Clearing Up Misconceptions about Islam

[EU Empire is fubar]

Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah. Is this true. ?
Are Muslims banned from anal sex even with their wives ? What does the Quran say about sodomy ?

[PointOfViewGun]

Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah. Is this true. ?
Are Muslims banned from anal sex even with their wives ? What does the Quran say about sodomy ?

There are no verses specifically dealing with anal sex, nor there are verses telling Muslims to terrorize non-Muslims in general.

[EU Empire is fubar]

Yes we must terrorize you. We need practice.

Skickat från min Nexus 6 via Tapatalk

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...reveal-8533563 Here we see ISIS saying why they hate the West, they seem to think they represent the Holy book and want to inforce its ways. Is what they say here not in the Quran. The parts about terror. Blasphemy. Sodomy.


It begins: "Shortly following the blessed attack on a sodomite, Crusader nightclub by the mujahid Omar Mateen, American politicians were quick to jump into the spotlight and denounce the shooting, declaring it a hate crime, an act of terrorism, and an act of senseless violence.
"A hate crime? Yes. Muslims undoubtedly hate liberalist sodomites, as does anyone else with any shred of their fitrah (inborn human nature) still intact.


"An act of terrorism? Most definitely. Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah."


I feel terrorised by people who say a book means they should do it. We must show that ISIS are wrong in their reading of the book. Millions of Muslims live in peace and nobility with other Religious people and atheists. So many use the book for good and some use it for bad. So someone show me the passages that dispel the belief that the Quran is anti gay and says we must kill Christians and non believers. I get told by friends who are muslim that many passages in the book are about peace. Lets get them up. Make ISIS look like Jerks.

[DaVinci]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...reveal-8533563 Here we see ISIS saying why they hate the West, they seem to think they represent the Holy book and want to inforce its ways. Is what they say here not in the Quran. The parts about terror. Blasphemy. Sodomy.


It begins: "Shortly following the blessed attack on a sodomite, Crusader nightclub by the mujahid Omar Mateen, American politicians were quick to jump into the spotlight and denounce the shooting, declaring it a hate crime, an act of terrorism, and an act of senseless violence.
"A hate crime? Yes. Muslims undoubtedly hate liberalist sodomites, as does anyone else with any shred of their fitrah (inborn human nature) still intact.


"An act of terrorism? Most definitely. Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah."


I feel terrorised by people who say a book means they should do it. We must show that ISIS are wrong in their reading of the book. Millions of Muslims live in peace and nobility with other Religious people and atheists. So many use the book for good and some use it for bad. So someone show me the passages that dispel the belief that the Quran is anti gay and says we must kill Christians and non believers. I get told by friends who are muslim that many passages in the book are about peace. Lets get them up. Make ISIS look like Jerks.

Bold part: While this is right, they look already like Jerks for the most people of the world, if muslims or non-muslims.

It is always the same. Certain circumstances lead to certain populists and demagogues have success in their rat-catchering campaigns - the thing here with the IS and familiar religious-fascist organisations is even more special, as for the (fragile, heated, uneducated, poor, feeling insulted/opressed/exploited/disadvantaged, by war terrorised/traumatised, you name more possible adjectives) people and the circumstances aka quite easy situations for them.

[squirel]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...reveal-8533563 Here we see ISIS saying why they hate the West, they seem to think they represent the Holy book and want to inforce its ways. Is what they say here not in the Quran. The parts about terror. Blasphemy. Sodomy.


It begins: "Shortly following the blessed attack on a sodomite, Crusader nightclub by the mujahid Omar Mateen, American politicians were quick to jump into the spotlight and denounce the shooting, declaring it a hate crime, an act of terrorism, and an act of senseless violence.
"A hate crime? Yes. Muslims undoubtedly hate liberalist sodomites, as does anyone else with any shred of their fitrah (inborn human nature) still intact.


"An act of terrorism? Most definitely. Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah."


I feel terrorised by people who say a book means they should do it. We must show that ISIS are wrong in their reading of the book. Millions of Muslims live in peace and nobility with other Religious people and atheists. So many use the book for good and some use it for bad. So someone show me the passages that dispel the belief that the Quran is anti gay and says we must kill Christians and non believers. I get told by friends who are muslim that many passages in the book are about peace. Lets get them up. Make ISIS look like Jerks.

What are you saying?? That isis dont follow islam??

Skickat från min Nexus 6 via Tapatalk

[bigdaddy1204]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...reveal-8533563 Here we see ISIS saying why they hate the West, they seem to think they represent the Holy book and want to inforce its ways. Is what hey say here not in the Quran. The parts about terror. Blasphemy. Sodomy.

It begins: "Shortly following the blessed attack on a sodomite, Crusader nightclub by the mujahid Omar Mateen, American politicians were quick to jump into the spotlight and denounce the shooting, declaring it a hate crime, an act of terrorism, and an act of senseless violence.
"A hate crime? Yes. Muslims undoubtedly hate liberalist sodomites, as does anyone else with any shred of their fitrah (inborn human nature) still intact.
"An act of terrorism? Most definitely. Muslims have been commanded to terrorize the disbelieving enemies of Allah."

I feel terrorised by people who say a book means they should do it. We must show that ISIS are wrong in their reading of the book. Millions of Muslims live in peace and nobility with other Religious people and atheists. So many use the book for good and some use it for bad. So someone show me the passages that dispel the belief that the Quran is anti gay and says we must kill Christians and non believers. I get told by friends who are muslim that many passages in the book are about peace. Lets get them up. Make ISIS look like Jerks.

This post was interesting, thanks for sharing. I hadn't seen this.

I like your suggestion in your last couple of sentences (about showing why ISIS is wrong). Me and a couple of other posters here like Abdulmecid I and Fardin have already done this many times over. I've got bored of repeating the same ground thousands of times, but if you click my profile and try to see my post history you should be able to find some posts where I addressed this recently (in the last couple of days).

See post #73 here in this thread, also post #3 in this thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...nst-Terror-end

So it is Sharia law that is to blame for chopping hands off. And this is not in the holy books. Those Saudi Religious police are fooling us.

Sharia is a body of legal rulings that were made up by judges living centuries after the time of Muhammad. In some cases, their decisions are against what Muhammad actually said. In many cases the traditions were politically influenced by kings, leaders and elites for their own advantage. In addition, there is no clear agreement over what Sharia is. Different countries have their own versions of it, which vary widely. One can even find websites where you can request a fatwa (legal ruling) from a cleric; if you don't like the answer, you can just go to somebody else and keep trying until you get the answer you want!

In my opinion, Sharia basically depends on who you ask. As a result, I'd tend to refer to the Quran and the Hadith instead, these are more reliable sources and can help us to form our own opinions.

[Infidel144]

Misconception #6: Punishment for Apostasy in Islam is death
When it comes to an apostate in Islam, the Qur’an Sura 2:256 is very clear which states that “there is to be no coercion in matters of religion .The Qur'an makes no mention of Forcefully Converting or Reconverting anyone, on the contrary it says:
"Say, "This is the truth from your Lord": Let him who will, believe, and let him who will, reject it" (18:28)

Is this un-Islamic?:
"We are from Allah and to Allah we shall return. I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qur'an, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions. Rouhollah al-Mousavi al-Khomeini."
Do you condemn this Fatwa?


Did Imam Mohammad Baqer define an apostate as someone who repudiates Islam and denies the revelation of the Prophet? Did he note that an apostate's repentance will not be accepted, and he must be put to death?
Did Imam Mousa Kazem state that a Muslim who converts to Christianity should be killed?
Did Imam Ja'far Sadeq note that there were at least three instances in which Imam Ali killed individuals who had committed apostasy?


Tahrir al-Vasilah Vol 4:
Conclusion Relating To Other Punishments
1-Chapter on Irtidad or Apostasy
"Problem #1. ...So Islam of a Murtad al-Fitri [an Apostate born of Muslim parents] shall apparently not be accepted [after he has once apostatized], and he shall be condemned to death if he is a male, but a woman shall not be condemned to death even if she is a Murtadda al-Fitriya [a woman born of Muslim parents], but shall be kept in life imprisonment, and she shall be given beatings at the times of prayer, and she shall be subjected to tightening or scarcity of food. Her repentance shall be accepted. So if she repents, she shall be set free. A Murtad al-Milli [an Apostate born of non-Muslim parents] shall be asked to repent. On his refusal, he shall be condemned to death. According to a more cautious opininion, he shall be asked to repent for three days, and on the fourth day he shall be condemned to death."


"Problem #4. A child born to a Murtad al-Milli before his apostasy shall be treated as a Muslim. If he becomes an infidel after attaining adulthood, he shall be asked to repent. If he repents, (well of good), otherwise he shall be condemned to death. Likewise, the son of a Murtad al-Fitri born before his apostasy shall be treated as a Muslim. If he becomes an infidel after attaining adulthood, and similarly the son of a Muslim who becomes an infidel after attaing adulthood before announcing their Islam, apparently both of them shall not be treated as Murtad al-Fitri, but shall be asked to repent, [if they repent, well and good, but if they refuse] they shall be condemned to death."

Are these conclusions wrong and un-Islamic?

[bigdaddy1204]

Is this un-Islamic?:
"We are from Allah and to Allah we shall return. I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qur'an, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions. Rouhollah al-Mousavi al-Khomeini."
Do you condemn this Fatwa?

I disagree with Khomeini. I think he's wrong, for several reasons:

1. The Quran says there is no compulsion in religion. (Quran 2.256). It further says: “You have no duty except delivering the message (Quran 42.48) and again at 13.40 where it says “Your only duty is delivering, we will call them to account.”

This and many other verses make it clear that it is not for us to judge others. Who are you to judge? It’s not your right to judge other people for their actions. That is between them and god, it is not your business. Who are you to say that all the editors and publishers are worthy of death? What gives you the right? Do you know these people? Can you prove that they are bad people? It is completely unacceptable to simply condemn people to death in absentia with no trial and no legal process, no examination of the evidence. Some of them may be good people; you’ve no right to just condemn them to death on a whim like that. That is murder.

2. The Quran says that life is sacred. "If anyone slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading corruption in the land - it would be as if he slew all mankind: and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all humanity." - Quran 5:32

This verse is clear. Human life must be respected. Even if we take the most extreme interpretation possible and claim that Rushdie was indeed “spreading corruption”, it’s questionable whether that interpretation can be proved. Unfortunately, there isn’t a clear definition provided. However, the dictionary defines it as: “dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.” The list of related words includes: “dishonesty, dishonest dealings, unscrupulousness, deceit, deception, duplicity, double-dealing, fraud, fraudulence, misconduct, lawbreaking, crime, criminality, delinquency, wrongdoing, villainy”.

So now we have to consider the book itself. What were Rushdie’s motives? Does it satisfy the definition above? I don’t think so. It’s a work of fiction. And besides, freedom of expression is a fundamental human right that must be respected.

[Fardin]

Apostates won't be sentenced to death unless they do big crimes against Islam and Islamic society like trying to spread Apostasy in Islamic society.
It doesn't need any further explanations.

[VINC.XXIII]

@Infidel144, where they clarified your point about azl' and how are treated captive women? I'm not sure to understand correctly it, but in my native language(and well, I've not a PhD in theology), its indeed sound like captive women can be raped.

[EU Empire is fubar]

So it is Sharia law that is to blame for chopping hands off. And this is not in the holy books. Those Saudi Religious police are fooling us.

[EU Empire is fubar]

''What are you saying?? That isis dont follow islam??'' I think they may be confused.? Mrs Kahn wife of the guy who just had a row with Donald T. Put this up on twitter. Basically ISIS broke every rule...

[Inhuman One]

Well for one they named their organisation after a pagan goddess.

[PointOfViewGun]

Well for one they named their organisation after a pagan goddess.

No one named Islam after Allah. Allah merely means the god. It just became a name in English. Christian Arabs praise Allah the same way as they too call god Allah in Arabic.

[squirel]

Well for one they named their organisation after a pagan goddess.

Isis a pagan godess??? Isis is egyptian now? At least they are not named after asus that would be weird.

Skickat från min Nexus 6 via Tapatalk

[Fardin]

The Quran is a source of the 7th century. That means it is a source which is 1300-1400 years old. It was written in the context of the 7th century and local circumstances (it contains ideas and knowledges of the 7th century).
Do you agree up to this?

Of course not, Qur'an is a road to Infinity,the words of god won't expire after centuries. Qur'an and the lifestyle of the prophet and our 12 Imams is our life pattern,We try to do what they did and avoid what they didn't, I think human's nature is unchangeable.Do you agree with this?

You agreed in relation of "modernisation", so what's with the basis, the Quran?

Yes,plus the prophets orders.

What is it, with the consideration of 1300-1400 years of development within human society?
In other words: How goes "modernisation" together with a basis, that is 1300-1400 years old, if 1:1 taken?

Or, do you actually believe, a source which is 1300-1400 years old (even if by believers seen as holy) is 1:1 of the same literal value 1300-1400 years later, just after it was written in the contextual relation of the 7th century?
If it is so, that you believe, the source is 1:1 of the same value still today, wouldn't that negate all human achievements (progress) between the 7th century and today, plus just negate or dis-consider the very changed circumstances today?

Yes, let me give an example: Sex change operations is a new thing and Qur'an didn't mention what to do about it but it is legal or another one is making weapons of mass destruction is illegal ,how?
The answer is some people who are expert in Islam and Qur'an _Marja' Taghlids_ deduce from Qur'an that these are legal or not,same for the others.
The Feqh helps us in these situations.

And again, i don't try to insult the Islam or their believers. It is just my point, where i don't understand the religious fundamentalism et al (et al, means here regarding all religions).

Some people ask questions for other purposes but I know that you ask questions for understanding better,This is really admirable.

I mean, i personally even criticise and refuse to live the general worldview until the 1960s years in europe or elsewhere.
How could i take a source of the 7th century as life guide or basis for my life?
The more valid is this aspect for a source which 2000 years old, the Bible.

Islam is not a daily plan or something like this,Islam is a life pattern for every era,the more you study, the more you'll understand.Islam shows the way of righteousness and we are trying to be on that path.
The human's life and behavior has not changed from 7th century the reason of my words is ; we still admire the good persons of history so why should we try to fool ourselves and justify our bad deeds with a simple "change of life" reason? It's like the teenagers justification about their faults.

....you won't find Rome apologising for anything until there is a public outcry just as you won't find Muslims taking to the streets in anger over atrocities committed in its name.

Excuse me??
I'm very curious to know how do you know this?

[DaVinci]

Of course not, Qur'an is a road to Infinity,the words of god won't expire after centuries. Qur'an and the lifestyle of the prophet and our 12 Imams is our life pattern,We try to do what they did and avoid what they didn't, I think human's nature is unchangeable.Do you agree with this?


Yes,plus the prophets orders.

Yes, let me give an example: Sex change operations is a new thing and Qur'an didn't mention what to do about it but it is legal or another one is making weapons of mass destruction is illegal ,how?
The answer is some people who are expert in Islam and Qur'an _Marja' Taghlids_ deduce from Qur'an that these are legal or not,same for the others.
The Feqh helps us in these situations.


Some people ask questions for other purposes but I know that you ask questions for understanding better,This is really admirable.


Islam is not a daily plan or something like this,Islam is a life pattern for every era,the more you study, the more you'll understand.Islam shows the way of righteousness and we are trying to be on that path.
The human's life and behavior has not changed from 7th century the reason of my words is ; we still admire the good persons of history so why should we try to fool ourselves and justify our bad deeds with a simple "change of life" reason? It's like the teenagers justification about their faults.


snip

Well, alright. As believer, i guess, you are supposed to believe this.

My conviction is that humans change as everything in this world changes. What doesn't change are nature-laws (as long universal structures remain as they are). To them belong also the very needs of humans (and all other creatures), while even those (needs) interact with the environment - that's a principle of the evolution.

As believer, you see humans have a holy role and position in this game on earth - i don't believe in that holy item. But i think, as we are kind of at the end of the power-chain on earth, of course except the laws of nature (which but might be influenced soon by humans, example genetic science et al), we have a very high position of responsibility - this the more we as humans know about the laws of nature aka nature sciences, and use this knowledge with daily growing tendency.

I think, most of all important regarding the thread, is the change of belief/philosophy, which changes, and forms society (as the thread title is 'Clearing up misconception about Islam').

Imo., it is a fact, that fundamental religion practice and dogma keeps the believers in chains.
Islam, or the Quran, manages the daily life, and thus it is a society manager, a dogmatic organisation, which was designed in the 7th century.
As believer, as said, you are supposed to believe in its infinite validity (which you confirmed above), which quasi negates all options of overwork (further-development).

You say, you believe this organisation-structure, layed out with the Quran, goes along with modernisation/progress et al (as said, not only technology is meant) - i doubt that (a lot).
Also when you say, Islam (or the Quran) determines you to increase knowledge, because you insist on the dogmatic design: Everything is here then framed (limited or pre-designed) by the laws of the one book and their scholars.
They interprete the book (and write new ones), and to which you as believers seem to obey without questioning the source of their message(s) or the interpretation(s).

That principle worked in europe the same way (and still does partially within the christian church), but else, the religious dogma is broken. As said, that break started with the Renaissance.

Btw., my "belief" goes with science, exlusively (exclusively means here without church/institution whatsoever shaped religion). To science but i count all sciences, not just only nature sciences.
I used to be a kinda spirital-influenced human as i was young (i checked-out diverse religions incl. esoterics). Then learned diverse sciences, which made it impossible to believe still in supranatural power(s).
In european medieval world, that way of life would have been seen as extreme sinful (to say the least), and after torture, those people often ended up on a stake.

Living properly indeed needs no religion-management anymore. Religion as life manager is a relict. It goes back to the times, as priests of the tribes layed out rules for the survival in this at the time overwhelming (mysterious) nature.
Today, just all the collected knowledge manages life. To this belongs also, of course, a lot ethic "material" taken from religions, but just not exclusively.

[Fardin]

Dear bigdaddy1204
Sharia= Qur'an + Sunna. The Qur'an is unchangeable( Wahhabies and terrorists are the exceptions ) and the only changeable thing is the Hadiths.
Sharia law is different only between Shia and Sunni countries because we know the lifestyle of our 12 Imams as Sunna too.
Please study these articles to understand better(I suggest everyone to read):
http://en.wikishia.net/view/Sunna
http://en.wikishia.net/view/Types_of_Hadith
http://en.wikishia.net/view/Hadith_al-Thaqalayn
http://en.wikishia.net/view/Fiqh
http://en.wikishia.net/view/Ijtihad

[Muizer]

@Fardin. In secular society, final exam standards require schools to teach science topics according to the current, scientifically accepted theories. Is it desirable for a muslim that their children are taught in school the scientifically accepted history of earth and life on it, including
- that the universe is around 13.5 billion years old,
- our planet 4.5 billion years old
- that life originated 3.9 billion years ago,
- that animals first appeard between 500 and 600 million years ago
- that we, homo sapiens, evolved from an ancestor we have in common with living primates
- that we've been around for several hundred thousand years
- that throughout all this time, continental drift has continuously reconfigured the layout of continents and oceans and has caused mountain ranges to rise and erode to nothing
- and that all these processes and many more are still going on and will continue to go on for hundreds of millions of years.

This is of great significance to understand the cosmic context in which we live. I personally do not think that any religion that does not embrace the true grandeur of the universe and our place in it can truely set itself apart from the many different cults with primitive creation myths that have graced human (pre) history.

[sumskilz]

- that we, homo sapiens, evolved from an ancestor we have in common with living primates

You might be surprised about the answer to that one:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: