tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148951396576155849.post2542243969750549934..comments2024-01-30T14:57:53.352-05:00Comments on Town Commons: Once a Muslim . . .scotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05052920226349799408noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148951396576155849.post-82305161097614707302007-04-20T14:07:00.000-04:002007-04-20T14:07:00.000-04:00"but that is a tool of Islamic clerics"Yes, but wa..."but that is a tool of Islamic clerics"<BR/><BR/>Yes, but was it not originally used by Mohammed himself to justify and explain his reversals of doctrine?pst314https://www.blogger.com/profile/08686377680772972035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148951396576155849.post-16694936187697658652007-04-20T01:12:00.000-04:002007-04-20T01:12:00.000-04:00One, thank you for the comment. Yes, I do know ab...One, thank you for the comment. Yes, I do know about the Koranic interpretation methods, but that is a tool of Islamic clerics - and one that must be challenged if Islam is ever to moderate. Muslims believe that the Koran is not just a book recorded by man, but a heavenly document. It would seem to me, and other Islamic scholars have commented, that it makes no sense to abrogate the words of heaven, rendering them meaningless. That, plus the ambiguity inherent in the arabic text, give a potential for modern muslims to mature their religion. For an overly long discussion of itjihad, etc from my viewpoint, please see my post at <BR/>http://towncommons.blogspot.com/2007/03/islam-history-and-defunding-un.html<BR/>On top of this, compulsion in religion would seem a clear human rights violation, though I admit not having read the UN human rights charters for some time. Were the UN a sane body, this act in Malaysia - and the more gruesome acts of execution for leaving Islam - would be condemned irrespective of how Islam is being interpreted by the Wahhabis. Unfortunately, it does not seem that the UN Human Rights Commission can shift their fixed stare from Israel.scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05052920226349799408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7148951396576155849.post-4477127770697645552007-04-20T00:56:00.000-04:002007-04-20T00:56:00.000-04:00The hypocrisy of Islam is mind boggling. Doesn't i...<I>The hypocrisy of Islam is mind boggling. Doesn't it say somewhere in the Koran that there shall be "no compulsion in religion?" Oh yes, verse 2:256. So why is it that to leave Islam for Christianity or Hinduism or just out of sheer agnosticism is considered a crime of apostacy under Sharia law and dealt with in Islamic countries by the sword or other coercive means?</I><BR/><BR/>Doesn't Scott know that the "no compulsion" verse has been abrogated, and therefore doesn't apply anymore?<BR/><BR/>To quickly quote <A HREF="http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015461.php" REL="nofollow">Hugh Fitzgerald</A>:<BR/><BR/><I>2) The internal contradictions in the Qur'an are resolved through the doctrine of "naskh" or "abrogation," so that, as in the systems of common law, where the doctrine of stare decisis ordinarily holds but later decisions, when different, cancel the effect of earlier ones (e.g., Plessy v. Ferguson is not valid after Brown v. Bd. of Education).<BR/><BR/>3) The doctrine of "naskh" allows the so-called Meccan suras, the softer ones, which were presumably the product of a time when Muhammad still felt the need for support and had not yet become as harsh toward Infidels as he became once he had taken control in Medina (Yathrib), to be cancelled or overruled or overturned by the much harsher so-called "Medinan" suras.</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com