The qur'an and Islamic terrorism

[beenie]

I think JIHAD is largely misunderstood as much by THE MUSLIMS THEMSELVES as the by non-Muslims. It is often the Muslims misunderstanding what jihad stands for that often cause confusion among the non-Muslim communities. And the translation of jihad as "holy WAR" don't help Muslims' situations. Calling anything that has a meaning of war, will always amount to immediate interpretation of violent armed conflicts first, and internal struggle last.

Perhaps it is because a lot of these imams, clerics or scholars are not as well as educated as one usually associated with learned scholars. They have their own interpretations of what jihad means.

It is largely the faults of Muslims that non-Muslims misunderstand jihad, because they are the ones who used jihad.

i completely agree, and have said so several times. you're preaching to the choir here (pun intended)

 

[YmirGF]

Muhammad's Sword
by Uri Avnery

(Saturday September 23 2006)

Relying on the words of Uri Avnery isn't likely the wisest ploy, TashaN. The man is no scholar. The briefest glance over his words is certainly amusing. It's not so much what he says that is outright wrong, but rather, it is highly revealing what he intentionally leaves out or simply glosses over. It might be best to find a more credible source.
​

 

[TashaN]

Relying on the words of Uri Avnery isn't likely the wisest ploy, TashaN. The man is no scholar. The briefest glance over his words is certainly amusing. It's not so much what he says that is outright wrong, but rather, it is highly revealing what he intentionally leaves out or simply glosses over. It might be best to find a more credible source.
​

Yeah right. He is so wrong, how dare he speak in a positive way about Islam. He must be mistaken. Forgive me for my ignorance. I forget that you are a much credible source than him on the subject.

But hey, don't be upset, i'll make sure to quote you instead of him next time.

 

[Shredmeister]

Yeah right. He is so wrong, how dare he speak in a positive way about Islam. He must be mistaken. Forgive me for my ignorance. I forget that you are a much credible source than him on the subject.

But hey, don't be upset, i'll make sure to quote you instead of him next time.

Tasha, one thing i have learned since my new life experience is that it is wise to get a viewpoint from both inside and outside ANY religion so that one may be more neutral when making a determination. Many muslims say NOTHING bad about their faith, as do many Christians and people of other denominations.

I liken it to a car salesman versus a mechanic: the car salesman has a lot of product knowledge which can be critical when buying a car, yet he/she will gloss over any negatives. If you talk to a mechanic, he will likely give you a list of things to watch out for if you buy what the salesman is trying to sell.

It would be wise to know both perspectives, yeah?

 

[Shredmeister]

Sure, it might seem that way. But its not saying we should kill non-believers in general, if thats what you mean.

I am of the mindset that NO ONE should be killed if they don't believe in God UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Why not just discuss the fact that you think they should believe?

Who the hell starts a war with people and kills them because they don't believe in a certain religion??? Sounds like SERIOUS control issues.

 

[Badran]

I am of the mindset that NO ONE should be killed if they don't believe in God UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Why not just discuss the fact that you think they should believe?

Who the hell starts a war with people and kills them because they don't believe in a certain religion??? Sounds like SERIOUS control issues.

Yes, obviously. I do agree. Anyone who does that is a terrorist and a criminal, and i was saying that this is not something our religion tells us to do, on the contrary. It instructs us to do the exact opposite.

 

[TashaN]

Tasha, one thing i have learned since my new life experience is that it is wise to get a viewpoint from both inside and outside ANY religion so that one may be more neutral when making a determination. Many muslims say NOTHING bad about their faith, as do many Christians and people of other denominations.

I liken it to a car salesman versus a mechanic: the car salesman has a lot of product knowledge which can be critical when buying a car, yet he/she will gloss over any negatives. If you talk to a mechanic, he will likely give you a list of things to watch out for if you buy what the salesman is trying to sell.

It would be wise to know both perspectives, yeah?

You didn't even bother to read the article, right? That's why you don't know what you are talking about.

I am of the mindset that NO ONE should be killed if they don't believe in God UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Why not just discuss the fact that you think they should believe?

Who the hell starts a war with people and kills them because they don't believe in a certain religion??? Sounds like SERIOUS control issues.

Who told you the Muslims did that? In their entire history they didn't attempt or even think to do such a thing.

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.(Quran 2:190)

 

[TashaN]

Yeah right.

You guys just got lost and wound up in catholic Spain by mistake.

You didn't do your homework before posting huh? :slap:

The conquest

The traditional story is that in the year 711, an oppressed Christian chief, Julian, went to Musa ibn Nusair, the governor of North Africa, with a plea for help against the tyrannical Visigoth ruler of Spain, Roderick.

Musa responded by sending the young general Tariq bin Ziyad with an army of 7000 troops. The name Gibraltar is derived from Jabal At-Tariq which is Arabic for 'Rock of Tariq' named after the place where the Muslim army landed.

The story of the appeal for help is not universally accepted. There is no doubt that Tariq invaded Spain, but the reason for it may have more to do with the Muslim drive to enlarge their territory.

The Muslim army defeated the Visigoth army easily, and Roderick was killed in battle.
After the first victory, the Muslims conquered most of Spain and Portugal with little difficulty, and in fact with little opposition. By 720 Spain was largely under Muslim (or Moorish, as it was called) control.

Reasons

One reason for the rapid Muslim success was the generous surrender terms that they offered the people, which contrasted with the harsh conditions imposed by the previous Visigoth rulers.

The ruling Islamic forces were made up of different nationalities, and many of the forces were converts with uncertain motivation, so the establishment of a coherent Muslim state was not easy.

BBC - Religion & Ethics - Muslim Spain (711-1492): Conquest

 

[A-ManESL]

The Quran doesnt advocate terrorism. Any serious study of the Quran will reveal that.

This is a verse from the Quran:

Those who believe and those who are Jews, Christians and Sabeans,
[in fact] anyone who believes in God and the Last Day, and acts
honorably will receive their earnings from their Lord: no fear will lie
upon them nor need they feel saddened.-2:62

This is Prophet Muhammad's(pbuh) letter to Christians:

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.
No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.
If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.
Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.
No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

The terrorists who have their own motives distort the meaning and the words of the Quran for their own ends. Such distortion is not unique to any philosophy. The verses condemning Jews and Christians are in the context of the Arab Jews/Christians and their behavior towards Muslims in the Prophets time. The word religion in the Quran refers to way of life, and the word Islam in the context of the Quran means simply surrender, peace or inner piety and not the whole Islamic faith including the traditions etc as we think today. These words have changed their meaning over the years which also plays a part in this distortion.

Regards

 

[Wotan]

From your uh . . . source

The story of the appeal for help is not universally accepted. There is no doubt that Tariq invaded Spain, but the reason for it may have more to do with the Muslim drive to enlarge their territory.

The Muslim army defeated the Visigoth army easily, and Roderick was killed in battle.
After the first victory, the Muslims conquered most of Spain and Portugal with little difficulty, and in fact with little opposition. By 720 Spain was largely under Muslim (or Moorish, as it was called) control.

Now maybe you have a different understanding of words like "invade" "conquest" and "control" but those of us to whom English is a mother tongue do not.

You guys invaded Spain held it several hundred years and only give up "controlling" it when forced by armies to do so.

And your religion was a motivating factor. As it is NOW. This whole world-wide caliphate and the 12th iman story is used to justify the present influx of muslim's into Western Europe. And you well know it. It is advocated on muslins webs site, muslim publications, and in mosques all over the muslim world 5 times a day. It is an invasion by numbers with the aim of turning Europe into a muslim colony.

This religion is an aggressive ideology driven by many factors and ONE of them is religious tyranny. And most of the honest advocates of this movement have the guts to say so.

They justify the "tax" on Christians and Jews on religious grounds, they hang homosexuals for existing, they cut off body parts of non-believers' and engage in - and that proudly - other savage practices that the civilized world universally condemns.

But your "GOD" thingy says its OK so its OK.

Yet somehow we are to overlook ALL of that and get all warm and fuzzy over the expanding influence Religion of Peace whose believers want nothing but the best society for all.

The sad and depressing fact is YOU BELIEVE IT!:thud:

 

[TashaN]

From your uh . . . source

The story of the appeal for help is not universally accepted. There is no doubt that Tariq invaded Spain, but the reason for it may have more to do with the Muslim drive to enlarge their territory.

The Muslim army defeated the Visigoth army easily, and Roderick was killed in battle.
After the first victory, the Muslims conquered most of Spain and Portugal with little difficulty, and in fact with little opposition. By 720 Spain was largely under Muslim (or Moorish, as it was called) control.

Now maybe you have a different understanding of words like "invade" "conquest" and "control" but those of us to whom English is a mother tongue do not.

You guys invaded Spain held it several hundred years and only give up "controlling" it when forced by armies to do so.

And your religion was a motivating factor. As it is NOW. This whole world-wide caliphate and the 12th iman story is used to justify the present influx of muslim's into Western Europe. And you well know it. It is advocated on muslins webs site, muslim publications, and in mosques all over the muslim world 5 times a day. It is an invasion by numbers with the aim of turning Europe into a muslim colony.

This religion is an aggressive ideology driven by many factors and ONE of them is religious tyranny. And most of the honest advocates of this movement have the guts to say so.

They justify the "tax" on Christians and Jews on religious grounds, they hang homosexuals for existing, they cut off body parts of non-believers' and engage in - and that proudly - other savage practices that the civilized world universally condemns.

But your "GOD" thingy says its OK so its OK.

Yet somehow we are to overlook ALL of that and get all warm and fuzzy over the expanding influence Religion of Peace whose believers want nothing but the best society for all.

The sad and depressing fact is YOU BELIEVE IT!:thud:

They asked for help, and the Muslims helped them. But at that time if you read history, you only ask for the help of a totally another country, not even an ally of yours when you prefer them to rule your country instead of the other ruler you want to escape from and get rid of.

It's about politics, not religion.

 

[Cypress]

personally i believe, the root cause of islamic terrorism is the life of muhammad itself. He attacked innocent people, destroyed their temples, enslaved their wives etc. Im not sure if this is related to quran, but surely related to islam and muhammad. If you have no interest to discuss it here, the choice is yours...

Muhammed was a religious as well as a political person.
He not just brought a new religion but also a new political order.
Now, politics is a strictly human thing, God/the Absolute (whatever you call it) has nothing to do with it.
As with all things set up by humans quality differs, there are times of blossom and times of decline & corruption.
When religion & politics are seperated, corruption in religion must not necessarily affect politics and corruption in politics must not necessarily affect religion.
But when religion & politics are intertwined, decline in the quality of one will sure affect the other.
This is also why it is better to seperate religion from politics, it is a protection for religion and for religious & spiritual values.

 

[YmirGF]

Yeah right. He is so wrong, how dare he speak in a positive way about Islam. He must be mistaken. Forgive me for my ignorance. I forget that you are a much credible source than him on the subject.

But hey, don't be upset, i'll make sure to quote you instead of him next time.

I'm am a rather long way from being upset, TashaN. I have learned not to take your writing all that seriously. Did you even read what I wrote?

I wrote:

It's not so much what he says that is outright wrong, but rather, it is highly revealing what he intentionally leaves out or simply glosses over.

 

[Wotan]

"I'm am a rather long way from being upset, TashaN. I have learned not to take your writing all that seriously."

It has been my observation that, as rule, theists take themselves FAR more seriously then their non believing audience does.

But then theists often see themselves as on a "divine mission" and so assign appropriate significance to their "message."

 

[YmirGF]

It's about politics, not religion.

You are being less than honest, TashaN. You know very well that there is no separation of religion and politics in Islam. There is simply no division like non-Muslims are used to thinking.

RE: Al-Andalus,

One can only wonder why the Reconquista went on for nearly 800 years if the inhabitants of the land were so incredibly happy with their Muslim overlords...

 

[TashaN]

You are being less than honest, TashaN. You know very well that there is no separation of religion and politics in Islam. There is simply no division like non-Muslims are used to thinking.

RE: Al-Andalus,

One can only wonder why the Reconquista went on for nearly 800 years if the inhabitants of the land were so incredibly happy with their Muslim overlords...

I was trying to make a point that their motivation wasn't "holy war" as some might think, but it was mainly a political gain for them.

And of course there is no separation between religion and politics not because religion will give them a motivation to invade others like Christianity "Crusaders" but because Islam will give the Muslims the code of ethics on how to act during wars.

A Christian contemporary in the 7th century, John of Nikiû, stated the following regarding the conquest of Alexandria by 'Amr:

“ On the twentieth of Maskaram, Theodore and all his troops and officers set out and proceeded to the island of Cyprus, and abandoned the city of Alexandria. And thereupon 'Amr the chief of the Moslem made his entry without effort into the city of Alexandria. And the inhabitants received him with respect; for they were in great tribulation and affliction. And Abba Benjamin, the patriarch of the Egyptians, returned to the city of Alexandria in the thirteenth year after his flight from the Romans, and he went to the Churches, and inspected all of them. And every one said: 'This expulsion (of the Romans) and victory of the Moslem is due to the wickedness of the emperor Heraclius and his persecution of the Orthodox through the patriarch Cyrus. This was the cause of the ruin of the Romans and the subjugation of Egypt by the Moslem. And 'Amr became stronger every day in every field of his activity. And he exacted the taxes which had been determined upon, but he took none of the property of the Churches, and he committed no act of spoliation or plunder, and he preserved them throughout all his days.[12] ”

The principles established by the early Caliphs were also honoured during the Crusades, as exemplified by Sultans such as Saladin and Al-Kamil. For example, after Al-Kamil defeated the Franks during the Crusades, Oliverus Scholasticus praised the Islamic laws of war, commenting on how Al-Kamil supplied the defeated Frankish army with food:[13]

“ Who could doubt that such goodness, friendship and charity come from God? Men whose parents, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, had died in agony at our hands, whose lands we took, whom we drove naked from their homes, revived us with their own food when we were dying of hunger and showered us with kindness even when we were in their power.[14] ”

The early Islamic treatises on international law from the 9th century onwards covered the application of Islamic ethics, Islamic economic jurisprudence and Islamic military jurisprudence to international law,[15] and were concerned with a number of modern international law topics, including the law of treaties; the treatment of diplomats, hostages, refugees and prisoners of war; the right of asylum; conduct on the battlefield; protection of women, children and non-combatant civilians; contracts across the lines of battle; the use of poisonous weapons; and devastation of enemy territory.[13]

Islamic military jurisprudence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Peace.

 

[A-ManESL]

You are being less than honest, TashaN. You know very well that there is no separation of religion and politics in Islam. There is simply no division like non-Muslims are used to thinking.

RE: Al-Andalus,

One can only wonder why the Reconquista went on for nearly 800 years if the inhabitants of the land were so incredibly happy with their Muslim overlords...

There is unity in all spheres of life in Islam, this is true. But, that does not mean that people have not twisted and used Quranic verses for their own ends. Those who have invaded and conquered for the purposes of furthering their own selfish ends in arrogance of being the "chosen people" are not following the way of life as shown by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Regards.

 

[nameless]

Those who have invaded and conquered for the purposes of furthering their own selfish ends in arrogance of being the "chosen people" are not following the way of life as shown by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Regards.

did not muhammad invaded and conquered mecca? did not muhammad destroyed idols used by pagans for their worship? cant it be concluded those were the justification seen by muslims to conquer and destroy others civilization and monuments?

nb: now i think im not going off topic as already life of muhammad is being discussed here.

 

[Autodidact]

Tasha: I really expect you to post your own arguments, not long essays by someone else. Think what a disadvantage I'm at, how much more you know about the subject than I, and how long you have studied it. Surely you can make an argument yourself, not just spout propaganda.

 

[Autodidact]

So one factor we have is all these warlike, anti-infidel koranic verses. Another factor is that Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was a warrior and a general who united disparate tribes under Islam and went to war against, and conquered, surrounding tribes.

Not only is Muhammad the founder of the religion, he is held up as the example of the best possible man, whom all Muslims should emulate. He conducted raids on merchant caravans, ransomed prisoners. These raids and victories were instrumental in persuading Arab tribespeople to convert to Islam. They also strengthened the Muslims' belief that Allah favored them--that, because of their devotion to Allah, He granted them victory in battle. Muhammad himself led troops into battle. When they lost, they saw this as evidence of Allah's disfavor due to insufficient piety.* In victory, men of the losing army were beheaded, and women and children taken as slaves.

Again, the qur'an actually describes some of these battles, the results and lessons learned from them.

Muhammad gained the Muslim holy city, Mecca, by conquering it in battle. After conquering other Arab lands, when some tribes did not wish to convert to Islam, they were required to defer to its sovereignty and pay a tax.

To Muslims, this is not just history. This is the glorious tale of the beginning of establishing the reign of Allah on earth, and the model of what a Muslim should do--emulate Muhammad, dedicate their life to fighting and conquering on behalf of Allah.

My view is that radical Muslims take this to heart, and strive to emulate Muhammad with the weapons they have available to them, to fight and possibly die in battle on behalf of Allah.

So I think the early history of Islam and life of Muhammad is another significant factor in the violent actions of radical Muslims.

*(note what a primitive, superstitious world view this is. It is fundamental to Islam.)