Quote:
Originally Posted by thekid345
. . .
People can draw all sorts of varied conclusions from text and cherry pick portions to support their view. My point was that those with extremist views (though most would not consider themselves such) are not some fringe group, and are common throughout the Muslim world numbering in the hundreds of millions. Once you get into various Hadith, who many follow, it is clearly prescribed in some work to execute apostates and adulterers. Of course these aren't the only violent incarnations of Islam, as seen with the Life of Muhammad himself, the Conquest which followed his death, and the history which cam after. There are also plenty of lines in the Qur'an which seem to support various forms of violence.
Culture (as previously said) and quality of life of course plays a role, as many people don't need religious motivation and excuses for depraved violence.
I could post random verses and draw interpretation which sanction violence, but when even Muslim scholars themselves can't seem to reach the same end I doubt we will do it on some an internet forum.
BTW the supposed nonviolent verse you posted as 5:33, 5:33 is actually:
"Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,"
There they go with the hacking off limbs again.
I believe you meant 5:32, but you are cherry picking and posting it out of context like I mentioned in the first paragraph. Why not post the whole thing?
"Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors."
Not only is "innocent" open to interpretation, but it was apparently written to apply to Jews.
I could go . . .
edit: Forgot you random cool history bro about Al Qaeda. They are far from the only violent Jihadist group. While empowered by the west they would have existed and massacred regardless. And hey, way less people died under Pol Pot than Mao. He was obviously a peaceful man!
Last edited by 0bscura; 11-29-2013 at 10:51 AM.