Soren wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 12:18am:


IS is Islamic in the same way Jim Jones was Christian - worse. No one's making excuses for IS here, old boy, not a sausage.

Y has started a thread to show that the "ISIS is not ISLAMIC claim is being ridiculed". And yet, we now have a full assault on ISIL from 5 Muslim countries and every national Muslim leader around the world condemning it in the strongest of terms. The Saudis, Iran, the lot. On Lateline, the Indonesian foreign minister was clear that ISIL are a parody of Islam, and their practices are completely against Islamic teachings and principles. He said that ISIL are "anti-Islam".

Muslim leaders in Australia have said ISIL do not represent Islam and do not speak for them. Muslim leaders say they are doing everything in their power to prevent young people from leaving to fight for ISIL. Most have made public statements condemning ISIL and given lengthy media interviews stating how ISIL do not represent Islam, are breaking Islamic laws teachings, and are just plain mean.

So you tell me: how is the claim that ISIS is not ISLAMIC being ridiculed?

Y's providing old quotes about everything BUT ISIL. FD's giving the old obeying their sinister prophet excuse.

But Muhammed didn't say anything about ISIL either.

You tell me, old boy - who exactly is ridiculing such a claim? Y's not saying ISIL are a bunch of meanies that need to be taken out - and if he did, he would be supported by all those Muslim leaders.

Y's saying he has all this proof from the words of Muslims themselves why ISIL are gen-u-wine Muslims.

So where is it?

I have not heard anyone saying that the justifications IS are quoting from the Koran are not in the Koran.The subject is simply ignored. Nobody mentions Houses of War and Peace, nor the slay them this way and that,, the cut their necks stuff, the idolators and apostates, the final triumph of Islam when the trees even will give up the jehud to the muslims to be killed.
Nobody mentions this because you can be killed even for novels, cartoons, youtube vids. But fearing muslim violence doesn’t make islam a religion of peace.
Abbott got into rouble even for suggesting that muslims should be loyal to Australia and not to overseas religio-political entities.

Soren wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 12:41pm:


The question of this thread is not whether the actions of ISIL are justified using the Koran - they most certainly are. This thread discusses Obama's claim that ISIS is not truly Islamic - a claim was that also made by Tony Abbott in a meeting of the Security Council yesterday.

And it's a claim that has been authorized by every influential Muslim country with both condemnations of ISIS and military support. In Australia, Muslim leaders have done just the same - declaring ISIS to be unIslamic based on its statements and its actions.

This is important. If we're to stop Australian Muslims from joining ISIS, surely this is a claim you would support. If we're to defeat ISIS militarily, surely a coalition of Arab Muslim states is the best possible way to do it. And if we're to prevent the toxic values of ISIL spreading throughout the world, surely the way to do it is for Muslims to reinforce the most benign possible interpretation of their faith.

After all, how many times have you called for Muslims to stand up against the extremists in their ranks? Never ever?

Quote:


I'm still waiting for you to shoot down my "excuse", which merely paraphrases what Obama, Abbott, Muslim government and local Muslim relgious and community leaders have already said. Your latest?

Quote:


Going for a job in the UN, are you, old chap?

Sound to me as if you’d be happier working for ISIL.

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 12:52pm:


No no, G, we must stay positive. I, for one, think the old boy’s got it in him to provide one shred of evidence for his hysterical never-ever claims. One will do, and I can then say my job is done.

FD, on the other hand, is pointless. He gave up when Abu left, mainly because Abu gave him all the answers.

I must say, it’s inspiring to see Moses try. He usually just does hissy fits in the old boy style. It’s good to see him opening up to a critical appraisal of the texts he’s always mentioning. In an ideal world, a thread like that could cover a lot of ground. Here, it will just be drowned out in hysterical tanties and tears before bedtime. I give it another page.

You’ve gotta have a dream, no?

Ban them.

Soren wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 1:26pm:


Declaring something unIlamic is based on some insight into the totality of Islamic teachings.

The chap your Lutheran prophet based his teachings on said that he came not to bring peace, but a sword.

And yet, no one could seriously claim.that Christianity is about beheading people or eradicating peace. Nor is anyone condemning Christianity (or the West) for the millions killed in the wars of the past century - wars supported by a majority of Australians (and Christians) who went overseas to fight.

No one is blaming Germany for the "Teutonic" ideology of National Socialism or Russia for Bolshevism. No one is even blaming Catholicism or Anglicanism for very recent struggles in the UK. There is a nice little out in Christianity that I find quite appropriate: Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven.

Yeheshua, after all, would have them turn the other cheek.

Islam is different to Christianity. It started as a spiritually-inspired movement to unite warring Arab tribes. It later became a world religion. Islam does not proscribe the cheek-turning pacifism Christ taught (but few Christians follow).

But nor does Islam preach violence, genocide or forced conversion to Islam. In the other thread, I’m patiently waiting on a reply to a question on the nature of jihad. I doubt I’ll get an answer. So far, none of the quotes I’ve read in that thread advocate murder. Having never read it, I was under the impression that the Koran is much more violent than it actually reads. From what I see, it talks largely about a struggle to submit to God. It reads to me as a seventh century self-help book for warring Arabs - which is the prevailing view of mainstream and scholarly writing on Islam.

ISIL do not conform to that view, and mainstream Muslims around the world condemn them. I would have thought this would be a good thing, but no - it does not conform to never-ever, so we must continue the ongoing crusade purely to justify a stubborn point of view.

Always, absolutely, never ever - except when it’s not.

Oh brave new world with such wondrous things in it.

I think it’s a jolly world, but that’s just me.

Soren wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 1:56pm:


You go first, old chap. Provide the quote and we’ll try to make some sense of it.

I must say, however, this is a pretty intellectual game when Muslim world leaders (and their bombs) have already spoken. Marty Natalagawa, for example, didn’t quote the Koran when he was condemning ISIL as anti-Islam and anti-peace. He is, after all, the Indonesian foreign affairs minister, not an imam.

I’m always up for a bit of fun, so feel free to proceed with quotes. Maybe G can help to explain them.

The view he expressed in his link above is pretty common. It’s shared among Western religion scholars and Muslims themselves. As G argues, it certainly makes more sense to interpret peace as peace rather than peace as war.

But that’s just me.

Over to you, old boy.

Karnal wrote on Sep 26^th, 2014 at 2:36pm:

Nobody is asking that of anyone.
what is asked is that the IS use of the violent koranic verses and violent examples of mohammed be shown to actually be unislamic.

It turns, to a large extent, on what is taken to be the enemy of islam. Because islam has a very clear and detailed doctrine about fighting those who oppress or oppose islam.
The vast majority of the ’peaceful, law-abiding, etc’ muslims believe that the west opposes and oppresses islam. If you take that victimhood seriously, your reaction to the west will depend on your temperament, and will range from niqabs, hizb ul tahrir agitation and denouncing and resisting calls for being a team, to financial and armed support of those who are resisting the west by committing terrorist acts, from the taliban, al qaida to hamas, jamaa al islamiya to IS.
What the muslim and non-muslim leaders in the west are unable to say is that islam and the west are and have always been at loggerheads. In islamic countries they say it, in the west they are biting their tongues.