Support NeoGAF

[Maninthemirror]

Speculawyer was simply pointing out what justifications the Taliban use, since, as others have mentioned time and again, the only way to stop or combat an ideology is to understand it.

It would be nice if we could simply kill all the terrorists but so far, that hasn't worked at all, if we want them beaten sooner rather than later then grasping their mindset so that we may tackle and prevent it is an absolute must.

yes but there is a difference as you yourself know between pointing out and then saying "this is what is the problem with Islam" and not "This is the problem with their ideology/interpreation of Islam" as if the victim as no voice in their belief which is also islam and moderate and in much larger numbers and always the victims themselves despite being majority. The whole argument is being built on giving ideological equivelance between what Taliban and moderate belief as if on the moral and overall argument its 50 50 and you are being asked to see which one is real islam when any sane person can tell you which is likely the best interpretation and is the only plausable interpretation of those verses which need interpretation with context.

The argument is always being framed in the lens of "This shows there is a Problem with Islam itself" and the moderates are responding with "This shows we need to irradicate this interpretation of Islam itself nomatter small or medium or big in numbers". The thing is, if the people who make kthis problem with Islam itself even admit the problem lies with the abused interpretation rather than the source itself (live and let live with moderates) then it defeats their entire argument. Many legitimate critics have reservations about things like will structure and other social stuff but then there is people with legitimate hate and not just criticism, Hate, which says directly Islam is bad, it needs to be gone, as if they cannot perceive living with people of different ways of life in the world and because they need it gone and cannot perceive living with something that can exist people go around making side arguments trying to justify the hate for it by twisting stuff around their own arguments.

And that is the worst thing in the world, hate.

 

[SniperHunter]

Pakistan is still playing a double game. They bailed out a terrorist responsible for Mumbai bomb blasts earlier this week and another guy responsible for planning or funding Mumbai 2011 attacks still spews venom against India and roams free.

Pakistan needs to shut terrorists down.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Pakistan is still playing a double game. They bailed out a terrorist responsible for Mumbai bomb blasts earlier this week and another guy responsible for planning or funding Mumbai 2011 attacks still spews venom against India and roams free.

Pakistan needs to shut terrorists down.

the thing is. Pakistani culture needs to stop being afraid of Mullahism and put them in a corner and make them Afraid of the public rather than the public be afraid of Mullah. in Pakistan perspective they need a strict leader to reign politically and religiously hardline clerics

 

[Red Mage]

This just shows your ignorance towards Islam which is you saying what the Majority of what Muslims practice today is not the Islam of 1400 years ago and the Islamic ideology of taliban and ISIS is closer to that of the Holy Prophet.

It's closer, but I wouldn't say it's the true interpretation of it. Muhammad was essentially a 6th century Godfather with a religious angle.

How much of a low browed uneducated person does it take to come up with that?

I forgive you for your insults. = )

Your whole concept of Islam is based off of hadith and not Quran, Even if its an invalid hadith, you will portray as valid because...well it fits your "AGENDA" of Islam of Taliban being the REAL islam. how low can one get. Basically an insult to All the Muslims on GAF who are actually in all intends and purposes moderates and closer to Islam than the Taliban. A Hadiths validity is only there if it doesnt contradict the Quran

• I expressly said that it does not say so in the Quran, but does so in the Hadiths, in response to another poster's question regarding killing children.
• I have no idea which branch of Islam you are, so I have no clue which of the Hadiths you consider invalid. For all I know, you're a Quranist who thinks all Hadiths are invalid.
• In relation to the last point, some branches don't consider certain Hadiths "real" while others consider a different grouping "real."
  • Speaking of which, doesn't 6.159 forbid schismatics? = P
• If I were going to slander Islam, I would've taken 6.137 and turned it on it's head. It'd be real easy to take this verse and 8.17 to come up with "Allah is A-OK with sacrificing children, LOL!!!1!" But I didn't. Why? Because I wasn't slandering Islam.

but then again, you can try and find little corners to scrape for manufactured information to create your agenda that most muslims here on GAF are not really following the actual Islamic teachings smh

I have no idea what most Muslims on GaF believe, nor do I think most of them even post in these kind of threads.

I also have no agenda. You know my opinion of Muhammad, and have for some time due to our PM discussions. If you wish to resume them, I'm fine, but why act shocked over things I have told you before?

 

[Maninthemirror]

It's closer, but I wouldn't say it's the true interpretation of it. Muhammad was essentially a 15th century Godfather with a religious angle.



I forgive you for your insults. = )

• I expressly said that it does not say so in the Quran, but does so in the Hadiths, in response to another poster's question regarding killing children.
• I have no idea which branch of Islam you are, so I have no clue which of the Hadiths you consider invalid. For all I know, you're a Quranist who thinks all Hadiths are invalid.
• In relation to the last point, some branches don't consider certain Hadiths "real" while others consider a different grouping "real."
  • Speaking of which, doesn't 6.159 forbid schismatics? = P
• If I were going to slander Islam, I would've taken 6.137 and turned it on it's head. It'd be real easy to this verse and 8.17 to come up with "Allah is A-OK with sacrificing children, LOL!!!1!" But I didn't. Why? Because I wasn't slandering Islam.

I have no idea what most Muslims on GaF believe, nor do I think most of them even post in these kind of threads.

I also have no need to make up crap to create 'an agenda' about Islam. If I were aiming to burst your religious bubble, I'd cite 2.87, 3.3, 4.163, and 5.46 about how the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel were all handed down by God. Since 6.34 and 6.115 both say that no one is allowed to alter Allah's will, that'd mean you would have to follow those. I know many Muslims claim that the Bible's been corrupted, but as you said, if it contradicts the Quran, it is invalid.

Lets dissect this:


- Actually its not closer, its farthest away and thats what almost all Muslims believe in but then again you believe most Muslims of the world today are not the same kind of Muslims in terms of adherence to faith. Abuse of Faith does not equal adherence of Faith so if people like ISIS and Taliban seem to you as extremely religious thus probably original Islam you seem to be equating Abuse of Faith with Adherence of Faith.

- Founder of Islam came in 7th century not 15th century.

- The Quran is the word of God to All Muslims, the Hadith is written by men to all Muslims, which one do you think most Muslim think is divine vs corruptible ? Quran has come down word for word since the 7th century. Hadith was written over the course of 300 years by men and hearsay. How does one make sure the Hadith is valid? It is very simple. If the Hadith does not contradict the overall teaching of the Quran and its essence, its valid. If the Hadith does contradict the overall teaching of the Quran and its essence, it is invalid. e.g. A hadith saying Do not Kill Women and Children would be valid going by Quran's repeated verses of not harming innocents. A Hadith saying Kill the children is invalid because it contradicts Qurans repeated verses of harming innocents.

- Some people give more priority to Hadith than to Quran or treat it on an equal level thus saying what was written by men is equal to something muslims consider divine, there are 2 types of people who do this. People who don't consider Quran as divine, 2. Muslims who are fundamentalists and pick and chose what fits them and their ideology based off of what they can find from the Hadith and then try and find an out of context verse in Quran, which they end up failing to do and end up saying well its not in the Quran but it is in the Hadith so it must be valid (kind of Ironic that you seem to believe the same as the fundamentalists)

- 6:159 is a prediction more than anything to the founder of Islam:

This correlates with the valid Hadith

My ummah will be divided into seventy three sects. All of them will be in the Fire except one, [Saheeh Muslim, no.976]

Which means Islam will be divided eventially into 73 sects and all but ONE of them will be the one that is Actually Islamic in all its teachings, Now are ISIS that sect? well they are mostly Sunnis and most of the world is Sunni so a split within the sect itself wouldnt be Islamic would it? same could be said for any Sect so most Muslims leave it up to their God.

- Lets see how you try to convert this verse 6:137-138 on its head

And in like manner have their associate-gods made the killing of their children appear beautiful to many of the idolaters that they may ruin them and cause them confusion in their religion. And if Allah had enforced His will, they would not have done this; so leave them alone with that which they invent.

where it tells the state of Arabs before 7th century where they used to kill children as a sacrifice to appease their gods. and the message is, if God could force it physically, he would end it, but let them invent their beliefs like they (those arabs) are and meanwhile you (the Founder of Islam) should teach the message of love to these people where they don't kill their children for sacrifice and only worship one God.

Now I would really like to know how you turn this into a negative.

- Lets see what 8:17-18 says

So you killed them not, but it was Allah Who killed them. And thou threwest not when thou didst throw, but it was Allah Who threw, that He might overthrow the disbelievers and that He might confer on the believers a great favour from Himself. Surely, Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.

Do you even know what this is refering to ? let me educate:

lets look at 2:87

And verily, We gave Moses the Book and caused after him Messengers to follow in his footsteps; and to Jesus, son of Mary, We gave manifest Signs, and strengthened him with the Spirit of holiness. Will you (Children of Israel) then, every time a Messenger comes to you with what you yourselves desire not, behave arrogantly and treat some as liars and slay others?

This refers to Isrealites revolting against their own Messenger (Moses) and then Jesus and now God asks them will you revolt against Muhammad too?


lets look at 3:3

He has sent down to thee the Book containing the truth and fulfilling that which precedes it; and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel

lets educate people on this shall we

Lets look at 4:163

Surely, We have sent revelation to thee, as We sent revelation to Noah and the Prophets after him; and We sent revelation to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and his children and to Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and We gave David a Book.

lets get some education on this

lets look at 5:46

And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, fulfilling that which was revealed before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel which contained guidance and light, fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for the God-fearing.

lets educate

At which point we finally hit the nail on the head

which means...

So When Quran says in 6:34

And Messengers indeed have been rejected before thee; but notwithstanding their rejection and persecution they remained patient until Our help came to them. There is none that can change the words of Allah. And there have already come to thee tidings of past Messengers.

which means

and when Quran says in 6:115

And the word of thy Lord has been fulfilled in truth and justice. None can change His words; and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.

which says

The facts are it is saying the words itself and the message of God cannot be changed nomatter how corrupt one wants to make the book and its teachings and its subordinate texts. The true words are ONLY in the hearts and minds of those who are not evil and God.

Because that is proven by this simple verse:

[3:8] He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it there are verses that are decisive in meaning — they are the basis of the Book — and there are others that are susceptible of different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations, seeking discord and seeking wrong interpretation of it. And none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’ — And none heed except those gifted with understanding. —

Note the words: .....there are others (verses) that are susceptible to different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations, seeking discord and seeking wrong interpretation of it.......


So the perverse defined here:

are the ones who want to get wrong interpretaion out of it, which would also correlate to what I earlier said that they then ignore the verses that contradict the Hadith and take wrong interpretation of the verses to correlate with the hadith they think is legitimate but it is contradictory to the Quran.


And that is how you educate the uneducated.

 

[Jeels]

Didn't expect any less from GAF then to turn this into a religious debate.

This is a humanitarian crisis...

 

[Red Mage]

Lets dissect this:

- Actually its not closer, its farthest away and thats what almost all Muslims believe in but then again you believe most Muslims of the world today are not the same kind of Muslims in terms of adherence to faith. Abuse of Faith does not equal adherence of Faith so if people like ISIS and Taliban seem to you as extremely religious thus probably original Islam you seem to be equating Abuse of Faith with Adherence of Faith.

Just so I've got this straight. You're claiming Muhammad didn't have his guys going around, cutting off the heads of people for booty (with him getting 20%), didn't have multiple poets murdered for insulting him, and didn't teach his followers to go axe-crazy on anyone who opposed him?

- Founder of Islam came in 7th century not 15th century.

I wrote 15th by mistake because I glanced at the 1400 you'd just wrote and had a brain fart. Also, he was born in the 6th Century. xD

- More Hadith stuff with an insult thrown in for good measure.

I told you I'm not going to argue about which Hadiths are valid. In my experience, people claim the Hadiths which fit with their interpretation of the Quran.

- 6:159 is a prediction more than anything to the founder of Islam:

So I'm guessing the Hadith where Aisha says that Muhammad did not know the future (Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 6.378) is on your list of invalid hadiths?

- Lets see how you try to convert this verse 6:137-138 on its head
*snip*

Yes, if I had quoted them like the example I gave, that'd been quoting out of context for the purpose of slander. Which was my whole point. I gave an example of what it would be like if I were doing what you accused me of, and now you're trying to use that to claim I'm doing what you accused me of before. That's not how things work.

Do you even know what this is refering to ? let me educate:

...

And that is how you educate the uneducated.

I know the context, but did you miss the part where they said that the texts I mentioned were valid? Have you ever read what the texts mentioned actually say? Because we know what the Psalms and Torah said in the time of Christ, and it is the same thing they say now. The Gospels of the time of Muhammad also say the same thing they say now. So the commentary about what the Gospels contained is incorrect, and thus contradicts the Quran. You can try and claim that they are incorrectly understood/interpreted, but it falls on you to provide genuine evidence of this.

Didn't expect any less from GAF then to turn this into a religious debate.

This is a humanitarian crisis...

Hey, I just started out by answering another poster's question. I even edited my last response to try and get him to take it back to PMs for the sake of the thread. >_<;

 

[Maninthemirror]

Didn't expect any less from GAF then to turn this into a religious debate.

This is a humanitarian crisis...

Well people want this to be about religion because it lines up with their view against it. so theres that...

Just so I've got this straight. You're claiming Muhammad didn't have his guys going around, cutting off the heads of people for booty (with him getting 20%), didn't have multiple poets murdered for insulting him, and didn't teach his followers to go axe-crazy on anyone who opposed him?



I wrote 15th by mistake because I glanced at the 1400 you'd just wrote and had a brain fart. Also, he was born in the 6th Century. xD



I told you I'm not going to argue about which Hadiths are valid. In my experience, people claim the Hadiths which fit with their interpretation of the Quran.

- 6:159 is a prediction more than anything to the founder of Islam:

So I'm guessing the Hadith where Aisha says that Muhammad did not know the future (Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 6.378) is on your list of invalid hadiths?



Yes, if I had quoted them like the example I gave, that'd been quoting out of context for the purpose of slander. Which was my whole point. I gave an example of what it would be like if I were doing what you accused me of, and now you're trying to use that to claim I'm doing what you accused me of before. That's not how things work.



I know the context, but did you miss the part where they said that the texts I mentioned were valid? Have you ever read what the texts mentioned actually say? Because we know what the Psalms and Torah said in the time of Christ, and it is the same thing they say now. The Gospels of the time of Muhammad also say the same thing they say now. So the commentary about what the Gospels contained is incorrect, and thus contradicts the Quran. You can try and claim that they are incorrectly understood/interpreted, but it falls on you to provide genuine evidence of this.



Hey, I just started out by answering another poster's question. I even edited my last response to try and get him to take it back to PMs for the sake of the thread. >_<;

1. No, The founder of Islam was not going around telling his followers to murder for Islam. The only people who believe that are the ones who accept the revisionist history created by
This is argued perfectly in the Quran itself:

&#8216;Verily, this is a reminder: so whosoever wishes may take to the way that leads to his Lord.&#8217; (76.30)

&#8220;There shall be no compulsion in religion, for guidance and error have been clearly distinguished; so whoever refuses to be led by those who transgress and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle&#8212;one which knows no breaking.&#8221; (2.257)

The Following are the words God tells Muhammad (sa) in the Quran to those who don't believe:

[39:9] And when an affliction befalls a man, he calls upon his Lord, turning penitently to Him. Then, when He confers upon him a favour from Himself, he forgets what he used to pray for before, and begins to assign rivals to Allah, that he may lead men astray from His way. Say, &#8216;Benefit thyself with thy disbelief a little while; thou art surely of the inmates of the Fire.&#8217;
[39:10] Is he who prays devoutly to God in the hours of the night, prostrating himself and standing, and fears the Hereafter and hopes for the mercy of his Lord, like him who does not do so? Say, &#8216;Are those who know equal to those who know not?&#8217; Verily, only those endowed with understanding will take heed.
[39:11] Say, &#8216;O ye My servants who believe, fear your Lord. There is good for those who do good in this life. And Allah&#8217;s earth is spacious. Verily the steadfast will have their reward without measure.&#8217;
[39:12] Say, &#8216;Verily I am commanded to worship Allah, being sincere to Him in religion.
[39:13] &#8216;And I am commanded to be the first of those who submit to Him.&#8217;
[39:14] Say, &#8216;Indeed I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of the great day.&#8217;
[39:15] Say, &#8216;It is Allah I worship, being sincere to Him in my religion.
[39:16] &#8216;So worship what you like beside Him.&#8217; Say, &#8216;Surely the losers will be those who ruin their souls and ruin their families on the Day of Resurrection.&#8217; Beware! that will surely be the manifest loss.
[39:17] They will have over them coverings of fire, and beneath them similar coverings. It is this against which Allah warns His servants. &#8216;O My servants, take Me, then, for your Protector.&#8217;
[39:18] And those who shun false gods lest they worship them and turn to Allah &#8212; for them is glad tidings. So give glad tidings to My servants,
[39:19] Who listen to the Word and follow the best thereof. It is they whom Allah has guided, and it is they who are men of understanding.
[39:20] Is he, then, against whom the sentence of punishment has become due fit to be rescued? Canst thou rescue him who is in the Fire?

sounds like forced eh? /s *rolleyes*

People who believe in the revisionist history
a) the religious people who are opposed to the idea of Islam
b) the non-religious people who accept the idea of the religious people who are opposed to the idea of Islam
c) Radicalized Muslims who accept the Maudoodi philosophy of Islam (which was the birth of the modern day fundamentalist movement in 1950s)

I would suggest you read the book "Murder in the name of Allah" written in 1988 (Available free to read below) about how orientalists and radicalized Muslims tried or try now to change Islam as originally violent as opposed to newly violent ideologies only in relatively modern age
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/mna/index.html

2. I was referring to when Islam was first introduced which was in the 7th century

3. The idea is that the Founder of Islam did not know the future himself, only what his God told him to be a Warner. There is a difference. A Man knowing himself what the future holds for people or a Man told by his God what the future holds about something specific like that of Heaven and Hell and the rightly guided and the ones that will go astray.

4. Yes the texts were valid. Torah is still I think valid as is a lot of the Gospels but unlike the Torah, the Gospels have been corrupted by many things written years after the crucifixion, do you deny that there was text added to the bible after crucifiction? Do you deny that in Torah he is a Prophet and a Man only and in the Bible that is suddenly changed to a literal son of God or a God himself ? these are all man made additions to the Gospels which were pristine when presented but corrupted when Jesus left.