Quote:
Originally Posted by x-factor
Islam is a very legalistic religion. Its all about what verse overrides what other verse. Jihadists have something called "nasikh" where they believe the later verses in the Koran override the earlier verses. This is a problem for us because the later versus come from a time when Muhammed was fighting a war of survival against the Arab pagans. Naturally, these verses are a lot more militant.
Most Muslims believe in applying verses contextually. Meaning this: they look at their situation, they look at the Koran. They study the circumstances in their life, they study the circumstances of the figures in the Koran. And then they try to draw comparisons and wisdom. This is how most of us read the Bible. We don't just say "Well Revelations came last, thats the book to follow! War, Pestilence, Famine, Death!"
(Incidentally, this is why alot of learned Islamic scholars regard the jihadists as simpletons.)
|
While I don't doubt this is true for the majority of the WESTERN Islamic scholars and people/friends you know here in the US, I really don't think this applies globally to the religion. I really believe that those of whom you speak could be considered the "radical" arm or the unorthodox part of the religion. They are the splinter group who have gone off the mark trying to make nice with us infidels.
There may be those who aren't actively trying to hunt us down and kill us right now, but like the good Colonel said, if push came to shove I'm not sure it's even debatable where their allegiances would lay. You said it yourself, it's all contextual and circumstantial and I really can't see many circumstances where they'd stand with the infidel over the good Muslim.