Well, when an interpretation nails it so well why argue? I am a bit confused though, was there some interpretation of Islam during the Medieval period of world history that wasn’t correct? Even by Muslims themselves?
“There is a temptation to rehearse this observation—that jihadists are modern secular people, with modern political concerns, wearing medieval religious disguise—and make it fit the Islamic State. In fact, much of what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere, carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
The most-articulate spokesmen for that position are the Islamic State’s officials and supporters themselves. They refer derisively to “moderns.” In conversation, they insist that they will not—cannot—waver from governing precepts that were embedded in Islam by the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers. They often speak in codes and allusions that sound odd or old-fashioned to non-Muslims, but refer to specific traditions and texts of early Islam.
To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.” To Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments—the stoning and crop destruction—juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an “uncircumcised geezer.”)
But Adnani was not merely talking trash. His speech was laced with theological and legal discussion, and his exhortation to attack crops directly echoed orders from Muhammad to leave well water and crops alone—unless the armies of Islam were in a defensive position, in which case Muslims in the lands of kuffar, or infidels, should be unmerciful, and poison away.
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.”
as opposed to…..
So what category do the ones who make woman dress like ninjas fit in this brilliant theory? I’ve had the misfortune of seeing at least 2 of them in the last 6 months, right here in the land of liberty. It’s disturbing to say the least.
The religion of Islam includes a basic set of rules designed to protect the rights and freedoms of individuals and communities. It is a doctrine concerned with respect, tolerance, justice, and equality. The Islamic concepts of freedom and human rights are imbedded in and guaranteed by the Sharia (Islamic Law).
Meanwhile, 3 paragraphs later:
There are only two categories of crimes for which the death penalty can be applied under Sharia law. One is murder and the other is for crimes against the community (sometimes known as spreading mischief). One of the core principles of Islam is that a cohesive and secure community is absolutely paramount. Crimes that threaten the community include treason, apostasy (when one leaves the religion of Islam and actively turns against it), piracy, rape, adultery, practising magic and homosexual activity.
Allow me to add my 21st century interpretation:
There are only two categories of crimes for which the death penalty can be applied under Sharia law. One is murder and the other is everything else.
This is directly from a website that I’m pretty sure they didn’t have in medieval times.
radical islam comes from a fairly modern effort of Nazis cultivating allies in the Middle East in the 30s. The origins if it lay with Haj Amin Al Husseini, Yaser Arafat’s mentor.
President Obama said that terrorism stems from a “medieval interpretation of Islam”.
As opposed to the progressive, chic, and ultra modern practitioners in Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.
Well, when an interpretation nails it so well why argue? I am a bit confused though, was there some interpretation of Islam during the Medieval period of world history that wasn’t correct? Even by Muslims themselves?
From a recent Atlantic article.
“There is a temptation to rehearse this observation—that jihadists are modern secular people, with modern political concerns, wearing medieval religious disguise—and make it fit the Islamic State. In fact, much of what the group does looks nonsensical except in light of a sincere, carefully considered commitment to returning civilization to a seventh-century legal environment, and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
The most-articulate spokesmen for that position are the Islamic State’s officials and supporters themselves. They refer derisively to “moderns.” In conversation, they insist that they will not—cannot—waver from governing precepts that were embedded in Islam by the Prophet Muhammad and his earliest followers. They often speak in codes and allusions that sound odd or old-fashioned to non-Muslims, but refer to specific traditions and texts of early Islam.
To take one example: In September, Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, the Islamic State’s chief spokesman, called on Muslims in Western countries such as France and Canada to find an infidel and “smash his head with a rock,” poison him, run him over with a car, or “destroy his crops.” To Western ears, the biblical-sounding punishments—the stoning and crop destruction—juxtaposed strangely with his more modern-sounding call to vehicular homicide. (As if to show that he could terrorize by imagery alone, Adnani also referred to Secretary of State John Kerry as an “uncircumcised geezer.”)
But Adnani was not merely talking trash. His speech was laced with theological and legal discussion, and his exhortation to attack crops directly echoed orders from Muhammad to leave well water and crops alone—unless the armies of Islam were in a defensive position, in which case Muslims in the lands of kuffar, or infidels, should be unmerciful, and poison away.
The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.”
as opposed to…..
So what category do the ones who make woman dress like ninjas fit in this brilliant theory? I’ve had the misfortune of seeing at least 2 of them in the last 6 months, right here in the land of liberty. It’s disturbing to say the least.
The religion of Islam includes a basic set of rules designed to protect the rights and freedoms of individuals and communities. It is a doctrine concerned with respect, tolerance, justice, and equality. The Islamic concepts of freedom and human rights are imbedded in and guaranteed by the Sharia (Islamic Law).
Meanwhile, 3 paragraphs later:
There are only two categories of crimes for which the death penalty can be applied under Sharia law. One is murder and the other is for crimes against the community (sometimes known as spreading mischief). One of the core principles of Islam is that a cohesive and secure community is absolutely paramount. Crimes that threaten the community include treason, apostasy (when one leaves the religion of Islam and actively turns against it), piracy, rape, adultery, practising magic and homosexual activity.
Allow me to add my 21st century interpretation:
There are only two categories of crimes for which the death penalty can be applied under Sharia law. One is murder and the other is everything else.
This is directly from a website that I’m pretty sure they didn’t have in medieval times.
http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3313/
radical islam comes from a fairly modern effort of Nazis cultivating allies in the Middle East in the 30s. The origins if it lay with Haj Amin Al Husseini, Yaser Arafat’s mentor.
Yeah Barky, and the Crusades you’re so fond of mentioning stem from a Medieval Papacy.
Guess which one didn’t end with the Medieval period?