If you live in the US, Are Hamas and Hizballah Terrorist Organizations?

[BecauseIKnow]

Shariah is another word for Islam. So what you posted above just means Islam is supposed to be a way of life for Muslims. Wow. I'm outraged. Zzzzzz

 

[Roudy]

And right there is a perfect example of the dishonesty of this kind of argument.



Pretty stark and damning as to the sentiments regarding Jews throughout history in both Christendom and Islam.

So what you're saying is that it is possible that Christians picked it up from the Muslims, and then passed it on to the Nazis through the close relationship between the Vatican and Hitler. Nobody's arguing that possibility. Other than the fact that Muslims started the practice is indisputable.

Good point Roudy - I'll concede it started with the Muslims but I'll raise you.

The Christians took the ball and ran with it - they took the badge further than the Muslims and it was the Christians that took it to the point of genocide.

For example, your same source states:

While antisemitism was less pronounced in the Muslim countries, Jews were at times treated with contempt, depending on the era and location. This was expressed through sumptuary laws that established what colors, clothing or hats they were permitted or not permitted to wear. The use of distinctive clothing or marks for Jewish and other religious communities has been traced by historians to ancient times.[2][unreliable source]

I think Jews were treated like shit historically - they were refused citizenship in many European countries unders laws that existed (though unenforced) until the nid 20th centuries, they were forbidden from owning land, and a host of other restrictions.

I guess what I see as bigoted is the hate is only directed at Muslims, when they were no worse and maybe not even as bad as some of the Christian countries. What it turns into is a hatred of Muslims (as an entire group) that is little different than the conspiracy-theory based hatred of Jews. None of it is good.

Yes I agree anti semitism was less pronounced in Muslim countries because Muslims and Christians were at constant religious based wars, and Jews took refuge in Muslim lands.

Muslims invaded Europe through their Jihads, Christians tried to repel them by Crusades and Inquisitions, and so on and so forth. With the main prize for this competition being whoever conquered Jerusalem. And Jews were stuck in the middle of this back and forth, and sometimes even got the brunt of it.

And I believe not much has changed. Except now it is the Muslims that are doing or trying to do what Christians did in the past, and Jews are now taking refuge in Christian lands.

 

[Maryland]

Shariah is another word for Islam. So what you posted above just means Islam is supposed to be a way of life for Muslims. Wow. I'm outraged. Zzzzzz

You're allowed to be uneducated.

Sharia Law, Umdat al-Salik wa Uddat al-Nasi: Jihad

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.

The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians... until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax.

The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim.
Reliance of The Traveller: Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Your quote has nothing to do with your link. You literally just made up your quote as if it was content of the link. No Jihad means struggle. No, the Caliph doesn't do so. You jumped the gun like usual. And I love how you went from Islamic Law to a self defense call. Yet your posts have no relevance to the topic. You aren't getting away with straw man arguments this time.

 

[Roudy]

Muslims actually started the requirement of Jews and Christians to wear religious identifying insignia as dhimmis in Islamic entities. In fact, the requirement is in the sharia, the Constitution of Islam.

Anti-Semitism is a formal doctrine of Islamic ideology. Muslims are required to hate and persecute Jews.

Bullshit. That is no more accuate than the claim that Christians are required to hate Jews because they killed Christ.

Sharia is not the "Constitution of Islam" - that is ignorance. Sharia and it's interpretation is variable and is more akin to Talmudic law than it is to the Constitution, both with a basis in the Old Testement (which, like it or not, is pretty horrific).

You are mistaken Coyote. Any country or nation that considers itself Islamic, the first thing the do is impose some type of Shariah Law.

 

[Roudy]

Your quote has nothing to do with your link. You literally just made up your quote as if it was content of the link. No Jihad means struggle. No, the Caliph doesn't do so. You jumped the gun like usual. And I love how you went from Islamic Law to a self defense call. Yet your posts have no relevance to the topic. You aren't getting away with straw man arguments this time.

Jihad means struggle eh? Ha ha ha!

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Like which country Roudy?

 

[Coyote]

Muslims actually started the requirement of Jews and Christians to wear religious identifying insignia as dhimmis in Islamic entities. In fact, the requirement is in the sharia, the Constitution of Islam.

Anti-Semitism is a formal doctrine of Islamic ideology. Muslims are required to hate and persecute Jews.

Bullshit. That is no more accuate than the claim that Christians are required to hate Jews because they killed Christ.

Sharia is not the "Constitution of Islam" - that is ignorance. Sharia and it's interpretation is variable and is more akin to Talmudic law than it is to the Constitution, both with a basis in the Old Testement (which, like it or not, is pretty horrific).

You are mistaken Coyote. Any country or nation that considers itself Islamic, the first thing the do is impose some type of Shariah Law.

No, I'm not: Sharia and it's interpretation is variable.

Many Islamic countries use a form - a form - of Sharia law for civil codes, but secular law for criminal codes, as one example. Not all interprete the penalties under Sharia in the same way.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Bullshit. That is no more accuate than the claim that Christians are required to hate Jews because they killed Christ.

Sharia is not the "Constitution of Islam" - that is ignorance. Sharia and it's interpretation is variable and is more akin to Talmudic law than it is to the Constitution, both with a basis in the Old Testement (which, like it or not, is pretty horrific).

You are mistaken Coyote. Any country or nation that considers itself Islamic, the first thing the do is impose some type of Shariah Law.

No, I'm not: Sharia and it's interpretation is variable.

Many Islamic countries use a form - a form - of Sharia law for civil codes, but secular law for criminal codes, as one example. Not all interprete the penalties under Sharia in the same way.

He doesn't debate reality, Coyote. He just likes stupid, which is clumping the worlds Islam, Jihad, Shariah and terrorism in one statement thinking he's gold. As if he has the better of the argument. Bigots try to bring you down to their level. But gladly you hit him with facts but he will keep saying otherwise anyways.

 

[Maryland]

Your quote has nothing to do with your link. You literally just made up your quote as if it was content of the link. No Jihad means struggle. No, the Caliph doesn't do so. You jumped the gun like usual. And I love how you went from Islamic Law to a self defense call. Yet your posts have no relevance to the topic. You aren't getting away with straw man arguments this time.

You lost the debate. Run along

Sharia Law, Umdat al-Salik wa Uddat al-Nasik: Jihad

Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.

The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians... until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax.

The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim.

"The scriptural basis for jihad issuch Koranic verses as...

"Fighting is prescribed for you"...
Quran 2.216...
Jihâd[] (holy fighting in Allâh's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.

"Slay them wherever you find them"
Quran 4.89...
They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allâh (to Muhammad SAW). But if they turn back (from Islâm), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliyâ' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.

"And such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet [Allah bless him and give him peace] said:"

Hadith: "I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah"

"and the hadith reported by Muslim,"
Hadith: "To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.

Quran 4.36...
Verily, the number of months with Allâh is twelve months (in a year), so was it ordained by Allâh on the Day when He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are Sacred, (i.e. the 1st, the 7th, the 11th and the 12th months of the Islâmic calendar). That is the right religion, so wrong not yourselves therein, and fight against the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) collectively[], as they fight against you collectively. But know that Allâh is with those who are Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25
“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah.
Reliance of The Traveller: Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law

 

[Coyote]

Your quote has nothing to do with your link. You literally just made up your quote as if it was content of the link. No Jihad means struggle. No, the Caliph doesn't do so. You jumped the gun like usual. And I love how you went from Islamic Law to a self defense call. Yet your posts have no relevance to the topic. You aren't getting away with straw man arguments this time.

Jihad means struggle eh? Ha ha ha!

See, here's the thing that I don't understand.

With any other religion, you guys allow differing interpretations - you allow reformation.

When it comes to Islam, you suddenly close ranks and say - oh no, there can be no other interpretation.

There are scholars in Islam examining Sharia and what it means in the modern world yet you deny the potential for change because all you want to do is demonize that religion as a whole rather than support reformation. Orthodox/Fundamentalist Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism is little better - it just isn't the law in any countries.

You treat no other religion in that manner. How is that not bigotry?

 

[Maryland]

Your quote has nothing to do with your link. You literally just made up your quote as if it was content of the link. No Jihad means struggle. No, the Caliph doesn't do so. You jumped the gun like usual. And I love how you went from Islamic Law to a self defense call. Yet your posts have no relevance to the topic. You aren't getting away with straw man arguments this time.

Jihad means struggle eh? Ha ha ha!

See, here's the thing that I don't understand.

With any other religion, you guys allow differing interpretations - you allow reformation.

When it comes to Islam, you suddenly close ranks and say - oh no, there can be no other interpretation.

There are scholars in Islam examining Sharia and what it means in the modern world yet you deny the potential for change because all you want to do is demonize that religion as a whole rather than support reformation. Orthodox/Fundamentalist Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism is little better - it just isn't the law in any countries.

You treat no other religion in that manner. How is that not bigotry?

Islam cannot change since the Koran which exhorts jiihad holy war is immutable as the direct word of allah.

You really are not knowledgeable about the subject matter.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Maryland, you just want to connect that dots that justify your ideology. Which is to find one source by one author to agree with your view. But you disregard Islamic scholars on this term. Which are the main schools, Hanafi, Maliki, etc..

Here's one example from a Islamic source.

What does Jihad mean? - IslamCan.com

The essential meaning of Jihad is the spiritual, psychological, and physical effort we exert to be close to God and thus achieve a just and harmonious society. Jihad literally means "striving" or "struggle" and is shorthand for Jihad fi Sabeel Allah (struggle for God's cause). In a sense, every Muslim is a Mujahid, one who strives for God and justice.

Al-Ghazali captured the essence of Jihad when he said: "The real Jihad is the warfare against (one's own) passions. Dr. Ibrahim Abu-Rabi calls Jihad "the execution of effort against evil in the self and every manifestation of evil in society." In a way, Jihad is the Muslim's purest sacrifice: a struggle to live a perfect life and completely submit to God.

Another form of Jihad is the striving to translate the Word of God into action. If one has experienced God and received guidance from the Qur'an, one struggles to apply that guidance in daily life. So the larger, more prevalent meaning of Jihad is the spiritual struggle of the soul. In this case, Jihad is always present for the believer whether there is an external enemy or not. We should never reduce Jihad to violence.

A third level of Jihad is popularly known as "holy war." The classic passage is found in the Qur'an:
Fight in the way of Allah those who fight against you, but transgress not the limits. Truly Allah likes not the transgressors (Qur'an 2:190).

As I said, it means many things and it can mean warfare. But not the way you present it as.

As he further explains....:

It is crucial to note here that what is condoned is defensive warfare; Islam cannot justify aggressive war. Muhammad and the Tradition are also against killing non-combatants, torturing of prisoners, the destruction of crops, animals and homes. Adapted from Ira 6. Zepp, Jr., A Muslim Primer (1992, Wakefield Editions, US) pp.133-135.

Most verses you listed were revealed at a moment of ambush by Quraysh tribes against the 100 Muslims at the beginning of Islam. They didn't want war. And they were greatly outnumbered. But they were left with no choice.

 

[Maryland]

Eminent Islamc Scholar Ibn Khaldun, "The Muqaddimah"

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, the caliphate and royal authority are united in Islam, so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same time.

The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty to them, save only for purposes of defence. It has thus come about that the person in charge of religious affairs in other religious groups is not concerned with power politics at all. Among them royal authority comes to those who have it--by accident and in some way that has nothing to do with religion. It comes to them as a necessary result of group feeling, which by its very nature seeks to obtain royal authority, as we have mentioned before, and not because they are under obligation to gain power over other religions, as is the case with Islam. They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people.

 

[Coyote]

Jihad means struggle eh? Ha ha ha!

See, here's the thing that I don't understand.

With any other religion, you guys allow differing interpretations - you allow reformation.

When it comes to Islam, you suddenly close ranks and say - oh no, there can be no other interpretation.

There are scholars in Islam examining Sharia and what it means in the modern world yet you deny the potential for change because all you want to do is demonize that religion as a whole rather than support reformation. Orthodox/Fundamentalist Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism is little better - it just isn't the law in any countries.

You treat no other religion in that manner. How is that not bigotry?

Islam cannot change since the Koran which exhorts jiihad holy war is immutable as the direct word of allah.

You really are not knowledgeable about the subject matter.

Neither are you when your sole defense is cherry-picking a holy book, stript of it's historical context.

I would suggest sources other than Jihadwatch.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Jihad means struggle eh? Ha ha ha!

See, here's the thing that I don't understand.

With any other religion, you guys allow differing interpretations - you allow reformation.

When it comes to Islam, you suddenly close ranks and say - oh no, there can be no other interpretation.

There are scholars in Islam examining Sharia and what it means in the modern world yet you deny the potential for change because all you want to do is demonize that religion as a whole rather than support reformation. Orthodox/Fundamentalist Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism is little better - it just isn't the law in any countries.

You treat no other religion in that manner. How is that not bigotry?

Islam cannot change since the Koran which exhorts jiihad holy war is immutable as the direct word of allah.

You really are not knowledgeable about the subject matter.

That's not what she meant moron.

 

[Maryland]

See, here's the thing that I don't understand.

With any other religion, you guys allow differing interpretations - you allow reformation.

When it comes to Islam, you suddenly close ranks and say - oh no, there can be no other interpretation.

There are scholars in Islam examining Sharia and what it means in the modern world yet you deny the potential for change because all you want to do is demonize that religion as a whole rather than support reformation. Orthodox/Fundamentalist Judaism, Christianity or Hinduism is little better - it just isn't the law in any countries.

You treat no other religion in that manner. How is that not bigotry?

Islam cannot change since the Koran which exhorts jiihad holy war is immutable as the direct word of allah.

You really are not knowledgeable about the subject matter.

Neither are you when your sole defense is cherry-picking a holy book, stript of it's historical context.

I would suggest sources other than Jihadwatch.

Ibn Khaldun is considered the most important Islamic scholar in history. D'oh

Ibn Khaldun "The Muqaddimah"

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, the caliphate and royal authority are united in Islam, so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same time.

The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty to them, save only for purposes of defence. It has thus come about that the person in charge of religious affairs in other religious groups is not concerned with power politics at all. Among them royal authority comes to those who have it--by accident and in some way that has nothing to do with religion. It comes to them as a necessary result of group feeling, which by its very nature seeks to obtain royal authority, as we have mentioned before, and not because they are under obligation to gain power over other religions, as is the case with Islam. They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Eminent Islamc Scholar Ibn Khaldun, "The Muqaddimah"

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, the caliphate and royal authority are united in Islam, so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same time.

The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty to them, save only for purposes of defence. It has thus come about that the person in charge of religious affairs in other religious groups is not concerned with power politics at all. Among them royal authority comes to those who have it--by accident and in some way that has nothing to do with religion. It comes to them as a necessary result of group feeling, which by its very nature seeks to obtain royal authority, as we have mentioned before, and not because they are under obligation to gain power over other religions, as is the case with Islam. They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people.

Your own source says its for defense purposes. And that was when there was one community. It was just their way of defining warfare. Today there is no Caliph and there are many Islamic countries or Muslim majority countries and a Caliph does not exist nor a united Islam. So you listing historical documentation doesn't mean anything without you giving your objective.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Ibn Khaldun was alive 700 years ago. Totally different environment and context. You can't use that as leverage to justify your bigotry.

 

[Maryland]

Eminent Islamc Scholar Ibn Khaldun, "The Muqaddimah"

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, the caliphate and royal authority are united in Islam, so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same time.

The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty to them, save only for purposes of defence. It has thus come about that the person in charge of religious affairs in other religious groups is not concerned with power politics at all. Among them royal authority comes to those who have it--by accident and in some way that has nothing to do with religion. It comes to them as a necessary result of group feeling, which by its very nature seeks to obtain royal authority, as we have mentioned before, and not because they are under obligation to gain power over other religions, as is the case with Islam. They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people.

Your own source says its for defense purposes. And that was when there was one community. It was just their way of defining warfare. Today there is no Caliph and there are many Islamic countries or Muslim majority countries and a Caliph does not exist nor a united Islam. So you listing historical documentation doesn't mean anything without you giving your objective.

Maybe, you can take a class on basic reading comprehension.

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force