The Student Room Group

Are ISIS muslims?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by BaconandSauce
No they didn't

It was made by Imams and muslim scholars.

It seem though, you know better than they do.......


Firstly, Imams are muslim scholars. Second, there are only a few legal things which they have a consensus on. The nature of the sharia or rules of Islam are debated almost totally, with the Alevis for instance even drinking alcohol. When the scholars are all disagreeing, it means that every muslim looks for a scholar knowledgable about the opinions they agree with, and they follow some of that's scholar's rulings (after investigating how they came to those juristic conclusions) while researching what other scholars say as well as the source materials to develop their opinions. As they progress, they might find that there's no single scholar they continue to agree with.
Original post by BaconandSauce
Then why do so many muslim majority countries kill people or leaving Islam or have some for of punishment for doing just this?

Why is it in the UK families have been know to try and kill their children for leaving Islam?


What muslims do in the name of their religion, and what Islam (the ideology of Muhammad and his Ahlulbayt according to reliable historical narrations and their quranic exegesis) actually teaches are often entirely different. Muslims that think killing apostates is within the sharia are at a loss to explain why Muhammad didn't kill apostates during his own rule, one of whom would include his cousin Ubaydullah ibn Jahsh, who converted to christianity for instance.
Reply 242
Original post by BaconandSauce
Then why do so many muslim majority countries kill people or leaving Islam or have some for of punishment for doing just this?

Why is it in the UK families have been know to try and kill their children for leaving Islam?


Because they're stupid. Regarding the UK families, their mentality is even more pathetic. It's the same reason you hear about children being tortured/killed because they've refused to marry abroad. They believe they have all rights over their child when totally that's not the case. Islam didn't teach them to do that, it's their own misinterpretation.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
Firstly, Imams are muslim scholars. Second, there are only a few legal things which they have a consensus on. The nature of the sharia or rules of Islam are debated almost totally, with the Alevis for instance even drinking alcohol. When the scholars are all disagreeing, it means that every muslim looks for a scholar knowledgable about the opinions they agree with, and they follow some of that's scholar's rulings (after investigating how they came to those juristic conclusions) while researching what other scholars say as well as the source materials to develop their opinions. As they progress, they might find that there's no single scholar they continue to agree with.


Ah so now your saying the document muslims have been using to show that ISIS aren't Islamic is Wrong!!

You need to go an tell them not me they've got it wrong and are being dishonest again
Original post by saad97
Because they're stupid.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Not good enough an answer when people are killed for leaving islam

Why do so many muslim countries punish those who leave islam

It's a simple question that if answered honestly might help us stop this evil
Original post by BaconandSauce
Ah so now your saying the document muslims have been using to show that ISIS aren't Islamic is Wrong!!

You need to go an tell them not me they've got it wrong and are being dishonest again


ISIS are muslims. Whether or not their actions and policies are islamic is a subject of debate, in which my position is that they are not, because they contradict the example of muhammad (from -reliable- narrations, not everything in the contradictory 6 major sunni books of hadith) and the example of his Ahlulbayt. I'm not sure if you're saying that some muslims are using the quran to show that ISIS isn't islamic - which I think is part of the process of proving that they aren't islamic. There is a difference between being dishonest and being mistaken. The Ummah (muslim people) contains a huge variety of opinions on almost everything.
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
ISIS are muslims. Whether or not their actions and policies are islamic is a subject of debate, in which my position is that they are not, because they contradict the example of muhammad (from -reliable- narrations, not everything in the contradictory 6 major sunni books of hadith) and the example of his Ahlulbayt. I'm not sure if you're saying that some muslims are using the quran to show that ISIS isn't islamic - which I think is part of the process of proving that they aren't islamic. There is a difference between being dishonest and being mistaken. The Ummah (muslim people) contains a huge variety of opinions on almost everything.


Then you need to have the debate not with me as I am simply passing round what other muslims have said and loudly announced in the national press


But can you clarify according to you the document the national press in the UK was given by various muslim groups to distance the UK muslim population from ISIS is actually worthless?
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
The Ummah (muslim people) contains a huge variety of opinions on almost everything.


For an ideology that is based on a book which proclaims itself to be clear, perfect and unambiguous Islam seems to struggle with what is Islamic and what isn't. Ironic, eh?
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
ISIS are muslims


I agree here they are muslim.

But can you tell you brothers and sisters on this thread as they seem confused
Original post by Good bloke
For an ideology that is based on a book which proclaims itself to be clear, perfect and unambiguous Islam seems to struggle with what is Islamic and what isn't. Ironic, eh?


The Quran says, 'We have made this book clear and precise.' The 'making precise' of the book is in the appointment and role of the Prophets and Ahlulbayt. Muhammad was very clear in his farewell sermon that the Quran was not enough alone - that he had been tasked with delivering -two- things to humanity; the quran and his Ahlulbayt (beginning with Fatima and Ali.)

Original post by BaconandSauce
Then you need to have the debate not with me as I am simply passing round what other muslims have said and loudly announced in the national press


But can you clarify according to you the document the national press in the UK was given by various muslim groups to distance the UK muslim population from ISIS is actually worthless?


Firstly, the 24 rulings that they gave were not all correct according to most scholars of my school of thought, akhbari ithna ashari shi'ism. The yezidis were never considered 'people of the scripture' in the past, and the only way that we could conclude that they are 'people of the scripture' would be to evaluate their books and to conclude whether or not we believe, as a nation, that there is evidence that their religion was initially of divine origin. Since muslims are no longer a cohesive nation, it would be a largely pointless exercise. Point 24 is also completely false and has no back up. If someone finds themselves oppressed for their religion in an anti-islamic state, then they are allowed to emigrate to escape persecution.
Point 22 is very interesting because in it, they (sunni scholars) have basically denied the caliphates of their own beloved 'first three caliphs' after muhammad, because a -lot- of people didn't want any of them in power. Point 21 is utter gob****e, which should be pretty obvious.

However, if they really believe those 24 points and cite references that they believe prove them, I guess that they can dissociate their own beliefs about the nature of Islamic rules from those of ISIS fairly easily. What I find interesting is that these people (sunni scholars) have written 24 points which are mostly contradictory to the precedent shown by their first three caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman.)
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by BaconandSauce
I agree here they are muslim.

But can you tell you brothers and sisters on this thread as they seem confused


I can tell them my opinions and back them up, but at the end of the day, if they wanna stick with their less valid ones... Well, I can't force anyone. *Shrug*.
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
The Quran says, 'We have made this book clear and precise.' The 'making precise' of the book is in the appointment and role of the Prophets and Ahlulbayt. Muhammad was very clear in his farewell sermon that the Quran was not enough alone


Then Islam's claim that the Koran is perfect is wrong (as it isn't even fit for purpose).
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed

Firstly, the 24 rulings that they gave were not all correct according to most scholars of my school of thought, akhbari ithna ashari shi'ism.


I'm shocked at this that muslims can say here is why ISIS aren't Islamic without full agreement on this

It's almost like were being lied to

But many thanks for your honest input on this while alarming it is refreshing
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
The Quran says, 'We have made this book clear and precise.'


Why does the quran refer to itself as a book when it wasn't a book during the time of the revelations?
Original post by Good bloke
Then Islam's claim that the Koran is perfect is wrong (as it isn't even fit for purpose).


The Quran is perfect as what it is - Half of the rope of god, not the entire rope. Muslims do not universally claim that the Quran is enough by itself. Only Quranists claim so.
Original post by BaconandSauce
Why does the quran refer to itself as a book when it wasn't a book during the time of the revelations?


The word 'kitaab' in arabic is translated to 'book' in english, but the arabic word doesn't necessarily mean a written, compiled text. This is a language issue. And generally muslims are like what you said. Despite total agreement or alignment with what Islam's sources actually say, they'll run outside and make silly declarations. Point 21 is one of the few points on that document actually used by the sunnis since before they used the name 'sunni'. Their leaders would use it like a divine right of kings, religiously shunning rebellion so that all who didn't accept the ruler would be considered apostates, and then using the false ruling that 'apostates should be killed' (from fabricated historical narrations attributed to muhammad) as a religious mandate to destroy all resistance.
Through this method, muslim rulers in history have found themselves able to perpetrate atrocities upon muslims and non muslims alike, as well as being incredibly unjust in various ways, such as increasing the 'jizya' tax (which is meant to be insignificant and symbolic) to an extortionate rate.
Original post by BaconandSauce
I'm shocked at this that muslims can say here is why ISIS aren't Islamic without full agreement on this

It's almost like were being lied to

But many thanks for your honest input on this while alarming it is refreshing


Besides, the very point 21 in that document gives al-Baghdadi a mandate over the people that are under his 'authority'...
Reply 257
What a stupid question ofcourse they ****ing are you ****ing idiot.
Original post by Hasan_Ahmed
The Quran is perfect as what it is


Well, we both know it isn't even that. I understand it contains stuff copied from elsewhere, grammatical errors, and it certainly contains historical errors, scientific errors, contradictions about punishments, religious compulsion, doubts about lengths of days that aren't days, all sorts of things.
Original post by Good bloke
Well, we both know it isn't even that. I understand it contains stuff copied from elsewhere, grammatical errors, and it certainly contains historical errors, scientific errors, contradictions about punishments, religious compulsion, doubts about lengths of days that aren't days, all sorts of things.


It's said to contain those things, but upon closer examination I found these claims to be based upon misunderstanding, often due to mistranslation. I used to be an atheist. I wouldn't have become muslim if I wasn't convinced that the Quran didn't contain what you say it does.

The quran echoes other books at times because we consider those books to have sections which originally also came from God, such as the original Mosaic texts.

There are no grammatical errors in the quran - most of the so called errors are clear shifts in address and subject, such as the switch in surah Tahrim, where the wives of the prophet are mentioned in the female, and suddenly the address becomes masculine plural as the book addresses Muhammad's Ahlulbayt (which contains both male and female individuals and is what masculine plural is used for.) There are about 140 such instances within the book.

The scientific errors often 'quoted' from the quran like the story of Dhulqarnain reaching a land where 'the sun set with the appearance of settling into a pool of muddy water' where it has been translated as if the Quran is saying Dhulqarnain actually saw the sun set into a muddy spring - this is ridiculous because the arabic words indicating 'seeming appearance' are present.

There's also the accusations that the Quran propagates a geocentric theory of the universe, which is false for clear linguistic reasons, and that the earth is flat, which is clearly false in the fact that the word 'duhaaha' or 'to spread' refers not to a 'flat nature of the earth' but the spreading of 'earth' in the sense of 'the ground', not the world, like a carpet - Muhammad went on to explain that it was a parable of a tent, where the carpet protects the tent's occupant from the hot sand beneath it, and mentioned that beneath the ground were 'seas of fire'.

There are no contradictions in religious compulsion. The Quran only compels people who have chosen Islam to follow it. There is no propagation of forced conversion in the entire book. You may be referring to the fact that the Quran says that when the muslims were at war with the arab polytheists, one of the ways a polytheist could obtain amnesty was through conversion - but the quran also says that a polytheist who desists from fighting is to be honoured and treated fairly.

I'm not sure what you mean about 'doubts about lengths of days that aren't days'. Perhaps you're talking about the verses related to the creation of the universe, which separates this creation into stages or 'yawm', meaning 'periods' or 'days'. I'm not sure if it matters whether we know from the quran how long each of these stages were. I think it's one of the things we were left to discover ourselves.

Quick Reply

Latest