What is your opinion of Islam & violence?

[Contarini]

buit he has extensive quotes from the Koran, Hadith,

You wouldn’t need to say that if the book was using its sources well. When a book has to be advertised by the fact that it cites sources, it’s in serious trouble.

Citations without context are the most effective way of distorting history. Since you yourself seem to have problems with this guy’s general attitude to history, why recommend him? Just because he happens to cater to some of your prejudices, while offending others? Why not cite professional historians of Islam? There’s a very good reason–because these historians don’t serve your purpose.

and references the consistent interpretations of jihad, dhimintude, etc… Wahabbi interpretation is FAR closer to the consistent interpretation of Islam that the liberal muslims like to admit.

I’m sure that’s true. But how close? Obviously the Wahhabis aren’t traditional Muslims on many counts–their rejection of saint veneration, for instance, or their suspicion of Sufism. They’re the Islamic equivalent of Puritans.

Furthermore, is there one Wahhabi perspective? Does Bin Laden even speak for all Wahhabis?

It’s a hard truth, but “liberal” muslims are “bad muslims”

I’m going to repeat this as often as needed: a statement like this is grotesque and absurd coming from a non-Muslim. We have no basis on which to say who is a “good” and who is a “bad” Muslim.

Anyone who makes such a claim has abandoned rationality altogether in favor of a prejudiced agenda.

And yes, the same applies just as much to those who say things like “Osama bin Laden is not a good Muslim.”

From our perspective, Muslims are Muslims. We can say that some Muslims are morally better than others, or closer to Christian truth than others; and we can say that some Muslims hold views that are minority views traditionally, or even total innovations (though I don’t particularly trust people with no professional training in the field. and an axe to grind one way or the other, to make such determinations). But we can’t say whether or not their views are “true Islam.”

Edwin

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

You wouldn’t need to say that if the book was using its sources well. When a book has to be advertised by the fact that it cites sources, it’s in serious trouble

.

Lorraine Bottner’s Roman Catholicis uses almost NO citations from Catholic writers–so a book without citations is good. A cliche statment is not reasoning.

Citations without context are the most effective way of distorting history.

The book has LOTS of context

Since you yourself seem to have problems with this guy’s general attitude to history, why recommend him?

A few problems, yes. Mostly, because he starts digressing from his main points.

Why not cite professional historians of Islam? There’s a very good reason–because these historians don’t serve your purpose.

Bernard Lewis you mean–who’s also cited in int CatholicAnswers special report?

I’m sure that’s true. But how close? Obviously the Wahhabis aren’t traditional Muslims on many counts–their rejection of saint veneration, for instance, or their suspicion of Sufism. They’re the Islamic equivalent of Puritans.

Saint veneration is apart of Shia practice and rejected by mainstream Sunni, not just Wahhabi–and Sufis are almost to the degree Catholics and Protestants consider Jehovah’s Witnesses–ie, not Christians

Furthermore, is there one Wahhabi perspective? Does Bin Laden even speak for all Wahhabis?

Bin Laden in a large degree, is a result of The Royal House of Saud giving lip service to Wahhabi teaching and practicing different

I’m going to repeat this as often as needed: a statement like this is grotesque and absurd coming from a non-Muslim. We have no basis on which to say who is a “good” and who is a “bad” Muslim

Anyone who makes such a claim has abandoned rationality altogether in favor of a prejudiced agenda.

And yes, the same applies just as much to those who say things like “Osama bin Laden is not a good Muslim.”

From our perspective, Muslims are Muslims. We can say that some Muslims are morally better than others, or closer to Christian truth than others; and we can say that some Muslims hold views that are minority views traditionally, or even total innovations (though I don’t particularly trust people with no professional training in the field. and an axe to grind one way or the other, to make such determinations). But we can’t say whether or not their views are “true Islam.”

Edwin

There is a LARGE corpora of Muslim practice, theology, and interpretation. The liberal Islam, the non-literal islam, the"peacefull jihad of the spirit" is extreme minority, and “heretical” interpretation when one looks at the history of this religion.

 

[Sixtus]

Ilsam is currently getting a bad press., It seems it is ok to bash Moslems.

Holy Jihad is not a violent activity, it is one of individual self-sacrifice for the benefit of others.

Of all the practicing Moslems I have ever met, they were all men of peace, goodwill and a real pleasure to know and associate with.

I am sure there are the radicals, fanatics and politically motivated who will use Islam as an excuse. If it were not for Islam they would use some other excuse. Christianity has their fair share of fanatics too. one has only to look at the Orange Order, which is committed to the destruction of Catholicsm. To the persecution of Catholics as individuals. To the destruction of their businesses, their homelife, etc etc

The worst Moslem I have ever met was far kinder and more charitable than the best Orangeman.

Christianity has a lot to answer for. in its persectution and allowing Moslems to be persecuted.

My Moslem brothers and sisters. I ask for your forgiveness

 

[pro_universal]

.

Bernard Lewis you mean–who’s also cited in int CatholicAnswers special report?

Bernard Lewis argues that the basic foundations of democracy and religious tolerance run deep in Islam, due to the early Muslims having and accepting numerous different methods of practice. But I have to say, I laughed out loud when I read his latest foray into numerology.

Saint veneration is apart of Shia practice and rejected by mainstream Sunni, not just Wahhabi–and Sufis are almost to the degree Catholics and Protestants consider Jehovah’s Witnesses–ie, not Christians

Where’d you get this info on Sufis? It’s wrong. Not just inaccurate or a dispute in the sources, but wrong. Sufism is and always has been mainstream Islam.

There is a LARGE corpora of Muslim practice, theology, and interpretation. The liberal Islam, the non-literal islam, the"peacefull jihad of the spirit" is extreme minority, and “heretical” interpretation when one looks at the history of this religion.

And where did you look to learn the “history of the religion”?

 

[Sixtus]

I have been hurt more times and more deeply by Protestants than I have by Moslems.

Therefore on the basis of my experience, Protestant Christianity is more violent than Islam

 

[cestusdei]

I am no fan of the Orange order, but how many beheadings have they done recently? How many planes have they flown into buildings? Muslims make the Orangeman look like little league.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Sixtus,
There are two forms of jihad - the greater or peaceful jihad and the lesser or violent jihad. We are not interested in the peaceful jihad because it does not concern nor affect us. What we are concerned about is the violent jihad.

When Westerns talk about jihad and accuse Muslims of jihading against us or call them jihadists, we are referring to the violent jihad. Muslims can practise the ‘peaceful’ jihad all they like and we wouldn’t even know they are doing it.

Don’t read apologists - get your knowledge of Islam from the source. In this case, read surah 9 where Muhammad told Muslims to jihad against the infidels by qatilooing (i.e. killing) them.

By any stretch of the imagination I don’t see how qatiloo the kafirs represents the peaceful jihad.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Ilsam is currently getting a bad press., It seems it is ok to bash Moslems.

When one brings up inconvient truths of history and theology, facts that run counter to the the-West-is bad PC cant, that’s called bashing

Holy Jihad is not a violent activity, it is one of individual self-sacrifice for the benefit of others.

Tell that to anyone who can read Surah 9, which was EITHER the last “revealed” or near-last–in any case, using the Koranic principle of “abbrogation”, it trashes the Meccan “tolerance” Surahs AND any idea of non-physical jihad

Of all the practicing Moslems I have ever met, they were all men of peace, goodwill and a real pleasure to know and associate with.

I am sure there are the radicals, fanatics and politically motivated who will use Islam as an excuse. If it were not for Islam they would use some other excuse. Christianity has their fair share of fanatics too. one has only to look at the Orange Order, which is committed to the destruction of Catholicsm. To the persecution of Catholics as individuals. To the destruction of their businesses, their homelife, etc etc

These VERY regional bigots have had HOW much influence on world events and history? HOW much of Christendom diid they conquer? HOW many people are the Orangemen killing in the Sudan, how many are they raping and enslaving? The bottom line is, that Chrisitanity has to be WAY distorted and ignored to justify homicide, conquest, & genocide. The justification for a Muslim for treating you as ferengi is right in the Koran, right in the Hadith, right in the very life of Muhammed who is consistently held up as the examplar of right conduct for a Muslim

The worst Moslem I have ever met was far kinder and more charitable than the best Orangeman.

Reminds me of Theodore Roosevelt who claimed the worst, most drunken and violent cowboy he ever met was still better than the best Indian he ever met–which begs the question, did TR see a valid sample of either group? Most Muslims, especially those of Arabic culture, come from intimate history with Behdoin-Desert concepts of hospitality–something we’re rather divorced from in our generations of urban living. However, that tribal culture can also justify killing and conquest without batting an eye–and w/in the Koran is a codification of BOTH principles–however, let me stress this, MOST Muslims are better than their theology

Christianity has a lot to answer for. in its persectution and allowing Moslems to be persecuted.

You mean the much misunderstood, much distorted history of the Crusades? You mean the defensive wars that saved Christendom and Europe from conquest?

My Moslem brothers and sisters. I ask for your forgiveness

Them first–and yes, I remember the dancing of jubilation in the streets of Gaza & Cairo on 9/11/01–and yes, in the Muslim neighborhood of Dearborn Michigan

 

[Contarini]

I am no fan of the Orange order, but how many beheadings have they done recently? How many planes have they flown into buildings? Muslims make the Orangeman look like little league.

Al-Qaeda certainly makes both sides in Ireland look good by comparison. I remember when the bombs went off in London last year, one of the commentators was talking about how when the IRA did this sort of thing they usually sent warnings and timed the blasts so that they would go off when there weren’t many people around. They were trying to disrupt infrastructure and send a political message, not to kill innocent civilians (though they were of course willing to do so if needed to get their point across). Al-Qaeda appears to be trying to kill as many people as possible, which is unspeakably and diabolically vile.

However, the fact remains that Islamic tradition *forbids *the killing of women or children or other noncombatants–something you and other anti-Muslim bigots conveniently ignore in your citation of Islamic calls for holy war.

Edwin

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Bernard Lewis argues that the basic foundations of democracy and religious tolerance run deep in Islam, due to the early Muslims having and accepting numerous different methods of practice. But I have to say, I laughed out loud when I read his latest foray into numerology…
Where’d you get this info on Sufis? It’s wrong. Not just inaccurate or a dispute in the sources, but wrong. Sufism is and always has been mainstream Islam…
And where did you look to learn the “history of the religion”?

Democracy? How many muslim democracies are there? (Turkey–sorta, enforced by the military, for Pete’s sake!) Tolerance?–Sharia law & dhiminitude are “tolerance” in the same regard as Aparteid was. Sufi’s have had a LONG history of defending themselves from Sunni overlords–a rather strong martial tradition, not unlike the Sikhs—and TWO different religious studies courses, and 1 specific Islam course taught by a liberal Muslim (History BA, minor in anthropology)

 

[Contarini]

Democracy? How many muslim democracies are there? (Turkey–sorta, enforced by the military, for Pete’s sake!) Tolerance?–Sharia law & dhiminitude are “tolerance” in the same regard as Aparteid was. Sufi’s have had a LONG history of defending themselves from Sunni overlords

And supporting them–Sufi dervishes were an important part of the Ottoman army, if I’m not mistaken.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

.

Lorraine Bottner’s Roman Catholicis uses almost NO citations from Catholic writers–so a book without citations is good. A cliche statment is not reasoning.

I’ve read a lot of books of propaganda with lots of citations. I know whereof I speak.

Bernard Lewis you mean–who’s also cited in int CatholicAnswers special report?

Absolutely. He’s someone I’ll listen to.

Saint veneration is apart of Shia practice and rejected by mainstream Sunni, not just Wahhabi

Then why did the Wahhabis desecrate holy places in Mecca to prevent the veneration of Muhammad and other Islamic saints?

–and Sufis are almost to the degree Catholics and Protestants consider Jehovah’s Witnesses–ie, not Christians

Marshall Hodgson says differently. Sufism was mainstream for centuries. Of course you will find many Sunnis today who reject Sufism.

Bin Laden in a large degree, is a result of The Royal House of Saud giving lip service to Wahhabi teaching and practicing different

Again, you’re identifying one group as not “real” because they don’t hold the extreme views you want to say are “real” (Wahhabism, in this case).

There is a LARGE corpora of Muslim practice, theology, and interpretation. The liberal Islam, the non-literal islam, the"peacefull jihad of the spirit" is extreme minority, and “heretical” interpretation when one looks at the history of this religion.

But am I talking about any of that? For one thing, I don’t care if it’s historically the minority position. I don’t understand why no one bothers to interact with my main argument, which is that no outsider to any religion is in any position to say what is orthodox or heretical. We can say what is majority or minority, sure. But if Islam changes so that what is minority becomes majority, we should welcome this (if it’s the right minority). It’s their business to decide what their religion really is.

Furthermore, your terms are so vague as to be useless. Obviously the identification of the “greater jihad” with inner struggle is not minority–it’s right there in Muhammad’s own teaching. The denial of any warlike connotation to jihad is an innovative position, as far as I can tell. That doesn’t make it “fake” or “heretical”–that’s for Muslims to decide, not for us.

Edwin

 

[cestusdei]

Edwin, Islam doesn’t forbid killing women and children. Muhammed ordered it done himself. They have been doing it ever since. I have posted multiple examples on it occuring in recent days. Yes, I hate. I hate how Muslims persecute Christians, murder converts, stone people to death for nothing…

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

To set the record straight - just to show the Muslims that I am not running a hate campaign against Muslims but am merely pointing out the truth about Islam.

Muhammad did tell his followers to not deliberate kill women and children.

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4319:
It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children.

Muslim Book 019, Number 4320:
It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.

However, he had no problem if women and children were/are killed in the course of Muslim aggression:

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4321:
It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them. (similarly repeated in 4322 & 4323)

The reason Muhammad forbade killing women and children was because he preferred to ENSLAVE them, and permitted his followers to RAPE their female captives.

This shows the sublime morality of Allah’s Apostle and proves Islam is the true religion of peace.

 

[sandmountainsli]

Well Rob, how many Islamic democracies are there? How are Christians treated in Saudi Arabia? How are they treated in any Muslim nation? Which religion contributes the most to sectarian violence? Which religion recently called for the death of the Pope because they didn’t like what he said?

Amen! Chalk one up for the Romists!
That statement is 100% on the mark and cannot be argued with.
WP

 

[rmcmullan]

A long time ago when I was in LA, I met an Armenian guy there, pretty old. He told me when he was a youngster, he was living in Armenia, in a small village, when a group of Muslims came through and killed all the men. He was taken with his Mom. He also told us that their “Holy Book” says that the more people you kill in the name of , the greater your reward in heaven will be. And he should know.

 

[Atreyu]

Edwin, Islam doesn’t forbid killing women and children. Muhammed ordered it done himself. They have been doing it ever since. I have posted multiple examples on it occuring in recent days. Yes, I hate. I hate how Muslims persecute Christians, murder converts, stone people to death for nothing…

Cestusdei, with all respect and humility, you need to learn how to forgive; to REALLY forgive. These guys just don’t know what they’re doing. It is wrong of course, but if you start to hate them, then do you know who wins? Satan. Him, and noone else.

Think of our Lord on the Cross forgiving his accusors. Think of Ignatius of Antioch on his way to martyrdom in Rome pleading with the Christians to not interfere. Think of the Amish involved in the recent mass murder who attended the funeral of the gunman. THAT is forgiveness, and it is the very essence of Christianity, and the biggest reason why the morality of Christianity is superior to that of Islam.
Lion of Narnia:

however, let me stress this, MOST Muslims are better than their theology

I really liked this, Aslan!

 

[cestusdei]

In order to forgive they must confess their sins, be sorry for them, repent, and promise to not do them again. They seem more then a little reluctant to do that. They can’t. It would mean admitting that Muhammed was wrong.

 

[Contarini]

A long time ago when I was in LA, I met an Armenian guy there, pretty old. He told me when he was a youngster, he was living in Armenia, in a small village, when a group of Muslims came through and killed all the men. He was taken with his Mom. He also told us that their “Holy Book” says that the more people you kill in the name of , the greater your reward in heaven will be. And he should know.

No, he shouldn’t. That’s absolutely the last person in the world I would go to for an accurate understanding of Islam.

Having been horribly mistreated by people does not give you some kind of insight into their sacred writings. It’s more likely to shut you off from such understanding forever.

Would you say that late-fifteenth-century Jews were the best people to go to for an accurate understanding of Catholicism? Even today Jews have trouble being fair to Christianity because of the atrocities we’ve committed against them in the past. That is understandable, but it doesn’t make their view of our religion accurate.

Edwin

 

[cestusdei]

Were not in the 15th century anymore. There is no sign that Islam has gained greater insight that has led it in a kinder direction. Both Jews and Christians generally are against religious violence nowadays. Islam holds on to it. The Armenian insight is still valid.