Fighting in the cause of God

savage_carrot

"fighting" includes physical fighting .

I don't think that was in doubt. What is in doubt is how does one decide which type is a 'major' part of the verses or not. I don't see it as one or the other and to presume that 'physical' (war/raiding) fighting is what is mentioned majorly is a bit much, they are what they are and applicable to different era's and the way one chooses to fight and as neo put it quite aptly, 'it only condones it when the war is brought to you - not otherwise'. After that, fighting obviously can/is physical but also not ur standard fisticuffs or guns. It can be on different levels but yes, it's still physical because you are doing something.

2190 and 475 can be interpreted on many levels and does not mean that it is old fashioned man to man or tank to gun fighting only. Peace.

KGB

Physical fighting is very clearly defined in Qur'an to defend our homes and the land. Iraqi Resistance is fighting against the illegal occupation of their land which according to me is what Allah (SWT) has prescribed in Qur'an. All middle eastern countries including whole world who labeled Iraqi Resistance as insurgents and terrorists are wrong including Ayatollah Shaitani.

unknownuser

To fiercely defend your freedom and God given rights. With violence if it can be in no other way. By submitting or accepting to any system that denies you any rights, ANY rights granted by God. you are submitting to other than God.

peace

neo

Physical fighting is very clearly defined in Qur'an to defend our homes and the land. Iraqi Resistance is fighting against the illegal occupation of their land which according to me is what Allah (SWT) has prescribed in Qur'an. All middle eastern countries including whole world who labeled Iraqi Resistance as insurgents and terrorists are wrong including Ayatollah Shaitani.

Yeah the insurgents killing both Iraqi citizens and US are doing a great job of liberating Islam and Iraq from the clutches of the fascist west.

KGB

You want to convert this topic into Iraq war? Yes Iraqis are getting killed mostly by occupation army and some get killed by Iraqi Resistance which is the part of war. The illegal Iraq invasion has to be blamed for this not the Iraqi Resistance. All the blame goes on this Iraq illegal invasion.

neo

You want to convert this topic into Iraq war? Yes Iraqis are getting killed mostly by occupation army and some get killed by Iraqi Resistance which is the part of war. The illegal Iraq invasion has to be blamed for this not the Iraqi Resistance. All the blame goes on this Iraq illegal invasion.

Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).

And yeah, it's okay if Iraqi civilians get killed as long as that number is less than the numbers the invaders kill right? Brilliant logic. Oh no, don't tell me - they are "collateral".

So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bullshit like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down.

Layth

Peace,

I would like other people's opinion on this too...

Especially Bro layths I am under the impression he somehow thinks it's okay to crucify and amputate the feet off anyone who opposes god and his messenger... but bro we oppose them everytime we sin, which is everyday on a regular basis....

I like your version of Islam...It entails upholding the verses you probably think are cool and simply ignoring or rejecting the verses you may see as unpopular.

You are trying to please people while it was God all along you should have cared about pleasing.

The Scripture has a complete take-it or leave-it approach...We either accept it all from God and try to uphold it, or we simply walk away rejecting the entire book because we disagree with some of its content.

Mufsidoon are to be treated as the words of God described...You and I may argue what the definition of a mufsid is based on the teachings of the Scripture, but never can you dispute that the punishment (including amputation of hand/foot) exist in the laws of the Almighty unless you are willing to forfit the entire Scripture.

What is your say...Do you uphold all or nothing?

Layth

Peace,

Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).

Show me in the book of the Amighty how the invasion was legal (that is your claim after all?).

So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bulls*** like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down

Asking for numbers is simply avoiding the key questions that need to be asked/adressed...

Elke

Peace layth

sorry to interfere, ur post is not directed at me but ...could have been

The Scripture has a complete take-it or leave-it approach...We either accept it all from God and try to uphold it, or we simply walk away rejecting the entire book because we disagree with some of its content.

What is your say...Do you uphold all or nothing?

everything is not all black and white in life and you may not be TOTALLY right in your understanding
i used to accept the scripture totally, with a lot of false interpretation and there were homeric fights within myself trying to accept things that were unaccceptable to me...
most of these things have become clearer with time, thanks a lot also to eye opening posts right here at FM
and i'm (we're) far from finished...
so why scare off people with this take it or leave it attitude ?

elke

KGB

Neo

I believe you don't read news. U.N. and Kofi Anan has called Iraq invasion illegal.

Show me in the book of the Amighty how the invasion was legal (that is your claim after all?).

Would like to see you answer to this question.

neo

Peace,

Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).

Show me in the book of the Amighty how the invasion was legal (that is your claim after all?).

So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bulls*** like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down

Asking for numbers is simply avoiding the key questions that need to be asked/adressed...

I was referring to 'the law of the land', not Qur'anic law.

Also, asking for numbers is perfectly acceptable when a person says "it's okay because the invaders killed more".

KGB, I'm afraid you don't understand politics.

KGB

Sure I don't understand politics. Can you explain why this illegal criminal invasion of Iraq justified?

neo

I didn't say it was justified. It's also not illegal. Just because it's legal does not imply it's 'justified'.

Layth

Peace,

everything is not all black and white in life and you may not be TOTALLY right in your understanding
i used to accept the scripture totally, with a lot of false interpretation and there were homeric fights within myself trying to accept things that were unaccceptable to me...

What understanding? This is not a discussion on interpretation (God knows how many people here have different interpretations and how we all get along as brothers and sisters because we all believe in the Scripture fully and respect that its interpretation in some aspects - such as the non-muhkam verses - is left to the Almighty).

What I cant entertain and put my smily face on is people who reject certain verses or certain laws so that they can be concidered coolandcivilized` by the standards of the people whose opinoins are the last thing we should care about..

Please read the quote carefully which sparked my reply

Especially Bro layths I am under the impression he somehow thinks it`s okay to crucify and amputate the feet off anyone who opposes god and his messenger... but bro we oppose them everytime we sin, which is everyday on a regular basis....

Now, read the verse where this issue is based on

The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off on alternate sides or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution. (533)

God says that those who fight Him and His messenger, as well as the mufsidoon, are to be killed or crucified or banished...This is a fact in the Scripture, which we as muslims simply hear & obey; we may discuss its meanings and implementation, but we are not allowed to hear & disobey unless we wish to become hypocrates or rejectors. The question of the poster did not care to read the verse, verify its applications, define its meanings...Rather, it was a simply layth thinks its ok to blah blah blah..

so why scare off people with this take it or leave it attitude ?

Perhaps I am getting less patient with age...Or, perhaps its because I am dissapointed that this forum is being used as a place where people come to chit chat while the last thing being done is people quoting or researching the Scripture...On this thread alone I can see one poster who seems to give legitmacy to the UN when discussing the issue of invasion while the Book of the Almighty seems irrelevant to research or quote!

What happened to God Alone?

mquran

Salaamun alaikum all

LaythMufsidoon are to be treated as the words of God described...You and I may argue what the definition of a mufsid is based on the teachings of the Scripture, but never can you dispute that the punishment (including amputation of hand/foot) exist in the laws of the Almighty unless you are willing to forfit the entire Scripture.

As you say, al-quraan needs to be taken in totality. Fasad, if you look at Quranic usage is the opposite of salih (to concile things so as to create a positive outcome). There are many shades of fasad. What some critics were doing on this forum can be considered fasad. To determine the appropriate payment for this fasad, we need to use the principle of qisaas or equivalences. Sure, when fasad fil ardh is at the level where people are displaced and killed, then those responsible must be dealt with the equivalent but for 'smaller' cases, equivalences will need to be determined and carried out.

The Scripture has a complete take-it or leave-it approach...We either accept it all from God and try to uphold it, or we simply walk away rejecting the entire book because we disagree with some of its content.

True and the decisive surah involving fighting is where you will see who stands by al-quraan and who doesn't.

Layth

Peace,

I was referring to \'the law of the land\', not Qur\'anic law.

The Quran is the law of the land.

All else is man-made and these systems will all be unnaceptable when presented as evoidence on J-day.

KGB

It is illegal to me. Iraqi Resistance jihad against oppression is very much according to Qur'an. I don't agree with you at all or the whole world on this issue. Illegal thats what U.N. point of view is regarding Iraq invasion. Go and argue with Kofi Anan not me.

mquran

Layth What I cant entertain and put my smily face on is people who reject certain verses or certain laws so that they can be concidered coolandcivilized` by the standards of the people whose opinoins are the last thing we should care about..

Here is where our ilah/god/source of authority is determined. For those who yell 'uncivilised', I ask where your source of values come from.

Al-QuranLet not the strutting about of the Unbelievers through the land deceive thee. Little is it for enjoyment Their ultimate abode is Hell what an evil bed (3/196-197)

And it is true. More and more we see 'civilised' nations paying the price for their disregard of God's laws. There's no escape from ad-deen.

neo

is the law of the land.

Really? Well, this government sure isn't implementing too many Qur'anic laws...which land are you talking about again?

It is illegal to me. Iraqi Resistance jihad against oppression is very much according to Qur'an. I don't agree with you at all or the whole world on this issue. Illegal thats what U.N. point of view is regarding Iraq invasion. Go and argue with Kofi Anan not me.

Not to be rude, but your (or mine) personal beliefs matter very little in this.

KGB

Not to be rude, but your (or mine) personal beliefs matter very little in this.

You clearly don't understand. U.N. has called Iraq invasion Illegal according to international laws. Not to be rude here but looks like you have some kind of understanding problem.

The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.
He said the decision to take action in Iraq should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally.