Islam is the most misunderstood religion in contemporary society

[sayak83]

Ok...BTW did you look at the video by Sheikh Omar Suleiman on women in Islam? Or did you want me to summarize more work for you?

I told you. I am moving houses. Can't watch videos now. Sorry about that.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm referring to the fears and the subsequent stigmas attached to Islam.

I know. And I too am speaking of such things attached to Satanism. Even academically it is misunderstood. We can also go on to include Rastafarianism, which is misunderstood by probably at least 99.999% of all people who have heard of it.

 

[YmirGF]

When it comes to the media and the phobias that come from that, I would disagree. I'm referring to the fears and the subsequent stigmas attached to Islam.

Tell that to gay people in Muslim majority counties. I'd say their fears are quite valid.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I told you. I am moving houses. Can't watch videos now. Sorry about that.

When you get a chance, watch it then come back to this then.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I know. And I too am speaking of such things attached to Satanism. Even academically it is misunderstood. We can also go on to include Rastafarianism, which is misunderstood by probably at least 99.999% of all people who have heard of it.

Right but we can talk about a lot of things that are misunderstood that is a given. What is popularly misunderstood is Islam which is older than aforementioned faiths.

 

[sayak83]

When you get a chance, watch it then come back to this then.

Could you comment on this?
Islam is the most misunderstood religion in contemporary society

Links without videos are fine.

 

[Estro Felino]

and yes Muslims do feel targeted by western secularists because they are! .

So many Muslims appreciate and defend our secularism. I've learned to acknowledge that geo-politically, the Muslim world isn't monolithic at all, and that the people coming from Africa are more compatible with our civilization.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Could you comment on this?
Islam is the most misunderstood religion in contemporary society

Links without videos are fine.

Comment on what in particular that was not said already?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

So many Muslims appreciate and defend our secularism. I've learned to acknowledge that geo-politically, the Muslim world isn't monolithic at all, and that the people coming from Africa are more compatible with our civilization.
It's a fact...that's why in Italy we could create this social cohesion...thanks to the African Muslims' majority.
So I pity the British....who were not as lucky.

Well secularism and Islam are not two divergent pathways.

 

[sayak83]

Comment on what in particular that was not said already?

If you click on the link, it links to my post where I quote Quran that says clearly that Nonbelievers, heretics and polytheists are going to hell. Is that a misunderstanding ?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Islam:- Nonbelievers and heretics and polytheists are going to Hell. Is that a misunderstanding?

Cow Surah
Truly it is the same for the disbelievers whether thou warnest them or warnest them not; they do not believe. 7 God has sealed their hearts and their hearing. Upon their eyes is a covering, and theirs is a great punishment. 8Among mankind are those who say, “We believe in God and in the Last Day,” though they do not believe. 9 They would deceive God and the believers; yet they deceive none but themselves, though they are unaware. 10 In their hearts is a disease, and God has increased them in disease. Theirs is a painful punishment for having lied.

So do not set up equals unto God, knowingly. 23 If you are in doubt concerning what We have sent down unto Our servant, then bring a sūrah like it, and call your witnesses apart from God if you are truthful. 24 And if you do not, and you will not, then be mindful of the Fire whose fuel is men and stones, which is prepared for the disbelievers.

161 Indeed, those who disbelieve , and die disbelievers, upon them shall be the curse of God, the angels, and mankind all together. 162 Therein they shall abide: the punishment shall not be lightened for them, nor shall they be granted respite.

Does anyone here disagree that this is the conclusion of Quran, that Nonbelievers are going straight to Hell? Am I misunderstanding?

Well obviously you know what I was referring to in regards to misunderstanding and this is nothing more than a poor attempt at deflecting the issues I brought up, but I'll indulge this nonsense since work is slow.....

I'll comment on the main theme which you presented which is disbelief and punishment and I'll begin with the following verse:

﴾2:171﴿ "The parable of those who disbelieve is that of one who cries to that which hears only a call and a shout. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they do not understand."

Let's look at the overall historical and doctrinal context

The Arabic root ‘ ك-ف-ر ’ or Kufr is used in approximately two hundred and seventy-three ayat in the first verbal form is translated as ‘to disbelieve’, ‘to deny’, or ‘to be 'ungrateful’. Denial and disbelief both give the meaning, from a religious context, that to disbelieve is to deny God, whether it be through ignorance or purposeful refusal. In its philosophical context, especially with the bestowing and receiving of benefits, the word naturally comes to mean ‘to cover, i.e. to ignore knowingly, the benefits which one has received’, and thence, ‘to be unthankful. The Cow ayah verse six, implies the unwillingness or ungratefulness of the disbeliever towards God in the following:

“Truly it is the same for the disbelievers whether thou warnest them or warnest them not; they do not believe." (2:6)

Surah Al-Baqarah was revealed during the Madinan period according to Al-Wahidi book Asbab al-Nuzul, in which according to Al-Wahidi, the disbelievers
has two potential specified groups of individuals. The first interpretation addresses the idea that ‘the disbelievers’ as stated in the āyah, refer to the major figureheads of the Quraysh tribe in the city of Mecca from which the Prophet Muhammad and his companions had just escaped in their emigration to Madinah. According to tasfir al-Jalalyn this ayah refers to Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab (pagan uncle of the prophet who believed Muhammad was a deceiver) and so forth. The idea of the disbeliever as mentioned before are those who turn away intently and ignorantly away from God. The lack of open-mindedness and unwillingness to possibly see another worldview appears to be centered in the verses of Al-Baqarah. You have to understand that the pagan tribes not only did not want to give up their beliefs, but sought to persecute anyone who practiced otherwise which were the Muslims. To disbelieve in this instance is seen as one who worships a polytheistic tradition, and in particular a polytheist who drives others away from the Word of God. According to scholars, this even extended to those who are of the scriptures like Jews and Christians. That is not to say they disbelieve but in reference to the Jewish tribes as we can in the following verse:


﴾2:26﴿ Truly God is not ashamed to set forth a parable of a gnat or something smaller, As for those who believe, they know it is the truth from their Lord, and as for those who disbelieve, they say, “What did God mean by this parable?” He misleads many by it, and He guides many by it, and He misleads none but the iniquitous.


The Jews and the Christians are both considered among believers and disbelievers due to a number of conflicting ayat of the Qur’an, and in this ayah their disbelief stems from their refusal to believe in the Word of God that was the ‘parable of a gnat. What you must understand that during these times it was objectionable to go against the religion of your forefathers. and anyone doing so was cast out, exiled, or persecuted, much like the Christians doing the Roman empire. This is not the same as one who is atheist because they see no revelation, and although they are considered under the concept of kufr in a contemporary context this could be open to interpretation. It is not to say that someone who is atheist is intentionally concealing truth, or does not want to believe in God. I think what is problematic here is the context in which the aforementioned verses that are stated are looked at with a secular lens instead of understanding the historical context of the nature of these verses.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

You're obviously dismissive of what I just said which is universally accepted y scholars so what is it you want me to address? Because even if I address it the correct way you're going to dismiss it if you don't agree so what is your goal in this exchange?

The Truth is my goal, which you continue to throw red herrings at in order to avoid addressing even one of the three issues I mentioned--
1. Forced submission of non-Muslims
2. Theocratic Sharia Law
3. Taqiyya, promoting lying to non-Muslims in the promotion of Islam

You can step up any time you want, but you know you don't appear to have a leg to stand on.

CAIR issued more than 100 releases in which we specifically condemn terrorism during the period from 1994-2015. The organization’s formula on terrorism is simple and comprehensive: CAIR condemns terrorism whenever it happens, wherever it happens, whoever commits it.

CAIR's Anti-Terrorism Campaigns

The problem is the media wants to maintain anti-Islamic hysteria because it brings in ratings. People tune into attacks made by extremists and paint this Islam-terrorist picture because it keeps people watching while other organizations like CAIR are drowned out in the anti-Muslim rhetoric. Same thing happens when some knuckle head kid who happens to be black does something, some people tend to make broad generalizations "blacks make up 13% but commit 50% of the crime" crap, without specifying the demographics or elements that contribute to said crime, you have African-American organizations coming out to defend itself.

CAIR, one of the foremost practitioners of Taqiyya, publishing condemnations of terrorism when politically expedient, while supporting the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and probably ISIS.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism

 

[Epic Beard Man]

The Truth is my goal, which you continue to throw red herrings at in order to avoid addressing even one of the three issues I mentioned--
1. Forced submission of non-Muslims

Let me destroy this nonsense....

Starting with position 1)

The Qur'an states:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things."

Yusuf Ali, Quran 2:256

Let us examine the meaning behind the verse by looking at the tasfir:


"This verse is decisive in establishing that each person has the right to make his or her own choice about embracing Islam. There is other equally decisive evidence in the Qur'an, among which are the following verses:

"If it had been your Lord's will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe?"

Al-Qur'an 10:99

"Some people might be wondering that if Islam indeed advocates such an approach, then what is all this we hear about jihad? How can we explain the warfare that the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his Companions waged against the pagans?

The answer to this is that jihad in Islamic Law can be waged for a number of reasons, but compelling people to accept Islam is simply not one of them."

See:Tafsir of Chapter 002 Verse 256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion ... " - SunnahOnline.com

2. Theocratic Sharia Law

Let us look at a Law professors take on Shari'ah Law:

Myth No. 1: Sharia is "Islamic law."

"But Sharia isn't even "law" in the sense that we in the West understand it. And most devout Muslims who embrace Sharia conceptually don't think of it as a substitute for civil law. Sharia is not a book of statutes or judicial precedent imposed by a government, and it's not a set of regulations adjudicated in court. Rather, it is a body of Quran-based guidance that points Muslims toward living an Islamic life. It doesn't come from the state, and it doesn't even come in one book or a single collection of rules. Sharia is divine and philosophical. The human interpretation of Sharia is called "Fiqh," or Islamic rules of right action, created by individual scholars based on the Quran and hadith (stories of the prophet Muhammad's life). Fiqh literally means "understanding" -- and its many different schools of thought illustrate that scholars knew they didn't speak for God. Fiqh distinguishes between the spiritual value of an action (how God sees it) and the worldly value of that action (how it affects others). Fiqh rules might obligate a devout Muslim to pray, but it's not the job of a Muslim ruler to enforce that obligation. Fiqh is not designed to help governments police morality in the way, say, Saudi Arabia does today.

Myth No. 2: In Muslim countries, Sharia is the law of the land.

While it's true that Sharia influences the legal codes in most Muslim-majority countries, those codes have been shaped by a lot of things, including, most powerfully, European colonialism. France, England and others imposed nation-state models on nearly every Muslim-majority land, inadvertently joining the crown and the faith. In pre-modern Muslim lands, Fiqh authority was separate from the governing authority, or Siyasa. Colonialism centralized law with the state, a system that carried over when these countries regained independence.

Myth No. 3: Sharia is anti-woman.

While it's true that many majority-Muslim societies have laws that treat women unfairly, many of these laws, like Saudi Arabia's ban on female drivers, have no basis in Fiqh. In instances where there is a Fiqh origin for modern legislation, that legislation often cherry-picks certain rules, including more woman-affirming interpretations.

And on a range of issues, Islam can fairly be described as feminist. Fiqh scholars, for instance, have concluded that women have the right to orgasm during sex and to fight in combat. (Women fought alongside the prophet Muhammad himself.) Fiqh can also be interpreted as pro-choice, with certain scholars positing that although abortion is forbidden, first-trimester abortions are not punishable.

Myth No. 4: Islam demands brutal punishments.

It's true that Sharia permits harsh corporal punishment, including amputation of limbs, but Fiqh restricts its application. Theft, for example, doesn't include anything stolen out of hunger or items of low value. (That piece of fruit Jasmine "stole" in Aladdin certainly wouldn't qualify.) Adultery? Yes, corporal punishment for extramarital sex is Quranic in origin, but it comes with an extremely high evidentiary burden of proof: four eye-witnesses. It's a sin but not one that is the business of the state to punish.

Myth No. 5: Sharia is about conquest.

But no such duty exists. The Quran repeatedly commands Muslims to keep promises and uphold covenants. That includes treaties among nations and extends to individuals living under non-Muslim rule. Muslims have lived as minorities in non-Muslim societies since the beginning of Islam -- from Christian Abyssinia to imperial China. And Fiqh scholars have always insisted that Muslims in non-Muslim lands must obey the laws of those lands and do no harm within host countries.

If local law conflicts with Muslims' Sharia obligations? Some scholars say they should emigrate; others allow them to stay. But none advocate violence or a takeover of those governments.

5 myths about Sharia law debunked by a law professor | Commentary | Dallas News

3. Taqiyya, promoting lying to non-Muslims in the promotion of Islam

"The word "al-Taqiyya”literally means: "Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.”A one-word translation would be 'Dissimulation.'

Aside from the instuctions of Quan and Hadith on the permissibility and necessity of Taqiyya, such necessity can also be derived from a logical and rational standpoint. It is apparent to any discerning observer that Allah (SWT) has bestowed upon His (SWT) creation certain defense mechanisms and instincts to protect themselves from impending danger. What follows are some examples that serve to illustrate the above point

If a person is about to be slaughtered because he is a Shi’i, then his concealment of his beliefs is of utmost importance, IF that concealment does not serve as an injustice to someone else. For example, if I, a Shi’i, deny my beliefs to protect myself; and, as a result, an innocent man is blamed instead, then I must come forward, at the risk of death, to protect that man; but when my denial serves no injustice whatsoever, then I must conceal my beliefs to protect myself.

It is clear from the above quotations that defense mechanisms are Allah’s (SWT) mercy to His (SWT) creation, such that He (SWT) has not left them unprotected. As such, al-Taqiyya, I contend, is an instinctive defense mechanism that Allah (SWT) has endowed humans with. The ability to use one’s tongue to escape persecution is indeed a supreme example of defense."

Source: Al-Taqiyya, Dissimulation Part 3

CAIR, one of the foremost practitioners of Taqiyya, publishing condemnations of terrorism when politically expedient, while supporting the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and probably ISIS.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism

This has yet to be proven...

 

[sayak83]

Well obviously you know what I was referring to in regards to misunderstanding and this is nothing more than a poor attempt at deflecting the issues I brought up, but I'll indulge this nonsense since work is slow.....

I'll comment on the main theme which you presented which is disbelief and punishment and I'll begin with the following verse:

﴾2:171﴿ "The parable of those who disbelieve is that of one who cries to that which hears only a call and a shout. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they do not understand."

Let's look at the overall historical and doctrinal context

The Arabic root ‘ ك-ف-ر ’ or Kufr is used in approximately two hundred and seventy-three ayat in the first verbal form is translated as ‘to disbelieve’, ‘to deny’, or ‘to be 'ungrateful’. Denial and disbelief both give the meaning, from a religious context, that to disbelieve is to deny God, whether it be through ignorance or purposeful refusal. In its philosophical context, especially with the bestowing and receiving of benefits, the word naturally comes to mean ‘to cover, i.e. to ignore knowingly, the benefits which one has received’, and thence, ‘to be unthankful. The Cow ayah verse six, implies the unwillingness or ungratefulness of the disbeliever towards God in the following:

“Truly it is the same for the disbelievers whether thou warnest them or warnest them not; they do not believe." (2:6)

Surah Al-Baqarah was revealed during the Madinan period according to Al-Wahidi book Asbab al-Nuzul, in which according to Al-Wahidi, the disbelievers
has two potential specified groups of individuals. The first interpretation addresses the idea that ‘the disbelievers’ as stated in the āyah, refer to the major figureheads of the Quraysh tribe in the city of Mecca from which the Prophet Muhammad and his companions had just escaped in their emigration to Madinah. According to tasfir al-Jalalyn this ayah refers to Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab (pagan uncle of the prophet who believed Muhammad was a deceiver) and so forth. The idea of the disbeliever as mentioned before are those who turn away intently and ignorantly away from God. The lack of open-mindedness and unwillingness to possibly see another worldview appears to be centered in the verses of Al-Baqarah. You have to understand that the pagan tribes not only did not want to give up their beliefs, but sought to persecute anyone who practiced otherwise which were the Muslims. To disbelieve in this instance is seen as one who worships a polytheistic tradition, and in particular a polytheist who drives others away from the Word of God. According to scholars, this even extended to those who are of the scriptures like Jews and Christians. That is not to say they disbelieve but in reference to the Jewish tribes as we can in the following verse:


﴾2:26﴿ Truly God is not ashamed to set forth a parable of a gnat or something smaller, As for those who believe, they know it is the truth from their Lord, and as for those who disbelieve, they say, “What did God mean by this parable?” He misleads many by it, and He guides many by it, and He misleads none but the iniquitous.


The Jews and the Christians are both considered among believers and disbelievers due to a number of conflicting ayat of the Qur’an, and in this ayah their disbelief stems from their refusal to believe in the Word of God that was the ‘parable of a gnat. What you must understand that during these times it was objectionable to go against the religion of your forefathers. and anyone doing so was cast out, exiled, or persecuted, much like the Christians doing the Roman empire. This is not the same as one who is atheist because they see no revelation, and although they are considered under the concept of kufr in a contemporary context this could be open to interpretation. It is not to say that someone who is atheist is intentionally concealing truth, or does not want to believe in God. I think what is problematic here is the context in which the aforementioned verses that are stated are looked at with a secular lens instead of understanding the historical context of the nature of these verses.

The Quran, as the final revelation of God, is considered to be clear and easily understandable by all who reads it. Its the claim of the book itself. Where in the Quran does it say that the verses have meaning only in the historical context of its first hearer? That makes the Quran temporally constrained and hence unsuitable for bearing the burden of providing God's direct commands to billions of Muslims.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

The Quran, as the final revelation of God, is considered to be clear and easily understandable by all who reads it. Its the claim of the book itself. Where in the Quran does it say that the verses have meaning only in the historical context of its first hearer? That makes the Quran temporally constrained and hence unsuitable for bearing the burden of providing God's direct commands to billions of Muslims.

Verses of the Quran were revealed gradually in proportion to the events and the people’s benefits, needs and the situations....

"Why is not the Qur'an revealed to him all at once'') meaning, why was this Qur'an, which was revealed to him, not sent down all at one time, as the previous Books, the Tawrah, Injil, Zabur and other Divine Books Allah answered them, telling them that it was revealed in stages over twenty-three years, according to events and circumstances, and whatever rulings were needed, in order to strengthen the hearts of the believers, as He says:

"And (it is) a Qur'an which We have divided (into parts)... (17:106). Allah says:

"that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages.) Qatadah said it means: "We have explained it.'' `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam said it means: "We have given its interpretation.''

Source: Quran Tafsir Ibn Kathir - The Reason why the Qur'an was revealed in Stages, the Refutation of the Disbelievers, and their Evil

 

[sayak83]

Verses of the Quran were revealed gradually in proportion to the events and the people’s benefits, needs and the situations....

"Why is not the Qur'an revealed to him all at once'') meaning, why was this Qur'an, which was revealed to him, not sent down all at one time, as the previous Books, the Tawrah, Injil, Zabur and other Divine Books Allah answered them, telling them that it was revealed in stages over twenty-three years, according to events and circumstances, and whatever rulings were needed, in order to strengthen the hearts of the believers, as He says:

"And (it is) a Qur'an which We have divided (into parts)... (17:106). Allah says:

"that We may strengthen your heart thereby. And We have revealed it to you gradually, in stages.) Qatadah said it means: "We have explained it.'' `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam said it means: "We have given its interpretation.''

Source: Quran Tafsir Ibn Kathir - The Reason why the Qur'an was revealed in Stages, the Refutation of the Disbelievers, and their Evil

So you are stating that the verses regarding heretics, disbelievers, polytheists no longer applies to non-Muslims, Muslim heretics (like Ahmadiyya), atheist disbelievers and polytheist Hindus of today?

Please quote a Muslim source for this.

 

[Curious George]

While I agree that Islam is misunderstood and some of what Islam teaches has value, I am not a fan of using religious scripture to influence law. The treatment of LGBTQ community by religions, Islam included, is a fine enough example to remove legal influence. The treatment of atheists is another. I agree that we can find in practice people of other religions who do this as well, but that is not the topic at hand.

A person who was Muslim and becomes an atheist is believed to be immoral. A person who is homosexual is believed to be immoral.

Though I have not read the Quran, I have not seen significant objection to either of these concepts. Am I misunderstanding?

**edit** appears to have been overlooked so edited to tag @Epic Beard Man

 

[Altfish]

Let me destroy this nonsense....

Starting with position 1)

The Qur'an states:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things."

Yusuf Ali, Quran 2:256

Let us examine the meaning behind the verse by looking at the tasfir:


"This verse is decisive in establishing that each person has the right to make his or her own choice about embracing Islam. There is other equally decisive evidence in the Qur'an, among which are the following verses:

"If it had been your Lord's will, all of the people on Earth would have believed. Would you then compel the people so to have them believe?"

Al-Qur'an 10:99

"Some people might be wondering that if Islam indeed advocates such an approach, then what is all this we hear about jihad? How can we explain the warfare that the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his Companions waged against the pagans?

The answer to this is that jihad in Islamic Law can be waged for a number of reasons, but compelling people to accept Islam is simply not one of them."

See:Tafsir of Chapter 002 Verse 256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion ... " - SunnahOnline.com



Let us look at a Law professors take on Shari'ah Law:

Myth No. 1: Sharia is "Islamic law."

"But Sharia isn't even "law" in the sense that we in the West understand it. And most devout Muslims who embrace Sharia conceptually don't think of it as a substitute for civil law. Sharia is not a book of statutes or judicial precedent imposed by a government, and it's not a set of regulations adjudicated in court. Rather, it is a body of Quran-based guidance that points Muslims toward living an Islamic life. It doesn't come from the state, and it doesn't even come in one book or a single collection of rules. Sharia is divine and philosophical. The human interpretation of Sharia is called "Fiqh," or Islamic rules of right action, created by individual scholars based on the Quran and hadith (stories of the prophet Muhammad's life). Fiqh literally means "understanding" -- and its many different schools of thought illustrate that scholars knew they didn't speak for God. Fiqh distinguishes between the spiritual value of an action (how God sees it) and the worldly value of that action (how it affects others). Fiqh rules might obligate a devout Muslim to pray, but it's not the job of a Muslim ruler to enforce that obligation. Fiqh is not designed to help governments police morality in the way, say, Saudi Arabia does today.

Myth No. 2: In Muslim countries, Sharia is the law of the land.

While it's true that Sharia influences the legal codes in most Muslim-majority countries, those codes have been shaped by a lot of things, including, most powerfully, European colonialism. France, England and others imposed nation-state models on nearly every Muslim-majority land, inadvertently joining the crown and the faith. In pre-modern Muslim lands, Fiqh authority was separate from the governing authority, or Siyasa. Colonialism centralized law with the state, a system that carried over when these countries regained independence.

Myth No. 3: Sharia is anti-woman.

While it's true that many majority-Muslim societies have laws that treat women unfairly, many of these laws, like Saudi Arabia's ban on female drivers, have no basis in Fiqh. In instances where there is a Fiqh origin for modern legislation, that legislation often cherry-picks certain rules, including more woman-affirming interpretations.

And on a range of issues, Islam can fairly be described as feminist. Fiqh scholars, for instance, have concluded that women have the right to orgasm during sex and to fight in combat. (Women fought alongside the prophet Muhammad himself.) Fiqh can also be interpreted as pro-choice, with certain scholars positing that although abortion is forbidden, first-trimester abortions are not punishable.

Myth No. 4: Islam demands brutal punishments.

It's true that Sharia permits harsh corporal punishment, including amputation of limbs, but Fiqh restricts its application. Theft, for example, doesn't include anything stolen out of hunger or items of low value. (That piece of fruit Jasmine "stole" in Aladdin certainly wouldn't qualify.) Adultery? Yes, corporal punishment for extramarital sex is Quranic in origin, but it comes with an extremely high evidentiary burden of proof: four eye-witnesses. It's a sin but not one that is the business of the state to punish.

Myth No. 5: Sharia is about conquest.

But no such duty exists. The Quran repeatedly commands Muslims to keep promises and uphold covenants. That includes treaties among nations and extends to individuals living under non-Muslim rule. Muslims have lived as minorities in non-Muslim societies since the beginning of Islam -- from Christian Abyssinia to imperial China. And Fiqh scholars have always insisted that Muslims in non-Muslim lands must obey the laws of those lands and do no harm within host countries.

If local law conflicts with Muslims' Sharia obligations? Some scholars say they should emigrate; others allow them to stay. But none advocate violence or a takeover of those governments.

5 myths about Sharia law debunked by a law professor | Commentary | Dallas News



"The word "al-Taqiyya”literally means: "Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.”A one-word translation would be 'Dissimulation.'

Aside from the instuctions of Quan and Hadith on the permissibility and necessity of Taqiyya, such necessity can also be derived from a logical and rational standpoint. It is apparent to any discerning observer that Allah (SWT) has bestowed upon His (SWT) creation certain defense mechanisms and instincts to protect themselves from impending danger. What follows are some examples that serve to illustrate the above point

If a person is about to be slaughtered because he is a Shi’i, then his concealment of his beliefs is of utmost importance, IF that concealment does not serve as an injustice to someone else. For example, if I, a Shi’i, deny my beliefs to protect myself; and, as a result, an innocent man is blamed instead, then I must come forward, at the risk of death, to protect that man; but when my denial serves no injustice whatsoever, then I must conceal my beliefs to protect myself.

It is clear from the above quotations that defense mechanisms are Allah’s (SWT) mercy to His (SWT) creation, such that He (SWT) has not left them unprotected. As such, al-Taqiyya, I contend, is an instinctive defense mechanism that Allah (SWT) has endowed humans with. The ability to use one’s tongue to escape persecution is indeed a supreme example of defense."

Source: Al-Taqiyya, Dissimulation Part 3





This has yet to be proven...

BUT you can find verses that tell followers the opposite.....

But those who reject Faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of Faith, – never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray.
Quaran 3.90

A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu'adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu'adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle."
Sahih al-Bukhari 9:89:271

 

[Epic Beard Man]

So you are stating that the verses regarding heretics, disbelievers, polytheists no longer applies to non-Muslims, Muslim heretics (like Ahmadiyya), atheist disbelievers and polytheist Hindus of today?

Please quote a Muslim source for this.

A disbeliever is one who does not believe in the Oneness of God, his prophets, his angels, nor believe in the last day. The main component of a Kufr is one who conceals truth even when hearing it.

 

[sayak83]

A disbeliever is one who does not believe in the Oneness of God, his prophets, his angels, nor believe in the last day. The main component of a Kufr is one who conceals truth even when hearing it.

So whats the Arabic for disbelievers.