Australian Politics Forum

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92359
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #105 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 10:37am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 7:44am:

Are you trying to point out that the Koran leaves it to Allah's intervention to bring peace rather than expecting Muslims to take the initiative?

It's a bit like you expecting me to make your point for you. But then you are unhappy with the outcome. I think there's something in that for all of us.

No, I'm asking for your own analysis. I'm not trying to lead you anywhere.

Remember, FD, sometimes a question is just a question.

Try answering one. You might enjoy it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92359
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #106 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 11:06am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 7:44am:

It's a bit like you expecting me to make your point for you.

There's no point. There's no judgment. I would have thought that, given the amount of time you spend on Islam, you would be interested in its texts.

If you can't post a neutral reading of a religious text, I think you're in the wrong business, FD.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47453 At my desk.	Re: chapter 9 Reply #107 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 12:47pm Quote: There's no point. Ah
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

Mattyfisk Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 92359 Gender:	Re: chapter 9 Reply #108 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:01pm freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 12:47pm: Quote: There's no point. Ah Is that your final answer?
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #109 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:01pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2017 at 8:29pm:

That's it? Islam "does not forbid" Muslims from refraining from being douchebags? That's the 'context' that changes the meaning of chapter 9?

No thats not it FD, there are 4 Quranic quotes there, plus the two you neglected to mention in chapter 9. How could you not notice that? Please don't ask silly questions when the answer is right there in front of you. Why do you play these silly games?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92359
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #110 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:07pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:01pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2017 at 8:29pm:

That's it? Islam "does not forbid" Muslims from refraining from being douchebags? That's the 'context' that changes the meaning of chapter 9?

No thats not it FD, there are 4 Quranic quotes there, plus the two you neglected to mention in chapter 9. How could you not notice that? Please don't ask silly questions when the answer is right there in front of you. Why do you play these silly games?

Because he wants to discuss chapter 9 without actually discussing chapter 9.

Sometimes a question is just a question, yes?

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #111 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:24pm

This is just one of the quotes FD inconceivably missed from post 71:

Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory.
22:39

Bolded the key part - in case its not obvious enough.

Is this not clearly specifying who (and only who) fighting against is given permission to? Or is FD just going to shift the goalposts again and pretend this is merely creating a victim complex that somehow excuses unrestrained slaughter?

oh look, Allah even specifys that when fighting is permitted, it must end when the oppression is over:

Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. 1:193

and, as mentioned, when the enemy inclines towards peace, you must also:

And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing. 8.61

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 26^th, 2017 at 1:31pm by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47453
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #112 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:19pm

Quote:

How could you not notice that?

I already responded to one of the others. The first one you came up with you managed to read into it something that was clearly not there.

Quote:

Is this not clearly specifying who (and only who) fighting against is given permission to?

No.

Quote:

Or is FD just going to shift the goalposts again and pretend this is merely creating a victim complex that somehow excuses unrestrained slaughter?

Treating guilt and innocence collectively makes conflict inevitable.

Gandalf can you reconcile any of this apologetics with Muhammad's behaviour?

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Mattyfisk Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 92359 Gender:	Re: chapter 9 Reply #113 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:36pm Oh, something tells me FD doesn't want to discuss any of that, G. Something tells me he doesn't want to discuss this subject at all.
Back to top	IP Logged

Mattyfisk Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 92359 Gender:	Re: chapter 9 Reply #114 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:37pm freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:19pm: Quote: How could you not notice that? I already responded to one of the others. Ah.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #115 - Jun 26^th, 2017 at 11:24pm

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:19pm:

No.

Yes it is, and moreover its a complete contradiction to your 'unrestrained slaughter of all non-muslims" claptrap - whether you like to admit it or not.

It is also just one of several quotes I have pointed out that clearly sets out the 'just war' (self defense) doctrine, which you avoid like the plague:

if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.

And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20970
A cat with a view

Re: chapter 9
Reply #116 - Jun 27^th, 2017 at 12:54am

Quote:

if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.

And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing

"See! ISLAM, calls for peace. And for an end to all hostilities!"

No.

Why so ?

LISTEN UP !

FACT;
There is no concession given from Allah, which ever allows devout [mujahideen] moslems to live at peace with disbelievers - EVER !
[in fact, throughout ISLAMIC religious texts, the exact opposite is stated and re-stated.]

"Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).
And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"
Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan."
Koran 4.74-76

Quote:

And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing

The form of words which are used here, in the moslems 'acceding' to this 'peace', are pure 'weasel words' [i.e. pure sophistry].

That form of words, which are being used, can have two distinct interpretations, of their specific meaning.

In ISLAM's lexicon;

The word 'oppressors' = = identifies those who 'hold out', those who continue to resist and to reject ISLAM, and to reject ISLAM's strictures, upon them. They are DISBELIEVERS.

In the phrase, 'incline to peace' = = the word 'peace', here, is NOT referring to a cessation of hostilities [i.e. against disbelievers!]. In the phrase, 'incline to peace', this is referring to an 'ideal' circumstance. Where an enemy who is joined in conflict, would sue the moslems for 'peace' - aka, accept ISLAM, and worship Allah.

Those who are converts [particularly those who may convert under 'duress' ]....
"As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them".....

....seek to establish the bona-fides of those who may convert under 'duress'.

"If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for Allah doth love the righteous.
How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked.
The Signs of Allah have they sold for a miserable price, and (many) have they hindered from His way: evil indeed are the deeds they have done."
Koran 9.006-009

Are they really going to follow ISLAM's strictures ?.......

"In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds.
But (even so), if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity,- they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand. "
Koran 9.010, 011

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20970
A cat with a view

Re: chapter 9
Reply #117 - Jun 27^th, 2017 at 9:13am

WHAT NAIVE NON-MOSLEMS NEED TO BE AWARE OF.......

Whenever the moslem speaks [to the non-moslem] using English words, the moslem will purposely, often attribute, to many common English words, a new and an oblique and a different meaning - within the context of a particular conversation. !!!!
[moslems speak using these linguistic tricks [this 'SLIGHT OF HAND'], so as to avoid the 'necessity' of speaking in a frank and candid manner]

So that whenever a moslem, and a non-moslem are in conversation, and are discussing a matter,

   they will often [unbeknownst to the non-moslem] be speaking at cross-purposes, while apparently, speaking in total agreement. !!!!

e.g.
After some bombing atrocity, when the moslem publicly is heard to condemn the killing of 'innocent people', the broader non-moslem community naturally assumes that the spokseman for the moslem community, is referring to those victims of such atrocities.

But those non-moslems would be mistaken!

ANOTHER EXAMPLE;
The English word peace, is defined as an absence of war, or conflict.

Dictionary;
Peace = =
1 freedom from disturbance; tranquillity.
2 freedom from or the cessation of war.

But within ISLAM's 'English language' lexicon,       the word 'peace', is attributed with a new meaning, which is;       'submission to Allah'.

And then, in our ears, we hear the moslem words,       that the moslem community wishes to see 'peace' spread all over the world. !!!!

ANOTHER EXAMPLE;

Dictionary;
oppress = = keep in subjection and hardship.

But within ISLAM's 'English language' lexicon, the word 'oppressor', refers to 'a person who refuses to accept ISLAM, and refuses to have ISLAMIC strictures imposed upon him'. !!!!

And then, in our ears, we hear the moslem words, that the moslem community wishes to see the overthrow of all 'oppressors'. !!!!

.

This is the 'holy' and the 'lawful' mindset, which the religion of ISLAM inculcates into the psyche of every moslem....

--------- >

"....those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them."

Quote:

.....In the book “Reliance of the Traveler" (This 1200+ page voluminous book on Sharia contains fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence), one of the more respected, classical works in Islamic theology, compiled by "the great 13th century Hadith scholar and jurisprudent", Iman Nawawi, and others. Defines jihad and its application in page 599 as follows:

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

Bassam Tibi wirtes in "War and Peace in Islam":

At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity.

Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world.

"We have sent you forth to all mankind" (Q. 34:28).

If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da’wa) can be pursued peacefully.

If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them.

In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya.

World peace, the final stage of the da’wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam.....

Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur’anic command to spread Islam as a way to peace.

The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims.

Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of "opening" the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad.

Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur’an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists.

Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da’wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it.

In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them.

Only when Muslim power is weak is ‘temporary truce’ (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of ‘temporary’).

.....These definitions from Islamic scholars are more than enough to prove that jihad is about bloody war against non-Muslims, forcing them to embrace Islam.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Peaseforever60415.htm this is part of page 1 of 4

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47453
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #118 - Jun 27^th, 2017 at 12:56pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 11:24pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 8:19pm:

No.

Yes it is,

No it isn't. It does not even hint that this is the only circumstance permissible. Again, you are projecting something onto it that is not actually there. If a particular verse gave you permission to eat an apple, would you conclude you are forbidden from eating oranges?

Quote:

and moreover its a complete contradiction to your 'unrestrained slaughter of all non-muslims" claptrap - whether you like to admit it or not.

You are absolutely correct Gandalf. But does it contradict anything I actually said? So far you are merely combining your misunderstanding of both what I say and what the verses you quote say.

Quote:

It is also just one of several quotes I have pointed out that clearly sets out the 'just war' (self defense) doctrine, which you avoid like the plague:

I am happy to discuss any of them Gandalf. None of them say what you claim, and you jump rapidly from one to the other because of this. Reading something into it that is clearly not there in ten verses does not make you any more correct than when you do it with one verse.

For example, in chapter 9, mocking Islam is listed as one of the reasons to slaughter the infidel. If this "just war" fantasy of yours had any legitimacy, why would that be in the Koran?

How do you reconcile your "just war" fantasy with Muhammad's behaviour?

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #119 - Jun 27^th, 2017 at 1:36pm

freediver wrote on Jun 27^th, 2017 at 12:56pm:

So far you are merely combining your misunderstanding of both what I say and what the verses you quote say.

OK FD, here's what you say...

Quote:

It looks like wholesale slaughter, and the exception is when there is an oath oath of peace the Muslims still choose to recognise.

Can you educate me as to how these verses don't contradict this statement of yours?

Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. (8:61)

And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing (1:193)

Speaking frankly FD, I think you are being completely unreasonable in flatly denying muslims any scriptural leeway to interpret the Quran as commanding war in self defense only. The verses I have pointed out to you I think are very clear. But tell me this FD, in my (and vast numbers of muslims around the world) interpretation of the Quran as permitting war only in self defense, are you really going to persist with this line that to do so I must necessarily be cherry-picking and being dishonest? I have patiently given you what I think is a reasonable case which not only cites the verses that clearly outline restrictions, I have also dealt with the "incriminating" verses and explaining they have a context both in time and place as well as the verses ordering self defense (ie they are linke, not isolated and therefore contradictory).

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged