Quote:
Originally Posted by raytri
Sufis
Ahmadis
Most Muslims living in the West, regardless of sect
|
You might as well have typed "Joe" or "Phil down the street." Without any context, this means nothing and doesn't constitute evidence.
Thanks for a twenty page article. I'll read it at my liesure, but since you apparently don't think anything in the article is worth quoting, then I won't address it. However, the article did have this in its introduction:
Quote:
|
It is true that Islam’s fierce dogma of monotheism insists that the world in its entirety must come to acknowledge Allah and the teachings of his unique messenger. Passages of Islamic Scripture imply a relentless war until this goal is achieved. But, as always with Scripture, contrary inferences may be drawn from other passages. In any case, non-Muslims clearly cannot accept a Muslim doctrine of war against them and, if need be, will surely meet war with war. At the same time, it is scarcely the place of non-Muslims to tell Muslims how pious their practice ought to be or how intense their devotion to their faith. If the premise of our fight against terrorism is that Muslims must become less devout, then the prospects for success will be both poor and beyond our control.
|
But let's move on....
Quote:
|
So what? In order to disprove your absurd claim, I can't rely on reporting, I have to go track down specific Islamic scholars? To which you'll doubtless reply "well, that's just one."
|
I asked for just one. One who repudiated the idea of jihad as military struggle.
Quote:
|
Sorry. I'm going to provide broad scope links that show the overall picture.
|
And that's the problem. You have given me politically correct Western links, which do not accurately describe the reality that is Islam.
Quote:
|
My links say otherwise, notwithstanding your rejection of journalists and Israeli rabbis as viable sources.
|
Now, isn't it strange though, that the only links you can furnish are Western and Israeli. To me, that should be telling.
Quote:
Jihad translates as "struggle." That has multiple meanings.
Quote:
|
Yes, historically Islam was used to justify conquest. But then, so was the God of the Old Testament. As I've noted before, if Christians can ignore inconvenient verses in the Bible, why do you insist that Muslims cannot? Especially when hundreds of millions of them *do*, ever day?
|
Yes, that's what I'm claiming. And not because I'm making it up. The word Islam means submission, namely submission to the will of Allah, and that will is only known through the words of his Prophet. But this is neither here nor there. If there is a Muslim who has reject the military interpretation of the word jihad, you still have failed to find that individual. I am telling you that, if he does exist, the average Muslim in the Middle East would not consider that individual to be Muslim at all.
Quote:
|
Yep, Muhammad was a warrior and conqueror. No question. And the Jews killed everyone in Jericho, and God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and sent bears to kill children. The Bible is soaked in blood.
|
As is human history, but this has no bearing on our present question.
[quotet]If your point is that Muhammad wasn't anywhere near as peaceful as Jesus, no duh. That does not mean that Islam is inherently violent, or that it can't evolve and discard its most violent aspects.
|
What does imply that Islam is inherently violent, as you say, are the words of the Koran themselves, which I have shown you.
Quote:
|
The point of the first link I provided was to show that Muslims themselves have been divided over the meaning and scope of jihad since the beginning. So maybe the passage you quote simply isn't as clear-cut and authoritative as you'd like to think it is.
|
But there are some things they have to agree to, or they would not be Muslim.
Quote:
That would seem to be badly outdate, if not a blatant lie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Sayyid_Tantawy
To quote the relevant text:
He has taken a line against Suicide bombings, and unlike his compatriot Yusuf al-Qaradawi, he has condemned the use of suicide bombings against Israelis, rejecting the argument that all Israelis were legitimate targets because at some stage they would all carry a gun. In 2003 he called suicide bombers "enemies of Islam", adding "people of different beliefs should co-operate and not get into senseless conflicts and animosity. Extremism is the enemy of Islam. Whereas, jihad is allowed in Islam to defend one's land, to help the oppressed. The difference between jihad in Islam and extremism is like the earth and the sky"Speaking after the September 11, 2001 attacks he said "It's not courage in any way to kill an innocent person, or to kill thousands of people, including men and women and children." He said that Osama bin Laden's call for a Jihad against the west was "invalid and not binding on Muslims", adding "Killing innocent civilians is a horrific, hideous act that no religion can approve". He said the Qur'an "specifically forbids the kinds of things the Taliban and al-Qaida are guilty of".
|
Very good scholarship on your part. I'm glad to see you are finally doing something worthwhile with your spare time. However, my reference to Tantawi is still accurate, as it refers to his position on using suicide attacks against innocents in Israel:
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Pa...=sd&ID=SP36302
Quote:
|
Within the past year, Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, the top Egyptian cleric of Al(*)Azhar University, has shifted his position regarding the targeting of civilians in suicide bombings. While he previously stated that Palestinians should refrain from targeting civilians,[1] he recently declared that martyrdom (suicide) operations and the killing of civilians are permitted acts and that more such attacks should be carried out. Tantawi's positions were posted on www.lailatalqadr.com, a website associated with Al(*)Azhar.
|
So, since you called my words a lie, when in fact they were true, I guess that makes you the liar....
Quote:
|
You did, with your Grand Sheik. I list entire populations that have repudiated it at the beginning of this post. And like it or not, the broader context links I provided say the same thing.
|
Have a nice day, Raytri, and go on believing what you will.
02-15-2008, 06:42 AM
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
