Muslims are our friends but Islam is the enemy of Western Civilization?

[Ropey]

Your failure to understand something or realize its pertinence to our present situation does not make it "obfuscatory."

Not at all. You are not presumed innocent until proven guilty in a web discussion of scripture.

How could you be personally indicted for that?

And you laugh at me?

OK

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

It isnt scripture, its a distillation of scripture a snap shot to make it clear.



Noble Qur’an 2:190 Footnote: “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite.”


Agree or not ?
If not why not.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Remember how this works ?
Im the Pimp.
You work for me
No matter what you say.

Please keep your sexual fantasies about me to yourself in the future.

It isn't a unsubstantiated claim .

Then show me where it has been substantiated.

Dont be silly, you know how it works
You give opinions .
I show they dont hold water.

Thanks why you wont give opinions , thats why Sunni bitch of having an interweb outage.

 

[Kalam]

Not at all. You are not presumed innocent until proven guilty in a web discussion of scripture.

How could you be personally indicted for that?

I see no reason to assume that the interpretation is valid in light of the author's failure to substantiate his claims. Do you?

And you laugh at me?

OK

Do you need a Kleenex?

 

[Kalam]

It isnt scripture,

Precisely.

its a distillation of scripture a snap shot to make it clear.

Prove that it's accurate.

 

[Kalam]

you know how it works
You give opinions .
I show they dont hold water.

We have always been at war with Eurasia.

 

[Ropey]

It isnt scripture, its a distillation of scripture a snap shot to make it clear.

Of course. That's why we still discuss the books. All of them. They are not clear and interpretation is everything in all the books.

But that being said, this is a discussion on the books and their interpretations to see if Islam (via interpretation) [Sheesh, I have to modify that?] is in fact an enemy.

No interpretations allowed? Innocent prior to presumption of guilt. This is a discussion, not a court of law.

Those who want to enter as Muslims to support their view need to be strong enough to actually respond to the questions.

It would seem not. So far both Sunni Man and Kalam came in here to deny there is any reason for the thread I guess.

Can't rightly say...

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Im willing to trust the the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia or who ever runs the “King Fahd Complex" for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques on the translation and meaning of the Quran in this instance.

I made the scan myself.
All Im asking is do you agree or not?
And if not why?

 

[gautama]

Kalam

Mr. Fitnah said that he's not interested in your opinion on the scripture, but your rebut using scripture. That's what he's been asking for all along.

Where you went, well that's an entirely different path. Why?

Obfuscation or simply not the understanding of the scripture to find the relevant passages? Legal terms in Latin are obfuscatory as we are not in a court of law.

I want to read your response...

It's obvious, both of the two Muslim arseholes: Sunni Bitch and Kalam Shazam are dodging the question.

Fitnah is clobbering the two muslim jerks with their own Quran and Quaranic scholars.

 

[Kalam]

Im willing to trust the the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia or who ever runs the “King Fahd Complex" for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques on the translation and meaning of the Quran in this instance.

I'm not.

I made the scan myself.

Would you like a sticker?

All Im asking is do you agree or not?
And if not why?

Fine. If it will keep you and Ropey from whining any more, I'll overlook your logical fallacy. The Saudi footnote is characteristically misleading because "jihad" encompasses far more than physical conflict. That's the first problem.

 

[Kalam]

It isnt scripture, its a distillation of scripture a snap shot to make it clear.

Of course. That's why we still discuss the books. All of them. They are not clear and interpretation is everything in all the books.

But that being said, this is a discussion on the books and their interpretations to see if Islam (via interpretation) [Sheesh, I have to modify that?] is in fact an enemy.

No interpretations allowed? Innocent prior to presumption of guilt. This is a discussion, not a court of law.

Those who want to enter as Muslims to support their view need to be strong enough to actually respond to the questions.

It would seem not. So far both Sunni Man and Kalam came in here to deny there is any reason for the thread I guess.

Can't rightly say...

Do you agree with this interpretation of your religion? If not, please disprove it using scripture:

The sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews, according to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the head of Shas’s Council of Torah Sages and a senior Sephardi adjudicator.

“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel,” he said in his weekly Saturday night sermon on the laws regarding the actions non-Jews are permitted to perform on Shabbat.

According to Yosef, the lives of non-Jews in Israel are safeguarded by divinity, to prevent losses to Jews.

“In Israel, death has no dominion over them... With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money.

This is his servant... That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” Yosef said.

“Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.

That is why gentiles were created,” he added.

Yosef: Gentiles exist only to serve Jews

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Im willing to trust the the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia or who ever runs the “King Fahd Complex" for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques on the translation and meaning of the Quran in this instance.

I'm not.

I made the scan myself.

Would you like a sticker?

All Im asking is do you agree or not?
And if not why?

Fine. If it will keep you and Ropey from whining any more, I'll overlook your logical fallacy. The Saudi footnote is characteristically misleading because "jihad" encompasses far more than physical conflict. That's the first problem.

The Quran is full of conditional and unconditional dictates concerning jihad.
the purpose is without question .To make Islam superior to all laws and insure only allah is worshiped yes or no .

 

[Ropey]

But that's just complicating an expression. How about simplifying it. That's the reason for the interpretation Kalam.

To make it easier to understand. Why do you try to attach more complications?

To obfuscate. To hide the simplistic which:

Can be taught to those who can not even read.

Those who say, "It is complicated"

Do not want to discuss. They seek to exclude. I put forward that this is what I see you doing.

Call it whining when you are called to respond if you wish.

I call it obfuscation.

 

[Kalam]

To make Islam superior to all laws

Yes.

and insure only allah is worshiped

No.

 

[Foxfyre]

Im willing to trust the the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia or who ever runs the “King Fahd Complex" for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques on the translation and meaning of the Quran in this instance.

I'm not.

I made the scan myself.

Would you like a sticker?

All Im asking is do you agree or not?
And if not why?

Fine. If it will keep you and Ropey from whining any more, I'll overlook your logical fallacy. The Saudi footnote is characteristically misleading because "jihad" encompasses far more than physical conflict. That's the first problem.

Okay, I've refused to bash either Muslims or Islam as that was not my intent for this thread. The thread addresses my concern for Islam's intent to put western civilization under the authority of Allah and my objections to that.

So far nobody has come up with anything persuasive to reassure anybody that this is not the case.

But, as an aside, in the matter of jihad, Sunniman has insisted that the Qu'ran does not contain the nuances, metaphors, imagery, allegory etc. as is found the the Hebrew and Christian holy books, that it can be read literally with no translation or interpretation necessary.

So how does that square with there being multiple meanings for jihad? And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

 

[Ropey]

Do you agree with this interpretation of your religion? If not, please disprove it using scripture:

Open up a thread about Judaism and its possibility of being an enemy and post in there. I will respond and I will do so far differently than you just did here.

Trying to shift the entire thread. Come on Kalam. You are better than that.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

and insure only allah is worshiped

No.

So you believe allah was wrong .
according to all these Islamic scholars
OTay.

Shirk is worse than Killing

Since Jihad involves killing and shedding the blood of men, Allah indicated that these men are committing disbelief in Allah, associating with Him (in the worship) and hindering from His path, and this is a much greater evil and more disastrous than killing. Abu Malik commented about what Allah said:

[وَالْفِتْنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ الْقَتْلِ]

(And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.) Meaning what you (disbelievers) are committing is much worse than killing.'' Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Sa`id bin Jubayr, `Ikrimah, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas said that what Allah said:

[وَالْفِتْنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ الْقَتْلِ]

(And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.) "Shirk (polytheism) is worse than killing.''

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir
The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah

Allah then commanded fighting the disbelievers when He said:

[حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ]

(...until there is no more Fitnah) meaning, Shirk. This is the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi`, Muqatil bin Hayyan, As-Suddi and Zayd bin Aslam.

Allah's statement:

[وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ للَّهِ]

(...and the religion (all and every kind of worship) is for Allah (Alone).) means, `So that the religion of Allah becomes dominant above all other religions.' It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari said: "The Prophet was asked, `O Allah's Messenger! A man fights out of bravery, and another fights to show off, which of them fights in the cause of Allah' The Prophet said:

«مَنْ قَاتَلَ لِتَكُونَ كَلِمَةُ اللهِ هِيَ الْعُلْيا فَهُوَ فِي سَبِيلِ الله»

(He who fights so that Allah's Word is superior, then he fights in Allah's cause.) In addition, it is reported in the Two Sahihs:

«أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ حَتَّى يَقُولُوا لَا إِلهَ إلَّا اللهُ، فَإِذَا قَالُوهَا عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُم وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى الله»

(I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people until they proclaim, `None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. Whoever said it, then he will save his life and property from me, except for cases of the law, and their account will be with Allah.)

Allah's statement:

[فَإِنِ انتَهَواْ فَلاَ عُدْوَنَ إِلاَّ عَلَى الظَّـلِمِينَ]

(But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against the wrongdoers.) indicates that, `If they stop their Shirk and fighting the believers, then cease warfare against them. Whoever fights them afterwards will be committing an injustice. Verily aggression can only be started against the unjust.' This is the meaning of Mujahid's statement that only combatants should be fought. Or, the meaning of the Ayah indicates that, `If they abandon their injustice, which is Shirk in this case, then do not start aggression against them afterwards.' The aggression here means retaliating and fighting them, just as Allah said:

[فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُواْ عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ]

(Then whoever transgresses against you, you transgress likewise against him.) (2:194)

Similarly, Allah said:

[وَجَزَآءُ سَيِّئَةٍ سَيِّئَةٌ مِّثْلُهَا]

(The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.) (42:40), and:

[وَإِنْ عَاقَبْتُمْ فَعَاقِبُواْ بِمِثْلِ مَا عُوقِبْتُمْ بِهِ]

(And if you punish them, then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. ) (16:126)

`Ikrimah and Qatadah stated, "The unjust person is he who refuses to proclaim, `There is no God worthy of worship except Allah'.''

Under Allah's statement:

[وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ]

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah) Al-Bukhari recorded that Nafi` said that two men came to Ibn `Umar during the conflict of Ibn Az-Zubayr and said to him, "The people have fallen into shortcomings and you are the son of `Umar and the Prophet's Companion. Hence, what prevents you from going out'' He said, "What prevents me is that Allah has for bidden shedding the blood of my (Muslim) brother.'' They said, "Did not Allah say:

[وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ]

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah))'' He said, "We did fight until there was no more Fitnah and the religion became for Allah Alone. You want to fight until there is Fitnah and the religion becomes for other than Allah!''

`Uthman bin Salih added that a man came to Ibn `Umar and asked him, "O Abu `Abdur-Rahman! What made you perform Hajj one year and `Umrah another year and abandon Jihad in the cause of Allah, although you know how much He has encouraged performing it'' He said, "O my nephew! Islam is built on five (pillars): believing in Allah and His Messenger, the five daily prayers, fasting Ramadan, paying the Zakah and performing Hajj (pilgrimage) to the House.'' They said, "O Abu `Abdur-Rahman! Did you not hear what Allah said in His Book:

[وَإِن طَآئِفَتَانِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ اقْتَتَلُواْ فَأَصْلِحُواْ بَيْنَهُمَا فَإِن بَغَتْ إِحْدَاهُمَا عَلَى الأُخْرَى فَقَـتِلُواْ الَّتِى تَبْغِى حَتَّى تَفِىءَ إِلَى أَمْرِ اللَّهِ]

(And if two parties (or groups) among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both. But if one of them outrages against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which outrages till it complies with the command of Allah.) (49:9) and:

[وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ]

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief))

He said, "That we did during the time of Allah's Messenger when Islam was still weak and (the Muslim) man used to face trials in his religion, such as killing or torture. When Islam became stronger (and apparent), there was no more Fitnah.'' He asked, "What do you say about `Ali and `Uthman'' He said, "As for `Uthman, Allah has forgiven him. However, you hated the fact that Allah had forgiven him! As for `Ali, he is the cousin of Allah's Messenger and his son-in-law.'' He then pointed with his hand, saying, "This is where his house is located (meaning, `so close to the Prophet's house just as `Ali was so close to the Prophet himself').''

[الشَّهْرُ الْحَرَامُ بِالشَّهْرِ الْحَرَامِ وَالْحُرُمَـتُ قِصَاصٌ فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُواْ عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللَّهَ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ الْمُتَّقِينَ]

(194. The sacred month is for the sacred month, and for the prohibited things, there is the Law of equality (Qisas). Then whoever transgresses against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allah, and know that Allah is with Al-Muttaqin.)
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

IT IS A JOY WORKING WITH A PROFESSIONAL.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Im willing to trust the the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia or who ever runs the “King Fahd Complex" for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques on the translation and meaning of the Quran in this instance.

I'm not.


Would you like a sticker?

All Im asking is do you agree or not?
And if not why?

Fine. If it will keep you and Ropey from whining any more, I'll overlook your logical fallacy. The Saudi footnote is characteristically misleading because "jihad" encompasses far more than physical conflict. That's the first problem.

Okay, I've refused to bash either Muslims or Islam as that was not my intent for this thread. The thread addresses my concern for Islam's intent to put western civilization under the authority of Allah and my objections to that.

So far nobody has come up with anything persuasive to reassure anybody that this is not the case.

But, as an aside, in the matter of jihad, Sunniman has insisted that the Qu'ran does not contain the nuances, metaphors, imagery, allegory etc. as is found the the Hebrew and Christian holy books, that it can be read literally with no translation or interpretation necessary.

So how does that square with there being multiple meanings for jihad? And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

 

[Kalam]

So how does that square with there being multiple meanings for jihad? And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

The word doesn't have multiple meanings; it literally denotes striving and refers in religious contexts to any effort made for the sake of Allah (SWT). My point was that this term includes a far broader range of actions than the posted interpretation implies.

And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

By examining the scriptural and historical context of the passage in question. Did you have any in mind?

 

[Ropey]

So how does that square with there being multiple meanings for jihad? And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

The word doesn't have multiple meanings; it literally denotes striving and refers in religious contexts to any effort made for the sake of Allah (SWT). My point was that this term includes a far broader range of actions than the posted interpretation implies.

And how does one discern which meaning applies in any given passage?

By examining the scriptural and historical context of the passage in question. Did you have any in mind?

Where is the interpretation Kalam? There's circular logic at work here. It gets nothing done. That's why there needs to be interpretations and why we need to be able to discuss them singly, and not attach other significances until we move on to other significances.

I agree Foxfyre, to simply say it is more complicated than that considers we are far too simple to understand that which they can even teach the illiterate.