Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
Questions and Discussions about Islam
 Whyislam.org Forums : WhyIslam : Questions and Discussions about Islam
Message Icon Topic: Justification for the murder of innocent(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 4 Next >>
Author Message
Traveller  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2254
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 27 November 2017 at 10:43pm
Yes, NB, you can call me by that name because I believe the Quran to be true 100%.

We must agree to disagree.

In life, be like a traveller. Take only what you need
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 28 November 2017 at 12:45am
Originally posted by Traveller

Yes, NB, you can call me by that name because I believe the Quran to be true 100%.

We must agree to disagree.
I don't know what I would be agreeing to.

I don't know why this forum exists. Any non-Muslim is going to be appalled at what Muslims say here and there is no chance that this forum can promote better relations between Muslims and non-Muslims.

If the Muslims aren't going to be honest enough to admit that the genocide which is spoken of with pride in the Qur'an is viewed as a heinously barbaric act in modern times. We are no longer so tribal that we can accept the violence of our antecedents as models for our times.

There can be little doubt for anyone who takes some time to look into the Qur'an and, understanding the absolute way that Muslims understand the Qur'an, that Islam is a religion with a violent past and which provides models for a violent future. The violent acts that we see today are unavoidable unless Islam finds a way to change.

I don't see any point in posting here any longer. Not one Muslim here will carry on an honest discussion.
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 28 November 2017 at 2:05pm
Once again, the "Quote of the Week" on aboutislam.net belies what Islam really is:

"Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said: “You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.”
by Hadith in Sahih Al-Bukhari

What I've learned about Islam is that whatever is said, so is the opposite. You can always find the text you need for any situation, which ever way you wish to go.

In this case, treat your enemies with forgiveness and kindness? Then heed this Hadith. Murder your enemies and take their property and land? Then heed the verses 33:23-27.

The religion's "completeness" is in providing you with your choice of contradictory teachings. I have yet to find a consistent teaching in Islam to adopt for myself; one that isn't more easily understood from a more coherent source.

Edited by Non Believer - 28 November 2017 at 2:06pm
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3224
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 3:33pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

In this case, treat your enemies with forgiveness and kindness? Then heed this Hadith. Murder your enemies and take their property and land? Then heed the verses 33:23-27.


I don't post regularly here any longer, but I just had to chime in about the unfairness of this post. The political vs. personal components of Islam is something I'm finding that many Western non-Muslims have difficulty grasping, and you more so than most others, NB. Perhaps that's because Christianity is a personal faith separate from the state, and Westerners then use it as a template to understand Islam, which ought to be a no-no.

There isn't any contradiction, only your misunderstanding. Don't take out (what are in reality) your frustrations at the limitations of your own knowledge, reasoning and understanding on our faith and make it out as incoherent.

This isn't the first time we've been down this road either. I've hashed this concept at least 2 or 3 times before and you still don't get the difference between personal/individual-level and community/political/state-level directives.

Your understanding of religion in general, as a concept, is that it doesn't govern community and/or state affairs, only relations between individuals. That's not our definition of religion. Different definitions don't make anyone wrong. They just make people different. I'm not holding my breath that it will ever sink in for you.

Edited by Shenango - 30 November 2017 at 3:44pm
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 5:57pm
Originally posted by Shenango

Originally posted by Non Believer

In this case, treat your enemies with forgiveness and kindness? Then heed this Hadith. Murder your enemies and take their property and land? Then heed the verses 33:23-27.


I don't post regularly here any longer, but I just had to chime in about the unfairness of this post. The political vs. personal components of Islam is something I'm finding that many Western non-Muslims have difficulty grasping, and you more so than most others, NB. Perhaps that's because Christianity is a personal faith separate from the state, and Westerners then use it as a template to understand Islam, which ought to be a no-no.

There isn't any contradiction, only your misunderstanding. Don't take out (what are in reality) your frustrations at the limitations of your own knowledge, reasoning and understanding on our faith and make it out as incoherent.

This isn't the first time we've been down this road either. I've hashed this concept at least 2 or 3 times before and you still don't get the difference between personal/individual-level and community/political/state-level directives.

Your understanding of religion in general, as a concept, is that it doesn't govern community and/or state affairs, only relations between individuals. That's not our definition of religion. Different definitions don't make anyone wrong. They just make people different. I'm not holding my breath that it will ever sink in for you.
I feel so honoured that you would return to the forum for the sole purpose of insulting me again. You ramble on and on about what you think I understand and what you think I don't understand. I haven't missed your hubris at all.

My point concerns the purported character of an historic figure of whom we know about only through accounts passed down by people who revere his myth. The fact that a "religion" (whatever your definition of that is) has developed around this "heroic" character is irrelevant to the discussion.

I only want to know why Muslims are not bothered by this genocide and why they don't see this genocide as something being used as an example by Muslims today.

If you are going to post here, then speak to the issues rather than attacking those who are trying to understand them.
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3224
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 6:47pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

I only want to know why Muslims are not bothered by this genocide and why they don't see this genocide as something being used as an example by Muslims today.


What genocide? Are you referring to the execution of the men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe of Medina, and enslavement of their women and children?
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Doris  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Agnostic(Agnostic)
Posts: 173
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 7:30pm
Was that despicable event perhaps the instigation for centuries of attempts to achieve genocide against the world's Jews?

If so, is this a religious or a political policy?
History Buff
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 8:00pm
Originally posted by Shenango

Originally posted by Non Believer

I only want to know why Muslims are not bothered by this genocide and why they don't see this genocide as something being used as an example by Muslims today.


What genocide? Are you referring to the execution of the men of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe of Medina, and enslavement of their women and children?
I am referring to what Muslims learn from the Quranic verses 33:9-27 and in particular 33:26 and 33:27 where it is stated that the followers of Muhammad killed and took captive and "inherited" the land and property of some (unnamed) people. Implicit is that none of the residents of this tribe remained, otherwise the land would have remained in the possession of the survivors. This is the only source that is purported to date from the actual event and I am assuming that this was a genocide.

There are later accounts which add to this conclusion, but I'm satisfied with accepting the words which are purported to have come straight from Muhammad's mouth.

I am attempting to approach this issue objectively.

Edited by Non Believer - 30 November 2017 at 8:04pm
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3224
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 November 2017 at 9:59pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

This is the only source that is purported to date from the actual event and I am assuming that this was a genocide.


Ok, we're talking about the same event. Genocide? Ok, I'll humor you along since you're adamant that I'm too cocky and insulting. So, NB, what would you have done with the tribe that was executed instead of genocide?
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Doris  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Religion: Agnostic(Agnostic)
Posts: 173
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 01 December 2017 at 12:38am
I have read that the tribe was attacked by Mohammed and his warriors. They surrendered without a fight, or have I got this wrong? They were attacked on their own land.

Is it just a coincidence that the extermination of the tribe let Mohammed take their land and possessions to himself?

If what Mohammed wanted was the land, why not exile the tribe? It would still be a reprehensible act, for even such a solution would also involve mass punishment of an entire group of people, babies and old people, boys and many others who doubtless had no part in the "treachery".

Despite the phony baloney excuses used to justify this atrocity, it was a genocide. The tribe was wiped out.
History Buff
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 01 December 2017 at 2:33am
Originally posted by Shenango

Originally posted by Non Believer

This is the only source that is purported to date from the actual event and I am assuming that this was a genocide.


Ok, we're talking about the same event. Genocide? Ok, I'll humor you along since you're adamant that I'm too cocky and insulting. So, NB, what would you have done with the tribe that was executed instead of genocide?
Now we're getting somewhere. I'm not wishing to judge Muhammad using modern standards. Maybe it was the only course available to him.

It is the constant denial that Muhammad would ever execute an innocent person that I am objecting to. It is the constant denial that the various atrocities committed by Islamic dictators in recent times is consistent with early Islamic traditions. It is the constant denial that killing non-believers who pose any sort of a threat to an Islamic state is consistent with early Islamic tradition. All of these things were condoned by Muhammad and carried on by his followers and the Rightly Guided Caliphs.

It is these denials that anger me when it is obvious that these violent actions were very much part of early Islam.

It is the denial that modern fundamentalists who follow the example of Muhammad and the early Caliphs are following these Islamic traditions.

Edited by Non Believer - 01 December 2017 at 2:40am
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3224
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 01 December 2017 at 9:47am
Originally posted by Non Believer

It is the constant denial that Muhammad would ever execute an innocent person that I am objecting to.


In the context of this discussion, this statement could be taken to imply that your position is that the Jewish tribe whose men were executed was innocent. Clarify that. Justify your position. Tell me what you would have done in the Prophet's place, and why that's better than what he did.

I'm seriously all ears. If you're going to say Muslims deny that their Prophet (PBUH) killed innocent people, then you shoulder the burden of showing their innocence. Is that reasonable?

Edited by Shenango - 01 December 2017 at 10:40am
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Non Believer  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate

Religion: Atheist(Secular Humanist)
Posts: 1033
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 01 December 2017 at 12:33pm
Well at least you should say what you believe them to be guilty of.

It is normal, especially for a capital offence, that the standard is that it is for you to show their guilt. However, to keep the conversation going, I'll play along once I know what it is that I'm defending.
Men do you harm either because they fear you or because they hate you.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Shenango  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Religion: Islam(Sunni)
Posts: 3224
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 01 December 2017 at 2:21pm
Originally posted by Non Believer

Well at least you should say what you believe them to be guilty of...I'll play along once I know what it is that I'm defending.


No, sir. I know what they were guilty of. Most somewhat educated Muslims know of this well-attested incident, and we all can still and do live with it. We (Muslims) all understand that the Prophet (PBUH) formed a state in Medina that was periodically at war with its neighbors. Wars are ugly, there are allies and enemies. People get killed. Booty and property are taken. Soldiers, women and children alike are taken captive.

Muslims have always believed that no one was ever killed by the Prophet (PBUH) or on behalf of his mission unjustly. Now, there are a handful of cases where a few of his companions were responsible for 'friendly fire'-type incidents, but they were few and far in between, and atoned for. It's nothing that would disqualify the core of the Islamic message.

You come along 15 centuries later claiming these people were "innocent"...and you have used this word at least twice now. That's news to us (Muslims), so I'm issuing you an open invitation for the second time now to state your case. I'm not going to do your homework for you. I WILL NOT fall into the trap of making your case for you. You can't be angry with us if you're unwilling to put forth the effort to show why we shouldn't live with these events.

We're hard core believers, buddy. A few half-baked lines about vague links between early Islamic history and current "Islamic dictators" (whatever those are) just isn't going to cut it. We don't have the dismissive view of religion that you start with, so if you want to bring us over to your view of things you're going to have roll your sleeves up and get to work.

The ball's in your court. Either put up or shut up. Can I be any clearer?
"I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none"--Paul c. 55 CE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 4 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.