Woolwich serious incident

w3bbo

w3bbo

w3bbo

Man of Honour
Joined
14 Nov 2005
Posts
10,661
Location
Up North
Kouba said:
Hi Arthur, I thought I would take the time to address this selective quote that you have shared with us.

Verses like 8:12, as I have explained in the past, have a context. Once the context is understood, the verses are clearly understood. Yet, before I go into verse 8:12, I must explain a bit about the process of revelation of the Qur’an. The Qur’an was not revealed all at once. Rather, it was gradually sent down over a period of 23 years. During that period, the community of believers evolved and specific situations came up, to which the Qur’anic text frequently responded.

This is important to understand when reading verse 8:12. This verse - along with several ahead of it - was revealed in reference to the Battle of Badr, the first major battle between the Muslims and the Meccan pagans around 625 C.E.

The verse is speaking about the events surrounding the Battle of Badr. It is not a general command to “strike at the necks of the infidels.” Anyone with an understanding of the history of Islam knows this. When I read these verses, I know that they refer to the Battle of Badr. Nowhere in my mind is there even an inkling of a thought to “strike at the necks of the infidels.”

There are quite a number of verses, like 8:12, that speak about the believers’ conduct in an open battle against the enemy. God is “psyching up” the believers before a battle, just like American soldiers psych themselves up before they go into combat. It is not an open call to behead all infidels. Once again, when the verse is understood in its context, this becomes obviously clear.

In fact, the verse actually is one of mercy toward the enemy. After the battle is over, during which the believers are to “smite their necks,” the verse directs the believers to set free those who are captured by the Muslims, either “by an act of grace or against ransom.” These captives are avowed enemies, who would have killed the believers if they had the chance. Despite this, however, the verse directs the Muslims to set them free. Therefore, how on earth can this verse be one of terror?

But, you know, anyone can misquote, mistranslate, or quote out of context a verse of scripture to seemingly prove a point.
Click to expand...

The problem as you rightly state is context, which goes some way to explaining why so many atrocities attributed to Islamic extremists. Perhaps it is therefore fair to say the teachings in the Qur'an are too easily taken out of context. That blame lays solely at the feet of Islam. It should be the Muslim communities responsibility to ensure all who follow their chosen faith, ensure the teachings are correctly followed. Yet I do not see public Muslim protests against their own people when such atrocities are carried out. I see weak 'announcements' renouncing such behavior. No march, no visual appeasement. There is much more effort applied to spitting at soldiers returning from tours of duty, burning poppies and the British flag on remembrance day. Surely their efforts would be better spent calming the nation, proving how peaceful Islam can be rather than inciting hatred.
 

No1newts

No1newts

No1newts

Soldato
Joined
24 May 2009
Posts
20,154
Location
North East
I've tried to keep out this thread with the way it going but I do have one thing I feel strongly about I want to mention.

For those saying "he deserved it, the British deserve it for being involved in the Arab areas" whilst I disagree anyone deserves that form of horrific attack I do think people have a point we shouldn't be involved.

I think we should pull out the wars, on top of that though we should also withdraw every penny in aid to the Arab countries, every form of support in any format and then let them get on with killing each other and having a grand old time. Block all trade to those areas if the West is such a bad influence and let them live their lives as they see fit and good luck to them.

So yes, we shouldn't be involved, at all.




Though I accept this will probably never happen due to oil and whilst people dislike us getting involved militarily, apparently we still have some moral obligation to support them in every other way :rolleyes:
 

Rofflay

Rofflay

Rofflay

Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
Kouba said:
Hi Arthur, I thought I would take the time to address this selective quote that you have shared with us.

Verses like 8:12, as I have explained in the past, have a context. Once the context is understood, the verses are clearly understood. Yet, before I go into verse 8:12, I must explain a bit about the process of revelation of the Qur’an. The Qur’an was not revealed all at once. Rather, it was gradually sent down over a period of 23 years. During that period, the community of believers evolved and specific situations came up, to which the Qur’anic text frequently responded.

This is important to understand when reading verse 8:12. This verse - along with several ahead of it - was revealed in reference to the Battle of Badr, the first major battle between the Muslims and the Meccan pagans around 625 C.E.

The verse is speaking about the events surrounding the Battle of Badr. It is not a general command to “strike at the necks of the infidels.” Anyone with an understanding of the history of Islam knows this. When I read these verses, I know that they refer to the Battle of Badr. Nowhere in my mind is there even an inkling of a thought to “strike at the necks of the infidels.”

There are quite a number of verses, like 8:12, that speak about the believers’ conduct in an open battle against the enemy. God is “psyching up” the believers before a battle, just like American soldiers psych themselves up before they go into combat. It is not an open call to behead all infidels. Once again, when the verse is understood in its context, this becomes obviously clear.

In fact, the verse actually is one of mercy toward the enemy. After the battle is over, during which the believers are to “smite their necks,” the verse directs the believers to set free those who are captured by the Muslims, either “by an act of grace or against ransom.” These captives are avowed enemies, who would have killed the believers if they had the chance. Despite this, however, the verse directs the Muslims to set them free. Therefore, how on earth can this verse be one of terror?

But, you know, anyone can misquote, mistranslate, or quote out of context a verse of scripture to seemingly prove a point.
Click to expand...

Hi Kouba i found this very interesting.When the quote is first read is very much sounds like a call for violence.Scriptures need to be re written in clear modern language i think so people can not interprit.Or they need a higher understanding before being thrown quote and sent off to Jihad.But i guess those are the exact people Choudray want to use to wage war on the west.Young and naive.

But what about the Old testament in the bible? Where God calls upon the slaughter of the peoples in the lands of Israel for no good reason apart from the fact he wants his own chosen little group of people to have all the nice milk and honey.


And the song i was taught in school aged 8 unknown to me was about the battle of jericho.Yes aged 8 im being thought to sing nice songs about the slaughter of people who refuse to conform to whatever these books tell us.


I have no faith anymore.Not when god calls upon us to do terrible violence.Either the books are written wrong or god or allah can be mighty cruel to those who disbelieve.What happened to love of all mankind?
 

cm1179

cm1179

cm1179

Soldato
Joined
30 Sep 2009
Posts
3,626
No1newts said:
on top of that though we should also withdraw every penny in aid to the Arab countries, every form of support in any format and then let them get on with killing each other and having a grand old time. Block all trade to those areas if the West is such a bad influence and let them live their lives as they see fit and good luck to them.
Click to expand...

well that would be a great solution :rolleyes:
 

cm1179

cm1179

cm1179

Soldato
Joined
30 Sep 2009
Posts
3,626
OldCoals said:
There is a former radical islamist on QT now, he mentioned institutional racism and the Bosnian conflict as drivers for radicalisation.
Click to expand...

he also mentioned the brainwashing aspect. he was caught up in it from 16 and this is a massive problem. massive respect to the bloke for how he has turned his life around and now tries to prevent the same happening to other people.

the stat on the deaths in NI compared to mainland UK was a real eye opener.
 

asim18

asim18

asim18

Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
w3bbo said:
The problem as you rightly state is context, which goes some way to explaining why so many atrocities attributed to Islamic extremists. Perhaps it is therefore fair to say the teachings in the Qur'an are too easily taken out of context. That blame lays solely at the feet of Islam. It should be the Muslim communities responsibility to ensure all who follow their chosen faith, ensure the teachings are correctly followed. Yet I do not see public Muslim protests against their own people when such atrocities are carried out. I see weak 'announcements' renouncing such behavior. No march, no visual appeasement. There is much more effort applied to spitting at soldiers returning from tours of duty, burning poppies and the British flag on remembrance day. Surely their efforts would be better spent calming the nation, proving how peaceful Islam can be rather than inciting hatred.
Click to expand...

You want peaceful Muslims to go out and protest to prove how peaceful they are?

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?
 

Xordium

Xordium

Xordium

Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
badcompany said:
They were happy enough for us to oust sadam and gadaffi.
Click to expand...

People seem to have a rather selective memory. Also the accusations in this thread, eg by Craterloads, are about the actual actions of the US not the UK. We use completely different procedures and we also don't do a great number of the things the US does do.

I would be the first to say these actions are not representative of the Muslim community because they are not. However, what really ***** me off is British Muslims seem to be able to find a great deal of time to condemn, protest and be vocally challenging towards British foreign policy and yet they can't seemingly find any time whatsoever the actually the challenge the very perversion of a faith they allegedly hold so dear.

This is their god, this is their god's message being corrupted in universities and mosques across the country but never the protest lines there? Surely that should be more important to them ...
 

badcompany

badcompany

badcompany

Soldato
Joined
12 May 2004
Posts
7,018
Location
England
titaniumx3 said:
This is what happens when we have masses of people completely unaware and detached from what their governments are doing overseas.
Click to expand...

no not really I like to keep up with current affairs and fully support my governments policy. perhaps if other countries weren't involved in killing each other we would be getting involved.
 

NZB

NZB

NZB

Associate
Joined
18 Jul 2012
Posts
2,273
badcompany said:
wow ! they got close to the car hey?
Click to expand...

Aye, i don't think the armed police had much time to react though. As soon as the car turned the corner the two went straight for them, i think when you see them start running on that vid is when the car appeared.
 

Xordium

Xordium

Xordium

Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
asim18 said:
You want peaceful Muslims to go out and protest to prove how peaceful they are?

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?
Click to expand...

No it is not protesting does not have to be violent? Or maybe it does if you are of a certain persuasion. The last time I looked peaceful protest seemed to work quite well.
 

Rroff

Rroff

Rroff

Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
91,177
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom