4 ms·

There is no version of Islam that would be "representative of Islam generally", this is a trivial observation that you are trying to use as a cudgel. You are e

There is no version of Islam that would be "representative of Islam generally", this is a trivial observation that you are trying to use as a cudgel. You are engaging in an elaborate No True Scotsman fallacy. For me, if if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck, and I will consider the Islamic Republic of Iran to be Islamic. I don't particularly care about sectarian squabbles what is geniunely Islamic or not.

handfuloflight 1y ago
Your arguments collapsed under scrutiny. You claimed Iran's hostility stems from "Islamic doctrine" but couldn't cite a single supporting text. You've retreated to "if it calls itself Islamic, it's Islamic," like claiming North Korea represents democracy because "Democratic" is in its name. When you stated "There is no version of Islam that would be representative of Islam generally," you contradict Islamic tradition itself. The Prophet Muhammad, the FOUNDER of the religion said: "My community will never agree upon error" and "Allah's hand is with the congregation" (Source: Tirmidhi). This hadith establishes that consensus (ijma) of the Muslim community is authoritative in Islam. Look, these facts remain: you admitted Iran's system is Khomeini's modern innovation. Most Muslim nations have peaceful relations with Israel. And you've cited zero Islamic doctrines supporting your claim. This isn't about religion: it's politics in religious clothing. If Iran's position were truly Islamic, 1.8 billion Muslims would share it. They don't. Stop conflating one country's politics with an entire faith.
- nailer 1y ago
  > This isn't about religion: it's politics in religious clothing No true Scotsman.
  - handfuloflight 1y ago
    Can't respond to my rebuttal about your own no true scotsman claim so you stick your nose into another thread. You are forming an obsession.
    - nailer 1y ago
      But I claimed it first https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347957 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347957 and you still haven’t rebutted it, as you know. This is just me noticing you did it again.
      - handfuloflight 1y ago
        I did rebut it. > Third, you preemptively accuse me of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but you're the one committing it. You claim "perpetrators of Islamic violence" cite these doctrines, but when pressed for specifics, you can't name them. That's you implying that a Muslim who doesn't commit violence isn't following the "real" Islam, which is literally the No True Scotsman fallacy you're projecting onto me.
        nailer 1y ago
        But I have named the doctrines. Remember when we discussed your beliefs about fighting Jews at the end of time and traitorous bushes? You got very angry about it. There are many more but you should probably acknowledge this one. I didn’t need to do that. You say you’re an Islamic scholar so you should already be aware of this. I shouldn’t be needing to do research for you. And you still haven’t defended my original accusation that you repeatedly stated that followers of Islamic violence are somehow un-Islamic - this is a textbook no true Scotsman. > That's you implying that a Muslim who doesn't commit violence isn't following the "real" Islam No it isn’t. Many Muslims do not commit violence although Islam itself states it is a violent belief system. Most Christians eat shellfish.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        handfuloflight 1y ago
        I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. You have not demonstrated how you have brought any evidence that Islam calls for unrestricted violence against Jews or any people.

handfuloflight 1y ago

Your arguments collapsed under scrutiny. You claimed Iran's hostility stems from "Islamic doctrine" but couldn't cite a single supporting text. You've retreated to "if it calls itself Islamic, it's Islamic," like claiming North Korea represents democracy because "Democratic" is in its name. When you stated "There is no version of Islam that would be representative of Islam generally," you contradict Islamic tradition itself. The Prophet Muhammad, the FOUNDER of the religion said: "My community will never agree upon error" and "Allah's hand is with the congregation" (Source: Tirmidhi). This hadith establishes that consensus (ijma) of the Muslim community is authoritative in Islam. Look, these facts remain: you admitted Iran's system is Khomeini's modern innovation. Most Muslim nations have peaceful relations with Israel. And you've cited zero Islamic doctrines supporting your claim. This isn't about religion: it's politics in religious clothing. If Iran's position were truly Islamic, 1.8 billion Muslims would share it. They don't. Stop conflating one country's politics with an entire faith.

nailer 1y ago
> This isn't about religion: it's politics in religious clothing No true Scotsman.
- handfuloflight 1y ago
  Can't respond to my rebuttal about your own no true scotsman claim so you stick your nose into another thread. You are forming an obsession.
  - nailer 1y ago
    But I claimed it first https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347957 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44347957 and you still haven’t rebutted it, as you know. This is just me noticing you did it again.
    - handfuloflight 1y ago
      I did rebut it. > Third, you preemptively accuse me of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but you're the one committing it. You claim "perpetrators of Islamic violence" cite these doctrines, but when pressed for specifics, you can't name them. That's you implying that a Muslim who doesn't commit violence isn't following the "real" Islam, which is literally the No True Scotsman fallacy you're projecting onto me.
      - nailer 1y ago
        But I have named the doctrines. Remember when we discussed your beliefs about fighting Jews at the end of time and traitorous bushes? You got very angry about it. There are many more but you should probably acknowledge this one. I didn’t need to do that. You say you’re an Islamic scholar so you should already be aware of this. I shouldn’t be needing to do research for you. And you still haven’t defended my original accusation that you repeatedly stated that followers of Islamic violence are somehow un-Islamic - this is a textbook no true Scotsman. > That's you implying that a Muslim who doesn't commit violence isn't following the "real" Islam No it isn’t. Many Muslims do not commit violence although Islam itself states it is a violent belief system. Most Christians eat shellfish.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        handfuloflight 1y ago
        I am not going to let you snake around. I can see the slithering. You have not demonstrated how you have brought any evidence that Islam calls for unrestricted violence against Jews or any people.