SamurAchzar
Platinum Member
- Feb 15, 2006
- 2,422
- 3
- 76
The quotes you brought explicitly order to kill non-believers. In "desist" I don't think the Quran means "reject the conversion to Islam", but their present religion.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Sura 9:5
Also, "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." I don't see what you're getting at. It says to kill those who don't convert.
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
The quotes you brought explicitly order to kill non-believers. In "desist" I don't think the Quran means "reject the conversion to Islam", but their present religion.
Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
The quotes you brought explicitly order to kill non-believers. In "desist" I don't think the Quran means "reject the conversion to Islam", but their present religion.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: manowar821
Does it matter? The book is not the problem. The problem was never with the Bible, the Torah, or the Quran. It's the people. They're just fucking stupid.
No really the problem is with the Quran. Muhammed took parts of the Old Testament and rewrote them, changed some stuff around for the heck of it, etc. It's full of contradictions and commands to kill those that don't convert.
"The Quran seems to describe Christ in conflicting terms, some of which correspond to the unorthodox Christian teachings which were the subject of controversies in the early church; others confirm the biblical teaching. In certain places the Quran denies that Jesus is the Son of God (2:116), describing him as a mere man (3:59). Nevertheless, in other places Jesus is described in lofty, highly favoured terms, elevating him above all other prophets. Unlike other prophets, Jesus' prophetic ministry was validated in the Quran by a number of distinctives. First, miracles were ascribed to him (5:112-12; 3:46). Secondly, he was united with the Holy Spirit (2:86). Thirdly, he was called the Messiah (3:45). Fourthly, he was born of a virgin (3:47). Another important designation of Jesus is that of the 'Word", of which he was spoken of in John 1:1 in the New Testament. In Surah 3:45 we read 'O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from him: his name will be Christ Jesus.' George Sale translated this verse more literally from the original Arabic: 'O Mary! God sendeth thee good tidings, that thou shalt bear the Word, proceeding from Himself; his name shall be Christ Jesus.' The 'Word, proceeding from Himself,' seems to correlate with John's affirmation of Christ's eternal existence, and to be a more accurate translation of the Arabic text." (Bassam M. Chadid wrote this in one of his books on Islam).
Islam is basically a cult of Christianity. It is interesting that Muhammed appelaed to previous revelation (such as the Torah you speak of, Psalms, and he even refers to the Injil ("Gospels"-- these would be Matthew Mark Luke and John from the New Testament)), yet he ignores or rejects the parts of these that are incompatible with the accounts found in the Quran.
As far as Militantism goes, the word "dawah" means in an Islamic context, 'to propagate the faith by calling people to embrace Islam'. From the beginning of the Quran, dawah is associated with military conquest through the concept of "jihad" (8:74,75; 9:44), the justification for which is laid down down in the prescriptions of the Quran (2:69; 2:190; 2:217; 2:256; 3:103; 8:39; 8:61-62; 25:52; and 61:9).
For those who will undoubtedly bring up the Catholic Church's crusades, I would encourage them to look at the relationship between the Church and Muhammed's army that he raised. His conquests moved all the way into Spain before being defeated in France in 732AD at the Battle of Tours (they were hoping to control southern Europe and Constantinople, which they had failed to achieve in their earlier invasion from the east). The Catholic church felt very threatened by this new militant religion and their treatment of Christians and Jews. Al-Hakim (996-1021), the sixth Fatimid caliph at Cairo (as in Cairo, Egypt) was known for his severe and cruel persecution of Christians and Jews. He implemented harsh restrictions (such as the humiliating "poll tax", after which paying to live/survive/not be killed, you had to wear a document around your neck which identified you as a dhimmi (Jew or Chrisitan) and enabled you to move from place to place, supposedly without persecution. In reality, it simply notified people that you were an outcast and so it made the persecution worse) on groups and ordered the destruction of the Church of the Nativity, which fuelled desire on the part of Western Christendom/Church to liberate the Holy Land from the hands of the Muslims.
? 2:190. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors
? 2:191. 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
? 2:192. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
Wrong. If you said the people are misrepresenting the Quran in circumstances then that would be a legitimate argument, but I fail to see how the Quran is teaching that.
Sura 9:5
Also, "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." I don't see what you're getting at. It says to kill those who don't convert.
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
If you read the verse right after that it states: [9.6] And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.
Anything else?
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: manowar821
Does it matter? The book is not the problem. The problem was never with the Bible, the Torah, or the Quran. It's the people. They're just fucking stupid.
No really the problem is with the Quran. Muhammed took parts of the Old Testament and rewrote them, changed some stuff around for the heck of it, etc. It's full of contradictions and commands to kill those that don't convert.
"The Quran seems to describe Christ in conflicting terms, some of which correspond to the unorthodox Christian teachings which were the subject of controversies in the early church; others confirm the biblical teaching. In certain places the Quran denies that Jesus is the Son of God (2:116), describing him as a mere man (3:59). Nevertheless, in other places Jesus is described in lofty, highly favoured terms, elevating him above all other prophets. Unlike other prophets, Jesus' prophetic ministry was validated in the Quran by a number of distinctives. First, miracles were ascribed to him (5:112-12; 3:46). Secondly, he was united with the Holy Spirit (2:86). Thirdly, he was called the Messiah (3:45). Fourthly, he was born of a virgin (3:47). Another important designation of Jesus is that of the 'Word", of which he was spoken of in John 1:1 in the New Testament. In Surah 3:45 we read 'O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from him: his name will be Christ Jesus.' George Sale translated this verse more literally from the original Arabic: 'O Mary! God sendeth thee good tidings, that thou shalt bear the Word, proceeding from Himself; his name shall be Christ Jesus.' The 'Word, proceeding from Himself,' seems to correlate with John's affirmation of Christ's eternal existence, and to be a more accurate translation of the Arabic text." (Bassam M. Chadid wrote this in one of his books on Islam).
Islam is basically a cult of Christianity. It is interesting that Muhammed appelaed to previous revelation (such as the Torah you speak of, Psalms, and he even refers to the Injil ("Gospels"-- these would be Matthew Mark Luke and John from the New Testament)), yet he ignores or rejects the parts of these that are incompatible with the accounts found in the Quran.
As far as Militantism goes, the word "dawah" means in an Islamic context, 'to propagate the faith by calling people to embrace Islam'. From the beginning of the Quran, dawah is associated with military conquest through the concept of "jihad" (8:74,75; 9:44), the justification for which is laid down down in the prescriptions of the Quran (2:69; 2:190; 2:217; 2:256; 3:103; 8:39; 8:61-62; 25:52; and 61:9).
For those who will undoubtedly bring up the Catholic Church's crusades, I would encourage them to look at the relationship between the Church and Muhammed's army that he raised. His conquests moved all the way into Spain before being defeated in France in 732AD at the Battle of Tours (they were hoping to control southern Europe and Constantinople, which they had failed to achieve in their earlier invasion from the east). The Catholic church felt very threatened by this new militant religion and their treatment of Christians and Jews. Al-Hakim (996-1021), the sixth Fatimid caliph at Cairo (as in Cairo, Egypt) was known for his severe and cruel persecution of Christians and Jews. He implemented harsh restrictions (such as the humiliating "poll tax", after which paying to live/survive/not be killed, you had to wear a document around your neck which identified you as a dhimmi (Jew or Chrisitan) and enabled you to move from place to place, supposedly without persecution. In reality, it simply notified people that you were an outcast and so it made the persecution worse) on groups and ordered the destruction of the Church of the Nativity, which fuelled desire on the part of Western Christendom/Church to liberate the Holy Land from the hands of the Muslims.
? 2:190. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors
? 2:191. 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
? 2:192. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
Wrong. If you said the people are misrepresenting the Quran in circumstances then that would be a legitimate argument, but I fail to see how the Quran is teaching that.
Sura 9:5
Also, "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." I don't see what you're getting at. It says to kill those who don't convert.
If you read the verse right after that it states: [9.6] And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.
Anything else?
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
I don't sit here and claim to know the Torah because I haven't studied it. I know my book, do you know yours?
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
I don't sit here and claim to know the Torah because I haven't studied it. I know my book, do you know yours?
Your book? Ok.
I'd never confine myself to just one book. Hell, if I had to chose one, it'd be something like Gravity's Rainbow by Pynchon or the play Waiting For Godot by Beckett or another play, Rosencrantz and Guilderstern Are Dead by Tom Stoppard, peace and blessings be upon his name.
The Old Testament is at least 4,000 or so years old, no wonder it's such a violently primitive dog and pony show.
And if I had to take just one book with me on the proverbial deserted island, I'd take something I hadn't read yet . . . because we never stop learning.
I do cotton to Sufis, though, mrSHEiK. They're among the least primitive "believers." It's no coincidence to me that my two favorite Islamic poets are Sufis, Hafiz and Rumi. Sufis be cool, man, but then the more mystical flavors of any of the main religions have the lightest and wisest touch, imho.
Infinity is serious business.
Myself, I'd shorten "there is only one God" to "there is only one", but that's just me; no matter what any of us believes, not one of us knows.
I'm cool with that.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: manowar821
Does it matter? The book is not the problem. The problem was never with the Bible, the Torah, or the Quran. It's the people. They're just fucking stupid.
No really the problem is with the Quran. Muhammed took parts of the Old Testament and rewrote them, changed some stuff around for the heck of it, etc. It's full of contradictions and commands to kill those that don't convert.
"The Quran seems to describe Christ in conflicting terms, some of which correspond to the unorthodox Christian teachings which were the subject of controversies in the early church; others confirm the biblical teaching. In certain places the Quran denies that Jesus is the Son of God (2:116), describing him as a mere man (3:59). Nevertheless, in other places Jesus is described in lofty, highly favoured terms, elevating him above all other prophets. Unlike other prophets, Jesus' prophetic ministry was validated in the Quran by a number of distinctives. First, miracles were ascribed to him (5:112-12; 3:46). Secondly, he was united with the Holy Spirit (2:86). Thirdly, he was called the Messiah (3:45). Fourthly, he was born of a virgin (3:47). Another important designation of Jesus is that of the 'Word", of which he was spoken of in John 1:1 in the New Testament. In Surah 3:45 we read 'O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from him: his name will be Christ Jesus.' George Sale translated this verse more literally from the original Arabic: 'O Mary! God sendeth thee good tidings, that thou shalt bear the Word, proceeding from Himself; his name shall be Christ Jesus.' The 'Word, proceeding from Himself,' seems to correlate with John's affirmation of Christ's eternal existence, and to be a more accurate translation of the Arabic text." (Bassam M. Chadid wrote this in one of his books on Islam).
Islam is basically a cult of Christianity. It is interesting that Muhammed appelaed to previous revelation (such as the Torah you speak of, Psalms, and he even refers to the Injil ("Gospels"-- these would be Matthew Mark Luke and John from the New Testament)), yet he ignores or rejects the parts of these that are incompatible with the accounts found in the Quran.
As far as Militantism goes, the word "dawah" means in an Islamic context, 'to propagate the faith by calling people to embrace Islam'. From the beginning of the Quran, dawah is associated with military conquest through the concept of "jihad" (8:74,75; 9:44), the justification for which is laid down down in the prescriptions of the Quran (2:69; 2:190; 2:217; 2:256; 3:103; 8:39; 8:61-62; 25:52; and 61:9).
For those who will undoubtedly bring up the Catholic Church's crusades, I would encourage them to look at the relationship between the Church and Muhammed's army that he raised. His conquests moved all the way into Spain before being defeated in France in 732AD at the Battle of Tours (they were hoping to control southern Europe and Constantinople, which they had failed to achieve in their earlier invasion from the east). The Catholic church felt very threatened by this new militant religion and their treatment of Christians and Jews. Al-Hakim (996-1021), the sixth Fatimid caliph at Cairo (as in Cairo, Egypt) was known for his severe and cruel persecution of Christians and Jews. He implemented harsh restrictions (such as the humiliating "poll tax", after which paying to live/survive/not be killed, you had to wear a document around your neck which identified you as a dhimmi (Jew or Chrisitan) and enabled you to move from place to place, supposedly without persecution. In reality, it simply notified people that you were an outcast and so it made the persecution worse) on groups and ordered the destruction of the Church of the Nativity, which fuelled desire on the part of Western Christendom/Church to liberate the Holy Land from the hands of the Muslims.
? 2:190. Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors
? 2:191. 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
? 2:192. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
Wrong. If you said the people are misrepresenting the Quran in circumstances then that would be a legitimate argument, but I fail to see how the Quran is teaching that.
Sura 9:5
Also, "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." I don't see what you're getting at. It says to kill those who don't convert.
If you read the verse right after that it states: [9.6] And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.
Anything else?
That's only for one person; if an entire nation doesn't want to convert to Islam, heh....good luck using that logic of yours with this verse on them. You can't "wait for the word from Allah" forever. And besides, I think I'll take the word of one person who agrees with me and deny everyone else including scholars over some random internet guy's mis-quoted quips any day.
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
You're missing the context...
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
Originally posted by: Doboji
Go read the first bit of the Bible.... that is the Torah.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Haha, so the US should pay a tax to them? To which Islamic nations should we pay a tax to? To which militant group? Hamas? Rofl.
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
Haha, so the US should pay a tax to them? To which Islamic nations should we pay a tax to? To which militant group? Hamas? Rofl.
You DO realize how absurd this logic is, don't you? Let's recapitulate:Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: Fern
Yeah, I've recently been thinking about trying to read it.
Only copies I've ever seen were in Hebrew IIRC.
Was also wondering how much is similar/dissimilar to the Old Testement in the Christian Bible?
If it's similar to the OT, I suspect there's more 'death & destruction' than 'love and peace' (that and a bunch of religious laws)
Fern
The Torah is the first 5 books of the Old Testament, which I have read.
The reason Jews don't catch any flack is that all the commands to destroy other nations/peoples were given directly to the Jews by God and were meant for execution at that time only. There are no commands that say "you [as in you specifically the person reading it, right now] must actively go and kill anyone and everyone that does not repent and convert" like there are in Sura 9 of the Quran.
The militant verses you will find (such as "if a man and woman are caught in the act committing adultery, stone them") were for use within the nation of Israel, not applicable to those outside. Their purpose was to show how God demands absolute perfection from us, and to show us how horrible sin is in God's eyes. Their purpose was to show us that there was no possible way that we could please God in our own actions. They made it clear that were we to be reconciled with God, God would have to do something about it because there was nothing that we could do, no sacrifice, and no level of effort, could provide the perfection on our behalf that God demands. This "God would have to do something" that I refer to is "God would have to provide a perfect sacrifice if we were to have anything to do with God"; the Old Testament/Torah in your case pointed the way to, and proved the need for, the promised sacrifice that God said he would eventually provide (this perfect sacrifice was Jesus, the man who lived perfectly).
Originally posted by: shira
You DO realize how absurd this logic is, don't you? Let's recapitulate:Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: Fern
Yeah, I've recently been thinking about trying to read it.
Only copies I've ever seen were in Hebrew IIRC.
Was also wondering how much is similar/dissimilar to the Old Testement in the Christian Bible?
If it's similar to the OT, I suspect there's more 'death & destruction' than 'love and peace' (that and a bunch of religious laws)
Fern
The Torah is the first 5 books of the Old Testament, which I have read.
The reason Jews don't catch any flack is that all the commands to destroy other nations/peoples were given directly to the Jews by God and were meant for execution at that time only. There are no commands that say "you [as in you specifically the person reading it, right now] must actively go and kill anyone and everyone that does not repent and convert" like there are in Sura 9 of the Quran.
The militant verses you will find (such as "if a man and woman are caught in the act committing adultery, stone them") were for use within the nation of Israel, not applicable to those outside. Their purpose was to show how God demands absolute perfection from us, and to show us how horrible sin is in God's eyes. Their purpose was to show us that there was no possible way that we could please God in our own actions. They made it clear that were we to be reconciled with God, God would have to do something about it because there was nothing that we could do, no sacrifice, and no level of effort, could provide the perfection on our behalf that God demands. This "God would have to do something" that I refer to is "God would have to provide a perfect sacrifice if we were to have anything to do with God"; the Old Testament/Torah in your case pointed the way to, and proved the need for, the promised sacrifice that God said he would eventually provide (this perfect sacrifice was Jesus, the man who lived perfectly).
God is an omniscient, omnipotent, immortal super-being. God knows everything that ever happened, everything that ever WILL happen, everything each one of us thinks every instant of our lives, everything that every one of us will do every instant of our lives.
So God needed to create Jesus, then have him sacrificed, in order to make us acceptable to God? WTF?
Like God couldn't just "think," "Mankind, with all his flaws, is acceptable to me." ?
Instead it's, "Mankind is really fvcked up. What to do, what to do. I know, I'll create this perfect person and then have him crucified. THAT will make mankind good enough."
Seriously, the degree to which one must suspend all rational processes to accept these religious stories is astounding.
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: shira
You DO realize how absurd this logic is, don't you? Let's recapitulate:Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: Fern
Yeah, I've recently been thinking about trying to read it.
Only copies I've ever seen were in Hebrew IIRC.
Was also wondering how much is similar/dissimilar to the Old Testement in the Christian Bible?
If it's similar to the OT, I suspect there's more 'death & destruction' than 'love and peace' (that and a bunch of religious laws)
Fern
The Torah is the first 5 books of the Old Testament, which I have read.
The reason Jews don't catch any flack is that all the commands to destroy other nations/peoples were given directly to the Jews by God and were meant for execution at that time only. There are no commands that say "you [as in you specifically the person reading it, right now] must actively go and kill anyone and everyone that does not repent and convert" like there are in Sura 9 of the Quran.
The militant verses you will find (such as "if a man and woman are caught in the act committing adultery, stone them") were for use within the nation of Israel, not applicable to those outside. Their purpose was to show how God demands absolute perfection from us, and to show us how horrible sin is in God's eyes. Their purpose was to show us that there was no possible way that we could please God in our own actions. They made it clear that were we to be reconciled with God, God would have to do something about it because there was nothing that we could do, no sacrifice, and no level of effort, could provide the perfection on our behalf that God demands. This "God would have to do something" that I refer to is "God would have to provide a perfect sacrifice if we were to have anything to do with God"; the Old Testament/Torah in your case pointed the way to, and proved the need for, the promised sacrifice that God said he would eventually provide (this perfect sacrifice was Jesus, the man who lived perfectly).
God is an omniscient, omnipotent, immortal super-being. God knows everything that ever happened, everything that ever WILL happen, everything each one of us thinks every instant of our lives, everything that every one of us will do every instant of our lives.
So God needed to create Jesus, then have him sacrificed, in order to make us acceptable to God? WTF?
Like God couldn't just "think," "Mankind, with all his flaws, is acceptable to me." ?
Instead it's, "Mankind is really fvcked up. What to do, what to do. I know, I'll create this perfect person and then have him crucified. THAT will make mankind good enough."
Seriously, the degree to which one must suspend all rational processes to accept these religious stories is astounding.
No more astounding than the point you are trying to get across...
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
yea, and if you don't pay jizya what happens? oh that's right, you die. So how is that different? Just raise the jizya to 110% of your income and you can legally kill infidels because they can't pay the jizya.
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
yea, and if you don't pay jizya what happens? oh that's right, you die. So how is that different? Just raise the jizya to 110% of your income and you can legally kill infidels because they can't pay the jizya.
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Originally posted by: brownzilla786
? 2:193. 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 the wrongdoers.
This is an excellent example that surely even some of the most hard core Hamas terrorists could respect, if only we in the US along with Israel could end our ongoing denial of Palestine's right to exist.
You can't get more authoritative to a Muslim than straight out of the Qu'ran.
You're missing the context, there are other verses which are contradictory to that (which I have linked above, and which brown et al, much to their chagrin, have not satisfactorily addressed), which make it clear you must convert to Islam, only Islam, or die. I don't care about "temporary safety harbors" for a singular person, neither does Hamas, terrorists, etc. It's clear if they did then would not be so militant. They are following the Quran to the T, that is why they are militant.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya
Jizya is a tax paid by non believers, let me highlight the important features of Jizya
From the point of view of the Muslim rulers, jizya was a material proof of the non-Muslims' acceptance of subjection to the state and its laws, "just as for the inhabitants it was a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes."[6] In return, non-Muslim citizens were permitted to practice their faith, to enjoy a measure of communal autonomy, to be entitled to Muslim state's protection from outside aggression, to be exempted from military service and taxes levied upon Muslim citizens.
The Arabic term jizya appears in verse Qur'an 9:29
Clearly you are wrong.
yea, and if you don't pay jizya what happens? oh that's right, you die. So how is that different? Just raise the jizya to 110% of your income and you can legally kill infidels because they can't pay the jizya.
:roll:
