The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Disaster of Israel's making > Comments

Disaster of Israel's making : Comments

By Sonja Karkar, published 12/11/2008

A peace effort in the Middle East has been 15 years in the undoing.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
" ... My personal faith based view is..that it will all pan out in the end, with the Almighty doing what He sees fit. ... "

Alas dear *bOAZy* it seems U r being converted by stealth.

Is not the above the same as saying:
"In Sha'a Allah"
(If El GoddO wants/If it is the Will of El GoddO)
[snicker, snicker]

"Bism Illaha Al Rahman Al Raheem"
In the name of El GoddO, the most gracious, the most merciful

"Assalam Alikum"
(Peace be upon you)

"Hag Mabrur"
(Congratulations on your pilgrimage)

9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

Now *bOAZy* u must appreciate
1. This is a translation and easily bastardised with shifting subtlety of meaning
2. In what context was it said?
3. Was it when the early Muslims were being hounded and persecuted over and over by those with clear genocidal intent?

(Eventually the prophet allegedly consulted with Heaven and Heaven said OKei, fair go ey resist them by force of arms but do not transgress the limits. Mayhaps the prophet (May peace be his portion) was latent schiz and when subjected to prolonged stress began to hallucinate. Yung also apparently had this problem. Even so, if the history of their persecution is true, it still demonstrates considerable tolerance in the face of acute adversity.)

4. All the rest is politics mate, so as a more evolved *bOAZy* I shld like to see U consider redirecting some of yr examinations at the scurrilous politicians on all sides who take advantage of not just the "Holy Books" but whatever means, in varying shades of grey, to inflame the prejudice of the flocks to have them fight it out when the so called "princes" of the world struggle over limited resource and geo poltical influence.
Posted by DreamOn, Sunday, 16 November 2008 11:07:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Benjam1n - your username is under a day old and is already synomymous with mud. Your posts are a disgrace and contribute nothing. Take your silly rants elsewhere.
Posted by bennie, Sunday, 16 November 2008 11:38:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As for the Yahudis & the Palestinians, ..
What's it all about?

I think that from an Israeli perspective, as the self appointed guardians of the holocaust survivors, they will not under any circumstances give anyone, Palestinian or otherwise, the opportunity to attempt to kill one of their own. Their security policy seems to reflect this. Some of u may recall the napalming of the n.american war boat in the end stages of WWII?

This issue seems to hinge upon the fact that the representatives of Islam refuse to make a "Covenant of Luv," for want of a better term, disavowing any desire to attempt to take vengeance or retribution against any "Israeli," irrespective of the fact that there are amongst the Israelis some who are every bit as "wicked" as any on the planet.

For the Islamic part, they cite the issue of mass denial of access to the *hOLy sITEs* and as such such a Covenant cannot be given, to which the Yahoodees reply, well, but U will not let us do Head banging at all the sites Holy to us and thus, stalemate.

And of course, there are those that are implacable on both sides and these violent minorities seem to be able to circumvent security at whim to the extent of causing ongoing disruption of the so called peace process.

Here again, a peron whom I have known for more than 30 yrs had no problem running drugs between Egypt and Israel so it makes it all look a bit suss to me but however, ..

Irrespective, my view is that collective punishment is abhorrent and that Islam as a whole, without renouncing their claims, ought relocate the people until there is a resolution, that their cries of suffering may not continue to ring out upon Heaven & Earth. Surely Allah has blessed U with more than sufficient means as to care for them, and care for them in a grand manner, becoz it seems quite plain that the Israelis will not.
Posted by DreamOn, Sunday, 16 November 2008 12:11:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles first:

<<"Your methodology is to claim for yourself the right to judge the scriptures of others, on the basis that your scripture is somehow infallible.">>

No dear P, I claim to be able to read english..and make general sense of what Islamic writers themselves write. I could say ALL that I say about the 9th Surah as a complete atheist. Because it is based on the Surah itself..not my 'Biblical' interpretation of it. The point at which my own faith takes me from 'impartial observer' to 'passionate opponent' is the bit which says (9:30)
-"May Allah destroy them" (or..Allah's curse be on them) meaning Jews and Christians.
-"Subjugate them" (9:29)

Were I not a Christian, I'd probably not care much one way or the other about it.. BUT.. and it is a most important but, that would not alter the fundamental meaning of the Surah as it stands in historical context and in Islamic jurusprudence to this day.

I don't know how many times I need to point this out..but my understanding of 9:29 and 30 is entirely consistent with that of Islamic scholars who most Muslims look up to..i.e..Ibn Kathir.

DREAMY... some answers to your points are included above.

POINT 1) Bastardize/meaning: I defer to the tafsir of Ibn Kathir..

POINT 2 & 3) Context: ditto, but THAT is what Pericles needs to study. You were a crafty boy :) You merged the historical context of surah TWO with that of surah 9 :) naughty naughty.

Surah 2= Mohammad weak...Community small.. driven out of Mecca.

Surah 9= Mohammad strong.. community strong.. most of Arabian peninsula subjugated...

You might try Maududi's introduction/commentary about that also.

Surah 2 http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau2.html

Surah 9 http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau9.html

For Pericles benefit..I'm quite happy to accept this Islamic statement of the conditions of the day. Is he?

So(Dreamy).... NO.. he was not being attacked by genocidal hoardes in surah 9..HE WAS the genocidal hoarde..ask the Jews of Bani Qurayza - Oh wait.. you can't..because he systematically sliced and diced off the heads of every man and enslaved the women and children.
Posted by Polycarp, Sunday, 16 November 2008 12:43:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You flatter yourself Boaz.

>>I claim to be able to read english..and make general sense of what Islamic writers themselves write<<

You do not make "general sense" of anything. You very specifically insist that bloody surah bloody nine needs to be taken literally, and that it applies verbatim to the twentyfirst century.

So how do you explain the fact that some scholars disagree with your interpretation? Is it perhaps for the same reason that you have decided that your version of "who wrote the John gospel" is the only one?

Could it also be, that to believe otherwise would be uncomfortable for you? It is clear that you accept nothing short of absolute certainty, therefore anything that requires original thought would be an object of fear for you.

>>I could say ALL that I say about the 9th Surah as a complete atheist<<

For what possible reason would an atheist bother to interpret the Qur'an in the manner that you have? It is a religious document, and as such has no intrinsic validity to an atheist. It would be like asking a forensic accountant to justify your horoscope - there would be absolutely no credible basis for their answer whatsoever.

The only people qualified to determine the impact of the contents of the Qur'an in the twentyfirst century are Muslims. Show me one who justifies killing people on the basis of bloody surah bloody nine, and I'll show you a terrorist.

You are simply using the terrorists' language to tar the entire religion with the brush of fear and loathing, Boaz, and it simply will not wash.

>>Were I not a Christian, I'd probably not care much one way or the other about it.<<

Damn right about that.

>>...but, that would not alter the fundamental meaning of the Surah as it stands in historical context and in Islamic jurusprudence to this day.<<

In your very personal, highly one-eyed and heavily prejudiced evangelical Christian view.

You might think about adding that last line to all your opinions, Boaz. At least it would demonstrate a modicum of intellectual honesty.
Posted by Pericles, Sunday, 16 November 2008 6:08:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Bushbred,

I admire George, yes. Here a few things he's done that I especially like.

The first role of a US president is to keep the population secure. He's had spectular success at that.

He oversaw the greatest and longest period of wealth creation and distribution in the history of mankind.

(The current fiasco isn't of his making, although I hold him responsible for not enforcing the Senate oversight of Banking. See my article:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8053).

Surprisingly a few reputable academics agree with my views in the article.

He's done more to eliminate AIDs in the world's poorest countries than all the word spouting lefties put together.

He's appointed more Afro American officials in senior Government positions than any previous US president and has thereby assisted with the wider acceptance of Afro Americans in American society. I think Obama might just be a tad thankful to him.

I predict, if Obama doesn't cause it's failure, democracy may take root in Iraq and spread throughout the mid-east. Peace and curtailment of Israel's expansion will result if that occurs. Peace in the Mid East might be his greatest legacy.

And finally he's the only US president in 60 years, since Roosevelt/Truman, to have actually led the US to a winning position in a hot war. (Let's not forget accolades to my hero Ronnie for winning the Cold War.)
Posted by keith, Monday, 17 November 2008 3:05:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy