Islam and Islamophobia

[RAMOSS]

Slay unbelievers with the sword - said no religion of peace.

Or, for that matter 'bring them before me and slay them'

 

[Tigerace117]

Actually I didn't have to go back hundreds of years to find a whole slue of attacks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

Actually, I didn't have to go back hundreds of years to find a slew of attacks either(2000 is "hundreds of years"? Really buddy?) but since we were discussing the fact that people living closer to Jesus's time than we do today still committed plenty of atrocities, I figured those should have the priority.

 

[stevecanuck]

No, you are spewing your interpretation, one not shared by the vast majority of Muslims.

If your interpretation was correct groups like ISIS would have taken over the entire Middle East decades ago.

It seems you are desperate to pretend the vast majority of the Muslim world does not exist.

Time to respond to this in a little more detail (Btw, Tiger, I don't expect you to even read this, let alone to try responding in a genuine manner. After all, why start now? I'm doing this strictly as an exercise in completeness for my own amusement). I'm going to explain how your entire 'argument' is based on two false, disingenuous, and gratuitous assertions (a gratuitous assertion is one made without supporting data - see, you learned something today):

First, you try to float the absurd notion that actual quotes from the Qur'an are somehow, perhaps magically, "my interpretation". As I've repeatedly shown, the quotes are the quotes are the quotes. You can't deny the existence or content of specific verses, so in a pathetic attempt to dismiss them, you have to keep pretending that I'm giving them my own interpretation. Noted, of course, is that you never try to tell us what they 'really' mean. My reference website is The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran which provides the seven most commonly used and widely trusted English translations. They speak for themselves, so any attempt on my part to interpret or editorialize further would be redundant and pointless. Once you feel you've successfully fooled people and morphed actual quotes into "my interpretation", you can then simply state a basic truth, which is that not everybody would agree with a statement that is an interpretation. Sophistry 101. You get an A+. Every time you use the word "interpretation" you further demonstrate your disingenuous nature.

Assuming acceptance of the above lie, you segue smoothly into a false dichotomy, the repetition of which you seem to think somehow diminishes its illegitimacy. Saying that because a world-wide armed jihad is not currently happening is proof that the Qur'an does not tell Muslims to fight infidels is absurd notion number two. That makes as much sense as claiming the Bible does not say, "Thou shalt not steal." because there are Christians who steal. Even if not one Muslim in the world supported or committed acts of jihad, it would not change the fact that the Qur'an commands them to. So, what percentage of Muslims actually do support jihad? I can answer that for you: enough to disrupt and change the world for the foreseeable future. Al Shabaab members just sacrificed themselves and killed 14 people in Nairobi because they honestly thought their god wanted them to. They were obeying the literal command of verse 9:29. Who cares if X% of Muslims don't agree with what they did?