a reply to: Ridhya
Having gone to painstaking lengths to outline why radical Muslims are obeying their prophet and holy book by committing acts of terror I'm honestly
surprised, quoting terminology like people of the book appears to prove you're acquainted with Islamic literature, yet you quote no surah nor an
ayat, you're obviously passionate and believe what you're writing, nevertheless your message is nothing bar someone's strong assertion, that and
nothing more. Where is the coherent interpretation of Islam that makes it a non-violent, non-cultish movement?
Furthermore when you write: 'It (the Qur'an) explicitly prohibits killing "people of the book"' that's just not the case, simply reading surah
9:29 disproves what you've written. Read with me: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what
Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they
give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled."
Fight those who were given the Scripture, fight until they pay the non-believer tax and feel themselves humbled. However you may be dissatisfied by my
interpretation of the Islamic writings, for which we have Muslim writers who're thoroughly pleased to interpret the passages for you and I. Here's
Tafsir Ibn Kathir, one of the greatest Muslim commentaries ever to be written, which goes into explaining surah 9 of the Qur'an: (I have been
commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,
establish the prayer and pay the Zakah.) This honorable Ayah (9:5) was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, "It
abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolator, every treaty, and every term.'' Al-`Awfi said that Ibn `Abbas commented:
"No idolator had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara'ah was revealed. The four months, in addition to, all peace treaties
conducted before Bara'ah was revealed and announced had ended by the tenth of the month of Rabi` Al-Akhir.''
Every agreement of peace abrogated, no idolater has promise of safety, the above you'll find is the Islamic state, it's al qaeda, it's boko haram,
it's everything we're told Islam isn't. Returning again to Tafsir Ibn Kathir (on Qur’an 9:30)—Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated
because they are idolaters and disbelievers. Allah the Exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving Jews and Christians,
who uttered this terrible statement and utter lies against Allah, the Exalted. As for the Jews, they claimed that Uzayr was the son of God, Allah is
free of what they attribute to Him. As for the misguidance of Christians over Isa, it is obvious.
Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated. It is obvious, Ridhya. I hope you're open to changing your mind on the subject. Although you're
totally right when you write religion is no excuse, yet it is justification to Muslim fighters everywhere, though such men shouldn't be called
radicals, as they're doing exactly what the Qur'an teaches, they ought to be called complete Muslims, whereas Muslims who won't slay are incomplete
(or hypocrite) Muslims. That leads into your point about Muslims murdering others supposedly professing the same faith, it's the complete believer in
Islam who's killing who they'd call hypocrites and apostates of the faith. Moreover, as for the sake of clarity this deserves saying, you standing
up to Islamic doctrine isn't an attack upon Muslims, you're yet rational and clear of head when challenging what appears to be an evil ideology. In
football it's called playing the ball and not the man.
"Christ was against violence and in the end he chose to die rather than fight back against his killers." Which Christ The King most certainly could
have done according to the biography of Matthew: "Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve
legions of angels." Yet he did no such thing, instead the Messiah went to the cross and an ignominious death so that you and I may be arrayed in
righteousness. That my good friend is what Christianity looks like, not whatever military skirmish America may or may not be involved in. Together
we've outlined both Islam and Christianity therefore, with one being centered around love, self-sacrifice and an awesome King who so loved his
ungrateful subjects that he died for them. Then there's Islam, the paedophilic throwback that demands the death of ex-Muslims (Sahih al-Bukhari,
9:83:17), allows Muslim men to marry prepubescent girls (Qur'an 33:49), taxes non-Muslims (surah 9:29), and refuses you the right to play certain
musical instruments (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/451), draw pictures (Sahih al-Bukhari, no: 5609), and even wear yellow clothes! (Sahih Muslim 5173.) This
is how cults operate, it's about control.
Red herrings suchlike America's war history and Christian beliefs are the excuse that just won't save Islam any more, moreover whatever apologists
say regarding Islam (if they're attempting to say it's peaceful) routinely goes against the message of the Qur'an, Mohammed and every Muslim
commentator that's there to be read. So who's speaking for Islam, a frothy mocha latte drinking student at Starbucks who's most in depth knowledge
of Islam is gained from conversations with their equally vacuous friends, or Mohammed (the self-confessed terrorist) who said: "....I have been made
victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)...."? (Bukhari: 4 Volume 52 Hadith 220.)