Inculcating Violence

[The Dude]

Do you ever get the feeling that a big part of the reason that there is so much violence in the Middle East, or wherever there is significant Muslim population, is because violence is inculcated so much in the Holy Koran and Hadith?

 

[bob x]

It was quite violent in the Middle East before. And other parts of the world have been quite violent, too.

 

[Tao_Equus]

Of course Islam encourages violence against non-muslims but this does not explain internal violence which is supposedly against the koranic law. The problem with Islam I think is that by its structure it is conducive to any crazy fool and any ambitious gangster to pervert it to their gameplan. It is a highly effective drum with which to beat out any tune one wishes that includes killing your enemies.

tao

 

[c0de]

@ The Dude + Tao


The Dude

Do you ever get the feeling that a big part of the reason that there is so much violence in the Middle East, or wherever there is significant Muslim population, is because violence is inculcated so much in the Holy Koran and Hadith?

Hey Dude (who continues to not abide ; )

The only violence Muslims are allowed to engage in the Quran is defensive violence against armies. Also, I think that you have to wrong impression of Islam in your suggestion that there is any more violence in the Quran then there is in other religious scriptures.




Tao

Of course Islam encourages violence against non-muslims but this does not explain internal violence which is supposedly against the koranic law.

The Quran does not encourage violence Tao. I recommend you read the Quran, cover to cover. You will see for yourself how wrong this statement really is.

The problem with Islam I think is that by its structure it is conducive to any crazy fool and any ambitious gangster to pervert it to their gameplan.

Crazy people can take anything and use it to justify crazy things Tao... that's why they are called "crazies" (duh!). I can make the same argument about Stalin and atheism. Or Mao and communism, either one works.

It is a highly effective drum with which to beat out any tune one wishes that includes killing your enemies.

According to Quranic and Prophetic rules of war, a Muslim army is not even allowed to harm the wildlife or the natural environment. We are not allowed to use fire (flamethrowers and napalm) either. And you can forget about targeting civilians in whatever situation.

 

[The Dude]

Where do you get this idea that I am not abiding? As I have said elsewhere I am abiding just fine. You should see me abide. In fact I'm abiding right now.

Anyhow, I have read the Koran and it gets more violent the further it goes along. But even from the get-go the book starts with a threat. And it is not just the Koran that inculcates so much violence there is also Hadith.

All that talk about who Islam's enemies are and how you can use any and all means to fight them would not only lead to a violent society but a paranoid one as well.

 

[farhan]

Do you ever get the feeling that a big part of the reason that there is so much violence in the Middle East, or wherever there is significant Muslim population, is because violence is inculcated so much in the Holy Koran and Hadith?

Wherever there is significant human population, they fight. Americans kill latinos, Middle Easterners, East Asians, Africans, East Europeans & West Europeans fight with one another, they both dont like rising China, China doesnt like India.......

Violence in MiddleEast is a direct reaction to greedy westerners poking their nose everywhere. The moment west calls their forces back, & stop supporting thugs (whether in Saudia or Israel), things will start going in the right direction. But an indigenous social equilibrium in the islamic world or other regions is not what a lot of people would like. If this is allowed, you wont find anybody selling their oil in charity. Neither will you get cheap labour.

Anyhow, I have read the Koran and it gets more violent the further it goes along. But even from the get-go the book starts with a threat. And it is not just the Koran that inculcates so much violence there is also Hadith.

There are dozens of translations around. Some of them are scary, others are better. Quran starts with a thanks to the All-Compassionate, dont know what you read. If you had read the context of the chapters, you would have realised the story behind any particular threat (And threats dont cause violence btw). When there is an army outside your city, you fight. Its called survival, not violence.

Hadith was never supposed to be read by the untrained. Its not somekind of sacred scripture either. At best it's glimpses of the sacred. Some of it is authentic, some dubious, some fabricated. Different people have developed their hermeneutics, some time they agree, some time they dont. Some outsiders think hadith is some kind of deuterocanonical book kicked out of Quran. They fail to realise there are hundreds of thousands of traditions in dozens of books (that were never a part of Quran). Who many have read it? Well, how many muslims have read Quran? which is ironic.

All that talk about who Islam's enemies are and how you can use any and all means to fight them would not only lead to a violent society but a paranoid one as well

There are chances of paranoia, but thats inevitable. One can't live like an ostrich.

 

[GlorytoGod]

Violence in MiddleEast is a direct reaction to greedy westerners poking their nose everywhere. The moment west calls their forces back, & stop supporting thugs (whether in Saudia or Israel), things will start going in the right direction. But an indigenous social equilibrium in the islamic world or other regions is not what a lot of people would like. If this is allowed, you wont find anybody selling their oil in charity. Neither will you get cheap labour.

sounds like your passing the buck !

 

[c0de]

Where do you get this idea that I am not abiding? As I have said elsewhere I am abiding just fine. You should see me abide. In fact I'm abiding right now.

(LOL )

I beg to differ with His Dudeness

Anyhow, I have read the Koran and it gets more violent the further it goes along. But even from the get-go the book starts with a threat. And it is not just the Koran that inculcates so much violence there is also Hadith.

God threatens the people who are "evil". Like, for example the people who harm other people, innocent people with... lets say... violence. I believe that you are misinterpreting God's Wrath. God's Wrath is reserved for people who harm God's creation. All the paths which lead away from God ultimately end up contributing negatively to God's creations and bring it harm.

 

[Tao_Equus]

Problem on this site is we only hear from the apologists, the whitewashers of Islam. Not from the percentage that support violence openly and explicitly or by stealth and deception. You do get good clues as to the effectiveness of muslim propaganda here, but nothing in the way of truth as to the intent of the Islamic ideal which is totalitarianism.

tao

 

[c0de]

Problem on this site is we only hear from the apologists, the whitewashers of Islam. Not from the percentage that support violence openly and explicitly or by stealth and deception. You do get good clues as to the effectiveness of muslim propaganda here, but nothing in the way of truth as to the intent of the Islamic ideal which is totalitarianism.

tao

Hey Tao, a couple of issues regarding this post of yours:

A) Your making a general unqualified assumption about Muslims everywhere

B) You are not addressing the actual arguments of the people who you arguing with.

C) You are labeling fellow members of this board in a negative way.

 

[Tao_Equus]

Hey Tao, a couple of issues regarding this post of yours:

A) Your making a general unqualified assumption about Muslims everywhere

B) You are not addressing the actual arguments of the people who you arguing with.

C) You are labeling fellow members of this board in a negative way.

A: I reject that my statements are unqualified. I have read the koran from back to front. In addition I have read several histories of Islam by different authors. And I have debated at length with muslims and non-muslims at length on the subject. And I am as entitled to draw an opinion on muslims as anyone.

B: I have responded to the OP in good faith and with the intention of inputting a valid opinion on the question asked.

C: When a muslim rejects utterly what I know to be fact in order to whitewash the truth of Islamic history I am forced by their denial to respond in a negative way. To not respond would give them carte blanche to use this site to propogate lies. Having invested heavilly my time in this site I will not sit by idly and let it become a propaganda machine for those who wish to abuse it in that way.

You are a new member here yet several times now you think you have the right to determine not only what people say and post but what they think. This has happened now on 3 occasions in your 'arguments' with me and I have seen you do the same to others. Who the hell do you think you are? If you do not agree with what I say that is your problem not mine. You are a 24 year old student indocrinated since birth into Islam. You have no right or qualification to even assess, never mind command, my thoughts. Get over your own self importance, its extremely ugly.

tao

 

[c0de]

@ Tao

A: I reject that my statements are unqualified. I have read the koran from back to front. In addition I have read several histories of Islam by different authors. And I have debated at length with muslims and non-muslims at length on the subject. And I am as entitled to draw an opinion on muslims as anyone.

Your research on the matter has already been called into question in the other thread: http://www.interfaith.org/forum/is-islam-compatible-with-western-9411-5.html#post167090

And not just by the Muslims on this board, but other members as well.

B: I have responded to the OP in good faith and with the intention of inputting a valid opinion on the question asked.

Yes, but my objection was that you avoided the arguments on the thread which deal with the original question raised by the Dude. Instead you posted an opinion on the people responding to his argument. For your convenience, I have complied the list of arguments here made my others and myself:


1) It was quite violent in the Middle East before. And other parts of the world have been quite violent, too.

2) Wherever there is significant human population, they fight.

3) There are dozens of translations around. Some of them are scary, others are better.

4) Hadith was never supposed to be read by the untrained.

5) The only violence Muslims are allowed to engage in the Quran is defensive violence against armies.

6) The suggestion that there is more violence in the Quran then other scriptures is unqualified. You will have to present a very detailed cross examination of many scriptures in order to make such a suggestion

7) With regards to the nature of the violence threatened by God in the Quran: God threatens the people who are "evil" themselves.

C: When a muslim rejects utterly what I know to be fact in order to whitewash the truth of Islamic history I am forced by their denial to respond in a negative way. To not respond would give them carte blanche to use this site to propogate lies. Having invested heavilly my time in this site I will not sit by idly and let it become a propaganda machine for those who wish to abuse it in that way.

No one is "forcing you" to respond in a negative way. Your opinion contradicts mine but I have not responded by labeling you like you have me.

You are a new member here yet several times now you think you have the right to determine not only what people say and post but what they think. This has happened now on 3 occasions in your 'arguments' with me and I have seen you do the same to others. Who the hell do you think you are? If you do not agree with what I say that is your problem not mine. You are a 24 year old student indocrinated since birth into Islam. You have no right or qualification to even assess, never mind command, my thoughts. Get over your own self importance, its extremely ugly.

But I am the one who is being labeled by you... And in doing so, you are the one who is proposing to command my thoughts. This, I might also add, has already happened many times in my short period of interaction with you. Even in this paragraph you assume that I have been "indoctrinated since birth into Islam." Without knowing anything about my history, how can you possibly make that assumption? This also assumes that I have been a good Muslim all my life, which is VERY far from the truth.

But that is all besides the point, I don't really care about how you say whatever it is that you say, as long as you address the arguments above.

 

[Tao_Equus]

lmao, again you are demanding I answer your agenda!! Your gall has no bounds.

From the OP we see this:

Do you ever get the feeling that a big part of the reason that there is so much violence in the Middle East, or wherever there is significant Muslim population

I chose to answer the OP and have done so fully and concisely. I am under no obligation to pander to your sense of superior intellect. I have had conversations with other muslim apologists on this site over an extended period. I think that gives me the right to define who is or is not of that camp. I presented valid histories on the other thread that you reject as invalid. You present standard muslim orientalist school whitewash apologetics. No matter what I say to you I am wasting my time. You are far from the first I have encountered and I guess you will not be the last. So I use language that leaves in no shadow of doubt that I know your technique and formula and that I will do all I can to expose it for the sham that it is. If you do not like that hard lines. I do realise that you are probably unaware that you are even being an orientalist apologist. Well consider this an education. And like I say, get over your arrogance. It remains ugly.

tao

 

[c0de]

@ Tao

I chose to answer the OP and have done so fully and concisely.

But that was not my objection. I objected to the fact that you did not answer the arguments raised by the opposing side. The list of points has already been provided.

 

[Tao_Equus]

@ Tao




But that was not my objection. I objected to the fact that you did not answer the arguments raised by the opposing side. The list of points has already been provided.

..... again you are demanding I answer your agenda!! Your gall has no bounds.

Understand it yet ?...it really is quite simple.

 

[c0de]

again you are demanding I answer your agenda!!

How do you "answer an agenda"?

I asked you to answer the objections raised, not just by me but others. This is a -discussion- after all is it not?

 

[The Dude]

There are dozens of translations around. Some of them are scary, others are better. Quran starts with a thanks to the All-Compassionate, dont know what you read. If you had read the context of the chapters, you would have realised the story behind any particular threat (And threats dont cause violence btw). When there is an army outside your city, you fight. Its called survival, not violence.

Hadith was never supposed to be read by the untrained. Its not somekind of sacred scripture either. At best it's glimpses of the sacred. Some of it is authentic, some dubious, some fabricated. Different people have developed their hermeneutics, some time they agree, some time they dont. Some outsiders think hadith is some kind of deuterocanonical book kicked out of Quran. They fail to realise there are hundreds of thousands of traditions in dozens of books (that were never a part of Quran). Who many have read it? Well, how many muslims have read Quran? which is ironic.


There are chances of paranoia, but thats inevitable. One can't live like an ostrich.

Scary translations, less scary translations, scripture not meant to be read by the untrained. However you slice it violence is heavily inculcated by Islam as is the idea of becoming a martyr to achieve it.

 

[c0de]

Scary translations, less scary translations, scripture not meant to be read by the untrained. However you slice it violence is heavily inculcated by Islam as is the idea of becoming a martyr to achieve it.

You misread, Farhan did not say that the Quran was not meant to be read by the untrained eye. He said the Hadith, is not meant to be read by the untrained eye.

Also, you should consider the other arguments everyone has made against the suggestion of the presence of violence in the Quran, in fact the entire hypothesis. I still disagree with this view of yours that there is unnecessary mention of violence in our scripture. For example, how many verses did you find in the Quran that deal with war and martyrdom? Calculate the ratio and you will see.

 

[Tao_Equus]

You misread, .

Of course he did. EVERYBODY except an apologist muslim misreads! Your ineffable rendering of any and all information to your apologetic really convinces me. How do I convert? Do i get my lobotomy now or do I have to learn Arabic first?

tao

 

[c0de]

@Tao

Of course he did. EVERYBODY except an apologist muslim misreads!

Err no. The Dude, actually did misread Farhan's statement.

Your ineffable rendering of any and all information to your apologetic really convinces me.

"Rendering information" to my... "apologetic"...