Page 1 of 1

Back in the game

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 1:27 am
by jihadnews
I have been away from the free speech fight against Islamic supremacy and jihad.
But I back I need a little help finding a file about Taqiyya written under the paris2000 or some such name.
It was very good about four pages long If you can help locate it I would be very grateful thanks

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 8:04 am
by enceladus
Welcome!

I don't remember seeing that post that you mentioned but hopefully you'll be able to find it.
- enceladus

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 9:25 am
by Ariel
Welcome jihadnews.

Have you tried to google it?

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 10:50 am
by jihadnews
Hi folks If it recall it was an essay in a word file that required a down load but I could be wrong.. Try google ....why didn't I think of that instead of going straight for the wayback machine and looking under the couch for digital papers ?

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 12:25 pm
by Ariel
Try google ....why didn't I think of that instead of going straight for the wayback machine and looking under the couch for digital papers ?


:lol: Sorry, but I found a few files. And I found an aricle "What is Sharia" from our Arabist Hans Jansen. He is by no means political correct, and the man is hated by all the friends of Islam as Hans calls them. I love Hans Jansen.

http://www.arabistjansen.nl/Arabist/What_is_Sharia.html

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2014 5:35 pm
by jihadnews
Ariel wrote:
Try google ....why didn't I think of that instead of going straight for the wayback machine and looking under the couch for digital papers ?


:lol: Sorry, but I found a few files. And I found an aricle "What is Sharia" from our Arabist Hans Jansen. He is by no means political correct, and the man is hated by all the friends of Islam as Hans calls them. I love Hans Jansen.

http://www.arabistjansen.nl/Arabist/What_is_Sharia.html

Glad you got it... Place is a little slower than back in the day used to be real active with lots of users some one may wander in .Thanks for the link . Ill be back after visiting Eurabia . :sheikh:

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:35 pm
by Fernando
Thanks jihadnews for bringing the matter up, and Ariel for finding the paper: a most interesting one too. I was particularly interested to see these arguments
Modern Western scholars have called into doubt the origins of the Sharia. They believe that the Sharia is the continuation of Roman provincial law as it was in force in the Roman Empire in the Middle East on the eve of the Arab conquests. A number of 20th century scholars wrote about the relationship between Roman and Islamic law. It is easy to see that the figure of the mufti is a continuation of the scholar of jurisprudence well known from Roman law, and other examples abound.
and
Muslims believe that their religious specialists derived the rules of the Sharia from its four sources: Koran, Hadith, Analogy and Consensus. However, modern Western scholars have come to believe that the rules of the Sharia were not derived from the four ‘roots’, but that the rules and provisions were anchored in these four ‘roots’ only in retrospect.
The first I didn't know about and it's an argument bound to inflame the pious. The second fits with the alternative narrative about the origins of Islam and has the capacity to destroy its credibility.

Re: Back in the game

PostPosted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:06 pm
by Fernando
Here's another interesting article by Hans Jansen on the historicity of Islam. He makes the interesting point that parts of the supposed timeline of Islam have a literary symmetry that suggests they are indeed stories. He applies this argument to Aisha, too, suggesting that maybe Mo wasn't actually a paedo - perhaps one day that will save a lot of little girls from a nasty fate if correct. A bit awkward for the apologists though: not a paedo? Then the stories were made up - by the originators of Islam, not the wicked Westerners!
The historicity of Muhammad, Aisha and who knows who else
Copenhagen, May 2011

http://www.arabistjansen.nl/Arabist/Copenhagen11.html
By the way, he refers to a historian I haven't come across, predating Crone et al.:
Much earlier, the Scottish scholar John Burton had shown convincingly that the stories and traditions about the collection of the Koran were not history in any secular sense of that word. These stories were similarly created in answer to urgent theological necessities: his The Collection of the Qur’an, 1977.
Part can be seen here (I've yet to strain my eyes over it) http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Collection_of_the_Qur_an.html?id=Ggc4AAAAIAAJ
NB: I found that in Firefox could only read Jansen's article by turning off page styles: for some reason the fancy text overlaps itself. It's ok in a recent version of Opera though.
EDIT to add:
Google Books shows only the introduction and, at the very end, the blurb. The blurb rather gives the theme away though:
The most surprising featurc of ihe Muslim traditions on the collection
of the Quran is the denial of any role in the process to Muhammad himself. The merit of assembling and preserving the record of the
momentous divine revelations has been variously ascribed to some half dozen of the Prophet's associates or Companions, and these ascriptions have usually been treated as hopelessly conflicting. Dr Burton argues that they are in perfect agreement. Their sole function was the deliberate exclusion of Muhammad.
[and]
A crisis seemed imminent when in the second Muslim century
(roughly between a.d. 850 and 950j certain legal views which were
agreed between the sch<M>ls were rejected by a powerful fundamentalist group on the ground that they were not mentioned in the Qiir'an texts. Two replies were offered. The first, that the Prophet himself had legislated on these matters, proved unsatisfactory since it raised the problem of the repeal of thc Qur'an. The second suggestion, that these matters had been treated in the Qur'an and the relevant verses omitted on the assembly of the texts, ensured that medieval Islam would regard
the maikaf as incomplete. This certainty necessitated the placing of the collection of the Quran in the period following the Prophct's death.
My emphasis. Extract edited slightly to overcome errors in my OCRing.
It suggests that the book is very interesting but, like so much in its genre, hard work!
(I may have found a pdf but it doesn't work in Adobe. I need to virus scan it as a minimum before I try to find a way of reading it, because it's in a rather weird format.)