ūüéĄ December Fan Mail ūüéĄ

Sign in to follow this  
society

Macron Decries Islamic Terrorist Attack

Faysalaaa
15 minutes ago, Curunir said:

Easy? :laughga:

I think it's borderline impossible :deadbanana:

That's a good idea, but I think that's something that's probably not going to happen in our lifetimes. The world is too political and too corrupt for that now.

It's true that we don't hear much about terrorism that doesn't affect the Western world, be it committed in the name of Buddhism, Christianity or another religion, but it's also true that terrorist acts done in the name of Islam are much more prevalent in recent times.

When I say the solution is easy, I mean if the corrupted system wants to actually change things, they can easily do it.

Things are actually changing drastically for the first time in Saudi Arabia which is where im from. Saudi Arabia is responsible for almost all islamic teachings all over the world. Saudi Arabia is changing its direction on religion and are reforming many things on a daily basis. What shocked me is people changed so fast in one day with the government.

And yes the Muslim community obviously have a radicalization problem. Changing it though is not only by saying these verses are violent so Islam is bad. There is a whole systemic issue to why radicalization is happening in the Muslim community and western powers and local powers are involved.

Edited by Faysalaaa
  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
littlepotter
1 hour ago, Pharamon said:

I'm ready to bet you were quick to judge someone without educating the wrong or those who might be unfamiliar with neurolinguistic programming.

Huh? You're literally the one who quoted someone and told them they don't have common sense, and now you're telling me not to be quick to judge :bear: 

can you hear me come undone?

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pharamon
59 minutes ago, littlepotter said:

Huh? You're literally the one who quoted someone and told them they don't have common sense, and now you're telling me not to be quick to judge :bear: 

Who asked

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustaMonster
7 hours ago, Faysalaaa said:

Well I personally dont see any violence in the Quran. Many users here confronted me and challenged me with violent verses that I easily explained without being apologetic.

Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 5 Surah Maidah verses 33-34: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main to spread mischief in the land is this: they should be put to death, or crucified, or their alternate hands and feet should be cut off, or they should be banished from the land. That is the disgrace and ignominy for them in the world, and there is in store for them a harsher punishment in the Hereafter.

How is this non-violent?

Hands up to the sky, I'm about to fly!

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faysalaaa
8 hours ago, JustaMonster said:

Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 5 Surah Maidah verses 33-34: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main to spread mischief in the land is this: they should be put to death, or crucified, or their alternate hands and feet should be cut off, or they should be banished from the land. That is the disgrace and ignominy for them in the world, and there is in store for them a harsher punishment in the Hereafter.

How is this non-violent?

You need to understand that the Quran is studied in a detailed way. Nobody takes an isolated verse and come with a conclusion. For example, we have another book called tafsir which explains exactly why each Quranic verse was revealed. We also have to read the whole chapter and not one verse to understand the full context.

Even if we took the verse you provided by itself without full context, its clearly talking about people waging war on Muslims and spreading mischief in the land which Muslims had to deal with these issues alot during this time.

If we look further into its historical context and why the verse was revealed, we see that it was concerning people who came to Madinah, ate some food and later in the day murdered and robbed an innocent shepherd. The criminals tortured and then literally butchered this innocent man to pieces.

Now lets look at the whole chapter instead of one verse. One cannot quote verse 5:33 without quoting verse 5:32 (prohibition of murder) and verse 5:34 (command to forgive). We should not simply brush aside the verse and merely concentrate on the punishment forgetting to look at why such a punishment is given.

Here is the full verse: (5:32) if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or for spreading mischief in the land ‚Äď it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. (5:33) The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land (5:34) except for those who repent before you have overpowered them. Know well that Allah is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate.

The average Muslim doesnt know any of this because Muslims are like Christians, they are not educated about their religion as much as you think. Which is why when they are confronted, they dont know what to say or give apologetic arguments.

Edited by Faysalaaa

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustaMonster
Just now, Faysalaaa said:

You need to understand that the Quran is studied in a detailed way. Nobody takes an isolated verse and come with a conclusion. For example, we have another book called tafsir which explains exactly why each Quranic verse was revealed. We also have to read the whole chapter and not one verse to understand the full context.

Even if we took the verse you provided by itself without full context, its clearly talking about people waging war on Muslims and spreading mischief in the land which Muslims had to deal with these issues alot during this time.

If we look further into its historical context and why the verse was revealed, we see that it was concerning people who came to Madinah, ate some food and later in the day murdered and robbed an innocent shepherd. The criminals tortured and then literally butchered this innocent man to pieces.

Now lets look at the whole chapter instead of one verse. One cannot quote verse 5:33 without quoting verse 5:32 (prohibition of murder) and verse 5:34 (command to forgive). We should not simply brush aside the verse and merely concentrate on the punishment forgetting to look at why such a punishment is given.

Here is the full verse: (5:32) if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or for spreading mischief in the land ‚Äď it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. (5:33) The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land (5:34) except for those who repent before you have overpowered them. Know well that Allah is All-Forgiving, All-Compassionate.

The average Muslim doesnt know any of this because Muslims are like Christians, they are not educated about their religion as much as you think. Which is why when they are confronted, they dont know what to say or give apologetic arguments.

Yes it is a punishment, the problem is that in no circumstance is this punishment ever justified. You actually think that god commanding his followers to chop off the hands and feet of non believers is justified? Because what this is saying is that murder is wrong unless you are against Allah or you convert to Islam and the punishment for non belief is execution, crucifixion or cutting off appendages. How is the non violent? I don't see any interpretation where this could be.

Hands up to the sky, I'm about to fly!

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faysalaaa
5 minutes ago, JustaMonster said:

Yes it is a punishment, the problem is that in no circumstance is this punishment ever justified. You actually think that god commanding his followers to chop off the hands and feet of non believers is justified? Because what this is saying is that murder is wrong unless you are against Allah or you convert to Islam and the punishment for non belief is execution, crucifixion or cutting off appendages. How is the non violent? I don't see any interpretation where this could be.

I already explained all this in details with proof in my last comment to you, but ill make it more simple..

The verse does not talk about none believers, it talks about none believers who are waging war against Muslims. The verse also tells Muslims that killing one person not in self defense is like as if you killed all of mankind. This means Gods rule for killing is based on self defense.

I would agree with you if your criticism of the verse is the punishment sounds a bit harsh and barbaric, but thats not what your criticism is.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustaMonster
Just now, Faysalaaa said:

I already explained all this in details with proof in my last comment to you, but ill make it more simple..

The verse does not talk about none believers, it talks about none believers who are waging war against Muslims. The verse also tells Muslims that killing one person not in self defense is like as if you killed all of mankind. This means Gods rule for killing is based on self defense.

I would agree with you if your criticism of the verse is the punishment sounds a bit harsh and barbaric, but thats not what your criticism is.

Yes people who are at war against Muslims. You know that Muslims declared offensive wars against people? It's pretty clear from the verses that this is saying that if you're a non Muslim and you are at war with Muslims and you do not surrender and repent before you are "seized" then you're punishment is execution, crucifixion, or dismemberment. And that this is a punishment for them and disgraces them. That last part of the verse was left out of the quotes we've made for some reason. Also in the following few verses, 36-37, it talks about how non believers will suffer a never ending punishment and torture in hell.

Again, you can try to justify this if you want and somehow claim its non-violent but its disgusting and there's a reason that in modern societies these are not punishments we give to people, because they are completely immoral.

Hands up to the sky, I'm about to fly!

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faysalaaa
25 minutes ago, JustaMonster said:

Yes people who are at war against Muslims. You know that Muslims declared offensive wars against people? It's pretty clear from the verses that this is saying that if you're a non Muslim and you are at war with Muslims and you do not surrender and repent before you are "seized" then you're punishment is execution, crucifixion, or dismemberment. And that this is a punishment for them and disgraces them. That last part of the verse was left out of the quotes we've made for some reason. Also in the following few verses, 36-37, it talks about how non believers will suffer a never ending punishment and torture in hell.

Again, you can try to justify this if you want and somehow claim its non-violent but its disgusting and there's a reason that in modern societies these are not punishments we give to people, because they are completely immoral.

Sorry im trying hard to see it the way you do, but the verse clearly does not say what you are claiming. Even Radical Islamic scholars and official Islamic books dont translate the verse the way you do. I gave you detailed evidence and the full context of how to translate a verse but you only gave me your personal translation.

The verse first says the only justified killing is self defense. Then it says people who wage war against Muslims and spread corruption in the land should be killed. Then it says to forgive the ones who surrender.

Islam never went to war with anyone, it only defended itself from Quraish in Mecca.

None believers being punished in hell is another subject..

Edited by Faysalaaa

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustaMonster
Just now, Faysalaaa said:

Sorry im trying hard to see it the way you do, but the verse clearly does not say what you are claiming. Even Radical Islamic scholars and official Islamic books dont translate the verse the way you do. I gave you detailed evidence and the full context of how to translate a verse but you only gave me your personal translation.

The verse first says the only justified killing is self defense. Then it says people who wage war against Muslims and spread corruption in the land should be killed. Then it says to forgive the ones who surrender.

Islam never went to war with anyone, it only defended itself from Quraish in Mecca.

None believers being punished in hell is another subject..

At this point I think you are being dishonest and are arguing in bad faith if you're claiming that Islamic kingdoms/countries etc never went to war with anyone and it was only self defense so I'm done with this conversation because it wont lead anywhere. I get it, I understand that you have to defend your religion and have to come up with justifications for the things in it because you can't possibly think that your god could do anything wrong because you've been indoctrinated with that belief since birth. I used to do it too when I was religious, I hope one day you realize that its all just bullshit, I'm sorry but it is. I see people doing the same thing you're doing right now except with the bible. They'll say "oh you're just misinterpreting that verse" "oh it really isnt that bad because xyz" blah blah. It's all just excuses and mental gymnastics they come up with in their head because they cannot possibly believe that their god is immoral.

The fact is that in all Abrahmic religions there are horrible horrible things written down in these books. In the 21st century we realize now that these things are not things we should follow anymore that's why with most of these religions you have the normal people who don't follow commands to kill or execute or stone people to death for small crimes or cut peoples hands off for stealing bread. And then you have the people who just read what these books say and follow them, that's where you get the crazy fundamentalist psychopaths. Yes there are peaceful Christians and Muslims who are good people obviously but that's because they do not follow what the religion actually teaches. However a huge problem is the people who, while they may not do it themselves, support people or are apathetic to crimes committed in the name of religion as we see some Muslims doing right now with this decapitation. They'll say "well he shouldn't have disrespected the prophet like that, it is forbidden" as if what the teacher did in any way justifies being beheaded.

Hands up to the sky, I'm about to fly!
  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego
13 hours ago, JustaMonster said:

of those who wage war against

 

 

So what you’re saying is war is violent (no **** sherlock?!)  and muslims are allowed to defend themselves against non-muslims?

You can say punishments are harsh, it’s not Geneva convention, but that’s not the point.

What that man in France did, is in no way justified by religion. There is no verse saying to commit such criminal act for mockery. 

Also it‚Äôs rude saying your opponent in discussion¬†is ‚Äúindoctrinated¬†from birth‚ÄĚ (ignoring the converts/reverts here)¬†you don‚Äôt know his life and how much he researched by himself;¬†they could also say¬†you‚Äôre indoctrinated by modern day¬†atheism, which is many ways similar to religious zealots, there‚Äôs the obsession to ‚Äúdebate‚ÄĚ and promoting¬†discrimination against religious minorities.¬†

racist ppl really be like ‚Äúso just because I‚Äôm a racist that makes me racist ??? wow‚ÄĚ
  • Thanks 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faysalaaa
2 hours ago, JustaMonster said:

At this point I think you are being dishonest and are arguing in bad faith if you're claiming that Islamic kingdoms/countries etc never went to war with anyone and it was only self defense so I'm done with this conversation because it wont lead anywhere. I get it, I understand that you have to defend your religion and have to come up with justifications for the things in it because you can't possibly think that your god could do anything wrong because you've been indoctrinated with that belief since birth. I used to do it too when I was religious, I hope one day you realize that its all just bullshit, I'm sorry but it is. I see people doing the same thing you're doing right now except with the bible. They'll say "oh you're just misinterpreting that verse" "oh it really isnt that bad because xyz" blah blah. It's all just excuses and mental gymnastics they come up with in their head because they cannot possibly believe that their god is immoral.

The fact is that in all Abrahmic religions there are horrible horrible things written down in these books. In the 21st century we realize now that these things are not things we should follow anymore that's why with most of these religions you have the normal people who don't follow commands to kill or execute or stone people to death for small crimes or cut peoples hands off for stealing bread. And then you have the people who just read what these books say and follow them, that's where you get the crazy fundamentalist psychopaths. Yes there are peaceful Christians and Muslims who are good people obviously but that's because they do not follow what the religion actually teaches. However a huge problem is the people who, while they may not do it themselves, support people or are apathetic to crimes committed in the name of religion as we see some Muslims doing right now with this decapitation. They'll say "well he shouldn't have disrespected the prophet like that, it is forbidden" as if what the teacher did in any way justifies being beheaded.

I think its clear that im not dishonest or bad faith, but if you think I am, no need to waste your time replying to me. I dont want to make this conversation personal, or insult you by calling you stupid and brainwashed like you did. I can easily make the same arguments against you if I wanted. Stop being snarky in a passive aggressive way and showing fake concern about me being indoctrinated.

Its extremely showing that you are coming from an emotional place when it comes to religion. Simply being an Atheist is clearly not enough to make you rational. You still have alot of work to do.

I did not say no Islamic kingdom or country went to war, I said Islam and the prophet did not. What happened after Islam is not part of our religion, its part of history.

Edited by Faysalaaa
  • Love 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
JustaMonster
Just now, lego said:

So what you’re saying is war is violent (no **** sherlock?!)  and muslims are allowed to defend themselves against non-muslims?

You can say punishments are harsh, it’s not Geneva convention, but that’s not the point.

What are you talking about? It's exactly the point. He's claiming that the Quaran is non violent in peaceful when that's just clearly not true. Ignoring the fact that it's not just self defense here, as Islam expanded mostly through conquest, are you saying that its justified to after having successfully defended yourself to execute, crucify, and dismember the people who attacked you? Why are you trying to say this is okay?

Just now, lego said:

Also it‚Äôs rude saying your opponent in discussion¬†is ‚Äúindoctrinated¬†from birth‚ÄĚ (ignoring the converts/reverts here)¬†you don‚Äôt know his life and how much he researched by himself;¬†they could also say¬†you‚Äôre indoctrinated by modern day¬†atheism, which is many ways similar to religious zealots, there‚Äôs the obsession to ‚Äúdebate‚ÄĚ and promoting¬†discrimination against religious minorities.

 

You can't be indoctrinated into a non belief, Atheism is the rejection of god claims so no it's not really the same thing at all. Are you indoctrinated to not believe in Thor or Zeus? No, that's ridiculous. But for some reason when you apply the same logic on religions that people still believe somehow its "indoctrination" to not believe that even though its a non belief, not an assertion that gods don't exist.

Hands up to the sky, I'm about to fly!
  • Sad 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...