Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    Oh, and blame George Bush and Tony Blair for ordering the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place and giving rise to the insurgency that brought ISIS about.
    So there was no Islamist terrorism or Muslim sectarian violence before the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan?
    Really?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    It's fair to blame the Muslims who committed the act of terror
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So there was no Islamist terrorism or Muslim sectarian violence before the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan?
    Really?
    In fact, the terrorists have a seventh century model of perfection to emulate - whose political aims Islam was initially set up to facilitate.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    ISIS and al-Qaeda are both radical anti-western militant groups. Al-Qaeda was formed to wage insurgency against US troops in Iraq, and the security vacuum left when the US withdrew from Iraq in 2011 was exploited by ISIS - all a consequence of the actions of Bush and Blair. Or is blaming two white men too close to home for comfort?
    *SMH*
    Al Qaeda was formed in 1988.
    The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001 (as a response to Al Qaeda attacks on the US), and Iraq in 2003.

    The legitimacy of those wars, and the culpability of the leaders, can be argued, but by bringing race into the argument, you are saying a lot more about yourself than you are about those you are accusing.

    If you are going to join in, at least learn the basics.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mona-S)
    Quran 5:33 - That's for the people who start a war or with Muslims or who cause corruption in earth = Justifiable.
    In America death penalty still exists, and that includes lethal injection, electrocution, or firing squad.

    Quran 98:6 - If you don't believe in Islam, you will go to hell. I think if you're a person who knows that Islam is not a true a religion, then you shouldn't really care about this quote.

    Quran 3:91 - Same as top, if you're a non-Muslim, why do you care about going to hell for not being a Muslim

    Quran 4:56 - 'These are the verses of Allah which We recite to you in truth. Then in what statement after Allah and His verses will they believe?' - what's wrong with this verse?

    Quran 8:39 - Verse 8:39 is in the context of those non-Muslims who were hostile to the Muslims back then. The verse before it, 8:38 (if you did read it) says 'if they cease, what has previously occurred will be forgiven for them' and if they don't stop then fight them back. Do you expect people to get killed and God telling them to sit down.

    rhia9 This is what ISIS do, the same thing this user just did. Pick out quotes from the Quran and explain them the way they want.
    So, what you are saying is that the Quran and sunnah do contain violent passages (and many more than were listed here), but you favour an interpretation that says that they do not apply anymore and should be ignored (althought this would call into question the Quran's infallible, timeless, universal perfection).
    However, there are different interpretations (by universally renowned and accepted classical scholars like Ibn Kathir) that make some of them far more general and universal in application. He states that 5:33 is general in meaning and applies to all those who commit the crimes mentioned - like "fasad" (corruption/mischief). Look up "fasad" and see the various things that are covered. To claim that it only applies to those "at war" is disingenuous at best.

    Also, I fail to see why another system or country employing barbaric and inhumane punishment somehow absolves Islam from criticism. Could you explain?

    And what about the punishments for fornication, adultery, theft, apostasy, etc? They are all violent, and presumably they still apply. And don't get me started on the Quran's permission for husbands to beat disobedient wives (under certain conditions).
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    This is very dishonest quote and it has been refuted many times

    Telling porkies to cover for Islamic terror is as bad as the terror itself (IMO)


    READ THE QURAN and u will find it there
    Then come back to me


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    This is actually quite interesting. If the moderates cannot claim ISIS are not true Muslims then according to your logic, ISIS cannot do the same vice versa. Hence, when ISIS do kill muslims they may say those that are killed were not true Muslims but here they would be playing the no true scottsman fallacy too. Hence, we can say those killed by ISIS are Muslims right? Look at the following verse:

    And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is Hell; he shall abide in it, and Allah will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement...

    So technically after they kill another muslim they aren't "true" or they are unislamic.
    The problem with this argument is that you are not comparing like to like.

    ISIS accuse other Muslims of kufr who follow a revisionist, modernised version of Islam, who reject or ignore certain passages that are deemed unacceptable by modern society. Who live a lifestyle that is at odds with what is laid down in the Quran and sunnah. (Remember that a Munafiq is worse than a kuffar)

    By contrast, most Muslims accuse ISIS of kufr because they refuse to reject or ignore any part of the Quran or sunnah, no matter how unacceptable it seems to our modern sensibilities. To borrow a slogan, they believe they are "taking their religion back".
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shiby_123)
    READ THE QURAN and u will find it there
    Then come back to me


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have read the quran and the verse you quote is not complete (in fact it's been edited to remove certain sections) and you ignored the verse that follows

    I understand why you do this but we all know the lie for what it is

    Tell you what you post the full verse then the one that follows it then come back to me
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dexterminate)
    Let us not forget the KKK, a white-supremacist terrorist group which murdered and harassed people of colour (not just blacks) and yet, nobody asks white Christians to apologise for their actions.
    Apart from tha fact that no one is asking all Muslims to apologise - the KKK, as you point out, were political, not religious. They were not attempting to establish a literalist Christian theocracy. They were attempting to retain and consolidate the power of Southern plantation owners during the reconstruction after the Civil War.

    Basically, bringing up the KKK in the "Is ISIS Islamic" argument demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of what the KKK were. And a lack of knowledge of ISIS's motivations and justifications.

    It is like saying "WW2 Nazis had nothing to do with National Socialist ideology. Stalin murdered millions, but nobody asks Russian atheists to apologise". It is a total non sequitur.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shiby_123)
    READ THE QURAN and u will find it there
    Then come back to me


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I did and you have ignored my post.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    You blame the Muslims who commit these atrocities but you don't blame all Muslims

    you can also blame Islam as this is their ideology and their interpretation

    But those denying this is a muslim issue are just as dangerous as those comminting the slaughter.
    Can not say these are Muslim attacks
    Muslims would not attack other Muslim countries let alone the Prophets mosque. These are deluded individuals aka Arsenal fans


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Apart from tha fact that no one is asking all Muslims to apologise - the KKK, as you point out, were political, not religious. They were not attempting to establish a literalist Christian theocracy. They were attempting to retain and consolidate the power of Southern plantation owners during the reconstruction after the Civil War.

    Basically, bringing up the KKK in the "Is ISIS Islamic" argument demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of what the KKK were. And a lack of knowledge of ISIS's motivations and justifications.

    It is like saying "WW2 Nazis had nothing to do with National Socialist ideology. Stalin murdered millions, but nobody asks Russian atheists to apologise". It is a total non sequitur.
    The KKK were a white supremacy group. A CHRISTIAN terror group. ISIS is an ISLAMIC terror group. Nobody seems to emphasise the religion in the KKK as much as they do with ISIS. Wonder why.

    And this is a very stupid question. Of course all Muslims are not to blame.

    And people don’t ask Muslims to apologise? Are you being serious?

    “You know your people killed thousands”
    “Sorry”

    — a conversation my friend had in NY the first time she visited, followed by many others.

    The fact we are expected to apologise is sickening, and if you’re not Muslim, please do not speak for them.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shiby_123)
    Can not say these are Muslim attacks
    Muslims would not attack other Muslim countries let alone the Prophets mosque. These are deluded individuals aka Arsenal fans


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They choose to identify as Muslims, they are Muslims just not good ones. Just aggravated by the fact that media only cares about their religion making us all look bad.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shiby_123)
    Can not say these are Muslim attacks
    Muslims would not attack other Muslim countries let alone the Prophets mosque. These are deluded individuals aka Arsenal fans


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    'No true Scotsman'

    such a fail
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dexterminate)
    The KKK were a white supremacy group. A CHRISTIAN terror group. ISIS is an ISLAMIC terror group. Nobody seems to emphasise the religion in the KKK as much as they do with ISIS. Wonder why.
    Then let me tell you why.

    The original KKK sought protestant white racial supremacy. They attacked, blacks, Jews and Roman Catholic Christians and were suppressed after only a few years.

    The second KKK was similar and lasted only about thirty years, disappearing during WW2.

    The groups currently calling themselves KKK are generally extreme right wing political agitators with not particular religious affiliations at all.

    ISIS seek an Islamic caliphate. What they do is very specifically in the name of Islam, with an Islamist agenda.

    Can you see the difference?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tamanna___)
    Okay so in the Quran they read a passage and interpreted it as that your allowed to kill,
    No, they simply take it at face value, or use a long-standing and authoritative tafsir like Ibn Kathir. There is no need for such personal interpretation. Classical scholars have already done it.

    however one of the most clearest commands or rules if you like, is the one that tells us killing any human is forbidden, and doing so will be as if we have not killed one person, but the whole of mankind. Why would you interpret when the meaning is clearly there? Surely they want to twist words now, dont you think?
    Oh dear! Not this one again?
    The use of this argument is a clear sign that you have not read this passage (5:32) in context, because it absolutely does not forbid killing any human.
    However, there are many Islamic apologist websites and speakers who deliberately misquote this verse - presumably to mislead Muslims into believeing their claims.
    It actually reads...
    "We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people"

    The bit in bold is often omitted, because when it is included, the verse clearly states that it is permitted to kill people as a punishment for murder or "corruption" (fasad). Fasad is a vague term but various scholars have claimed that it includes everything from revolution to disobeying god's law.

    The next verse (5:33) goes further...
    "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to cause corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land."

    So, more clear permission to kill people for somewhat ambiguous offences. Ibn Kathir states that 'wage war' includes "opposition, contradiction and disbelief".

    So we can see that the most widely used and respected classical tafsir clearly states that the very verse you claim forbids killing actually provides permission to kill those who oppose Islam (amongst other things).

    Now, I appreciate that you may reject Ibn Kathir's interpretation and explanation, but many millions don't. And that is the whole point!

    Also lets look at the passages of the quran
    Example : Quran 9:5
    I will keep it brief and simply copy a line from Ibn Kathir's tafsir of 9:5
    "Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam,"

    Not only permission to use non-defensive violence, but clear evidence of forced conversion.

    As I said, you don't have to accept this interpretation, but ...
    "The Tafsir of Ibn Kathir is of the most respected and accepted explanations for the Quran and is the most widely used explanations in Arabic used today." - qtafsir.com

    "Tafsir ibn Kathir is famous all over the Muslim world, and among Muslims in the Western world is one of the most widely used explanations of the Qu'ran today." - quranwebsite.com

    So, you can't simply dismiss it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    No it's not fair to blame Muslims. But blame Islam? Absolutely. That religion is toxic.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheO.G.Slayer)
    SPARE ME! u think being rich and educated makes you superior? LOL F OFF
    well im certainly not rich. but being educated is what has taken human race out of caves and huts into cities and civilisation - even islam agreed with this concept for a short period during its intellectual 'golden age' . you seem to suggest a 'perfect system' of islam should create a world of perpetual wars, terrorism, poor human rights and living standards - this is a misnomer
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kutta)
    Don't be silly bro You've missed the point in its entirety.

    As for the end part, you should reform your thinking as it is blinded by hate which is unhealthy The islamic "dogma" you refer to is followed by billions of people of which maybe a few odd thousand have interpreted it to fit their political and hateful views. Why not look at 99.99999999% of the Muslim population who live peacefully in the world?
    a bit over a billion, rather than 'billions' actually. but there also also well over a billion Christians and Hindus also - numbers of adherents dont really prove anything. the facts we are talking about here is that the billion plus islamic world is producing the majority of the worlds terrorism issue - despite being around for the least amount of time when compared to the worlds other faiths. The reason is due to the '99%' of musims, you included living in self induced ignorance as to the problems coming from your islamic communities and doing nothing about it.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shiby_123)
    Attachment 559024

    Hope people understand, can't blame the majority for the acts of the minority, this is not the teaching of Islam or the Quran:
    How does WW1 not being caused by Muslims mean that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam?
    The argument is just meaningless, and for people to claim it is an "amazing comeback" just shows the levels of objective criticism employed by some!

    And this had been demonstrated, time and time again, to be highly disingenuous. Anyone who has read this verse (and the next one) in context knows that they specifically give permission to kill people for committing the crime of "fasad".
    Now, look up "fasad". I'll give you a start.
    http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?opt...sk=view&id=436
    In his Tafsir, As-Suddi said that Ibn `Abbas and Ibn Mas`ud commented,
    ("Do not make mischief on the earth'', that is disbelief and acts of disobedience.'

    So, according to at least one classical scholar, "fasad" includes "disbelief".
    Now, as I have said before, you do not have to accept this scholar's interpretation. There are probably others. However, there are many millions who do accept it.
    So it is clear that the ambiguous nature of the Quran leads to varying interpretations, some of which clearly permit killing people for refusal to submit to (their interpretation of) Islam. Which is exactly what ISIS do.
 
 
 
  • create my feed
  • edit my feed
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
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.