Turn on thread page Beta

Two men kidnap priest, take hostages in church near the French Rouen watch

Announcements
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    Or maybe because their interpretation is not only rejected, they themselves are considered criminals, akin to the historical khawarij.

    ISIS have as much to do with Islam as I have the LRA has to do with Christianity.

    Continue cherry picking, the majority of the Muslim scholars disagree and I'd much rather back the consensus
    So, only ISIS cherry-pick passages to suit their agenda? LOLOL

    The argument is not "which is the most acceptable interpretation?", it is "are ISIS Islamic?"
    And they clearly are. Opposing their unacceptable agenda does not affect this.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    I think it is pretty clear that Muhammad and the quran condoned murder, acts of terror, torture, slavery, rape, paedophilia etc., and that Muhammad was one of the most evil people who have ever lived.
    Actually, he was extremely tame compared to his contemporaries.

    Ascribing emotive moral judgements on historical figures is hardly sophisticated.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So, only ISIS cherry-pick passages to suit their agenda? LOLOL

    The argument is not "which is the most acceptable interpretation?", it is "are ISIS Islamic?"
    And they clearly are. Opposing their unacceptable agenda does not affect this.
    I never said only ISIS cherry pick. There are other misguided extremists as well

    But putting "Islamic state" as their name doesn't make them Islamic; it just means they're relying on the lack of knowledge of Islam to perpetuate their own tribal agendas
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    Exactly. The content of the ideology makes it clear that the peaceful aspects followed by Muslims are in-line with Islam, while the violent passages are almost always misinterpreted
    In other words "followers of an interpretation claim their interpretation is correct, and that opposing interpretations are wrong".

    I absolutely agree.

    You really should try reading the Quran with Ibn Kathir. You will see that there is no single, clear "peaceful" interpretation, and those that claim there is are either poorly informed or dishonest.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    In other words "followers of an interpretation claim their interpretation is correct, and that opposing interpretations are wrong".

    I absolutely agree.

    You really should try reading the Quran with Ibn Kathir. You will see that there is no single, clear "peaceful" interpretation, and those that claim there is are either poorly informed or dishonest.
    I did read Ibn Kathir's commentary on these verses as a whole, unlike you who cherry-picked bits from the commentary itself!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    Punjab, where most of the world's Sikhs reside, remains the heart land of pre-natal sex selections and post-natal gender discrimination, in the country. The birth of a son is preferred over that of a daughter since ancient times.
    You claimed...
    "Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

    This is clearly not true. You made it up. You are clearly prepared to lie to defend your position. And you defend FGM.
    You have lost what little credibility you may have had.

    Sometimes, you need to realise when to stop digging.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    This is so tragic


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    You claimed...
    "Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

    This is clearly not true. You made it up. You are clearly prepared to lie to defend your position. And you defend FGM.
    You have lost what little credibility you may have had.

    Sometimes, you need to realise when to stop digging.
    But it is true. Go to a random village in Punjab and survey. I know it must be hard for you to acknowledge that humans other than Muslims tend to put cultural practices over religion, but it's true
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    But it is true.
    Prove it
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    I never said only ISIS cherry pick. There are other misguided extremists as well
    So, you are claiming that only "extremists" cherry pick the Quran and sunnah to suit their agenda.

    So how do you explain all those scripture-based arguments that you presented that were refuted by other, contradictory passages?

    But putting "Islamic state" as their name doesn't make them Islamic; it just means they're relying on the lack of knowledge of Islam to perpetuate their own tribal agendas
    Perhaps if you spent some time looking at their agenda, their actions and their justifications, you would see that all of the have a basis in Islam. It could be argued that they adhere more literally to the Islam of Muhammad and the 7th century.

    If Muhammad was suddenly transported to today's Raqqah and Cairo (or even Mecca), which one do you think he would feel more at home in?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Prove it
    http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report...second-1323987

    Most Sikhs also accept dowry from girls' parents, despite its prohibition in Sikhism.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    Actually, he was extremely tame compared to his contemporaries.

    Ascribing emotive moral judgements on historical figures is hardly sophisticated.
    I did not make an emotive moral judgement. I personally do not believe evil exists, as that is an attribution that can only be applied at an objective, universal level, that humans simply do not have: however, in the case of Muhammad, I can safely say he was evil, because he propagated an ideology that believed that subjective mortals should be tortured for eternity for not following his teachings.

    His ideology was the most evil created in the 7th century, and of all the individuals born in the 6th century, he was responsible for more deaths in his time and the succeeding 1300+ years. His ideology was backward even for the Bronze Age, so he absolutely was not "tame" in comparison to his contemporaries.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So, you are claiming that only "extremists" cherry pick the Quran and sunnah to suit their agenda.

    So how do you explain all those scripture-based arguments that you presented that were refuted by other, contradictory passages?
    They weren't contradictory. They apply in different situations.

    Perhaps if you spent some time looking at their agenda, their actions and their justifications, you would see that all of the have a basis in Islam. It could be argued that they adhere more literally to the Islam of Muhammad and the 7th century.
    I've looked into their justifications and found them to contradict the teachings of Islam as its preached by the scholars and practised by Muslims historically.

    If Muhammad was suddenly transported to today's Raqqah and Cairo (or even Mecca), which one do you think he would feel more at home in?
    He'd probably feel more at home with whichever group was giving precedence to the inner mysticism than the outer, cherry-pickers who ignore explicit commands.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    I did not make an emotive moral judgement. I personally do not believe evil exists, as that is an attribution that can only be applied at an objective, universal level, that humans simply do not have: however, in the case of Muhammad, I can safely say he was evil, because he propagated an ideology that believed that subjective mortals should be tortured for eternity for not following his teachings.
    Says evil doesn't exist. Proceeds to make moral judgment. LOL

    His ideology was the most evil created in the 7th century, and of all the individuals born in the 6th century, he was responsible for more deaths in his time and the succeeding 1300+ years. His ideology was backward even for the Bronze Age, so he absolutely was not "tame" in comparison to his contemporaries.
    Clearly you haven't studied Late Antiquity. I'd love to see how you arrived at that conclusion. Do you have any historical studies to support your conclusion? I can cite plenty of articles which go into detail on how Muhammad changed society for the better.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    I did read Ibn Kathir's commentary on these verses as a whole, unlike you who cherry-picked bits from the commentary itself!
    So you will be well aware that it can be used to justify a variety of interpretations.

    Do you deny that he explains the punishments in 5:33 to include those who "oppose, contradict and disbelieve"?

    And yet again, your argument rests entirely on assuming that there is only one interpretation, when that is clearly false.

    I am quite aware that there are many differing and often conflicting interpretations, due to the vague, ambiguous and contradictory nature of the texts. Even those "scholars" who take it on themselves to clarify the mess often come to different conclusions! You seem to be denying the obvious.
    Just because you find an interpretation unacceptable, doesn't mean that it is invalid. And as you stated earlier, just because the majority follow a particular interpretation doesn't make it correct.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So you will be well aware that it can be used to justify a variety of interpretations.

    Do you deny that he explains the punishments in 5:33 to include those who "oppose, contradict and disbelieve"?

    And yet again, your argument rests entirely on assuming that there is only one interpretation, when that is clearly false.

    I am quite aware that there are many differing and often conflicting interpretations, due to the vague, ambiguous and contradictory nature of the texts. Even those "scholars" who take it on themselves to clarify the mess often come to different conclusions! You seem to be denying the obvious.
    Just because you find an interpretation unacceptable, doesn't mean that it is invalid. And as you stated earlier, just because the majority follow a particular interpretation doesn't make it correct.
    In Islam, actually, the majority of the scholars are a source of guidance. Ever heard of the term Ijma?

    And I'm not saying Ibn Kathir contradicted himself at all!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report...second-1323987

    Most Sikhs also accept dowry from girls' parents, despite its prohibition in Sikhism.
    Your claim was "Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

    your article says 'The country as a whole reported 294 cases during the same period.'

    So your article does not prove your claim
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    anyone who thinks that murdering elderly priests is pleasing to God is ****ed up to the max.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Your claim was "Most sikhs in india commit female infactcide"

    your article says 'The country as a whole reported 294 cases during the same period.'

    So your article does not prove your claim
    Most incidents are not reported, Bacon Boy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blah3210)
    Most incidents are not reported, Bacon Boy.
    so you can't prove your claim then (an adult would have simply admitted the rhetoric they used was wrong)
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 7, 2016
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.