If someone had asked me to explain Surah 9:5, it wasn't all that long ago that I would have been at a loss for words. It’s five minutes after nine? It's when your working hours are nine to five? Oh wait—I remember. Isn’t that a zone coverage look, where the defense sets up in a Cover 2, but the weak side safety blitzes from the outside?
Actually, it goes like this:
quote
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists [non-Muslims] wherever you find them, and capture and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
So, kill the non-Muslims? That doesn't sound very promising. But is that what the Qur'an commands for Muslims? Or is that what Surah 9:5 of the Qur'an commands for Muslims?
If you think that's a meaningless question--a "no brainer", as it were--then you just flunked out of Mereology 101. Because you tried to read the Qur'an before you educated yourself on how to read the Qur'an. "I never advise a non-Muslim who wants to find out more about Islam to blindly grab the nearest copy of an English-language Quran they can find," Mehdi Hasan, a journalist for Al Jazeera, said during the panel discussion at Georgetown.
So, there was a panel discussion at Georgetown? Why yes there was. And guess who already covered it for you? That's an aside.
Surah 9:5 is about a specific moment in history. A specific set of circumstances. The Muslims had been forcibly exiled from Mecca by the non-Muslims who controlled that city. The Muslims had been forced to abandon their real estate--the homes, businesses, and other non-relocatable assets of Mecca that they once owned, and that were wrongly taken away from them. They wanted back in, and after eight years of pleading and unsuccessful diplomacy, they finally took up arms under their leader, Mohammed, and pushed the non-Muslims out of Mecca.
It was an "Occupy Mecca" kind of thing. But not just civii disobedience. They took it to the next level. Swords, and I dunno-catapults? Bows and arrows? Slingshots? Camel-pucky? The 7th century weapons of war. After eight years of being forcibly and unjustly exiled, who could blame them?
This, from “Jihad and the Islamic Law of War”; Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute (of Jordan); 2009.
quote
Muslims are expected to live in peace with their neighbors whenever possible, and must respect treaties, but this never precludes the right to pre-emptive or responsive self-defense. Indeed, fourteen centuries ago Islam drew a line between pre-emption and aggression, allowing the former--as in the Prophet’s campaigns at Khaybar and Mu’tah--but condemning the latter. "Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but do not start hostilities. For God does not love aggressors." Al-Baqarah, 2 :190.
So who do you think has thought long and hard about how to read the Qur'an, before actually reading the Qu'ran? The scholars at the Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute of Jordan? Or some ISIS creep? That's a rhetorical question---and a "no brainer".
Odds are, you've already wasted at least 15 minutes of your precious life, misinforming yourself online about Islam at "cheap thrills" venues like Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrugs, from the likes of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. Or if not that, then just reading rant-level messages at certain online discussion forums, like--I dunno--maybe the off topic section of Pennock's Fiero Forum (just a wild guess).
I have 6+ minutes of expert video testimony from two people who have thought long and hard about how to read the Qur'an. These are YouTube videos. Each one is just about 3 minutes long.
Explanation of Surah 9:5, and kill them where ever you find them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQOIXuw1gFw Lesley Hazleton, who finally starts talking about 40 seconds into this YouTube video, describes herself as an agnostic, of Jewish heritage. She is the author of "The First Muslim", published in hardback in 2013 and subsequently in paperback.
Kill Them Wherever You Find Them Quran Verse Explained Mufti Menk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSs6Un3C06Y Ismail (ibn Musa) Menk is a well known Muslim cleric and educator, and the Grand Mufti of Zimbabwe. His spoken English is very "English". An Oxfordian style and accent, maybe--I really dunno.
It wouldn't be all that surprising to me if some new atrocity perpetrated somewhere around the world by radical Islamists has already become one of the top news stories, and I won't know about it until I finish with this message and go on to the next thing.
But it's not because the perpetrators understood the Qur'an.
It's because they didn't.
"Part of the problem, I think, is that we imagine that the Qur'an can be read as we usually read a book."
Originally posted by Tony Kania: Their "book" is a guide. I can agree on interpretations, but not the fundamental context behind this "book".
Interpretations are my concern; the fundamental context is not.
What is the fundamental context? That a man named Mohammed had a revelation from God, and that he had the revelation transcribed into a book called the Qur'an?
I don't "agree" (to use your word) with that. I don't believe that is how the Qur'an came to be.
Really? I haven't ever read so much as a page of "The First Muslim" or anything else that Lesley Hazleton may have written.
I wasn't aware of her existence until a few hours ago, when I started rolling out this new discussion thread.
I was looking for video presentations from sources that I think are credible and authoritative, with speakers of the King's--I mean the Queen's--English that would not be difficult for anyone of Pennock's to understand, in the purely linguistic sense--and that are brief.
These were the first ones that I located on YouTube that check off all of these boxes.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-07-2017).]
Really? I haven't ever read so much as a page of "The First Muslim" or anything else that Lesley Hazleton may have written.
I wasn't aware of her existence until a few hours ago, when I started rolling out this new discussion thread.
...
I believe you. I read over several of her articles, and found similar writing styles. I will take this as an obvious coincidence missed on my part. Well, not so much missed, but more spoken before knowing the truth.
It wouldn't be because they understood the Qur'an.
Your beef (and my beef as well, and of course it's way more than just a "beef"...) is with certain Muslims, but not the Qur'an.
The Qur'an is a book.
Learning how to read the Qur'an is what the religion (Islam) is all about.
Then, why are you wasting your time preaching to us? Many of us, including me, are no longer listening. Wouldn't your effort be better spent trying to educate those errant "certain Muslims"?
Originally posted by williegoat: Then, why are you wasting your time preaching to us? Many of us, including me, are no longer listening. Wouldn't your effort be better spent trying to educate those errant "certain Muslims"?
No. I'm not capable of that. I can only identify certain Muslims, or non-Muslims that have written about Islam and the Qur'an, and "root" for their understanding to prevail over the distortions and misconceptions of the "pushy" Muslims that think (wrongly) that God wants them to force others to submit to Islam.
The more that people onboard here at Pennock's put up messages that trash the religion itself and its most fundamental text, the more recreation I have found in explaining why I do not agree with that line of thought.
Them folks here that I have just called out (although not by name) would not be welcome at the White House National Security Council, as it is currently headed up by the President's National Security Advisor, General H.R. McMaster, who said this:
quote
At an all-hands meeting of the National Security Council on Thursday, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster said jihadist terrorists aren't true to their professed religion and that the use of the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" doesn't help the U.S. in working with allies to defeat terrorist groups, an official present at the session confirmed to CNN.
The phrase is unhelpful because terrorist organizations like ISIS represent a perversion of Islam, and are thus un-Islamic, McMaster said, according to a source who attended the meeting.
I am not suggesting that anyone needs to not say "radical Islamic terrorism". But anyone who parses this statement from "H.R." has to understand that he is distinguishing between an authentic presentation of Islam--the presentation that I have just created--and the perverted and false representations of Islam that are upheld by the out-and-out terror groups like ISIS, and also by the "pushy" Muslims that want to encroach upon Western nations by making what should be their private religious beliefs and practices into public beliefs and practices; i.e., to suborn entire Western nations into an imposition of Islam upon those who do not want to be part of Club Mo'. If you get my drift. Mo' for Mohammed.
That is kind of an expansion or an enlargement of that brief statement from H.R. McMaster, but you can't have these "pushy" Muslims without also having pushback from people who want to maintain the longstanding separation between church and state (or mosque and state) that is foundational to Western governance and culture. And if you have that push and that pushback, then you are so close to an out-and-out terror situation, with wrong-headed Muslims resorting to violence, or resorting to coercive tactics that are essentially quasi-violence in their efforts to remake Western nations into Islamic theocracies or caliphates, then there is no longer any real distinction.
You wouldn't want to post messages here on Pennock's that would disappoint President Donald J. Trump's serving National Security Advisor... would you?
I mean, that would be kind of like insulting the Trump-ster himself.
I hope not.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-07-2017).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: I am not suggesting that anyone needs to not say "radical Islamic terrorism". But anyone who parses this statement from "H.R." has to understand that he is distinguishing between an authentic presentation of Islam--the presentation that I have just created--and the perverted and false representations of Islam that are upheld by the out-and-out terror groups like ISIS, and also by the "pushy" Muslims that want to encroach upon Western nations by making what should be their private religious beliefs and practices into public beliefs and practices; i.e., to suborn entire Western nations into an imposition of Islam upon those who do not want to be part of Club Mo'. If you get my drift. Mo' for Mohammed.
That is kind of an expansion or an enlargement of that brief statement from H.R. McMaster, but you can't have these "pushy" Muslims without also having pushback from people who want to maintain the longstanding separation between church and state (or mosque and state) that is foundational to Western governance and culture. And if you have that push and that pushback, you are so close to an out-and-out terror situation, with wrong-headed Muslims trying to remake Western nations into Islamic theocracies or caliphates, there's no real distinction.
You wouldn't want to post messages here that would disappoint President Donald J. Trump's serving National Security Advisor... would you?
I hope not. Click to show
Fine then...
What is the difference between jelly and jam? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
You cannot jelly your dick in her azz.
Feel free to use this one at barmitzvahs, orientations, and festivals. Best not to use in or around another's "safe space".
To say ISIS is a perversion of Islam is to ignore 1400 years of Islamic armies conquering other nations. Islam is a political ideology, not a religion. If you have to enforce your religion through violence then your religion sucks.
Rinsy, if you want Islam to be acceptable in non Islamic countries, you need to rewrite the Quran and other texts, including the ones making it acceptable to decieve people for the sake of domination through infiltration.
Since we know there's no chance of that, have fun with the sheep.
To say ISIS is a perversion of Islam is to ignore 1400 years of Islamic armies conquering other nations. Islam is a political ideology, not a religion. If you have to enforce your religion through violence then your religion sucks.
"The more that people onboard here at Pennock's put up messages that trash the religion itself and its most fundamental text, the more recreation I have found in explaining why I do not agree with that line of thought."
So, if we ignore you, it's no fun anymore and you go away?
The Qur'an has many verses that are about or that refer to non-Muslims. Here is one of the common English language translations of Al-Baqarah 2:62 :
quote
"Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians---whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor shall they grieve."
When the thoughtful people at ThoughtCo discussed this topic, they presented this same verse using "God", where I have "Allah". I have seen online English language translations of the Qur'an that use "God", and other ones that use "Allah".
Tony's question--and don't get me wrong, it was a great question--is general. Open-ended. Too many possibilities. It has to be narrowed down before anyone could respond in a sensible way.
So, I am focusing here on a more specific question: What does the Qur'an say about whether non-Muslims are eligible for an eternal afterlife in Paradise (Heaven; God's Domain; Allah's Abode; what have you) alongside Muslims? Can anyone expect Salvation if they have not lived at least the last part of their life as a "pro" (professing) Muslim.
Here's Dr. Shabir Ally talking for 2+ minutes on YouTube about this same verse (2:62) from a Muslim perspective. HIs Muslim perspective. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHzguMqT4xQ
Dr. Ally says it is a contentious topic among Muslims, but he personally is inclined to believe that non-Muslims who live a good and honorable life are Paradise-bound.
Sheikh Ayub, on the other hand, maintains that none can attain Salvation unless they live at least the last part of their life as a professing Muslim. He goes on at some length about it, and starts his discussion with the same Qur'anic verse (2:62). But he does not say anywhere in this particular analysis that Muslims are either commanded or even permitted by Allah to wage war against anyone or make anyone's earthly life miserable, in order to force non-Muslims into accepting the Islamic faith as their own. http://ayubhamid.com/reflec...rse-62-of-al-baqarah
Towards the end of 2014, almost 200 Muslim clerics and scholars from around the world signed onto a 16-page letter that was published and was put online. The letter, which was worded as if it were a direct message to ISIS and its leader, laid out 24 different bullet points for ISIS. It laid out 24 different practices and beliefs that were being promulgated by ISIS that the authors and signatories of the letter said were contrary to Islam. Each of the 24 bullet points was enlarged upon with an explanation drawn from the verses of the Qur'an and other respected Islamic sources. The letter had the imprimatur of Al-Azhar, the oldest established institute of Sunni Islamic thought and jurisprudence on Earth. (It's in Cairo, Egypt.)
This was bullet point number 13.
quote
It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.
Originally posted by jmbishop: Rinsy, if you want Islam to be acceptable in non-Islamic countries, you need to rewrite the Quran and other texts, including the ones making it acceptable to decieve people for the sake of domination through infiltration.
This is a condition--an unfortunately common condition--known as "Cognitive Disability from reading and believing Jihad Watch."
The reference here, from jmbishop, is often rendered as "taqiyya".
I have researched this myself. In fact, I had a long discussion about it on Pennock's, with several other worthies of the Fiero faith.
Muslims do have a permission from Allah to lie and (or) deceive. But this permission of taqiyya is reserved for last resort situations, where Muslims are under duress and are using lies or other deceptions in order to save their own lives, their families and any property or real estate that is central to their livelihoods and well-being on Earth. There is no permission for Muslims to use taqiyya-like methods of deception for aggressive purposes, and especially not for the purpose of forcing non-Muslims to convert to Islam, or for campaigns of conquest to expand the Earthly domain of lands that are under Islamic governance.
Nice try, my conclusions are drawn from reading the Quran and the Hadith. Islam is cancer, its spread through lies much like the ones you're trying to spin right now.
If anyone has doubts, the Quran, Hadith and Sunnah are translated into English, I suggest you read them. People like Rinsy are counting on people not reading it and taking their word for it.
[This message has been edited by jmbishop (edited 09-09-2017).]
This is a condition--an unfortunately common condition--known as "Cognitive Disability from reading and believing Jihad Watch."
The reference here, from jmbishop, is often rendered as "taqiyya".
<snip> There is no permission for Muslims to use taqiyya-like methods of deception for aggressive purposes, and especially not for the purpose of forcing non-Muslims to convert to Islam, or for campaigns of conquest to expand the Earthly domain of lands that are under Islamic governance. <snip>
That is false. Which brings into question whether you are Muslim and are trying to deceive or just telling a little white lie.
Islam has always been acceptable in the United States.
Depending on where you travel in this country, you could--should there be an accident or an illness--be assisted by first responders and paramedics who happen to be Muslim. Were you to be transported to a hospital or if you had yourself admitted, you could be attended to by a doctor, nurse, or technician who happen to be Muslim. There are architecturally significant buildings in this country that are the work of Muslim architects and engineers. If you need to appear in a courtroom, the court could be presided over by a judge who happens to be Muslim.
If not you yourself, then someone else who participates in these online discussions could be having any of these experiences.
If I searched online, do you think I could find at least one Muslim serving as a commercial airline pilot for one of the U.S.-based passenger or freight air carriers?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 09-09-2017).]
Islam has always been acceptable in the United States.
...
If not you yourself, then someone else who participates in these online discussions could be having any of these experiences.
...
The first sentence is also an outright lie. It has not always been accepted. Not by a long shot.
I ask, what are your experiences? Besides reading, and a bit of fascination with the unreal, what is your dealings with muslims? How many do you know, and I do not mean work near, but actual affiliation?
This is the degenerative false narrative that we have been dealing with from you and the rest of the left for some time now. We get asked why we are now so angry, but after lending a hand over and over again, I am left with a stump. How am I supposed to work with this stump?
I really do like you, but often find it difficult to respond in kind to lies. To you this is fun, but to many of us it is an annoyance.
Islam has always been acceptable in the United States.
Wrong, Islam is unacceptable period.
Sometimes you have to live with cancer, sometimes you didn't know you had it until after it starts doing damage, sometimes it's advanced enough that removing it would cause to much trauma and you're just "tolerating" it until something changes and it's worth the risk to operate.
Sometimes you have to live with cancer, sometimes you didn't know you had it until after it starts doing damage, sometimes it's advanced enough that removing it would cause to much trauma and you're just "tolerating" it until something changes and it's worth the risk to operate.
Let's change a word on your post and see how it works.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Pedophilia has always been acceptable in the United States.
Depending on where you travel in this country, you could--should there be an accident or an illness--be assisted by first responders and paramedics who happen to be a pedophile. Were you to be transported to a hospital or if you had yourself admitted, you could be attended to by a doctor, nurse, or technician who happen to be a pedophile. There are architecturally significant buildings in this country that are the work of pedophile architects and engineers. If you need to appear in a courtroom, the court could be presided over by a judge who happens to be a pedophile.
If not you yourself, then someone else who participates in these online discussions could be having any of these experiences.
If I searched online, do you think I could find at least one pedophile serving as a commercial airline pilot for one of the U.S.-based passenger or freight air carriers?
This is an argument I had with a cousin, just on a different subject... Same argument. It doesn't matter if you are a military hero, a pilot, or even if you save kids on an ambulance. If you believe that you should kill people because they don't follow the same pedo-god that you do, then you are a pos and your religion isn't welcomed here. One of many problems with Islam is that the religion says to pretend to help, pretend to be nice, lie to the Christians, and wait until the proper moment to attack.
"Bob may rape women in his basement, but he gives to charity every week and helps at the soup kitchen."
Originally posted by Hudini: To say ISIS is a perversion of Islam is to ignore 1400 years of Islamic armies conquering other nations. Islam is a political ideology, not a religion. If you have to enforce your religion through violence then your religion sucks.
And what were the Christians of the British Isles and Western and Central Europe up to for most of that same 1400 years since the life of Mohammed?
Every educated Jewish person knows (or should know) that when the Jews of Spain were subjected to the persecution of the Spanish (Christian) inquisition, many found refuge and safety in various Muslim-ruled areas in the Mideast and along the north (Mediterranean) coast of Africa.
What happened when the indigenous peoples of the Western hemisphere were "visited" by the Spanish conquistadors and the Christian missionary zeal that tagged along with the conquistadors for the ride?
And of course, there were never any wars or long periods of enmity over theological differences and other church-related issues between Catholics and Protestants... [sarcasm]
And that's just for starters.
Unimpressed.
quote
Originally posted by Hudini: That is false. Which brings into question whether you are Muslim and are trying to deceive or just telling a little white lie.
I followed the Internet link from Hudini and arrived at a YouTube video where I see a word that I have never encountered before: Tawriya.
When I need to waste more time, I might drill down into that word. See what I might be able to discover about it, online. I don't have time for that 9+ minutes video presentation at the present moment.
If this were gambling, I would put my money on this "Tawriya" as being just another misconception or mislead from Jihad Watch or its likes. I think it's probably something that ISIS and other Islamist-radicals have latched onto, but is a concept that is rejected by the Participant Muslims of the West.
But that's just speculation, on my part. Some "pre-drilling phase" speculation. Pre-drilling speculation before my drilling down online into the meaning and origins of Tawriya.
I ask, what are your experiences? Besides reading, and a bit of fascination with the unreal, what is your dealings with muslims? How many do you know, and I do not mean work near, but actual affiliation?
Akbar Bin Shadeball has answered that very same question from me before.
He admitted that he has no personal experience outside of his internet reading and a brief brush past one of his fellow Silicon Valley California residents that might be "muslim".
His obsession with islam is more than apparent on this forum, which does indeed make Hudini's question valid:
quote
Originally posted by Hudini:
That is false. Which brings into question whether you are Muslim and are trying to deceive or just telling a little white lie.
Notably, Ronald refused to answer Hudini's question but chose to clumsily dance around it.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
If I searched online, do you think I could find at least one Muslim serving as a commercial airline pilot for one of the U.S.-based passenger or freight air carriers?
It's almost impossible to believe that Ronald can be so obsessed with, and constantly defend, a dogma that he doesn't share.
It becomes even more difficult to believe he doesn't share the muslim belief when you look at how Ronald doesn't defend, but mocks, degrades, or attacks other religions in one way or another:
(Of course he will claim that he only "reports" these things, but the obvious question then is *why*, especially contrasted with his history of islamo-pimping.)
If he is muslum or not, he is doing their bidding, that book states it is ok to lie if it is for the advancement (good) of the cause.. This make it even worse than just spinning the facts, he knowingly is doing their bidding.. no respect for that.. knowing what their "book" states to do..
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 09-09-2017).]
Irrelevant. We are talking about Islam. Your attempts at deflection are noted.
People are finally realizing the actual nature of Islam. It is not a religion of peace but a cult of domination. The basic tenet is that everyone is a slave to Allah. And you will submit or be assimilated. You can lie or white wash all you want but the truth is finally sinking in.
Now, how about the mention of isis and their call for US muslims to poison the foods in our grocery stores? 
}
I read over several of her articles, and found similar writing styles. I will take this as an obvious coincidence missed on my part. Well, not so much missed, but more spoken before knowing the truth.
To you this is fun, but to many of us it is an annoyance.
