Three things about Islam

[Quantum Windbag]

I was expecting some sort of a bibliography at the end. No matter; I'm sure that seeing something on Youtube is proof enough for most of the credulous twits who watch videos like this. You've discovered the master plan.

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

 

[Kalam]

I was expecting some sort of a bibliography at the end. No matter; I'm sure that seeing something on Youtube is proof enough for most of the credulous twits who watch videos like this. You've discovered the master plan.

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I was expecting some sort of a bibliography at the end. No matter; I'm sure that seeing something on Youtube is proof enough for most of the credulous twits who watch videos like this. You've discovered the master plan.

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

Then try this, explain why everyone who "misunderstands Islam" in your opinion, always misunderstands it in exactly the same way.

 

[manifold]

Follow-up...


The next fact from the video to be proven false will be the first.


true story

 

[Kalam]

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

Then try this, explain why everyone who "misunderstands Islam" in your opinion, always misunderstands it in exactly the same way.

Because all of the people who "misunderstand" it in that way are ignorant kuffar who attempt to pass off their shallow understanding of Islam as indicative of mainstream thought within the religion.

 

[Kalam]

Follow-up...


The next fact from the video to be proven false will be the first.


true story

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

Then try this, explain why everyone who "misunderstands Islam" in your opinion, always misunderstands it in exactly the same way.

Because all of the people who "misunderstand" it in that way are ignorant kuffar who attempt to pass off their shallow understanding of Islam as indicative of mainstream thought within the religion.

Yeah ignorant kuffar like this guy. Ibn Kathir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The video consists entirely of half-truths and intentionally misleading hype.

I should begin by pointing out that any Muslim who becomes involved in an argument of this nature this finds himself caught in a catch-22: If Muslims are commanded to "lie to the infidel", anything I say can be dismissed flatly as "Muslim lies." If you're going to participate in this discussion under the assumption that I'm a liar, it will go nowhere. If not, perhaps we can learn a few things from each other.

Yet you are also commanded to be honest with seekers. Taqiyya is permissible only under specific conditions, and not in an honest discussion with a seeker after the truth.

The first problem with the video is how it presents the Qur'an. The Qur'an wasn't something that a person decided to write one day; It is, to us, the word of Allah ta'ala delivered to humanity through His Messenger, Muhammad (SAWS). It was revealed piecemeal over a period of more than 22 years and consists largely of commandments that are specific to a particular time and situation. As such, a few revelations became inapplicable as circumstances changed.

The "contradictions" the video mentions refer to an Islamic concept know as nasikh and mansukh, the abrogator and the abrogated. It is based on the following ayah:

Whatever message We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one like it. Knowest thou not that Allah is Possessor of power over all things? - 2:106​

There are multiple problems with claiming that all peaceful passages in the Qur'an have been abrogated. First of all, anybody making this claim takes for granted that they possess sufficient knowledge of Islam to make judgments of that importance. As non-Muslims, the makers of this video obviously do not. Secondly, there is no basis for claiming that any particular commandment has been abrogated unless there is a specific statement attributable to Muhammad (SAWS) himself that says so. Finally, it is not a consensus or even a prevalent opinion among Muslims or scholars that every call for peace in the Qur'an has been abrogated. One of the most authoritative rulings on the subject can be found in As-Suyuti's Itqan fi 'ulum al-Qur'an. The chapter devoted to abrogation identifies 21 ayat that may be nasikh or mansukh; the rest are not. As-Suyuti was a 15th-century Egyptian expert in Islamic jurisprudence. The issue was taken up again by 18th-century South Asian scholar Shah Waliullah, who concluded that only five of As-Suyuti's verses were actually subject to abrogation. They are as follows:

2: 180, abrogated by 4: 11, 12
2:240, abrogated by 2: 234.
8:65, abrogated by 8: 62.
30:50, abrogated by 33: 52.
58: 12, abrogated by 58: 13.

In none of these instances do we find a peaceful injunction being replaced by a violent one.

If anyone can prove that each peaceful verse was abrogated by a more violent passage and back up each assertion with a specific explanation from Muhammad (SAWS), the video's claim will be correct. Otherwise, it is not.

The whole concept of abrogation makes me wonder who the Qur'an can be ta'ala. Did Muhammad get the message wrong when he spoke it? Why did Allah change the message after he gave it the first time? Was he wrong, or unable to see the consequences of his words? Sure he can change his mind if he wants, but why would he need to?

Another question, if something is abrogated, and the Qur'an is arranged without any regard to when anything was said, how do we know what is abrogated by what? Scholars can go around picking the verses they want, and dismissing others, without any regard to anything but the point they want to prove.

When someone tries to point out that it is even possible that all of the Suras Muhammad revealed are not collected various arguments are presented, including the ridiculous assertion that there were 72 scribes that followed him day and night to record anything he said after one of his visions. (I have heard that one more than once.)

The next incorrect claim is that Shari'ah is totalitarian. Shari'ah, when properly implemented, is a just and accountable form of governance. Note that as Sayyid Qutb pointed out, no government in today's so-called Islamic world practices Shari'ah in it's pure and uncorrupted form.

The Rashidun caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and 'Ali -- RA) made it clear that everyone was free to petition them for a redress of grievances and that they were the subjects of their people. Shari'i governance can only be understood by examining their methods of political administration, as those are the examples after which we Muslims should be modeling our own governments.

Yet Shari'ah also holds the word, and the life, of a Mulsim as more valuable than a non Muslim. Non Muslims are, at best, second class citizens who do not hold the same rights and privileges as Muslims. Dhimmi requires complete surrender to Islamic rule and Shari'ah law for all people, the payment of jizya, and limited right to self determination. Anyone who transgressed any of the obligations of dhimmi were stripped of all their legal protections, and subject to slavery or death.

And that is only for the people of the boom, others are not even permitted that level of autonomy. Perhaps the problem here is that you misunderstand what the term totalitarian actually means.

Definition of TOTALITARIAN1 a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : authoritarian, dictatorial; especially : despotic
b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)


2 a : advocating or characteristic of totalitarianism
b : completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency c : exercising autocratic powers : tending toward monopoly

Totalitarian - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

It is easy to say that a regime is not totalitarian if you are in the the part that controls everyone.

Finally, there is the claim that "the Qur'an instructs Muslims to lie to infidels." I challenge anybody to post the specific verse or verses from the Qur'an that command me to "lie to infidels." Nobody has ever been able to, because they don't exist. The issue of prevarication is dealt with in the ahadith.

...Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything that the people speak dishonestly but in three instances: in battle, for bringing reconciliation between persons (as in a minor dispute between two people), and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in order to bring reconciliation between them.) - Sahih Muslim, no. 6303​

I can only "lie to infidels" if I'm actively engaged in an armed conflict with them and need to do so to protect my life. There is absolutely nothing about lying to spread Islam, and again, I challenge anyone to support that claim with specific evidence if they feel that they can do so.

Yet Muslims lie all the time to infidels, mostly because others feel free to lie to anyone who is not a Muslim. The video was completely accurate when it spoke of Muslim leaders that say one thing to the world in English, and another to their own people in Arabic. I guess not all Muslims agree that armed conflict is the only time it is permissible to lie. Or maybe they rationalize that they are in armed conflict with all non believers, which is essentially what the video said.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I was expecting some sort of a bibliography at the end. No matter; I'm sure that seeing something on Youtube is proof enough for most of the credulous twits who watch videos like this. You've discovered the master plan.

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

I am always willing to reasonably discuss any reasonable post. This post was not reasonable, unlike the next one I answered.

 

[Kalam]

Yet you are also commanded to be honest with seekers. Taqiyya is permissible only under specific conditions, and not in an honest discussion with a seeker after the truth.

What are you talking about?

The whole concept of abrogation makes me wonder who the Qur'an can be ta'ala. Did Muhammad get the message wrong when he spoke it? Why did Allah change the message after he gave it the first time? Was he wrong, or unable to see the consequences of his words? Sure he can change his mind if he wants, but why would he need to?

Advice and commandments was given for specific situations; circumstances changed and so did the commandments.

Another question, if something is abrogated, and the Qur'an is arranged without any regard to when anything was said, how do we know what is abrogated by what? Scholars can go around picking the verses they want, and dismissing others, without any regard to anything but the point they want to prove.

I already explained that. An authentic report originating from Muhammad (SAWS), or perhaps certain companions, must be used to prove that an ayah is mansukh.

When someone tries to point out that it is even possible that all of the Suras Muhammad revealed are not collected various arguments are presented, including the ridiculous assertion that there were 72 scribes that followed him day and night to record anything he said after one of his visions. (I have heard that one more than once.)

All of the ayat were recited publicly upon revelation. Part of the reason that the Qur'an was revealed gradually was so that it could more easily be memorized by the followers of Muhammad (SAWS). It would be difficult to omit something from the Qur'an without at least one of the hundreds of Muslims who witnessed and memorized its revelation mentioning something.

Yet Shari'ah also holds the word, and the life, of a Mulsim as more valuable than a non Muslim. Non Muslims are, at best, second class citizens who do not hold the same rights and privileges as Muslims. Dhimmi requires complete surrender to Islamic rule and Shari'ah law for all people, the payment of jizya, and limited right to self determination. Anyone who transgressed any of the obligations of dhimmi were stripped of all their legal protections, and subject to slavery or death.

A hadith attributed to Muhammad (SAWS) and a saying of 'Ali confirm that the blood of a person of the dhimma is equal to that of a Muslim in matters of qisas. In spite of certain reports that Muslims cannot receive a death sentence for killing a dhimmi, the position of the Hanafi school of jurisprudence is generally in line with the aforementioned position of Ali's and Muhammad's (SAWS); the Hanafis cite a hadith in which Muhammad (SAWS) ordered the execution of a Muslim who had killed a dhimmi in support of this belief. People of the dhimma have a right to the same protection as anyone else; they're entitled to communal autonomy and they are allowed to petition the government if they feel that they're being treated unjustly.

And that is only for the people of the boom, others are not even permitted that level of autonomy. Perhaps the problem here is that you misunderstand what the term totalitarian actually means.

"The boom"?

Yet Muslims lie all the time to infidels, mostly because others feel free to lie to anyone who is not a Muslim. The video was completely accurate when it spoke of Muslim leaders that say one thing to the world in English, and another to their own people in Arabic. I guess not all Muslims agree that armed conflict is the only time it is permissible to lie. Or maybe they rationalize that they are in armed conflict with all non believers, which is essentially what the video said.

You assume that they're driven to lie by their religiosity. If they were sincerely religious, they'd establish Shari'ah.

 

[Kalam]

Feel free to refute any portion, or all, of the claims made in the video. We both know how hard the latter will actually be, but feel free to give it a try. I will enjoy watching you telling the world that your religion is a lie.

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

I am always willing to reasonably discuss any reasonable post. This post was not reasonable, unlike the next one I answered.

Not nearly as reasonable as a video which spouts propaganda and provides no documentation of its claims, no.

 

[Hister]

Mohammad made the whole koran up, copied a lot from the bible.

 

[gautama]

Bottom line:

ISLAM and its stooges are.........

BBBBBBBBBBBBUUUUUUUSSSSSSTTTTTEEEEDDDDDD!!!!!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What are you talking about?

Aren't you one of the people that claim you have to be honest in order to spread Islam? Was that position abrogated also?

Advice and commandments was given for specific situations; circumstances changed and so did the commandments.

Funny, I can give advice like is found in the Qur'an that is applicable to any situation. Are you saying Allah is not smart enough to do the same?

I already explained that. An authentic report originating from Muhammad (SAWS), or perhaps certain companions, must be used to prove that an ayah is mansukh.

All of the ayat were recited publicly upon revelation. Part of the reason that the Qur'an was revealed gradually was so that it could more easily be memorized by the followers of Muhammad (SAWS). It would be difficult to omit something from the Qur'an without at least one of the hundreds of Muslims who witnessed and memorized its revelation mentioning something.

And wars were fought over those memories, and the loosing side was rejected out of hand. Lucky for you Allah's will covers that to.

"The boom"?

People of the book.

A hadith attributed to Muhammad (SAWS) and a saying of 'Ali confirm that the blood of a person of the dhimma is equal to that of a Muslim in matters of qisas. In spite of certain reports that Muslims cannot receive a death sentence for killing a dhimmi, the position of the Hanafi school of jurisprudence is generally in line with the aforementioned position of Ali's and Muhammad's (SAWS); the Hanafis cite a hadith in which Muhammad (SAWS) ordered the execution of a Muslim who had killed a dhimmi in support of this belief. People of the dhimma have a right to the same protection as anyone else; they're entitled to communal autonomy and they are allowed to petition the government if they feel that they're being treated unjustly.

Yet, if the dhimmi was no longer dhimmi because a Muslim testified he broke the law, tough shit.

You assume that they're driven to lie by their religiosity. If they were sincerely religious, they'd establish Shari'ah.

No, I assume that they are driven to lie because they are human, and they use their religion to justify it. Unfortunately for Christians, they cannot use their religion to lie, even though they do it just as often. Muslims, when caught out, get to call Taqiyya, and get a free pass from everyone, including you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not too quick on the trigger today, are you, Tex?

I am always willing to reasonably discuss any reasonable post. This post was not reasonable, unlike the next one I answered.

Not nearly as reasonable as a video which spouts propaganda and provides no documentation of its claims, no.

Which is why it claimed to be an educated opinion. All you did by resorting to your attack was prove it was right.

 

[Kalam]

Aren't you one of the people that claim you have to be honest in order to spread Islam? Was that position abrogated also?

Honesty is required in all but the three aforementioned scenarios. Unsurprisingly, you aren't making any sense.

Quantum Funny, I can give advice like is found in the Qur'an that is applicable to any situation. Are you saying Allah is not smart enough to do the same?

Congratulations. The Qur'an contains both general and specific advice.

And wars were fought over those memories, and the loosing side was rejected out of hand. Lucky for you Allah's will covers that to.

Please produce hard evidence of "missing" passages from the Qur'an. Thank you.

People of the book.

What about them?

Yet, if the dhimmi was no longer dhimmi because a Muslim testified he broke the law, tough shit.

Can you quote something from scripture that proves that a person's dhimmi status can be revoked in that way?

No, I assume that they are driven to lie because they are human, and they use their religion to justify it. Unfortunately for Christians, they cannot use their religion to lie, even though they do it just as often. Muslims, when caught out, get to call Taqiyya, and get a free pass from everyone, including you.

Who do I give a "free pass"?

 

[Ava]

Location, location, location?? *eyeroll*

 

[Againsheila]

Sorry, as long as the Christian throws it out there as reality, I will refute it. And by the way I am a decent human being, live a decent life, a humanitarian way of life, and feel the 1st Amendment is there for whoever wants to use it. Where you received anything to refute my character is beyond me. I think you are showing a bias, for whatever reason known only to you.

Gee, why would I be biased towards someone who calls my faith a fairy tale? Ever hear of live and let live? Enjoy eternity in a lake of fire. See that wasn't cool was it?

I heard of live & let live, which clearly states your right to say it ends where my right to refute begins. And forget the lake of fire, that mumbo jumbo only refers to christians like youself, and not non believers like me. I am in no way affected by your gods or demons. But you are, so act like a christian and go by the black book you are suppose to believe in.

Now getting back to the topic, I see some simularities between the Koran & black book. For instance, the christian is being told to abandon the Old Testament, and carry on from the new testament. The Koran says to use the later writings, not the first. And the black book contains some passages that the Koran agrees with, like,...

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Sound familar huh?

Why do you call the Koran the Koran and the Bible, the black book? My Bible is white....just so you know. I think your hatred for Christianity is showing and you can't even see it, you are so blind.

 

[hipeter924]

Well most socialists hate Christianity as do most self hating westerners. Plus if you really believe in total 'freedom of religion' you have to allow Muslims their Islamic state, and Christians their Christian state, the people who preach that total religious freedom is not practicing their religion in full need a bullet to the head.

If you believe in a totally secular world you want to eliminate religion through force and violence aka Stalinism/Maoism. I go for light secularism instead. Meaning I don't like a world run by religion (if everyone would go off it by choice it would be great, even though it won't happen) but I don't believe in a world where people aren't allowed to fully express their views even if I don't agree with them and think them insane.

 

[manifold]

Take a look at this and it should be clear why I posted this in the politics forum rather than the religion forum.


[youtube]Ib9rofXQl6w[/youtube]

I still say this is more political than religious.

true story