The Instigator
Ron-Paul
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
GenesisCreation
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Islam Is a Religion of Peace: part II

Do you like this debate?NoYes+6
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
GenesisCreation
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,125 times Debate No: 24368
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (22)
Votes (4)

 

Ron-Paul

Pro

My opponent was unfortunately a few minutes late in posting his argument, so we have decided to make a part II. Try to be more careful in this debate about how much time you have left. The full resolution, definitions, rules, and debate structure are the same. Here is the previous debate: http://www.debate.org...

Enjoy.
GenesisCreation

Con

I accept the debate and thank my opponent for his virtue in patience. I await the argument re-post from the original debate. My round two arguments are established and ready to post.
Debate Round No. 1
Ron-Paul

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting a part two to thisdebate and hope that he can post his arguments in time. I will use the same arguments as I started with in the previous debate.

I. What Does Islam Mean?

"Islam is a verbal noun originating from the trilateral root s-l-m which forms a large class of words mostly relating to concepts of wholeness, completion and bonding/joining. In a religious context it means "voluntary submission to God"."[1] "The Arabic word 'Islam' simply means 'submission', and derives from a word meaning 'peace'."[2]

There were two key words there; voluntary and peace. First, voluntary. In religious context (the accepted meaning of the word described in Round 1), it means a voluntary submission to God. Non-peaceful religions do not allow for a voluntary submission to God. Next, peace. The word in Arabic for Peace is Salam, as opposed to Islam. The two words are similar and it is seen that one word is derived from the other (since Salam is the older word, the former word was the word derived for the latter word). So obviously, if one of Islam's meanings is peace, it must be a peaceful religion.

"There is no ground for the oft-repeated allegation that Islam is intolerant and was propagated by the sword. The Qur'an states clearly 'there is no compulsion in religion.'"[3] More proof that in Islam, there is no compulsion to be Islamic.

II. What Does the Qur'an Say?

"O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do." (Qur'an 5:8) [4]

"Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors."(Qur'an 5:32) [4]

"Repel evil with that which is better." (Qur'an 23:96) [4]

"And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend. But none is granted it except those who are patient, and none is granted it except one having a great portion [of good]." (Qur'an 41:34-35) [4]

"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly." (Qur'an 60:8) [4]

On many accounts does the Qur'an preach peace and non-violence? It preaches that even if you have hatred for someone, that that should not prevent you from following the path of Allah. It even says that the killing of civilians in wartime and of anyone in peacetime is a great sin and that one who breaks those rules will suffer eternal torment in Hell.

III. What Did Muhammad Do and Say?

"The prophet Muhammad said, 'Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or sick people'."[5]

"Prophet Muhammad said there is no excuse for committing unjust acts: 'Do not be people without minds of your own, saying that if others treat you well you will treat them well, and that if they do wrong you will do wrong to them. Instead, accustom yourselves to do good if people do good and not to do wrong (even) if they do evil.'"[6]

"The first cases to be adjudicated between people on the Day of Judgment will be those of bloodshed." (Muslim and Al-Bukhari)

"Do not kill children. Avoid touching people who devote themselves to worship in churches! Never murder women and the elderly. Do not set trees on fire or cut them down. Never destroy houses." (Bukh�ri)

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) on repeated occasions said to not to kill people unless they attack you, even if those people you want killed do evil. Why? Because these people who do evil will be eternally punished in hell, and Muslim & Al-Bukhari, the people who cause bloodshed will be the first people to be adjudicated on the Day of Judgment. Muhammad (peace be upon him) even prohibited the destruction of other's property, including but not excluded to other religions' churches and worshipping houses.

IV. What Did Abu Bakr Say?

"Abu Bakr a close companion and successor (Caliph) of the prophet whilst giving instructions to his army general said: 'I command you not to do ten things, do not kill women, do not kill children, do not kill the elderly, do not destroy trees, do not destroy properties, do not slaughter animals unless it is for food, neither flood or set fire to palm trees, avoid extremism, and do not act cowardly or weak.'"[7]

Abu Bakr was Muhammad's (peace be upon him) faithful companion in the time of Muhammad's (peace be upon him) life and the next leader of Islam in the wake of Muhammad's (peace be upon him) death. He continued to follow in Muhammad's (peace be upon him) tradition of peace and voluntary willingness to join Islam.

V. Later Successors to Muhammad and Abu Bakr.

The successive caliphates and reigning dynasties all preserved Islam's early tradition of peace. This spread of Islam was less a spread of the religion as it was one, the caliphate's quest for empire and two, and more importantly, it was the peoples they were subjugating voluntarily chose to become Islamic. A great question is when the caliphates drew out of North Africa and other parts of the Middle East, why did the religion prevail and remain?

Today, Islam has been misinterpreted by various groups including but not excluded to Al Qaeda. These terrorist groups are not true Muslims and in the words of one of the most highly regarded Hadiths, will be "The first cases to be adjudicated between people on the Day of Judgment will be those of bloodshed." Allah does not tolerate terrorists and people who disrupt peace for violent and greedy purposes.

Thank you.

[1]:http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]:http://www.islamicity.com...
[3]:http://www.answeringinfidels.com...
[4]:http://quran.com...
[5]:http://kurzman.unc.edu...
[6]:http://www.cair.com...
[7]:http://mercyprophet.org...
GenesisCreation

Con

To start this debate I would like to introduce the concept of “God’s Purpose”.

Whether we speak of Islam, Christianity or Judaism, God’s singular purpose is to invite mankind to seek and worship Him. God does not need to seek his own glory; God simply is glorious and desires his creation to honor him for it. We are called to worship God because he is glorious. To solidify this established point, consider these verses from three scriptures of three separate faiths:

  • "In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful, Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, The Beneficent, the Merciful. Owner of the Day of Judgment, Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help. Guide us on the straight path, The path of those whom Thou hast favored; Not (the path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray." – Al Faatihah (Islam)

  • 7 But I, through the abundance of your steadfast love, will enter your house. I will bow down toward your holy temple in the fear of you. 8 Lead me, O Lord, in your righteousness because of my enemies; make your way straight before me. - Psalms 5:7 (Judaism / Christianity)
  • Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.- Philippians 2:9-11 (Christian)

Clearly, the purpose of God is NOT to bring peace, but to bring worship.

When we speak about the tenants of faith being intrinsically “peaceful” or “love centered”, we cannot approach the issue one-dimensionally, because the purpose of worship is the glory of God, a principle which is also not one dimensional.

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

– Mathew 10:34 (ESV)

Jesus Christ makes a remarkable statement. While he is not calling his followers to raise a literal sword, he makes the prophetic prediction that following him will make us outcasts, even in our own homes. It will make us enemies of the world. We are at war and conflict is intrinsic to our faith.

The question begs, “Is Islam engaged in a similar model of war with the unfaithful world”? The answer is a resound “yes”. In fact, Islam is not only in a war with unbelievers, it allows its followers to raise a literal sword against the enemies of God. This means, while Christians recognize a conflict between themselves and the world, the Muslim is called to actual battle. In the following scriptures of Quran we see a direct call to war, to defend the faith of Islam against aggressors. Note the varying translations agree and are not provided out of context.

  • YUSUFALI: And slay them (aggressors) wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
    PICKTHAL: And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

  • YUSUFALI: And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.

    PICKTHAL:
    And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers. [1]

**Note** - K 2.216 teaches that warfare is good for the faithful, even if you don’t want to fight.

  • YUSUFALI: Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

    PICKTHAL
    : Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye 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.

Conclusion: As we can clearly see, the purpose of Islam is the glory of God and method of engaging the oppressive unfaithful is ordained war. Even in the holy month, when war is outlawed, the scriptures still ordain the faithful to battle, if the oppressors prevent the Muslims from entering their place of worship. In short, if anyone prevents the Muslim from glorifying God, he directs them to war.

To call Islam a religion of peace is flagrantly false. The purpose of Islam is not to bring peace, but to glorify Allah and the methods include violence. Islam does not make apologies for this call to war. According to the Quran, it is a righteous war and therefore “justice”.

The next argument will be based on instigation. As previously noted, a Muslim is ordained to engage in warfare when they are attacked or oppressed. What about instigating violence? Is a Muslim called to start a conflict of war?

  • Prophet! urge the believers to war; if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a hundred of you they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, - K 8.65
  • Be not fainthearted then; and invite not the infidels to peace when ye have the upper hand: for God is with you, and will not defraud you of the recompense of your works - K 47.035
  • When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them. - K 8:01
  • “Make war on them [infidels] until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.” - Sura 2:193
  • “Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you.” - Sura 9:123

My opponent may claim that an infidel is a person who oppresses Islam, thus instigating war themselves (which would make Islam the oppressed defender). As we can see, the only offense that is required for a Muslim to make war (as per Sura) is that his enemy be an infidel (not accepting of Islam, therefore not glorifying Allah).

in·fi·del -   [in-fi-dl, -del]
noun
1. Religion .
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b.(in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c.(in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.

2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Review:

  • The purpose of Islam is the recognition of the glory of Allah through worship. (Called Ibadah) [3]
  • The purpose of Islam is not peace because peace does not glorify Allah. Worship glorifies Allah. (And I did not create the jinn and humankind except to worship Me… [Quran 51:56-58])
  • If a Muslim is oppressed or attacked in his purpose of glorifying Allah, the response is ordained warfare.(K2:216)
  • If the Muslim encounters an infidel, he is ordained to make war. (S2:123)
  • War continues, for the glory of Allah, until Allah’s religion reigns supreme. (S9:193)

Over to you Pro.

http://www.cmje.org... [1]

http://www.islamtomorrow.com... [2]

Debate Round No. 2
Ron-Paul

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for presenting great, thoughtout arguments. This round will be for refuting your opponent's Round 2 arguments.

I. God's Purpose

There is not really a point in debating this since I believe in the worship of God. He is just establishing the concept that the purpose of God is to bring worship.

II. The Real Debating Material

Now we are getting into some conflict here. In the actual translations and meanings of my opponent's verses, we will see that they indeed are taken out of context. When defenders of Islam refer to a Qur'an-ic verse that is taken out of context, they are not pointing to a different translation, but actually to a broader look at the verse and an actual meaning of the verse. I will look at each of my opponent's verses.

II.i. Verse one: Qur'an 2:191

This is taken out of context in the cut-and-paste sense. Let us look at the broader area of the Qur'an:

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors. And kill them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear (the punishment of) God, and know that God is with those who restrain themselves."(Qur'an 2:190-194)[1][2]

"These verse[s] were revealed at a time when Muslims of Madinah were under constant attack from the Makkans.""So what does this verse say in this context? 'Fight in the cause of God those who fight you', 'unless they (first) fight you there' - the context of this verse applies to those who initiate the attack against Muslims."[1]

So here, in this verse, the Muslims are being attacked. To defend yourself against attack is still peaceful. And, if they stop attacking, the Muslims must stop fighting. "Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression." That is even in your broken-up verses.

II.ii. Verse two: Qur'an 2:216

This verse is commonly mistaken due to a misused word. The word used is not Jihad, but is rather Qital.

"The first mistake in this translation is that this Quranic verse actually does not use the word 'Jihad'. This verse actually uses the word 'Qital', which refers to physical combat in war. Combat is ordained for Muslims in order to defend themselves and their rights, as well as the rights of others. The obligation to physically defend one's rights..."[1]

Let us now back up this claim:

"And what is wrong with you that you do not engage in combat for the sake of Allah, and for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help."(Qur'an 4:75)[1][2]

"It is most certainly a duty of all human beings to help each other from oppression and injustice."[1] This in itself is peaceful, since trying to create a peace is of course peaceful.

So here, in this verse, Muslims do not have to fight, they only have to fight to protect their own and their community's rights from oppressors. Trying to protect rights and keep peace in reign is most certainly peaceful.

III. Conclusion

As we can clearly see, it is peaceful to defend your home from attackers. One can defend yourself. One can also stand up for people who are having their rights taken. To combat an enemy who intends on war to prevent rights is peaceful in the end when the rights are preserved. Also, if someone is preventing you from practicing your religion, they are obviously doing something aggressive.

Islam is a religion of peace since they are never the oppressors or attackers without probable cause. They defend themselves and others from the oppression of attackers. To do that is not unpeaceful, and as mentioned earlier, helps spread the peace.

Now on to your last verses.

III.i. Verse three: Qur'an 8:65

"It is for this reason that the Qur'an declares that a believer with understanding is ten times stronger than an unbeliever. For the believer understands the truth and a non-believer does not. It may be remembered, however, that the verse also mentions another important factor in addition to 'understanding' which makes a believer much stronger than an unbeliever, and that is 'patience'."[3] They only think the believer stronger because the non-believer does not understand the truth.

Qur'an Verse 8:65 also mentions "steadfast"[2], which means the non-believers attacked first. The call to battle is the call to defend Islam.

"In the verse quoted above [8:65] in which Muslims are urged to make ready their "strength to the utmost" of their power, one needs to take into account (a) the context of the entire Chapter, where it deals with treachery, hypocrisy and unilateral abrogation of a treaty that was imposed upon Muslims by their adversaries, and (b) the verse that comes after it."[4] So obviously, this is a war of self-defense.

III.ii. Verse four: Qur'an 47:35

"Surah 8:61 is saying that you should incline to peace IF THE ENEMY is inclining to peace. But Surah 47:35 says that if you have the upper hand, YOU SHOULDN'T INCLINE TO PEACE in being the first one to do so. However, Surah 47:35 does not say that you shouldn't incline to peace IF THE ENEMY INCLINED TO PEACE first. So there is no contradiction. Surah 8:61 states that you should incline to peace if your enemy did so, but 47:35 basically states that you shouldn't initiate it if you have the upper hand."[5]

Here, the verse is basically saying that you should not incline to peace if your opponents were the aggressors, and you have the upper hand, but if the enemy inclines toward peace, then Muslims must accept. You can not initiate, but you can accept.

"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing."[2]

III.iii. Verse five: Qur'an 8:12 (I think. Your quoted verse is most certainly not 8:1)

True context: "8:12-13 Recall that your Lord inspired the angels: "I am with you; so support those who believed. I will throw terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved. You may strike them above the necks, and you may strike even every finger." This is what they have justly incurred by FIGHTING God and His messenger. For those who fight against God and His messenger, God's retribution is severe."[1]

"The historical context is that this verse was revealed at the Battle of Badr, a battle in which the pagans of Makkah traveled over 200 miles to destroy the Muslims of Madinah."[1]

III.iv. Verse six: Qur'an 2:193

You forgot the rest of the verse: "Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors." Obviously, if they [infidels] have to cease, they were the aggressors.

III.v. Verse seven: Qur'an 9:123

"If we read this verse along with the succeeding passage, it becomes clear that here disbelievers who are near you refers to those hypocrites who were doing great harm to the Islamic society by mixing up with the sincere Muslims."[5]

IV. Infidels

It is misinterpreted: "What does the term infidel mean? It is not a Qur'anic term. It is a term that Christians have historically applied to non-Christians, particularly Muslims. Christian doctrine simply did not recognize the legitimacy of Islam. Hence, Muslims were "infidels," and usually placed in the same category as "pagans" and "savages."

The Qur'an speaks of "kuffar," or those who disbelieve, or cover up the truth, or deny the truth of God and His messengers. However, it is incorrect to translate "kafir" as infidel. The Qur'an also does not label all non-Muslims as kuffar, or unbelievers."[6]

Also, Muslims response to these supposed "Infidels" is peaceful, unless the "Infidels" attack them. "The Qur'an does not teach that "infidels" should be killed, taxed, or converted as a matter of principle."[6] In fact, conquered territories were usually allowed to keep their original religion, "However, Muslim rulers usually insured that local populations could practice their own religions and have their own institutions, provided they accepted Muslim rule and paid their taxes." This tax is not exclusive to non-Muslims because Muslims had a tax themselves.

Review:

*The purpose of Islam is the recognition of the glory of Allah through worship, like the other Abrahamic faiths.
*Neither in the other Abrahamic faiths is God's purpose to bring peace. All three state a purpose of worship; Islam is not exclusive.
*If a Muslim is attacked, or anyone for that matter, he has the right to defend himself. Obviously, if someone is preventing you from worship, he is being unpeaceful.
*If a Muslim encounters an Infidel, he is to not kill him.
*Allah only ordains wars he wants, which are exclusively wars of self defense.
*Islam is a religion of peace because oppression is disallowed.

Thank you Con. Over to you.

Sources:
[1]: http://islamnewsroom.com...
[2]: http://quran.com...
[3]: http://www.islamicstudies.info...
[4]: http://www.islamicity.com...
[5]: http://www.islamicstudies.info...
[6]: http://qa.sunnipath.com...
GenesisCreation

Con

“Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of
all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still
savages.” - Thomas A. Edison

Pro defended Allah's call to war in the Qur'ran by explaining that "the context of these verses applies to those who initiate the attack against Muslims". He continues to explain that a peaceful religion may engage in warfare to obtain or maintain peace. That’s a bit of a paradox, if I do say
so. Tranquility after a bloodbath is not peace, unless you define peace as the destruction
of non-Muslims. (Unfortunately, the term peace was defined in round one).

The context of peace, as per the round one definition, is the cessation of violence or war. [1] Therefor, his burden is not that Islam seeks "peace within itself", but that it is an intrinsically peaceful
religion that desires the cessation of war and violence against anyone.

Here we have a few quotes by supporters of peace, the cessation of violence and war:

“Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the
mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.”

Mahatma Gandhi

“Non-violence is not a garment to be put on and off at will. Its seat is in the heart, and it
must be an inseparable part of our being.”

Mahatma Gandhi

“Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence
of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him.”

Martin Luther King, Jr.

“It belongs to the very substance of nonviolence never to destroy or damage another
person's feeling of self-worth, even an opponent's. We all need, constantly, an
advance of trust and affirmation.”

Bernard Haring

There are many causes I would die for. There is not a single cause I would kill for.

Mohandas Gandhi

"Every relationship of domination, of exploitation, of oppression is by definition violent, whether or not the violence is expressed by drastic means. In such a relationship, dominator and dominated alike are reduced to things- the former dehumanized by an excess of power, the latter by a lack of it. And things cannot love."
Paulo Freire

2nd round Rebuttal:

A truly peaceful religion resigns to absolute non-violence:

  • Jainism fulfills the criteria of a peaceful religion, extending non-violence even to
    animals.
  • Hinduism fulfills the criteria of a peaceful religion, in accordance with
    "Ahimsa", (absolute non-violence, even in self-defense.)
  • Buddhism fulfills the criteria of a peaceful religion (outside of self-inflicted harm in
    protest ceremony), in accordance with "Ahimsa".

Islam does not meet the criteria of a non-violent religion:

  • Islam does not seek peace with men; it seeks to glorify Allah at any expense. Any acquired
    peace is coincidental, a splinter effect, not ordained and unintended.
  • Islam is an Abrahamic religion and confirms that Allah uses violence himself:

    1.> The destruction of the human race via a global flood

    2.> The killing of Egyptian children by Allah

    3.> The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by Angels

  • Islam has over 500 verses dealing with cruelty, including these ten:

    1.> If someone kills your slave, you are called to kill one of his. (That's
    murder of an innocent by any token.) (K 2:178)

    2.> Moses asked Allah to harden the hearts of the Egyptians, so that they
    could not repent, effectively blocking their salvation. He desired
    their suffering and destruction, not their salvation and peace.
    (Surah 10:88)(***Note Pharaoh did eventually repent and praise
    Allah, but he was denied salvation because he waited to long.)

    3.> Muslims are called to fight those who have been given some scriptures
    but refuse to believe in Allah (Christians and Jews). (Surah 9:29)

    4.> Anyone who doubts that Allah grants victory to his prophet should
    commit suicide. Life and peace are virtues for Muslims only!
    (K 22:15)

    5.> Adultery is punished with 100 lashes and Allah demands that a group
    of believers gather to watch the judgment occur. (24:2)

    6.> Allah calls Muslims to kill all oppressors and if any disbelievers
    remain after the Muslim killed the oppressors, kill them too. (Surah
    2:193)

    7.> People who use religion as a hobby will be tormented by drinking
    boiling water, after which they burn in fire.(A little sadistic) (6:70)

    8.> Allah sends strong delusions to idolaters, making it seem lawful for
    them to murder children. Ordained infanticide. (6:137)

    9.> Muslims must fight to glorify Allah. They must kill and be killed for
    great rewards. (Surah 9:111)

    10.> Muslims are called to join Allah to curse non-believers. (2:161)
Islam is not a religion that preaches the cessation of war or violence. It does not
seek peace. Islam seeks to humiliate non-believers. It seeks to curse
non-believers. It glorifies battle with non-believers. It punishes transgression with
sadistic violence. The only peace that Islam preaches is the hypothetical utopia in
which everyone believes and honors Allah.

Argument extended.

Pro also said: The Qur'an speaks of "kuffar," or those who disbelieve, or cover
up the truth, or deny the truth of God and His messengers. However, it is
incorrect to translate "kafir" as infidel. The Qur'an also does not label all non-Muslims
as kuffar, or unbelievers."

Rebuttal: Really? The Qur'an does not label all non-Muslims as unbelievers?

2:104 O ye who believe, say not (unto the Prophet): "Listen to us" but say
"Look upon us," and be ye listeners. For disbelievers is a painful doom.

3:4 Aforetime, for a guidance to mankind; and hath revealed the Criterion (of right and wrong).
Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom.

3:19 Lo! religion with Allah (is) the Surrender (to His Will and Guidance). Those who (formerly)
received the Scripture differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso disbelieveth the revelations of Allah (will find that) lo! Allah is swift at reckoning.

3:85 And whoso seeketh as religion other than the Surrender (to Allah) it will not be accepted
from him, and he will be a loser in the Hereafter.

4:55 And of them were (some) who believed therein and of them were (some) who turned away from
it.(Apostates) Hell is sufficient for (their) burning.

4:56 Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their
skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.

Conclusion: If you do not believe in Allah and his revelation, you are a non-believer and doomed for
destruction. Even Jews and Christians are condemned by the Qur'an, even though
it acknowledges that they received the first revelations of Allah. I would respectfully ask my opponent to justify his claim that not all non-Muslims are Kuffar. (Kaffir / Kafir is also a correct rendition). I appreciate the "insinuation" that I didn't properly research the colloquial terms. [3]







http://www.debate.org... [1]

http://en.wikipedia.org... [2]

Debate Round No. 3
Ron-Paul

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for presenting more great arguments.

I. What Does Peace Mean?

I will go through the two kinds of Islamic wars and progress to the conclusion to this contention

The first kind of Islamic war is for self-defense. My opponent seems to think that fighting for your self-defense is not peaceful. The second kind of Islamic war is for the defense of oppressed people. My opponent seems to think that fighting to end oppression is not peaceful. Like my opponent said, my burden is do prove that "[Islam] is an intrinsically peaceful religion that desires the cessation of war or violence against anyone."

So, here is the true argument:

"The Quranic verses on this are very clear. God repeats, "do not aggress", multiple times. Only if attacked, is one permitted to fight back. If the other party refrains from aggression and offers one peace, we are told to stop fighting.

Rules of War*

[2:190] You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you, but do not aggress. GOD does not love the aggressors.
[2:191] You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you. Oppression is worse than murder. Do not fight them at the Sacred Masjid, unless they attack you therein. If they attack you, you may kill them. This is the just retribution for those disbelievers.
[2:192] If they refrain, then GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
[2:193] You may also fight them to eliminate oppression, and to worship GOD freely. If they refrain, you shall not aggress; aggression is permitted only against the aggressors."[1] So as shown, Islam does not desire war or violence, and is eager to end it whenever possible by accepting peace treaties from the enemy. That is certainly peaceful. Also, protecting other [non-Muslims] rights is peaceful because it is trying to restore peace and freedom for the oppressed.

"Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul {any soul, non-Muslim included} unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors." (Qur'an 5:32) [2] Unjust killing is bad.

II. 2nd Round Rebuttals

II.i. Islam As a Religion of Peace

"Islam clearly prohibits all kinds and forms of aggression and violence against anyone, except in self-defense. Islam is a practical religion, meant to be implemented in every aspect of our life. Therefore, it realizes the fact that a person who commits aggression and violence against others will not cease these actions unless they are deterred by similar actions taken against them."[3] As a definition of Islamic peace.

II.ii. Allah's "Violent" Acts Against Humanity.

As to Allah's violence, I will cover each point seperately. The first action was taken as a means to fix broken civilization, as a way of re-affirming peace. The second action was to help the Isrealites - who I might add were being enslaved by the Egyptians (this is oppression) - escape to the promised land. The third action was again taken to promote peace by destorying a non-peaceful civilization. Might I add that you are being very hypocritical here.

II.iii. Qur'anic Verses

The verses I will cover each seperately.

II.iii.a Verse one: 2:178

"To translate qisas, therefore, by retaliation, is incorrect. The Latin legal term Lex Talionis may come near it, but even that is modified here. In any case it is best to avoid technical terms for things that are very different. "Retaliation" in English has a wider meaning equivalent almost to returning evil for evil, and would more fitly apply to the blood-feuds of the Days of Ignorance. Islam says: if you must take a life for a life, at least there should be some measure of equality in it; the killing of the slave of a tribe should not involve a blood feud where many free men would be killed; but the law of mercy, where it can be obtained by consent, with reasonable compensation, would be better."[4] There are forgiveness laws and it is not necessarily death.

II.iii.b Verse two: 10:88

As I stated earlier, the Egyptians were unrightfully enslaving the Isrealites, and they were good to get out. The Pharaoh was warned on numerous occasions by Moses. While they were escaping, the Pharaoh and his army even chased them, so their drowning was of self-defense. They would have gotten killed had that not happened.

II.iii.c Verse three: 9:29

"We previously established the fact that the Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile to Islam, who do not oppress Muslims, or try to convert Muslims by force from their religion, or expel them from their lands, or wage war against them, or prepare for attacks against them. [Only self-defense warrants war] Muslims are not permitted to attack non-Muslims who signed peace pacts with them, or non-Muslims who live under the protection of the Islamic State."[5]

Also, "Soon afterwards, they [Jews] betrayed the peace pact and joined forces with the pagans and the hypocrites against Muslims."[5] Again, self-defense.

II.iii.d Verse four: 22:15

Actually, your interpretation is irrelevant. "You may do whatever you can to change the decrees of Allah, but you will see that no device of yours can succeed, whether these decrees are favorable to your designs or unfavorable to them. Obviously, 'so let him stretch a rope up to the sky, then cut it off' has not been used in the literal but in the figurative sense."[6] Not suicide, figurative.

II.iii.e Verse five: 24:2

"The Western laws of the modern times, which have also been adopted by the Muslims in various countries, are based on such conceptions. According to them, zina may be an evil, and an immoral and sinful thing, but it is not a crime. It becomes a crime only when illicit intercourse is committed without the consent of the other party."[6] This is long and complicated. I encourage my opponent to read source 6 to learn more.

II.iii.f Verse six: 2:193

You forgot the rest of the verse: "Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors." [2] If the enemy has to cease, then the enemy was the aggressors.

II.iii.g Verse seven: 6:70

Again, you left out some of the verse: "And leave those who take their religion as amusement and diversion and whom the worldly life has deluded."[2] They are to be left alone. Them drinking boiling water is their eternal punishment in hell. Not to be done by Muslims.

II.iii.h Verse eight: 6:137

Actually, the Qur'an is just describing Arab practices. They are condoned in the Qur'an. "Described in the previous verses [6:137] were false beliefs of the Mushriks of Arabia while the present verses recount their practical errors and ignorant customs."[7]

II.iii.i Verse nine: 9:111

Again, this was for defending the rights of themselves and others.

II.iii.j Verse ten: 2:161

This verse is in no way unpeaceful. Calling someone a disbeliever is not unpeaceful. They are not acting upon it.

Islam is a religion of peace that only fights when it has to: in self-defense and when other [non-Muslims] rights are being threatened. This is peaceful because it is restoring peace. Islam seeks peace since it always is ready to sign for peace, even at their opponent's will. Islam also does not aggress because aggression is oppression. Islam obviously wants peace, its just their opponents do not, and thus, war. Islam is a peaceful religion.

III. Infidels

"Regarding whether to call non-Muslims "kuffar" or not, the answer is that we should call people the names that the Qur'an gave them. In the Qur'an, you will not find a single "O disbelievers" ("Ya Kuffar", "Ya ayuhalathina kafaru", or "Ya ayuhal-kafirun") other than in the following two places:

1. In Hellfire, we seek refuge in Allah from it. The Qur'an says what means:

*{[Then it will be said]: "O ye who disbelieve (Ya ayuhalathina kafaru)! Make no excuses for yourselves this day.}* (At-Tahrim 66:7)

So, it is something that is said to them by Allah Almighty or by the angels, not by us.

2. In Surat Al-Kafirun (109) that you mentioned in your question. It says what means:

*{Say [O Muhammad]: "O ye that reject faith (al-Kafirun)! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship."}*

But this surah is addressing Prophet Muhammad and therefore must be understood in its historical context."[8] They are not all nonbelievers.

IV. the Qur'an

"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, and do not transgress; for Allah loveth not transgressors." (Surah 2, Verse 190).

"But if they cease (fighting you), Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Surah 2, Verse 192).

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the One that Heareth and Knoweth (all things)." (Surah 8, Verse 61).

"The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves." (Surah 2, Verse 194).

" ... and let not the hatred of some people in (once) shutting you out of the Sacred Mosque lead you to transgression (and hostility on your part). Help ye one another in righteousness and piety, but help ye not one another in sin and rancour: fear Allah: for Allah is strict in punishment." (Surah 5, Verse 2).

"Nor can Goodness and Evil be equal. Repel (Evil) with what is better: then will he between whom and thee was hatred become as it were thy friend and intimate!" (Surah 41, Verse 34).

"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." (Surah 4, Verse 135).

"God advocates justice, charity, and regarding the relatives. And He forbids evil, vice, and transgression. He enlightens you, that you may take heed." (Surah 16, Verse 90).

"And if ye do punish them, punish them no worse than they punished you: but if ye show patience, that is indeed the best (course) for those who are patient." (Surah 16, Verse 126).[3]

Thank you con. Over to you for the last full argument.

Sources:

[1]:http://www.submission.info...
[2]:http://quran.com...
[3]:http://www.al-islami.com...
[4]:http://www.answering-christianity.com...
[5]:http://islamnewsroom.com...
[6]:http://www.islamicstudies.info... Please search for any verses I wuoted for this source. There are several links to this source.
[7]:http://islamicstudies.info...
[8]:http://www.ilaam.net...
GenesisCreation

Con

Those who can win a war well can rarely make a good peace and those who could make a good peace would never have won the war.” - Winston Churchill

Pro said:
I will go through the two kinds of Islamic wars and progress to the conclusion to this contention.

Rebuttal: Islam cannot be a religion of peace if we acknowledge a concept like “Islamic wars”. They are polar opposites.

Pro said: The first kind of Islamic war is for self-defense.”

Rebuttal:” Any type of war is an anathema to peace. The two are polar opposites. Peace by means of war is called a “military occupation” or “genocidal extermination”. For example, the Nazi empire's official policy was that it must strike down it's enemies to preserve German purity. As per the German political doctrine, it also claimed to fight in self-defense to prevent racial corrosion.

Nazi Germany was terribly oppressive toward it's enemies. Yet after it's defeat, the Soviet military occupation raped and murdered an astounding population of German citizens. As per the source:” At least 100,000 women are believed to have been raped in Berlin based on surging abortion rates in the following months and contemporary hospital reports, with an estimated 10,000 women dying in the aftermath. Female deaths in connection with the rapes in Germany, overall, are estimated at 240,000. Antony Beevor describes it as the "greatest phenomenon of mass rape in history", and has concluded that at least 1.4 million women were raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone.” [1]

When my opponent stated that I seem “to think that fighting for your self-defense is not peaceful”, he was absolutely
correct. I'm not debating the merits of self-defense, nor it's justification. I am asserting that it is violent.
Islam, by this very same token is violent.

Pro quoted:[2:190] You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you, but do not aggress. GOD does
not love the aggressors.

Rebuttal:
Allah ordains the use of violence in this text. We are not concerned with the reason, we are concerned
with the method. Any act of war is not peaceful. Peace is axiomatic. If the United States invades Iraq to stop a dictator,
it requires congressional approval to declare “war”, not “peace”.

My opponent is seeking to draw a parallel between Justice and Peace. They are different virtues.

Justice may employ war to meet it's satisfaction. Peace may not.

Conclusion: My opponent has displayed a massive list of verses that are designed to convince you (the reader) that Muslims cannot engage in warfare without conditions. He asserts that these conditions justify the war. This entire list, nay, the Qur’an is it's entirety can be stricken from the list of “peaceful religions” by my opponents own definition.
I do not need to discredit his scripture line by line. It condemns itself.

God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing.
-
C. S. Lewis



http://www.bbc.co.uk... [1]

Debate Round No. 4
Ron-Paul

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for presenting more arguments. We have discussed the 3000 character conclusion, and we have decided that that can be taken out for purposes of refutation-read my profile comments if you don't believe me. It can go over. My opponent can do the same.

I. Since When Is War Peaceful?

Like I said in the last round, my Burden of Proof is to prove that "Islam is an intrinsically peaceful religion that desires the cessation of war or violence against anyone." Obviously, war cannot always be prevented, but if Islam can be proven to seek peace, I win.

2:190: You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you, but do not aggress. GOD does not love the aggressors.
2:192: If they refrain, then GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
2:193: You may also fight them to eliminate oppression, If they refrain, you shall not aggress; aggression is permitted only against the aggressors."[1]

"And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah . Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing." [1] (Qur'an 8:61)

Again, whenver the enemy inclines to peace, Muslims must accept. Muslims are looking for any opportunity to give peace.

"The Qur'an emphasizes peace and reconciliation as basic to all social and even international relations. One of the ninety-nine names of God is Salaam, which means peace. Throughout history, Muslims have made every effort to establish peace and serenity everywhere in all divergent fields, only taking military measures when their enemies tried to hinder these efforts for humankind. Over the course of history, the general approach of Muslims has been supportive of maintaining peace, spreading an environment of serenity and trust, and constructing a civilization of love, compassion, and mercy to share with other people in peace."[2]

II. How Does Islam Fight Its Wars?

This may seem self-defeating. But I have already proven that Islam seeks peace in all capacities.

II.i. Mecca.

"After conquering Makkah, Nabi Muhammad (saw) treated people so kindly that they all were surprised. No one could believe that a victor could treat the defeated party in this way.

However, after breaking the idols, Nabi Muhammad (saw) came out of Kaaba addressing the people of Makkah as such,

'O people! You were bad kinsmen and neighbors for me. You expelled me from my hometown and fought against me in an unmanly way. You did not spare any attempt to persecute me, my friends and my companions. You killed my uncle, Hamza ibn Abd Al-Muttalib. You fought against Allah's Messenger so I have the right to avenge myself on you. Based on this right, your men must be killed, your wives and children must be taken captive, your property must be seized by the conquerors, and your houses must be demolished. But I leave the judgment to you. What do you think?'"[3]

Muhammad spared the defeated even though they had persecuted his religion and his own family.

II.ii. Jerusalem.

After the Muslims recaptured Jerusalem from the Christians during the Crusades, they committed an act that is still wondered at today.

When the Christians took the city, they stormed in killing thousands of innocent Jews and Muslims. But when the Muslim retook the city, they spared the Christians, even though they had slaughtered thousands of their own people and religion.

These two stories show the tolerance of Islam to other religions, including other Monotheistic and even Polytheistic religions, even if the other religions had previously slaughtered their own people.

Islam seeks peace, and does conduct its necessary wars peacefully.

III. War, Peaceful?

Self defense is in the end peaceful because you have the right to defend yourself, but not to aggress. Also, attacking aggressors to defend the oppressed is peaceful because it is returning peace to the oppressed and the world itself.

IV. Qur'an Verses

Extend my original verses. Here are more (these do not count under character limit):

2:256 “Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.”

16:82 But if they turn away from you, (O Prophet remember that) your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message (entrusted to you).

6:107 Yet if God had so willed, they would not have ascribed Divinity to aught besides him; hence, We have not made you their keeper, nor are you (of your own choice) a guardian over them.

4:79, 80 (Say to everyone of them,) 'Whatever good betides you is from God and whatever evil betides you is from your own self and that We have (O Prophet) sent you to mankind only as a messenger and all sufficing is God as witness. Whoso obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys God. And for those who turn away, We have not sent you as a keeper."

11:28 (Noah to his people) He (Noah) said "O my people! think over it! If 1 act upon a clear direction from my Lord who has bestowed on me from Himself the Merciful talent of seeing the right way, a way which you cannot see for yourself, does it follow that we can force you to take the right path when you definitely decline to take it?°

17:53, 54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner (unto those who do not share their beliefs). Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe .... Hence, We have not sent you (Unto men O Prophet) with power to determine their Faith.

21:107 to 109 (O Prophet?) 'We have not sent you except to be a mercy to all mankind:" Declare, "Verily, what is revealed to me is this, your God is the only One God, so is it not up to you to bow down to Him?' But if they turn away then say, "I have delivered the Truth in a manner clear to one and all, and I know not whether the promised hour (of Judgment) is near or far."

22:67 To every people have We appointed ceremonial rites (of prayer) which they observe; therefore, let them not wrangle over this matter with you, but bid them to turn to your Lord (since that is the main objective of religion). You indeed are rightly guided. But if they still dispute you in this matter, (then say,) `God best knows (the value of) what you do."

88:21, 22; And so, (O Prophet!) exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.

48:28 He it is Who has sent forth His Messenger with the (task of spreading) Guidance and the Religion of Truth, to the end that tie make it prevail over every (false) religion, and none can bear witness to the Truth as God does.

42:6, 48 And whoso takes for patrons others besides God, over them does God keep a watch. Mark, you are not a keeper over them. But if they turn aside from you (do not get disheartened), for We have not sent you to be a keeper over them; your task is but to preach.

64:12 Obey God then and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away (no blame shall attach to our Messenger), for the duty of Our Messenger is just to deliver the message.

60:8 Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.

60:9 Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

Conclusion:

I would like to thank my opponent for this great debate.

My opponent has dropped all of his violence verses, so they should be assumed to be taken out of context. My opponent has not refuted any of my peaceful verses, so they still stand. I have proven that war to defend yourself and others is peaceful in the end.

Sources:

[1]:http://quran.com...
[2]:http://www.peaceandislam.com...
[3]:http://www.ezsoftech.com...
[4]:http://www.sunniforum.com...


GenesisCreation

Con

"May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of the prophets." – Muhammad

“Then the apostle divided the property, wives, and children of the Banu Qurayza among the Muslims, and he made known on that day the shares of horse and men, and took out the fifth.” Muhammad enjoys the spoils of war, 1/5th of all the loot.

"I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them." – Muhammad

"Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the "jizya" (poll tax) with the hand of humility." –Muhammad

"When we decide to destroy a population, We send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then we destroy them utterly." –Muhammad

"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them, in every stratagem of war." – Muhammad

"I am the prophet that laughs when killing my enemies." -Hadith, Muhammad

Established point 1: The Burden

Pro said: “…my Burden of Proof is to prove that "Islam is an intrinsically peaceful religion that desires the cessation of war or violence against anyone." Obviously, war cannot always be prevented, but if Islam can be proven to seek peace, I win.”

I agree. If Islam can be proven to seek peace, you win. Let’s review what you have established in your own words thus far:

a.> Neither in the other Abrahamic faiths is God's purpose to bring peace. All three state a purpose of worship; Islam is not exclusive.

b.> Obviously, war cannot always be prevented.

c.> “The first kind of Islamic war is for self-defense.”

d.> Rules of War (2:190, 2:191,2:192,2:193).

My opponent may redefine peace over, and over, and over again. In the end peace is as separated from war, as the east is from the west.
It would be peaceful to flee from conflict rather than to engage the enemy. Peace is not just a state of existence, peace is a method. Since Islam does not seek peace through peace (but rather engages enemies with war) we simply cannot conclude that “a cessation from violence and war” is synonymous with its teaching.

Argument discredited.

Established point 2: The 99 names of Allah

My opponent introduced new arguments in his final round by establishing that one of the 99 names of Allah means “Peace”. I hope my
opponent will not mind if I illuminate the folly of this submission with four more names given to Allah.

Al-Ḥasīb - The Bringer of Judgment

Al-Mumīt -The Destroyer, The Bringer of Death

Al-Muntaqim - The Avenger


Argument discredited.

Established point 3: “The List”

My opponent has provided a huge list of verses to convince you that Islam is peaceful and that Allah seeks peace. I ask the voter: What good are 99 verses of temperance and peace if the 100th verse demands the blood of another human? Is the last verse any less of a God-breathed mandate than the first 99, to the devout Muslim? Do the other 99 verses stop the Muslim from exercising the last verse and bringing the sword? Is that what we see on a massive scale in this world? Absolutely not!

For all of the merits of Islam, we cannot ignore the war it teaches. There are 164 verses on Jihad alone. Nobody, except perhaps those who
approach the Qur’an like and Ostrich (head firmly planted into the sand), can claim that Allah seeks peace from men, between men or for any man that is not already moved onto paradise.

Allah seeks your worship, not your peace. Any peace is unintended. Had the fascists conquered Europe, they too would eventually run
out of enemies. Would you call them peaceful just because they ran out of enemies?

My argument is extended. Islam seeks the glory of Allah, not peace with men.

Final Conclusion:

It was my burden to show that Islam is not a peaceful religion.
I showed that:

1.> Islam’s only purpose is to glorify Allah through worship, a point my opponent concedes. (And I did
not create the jinn and humankind except to worship Me… [Quran 51:56-58])
This scripture clearly shows that mankind has a single purpose: worship, not peace.
2.> Islam teaches that war is good for the believer, even if the believer does not want war. That means, Islam teaches the Muslims
to fight even if the war violates their conscience. My opponent does not reject this claim; he simply amplified it by stating that such wars are justified
through self-defense. Any doctrine of religion that teaches it’s believers to ignore their moral
conscience and kill in the name of their God, is not peaceful.

3.> True peace is the spirit of non-violence. The list of religions that qualify as peaceful are Jainism, Hinduism and Buddhism in accordance with Ahimsa.

4.> I have provided an unchallenged example which shows the aftermath of war, a concept my opponent would call “peace”. I have shown that war leads to occupation, plundering, raping and genocide. Consider the aftermath of WW2 on the German women. The rape of over one million women
was during the time of “peace” that war acquired. The Muslim fighter, according to the Qur’an, is allowed to loot and take slaves as trophies of conquest.

I’d like to thank my opponent for this debate and the judges who endured the length and weight of this topic.

Debate Round No. 5
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Abdul_Ahad 3 years ago
Abdul_Ahad
Posted by Abdul_Ahad 3 years ago
Abdul_Ahad
Islam is a religion of Peace, especially in Sharia, which means "Law" in Arabic. There is a lot to cover so here is a video link: , also in general Saudi Arabia, Iran and all those so called Muslim States DO NOT practice Sharia based on Quran, Sunnah (Things the Prophet (Peace be upon him) did) and Hadith (Things the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said. You may hate Sharia in Saudi Arabia or former Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, but let me tell you one thing. Sharia is practiced a bit in some so called Muslim countries but most of it no. I know many Occidentals think Democracy is the best and we need to assimilate a democratization in the Middle East. Want to see what happens when Islam makes it's own type of Democracy when Sharia is already there look at Egypt, was it a success? Look at Libya, Tunisia etc... these are all countries that combined Sharia and Democracy, bad idea. Sharia is a better type of Democracy based on Quran where Women are equal as men, where there is no stoning to death or hanging of apostates, homosexuals and also there is no actual "wife beating" (see video) and child marriage (even though marriage wasn't for sexual related purposes but for tribalism (see video) etc... Funny how Women received rights to have a divorce in the UK not until the 1800s while in the Islamic Caliphate they could anytime and there are so many comparisons. We may judge Saudi Arabian Sharia wtiht the True Sharia but instead of assimilation of democratization, why not modify Sharia, BUT by referring to the Quran and reflecting back. Women in Canada weren't aloud to vote for a prime minister until 1917 where women could vote all the time any time for a new Caliph or Grand Vizier and so many more comparisons (see video link). I will be talking about Muhammad's marriage next comment and please ask any questions, Islam gives Free Choice.
Posted by Abdul_Ahad 3 years ago
Abdul_Ahad
Ali said that if he killed the unbeliever in anger for being spat on, Ali would be a murderer in the Eyes of Allah, and he would avenge his anger rather then a desire for justice. This is a true Holy Warrior, to let go of your emotions and fight the evil in you. This is the True Jihad, why did Muhammad (Peace be upon him) take so long until maybe 10 years after receiving the Word of God to fight against persecution when all the Muslims asked? Because God wanted the former pagans who became Muslims to fight their anger first to seek a Desire For Justice and we should all do Jihad, whether Muslim or Non-Muslim.
Posted by Abdul_Ahad 3 years ago
Abdul_Ahad
Hello, I am a Muslim and of coarse I say Islam is a religion of Peace, first of all Islam just means "Submission to God" so Jesus (Peace be upon him) submitted to God and Moses (Peace be upon him) submitted to God so they are Muslims (People who Submit to God). Islam is based on only the Quran and we believe it is the Last Testament sent by God. Now if you look at Islam, Islam based on Quran is peaceful, but Islam based on Hamas, Al-Qaeda, Taliban isn't really the true Islam, they use the label Islam, to kill murder innocent people, something the Last Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) would've never done. Some of these so called "extremist" are wanting to seek God but instead follow the Devil. They use anger for a Desire for Justice rather then fight for a cause for God. The concpet of Jihad is also confused to even Muslims themselves, you I use to think the Taliban in general were good from these "Invaders" called "the Americans", I still do not support the United States efforts in Afghanistan nor completely with the Taliban too. Jihad does not mean "Holy War" as said in media rather it means to struggle and we all struggle in life. Jihad is only used in 13 types (look it up), there is also the Bigger Jihad and Smaller Jihad, the smaller Jihad is the Jihad to fight the Unbelievers (including any type of persecutors if they don't stop and begin killing innocents, Jihad can be amognst Muslims, or so called Muslims because Muslim does not mean to persecute. So it's to fight the Unbelievers (including so called Muslims) in battle until they stop and you don't kill innocents or it is as if you killed all of mankind mentioned in the Quran. The Bigger Jihad is the one the Cousin of the Prophet, Ali (May God be please with him) did. He was fighting an unbeliever in battle and managed to upper strike the persecutor and break his sword, just before Ali stroked the Unbeliever spat at Ali and Ali refused to kill him, unbeliever asked why, (see my next comment)
Posted by GenesisCreation 4 years ago
GenesisCreation
I didn't. I format most of my debates in Microsoft Office. Regardless, there's plenty of web services that check for plagiarism. Feel free to check my work.
Posted by InsertNameHere 4 years ago
InsertNameHere
Honestly it looks like con just copy/pasted all his arguments from other sites. I can't vote anyway though since voting period is up.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
I don't understand why Muslims have to go to such lengths to lie about their faith. Why not just tell the truth about it and move on?
Posted by Gileandos 4 years ago
Gileandos
Con Round 5:

Con again asserts what most would call pacifism as his idea of peaceful.

He also asserts here many statements that give credence to the idea that Islam is an inherently evil ideology by citing Muhammad's ‘evil' statements.

To quote Con:
" Islam teaches that war is good for the believer, even if the believer does not want war. That means, Islam teaches the Muslims
to fight even if the war violates their conscience. My opponent does not reject this claim; he simply amplified it by stating that such wars are justified
through self-defense. Any doctrine of religion that teaches it's believers to ignore their moral
conscience and kill in the name of their God, is not peaceful."

This point again was never addressed by Pro. He needed to show that Islam is not an evil ideology.

Summary:

Pro had the burden of proof. He needed to show that Islam was not evil and has never been the aggressor. Instead Pro focused on Qu'ranic verses that did not teach aggression but taught self defense. Most ideologies, evil or otherwise teach self-defense. Pro needed to address the ‘marketplaces' idea that Islam teaches aggression. That was Pro's burden.

Con confused peace with pacificism and Pro did nothing to correct this. But drilled down did make a clear enough argument that evil aggressive ideologies do make statements of self defense.

After all predatory pedophiles and murderers will defend themselves. That does not mean they adherents to such ideologies are not aggressive.

In the end sources tied.
Arguments go to Con as the BoP was not met by Pro. Though I agreed with Pro's definition of peaceful and that Islam has the right to defend itself. I did not see enough proof that Islam was not an aggressive ideology or any detraction against the mainstream belief that Islam is the aggressor.
Posted by Gileandos 4 years ago
Gileandos
Con round 4

Con here in this brief round asserts Nazism as not peaceful. We would all agree that evil ideologies are not inherently peaceful though they preach doctrines of self defense as well.
This is probably the single point so far that defeats Pro's point on the resolution.

Though again within this Con is confusing pacifism with the idea of peaceful.

No objective understanding is in line with Con that peaceful is devoid of action against evil ideologies. Only pacifism asserts such an idea to lack a response to evil ideologies.

Sadly Pro has YET to point this out clearly in the debate.

Pro Round 5:

"Obviously, war cannot always be prevented, but if Islam can be proven to seek peace, I win."

And then Pro proceeds to quote more verses. This is entirely frustrating Pro cannot seem to realize the fact that he need only affirm his interpretation and assert a proper definition to win this debate.

Pro continues to assert, "Again, whenever the enemy inclines to peace, Muslims must accept. Muslims are looking for any opportunity to give peace. "

Pro continues to fail to properly frame his argument or the reality of common understanding here.
He has yet to address that evil ideologies brook no peace. For example, if an entire nation takes up child sacrifice, Peace only exists objectively when the child sacrifice stops. Fighting evil is commonly agreed as an inherently peaceful act.

Yet Pro does nothing to address the objectivity of what is inherently peaceful verses apparent peace. He does nothing to call Con on his use of pacifism in defining peaceful.

III. War, Peaceful?
Now I agree also self defense is not an unpeaceful act but Pro does nothing to detract from the Con's pointing out the fact that Nazism, an evil aggressive ideology promotes self defense. Even if all of Pro's verses were correct, he needs to affirm there is no action of aggression in Islam.
Posted by Gileandos 4 years ago
Gileandos
Pro Rd 4:

Pro starts by addressing the definition of Peace. I hope that he takes the mainstream understanding that peace does not mean just cessation of war against evil ideologies. We may one day be at peace with murderers ONLY when murder as a valid ideology is eradicated. Same with any destructive ideology, like child sacrifice, sacrificing nuns, predatory pedophilia etc…

Again, a person is still considered peaceful even though they will never be at peace with a person who holds to an ideology of pedophilia. There is zero expectation to allow evil to persist.

I wait to see how well Pro argues here to win or lose the debate.

Sadly I do not feel Pro drove home this point with certainty and clarity. He did assert that as his definition but did not drive it home.

He needed to show why the Qu'ran's assertions are objectively correct. I wait for clarification in future rounds.

II. 2nd Round Rebuttals

"Might I add that you are being very hypocritical here."
I giggled at this and thought as much myself.

II.iii. Qur'anic Verses

All of these verses are interpreted by Pro to affirm his definition of Peace. If Con does not challenge the interpretations before are now being asserted by Pro, then this definition becomes one about the Definition of peaceful.

III. Infidels

This was terribly unclear and not easy reading. Pro seems to now concede that Con is correct. The verses seem to affirm that.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by cabio 4 years ago
cabio
Ron-PaulGenesisCreationTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I did agree with Con at the start. But I do feel my belief was reinforced by the arguments. Sources and conduct both ok. Con provided more persuasive evidence.
Vote Placed by Gileandos 4 years ago
Gileandos
Ron-PaulGenesisCreationTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: In the end sources tied. Arguments go to Con as the BoP was not met by Pro. Though I agreed with Pro’s definition of peaceful and that Islam has the right to defend itself. I did not see enough proof that Islam was not an aggressive ideology or any detraction against the mainstream belief that Islam is the aggressor. RFD in comments
Vote Placed by Microsuck 4 years ago
Microsuck
Ron-PaulGenesisCreationTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Neutralizing counter because Arizonian gave a better RFD.
Vote Placed by AnalyticArizonan 4 years ago
AnalyticArizonan
Ron-PaulGenesisCreationTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in the comments