to tariq

Submitted by dianamoon12 (United States), Dec 26, 2005 at 09:35

I do understand..... but here's an example...

100 years ago, the word gay meant happy. it now means homosexual.

the word jihad had 3 primary meanings. one of them was to struggle inwardly, one meant to struggle in resisitance to outside temptation, and the last was to struggle violently against nonmuslims.

but popular, contemporary meaning among THE MAJORITY OF MUSLIMS ON THIS EARTH TODAY, means violent struggle against nonmuslims.

words change meaning over time. This word has evolved from three primary meanings, to 1 primary meaning, and 2 secondary meanings.

Also, it just dawned on me the other night, it really does not matter what the exact definition of jihad is, Islam is an inherently violent religion. It was founded by a warlord, and uses violent conquest to overcome anyone who stands in it's way. Christianity has done that in the past, but has grown beyond that. This is due to the fact that from the beginning, Jesus was a peacemaker, he never fought a battle in his life. Islam can not be seperated from violence. Even for a moderate Muslim like you, the more you delve into it, you would eventually feel obligated to take up arms. You would justify it by the fact that your Qu'uran allowed it because of the NUMEROUS surras allowing for warfare against unbelievers.

This is really a ridiculous subject to be quibbling over. Actions speak louder than words. The Muslim world is dominated by violence and oppression. It is not dominated by people who are struggling within. Islam is a violent religion, even if jihad meant inward struggle. As to a previously raised arguement, that the leaders of violent regions don't represent the people, you are right in a sense. They don't represent the Christians, Hindus Buddhists, Women, and Children in most of those places ( i know that there are exeptions, but few). They do represent everyone else. The majority, or else the people would revolt.

I look forward to hearing from you.
dianamoon

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".