Note no human in the world can judge ‘What is Islam’.
According to Islam as in the Quran, Allah is the only authority to decide ‘What is Islam’.
Allah’s definition of ‘What is Islam and Who is a Muslim’ is stated in the Quran.
Therefore we have to refer to the Quran to determine from Allah’s words ‘What is Islam and Who is a Muslim.’
I have spent 3 years full time reading and researching the Quran and Islam.
Thus I am in the position to quote Allah’s words to support my points.
You? I don’t think you are qualified to state much about Islam.
First just because one group of muslims says they represent Islam or the true Islam does not mean that all Muslims must agree to that.
Muslims’ agreement don’t count.
What count are the references directly from the Quran.
I am well acquainted with Allah’s definition of ‘What is Islam and Who is a Muslim’ and I can bring all the necessary and relevant quotes to support my point. It is a long lists so I will not produce it at this moment.
Second, IS is fighting Muslims and have been extremely violent against other Muslims, including non-combatants and prisoners who are Muslims. So obviously any muslim, especially those who IS has decided to kill or rape need not support them.
The Muslims that IS killed are supposedly hypocrites or deemed apostates in accordance to the Quran.
IS may have killed some innocent Muslims which is incidental as a part of the war against enemies of Islam.
It is regrettable that the Muslims of IS are more in compliance with the words of Allah in the Quran. This is very objective since reference can be made to the Quran. That is the problem with Islam per se that humanity need to recognize and deal with.
As I had stated, the Muslims that IS killed are being more human than being more Islamic per the Quran.
It is not a question whether which Muslims support which Muslims. The definition of ‘What is Islam and Who is a Muslim’ is objectively defined by the words of Allah in the perfect Quran delivered directly from Allah to Muhammad.
Third, it is very odd that you think you know the mind of a man no longer alive and what he would ‘likely’ do. Presumably mind reading is not a skill you think you have. To say ‘likely’ while not saying you are certain implies you have some sort of knowledge of him and his priorities, which you clearly do not.
Note Ali stated
I am dependent upon Allah as the final judge of those actions brought about by my own conscience.
washingtonpost.com/news/ret … 244dd2e1a3
Ali as a Muslim has to obey the words of Allah to the ‘t’ which include going to war against those [Muslims and non-Muslims] who are a threat to the religion of Islam. Ali was willing to sacrifice his career for his beliefs. This is why I stated ‘Ali is LIKELY to support any war by Islam against non-Muslims.’
Another point is Allah permit a Muslim to lie for the good of Islam. Thus a Muslim will likely to lie if the truth of his conviction [supporting war against non-Muslims] is not in his favor.
Fourth, often Muslims are drawn into battles along sectarian lines. So, again, there is no need to assume or consider likely that any given Muslim would feel obligated to take up the IS banner. Fifth whole Islamic regimes, like Iran, took up the fight against IS. For all sorts of reasons - some having nothing to do with being more human than other Muslims that went on the side of IS.
Note the Sunni Muslims [90% e.g Saudi ] deemed the Iranian Shia Muslims [7%?] as heretics, thus deserved to be killed if need to.
All Muslims are striving for an Islamic State which may not be necessary in exact form like current defeated ISIS format but the core principles are the same, i.e. strive for dominance and kill enemies if necessary under very flimsy conditions of a threat to the religion [e.g. drawing of cartoons, etc.]
Now Muhammed Ali is dead and I doubt his family will ever hear your strange psychic claim, but it is still making up negative stuff about another person based on next to nothing. He never went to war for Muslims while he was alive, and there were opportunities to get into struggles at that time. For example he didn’t rush off to join the Arab Israeli war.
And since he is known for refusing to fight, it is even odder to assume he would have now. And yes, I realize he refused to fight in a war that was not with muslims on one side, there is still no reason to treat him as likely to go off to war, when the indications are precisely the opposite, if anything.
This is, of course, a tangential issue in the thread. But it fits a pattern that this thread is a pattern of. I often find you making statements that do not seem supported or cannot be supported.
The Arab Israeli War was not an Islam versus Jews war.
I had supported my opinion with reasonable facts;
Note I stated theoretically,
- as a Muslim - the need to obey Allah as in the Quran and
- with his show of defiance and
- willingness to sacrifice such a career like his,
Ali was LIKELY to support any Islamic War against non-Muslims and would have gone to war given the right conditions.
Note, two verses [READ THEM CAREFULLY] among the many 1000s related that support my points;
9:111. Lo! Allah hath bought [ish’tarā; purchased] from the believers [Muslims] their lives [anfusahum; nafs] and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs they [Muslims] shall fight in the way [sabil] of Allah and shall slay and be slain.
It is a promise which is binding on Him [Muslim] in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an.
Who fulfilleth His covenant [3HD: biʿahdihi; promise] better than Allah?
Rejoice then in your bargain [BY3: bibayʿikumu bāyaʿtum] that ye [Muslims] have made, for that is the supreme triumph.
2:216. Warfare [l-qitālu] is ordained [kutiba: prescribed] for you [Muslims], though it is hateful unto you [Muslims]; but it may happen that ye [Muslims] hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.