You're making the same points time and time again. If they're going against basic principles of Islam, then they are clearly not following the faith properly. The most conservative Salafi scholars have clearly dismissed IS as being legitimate or as being Muslims. They are from a sect called Khawarij.
Someone claiming something doesn't mean its true.
If I said I'm a purple unicorn with three-tails, I may genuinely believe that in my mind. It doesn't mean that it's the objective reality.
As per our discussions in the past, you clearly have an issue with Islam. Which is fine because you have your reasons, but there are a lot of misconceptions about Islam that you seem to have and you're unwilling to change your position on the matter.
If you think IS are genuinely Muslims because they say they are, why aren't more people supporting them and backing their cause?
I have an issue with religion as whole, not Islam specifically.
I also have an issue with people stifling debate by claiming that those that disagree with them are bigots or fascists.
You claim that ISIS aren't legitimate or even Muslims because some scholars disagree with them.
That's true of every sect, even the major ones. Sunnis claim that Shiites aren't true Muslims and vise versa.
There are no actual Muslims, in this case.
The same equally applies to Christianity with it's thousands of sects and Judaism, with it's various degrees of orthodoxy.
Again, extremists will use anything to justify their actions. Including going against the mainstream Islamic position and scholars to suit their agenda. You've had members of IS talk about replicating the feats of the British Empire and colonialism. This clearly shows that they're not just using scripture to validate their actions.
French Journalist Didier Francois, who was held hostage, said the same thing.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/03/intl_world/amanpour-didier-francois/
When did I claim that they were solely using scripture, either as motivation or to justify their behaviour?
They commonly seem to be young, disinfrachised men who have been sold on the idea of something special.
To deny that Islam has anything to do with it is just bizarre, though.
The same is true of Christianity and the KKK. It's a big part of their organisation.
You're just arguing for the sake of it now. You know as well as I do that they're not. I expected better from you PNP.
https://www.rt.com/news/190468-muslim-scholars-islamic-state/
Poor form.
Russia Today? Awful source. Literally Putin's mouthpiece.
I believe that I've already addressed this, though. Various followers claim that others aren't True Scotsmen. So what?
Having a Jew as the first signatory is an awful idea, too. Like ISIS will take it seriously after that.
There are certain laws and principles in Islam that everyone has to abide by - praying 5 times a day, giving zakat, not drinking alcohol, fornicating and some others that are mainstream. Other parts are open to interpretation where even some scholars disagree. The best thing to do in this case is to follow what the Prophet had reportedly said and following the authentic Hadith (some have been poorly translated over the years).
There's not one strict, rigid Islam to follow per se. But there are certain basics that all have to abide by. Why pick and choose bits of Islam that suit your lifestyle? May as well create your own religion. As I say, context is important. This is why people look up to muslim scholars to explain the meanings behind certain verses of the Qur'an or Hadith.
There are some parts that are virtually set in stone, but a hell of a lot of it's debatable.
As you point out yourself, even the various scholars disagree and interpretations change over time, as new information is discovered.
This leaves a lot of leeway for pick-n-mix religion and is true of virtually all faiths.
It's funny how many people think that these holy books tell them what they already believe.
Look at the current Christian Conservatives in America.
Their politics couldn't be more different to what most people would claim that Jesus Christ taught.
It's a pretty standard disconnect, in my experience.
That's your opinion. I don't share it and there would be a multitude of christians that don't share it either.
Exactly. They're following their book to the letter, as far as they're concerned, yet that makes them bad Christians, somehow.
I'd say that they're ****ty people and completely mislead, but they can support their claims through scripture.
Nafeez Ahmed is a very, very good investigative journalist. Although he may not be particularly fond of Harris or Dawkins or Nawaz, the claims that have been made have, generally, been supported.
Having read Harris's response to the alleged claim of 'nuking of the Muslim world', I still think his position is wrong and counterproductive.
Where does he support his claims? He links to other blogs and other claims about his claims.
He doesn't source anything to the original point and clearly isn't being honest about what Harris said.
You're free to disagree with the man and think poorly of him, but do so knowing what he actually wrote.
Ahmed misrepresented it at best and completely mislead his readers intentionally at worst.
The does not make a good journalist, in my book.
You seem to know more about this bloke than me, but there are a lot of people, non-Muslim or even not religious, that don't like Harris and have issues with his opinions.
I've already stated that I disagree with Harris about various things and his delivery is often very controversial.
The same is true of each of the so-called New Atheists that I've read.
I find it incredibly tiresome to see them constantly misrepresented, though.
A lot of what they're saying is going to be massively controversial, anyway.
Their critics would do better to address the points being made, rather than attacking continual strawmen.
And what about the majority of Muslims who have opposed the violent monstrosity?
http://www.benarnews.org/english/news/bengali/publisher-killed-11022015154152.html
There are extremists in all forms (not just religious) who take things way too far. It doesn't mean they're practicing the faith properly and most clerics, scholars and imams would tell you this. Otherwise Muslims wouldn't be happily living and conversing with non-Muslims, you would all be dead by now.
It doesn't take the majority to commit foul actions, but the lack of justice for those that do is extremely telling.
It also doesn't matter how many clerics, scholars and imams object when the source material gives direct instructions.
You can claim that they're bad hadith, but then why are they still in there? Christians make similar claims about the Bible.
The third result for a Google search on apostasy in Islam brings up this result:
https://islamqa.info/en/20327
It explicitly endorses the execution of those leaving the faith.
This is the guy that runs it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Al-Munajjid
Respected scholar of the Salafi movement and ****ing fruitcake, frankly.
Is he a proper Muslim?
) not just reveal themselves to us. Pretty stark choice then if all doubt is removed.
) .
