Criticism of Islam is not a hate crime, nor racist, nor enophobic

Scroll to see replies

Here we have that person again who randomly takes a quote from the Quran out of its context and presents it as evidence islam is evil. I have no problems with people who criticise my religion, but at least do it properly than.

Regardless of context, those quotes from the Koran show that your god ordered or sanctioned, whether as a one-time event or an enduring command, the killing by Mohammed's followers of human beings just because they didn't believe.

If this god exists this demonstrates how arbitrary and nasty it is. If it doesn't exists, as is most likely, it shows how ruthless Mohammed was and how easily superstitious people can be influenced to kill those who hold different beliefs.

Either way, it certainly shows the ruthless and aggressive nature of your religion.

Reply 221

KimKallstrom

Original post by Undercover_xo

Are you okay? The prophet did not order anyone to slaughter those who did not convert, in fact at the time the prophet protected the Jews....

Except for when he was ordering the execution and sexual slavery of entire tribes of them like in the case of the Banu Qurayza, naturally

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 222

KimKallstrom

Original post by admonit

There are no Jews in Iraq. They all were expelled.

As with Syria

Reply 223

Undercover_xo

Original post by Onde

Do you believe that heretics, pagans, polytheists, atheists, and anybody that the qur'an deems social miscreants should be brutally murdered?

By the way, it is highly likely that Muhammad misunderstood Christianity if he considered it a religion of the Book, as he would have considered worship of Jesus as god to be blasphemy.

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." - qur'an 8:12

"And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)." - qur'an (2:191-193) -

Okay you seriously need to start reading properly I just said that we protect whatever region or people and humanity. Also, that verse has a meaning to it you cannot just randomly bring it up and out of its context, I do not really know what the context is, maybe since you were bothered to only know this verse add the context to it and explain to us why this is evil. It's also funny how you only focus on these verses when there is a verse that says "Whoever kills a person it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.” (Qur’an, 5) doesn't that make killing a bad thing? It also says a person it doesn't say Muslim only, so it doesn't matter whether he's a pagan an aetheist you cannot kill them. I suggest you start looking at more of these verses and the Quran as a whole and not ignorantly only focusing on verses that seem harsh without knowing the context. God bless.

Reply 224

Josb

Original post by Undercover_xo

It's crazy to see that Muslims know so little about their own religion.

You haven't properly quoted the verse. The correct one is:

Muhammad Sarwar: For this reason, We made it a law for the children of Israel that the killing of a person for reasons other than legal retaliation or for stopping corruption in the land is as great a sin as murdering all of mankind. However, to save a life would be as great a virtue as to save all of mankind. Our Messengers had come to them with clear authoritative evidence but many of them (Israelites) thereafter started doing wrong in the land.

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=32

"Corruption of the land" is somewhat vague, and can mean pretty much anything, isn't it? Moreover, it's ok to kill as "legal retaliation". Islam is not as peaceful as you say...

Reply 225

mariachi

Original post by HanaKimi

omg poor you let's talk about your feelings and how you feel victimised for merely criticising Islam. It must be a tough existence. Please share how this is impacting you daily life. Stay strong!

hey, I was banned several times for merely criticising Islam

since I am a dedicated, faithful member of TSR (and a committed aficionado of discussions about religion) it severely impacted my daily life. But I did stay strong, and eventually was rehabilitated

best

Reply 226

mariachi

Original post by CookieButter

My friend, you make a mistake that is all too common amongst people who come to analyse Shia Islam without knowing the basics.

In shia islam, unlike sunni islam, we have no books that contain collections of correct narrations. We have compendiums of all hadiths ever said amongst shia muslims. these compendiums make it clear in their preface, which people often miss, that the narrations in the book aren't necessarily correct and the kulyani makes that clear in his preface for his book kitab el Kafi, which you quoted etc etc

dear friend, I am well aware of how Shias (and Jaafaris in particular) consider ahadith

as to the particular hadith I quoted, mentioning Aisha as being 10 when her marriage was consummated, it is classified as sahih by Al-Majlisi (Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 24, pg. 235)

You are of course familiar with Sheikh ul-Islam Al-Majlisi and his "Mirror of intellects"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Baqir_Majlisi
best

Reply 227

CookieButter

Original post by mariachi

dear friend, I am well aware of how Shias (and Jaafaris in particular) consider ahadithas to the particular hadith I quoted, mentioning Aisha as being 10 when her marriage was consummated, it is classified as sahih by Al-Majlisi (Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 24, pg. 235) You are of course familiar with Sheikh ul-Islam Al-Majlisi and his "Mirror of intellects" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Baqir_Majlisi best

Thank you for the polite reply.

Again you make mistakes based on a lack of understanding.

The science of classification of hadith in Shia islam is complex. A cleric quoting a hadith as being correct doesn’t necessarily make it so. To appreciate this you need to understand the concept of 'Ijma'.

We have a system in Shia Islam that is called 'Ijma' or 'Consensus' as in 'what is agreed upon by the majority of learned folk’, which is a science in and of itself. Let me elaborate. There is a Shia cleric in Iran who believes that we should allow evil to become empowered without challenge so as to hasten the appearance of our Mehdi (as). This is an oversimplification of his theories, but he bases this opinion on a choice of hadiths amongst other things, which he views as being correct. However, there is no 'Ijma' on his view so his views are rendered null and void. This concept of Ijma is mandatory to attaining verification in Shia Islam. So, you can't say this hadith is correct because Majilisi said it was correct. Without Ijma it is nothing. Majilisi, also had questionable opinions about the completeness of the Quran. Again there is no Ijma on his opinion in this matter, rendering it void.

Your lack of understanding in the concepts of hadith made me question that reference of yours. Could your interpretation of the correctness of that hadith/reference be based on a misunderstanding too? So, I looked into it.

The hadith in question is as follows (Mir’at el-Uqool, vol.24, page 235):

https://postimg.org/image/gtccky0yj/

It refers to Aisha's marriage to the prophet in reference to the minimum acceptable age for being a witness as a male and relates to the issue of imameh.

The Majilisi's interpretation of it is as follows:

https://postimg.org/image/p6sql865v/

The Majlisi writes that it is correct, but, and this is the important part that renders your understanding wrong, he adds underneath it in Arabic that it is correct in the context of the minimum acceptable age for witnessing as a male and that this judgement is based on the concept of 'Qiyaas Batil'. What is Qiyaas Batil? Putting it simply, it is a laborious method by which one compares the teachings of the hadith to quran and sunnah. If the TEACHING (not the hadith) is agreeable with both then it is considered correct and that is what he is referring to here. As in, he is referring to the act of becoming a witness as a ten year old boy as being correct because it is not disgareeable with the quran and sunnah and he is not referring to the age of marriage of Aisha to the prophet at ten as being correct.

Having an undertsaning of the basic terminology of hadith classification is vital to gaining a correct understanding of the interpretation of the hadith. Without it you wind up making mistakes like the ones I have mentioned above. These are scholarly books. You need a high degree of education in islamic jurisprudence and Arabic to understand what is being said. They are not written for laypersons.

It takes our clerics decades to become proficient in interpreting hadiths and people like yourself, my friend, with all due respect, who know very little, interpret without a second’s thought. Just a matter of copy and paste…. ISIS and Alqeada chop our heads off based on a similar way of thinking. They pick up our books and read for example that Majlisi said that the Quran may be not compelete and they kill us over it. They kill us over misunderstanding based on a lack of knowledge of how things work in our religion.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 228

admonit

Original post by Undercover_xo

Yeah you're right, apologies. There are Jews in Iran.

Still there are.. Thanks to Muslim "protection" the Jewish population decreased from 100000 to several thousands.

Reply 229

admonit

Original post by KimKallstrom

As with Syria

Well, in fact Jews were expelled from all Arab countries.

Reply 230

QE2

Original post by CookieButter

1. I am wrong how? You called a dictatorship, a country RUN by muslims. In what world does that make sense?

Does the king run the country all by himself?
Do you claim that the ulema Council of Senior Scholars, tribal sheikhs, heads of government departments, regional governors, senior civil servants, etc, etc, are all non-Muslims?

Saudi Arabia is very clearly run by Muslims, using Islam as the basis for most decision making. The only state that operates a more faithful and unmodernised application of Islamic ideology is ISIS.

Reply 231

QE2

Original post by medhelp

No
the marriage was only consummated after she reached puberty, so islamically she was not a child at that point.

Spoiler

To claim that a 9 year old is "not a child" is the definition of desperate apologetics of the indefensible.

It is clearly wrong, and to equivocate on the issue only demonstartes that you are attempting to avoid condemning child abuse.

Reply 232

QE2

Original post by CookieButter

Shia muslims believe that the prophet married Aisha when she was in her twenties and she had been a divorcee at the time.

Could you cite the historical references that support this view?
Thanks.

Reply 233

QE2

Original post by CookieButter

One sect has books of correct narrations amongst sunnis, books a few hundred pages long, like Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

Bukhari alone contains nearly 10,000 sahih hadith. A standard edition is around 5000 pages in multiple volumes. Seems like you've been duped by sectarian propaganda!

Reply 234

QE2

Original post by CookieButter

In shia islam, unlike sunni islam, we have no books that contain collections of correct narrations. We have compendiums of all hadiths ever said amongst shia muslims. these compendiums make it clear in their preface, which people often miss, that the narrations in the book aren't necessarily correct and the kulyani makes that clear in his preface for his book kitab el Kafi, which you quoted.

"Shia scholars do not make any assumptions about the authenticity of a hadith book. Most Shias believe that there are no "sahih" hadith books that are completely reliable. "

Ah. So when you earlier engaged in a pissing contest about the relative size of your collections, you forgot to mention that although you claim yours to be bigger, unlike Bukhari and Muslim, it is full off rubbish that can be discounted as unreliable.
Nice work! Are you new to apologetics?

Reply 235

QE2

Original post by Undercover_xo

You people are focusing on the dumbest thing of Islam you could ever think of...asking questions like did the prophet marry a girl and is he a pedophile? Wth? The prophet has also married a Christian so what, is he a Christian now? Do you know why the prophet at the time had married to many women, because some of them were poor or at a disadvantage and even some women wanted to marry the prophet because...he's the prophet.
Btw quick question to the Christians, why do you guys believe Jesus is the son of God?

I fail to see why the behaviour of the "perfect guide for all humanity" is irrelevant. Especially if that behaviour includes child abuse.

Your argument is like saying "Why are you focussing on all the child abuse? Jimmy Savile did loads of work for charity".

But ok, have it your way. Let's focus on another aspect of his behaviour. How about the execution of hundreds of helpless prisoners (some of them no more than children)? Or perhaps the assassinations of those who mocked and opposed him? What about torturing people to death? Your choice.

Reply 236

QE2

Original post by Undercover_xo

Are you okay? The prophet did not order anyone to slaughter those who did not convert, i

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered by Allah to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me - Sahih Bukhari

From Ibn Kathir on sura 9:5...
"This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam,
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq used this and other honorable Ayat as proof for fighting those who refrained from paying the Zakah. These Ayat allowed fighting people unless, and until, they embrace Islam and implement its rulings and obligations."

Seems the Quran, Muhammad and Ibn Kathir all disagree with you.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 237

QE2

Original post by Metalfros

So, could you explain the context in which ordering the killing of those who refuse to submit to Islam is acceptable?

BTW, such passages are not "evidence that Islam is evil". It is merely evidence that Islam contains passages that permit or encourage violence, intolerance and oppression against those who refuse to submit to, or oppose, Islam. No one who has read the Quran can disagree with that and still be taken seriously.

Reply 238

QE2

Original post by Undercover_xo

Also, that verse has a meaning to it you cannot just randomly bring it up and out of its context, I do not really know what the context is,

Seriously? Was that supposed to be some kind of a joke?

It's also funny how you only focus on these verses when there is a verse that says "Whoever kills a person it is as though he has killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.” (Qur’an, 5) doesn't that make killing a bad thing?

I wondered how long it would be before someone brought 5:32 up (you are new to this, aren't you?)

You misquoted 5:32, either through dishonesty or through lack of knowledge of the Quran (it can only be one of the two). It actually says "Whoever kills a person unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land it is as though he has killed all mankind".
So we can see that there are at least two occasions on which Allah says it is ok to kill people. The punishment for murder is pretty standard across cultures, so we can ignore that one. So, what about "mischief"? What does it mean? The Arabic word used in the Quran is "fasad". This is a vague term with a range of meanings and applications. If we consult Ibn Kathir, we find that it includes "disobeying Allah's laws" and encouraging others to disobey them. So it is clearly more than the "terrorism and highway robbery" that modern apologists try to claim.

We then look at the next verse (5:33). This states that the punishment for those who commit fasad and 'wage war' on Allah and Muhammad can be death. Ibn Kathir explains that 'wage war' includes "opposition, contradiction and disbelief".

So we can see that, in context, 5:32 actually means that killing is bad unless you are killing someone who opposes or rejects Islam.

Note: I am not claiming that all Muslims accept this interpretation, or that all those who accept it actually act on it, only that it is contained within the most respected and widely used of all the classical tafsir and is therefore a legitimate Islamic position.

It also says a person it doesn't say Muslim only, so it doesn't matter whether he's a pagan an aetheist you cannot kill them.

A person who rejects Islam is hardly likely to be a Muslim, are they?

I suggest you start looking at more of these verses and the Quran as a whole and not ignorantly only focusing on verses that seem [nice] without knowing the context. God bless.

With all due respect, that is something that you really need to do yourself!
Remember that your imams and scholars have a vested interest in painting Islam in the best possible light. Would you really trust a Tory politician to give you the truth about Tory policies?

Reply 239

jermybrown

For some, the Muslim is the natural and irreconcilable enemy of the Christian and the European; Islam is the negation of civilization, and barbarism, bad faith and cruelty are the best one can expect from the Mohammedans.