Poll
Question:
Should we seriously consider adopting Sharia law in Australia?
Option 1: Yes and kill the infidels.
votes: 0
Option 2: Yes and have mercy on the infidels.
votes: 0
Option 3: Yes and spare the women and children of the infidels.
votes: 0
Option 4: No because Australians are so cool they realise religion is a bunch of crap.
votes: 3
Option 5: No because Australians know that women matter more than beards and beheading innocent people.
votes: 9
ISIS think they have their finger on the pulse of the modern world. So lets vote.
Are you for real or taking the pi$$? If its the later, it aint even remotely funny!
Are you for real or taking the pi$$? If its the later, it aint even remotely funny!
I work with people who find this completely concerning in regards to the opinion of generational Australians. Of course we can jest at the selections offered but there are those genuinely concerned in the current climate of fear as to the opinions of the new arrivals in our country.
If we want to have a discussion about ISIS and the Middle East in general that's probably fair enough, although such debates usually end in grief.
We probably don't need the poll as the chances of Sharia Law being introduced are on a par with Wollongong winning an AFL premiership.
The problem with such Middle East debates is they are usually hijacked by folk on both sides who are close minded to the point that they refuse to accept that there are always two sides to any discussion.
The internet is full of information and more importantly misinformation that folk use to defend or support a position.
The only folk with any sense in such a debates are those that keep an open mind, don't accept everything they read on a football fan forum, and research the topic as widely as they can.
This is a problem that has had twists and turns (and old scores) since the beginning of settlement in that area. It has some particularly significant issues that have emerged as a result of events in the last century (Israel, Iraq).
A beheading hits hard at our senses but that may just be the effect that the perpetrators are after. Shock our sensibilities, make us scared and nervous, and more importantly, suspicious of a particular group in society, in this case Australians of Middle Eastern heritage. That then instils a fear in that group, makes them nervous and afraid...and in very, very extreme cases can serve as a recruitment tool for groups such as ISIS.
By all means debate it but if you think you have a thorough knowledge of what's going on in the Middle East and your opinion is the right one....think again!
I don't think this is an appropriate forum, although if people sign on to post in this thread it may give ASIO some leads on radicals from both sides!
As for the issue of law, a country can only have one set of laws and all religions fall under them.
Anyone ever wondered why a muslim group would adopt ISIS as its acronym?
Last I checked, they spoke arabic and from what I can tell they dont use S's in their day to day vernacular, and prounouce them as a SH sound which would make them ISHISH.
Makes me wonder if the whole thin isnt manufactured for the sake of sending in the troops.
Are you serious, Thry?
Just because that's the acronym in English doesn't mean it is used in Arabic. We know what NATO is, but in French it is known as OTAN. The French call the USA les États-Unis.
To make your case, you'd have to show that there's no Arabic name for ISIS. Couldn't ISIS merely be the English translation of the Arabic name? Wikipedia gives the Arabic name and asserts it is known by the Arabic acronym Da'esh.
I let you know my opinion later - I'm consulting with Jacqui Lambie to find out more about Shariah Law. ???
Are you serious, Thry?
Just because that's the acronym in English doesn't mean it is used in Arabic. We know what NATO is, but in French it is known as OTAN. The French call the USA les États-Unis.
To make your case, you'd have to show that there's no Arabic name for ISIS. Couldn't ISIS merely be the English translation of the Arabic name? Wikipedia gives the Arabic name and asserts it is known by the Arabic acronym Da'esh.
Sort of.
Personally, this is a storm in a tea cup created by a previous storm in a tea cup, that has negatively affected an entire area dating back to the establishment of Israel.
I also dont find it coincidental that so soon after the negative press about Palestine, that we are all of a sudden up in arms about a seperate issue in a similar location, that all of a sudden means that the Palestinian discussion has ceased completely.
As always, geo politically, things are not simple.
Ironically, we are sending in the troops here, whilst we were happy enough to sit by idly whilst a whole race of people are being persecuted in the West Bank.
Ironically, we are sending in the troops here, whilst we were happy enough to sit by idly whilst a whole race of people are being persecuted in the West Bank.
West Bank or Gaza? Gaza was the site of the recent Israel / Hamas conflict.
Israel vs Hamas is one thing, Israel vs Palestinians are another.
As you can see, the waters are that muddy that no one even knows what is happening, but Palestinians are being persecuted by Israeli's all over the country and not just in Gaza.
Personally I think we should stick to the topic.There are many Jews that follow Carlton who are pro israel just like there are many Muslims that follow Carlton who are pro Palestinian .One of the great things about our Club is we can all sit together and cheer for the greatest football team in the land .Lets not mix politics with sport PLEASE
Personally I think we should stick to the topic.There are many Jews that follow Carlton who are pro israel just like there are many Muslims that follow Carlton who are pro Palestinian .One of the great things about our Club is we can all sit together and cheer for the greatest football team in the land .Lets not mix politics with sport PLEASE
Agree
Next topic
With all due respect guys, this thread is in an appropriate part of the forum, and is a topic that some will be happy to discuss whilst those who are not need simply not click on it.
All Muslims and Muslim clerics should denounce ISIS or leave the country IMO. Any followers do not belong in this country. 98% of Muslims are just your average joe just like you or me. It's the 2% that concerns me.
With regards to Israel and the West Bank their treatment of the Palestinians there is disgraceful. Young boys arrested and tortured, Palestinians forbidden from entering certain areas. Two different laws for two different races.
Don't even get me started on the horror show that is Gaza. That speaks for itself.
The sad death of Numan Haider lays solely at the feet of the extremists such as ISIS. These radicals are using their outdated ideology to recruit disenfranchised youth to support their cause without any fear or concern of the consequences to the individuals. The media want to paint this kid as a monster and a terrorist from the world of Islam, to me he is a boy who has been let down by external influences which have preyed upon his circumstance.
The sad death of Numan Haider lays solely at the feet of the extremists such as ISIS. These radicals are using their outdated ideology to recruit disenfranchised youth to support their cause without any fear or concern of the consequences to the individuals. The media want to paint this kid as a monster and a terrorist from the world of Islam, to me he is a boy who has been let down by external influences which have preyed upon his circumstance.
This kid was no 'on-the-dole come-from-a-poor-family, disenfranchised' kid. He went to a good school was an ok student at least, had jobs, family obviously had money - judging by the family 2-storey home. So he does NOT fit the bill that so many muslims like to push. It is the religion that is the matter. >:(
Didnt know we are a current affairs website.How about we talk footy.I have my own opinion of this but I dont think this is where I should give my point of view :-\ nor should others
Didnt know we are a current affairs website.How about we talk footy.I have my own opinion of this but I dont think this is where I should give my point of view :-\ nor should others
No one ever has an issue with the tennis threads ;D
This is on topic for this sub-forum. You are free to ignore the discussion here. It doesn't take much discipline.
It is the religion that is the matter. >:(
All religions are the problem as they are all unfounded belief systems unsupported by fact, in other words fantasies about deities!
The only true purpose for religion as far as I can tell is as a tool of the intelligentsia to put the fear of some supernatural power into the utter lunatics who transgress societies boundaries. Religion is the tool most useful in controlling the morally ambiguous or the down trodden, it's better than law in this respect.
Laws work out of a sense of fairness, religion works out of a sense of fear, both are misappropriated by malevolent!
But on the main subject, ISIS and Islam, for me that Haider kids religion has nothing to do with his death, or with the behavior of ISIS. That kid is dead because he stabbed two police officers, many now wish to make this a religious issue which it clearly isn't because he'd still be dead if he was agnostic, if he hadn't stabbed people he would still be alive today! ISIS has no religion, they just use religion as a cover for otherwise anarchic activities that are diametrically opposed to the religion they claim to represent.
Look at the ISIS stereotype, lonely male virgin, derided by women in the western society he left, claims religious celibacy but really not by choice. Yet under vows of strength through abstinence marries and impregnates a child bride, then abusively dominates a family like an overlord until he grows tired of his wife and claims she committed adultery! This man is really a thief, a thief of womens rights, a thief of peoples freedoms and thief of happiness! Let his Sharia Law deal with his thefts in that very place he migrates to, only two of his peers need testify an oath on the Koran for him to be found guilty, we have no room for two laws here as we have a law and it is not Sharia Law.
Regardless, personally I think ISIS is as religiously invalid to Islam as were the Spaniards who took part in the Inquisition to Catholicism, the true motives of both groups lay elsewhere, they both want for wealth and power! ;)
These radical groups continue exist because they prey on forgiveness and tolerance. Like the Spaniards in the Inquisition who relied on the forgiveness of Rome, ISIS relies on the forgiveness of the west. Had they cut the heads off some Chinese officials I suspect the ISIS war would already be done and lost. But ISIS leaders are not so brave as to deliberately make themselves martyrs, that claim is made retrospectively after an unplanned death, and furthermore they are not stupid enough to poke the Chinese bear!
But on the main subject, ISIS and Islam, for me that Haider kids religion has nothing to with his death, or with the behavior of ISIS. That kid is dead because he stabbed two police officers, many now wish to make this a religious issue which it clearly isn't because he'd still be dead if he was agnostic, if he hadn't stabbed people he would still be alive today! ISIS has no religion, they just use religion as a cover for otherwise anarchic activities that are diametrically opposed to the religion they claim to represent.
Look at the ISIS stereotype, lonely male virgin, derided by women in the western society he left, claims religious celibacy but really not by choice. Yet under vows of strength through abstinence marries and impregnates a child bride, then abusively dominates a family like an overlord until he grows tired of his wife and claims she committed adultery! This man is really a thief, a thief of womens rights, a thief of peoples freedoms and thief of happiness! Let his Sharia Law deal with his thefts in that very place he migrates to, only two of his peers need testify an oath on the Koran for him to be found guilty, we have no room for two laws here as we have a law and it is not Sharia Law.
Regardless, personally I think ISIS is as religiously invalid to Islam as were the Spaniards who took part in the Inquisition to Catholicism, the true motives of both groups lay elsewhere, they both want for wealth and power! ;)
These radical groups continue exist because they prey on forgiveness and tolerance. Like the Spaniards in the Inquisition who relied on the forgiveness of Rome, ISIS relies on the forgiveness of the west. Had they cut the heads off some Chinese officials I suspect the ISIS war would already be done and lost. But ISIS leaders are not so brave as to deliberately make themselves martyrs, that claim is made retrospectively after an unplanned death, and furthermore they are not stupid enough to poke the Chinese bear!
Well said LP, one of the best posts of the year.
Are you serious, Thry?
Just because that's the acronym in English doesn't mean it is used in Arabic. We know what NATO is, but in French it is known as OTAN. The French call the USA les États-Unis.
To make your case, you'd have to show that there's no Arabic name for ISIS. Couldn't ISIS merely be the English translation of the Arabic name? Wikipedia gives the Arabic name and asserts it is known by the Arabic acronym Da'esh.
Sort of.
Personally, this is a storm in a tea cup created by a previous storm in a tea cup, that has negatively affected an entire area dating back to the establishment of Israel.
I also dont find it coincidental that so soon after the negative press about Palestine, that we are all of a sudden up in arms about a seperate issue in a similar location, that all of a sudden means that the Palestinian discussion has ceased completely.
As always, geo politically, things are not simple.
Ironically, we are sending in the troops here, whilst we were happy enough to sit by idly whilst a whole race of people are being persecuted in the West Bank.
The annexation of Palestine to create Israel unfortunately is the lightening rod for all Muslims however defined or labelled.
ISIS has no religion, they just use religion as a cover for otherwise anarchic activities that are diametrically opposed to the religion they claim to represent.
can you expand on this?
ISIS has no religion, they just use religion as a cover for otherwise anarchic activities that are diametrically opposed to the religion they claim to represent.
can you expand on this?
Disaffected and angry people using any excuse (religion in this case) to get attention and importance through harm and violence. Well, that's my humble take on it!
ISIS has no religion, they just use religion as a cover for otherwise anarchic activities that are diametrically opposed to the religion they claim to represent.
can you expand on this?
Did you see the press conference with Ken Lay and the two Sheiks (not ours) LR?
The Sheik who spoke articulately explained how ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Muslims.
Did you see the press conference with Ken Lay and the two Sheiks (not ours) LR?
The Sheik who spoke articulately explained how ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Muslims.
can you please link it?
The sad death of Numan Haider lays solely at the feet of the extremists such as ISIS. These radicals are using their outdated ideology to recruit disenfranchised youth to support their cause without any fear or concern of the consequences to the individuals. The media want to paint this kid as a monster and a terrorist from the world of Islam, to me he is a boy who has been let down by external influences which have preyed upon his circumstance.
This kid was no 'on-the-dole come-from-a-poor-family, disenfranchised' kid. He went to a good school was an ok student at least, had jobs, family obviously had money - judging by the family 2-storey home. So he does NOT fit the bill that so many muslims like to push. It is the religion that is the matter. >:(
Mate I'm sorry to break it to you but the disenfranchised are hardly stereotypically designed to satisfy our prejudices. Virgin teens of Islamic faith in a foreign country with a predetermination of our cultural stance are easy converts for the Jihadists despite efforts from our Government and the Islamic leaders of this country. This kid was recruited from a minority group and has died trying to deliver a message from a terrorist sect that has no place in our political landscape.
ISIS is no more representative of Muslims than the KKK is representative of Christians.
ISIS is no more representative of Muslims than the KKK is representative of Christians.
ISIS are taking the literal translation of the Koran. These are people who want to take the world back to the 7th century when the Koran was written.
Also Baggers, not sure it is great comparison. While yes they are both extremist groups ISIS reflects are wider struggle between the largest schism in Islam - Sunni v Shia (ISIS are Sunni).
KKK is a violent off shoot of an extreme baptist sect in the south of America. Virtually all Christian groups denounced the KKK at the time of their inception and continue to do so today.
True, but the KKK also chose to interpret the Old Testament literally. And many Fundamentalist Christians were and are eerily quiet in terms of KKK spruikings (or they give lip service).
Ultimately, I suspect, terrorism (in whatever form) comes down to any lunatic fringe with a gripe, angry and a dash mentally ill getting enough numbers and resources together.
Did you see the press conference with Ken Lay and the two Sheiks (not ours) LR?
The Sheik who spoke articulately explained how ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Muslims.
can you please link it?
I haven't tracked down the video yet LR but this should provide you with an idea of what was said:
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s4095202.htm?site=melbourne
One of Sheik Abdul Azim's best responses was along the lines of young Muslims being influenced by Sheik Google.
KKK is a violent off shoot of an extreme baptist sect in the south of America. Virtually all Christian groups denounced the KKK at the time of their inception and continue to do so today.
Today's KKK is far removed from the original organization. In fact there isn't one KKK, just several pathetic groups of racist, white supremacist neo-nazis.
While I think that the question about whether each group is representative of the religions they claim to represent is reasonable, it is an over-simplification.
KKK is a violent off shoot of an extreme baptist sect in the south of America. Virtually all Christian groups denounced the KKK at the time of their inception and continue to do so today.
Today's KKK is far removed from the original organization. In fact there isn't one KKK, just several pathetic groups of racist, white supremacist neo-nazis.
While I think that the question about whether each group is representative of the religions they claim to represent, it is an over-simplification.
ISIS is absolutely representative of Islam.... depending on gow you choose to interpret it and live by it.
ISIS are invoking instructions that they believe is the direct word of God as found in the Koran.
ISIS is no more representative of Muslims than the KKK is representative of Christians.
Also Baggers, not sure it is great comparison. While yes they are both extremist groups ISIS reflects are wider struggle between the largest schism in Islam - Sunni v Shia (ISIS are Sunni).
You have to be a bit careful here too Lance.
ISIS may be Sunni but they're hardly representative of all Sunni Muslims and in fact many Sunni dominated nations are opposed to them.
KKK is a violent off shoot of an extreme baptist sect in the south of America. Virtually all Christian groups denounced the KKK at the time of their inception and continue to do so today.
Today's KKK is far removed from the original organization. In fact there isn't one KKK, just several pathetic groups of racist, white supremacist neo-nazis.
While I think that the question about whether each group is representative of the religions they claim to represent, it is an over-simplification.
ISIS is absolutely representative of Islam.... depending on gow you choose to interpret it and live by it.
ISIS are invoking instructions that they believe is the direct word of God as found in the Koran.
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
ISIS is no more representative of Muslims than the KKK is representative of Christians.
Also Baggers, not sure it is great comparison. While yes they are both extremist groups ISIS reflects are wider struggle between the largest schism in Islam - Sunni v Shia (ISIS are Sunni).
You have to be a bit careful here too Lance.
ISIS may be Sunni but they're hardly representative of all Sunni Muslims and in fact many Sunni dominated nations are opposed to them.
True, of course not all Sunni's are ISIS supporters. Probably could have articulated that one better.
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
That maybe the case DJC but they are still using parts of the Koran as a basis for the killing to meet their ends.
ISIS is absolutely representative of Islam.... depending on gow you choose to interpret it and live by it.
ISIS are invoking instructions that they believe is the direct word of God as found in the Koran.
Well they've got you fooled at least. :P
ISIS is absolutely representative of Islam.... depending on gow you choose to interpret it and live by it.
ISIS are invoking instructions that they believe is the direct word of God as found in the Koran.
Well they've got you fooled at least. :P
how so?
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
That maybe the case DJC but they are still using parts of the Koran as a basis for the killing to meet their ends.
No they're not LR. They rely on an interpretation or corruption of the Koran rather than what is written. A bit like the right to lifers who use the Bible to justify killing folk at fertility centres.
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
That maybe the case DJC but they are still using parts of the Koran as a basis for the killing to meet their ends.
No they're not LR. They rely on an interpretation or corruption of the Koran rather than what is written. A bit like the right to lifers who use the Bible to justify killing folk at fertility centres.
I don't know how you can misinterpret the koran.
It is very succinct and to the point.
What ISIS and many other Islamist extremists do is take the Koran as the literal word of God as written by Mohammed in the 7th century.
And if that is what you are doing then it is very hard to misinterpret because it is all there in front of you.
You seem to know a lot LR. Can you show a few examples or 'parts' from the Koran which are the basis for their brutal regime?
You seem to know a lot LR. Can you show a few examples or 'parts' from the Koran which are the basis for their brutal regime?
PI2C, I don't want to go posting parts of the Koran as I fear it will be disrespectful.
I know I will be pilloried for not quoting it but I suggest you read it yourself and make up your own mind.
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
That maybe the case DJC but they are still using parts of the Koran as a basis for the killing to meet their ends.
No they're not LR. They rely on an interpretation or corruption of the Koran rather than what is written. A bit like the right to lifers who use the Bible to justify killing folk at fertility centres.
I don't know how you can misinterpret the koran.
It is very succinct and to the point.
What ISIS and many other Islamist extremists do is take the Koran as the literal word of God as written by Mohammed in the 7th century.
And if that is what you are doing then it is very hard to misinterpret because it is all there in front of you.
Not correct LR. In the same way that Christian sects place their own interpretation on what appears in the Christian Bible, Muslim sects and interpret what's written in the Koran; and that's the mainstream sects rather than the fundamentalists. No document written more than 1000 years ago can accommodate 21st century technology, mobility, communications, etc and the priests, imans and whatever determine how their followers should behave.
Islam is actually a religion based on tolerance and the Middle East used to be notable for the diversity of religions practiced there. That has changed dramatically in the last decade or so.
Not according the Sheik Abdul Azim who says that ISIS/ISIL is the enemy of Islam. 99% of the people they kill are Muslims.
That maybe the case DJC but they are still using parts of the Koran as a basis for the killing to meet their ends.
No they're not LR. They rely on an interpretation or corruption of the Koran rather than what is written. A bit like the right to lifers who use the Bible to justify killing folk at fertility centres.
I don't know how you can misinterpret the koran.
It is very succinct and to the point.
What ISIS and many other Islamist extremists do is take the Koran as the literal word of God as written by Mohammed in the 7th century.
And if that is what you are doing then it is very hard to misinterpret because it is all there in front of you.
The problem with the Qu'ran, like any religious book, is that, while it might have been written by a single author (quite unusual), it was put together by a single author. It is synthesis of writings from an extended period of time. As such, there are contradictions, there are good days and bad days, there are days when the Prophet felt betrayed with those close to him, who he then went to war with and there were days when he was raving. All this stuff was not arranged or edited by the Prophet, but by the people who followed him. Nor was it ever meant to be a blueprint for life for Muslims: it merely became so. The Prophet wrote for the problems and issues of his day and shows his hopes for the (near) future morals of his followers, based on the morals he saw of his people.
Times have changed. So has the way people relate to one another. A society has the morals it can afford and we can afford very different attitudes to what was acceptable in 635 AD. Smiting one's enemies is not the only way to control them, nor is cutting of a hand the only way to control a thief. As a result, much of what he wrote is no longer relevant.
And much of what he wrote is ignored by those who look for his writings to confirm their own views. For example, during the Crusades victorious Muslims often offered their defeated opponents to opportunity to convert to Islam and live (as a slave), or remain Christian and die. However, the Qu'ran states quite clearly that no Muslim may own another Muslim, that Muslims should not be slaves. Did that stop the Muslim leaders? Not a bit. They did not understand or chose to ignore one of the specific rules left by the Prophet.
Why ISIS will never totally win the hearts and minds in Australia.
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/bulldogs-fans-celebrate-win-in-the-streets-of-belmore-as-they-countdown-to-the-nrl-grand-final/story-fni0cx12-1227072778460?nk=685a5411d89ca1a83d0b9e8f3aa07f12
More than 120 Islamic scholars from around the world wrote an open letter to the leader of ISIS Al-Baghdadi, denouncing ISIS and its fundamentals. Everyone should at least go through these points to understand how ISIS’s ideology is far away from the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Full letter link is in the comments section.
Quick summary of the 17 page letter:
"1. It is forbidden in Islam to issue fatwas without all the necessary learning requirements. Even then fatwas must follow Islamic legal theory as defined in the Classical texts. It is also forbidden to cite a portion of a verse from the Qur’an—or part of a verse—to derive a ruling without looking at everything that the Qur’an and Hadith teach related to that matter. In other words, there are strict subjective and objective prerequisites for fatwas, and one cannot ‘cherry-pick’ Qur’anic verses for legal arguments without considering the entire Qur’an and Hadith.
2. It is forbidden in Islam to issue legal rulings about anything without mastery of the Arabic language.
3. It is forbidden in Islam to oversimplify Shari’ah matters and ignore established Islamic sciences.
4. It is permissible in Islam [for scholars] to differ on any matter, except those fundamentals of religion that all Muslims must know.
5. It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.
6. It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent.
7. It is forbidden in Islam to kill emissaries, ambassadors, and diplomats; hence it is forbidden to kill journalists and aid workers.
8. Jihad in Islam is defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose and without the right rules of conduct.
9. It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief.
10. It is forbidden in Islam to harm or mistreat—in any way—Christians or any ‘People of the Scripture’.
11. It is obligatory to consider Yazidis as People of the Scripture.
12. The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus.
13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.
14. It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.
15. It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.
16. It is forbidden in Islam to enact legal punishments (hudud) without following the correct
procedures that ensure justice and mercy.
17. It is forbidden in Islam to torture people.
18. It is forbidden in Islam to disfigure the dead.
19. It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God.
20. It is forbidden in Islam to destroy the graves and shrines of Prophets and Companions.
21. Armed insurrection is forbidden in Islam for any reason other than clear disbelief by the ruler and not allowing people to pray.
22. It is forbidden in Islam to declare a caliphate without consensus from all Muslims.
23. Loyalty to one’s nation is permissible in Islam.
24. After the death of the Prophet, Islam does not require anyone to emigrate anywhere.”
So LR here are a few examples for you of the Koran being contradicted by ISIS.
Carrotts.
You are missing the point.
Crash even highlighted the same point.
If you are reading in the context of the 7th century it is entirely different.
Islam doesnt have a central figure like a pope so self appointed leaders can use the passages literally.
Also... they arent koran quotes..
I know they're not quotes. They are summaries of what is in there.
I'm not missing the point at all, you are.
5. It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.
That addresses your other point.
I know they're not quotes. They are summaries of what is in there.
I'm not missing the point at all, you are.
5. It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.
That addresses your other point.
If you can find the corresponding passage in the koran I will be greatful.
Just an FYI, it is forbidden in Islam to commit violence against other believers of God.
Therefore, the only people who need fear Islamic people who are true to their beliefs, are to be atheists.