TR,

“Nor do I hear something like, "Would you like to think about it a bit longer Saad?"

Wasn’t it merciful enough to let the accused choose the judge? Do you know of any other king of that period or later to have done the same?
You sound like a smart guy, there are plenty of non-Muslim historians and philosophers (LaMartine, History of Turkey 1854) and the great Thomas Carlyle.

For Muslim thinkers, Tarik Ramadan documented the biography of the prophet in the book below. One of the most famous incidents is him releasing thousands of prisoners in return of them teaching early Muslims how to read and write.
http://www.soundvisioncanada.com/shop/pview.asp?Item=406-160

Believe whatever makes sense to you,

Bassam,

I think its old news to tell us meaning interpretation according to the Wahabis of Saudi.

“One of my intentions is to correct the misinformation spread by people like yourself. I guess from your side my intentions look bad”

That’s intellectual dishonesty. To correct misinformation means you display a whole verse then raise whats good and bad about it. In your post above you intentionally quoted ‘half of a verse’ or half of a truth that suits you. There is only one Quran and the meaning translation is around choice of words. And actually, the ‘softest’ meaning translation is Yussuf Ali but Oxford and Pickthall are reasonable meaning translation.

Here is a little challenge based on facts and figures:

The world’s most religious practice is Sufi / Mystic muslims and there are estimated to be 18% of the Muslim population (estimated 25 millions in Turkey alone www.fethullahgulen.org). The conservative (ie wahhabis) are estimated to be 15-18 millions at best (ie 1 % of the total Muslim population or 1/10 of the Sufis). In a classroom of 10 students, 9 understood and interpreted the lesson in a way and only one student interpreted it differently, don’t we say the 9 students got it right?

For further reading: www.affinity.org.au

Peace,

You said:
"When you mention the whole section, any child can now understand that war is only allowed in land defense in a time of war. The whole 19 references in the Quran relating to war have boundaries of ‘fight those who fight you and shall not transgress’ (ie army versus army)."

And an older child would see that it is incitement to violence, not only over land but also over an imaginary truth. As the good professors suggest, let's go to 9:36. "Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (in a year), so was it ordained by Allah on the Day when He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are Sacred (ie the 1st, the 7th, the 11th and the 12th months of the Islamic calendar). That is the right religion, so wrong not yourselves therein, and fight against the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) collectively as they fight against you collectively. But know that Allah is with those who are Al-Muttaqun (the pious)."

How much clearer does one have to be? Those who disbelieve in the Oneness of Allah are to be fought against. This doctrine is called Jihad. It is of utmost importance, a shining pillar of Islam. Two professors who specialise in Islamic study say this.

You go on to say:
"That’s intellectual dishonesty. To correct misinformation means you display a whole verse then raise whats good and bad about it. In your post above you intentionally quoted ‘half of a verse’ or half of a truth that suits you."

That's just your way of fobbing me off. I have shown verses from a translation of Quran, backed up with footnotes to explain that your "half of a truth" is incorrect. The readers can decide for themselves.

The rest of your response is a load of sophistry and red-herrings. 99.99999% of the world's population used to think that the world was flat. According to your twisted logic they all got it right.

Bassam,

No need to get hot under the collar its just a discussion.

- When you want to understand a faith, you ask those who belong to it. Please read the attached article by the top 100 Muslim scholars and thinkers from 26 different nationalities to the Pope. http://www.islamicamagazine.com/issue18/openletter18_lowres.pdf

- You failed to mention why Chapter 9 is the only chapter of 114 that does not start with “In the name of God Most gracious most merciful”.

Is this another dishonesty or your ‘professors on Islam’ don’t know? Let me tell you then: the time of this specific revelation Muslims were facing extermination wars (during their holy months of worship) and hence were allowed to defend themselves without transgressing. Muslims were forced into wars and the norm being outnumbered 9 or 11 to 1 and were permitted only self defence without transgression. Muslims never transgressed on people of other faith like Christians or Jewish. In fact, throughout history Christians and Jews lived in Muslim countries and early churches and synagogues are still there. I can’t say the same about other religions practices during the Spanish inquisition and what happened to Muslims and Jews.

-“War over imaginary truth” not sure what does that means but I can’t see the difference between Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Here is a youtube link by the famous Deedat on a lecture to muslims that there is no difference between the 3 great Abrahamic faith. The man is an expert on the Quran, the Bible and the Torah:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LRUeu83ZaI

-“Inciting violence, land wars, etc..” : That’s crusaders mythology. How did Islam get to Malaysia, Indonesia, India and the US?
The following is a news article on CNN and shows 25% of US Muslims are new converts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN-EfgU7PW4

Or is CNN a pro-Islam channel?

Peace,

You are a facinating person Fellow-Human. Indeed, your point that Sufis outnumber Wahabis is a good one.

However, you are committing a mistake by using the gentleness of Sufism to justify Islam in the face of Wahabist violence and bigotry.

This is not your mistake, but a general mistake made by numerous social commentators. Namely, justifying a set religious beliefs by whether they are peaceful or violent, tolerant or intolerant. And so we enter a debate that has NO conclusion and is bound to go round n' round in circles ad nauseum. Hence, Westerners continue to accuse Muslims of being inherently violent, and Muslims continue to accuse Westerners of being inherently egomanical.

So, instead of asking the question "Is Sufism peaceful?" we should be asking "Is Sufism correct?"

The answer to this question is an obvious NO. Sufism is similar to conventional Islamic sects in that it is founded on Sharia, which in turn is founded on the Sunnah. And as you know Fellow-Human the Sunnah is founded on the likes of Bukhari and Ibn Ishaq (via Ibn Hisham).

I already know how you feel about the reliability of Sahih Bukhari and Ibn Ishaq's biographies, so really from the viewpoint of finding plain accurate truth Sufism is NO BETTER than Wahabism!

It is the intrinsic problems of early Islamic history that is the pivotal problem and the main concern.

TR, basically, most Australians have very little or no personal experience of any people who practice the Islamic faith.

Some of the discussions that go on on OLO must be as frustrating to Muslims as it would be to a Christian of any sect in a Muslim country where the faith is viewed through one particular prism.

It is undeniable that there are people who profess to follow the faith of Islam and justify their behaviour and opinions with Islam. But this is not different as to what has happened in the Christian world in the past.

I'm sure the majority of Christians would be incensed if they and their faith were judged by the behaviour and opinions of say the Ku Klux Klan, a devout Christian group.

The concern for all, as well as Muslims, is the strident and public domination a small group of Islamists is getting. There seems to be a connection with Wahabism. I'd like to remind the conservatives that Saudi Arabia, a close ally of the Western World exports and bankrolls this variety of Islam.

The Royal Family of SA is only in power by the grace of the Wahabists. None of the Royal Family could actually afford to come out against this strand of faith without risking loss of power and destabilising SA. They are the Royal Family and in power because it suits the Wahabists.

I've grown up with people who practice the Islamic faith. I can assure you that what is going on has little to do with spiritual matters, and everything to do with power. Many, many more Muslims have died through terrorist attacks than Westerners.

TR,

“You are a fascinating person Fellow-Human. Indeed, your point that Sufis outnumber Wahabis is a good one”
I hope it’s a compliment : -) You are more fascinating since you are well read on Islam by choice, I had to because its my faith.

My point is this: Islam is a proven peaceful religion regardless of the criminals like Laden and Co, before you jump on me let me further qualify my statement:
- Islam is a fast growing religion.
- The fastest growing practice of Islam is Sufism/ Mystic Islam.
- The most peaceful spiritual religious sect is Sufi Muslims. They would carry an insect to safety across the fence since insects ‘are nations like us’ according to the Quran and there reading. That’s the only Islam they know.
- Many of the greatest spiritual leaders were Sufis (www.sharawy.com).
- Muslims in general consider Sufism to be an accepted spiritual practice with one or two caviets on one subsect (the human and creator unity stuff which I studied for years and couldn’t get it).
So, how can Islam be anything BUT peaceful, if almost 200-300 Millions are reading the same ONE book and end up in Mystic Islam?

Yvonne,

“Some of the discussions that go on on OLO must be as frustrating to Muslims”

On the other thread I posted a comment re wahabbi. Every Muslim and non muslim I know like to jump on the ‘spot the wahabi’ band wagon. But then neither (or very few) is willing to support moderate muslim organisations’ with a $1 worth. Few years ago I used to volunteer for charity work for Islamic and Christian charities. Some of these moderate organisations collect cents from each other to fix a whole in a mosque's roof on a rainy day. Wahabbis don’t like them and the average Aussie is scared of them. But then again some politician comes up with the infamous ‘moderate muslims should do more’. Frustrating? You have no idea.

Peace,