America's Most Prominant Muslim Scholar On ISIS

ftfy

that being said, done farming my KI, you have fun ladies.

Weather you believe the text or not, both sides of whom we're talking about do. so it doesn't matter what you're interpretation of anything is. only that your saying the scholar is the one twisting what the text says. if that's what you think, then prove that the scholar is the one twisting information and not the other side. That is all that im asking you do to.

People are bitching about misinterpreting "holy" texts, that's a classic. You all seem to be confused that if you read something that is not written by you, you are interpreting it. No one in this day and age, scholar or regular average Joe who reads them can know what the writers were trying to mean or say.

I'm curious as to how you guys would interpret a passage from the Qu'ran and from the Bible.

Qu'ran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Deuteronomy (2:32-34) - "Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, unto battle at Jahaz. And Jehovah our God delivered him up before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed every inhabited city, with the women and the little ones; we left none remaining."

I personally find both these little passages to be quite evil and to me it seems like both are something that the legions of Mordor would follow if Sauron ever wrote a book. A lot more like these where they come from too. So again, what are your interpretations?

Such a troll.

It proves itself you nimrod, there's only so many ways to interpret "kill infidels" and other such ludicrously evil statements, none of which are good.

Yeah, I know kj is, but you're severely confused if you think I troll. I don't care if anyone gets pissed off about what I say.

exactly my point, the dude is a scholar, he probably studies. he probably has a goddamn certification, proving he has some logicality to piecing the interpretation of ancient texts better then some philanthropist group out murdering people. yet here you are defending the fact that the scholar probably has it wrong. or you just bury your head in the sand about what their talking about and just start shooting from the hip about the subject as a whole. Stick to what the beef was.

you keep calling me a troll because here i am actually continuing on the illogical nature your presenting and you can't actually refute it with sustenance. you bluffed you knew a little about religion. you can't even bring anything to the table in reguards to what im talking about, so you post troll pics. lol you win ROFL

CONGRATULATIONS YOU POSTED THE FIRST TROLL HASTAG PIC. YOU WIN

I wouldn't assert that, as some of the meanings are very clear, or in the case of some writings, the meaning is written out.

But it is ludicrous to assert that one believer of a text isn't following the text right when they're doing exactly as the text says, nevermind the no true Scotsman argument of it all.

Nah I'm pretty sure you can interpret anything you want in any way you could think of. For example as you said, "Kill infidels." It can be taken literally as stab them with a spork until they bleed out and then scoop out their eyeballs or it can mean that you kill off the infidelity in them by converting them to *insert religion here*. There's two interpretations for one thing that might seem clear cut. Either way the dude who follows either interpretation is an ***.

Certifications mean absolutely dickweed, I know a lot of people that are certified in ***, and I wouldn't put them in charge of running a register.

You obviously don't know what the word philanthropist means btw.

I know people that have studied religion too, and their opinion means didlysquat as they're just tools of said religion, case in point: a guy I know who has a degree in religious studies from Liberty "University" that degree is worth less than ***paper.

This is what the guy's saying: "no they got it wrong, you're supposed to read it this way" this is what I'm saying: "it says the exact opposite" this is what you're saying "nah uh, prove it." When it's right there, for anyone to read.

I'm not going to hold your hand like a baby, but since that apparently is what you are, I can see why you expect me to do that for you.

either way i was proving the dude put his life goal towards studying ancient text. the probability that he has wrong over the murderers. he is also saying all his peers believe the same things. he's probably lieing about that also right?

Except the one way isn't killing them, it's converting them, means something entirely different. Your point may have a different story if so many translations say the same thing, and so many people over thousands of years haven't been doing just that. But I digress, and I really need to get to sleep.

The amount of time of his life he's spent doing it is irrelevant.

I'm not saying he's a liar, I'll take his word that he believes it to be true, I'm just saying that there's quite common hard knowledge to the exact opposite of what he's saying, regardless of what he and his peers say/think. Also you were asserting, not proving* Not to mention that he's very bias, so I don't take his word for it at all, even if he could remotely be accurate, it's muddled by evidence to the contrary and his obvious bias.

I have a friend who's spent years learning and working on computers, yet I still wouldn't let him open mine up for anything.

I can't find a image that shows just how stupid this thread is. ; ;

I was going to go with a stupidity meter but I couldn't find one that was stupid enough.

We broke it sir.

Depends on what kill meant in the old days or heck even now. When you "kill the lights" it means you turn off the lights, you don't actually shoot the bulb with a magnum. Have you read Shakespeare's work? It's technically "English", but it's gibberish for me without the translations on the side. This is worse considering the texts are translated from a completely different language. Heck have you ever tried translating Japanese to English directly? That can be some funny ***.

Lets be real for a second. You're the one being the A hole here. all i said was that, I love that the scholar, who has more credibility then murders, is awesome for showing them(isis) up with documentation and joint credibility from his peers. yet your antagonizing the whole situation. yes you don't believe in religion and it has nothing on you and your life. great. but guess what the people fighting over there, both sides, have their life entwined with their religion. So it does matter, what the differences are between the radicals and the norms. So I'm siding with the guy over there that is most logically sound and siding with them. your just arguing me for the sake of spite.

That is what Jet does. Welcome to FFXIAH.com/Forum

Yet he doesn't have more credibility, his interpretation is just as equal as theirs, they both claim to be followers of Islam, yet only the radicals are the only ones following the text to the letter.

I'm not antagonizing anything, that conflict will continue until thee end of time or until one side is wiped out, with or without me.

I'm arguing because I'm sick and tired of religious apologists trying to say that the religion is free from blame, when it very much indeed is not, it's not entirely to blame as some would have it, but it plays a very key role in the situation.

The guy isn't logically sound at all, no person who utilizes blind faith for anything is a logically sound person, they can have logical moments, but they are not logical people.

again with being completely oblivious as to what goes on around you.

I'm aware of what you're saying, but it's quite irrelevant to the point, and at this point you're just playing devil's advocate. It's very clear by the numerous passages that they meant to end the lives of non-believers, among many other horrible things, their will and intent is stated numerous times. Not to mention that it's not that difficult to translate things based upon uses of words of a period, in regards to the middle English that is Shakespeare: I understand it just fine, and quite enjoy it.

(ssh, don't tell Mag).

Anyway, like I said earlier: you ladies have fu.

You've got that backwards as usual.

Here is an article going over author and audience interpretations. It's on cracked so it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
6 Books Everyone (Including Your English Teacher) Got Wrong

Ray Bradbury on Fahrenheit 451

Machiavelli on The prince

Just to correct you, Islam itself does not promote violence nor killing in any sort of way that the ISIS does. More in fact, what ISIS is doing is NOT religious in any sort of way.

And that's coming from a person who is a Muslim and who actually studies/studied the holy scripture.

I'm not really playing devil's advocate. I'm just pointing out to you that people can see things in different ways. You take it literally and another person who believes in the religion takes it another way. I personally agree that pretty much all religions are founded on violence and/or superstition and that is why I choose not to believe in them. The way I see them is that if Harry Potter is fiction, they have to be as well. Now if you can successfully transmute my teacup into a mouse, I may go back to being a Christian.

I surely love people who take scripts from out of context. As usual, if you would want to debate, I would not mind correcting your false understanding of that verse. Just give me the name of the Chapter you took it from and I will surely explain it to you.

Qu'ran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Unless I'm reading things wrong, it says to not befriend anyone who is not a Muslim and to kill anyone who leaves Islam. Now I could be wrong, but if Islam didn't promote violence I'm pretty sure this passage and many like it wouldn't be part of the Qu'ran. Unless of course you're telling me Islam doesn't believe in every part of the Qu'ran and only cherry picks the peaceful parts out of it.

A true Muslim believer has to believe in EVERY word that the Quranic scripture says, similar to Christians and Jews to each respected holy text.

And I'm sorry to say but you misunderstood it wrong. May I ask from which Surah/Name of Chapter you took that quote from. So I can know from where you are quoting. Because seeing as how you are quoting things out of text, shows that you are the one who is Cherry picking texts. So I am asking to give me the name of the Surah/Name of Chapter.

Don't get me wrong, but this happens more time than you think, that's why I'm asking for you to give me the name of the chapter.

Or you could say that it states that you shouldn't be friends with bad people, and stop and kill those that use the belief in ways that are proscribed by the religious body/religious scholars.

*Edited*