4 ms·

The article makes an important point. It points out that those drawn to Jihadism in the west tend to be woefully ignorant of the teachings of Islam. Whenever t

The article makes an important point. It points out that those drawn to Jihadism in the west tend to be woefully ignorant of the teachings of Islam. Whenever there is an attack, both the snark about the "religion of peace" as well as the claim that Muslims don't condemn these acts both resurface. The fact is that both terrorism and ISIS have been roundly condemned by large panels of Islamic scholars. It would not surprise me that, once the religious background of these terrorists is examined, that it is proves to be very flimsy. The challenge, in my mind, and as a Muslim is that Muslims need to figure out how to prevent the brainwashing of impressionable young people in an era of instant communication.

jacquesm 11y ago
> The fact is that both terrorism and ISIS have been roundly condemned by large panels of Islamic scholars. If the media would act as good as a lens for those instances as they do for the terrorist acts themselves it would be splendid.
- ern 11y ago
  The more fair-minded outlets do seem to try, but even then, they seem to be the exceptions that prove the rule: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is-an-offence-to-islam-says-international-coalition-of-major-islamic-scholars-9756255.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is-... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-clerics-fatwa-declares-terrorism-heinous-crime-sharia-law http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-clerics-f... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-islamic-state_n_5878038.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-isl...
pbhjpbhj 11y ago
Where does Mohammed condemn actions of this sort? Does it matter what the scholars say when the 'perfect' copy of the Koran written before time in Allah's heaven says that Mohammed's followed should slay unbelievers wherever they are found? Even if you want to argue that was only for a specific time (those verses however are, I understand, non-abrogated). If it was morally proper then surely it is also proper now. The only way around this I see is for the scholars to say Mohammed was wrong. Mohammed was wrong to lead his followers to kill, rape, plunder and enslave. Mohammed being wrong doing these things would allow them to remain consistent saying those who purport to follow him are also wrong in doing those things. However it undermines central tenets of Islam to say any of that was wrong. Is it not entirely incompatible with peace for the founder of a religion to be a warlord who justified his killing with his 'revelations'.
- hackuser 11y ago
  First, I doubt these ignorant, violent perpetrators were scholars of the word of Mohammed. Like almost every human born, most likely they are influenced by the people around them. Most of what anyone does - what they do, say, eat, dress, etc. - is a product of the culture they live in, not words written millenia ago. Second, if we take any scripture literally, we can find plenty of justification for violence (and for peace and for whatever else we want to jsutify).
- ern 11y ago
  There seems to be a curious mirroring between violent jihadists and and some of those who condemn them. Both seem to take the exact same approach of cherry-picking phrases and interpretations of the Koran and from the life of Mohamed that best suit their contention that Islam is inherently violent, ignoring the centuries of exegesis that any religion, including Islam, would have accumulated: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/pdf/Booklet-English.pdf http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/pdf/Booklet-English.pdf
- dang 11y ago
  Religious flamewars are not allowed on HN. Please stop.
  - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
    If you're going to ask people not to respond on a forum to religious claims then IMO the rules really should stop those claims in the first place. But as requested I have stopped responding to comments.
nightspirit 11y ago
A problem with religions which I see is that their screw people's sense of truth and reality by requiring them to proclaim beliefs in dubious magic and jump through bullshit hoops, all under threats ranging from constant nagging to death. People just get used to doing bullshit if somebody tells them "because God". No matter what Islamic scholars say (and, honestly, what are they supposed to say if they want to be treated seriously?), what they are doing is creating an army of robots who just wait to be programmed - by whomever, for whatever.

jacquesm 11y ago

> The fact is that both terrorism and ISIS have been roundly condemned by large panels of Islamic scholars. If the media would act as good as a lens for those instances as they do for the terrorist acts themselves it would be splendid.

ern 11y ago
The more fair-minded outlets do seem to try, but even then, they seem to be the exceptions that prove the rule: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is-an-offence-to-islam-says-international-coalition-of-major-islamic-scholars-9756255.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is-... http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-clerics-fatwa-declares-terrorism-heinous-crime-sharia-law http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/17/saudi-clerics-f... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-islamic-state_n_5878038.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-isl...

pbhjpbhj 11y ago

Where does Mohammed condemn actions of this sort? Does it matter what the scholars say when the 'perfect' copy of the Koran written before time in Allah's heaven says that Mohammed's followed should slay unbelievers wherever they are found? Even if you want to argue that was only for a specific time (those verses however are, I understand, non-abrogated). If it was morally proper then surely it is also proper now. The only way around this I see is for the scholars to say Mohammed was wrong. Mohammed was wrong to lead his followers to kill, rape, plunder and enslave. Mohammed being wrong doing these things would allow them to remain consistent saying those who purport to follow him are also wrong in doing those things. However it undermines central tenets of Islam to say any of that was wrong. Is it not entirely incompatible with peace for the founder of a religion to be a warlord who justified his killing with his 'revelations'.

hackuser 11y ago
First, I doubt these ignorant, violent perpetrators were scholars of the word of Mohammed. Like almost every human born, most likely they are influenced by the people around them. Most of what anyone does - what they do, say, eat, dress, etc. - is a product of the culture they live in, not words written millenia ago. Second, if we take any scripture literally, we can find plenty of justification for violence (and for peace and for whatever else we want to jsutify).
ern 11y ago
There seems to be a curious mirroring between violent jihadists and and some of those who condemn them. Both seem to take the exact same approach of cherry-picking phrases and interpretations of the Koran and from the life of Mohamed that best suit their contention that Islam is inherently violent, ignoring the centuries of exegesis that any religion, including Islam, would have accumulated: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/pdf/Booklet-English.pdf http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/pdf/Booklet-English.pdf
dang 11y ago
Religious flamewars are not allowed on HN. Please stop.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  If you're going to ask people not to respond on a forum to religious claims then IMO the rules really should stop those claims in the first place. But as requested I have stopped responding to comments.

nightspirit 11y ago

A problem with religions which I see is that their screw people's sense of truth and reality by requiring them to proclaim beliefs in dubious magic and jump through bullshit hoops, all under threats ranging from constant nagging to death. People just get used to doing bullshit if somebody tells them "because God". No matter what Islamic scholars say (and, honestly, what are they supposed to say if they want to be treated seriously?), what they are doing is creating an army of robots who just wait to be programmed - by whomever, for whatever.