Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I took your advice and consulted Muslims to see what Islam teaches regarding offensive holy war and found out that Islam does allow for holy war against non-believers.

Now it turns out I haven't gone to the 'correct', government approved sources to learn about Islam properly, is that what you're saying ? (Of course, you've already shown that any old missionary rag is an appropriate source for learning about Christianity and Judaism.....)

I also see you still have not explained why law abiding citizens would be told not to break into homes or address what the quotation of Muhammad actually says.

Thorughout history when Islam considers itself strong enough, it proclaims offensive jihad. When it considers itself weaker as its opponent(s) it proclaims defensive jihad. The sheep and the wolf and the wolf wearing sheeps clothes.

event horizon wrote:I took your advice and consulted Muslims to see what Islam teaches regarding offensive holy war and found out that Islam does allow for holy war against non-believers.

Did you really - or are you on one of your fantasies again?

I simply asked you to read, understand and contrast the explanations of Jihad by Muslim scholars as listed in the link I gave and compare them with Spencer's interpretation of universal offensive holy wars.

I guess you had to go and invent some 'Muslims' that you 'consulted'. Was this because you chose not to read, or that when you read you realised you couldn't actually defend Spencer?

However, humour me - you seem to be implying you have followed the advice in the 'Who's afraid of Shariah' thread:

So the best thing to do is find out what Islam really is about. Talk to a Muslim in person. Read an introduction to Islam (try a fun one like mine). Read Loonwatch to read about the holes in the anti-Islamic rhetoric. Or take a look at the University of Georgia’s informational website on Islam, for some quick answers and further reading. If you read the anti-Islam fear-mongering websites, all you’ll learn will be tall tales.

http://www.uga.edu/islam/

Which articles agreed with Spencer's views?

Cheers,
Shafique

Let me know which of the following classical Muslim scholars have been invented:

Ibn Abi Zayd al—Qayrawani

Ibn Taymiyya

Shaikh Burhanuddin Ali

al—Mawardi

Ibn Khaldun

Also please refer to the article written by the fictitious Muslim scholar, Sherman Jackson, posted by Berrin on this forum, where the Muslim author agreed with Robert Spencer that the majority of Muslim scholars and jurists held the view of offensive Jihad warfare - the minority who did not subscribe to mandatory offensive warfare took the position that holy war was not obligatory for the Khalifa, rather than a condemnation against the practice of offensive holy war.

I could also point out that your cult founder, Ahmed, went against the grain of accepted dogma as late in the nineteenth century by proclaiming that Jihad was permissible only in cases of religious persecution or defense.

What part of 'selective quotes' confused you eh?

As for name dropping, may I refer you to the fact that I saw your selective quotes and raised you the Prophet's , pbuh, instructions and actions. I still see no argument why we should believe Spencer's interpretations over that of the Prophet, pbuh. (Especially as Spencer hasn't actually bothered to read the whole Quran yet).

As I said, if you insist on getting your info on Islam from Sheikh Bob, based on the verses of the Quran he's decided to read, then that makes you no different from this guy:

He says his deliberately limited grasp of Islamic history and culture was still more than sufficient to shape his views of the entire Muslim world.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-al ... bou,17990/

Please compare Spencer's arguments and the selective quotes you've given with what actual scholars of Islam say about Jihad (neither Spencer or his erstwhile buddy Bostom are Islamic scholars):

As I asked:

http://www.uga.edu/islam/

Which articles agreed with Spencer's views?

So we should ignore prophet 'I was ordered to fight all men, until they say 'There is no God but God'' Muhammad's clear examples and instructions in favor of your selective citation of history - which did not apply to Muhammad since he was never able to reach lands as far away as Africa with his armies???

Why not quote the hadith you must be referring to to analyze the reasons why Muhammad instructed his warriors to not invade Ethiopia???

Was it because they were peaceful or because of past interactions between Muhammad and the Ethiopians.

Further, why would someone need to tell his followers to not invade this or that peaceful kingdom?

That's like one neighbor telling his fellow law abiding neighbors to not break into the homes of the neighbors down the street.

No, we should ignore Spencer's take on Jihad which he gathered from selected verses of Quran and Hadith, and discredited orientalist interpretations.

But don't take my word for it (you never do anyway) - just compare Spencer's pronouncements on Jihad with those of actual Muslim scholars who have read the Quran.

Now, if your argument is why did the Prophet, pbuh, explicitly punk Spencer a millenia and a half ago - the answer is quite simple: He was explaining what the Quran actually teaches and not what loons want to believe.

Further, why would someone need to tell his followers to not invade this or that peaceful kingdom?

Why do Americans have a law which forbids s.ex with animals? Is it because all of you dream about s.exy goats?

Should you have another silly question, let me know. But first read what scholars who have actually read the whole Quran say about Jihad and compare it with Bob's crazee theory.

Cheers,
Shafique