|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6502 days) Posts: 756 From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Does Islam need a Reformation? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
CanadianSteve,
I hope we can discuss this in a rational and dispassionate manner. If you have cooled down now, I would be happy to be your partner in this discussion. Because I am a Muslim and I am also concerned by the Islamists. Having said that, you asked whether there is something intrinsic in Islam that leads to Islamism and violence. Well, the Qur'an did have some rules of warfare, and it does give Muslims licence for retaliatory violence. [But also note that it does not condone aggression--Muslims should only fight if attacked first]. However the Qur'an also taught that violence should be stopped if aggression and oppression has ceased. The Islamist ideology itself emerged from a set of factors: post-colonialism, a general dislike of Western domination, and ideas from early 20th century revivalist thinkers like Jamaluddin al-Afghani, Abul A'la Maududi, and Sayyid Quthb. The establishment of Israel is also a major factor, given the violent ways used to displace the native Palestinians [Jews could've bought their lands and move in peacefully, but the violence's already done]. And most importantly, for today's Islamist terrorists, they're a direct product of the US, who trained them, have them radicalized, and used them against the Soviets during the cold war. This is only apparent when you realize that many al-Qaeda leaders and their supporters used to fought in Afghanistan.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
Steve,
I'll only discuss with you and I'll ignore Faith because she's incapable of rational discussion.
quote: Well I haven't been impressed by your replies at the London bomb thread and the other Islam reformation thread. But I'll overlook that for now.
quote: From what I know about the history of Islam, during the lifetime of Muhammad, expansion was limited to Arabia and parts of the Middle East[up to Syria & Iraq by his death]. I can admit that some is motivated by a lust of conquest. Islam united warlike Arab tribes. Now that they can't fight each other anymore, the only way to channel their aggression is outside. And their immediate neighbours happen to be the Christian Eastern Roman Empire. The lust to conquest is not exclusive to Arabs. It also appeared among Mongols [see Genghis Khan and his descendants], Romans, exploration-age Europeans. The Qur'an just happen not to curb it. Besides, if you compare it to Christianity, Christianity also borrows the power of conquerors [its association with the Roman Empire helped it spread across the old world]. But since you're Jewish [IIRC] I'm sure that doesn't concern you. The Qur'an does not say anything about world domination though. It's just this lust for conquest looked for a religious backing from time to time. I'll leave aside the Israel issue for this moment. I know we see it differently, but the fact is its existence flamed a common cause among modern-day Islamists. About comparing al-Qaeda with the Wahabbis, the Iran Revolution, and the Ikhwan al-Muslimin, do understand that all three movements are more concerned with local issues [Saudi, Iran, Egypt]. Al-Qaeda & co. is international-oriented and they have no negotiable goals [unlike, say, the Ikhwan or Hizbullah, who has been incorporated into politics in Egypt and Syria].
quote: You're exaggerating the millions upon millions there. If only it's like that, we should see all Muslims will behave like the Islamists. But we don't. The majority of Muslims are peace-loving moderates. About the Sword verses, do read Jazzns' exposition. It is true that taken out of context they can be used to justify violence but that's selective quoting.
quote: FYI, I won't say that Islamist terrorists have 'solid theological reasoning'. How can they be, if they violate the 'no killing innocents' rule? But then again, Islam does not have a central authority so nobody can enforce their interpretation onto the whole body of Muslims [unlike Catholics]. The Islamists, and not just them, many Muslims are outraged by what they see as injustice and exploitation by the US. In recent years, the invasion of Afghanistan [which failed to eradicate Osama] and the illegal invasion of Iraq has put more fuel to the fire. A friend of mine in an informal discussion that GW Bush can be said as Osama's main recruiting lieutenant: GWB's policies has made more people support the terrorists' cause. The 'war on terror' could've been done in a better way. Indonesia managed to handle its own band of al-Qaeda supporters and violent Islamists efficiently: almost all living plotters of the Bali bomb, and many of those involved in latter cases have been captured and jailed. Why didn't the US, say, send teams of intelligence agents and special troops to infiltrate, say, Afghanistan or Pakistan and capture OBL, Mullah Omar, al-Zawahiri, etc. I'm sure the US authorities is capable of doing that operation. But instead of doing that, Bush brought his whole armed forces and destroyed two countries and millions of innocent citizens on the way. And still he failed to catch the culprits.
quote: Unfortunately, I can't see that this proposal will work. Every Muslim knows agrees that there is only one accepted Arabic text of the Qur'an, and it has never been altered since it was revealed to the Messenger. The closest you can get is to teach peaceful interpretations of the Qur'an, and this has been happening all the way, as evidenced by the majority of Muslims who are peaceful. Yes, we need a reformation. I know that sometimes Muslim religious teachers taught hate and bigotry. These are one part of the problem, which Muslims must address. The other part is on the Westerners' hands, to try to understand issues that concern Muslims. European nations IMO have a better handle on the Muslim issue, but I still don't see wise moves by the US. The need for reformation and change is Westerners' too.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
Hence my refusal to discuss with her. That last sentence, claiming the last chapter of the Qur'an as an order to annihilate non-Muslims, is just false. The last chapter, an-Nas, 'the Man', is a prayer for protection!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
The 'renowned scholar' couldn't even get the facts straight! [That 'last chapter' quote did it for me]. Hence I ignore you. I know how you behave at discussions. At least Steve showed a willingness to discuss things in good faith [pun intended].
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
Renowned scholar said
quote: The last chapter of the Quran is Chapter114The Man In the name of God, the Almighty, the Merciful. Say: "I seek refuge with the Lord of mankind,""The King of mankind," "The god of mankind," "From the evil of the sneaking whisperer," "Who whispers into the chests of mankind," "From among the Jinn and mankind."
Qur'an http://yaqb.lrhazi.com/index.php?query=c%3D114 Renowned scholar's credibility goes up in flames. This message has been edited by Andya Primanda, 07-28-2005 09:41 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
The Qur'an in the 1880s would have the same last chapter!
Man, that was the lamest getaway argument ever. To Steve: Sorry I must be off now. I'll get back to you soon.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
No it hasn't.
Only in your dreams. I've seen old Qur'ans from past centuries on exhibition and the chapter numbers are always the same.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024