Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Why run away from what the Quran actually says and what the military historian Hugh Kennedy concludes?

I'm sorry that the facts don't fit your Orientalist fantasy about early Islam or Islamic theology, but sometimes we have to face harsh realities.

I understand that having only counted 7 actual Muslim convert terrorists when over the same period there were 100s of Christian Converts who terrorised and killed civilians is causing you much heartache - as you evidently believed that only Muslim terrorists could be uncovered. This is a natural consequence of believing Fox New's (or Memri etc) version of reality.

Cheers,
Shafique

So Kennedy concludes that crucifixion is not used as a form of capital punishment (and apparently, the Koran says this as well)? Ok.

Please provide the passages from Kennedy and the Koran for me, then.

What the Quran says and what Kennedy concludes have been well referenced above.

You really should read what is written before jumping to the wrong conclusions.

I fully understand that you wish to ignore facts and believe in Orientalist Islamophobic spin - and that is your right. For me, I'll stick with what God says in the Quran and agree with the historians you quote from that conclude that early Muslims did not go around massacring people (Jews or otherwise).

Cheers,
Shafique

Let me know when you have evidence that Muslims can't carry out crucifixions as a form of capital punishment.

Any person can do whatever they want and justify it however they want - it is up to thinking people , though, to decide whether they agree with an Orientalist view of Islamic history or agree with Kennedy, Kung et al (who have studied and written about Islamic history).

God's commandment about crucifixion is there for all to read in the Quran - no need to go and study Hadith etc, and is enough evidence for me.

You keep asking for evidence that has already been provided - perhaps you should actually read up on some of the topics you claim to know about - and read up on what Muslims actually believe and practice rather than what the Islamphobic/Orientalist web sites tell you.

Cheers,
Shafique

God's commandment about crucifixion is there for all to read in the Quran - no need to go and study Hadith etc,

and read up on what Muslims actually believe and practice

Sounds like a contradiction to me. But yes, I agree with you. The Koran clearly allows for mischief makers to be crucified. Let me know when you have evidence from Muslim scholars that crucifixion does not mean to execute someone.

It's also interesting that you would compare a respected historian like Kennedy to Hans Kung.

We have already established that you have a quaint interpretation of scripture - be it the Bible where you disagree with all Biblical scholars and insist that there are no contradictory verses and refuse to accept that verses were inserted to the Bible to support Pauline Christian theology.

Your even quainter views about what God says in the Quran are well documented - and yet you freely admit that you haven't actually read the whole Quran and yet insist you are an authority on its interpretation.

In this case, God's words are quite clear and have been explained.

The fact you continue to pretend to not understand is not surprising - Islamphobic Orientalists have to live in the past to justify their views. (I wonder how long it will be before you refer back to a historical reference to a fictitious account of Muslims supposedly acting barbarically?)

All the while, your refusal to condemn white Jewish terrorists who kill Muslims, and use the Bible to justify these acts, stands testimony to your hypocrisy.

Cheers,
Shafique

Let me know when your 'research' on the various topics you pontificate on - such as first century Christianity and Rabbinical Judaism, moves from a few paragraphs you've come across on wikipedia to reading books by authors who have graduate degrees in the fields of history, theology, biblical scholarship, etc.

It's great that you spend so much time writing long posts on your belief that Jesus was the speaker in the epistle of James, or that Paul persuaded Peter in Acts 10 to convert Cornelius. It's just that anyone who isn't ignorant on these subjects recognizes your posts as chalk full of basic inaccuracies that you seem to build up on.

Refuting your beliefs just isn't as fun as agreeing with you that you think you know what you're talking about. Personally, if I was as illiterate on the New Testament as to think that a passage from an epistle was a quote from Jesus (and I can't begin to express how ignorant that was, other than to point out that someone with only a basic handle of the New Testament would know better), I probably wouldn't write more than a sentence on the topic, and that would be in the form of a question.

As I said, let me know when you have evidence showing that it is not allowed in Islam to execute prisoners by crucifixion.

I've provided a hadith that shows the early Muslims executed murderers via crucifixion, but you seem to reject the hadith for some reason. One wonders why you must then bring hadith up to 'properly' interpret the passage in the Koran instructing husbands to beat their disobedient wives.

Each topic in its own thread makes for easier reading.

As I said, on what God says in the Quran about crucifixion and what 21st historians have concluded about early Muslim conquests, have been well covered here already.

Your refusal to acknowledge that Islamophobic Orientalist views of history are now just quaint beliefs that are tolerated like the beliefs of the 'flat earth society' is not really our problem.

It is as quaint as your views that the Bible has no contradictions and didn't have verses inserted by Pauline Christians.

Cheers,
Shafique

Uh oh. Doesn't look like every Muslim knows from the clear Koran that crucifixion is obviously non-lethal:

“The Vice Chancellor of City University London, Julius Weinberg, should resign. He is refusing to take any action after the Islamic Society hosted a fundamentalist preacher, Abu Usamah, who advocates the murder of gay people and of Muslims who give up their faith,” said human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.

Abu Usamah was recorded on Channel Four’s television documentary, Undercover Mosque, as saying: “Do you practice homosexuality with men? Take that homosexual man and throw him off the mountain.” On Muslims who leave the faith he said: “If the Imam wants to crucify him, he should crucify him. The person is put up on the wood and he’s left there to bleed to death for three days.”

Abu Usamah was also filmed deriding women as “deficient”, inferior to men and intellectually “incomplete.”

Another speaker given a platform at the same City University event on 4 November, Murthadah Khan, was also caught on the Undercover Mosque documentary calling Jews and Christians “enemies” and “filthy”.

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/11/22/ ... niversity/

Anyways, this guy is probably just some self proclaimed expert on something or other (we seem to have a rash of google professors on this site). I'm sure he's just from the stix and he has no religious training to make him qualified to give an opinion on Islamic theology......

He converted to Islam in 1986 and applied to attend the University of Madinah as was the practice of many new converts to Islam at that time. He completed his BSc in Usool-Ul-Deen and learned the Arabic language. After his graduation from the University, Abu Usamah went to teach in the UK before returning to the US in 1996 in order to pursue his first position of Imam in Orlando, Florida. He was an imam at a mosque in Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Peoria before he moved to the UK, where he surfaced briefly in Keighley before moving to Birmingham to take up his place at Green Lane Mosque.

[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Usamah

So a convert and a scholar of Islam. Double shocker.

dp