[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

mbenigni · Post by **mbenigni** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:13 pm

I find it intriguing that in a thread like this we will quote anything and everything except the Koran or Muhammed himself. 6 pages and counting. It's like a solar eclipse; we all gather round to look at it... but never directly! What gives???

It's my understanding (and I could be wrong because I have no direct exposure to Muslim teachings and NO ONE EVER addresses them directly, for whatever reason) that Muhammad flat out told his followers that they had the OK to kill non-believers.

If that's true, then it makes things a little simpler for me. Islam is not exactly "one less thing to worry about", but it is one less thing to worry about being, aspiring to, sympathizing with, etc. (Sympathizing with Muslims as individuals is another matter entirely. I can always find sympathy when I read the news, for both victims and perpetrators of violence, where social, economic, cultural... essentially circumstancial... variables take their toll.)

If I am properly informed, then we have another "solar eclipse" here: something I don't think the modern peaceful Muslim wants to look at directly. Muhammed was a more "radical" Muslim then they would prefer themselves or their peers to be.

Don't flame me. Correct me if I'm wrong. And if we seek "authority", why not simply quote Muhammed?

guinee · Post by **guinee** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:40 pm

I concur, and suggest we seek out the commonalities connecting the koran and other religiious texts.

Music Unites. Stay Positive. Peace!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumi

Patch · Post by **Patch** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:49 pm

I'm not religious, but I don't call myself an atheist.

Is someone without religion considered an atheist?

noisetonepause · Post by **noisetonepause** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:03 pm

mbenigni wrote:It's my understanding (and I could be wrong because I have no direct exposure to Muslim teachings and NO ONE EVER addresses them directly, for whatever reason) that Muhammad flat out told his followers that they had the OK to kill non-believers.

There are those who will say he did, including the original poster of this thread (M. Breqs) and the so-called 'jihadists'.

Then there are those who will say that he didn't, which would include more than 95% of Muslims and people who study Islam.

Remember, like all scripture, the Qur'an is not an easy book to read. Muslims have spent 1400 years arguing over its interpretation, and they'll go until the last Muslim dies. Then comes the hadith and the sunna (the sayings and actions of Muhammad), which are also very important to most Muslims, they need to be interpreted as well.

Neither Islam nor Christianity nor Atheism is a homogenous group of people who think alike. For some reason it's just comme il faut in certain circles to talk about Islam in such terms... seems to be a human instinct, the generalise and see ghosts everywhere.

mbenigni · Post by **mbenigni** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:15 pm

Neither Islam nor Christianity nor Atheism is a homogenous group of people who think alike.

And that's the good news. The next step is to forget the labels, and we're all good.

As for the difficulty of interpreting the Koran, I appreciate this. But the message I am citing is a pretty simple one. It's either there or it's not. (And if it's not explicitly there, then it's not there, I'm wrongly informed, and modern extremists have strayed. There's no two ways about "killing is OK".)

yoshitosser · Post by **yoshitosser** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:51 pm

mbenigni

spend 5 minutes using google and you'll find links to the verses that you're looking for and people arguing about how to interpret them.

then you can make your own mind up

mbenigni · Post by **mbenigni** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:07 pm

Will do.

leisuremuffin · Post by **leisuremuffin** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:34 pm

mbenigni wrote:
Neither Islam nor Christianity nor Atheism is a homogenous group of people who think alike.
And that's the good news. The next step is to forget the labels, and we're all good.

As for the difficulty of interpreting the Koran, I appreciate this. But the message I am citing is a pretty simple one. It's either there or it's not. (And if it's not explicitly there, then it's not there, I'm wrongly informed, and modern extremists have strayed. There's no two ways about "killing is OK".)

I hope you don't think that islam is the only religion that condones violence. Have you ever actually read the bible?

And before you say "thou shall not kill" you might want to find out what the Hebrew words actually meant in this commandment. because it doesn't mean don't kill. How could it, at the same time god gave moses that comandment he was also directing him to amass an army to take the promised land by force. then read the accounts of how that went down. pretty rough stuff, all commanded by god himself. abraham's god is a rough character, in my estimation a demon, and should be avoided at all costs.

.lm.

M. Bréqs · Post by **M. Bréqs** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:23 pm

leisuremuffin wrote:abraham's god is a rough character, in my estimation a demon, and should be avoided at all costs.
.lm.

If I believed in god and demons and angels and all that, I would be inclined to agree. most of what's written about him actually indicates that he's a fucking manipulative evil asshole.

mbenigni · Post by **mbenigni** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:25 pm

I hope you don't think that islam is the only religion that condones violence.

Not for a second.

Have you ever actually read the bible?

Not in its entirety, no. I'm a pretty ignorant person, really (but always forearmed in knowing as much...) I've been studying the New Testament a bit lately, but that's a whole different ball of wax. By initial impressions, Jesus seems pretty much like a peace-loving hippy (on his good days.)

Anyhow... when I posted earlier, I was primarily trying to bring the topic already underway back to the source, not necessarily to cast aspersions or draw conclusions one way or the other. There's what I've heard, and I'd like someone more in the know to refute or confirm based directly on Islamic teachings.

abraham's god is a rough character, in my estimation a demon, and should be avoided at all costs.

Fair enough. But ya know... writing about writings about God, how can it possibly amount to much? There is no faith I can get very far with without picking and choosing what sounds reasonable. With the possible exception of Buddhism, but even there I see a great deal as "possible but not necessarily so."

Anyway, I meant no offense. I was just trying to maybe focus the conversation in one direction - to be honest, mainly to edumacate myself.

M. Bréqs · Post by **M. Bréqs** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:38 pm

mbenigni wrote:I find it intriguing that in a thread like this we will quote anything and everything except the Koran or Muhammed himself. 6 pages and counting. It's like a solar eclipse; we all gather round to look at it... but never directly! What gives???

...

Don't flame me. Correct me if I'm wrong. And if we seek "authority", why not simply quote Muhammed?

Plenty of that here;

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Quran.htm

Anyways, back to my point that religios adherents (even moderates) unfairly view their religion as being above criticism, Artist David Thompson sums up my views quite succinctly.

http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidt ... on_re.html

mbenigni · Post by **mbenigni** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:07 pm

Thanks for the links. Good stuff. Ah, but now there is just too much to say... too bad we're not all sitting around a table to discuss. I just can't type fast enough.

One thing, briefly (too briefly, no doubt): I see in these texts a lot of dangerous opportunities to misinterpret language in terms of context and scope, ie. who/what are/were pagans, who are/were the faithful, exactly what does/did comprise "Islam" - taking into consideration time, place, the perspective of persons then/there given constraints in travel, communication, education of history, etc. You can almost read between the lines here that many modern-day Christians, Jews, and others are essentially Muslims for the purposes of these doctrines. It's heartbreaking, really.

Anyway, this is the meat and potatoes as far as I'm concerned:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from
Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most
trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all
things," (2:256).

Substitute "Allah" with whatever random sequence of letters doesn't offend (or ommit those few words if you prefer) and you're home free. We should all have this tattood on the backs of our eyelids.

smartass303 · Post by **smartass303** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:08 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:So for what it's worth, I'll take the good Doctor's advice and I have stopped asking what my society has done wrong - we're inthe right here, and those who can't see that are fooling themselves.

Yeah,
you better never ask what is wrong... Ask what you can do for your society! Go to Afghanistan and get shot you stupid...

In the end your doing it "for us"

sincerely yours,

smartass

cbit · Post by **cbit** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:59 pm

Patch wrote:I'm not religious, but I don't call myself an atheist.
Is someone without religion considered an atheist?

if you don't have a positive belief in god/gods, you're an atheist. If you hold the position "I know there is no God" then you are a 'strong atheist'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_atheism

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 8:11 pm

mbenigni wrote:I find it intriguing that in a thread like this we will quote anything and everything except the Koran or Muhammed himself. 6 pages and counting. It's like a solar eclipse; we all gather round to look at it... but never directly! What gives???

It's my understanding (and I could be wrong because I have no direct exposure to Muslim teachings and NO ONE EVER addresses them directly, for whatever reason) that Muhammad flat out told his followers that they had the OK to kill non-believers.

If that's true, then it makes things a little simpler for me. Islam is not exactly "one less thing to worry about", but it is one less thing to worry about being, aspiring to, sympathizing with, etc. (Sympathizing with Muslims as individuals is another matter entirely. I can always find sympathy when I read the news, for both victims and perpetrators of violence, where social, economic, cultural... essentially circumstancial... variables take their toll.)

If I am properly informed, then we have another "solar eclipse" here: something I don't think the modern peaceful Muslim wants to look at directly. Muhammed was a more "radical" Muslim then they would prefer themselves or their peers to be.

Don't flame me. Correct me if I'm wrong. And if we seek "authority", why not simply quote Muhammed?

i already went that far(if its even considered to be a diss) calling out direct quotes from muhammad and his hadiths, but all youll ever get in return is instead of : "oh shit man, sorry i didnt even notice that" .....you get more like : " o yea what about the christian books or the jew books, dont they kill in those books?!?!"

have fun.

[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Citations Citations Citations