I Wtk Your Thoughts
An op-ed I read recently.
Just wondering how my more liberal friends would respond to it ? For my own part, I do believe that history provides enough evidence of violence as being a key component of Islamic belief, tradition, and practice.
Though that opinion may not be politically correct, I still have a real hard time ignoring the history and the lessons provided there.
While I can intellectually understand how it came into being...., Probably much more of a survivalistic creation, in response to the Mongols than anything else. That does little to make me sympathetic to the religion's proffered agenda since it's inception.
Most historians believe that Islam began in Mecca and Medina at the start of the 7th century. Seemingly not satisfied with regaining lands and freedom from the Mongol invaders Jihadists turned their attention towards the other major religion of the period, Christianity. A century later, the Islamic empire extended from Iberia in the west to the Indus river in the east.
In today's world the religion of Islam has perhaps evolved (or devolved depending upon your views) into a religious organization with extreme fringe elements of which the main body tends to distance itself from, but at the same time steadfastly refuses to condemn, and/or do anything about. Leaving the common non-Muslim man to wonder on the more suspicious quotes of the Quran, and how those quotes are considered by the main body of followers ?
Things such as:
Quran (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.
Quran (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves" against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim should appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel that way..
Quran (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway. (The next verse refers only to those who have a personal agreement with Muhammad as individuals - see Ibn Kathir (vol 4, p 49)
Quran (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.
Quran (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts"
Quran (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)
Taken collectively, are these verses interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose ? Say, like...., The complete and utter destruction of Christianity and the Western civilizations that adhere to it ?
I don't consider myself to be a prejudiced person, and I admit that I have no first hand knowledge of the Islamic belief system other than things I've read over the years.
Anyway, here's the op-ed that got me going this morning, for anyone that cares to read it.....
Interested in hearing people's thoughts. Not necessarily interested in arguing over them. I prefer respectful discourse of an intellectual nature.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263785/islamic-violence-forget-koran-look-history-raymond-ibrahim
Just wondering how my more liberal friends would respond to it ? For my own part, I do believe that history provides enough evidence of violence as being a key component of Islamic belief, tradition, and practice.
Though that opinion may not be politically correct, I still have a real hard time ignoring the history and the lessons provided there.
While I can intellectually understand how it came into being...., Probably much more of a survivalistic creation, in response to the Mongols than anything else. That does little to make me sympathetic to the religion's proffered agenda since it's inception.
Most historians believe that Islam began in Mecca and Medina at the start of the 7th century. Seemingly not satisfied with regaining lands and freedom from the Mongol invaders Jihadists turned their attention towards the other major religion of the period, Christianity. A century later, the Islamic empire extended from Iberia in the west to the Indus river in the east.
In today's world the religion of Islam has perhaps evolved (or devolved depending upon your views) into a religious organization with extreme fringe elements of which the main body tends to distance itself from, but at the same time steadfastly refuses to condemn, and/or do anything about. Leaving the common non-Muslim man to wonder on the more suspicious quotes of the Quran, and how those quotes are considered by the main body of followers ?
Things such as:
Quran (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.
Quran (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves" against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim should appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel that way..
Quran (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway. (The next verse refers only to those who have a personal agreement with Muhammad as individuals - see Ibn Kathir (vol 4, p 49)
Quran (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.
Quran (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts"
Quran (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)
Taken collectively, are these verses interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose ? Say, like...., The complete and utter destruction of Christianity and the Western civilizations that adhere to it ?
I don't consider myself to be a prejudiced person, and I admit that I have no first hand knowledge of the Islamic belief system other than things I've read over the years.
Anyway, here's the op-ed that got me going this morning, for anyone that cares to read it.....
Interested in hearing people's thoughts. Not necessarily interested in arguing over them. I prefer respectful discourse of an intellectual nature.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263785/islamic-violence-forget-koran-look-history-raymond-ibrahim
