Islam doesn't condone terror

[JJWhite]

So if this is true, then why are so many Muslims, including top level religious leaders like the Ayatollah Khomeini, who believe in murder, terrorism, and jihad, not getting the message?


.

Here are some guesses:

- ignorance
- fear (partially as a result of media)
- hate (partially as a result of media)
- personal agendas

btw... I support jihad (in circumstances where it is valid).. but not murder or terrorism.

 

[plenary]

In case you're not aware, Pakistan and Iran HATE each other.

Of course they to do... Because if a Muslim hates non-Muslims, than he will also hate other peoples... Which has to do with the love of self, which means hatred of others... One can't have one without the other.... (Even when they want to, it's just not possible...)

That's why, there will never be peace in the Muslim countries, as that is not possible.. Only when people start loving non-Muslims.. What will never happen, when people walk in the ways of Muhammad... (because the opposite is taught) And of course, the measure of self love varies among the Muslims, as that is the case among all human beings....
The point being, that the love of self is taught in Islam, which means that it is impossible that it originated from God... (Which is extra compounded by the fact, that Muhammad loved the world, which is the second hellish love... So Muhammad displayed both the hellish loves, in ample measure...)

But, as people don't want to listen to Christ, they will keep on making the same mistakes, until the patience of God runs out....

I find it extraordinary, that people aren't interested in what Jesus Christ has taught us, and follow blindly after Muhammad..... Even when Muhammad contradicts Christ on almost all points...

I guess many humans are creatures of habit and don't long for truth....

btw... I support jihad (in circumstances where it is valid).. but not murder or terrorism.

Do you also support the following statement of the Muslim Brotherhood? And would you think that Islam all over the world, would be a good thing?

The Brotherhood's official website notes that jihad is Islam's most important tool in effecting a gradual takeover, beginning with the Muslim countries, moving on to reestablishing the Caliphate over three continents in preparation for a conquest of the West, and finally instituting a global Islamic state.

A global Iran of Pakistan... Isn't that something to behold....

John 10:10

7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
13 The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14 I am the good shepherd, and know my [sheep], and am known of mine.
15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, [and] one shepherd.
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

 

[Montalban]

Here are some guesses:

- ignorance
- fear (partially as a result of media)
- hate (partially as a result of media)
- personal agendas

btw... I support jihad (in circumstances where it is valid).. but not murder or terrorism.

So your leaders know less than you do?

 

[Montalban]

This is what the Qur'an teaches, Montalban.

Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. (60:8)

Again this is extremely misleading.

It is recognised that this verse is abrogated by 9:29

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

I find it a dreadfully misleading but common practice of Moslems when they show verses that are in the Koran without letting people know that those verses no longer apply because they've been abrogated.

There is for instance in the Koran "There shall be no compulsion in religion". This Moslems use to deceive non-Moslems into believing that Islam is a faith of peace.

They don't mention it's been abrogated - which is why apostates can be killed.

But then lying for Islam is also permitted. I always think that a cause is greatly undermined when tactics such as deception are needed

 

[psalms 91]

The purpose of Islam is tio rule and convert the world. You have the choice of being Muslom, a slave to them or being killed. That is the true picture of what Islam wishes to accomplish.

 

[JJWhite]

Again this is extremely misleading.

It is recognised that this verse is abrogated by 9:29

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

I find it a dreadfully misleading but common practice of Moslems when they show verses that are in the Koran without letting people know that those verses no longer apply because they've been abrogated.

There is for instance in the Koran "There shall be no compulsion in religion". This Moslems use to deceive non-Moslems into believing that Islam is a faith of peace.

They don't mention it's been abrogated - which is why apostates can be killed.

But then lying for Islam is also permitted. I always think that a cause is greatly undermined when tactics such as deception are needed

Please show me who says it's abrogated.

 

[JJWhite]

So your leaders know less than you do?

Some religious leaders know less than other religious leaders.. and they each have their own strengths and weaknesses... I'm not coming to my own conclusions... I am communicating my honest understanding of what I heard from top scholars and their students.

...and most of the political leaders of the modern world have very little Islaamic education whatsoever.

Regarding Iran... I cannot comment on anything regarding that, because I am not Shi'ite and I don't know how they come to their conclusions, since they have completely different hadith and fiqh systems than what we have.

 

[plenary]

The purpose of Islam is tio rule and convert the world. You have the choice of being Muslom, a slave to them or being killed. That is the true picture of what Islam wishes to accomplish.

x2. That is the whole purpose of Islam right there.... Which has nothing to do with God, whatsoever.

And Muhammad is stated in John 10:
10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy:

Which constitute the fruits of Islam...

 

[FRM48]

What happens in Pakistan or any other country is NOT your concern; it's their country's internal matter. What you should worry about is the growing racism and xenophobia against the immigrants in your country. If we all worried about our backyard first without poking our nose into other people's affairs, the world would be much more peaceful than it is today. Something which both the US and Israel can learn.

Oh really,yeah let's just turn a blind eye,NOT.What country do you live in?Can't be one that's under constant threat of terrorist attack.Qustion for you simonpeter,What's your opinion of the U.N.?

 

[Montalban]

Please show me who says it's abrogated.

That's a fair enough question.

For a start they contradict each other.

One must therefore prevail.

This site (not an Islamic one but they seem to be well researched/referenced) states that one abrogates the other

This Islamic site shows that Book 60 was revealed before Book 9 and the rule of abrogation is that when two verses contradict then the latter verse abrogates the earlier verse

 

[AskTheFamily]

Again this is extremely misleading.

It is recognised that this verse is abrogated by 9:29

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

I find it a dreadfully misleading but common practice of Moslems when they show verses that are in the Koran without letting people know that those verses no longer apply because they've been abrogated.

There is for instance in the Koran "There shall be no compulsion in religion". This Moslems use to deceive non-Moslems into believing that Islam is a faith of peace.

The verse 9:29 doesn't abrogate the verse, it's understood it's being stated because the conditions of the other verse are there. It meant specifically the people of that region whom fought the Prophet (saw), and it referred to them generally. The conditions to not fight those whom don't fight you are not gone, they are not abrogated.

The verse is understood with the condition to fight only those whom fight you...the verse is not abrogated but explains the context of the verse 9:29 as well as other verses that talk about fighting.


This is your false interpretation of Quran.

They don't mention it's been abrogated - which is why apostates can be killed.

It's not abrogated either. The law of apostasy comes from hadiths, and when hadiths contradict Quran, the hadiths should be thrown out.

The verse is an eternal principle that you cannot force religion on people, because religion is something to be practiced freely. This never changes.

 

[JJWhite]

That's a fair enough question.

For a start they contradict each other.

One must therefore prevail.

This site (not an Islamic one but they seem to be well researched/referenced) states that one abrogates the other

This Islamic site shows that Book 60 was revealed before Book 9 and the rule of abrogation is that when two verses contradict then the latter verse abrogates the earlier verse

I'm going to PM you a portion of M.H. Kamali's book 'Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence' that is on the topic of abrogation. It will kind of give you an idea how there's a lot more to abrogation than that, and how different scholars have different opinions on what abrogation entails, when it can applied, what can abrogate what, etc. Cool?

 

[FRM48]

The US supplied him weapons. So much for moral outrage!

How many T55 and T72 tanks did Iraq have?Who supplied them with their S.A.M.S.?What was their small arms weapon of choice?AK47.what were their aircraft?MIGS.What country manufactured and sold them to Iraq?RUSSIA. What we sold Iraq was minor compared to what Russia armed them with.

 

[JJWhite]

The verse 9:29 doesn't abrogate the verse, it's understood it's being stated because the conditions of the other verse are there. It meant specifically the people of that region whom fought the Prophet (saw), and it referred to them generally. The conditions to not fight those whom don't fight you are not gone, they are not abrogated.

The verse is understood with the condition to fight only those whom fight you...the verse is not abrogated but explains the context of the verse 9:29 as well as other verses that talk about fighting.


This is your false interpretation of Quran.
It's not abrogated either. The law of apostasy comes from hadiths, and when hadiths contradict Quran, the hadiths should be thrown out.

The verse is an eternal principle that you cannot force religion on people, because religion is something to be practiced freely. This never changes.

Wallaahu a'lam, I do not believe that the laws regarding apostasy contradicts that either. I believe that the public apostasy of a knowledgeable person raised as a Muslim in a proper Islamic State and who is a citizen of that state... that is viewed as treason to the state, and that is why it may be punishable by death after other measures are taken to avoid it if possible. 'Ubaid ibn Jahsh converted to Christianity in Abyssinia when the Sahaabah were there and nobody bothered about him as he was not living in an Islamic State. Also... I heard of another example during the life of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in a lecture the other day too of an apostate who was not killed... can't remember the name or situation now... would have to relook that up.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

I believe that the public apostasy of a knowledgeable person raised as a Muslim in a proper Islamic State and who is a citizen of that state... that is viewed as treason to the state, and that is why it may be punishable by death after other measures are taken to avoid it if possible

NONSENSE!

 

[Montalban]

One says to only fight those against you
[60.8] Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.
[60.9] Allah only forbids you respecting those who made war upon you on account of (your) religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up (others) in your expulsion, that you make friends with them, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust.

The other says to fight those who don't believe the same as you.
[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

The verse 9:29 doesn't abrogate the verse, it's understood it's being stated because the conditions of the other verse are there. It meant specifically the people of that region whom fought the Prophet (saw), and it referred to them generally. The conditions to not fight those whom don't fight you are not gone, they are not abrogated.

If 9.29 doesn't 'abrogate' 60.8-9 then it's simply expanding on the criteria by which you can fight which still means that you can wage war on those who don't believe as you do – which is STILL against JJWhite's use of the verse.

It's not abrogated either. The law of apostasy comes from hadiths, and when hadiths contradict Quran, the hadiths should be thrown out.

That's not wholly true either. Those that believe in the killing of Apostates cite the Koran for this too
Koran 2:217 is used for concerning those that 'turn back'

The verse is an eternal principle that you cannot force religion on people, because religion is something to be practiced freely. This never changes.

Then your interpretation is out of kilter with 1,400 years of jurisprudence.

 

[Montalban]

I'm going to PM you a portion of M.H. Kamali's book 'Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence' that is on the topic of abrogation. It will kind of give you an idea how there's a lot more to abrogation than that, and how different scholars have different opinions on what abrogation entails, when it can applied, what can abrogate what, etc. Cool?

Thank you for the 11 PM's. Information over-load.

If you've got information specifically about these two verses that would be helpful to the current discussion.

 

[AskTheFamily]

@JJWhite, it's not treason to change religion. Freedom of religion means no one should be forced to religion as religion is not something that can be forced, and this includes Muslims. It makes no sense to state others should be able to convert to Islam and even fight for that condition to be possible, and yet not allow your own people to convert to another religion. It's a double standard that makes no sense.

There is verses about Prophets (aS) in the past that talk about how if a party of people believe and another party don't, then we should wait till God judges between us...The argument is saying, even if false, then you should not prosecute people for abandoning your religion and following a person claiming to be a Prophet... it's the same principle that applies to all people, no one should be forced in religion, and all should have freedom to choose.

This is basic right of all humans, and it's obvious human universal right. Freedom to choose which religion to follow is an obvious intuitive universal right, and the religion is the nature of God that God originated humanity on.

The verse says "there is no force in religion", so why force people to stay Muslims? It's not treason at all, treason is something else.

 

[JJWhite]

Then your interpretation is out of kilter with 1,400 years of jurisprudence.

Montalban, if you were forced to embrace Islam publicly, would you lovingly assist those who forced you and be an asset to the Muslim community, or would you hate those who forced you and be even more dangerous as an enemy from within? It makes absolutely NO SENSE whatsoever to think one can force people to change their religion. Second of all, there is a famous hadith of Prophet Muhammad which says, 'Religion is sincerity'. How can a person be sincere in their religion if they were forced?

I acknowledge that some very knowledgeable scholars have stated that the verse 'there is no compulsion in religion' was abrogated, but I believe that that group of scholars was wrong in this matter, and that those who found other ways to resolve between the texts were more accurate in their analysis, and God knows best.

Please read all 11 PMs on abrogation that I sent.

 

[AskTheFamily]

Thank you for the 11 PM's. Information over-load.

If you've got information specifically about these two verses that would be helpful to the current discussion.

You should read Jihad: The Holy War of Islam and Its Legitimacy in The Quran

It talks about the verse you quoted and how it is conditional. It talks about how the principle if you have verses setting conditions and other stated without the condition, it's understood that the condition is there. This is what it talks about, and that's how these verses should be understood.