Is ISIS/Taliban/etc. Muslim...

BigJoeNobody

BigJoeNobody

Professional Argument Attractor
Messages
1,179
Reaction score
126
Points
63
Location
Texas
Richard Pickett said:
I have see and heard many discussions on the topic of the Taliban and Isis over the past few months, and a few revolved around the faith base of these terror based organizations. Many Christians and Muslims alike are saying that members of these groups are not Muslim, they are cultists. I personally believe them to be Radical Muslims who wish to return Islam to to a time very long ago and keep as much modernization away from their corner of the world as possible. The rub here is, that they are willing to use what ever force is necessary to accomplish this. Now add the western world into the mix and BIG BANG.....
Click to expand...

This thread is to explain this only. Please keep in mind these are my opinions based on other's opinions who know much more about Quran and Hadith than I.

Are they Muslim... in short yes. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on the POV). Now... the meat of this might be a little more difficult to understand so bear with me.

First we must define what a Muslim is. Simply put it is someone who submits to the will of God to the best of their ability (Will use God here to avoid confusion. This is the same God of Abraham/Moses/Jesus/etc. (PBUTA)) In this sense there are many Jews and some Christians that equally fit into the broad definition of Muslim.

A more specific definition is someone who submits to the will of God in the way of Islam as taught by Prophet Mouhammed (PBUH).

These terror groups claim and often believe they are following the teachings of Mouhammed (PBUH). They believe in 1 God, the God of the Prophets (PBUTA) as mentioned before. They believe Mouhammed is the last and final messenger. From this I cannot say they are not Muslim. (I have stated this incorrectly in the past.)

Now what it seems you are asking in actuality is not are they Muslims, but are they acting in a truly Islamic manner. This answer is much easier to stomach for me. NO. For current relevance and such, lets just discuss ISIS. ISIS claims they are displaying the fundamentals of Islam. Which would fit with your word Radical, and attempting to return to a time long ago. These claims however are false even to the basis of their claim. I am going to make these claims without referencing the locations in the Quran in which they are stated or referenced as I am currently at work and don't have time for a full research topic ATM. I may revisit once I have some time.

First off killing of innocents is FORBIDDEN in Islam. In fact killing the guilty Quranically is often shadowed by the "better" option to spare them and punish them in other ways (fees, jail, Labor, Slavery, etc. or straight forgive given they repent and swear to never do the crime again(this one depends on severity of the crime)). In fact even their claims that these are reciprocations of war is unjustified. Many of the people they have killed have been non-combatants. You can not judge someone who has not committed a crime with the crime of another person. If you kill my brother, I cannot kill your brother, as your brother has done nothing to me. Furthermore the methods of which they use is usually Forbidden, Burning of the body, killing for all to see. We do not even treat animals like this. Another extension of this is the command not to make war against/kill others of the Ummah (Muslim community) who have not committed a crime befitting execution. Of which they have done 3 fold over their atrocities against all others. Their justification is using the verse of "kill the polytheists wherever you find them". Which is 1/3 of the Aya. The rest denotes the commandmant that If they seek refuge and give up, you must give them protection (amongst other things such as food/water/bed), and the last part tells of a warning not to go beyond what you are required as God does not like those who overreach their boundaries.

Second, they have already declared that the Kaaba is to be destroyed. This one is not from a commandment, but rather tradition. The Kaaba is the point of focus for out 5 daily offerings for a direction of unity only. We do not pray to it as it is nothing more than a stone. ISIS however has declared the intent to destroy it. A stone that has been a marker for 1400 years as commanded by Prophet Mouhammed (PBUH).

Third, forced marriages to the captured women. This is something I dispise discussing. The women they take (yes TAKE) when they are captured are forced into marriage on the will of the soldiers alone. They are forced to adopt the practices of Islam and treated like garbage. This action is oppression all around. and "God hates the Oppressors". No woman can be forced to marry anyone. If she does not approve, even an arranged marriage is anulled. Even if this were not the case women have the right to divorce, and a man cannot enforce his will on her during that time. Yet these women are constantly subjected to horrible atrocities.

So in conclusion, yes they are Muslim in that they claim it in taking Shahada, but to my knowledge that is the extent of their actions that follow the structure of Islam. They aren't moving toward a more pure form, but rather from it. Pure Islam is one that even the people who hated the idea of 1 God during Mouhammed's (PBUH) time respected him for. Even the gay/trangendered Eunichs were accepted to live in peace. While the action is forbidden, He allowed them to not only have protection/food/water/jobs/etc but also allowed them to follow God's religion and taught them. He cast noone away that came in peace. Never agressed an enemy that was not agressing or oppressing him.
 
BigJoeNobody said:
This thread is to explain this only. Please keep in mind these are my opinions based on other's opinions who know much more about Quran and Hadith than I.

Are they Muslim... in short yes. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on the POV). Now... the meat of this might be a little more difficult to understand so bear with me.

First we must define what a Muslim is. Simply put it is someone who submits to the will of God to the best of their ability (Will use God here to avoid confusion. This is the same God of Abraham/Moses/Jesus/etc. (PBUTA)) In this sense there are many Jews and some Christians that equally fit into the broad definition of Muslim.

A more specific definition is someone who submits to the will of God in the way of Islam as taught by Prophet Mouhammed (PBUH).

These terror groups claim and often believe they are following the teachings of Mouhammed (PBUH). They believe in 1 God, the God of the Prophets (PBUTA) as mentioned before. They believe Mouhammed is the last and final messenger. From this I cannot say they are not Muslim. (I have stated this incorrectly in the past.)

Now what it seems you are asking in actuality is not are they Muslims, but are they acting in a truly Islamic manner. This answer is much easier to stomach for me. NO. For current relevance and such, lets just discuss ISIS. ISIS claims they are displaying the fundamentals of Islam. Which would fit with your word Radical, and attempting to return to a time long ago. These claims however are false even to the basis of their claim. I am going to make these claims without referencing the locations in the Quran in which they are stated or referenced as I am currently at work and don't have time for a full research topic ATM. I may revisit once I have some time.

First off killing of innocents is FORBIDDEN in Islam. In fact killing the guilty Quranically is often shadowed by the "better" option to spare them and punish them in other ways (fees, jail, Labor, Slavery, etc. or straight forgive given they repent and swear to never do the crime again(this one depends on severity of the crime)). In fact even their claims that these are reciprocations of war is unjustified. Many of the people they have killed have been non-combatants. You can not judge someone who has not committed a crime with the crime of another person. If you kill my brother, I cannot kill your brother, as your brother has done nothing to me. Furthermore the methods of which they use is usually Forbidden, Burning of the body, killing for all to see. We do not even treat animals like this. Another extension of this is the command not to make war against/kill others of the Ummah (Muslim community) who have not committed a crime befitting execution. Of which they have done 3 fold over their atrocities against all others. Their justification is using the verse of "kill the polytheists wherever you find them". Which is 1/3 of the Aya. The rest denotes the commandmant that If they seek refuge and give up, you must give them protection (amongst other things such as food/water/bed), and the last part tells of a warning not to go beyond what you are required as God does not like those who overreach their boundaries.

Second, they have already declared that the Kaaba is to be destroyed. This one is not from a commandment, but rather tradition. The Kaaba is the point of focus for out 5 daily offerings for a direction of unity only. We do not pray to it as it is nothing more than a stone. ISIS however has declared the intent to destroy it. A stone that has been a marker for 1400 years as commanded by Prophet Mouhammed (PBUH).

Third, forced marriages to the captured women. This is something I dispise discussing. The women they take (yes TAKE) when they are captured are forced into marriage on the will of the soldiers alone. They are forced to adopt the practices of Islam and treated like garbage. This action is oppression all around. and "God hates the Oppressors". No woman can be forced to marry anyone. If she does not approve, even an arranged marriage is anulled. Even if this were not the case women have the right to divorce, and a man cannot enforce his will on her during that time. Yet these women are constantly subjected to horrible atrocities.

So in conclusion, yes they are Muslim in that they claim it in taking Shahada, but to my knowledge that is the extent of their actions that follow the structure of Islam. They aren't moving toward a more pure form, but rather from it. Pure Islam is one that even the people who hated the idea of 1 God during Mouhammed's (PBUH) time respected him for. Even the gay/trangendered Eunichs were accepted to live in peace. While the action is forbidden, He allowed them to not only have protection/food/water/jobs/etc but also allowed them to follow God's religion and taught them. He cast noone away that came in peace. Never agressed an enemy that was not agressing or oppressing him.
Click to expand...


Joe, I wish to thank you for this. This is by far the most eloquently, calmly stated answer I have yet to have to my question. I now have more to think about. So in your honest opinion, what should be done about Isis and the likes?
 
Richard Pickett said:
Joe, I wish to thank you for this. This is by far the most eloquently, calmly stated answer I have yet to have to my question. I now have more to think about. So in your honest opinion, what should be done about Isis and the likes?
Click to expand...
Honestly, IDK outside of handle it in the way of Islam. Or let a Islamic centralized country lead at least. Those who are combatants should be fought and if/when they surrender they should be tried for their crimes. Anyone who is guilty of breaking Shariah Law should be handled as such. For instance anyone involved with burning captives alive should be executed, but by Muslims who live in the area who have suffered from this war, and noone who is not a combatant should be harmed (jailed maybe if they supported). All captives (people currently being held as slaves/forced wives) should be given freedom to withdraw and leave or stay, whatever they wish.

I had a longer post typed up but figured out I was getting off-topic and covering more the issues of US leadership in these situations. Basically Turkey, SA, Iraq, and Syria should be leading and calling the shots. Not because they are more skilled or efficient, but because the local populace can't blame the west.
 
BigJoeNobody said:
Honestly, IDK outside of handle it in the way of Islam. Or let a Islamic centralized country lead at least. Those who are combatants should be fought and if/when they surrender they should be tried for their crimes. Anyone who is guilty of breaking Shariah Law should be handled as such. For instance anyone involved with burning captives alive should be executed, but by Muslims who live in the area who have suffered from this war, and noone who is not a combatant should be harmed (jailed maybe if they supported). All captives (people currently being held as slaves/forced wives) should be given freedom to withdraw and leave or stay, whatever they wish.

I had a longer post typed up but figured out I was getting off-topic and covering more the issues of US leadership in these situations. Basically Turkey, SA, Iraq, and Syria should be leading and calling the shots. Not because they are more skilled or efficient, but because the local populace can't blame the west.
Click to expand...

So am I to assume that the beheadings are also against Sharia law?
 
If the person is guilty of a certain crime, beheading is unadvisable but not forbidden. However, you must prove that that person has committed the crime and if I understand it all correctly, the victim is supposed to approve. The punishment is death, not the act. So be it stoning, beheading, shot, stabbed, as long as it is a quick death. Even criminals aren't deserving of suffering in death.

Let me explain a bit about the ideas at play here. If one does a crime that is punishable by death and can be proven with 2 witnesses (more for adultery), Then that person CAN BE (not has to be) punished by death. The judge then would choose a type of execution based usually on what is available (if beheaded, a swift death should still be inacted similar to the old Japanese Samarai style). A firing squad nowadays is probably the most common, but hanging/beheading/stabbing/etc. can still be found.

Now as it applies to the topic being discussed above, no. The people who were beheaded were done based on no law they broke. They were usually there to help people. IF we were to assume they were driving people away (with witnesses), then jail would have been appropriate at minimum for first and second offense.
 
BigJoeNobody said:
IF we were to assume they were driving people away (with witnesses), then jail would have been appropriate at minimum for first and second offense.
Click to expand...

Is there something specifically associated with a 'third strike' in Sharia law that would change the punishment for a third offense?
 
StevePame said:
Is there something specifically associated with a 'third strike' in Sharia law that would change the punishment for a third offense?
Click to expand...
No, it is meant more as an expression of perpetuality. Someone who persists in doing something harmful to society.
 
Interestingly enough the creation and rise of ISIS (or a group like it) is something that Dick Cheney predicted would happen if Saddam Hussien was taken out of power in Iraq...
 
This destruction of the Kaaba is hard to believe. What is ISIS Koranic reason for this (if they have one). 2nd - Do they intend to destroy all of the pilgrimage sites that are built around it too?
 
Nicholas Weeks said:
What is ISIS Koranic reason for this (if they have one)
Click to expand...
Not a Quran reference, but I remember hearing on the news that ISIS' rationale was that the Kaaba was tainted by its pre-Islamic association with the polytheistic religion of the region.

Richard Pickett said:
They appear to be destroying pretty much all historical sites they come across.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, although I thought they had been stating that they were destroying sites created by/commemorating polytheistic civilizations, like the Roman ruins at Palmyra.

That's all to say that I believe what ISIS claims. I don't think they actually know what they stand for.
 
StevePame said:
Not a Quran reference, but I remember hearing on the news that ISIS' rationale was that the Kaaba was tainted by its pre-Islamic association with the polytheistic religion of the region.


Pretty much, although I thought they had been stating that they were destroying sites created by/commemorating polytheistic civilizations, like the Roman ruins at Palmyra.

That's all to say that I believe what ISIS claims. I don't think they actually know what they stand for.
Click to expand...

I think I could give a few possibilities as to their reasoning, but I would probably be wrong...However, the destruction of these sites doesn't only hurt their enemies, it hurts everyone. Sometimes I think that all they care about is destruction and death.
 
too much to quote, so I will just give my opinion. From what I've heard their reasoning for destroying these temples, statues, etc. are that we as Muslims were instructed as the Jews were to destroy idols. Now, IF for some reason it can be shown that people were worshipping these sites and statues, I can almost agree that in the long run it is better. (please let me finish before you go to typing). I am looking at this in a POV of an actual religious society based on Islamic Principles. (we've already established that their actions thus far are mostly un-Islamic, but for sake of argument, let's say they are trying). If this were true, then they are obligated by law to either destroy them or make them out of sight of public (given people worship them and they are legal citizens paying Jizyah, they would have the right to pray to them) so that they do not influence the believers into sins that are worse than any other. This is a much more complicated issue and I know people will not like the idea of destroying these historical sites. I'm a fan of History and I would love for the sites to remain as historical references, but if I were just looking at religious goals, they are nothing but distractions and detractions.

From a Humanist standpoint, I agree nothing should be destroyed, it should be recorded and studied for the sake of knowledge of the past. Lock it up and make them museums. This would probably even be acceptable in Islam (again given the Idols are out of sight of public).

Now their rational for destroying Kaaba is that they believe people have started to worship it. Rather than worshiping Allah. ISIS are terribly misguided.

Richard Pickett said:
Sometimes I think that all they care about is destruction and death.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way, and as much as it is shown on the media about how horrible they treat Christians, their treatment of Muslims that do not jump to support them is much much worse.
 
BigJoeNobody said:
too much to quote, so I will just give my opinion. From what I've heard their reasoning for destroying these temples, statues, etc. are that we as Muslims were instructed as the Jews were to destroy idols. Now, IF for some reason it can be shown that people were worshipping these sites and statues, I can almost agree that in the long run it is better. (please let me finish before you go to typing). I am looking at this in a POV of an actual religious society based on Islamic Principles. (we've already established that their actions thus far are mostly un-Islamic, but for sake of argument, let's say they are trying). If this were true, then they are obligated by law to either destroy them or make them out of sight of public (given people worship them and they are legal citizens paying Jizyah, they would have the right to pray to them) so that they do not influence the believers into sins that are worse than any other. This is a much more complicated issue and I know people will not like the idea of destroying these historical sites. I'm a fan of History and I would love for the sites to remain as historical references, but if I were just looking at religious goals, they are nothing but distractions and detractions.

From a Humanist standpoint, I agree nothing should be destroyed, it should be recorded and studied for the sake of knowledge of the past. Lock it up and make them museums. This would probably even be acceptable in Islam (again given the Idols are out of sight of public).

Now their rational for destroying Kaaba is that they believe people have started to worship it. Rather than worshiping Allah. ISIS are terribly misguided.


I feel the same way, and as much as it is shown on the media about how horrible they treat Christians, their treatment of Muslims that do not jump to support them is much much worse.
Click to expand...

When you kill your own, you become rabid...
 
BigJoeNobody said:
and what should you do with a rabid dog? Let it infect others or put it down? I think we all accept this answer.
Click to expand...

Being a Christian my friend my Faith tells me that killing them is wrong, yet the Military man in me says it would be for the greater good to do so. The Military man will win out I believe. I also don't believe Allah would approve of their actions...
 
Richard Pickett said:
Being a Christian my friend my Faith tells me that killing them is wrong, yet the Military man in me says it would be for the greater good to do so. The Military man will win out I believe. I also don't believe Allah would approve of their actions...
Click to expand...
IMO God is God. There is no other, so when I read the description of God in the Bible, I see the same attributes in both books. As I've discussed recently there are parts that I don't believe such as limitations on God, but the God talked about in the OT and NT and Quran is the same. This topic however is very vast. One would almost need be an expert in both to fully understand. I am far from an expert in either, but I do not think Jesus (PBUH)preached absolute Pacifism as that would be illogical given the severity of criminal and war issues. Love thy neighbor. Doesn't mean you cannot punish him for his crimes. If someone rapes, beats and tortures your daughter, I doubt you or anyone could shake his hand and forgive him. This leads to "Judge not, Lest thee be judged". Can you judge a man that you know for a fact did this? The OT allowed for judges. the NT IMO does too. IMO that phrase means that if you Judge, you will have to answer to God. So you better make sure you are correct and not passing off false judgement. This is not however what is preached. Examples of "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" are used to backup the idea. Is he saying to never judge anyone, or is he saying sins can be repented and cleared, or is he simply stating that the men accusing her of adultry only knew so because they too were guilty of the same sin. or is it a combination? Not everything a Prophet says has 1 meaning.

Of course this is my own perspective so take it for what you will.
 
BigJoeNobody said:
IMO God is God. There is no other, so when I read the description of God in the Bible, I see the same attributes in both books. As I've discussed recently there are parts that I don't believe such as limitations on God, but the God talked about in the OT and NT and Quran is the same. This topic however is very vast. One would almost need be an expert in both to fully understand. I am far from an expert in either, but I do not think Jesus (PBUH)preached absolute Pacifism as that would be illogical given the severity of criminal and war issues. Love thy neighbor. Doesn't mean you cannot punish him for his crimes. If someone rapes, beats and tortures your daughter, I doubt you or anyone could shake his hand and forgive him. This leads to "Judge not, Lest thee be judged". Can you judge a man that you know for a fact did this? The OT allowed for judges. the NT IMO does too. IMO that phrase means that if you Judge, you will have to answer to God. So you better make sure you are correct and not passing off false judgement. This is not however what is preached. Examples of "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" are used to backup the idea. Is he saying to never judge anyone, or is he saying sins can be repented and cleared, or is he simply stating that the men accusing her of adultry only knew so because they too were guilty of the same sin. or is it a combination? Not everything a Prophet says has 1 meaning.

Of course this is my own perspective so take it for what you will.
Click to expand...

And that is one point I always try to keep in mind when discussing any subject. Perception is singular to a point. What we first perceive as being a bad thing in the first moments, once thought about with the proper time of course, can be swayed. That like you said above of judgement. I tell people all the time that Human nature is to judge many times a day, on many different things and levels. God will decide if our judgements are God will decide if we judged falsely or correctly and will judge us accordingly. Well said my friend....
 
Steve P.: "... I remember hearing on the news that ISIS' rationale was that the Kaaba was tainted by its pre-Islamic association with the polytheistic religion of the region."

If that is the case, then even Allah was borrowed from amongst the many gods of the region.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top