9:5) "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them..."

Fight anyone who doesn't do what we want them to do. Hmmm, more of the same? Your thoughts?

-Qur'an (9:11) - (Continued from above) "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion"

Oh, so if they do decide to 'convert' then they are fine? Well isn't that just wonderful. Silly old me for thinking Islam was a spiteful and hateful religion.


You contend my use of the word jihad but haven't said why it was wrong. You gave me a definition for jihad, but I don't see how my original comment differs from what you have said. You said yourself that jihad has certain military connotations, and that it CAN be used in the context of 'fighting'.

The quotes above say to fight those who do not submit. A fight in your own words can be called a jihad. So how was my original statement incorrect?

You may have other verses which say something different but then that highlights the clear contradictions in your own holy book, and how interpretations can differ.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Seriously Paddy, I at least thought that if you were going to assert someone as ignorant then you wouldn't be ignorant enough to think that you could just say that, then run away and not back it up. I am dissapoint.

Really? Gee, I don't know how I'll live with myself.

When I have nothing further to say, I prefer to say nothing. I've made my position on the matter as clear as I can and have no interest in a point-scoring debate.

I do not conflate winning an argument with necessarily being right. Could not care less if I win or lose an argument,I cease when I want to,and have no interest in your personal expectations.

[Minimalist]

Seriously Paddy, I at least thought that if you were going to assert someone as ignorant then you wouldn't be ignorant enough to think that you could just say that, then run away and not back it up. I am dissapoint.

Really? Gee, I don't know how I'll live with myself.

[Napoléon]

When I have nothing further to say, I prefer to say nothing.

\/

I have nothing further to say to on this topic.

Man of your fucking word huh.

I've made my position on the matter as clear as I can and have no interest in a point-scoring debate.

I do not conflate winning an argument with necessarily being right. Could not care less if I win or lose an argument,I cease when I want to,and have no interest in your personal expectations.

[Rayaan]

I was never under any illusion that jihad meant anything other than what you said. Please demonstrate where I said otherwise. I'm not sure why you think I meant that jihad means exclusively holy war.

Sorry, that was a misunderstanding then. I should have asked for a clarification.

I thought you meant it as a war only since you said that a moderate Muslim is someone who keeps quiet about wanting to "kill you" (in post # 15) and that it is a duty for every Muslim to "wage Jihad" (in post # 51) which made it sound like starting or conducting a war because of the word "wage." So, putting those two comments together, it seemed that you were talking about Jihad exclusively as a war or at least having a violent context to it. But now I know that your understanding of Jihad is not incorrect.

Qur'an (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

This would basically be saying that if you don't submit then you must be fought. Seems like conversion tactics to me. What is your interpretation?

This is a reply to both you and Min because this is the same verse that he quoted in his post:

1. Again, fighting can be done in ways other than a physical fight. It doesn't have to be a type of fight which results in bloodshed.

2. As I said earlier, an Islamic state is not allowed to fight non-Muslims who are not hostile to Islam, who do not oppress Muslims, or try to convert Muslims by force from their religion, or expel them from their lands, or wage war against them, or prepare for attacks against them. If any of these offenses occurs, however, Muslims are permitted to defend themselves and protect their religion in whichever way they think is the method to end the conflict and bitterness. These are the circumstances in which 'fighting' is a permissible thing.

3. The essence of the verse is not "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day" because that is not the complete verse, but rather, you will find it at the end of the sentence which says, "until they pay the Jizya [tax] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued." The key word is "until" - wa-qalati - and one cannot get the correct interpretation by only reading the beginning few words of the verse without making a connection to this word and the rest of the sentence.

What it means is that, like any nation, the Islamic government requires its citizens to pay taxes in return for its services, but if any of them willingly refuse to pay this tax and rebel against the state then it is the obligation of the state to confront them until they pay it as mentioned in this particular verse. If they do that, and do not oppress Muslims, then we are not allowed to harm them or fight against them even if they do not convert to Islam (for the reasons that I posted in # 2). In fact, according to what I learned, Muhammad granted the citizens of the Islamic state the freedom to practice their own religion as long as they sign a pact of non-aggression and pay taxes as demanded by the state. There were many Christian and Jewish communities which flourished under an Islamic rule without being forced to become Muslims. You can find more information about this in a book entitled "The Jews of Islam" by Bernard Lewis.

Qur'an (9:5) "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them..."

Fight anyone who doesn't do what we want them to do. Hmmm, more of the same? Your thoughts?

1. The words in the beginning of this verse - "But when the forbidden months are past" - indicates that there is something that comes before the verse which needs to be looked at to understand the context of the sentence. What are the "forbidden months"? Obviously, you can't know this from reading the verse itself and not looking at the verses before it (which brings me to the next point).

2. In the first two verses of the same chapter, it says that there was a treaty between the Muslims and the Mushriks (or pagans) of Mecca during Muhammad's time: "There is a declaration of immunity from Allah and His Messenger to those of the pagans with whom you have contracted mutual alliances. Go then, for four months, to and fro throughout the land. But know that you cannot frustrate Allah and that Allah will cover with shame those who reject Him" (Surah al-Tawbah, 1-2). From this, we know that the Muslims were prohibited from committing any acts of violence against the pagans as long as they do not break the peace treaty. This is supported by another verse in the Quran which says, "And if they incline towards peace, then incline to it (also), and trust in Allah" (8:61).

3. So when the Quran states "kill the pagans wherever you find them," in the verse that you quoted, it is talking about a specific group of pagans who initiated violence against Muhammad and his followers. It is not talking about Christians and Jews in Arabia nor anyone else for that matter. It is only referring to the pagans who broke the treaty by waging a war against Muslims and who are plotting to crush the new Islamic state. In such cases, fighting was allowed for Muslims to defend their religion and these particular verses are only serving the purpose of illustrating examples of such a thing happening in the past.

4. The last part of the verse says, "But if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practice regular charity, then they are your brethren in Faith." And just like you, Napoleon, there are many people who interpret it as simply meaning "convert to Islam or prepare to die." But that is not true. Why? Because in the next verse, it says, "If any amongst the Pagans ask you for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of God, and then escort him to a place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know" (9:06). This means that if there are any amongst the pagans who ask for protection, then it should be given to them, and the Muslims are not allowed to hurt them whether or not they convert to Islam because they are not the ones who are fighting, but only requesting to be saved or protected from the enemies.

This is in agreement with the verse which says, "Thus, if they let you be, and do not make war on you, and offer you peace, Allah does not allow you to harm them" (4:90). If any of the pagans did convert to Islam, as stated in Surah 9:05, then there was no need to escort them to a place of safety because they became Muslims and they refrained from aggression anyways.

You contend my use of the word jihad but haven't said why it was wrong. You gave me a definition for jihad, but I don't see how my original comment differs from what you have said. You said yourself that jihad has certain military connotations, and that it CAN be used in the context of 'fighting'.

Fine, you weren't wrong then. See my first comment in this post.

The quotes above say to fight those who do not submit. A fight in your own words can be called a jihad. So how was my original statement incorrect?

I finished explaining the verses, and if I'm correct, none of it is telling us to fight those who do not submit to Allah.

Two important things that I made clear in this post are that:
(1) Fighting is only permissible with those who fight against us (for self-defense); and (2) We cannot force anyone to convert and that is not even the purpose of Jihad.

You may have other verses which say something different but then that highlights the clear contradictions in your own holy book, and how interpretations can differ.

It's not that they contradict each other by saying different things. Rather, they are different but complementary, as I have shown, because there are certain verses in the Quran which which need to be interpreted in relation to other verses in the Quran. When interpreting a specific verse, we have to be aware that there may be other verses in the Quran which can add something to it's meaning.

Yes, interpretations differ even amongst the Muslims, but Islam's fundamental principles are more or less universally agreed upon, and the difference of opinion on several matters are not essentially a part of the core of Islam. Strictly speaking, even these differences are unjustified according to the majority of the billions of Muslims in the world including myself. However, there are Muslims who do form extremist views on certain issues in the Quran and that would be called their own interpretation. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are correct.

Having said that, I know that all the interpretations that I gave is a trivial issue to atheists (even if I'm right) because they do not believe in any such thing as 'revealed' information in the first place.