-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where in the Qur'an does it say to hurt/kill nonMuslims?
- Thread starter Jaymes
- Start date
The Black Whirlwind
Well-Known Member
more like "...and when the ignorant address them, they say, 'ALLAHU AKBAR!' and chop off their heads, basking in the glorious approval of Allah"Peace said:
Ryan2065
Well-Known Member
See, the thing is... the command is not to YOU.JerryL said:
If a commander in a war tells his soldiers to go out and kill all the Germans they find, does this mean that he wants them to kill these Germans because they are Germans? No, he is working under the assumption that his men realize the Germans they will encounter are enemies with guns who are trying to kill them as well. Does this command also stay in effect when the men encounter Germans back home? Are they to kill any Germans they see when they are back home? No.
This command was written for people of Islam at the time the book was written. Yes you can assume that the ONLY reason these pagans were being killed was because they were not Muslim, but I am assuming you have extremely limited knowledge of the political and social situation at that time. If YOU want to make the assumption that Islam was killing the pagans for the only reason that they were not Muslim, then please do back it up with facts.
For one, I am not interested in what you suspect, only what you can offer evidence to. For two, it says no where that those who heard the word and rejected it were not covered under the sanctuary rule. It specifically says to put them in a safe place, even those that reject it. Logically, if they wanted to just kill the ones who rejected their faith, they would be ordered to do it then, and not later.JerryL said:
Really?JerryL said:
Apparently this is not a reason to fight? Yet its talking about the Pagans... And it is asking them to fight the pagans (which isn't past tense) and it says they were the ones who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first to assult. I would consider these reasons... wouldn't you?009.013 said:
I believe he is refering to the origional Qur'an...JerryL said:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
I was going to comment on this but now I see Michel and Sunstone have done a great job of doing that.Fat Kat Matt said:
JerryL
Well-Known Member
Question: Where in the sayings of German commander Smitz does he say to hurt kill non-Germans.
Answer: When he said "Go kill non-Germans wherever you find them"
You've got a fine metaphor, but a horriffic conclusion based mainly on a straw-man of what I've siad.
If I assume they did what it said for the reasons it said I should support that there aren't unevidenced facts? That's a negative request. I have a burden of proof to show what the Quran says. You, not I, are adding to it; which carries a burden of proof for you.
An interesting response for me agreeing to your unsupported assertion.
The part that says to kill them wherever you find them.
Yes, really. If it didn't, You should have pointed that out some time ago.
"(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous. "
They original Quran will remain unchanged? Tautological.
Ryan2065
Well-Known Member
Again, please quote the passage that denotes the reason? You have failed to do so. All you have quoted was the command... If someone says "Kill pagans wherever you find them" does that immediatly denote that the reason they want to kill them is because they are pagans?JerryL said:
Yes, it says to kill them wherever, not whenever. If you want to assume that the command is to kill both whenever and wherever then you have to back that up. Also, by your logic, if the command is for "wherever" then there is technically no "secure" place. Therefore, because there is also a command for "escore them to a secure place" one can logically assume that there is someplace where they are secure (ie the secure place) so they are not to be killed when they are there. Again, if you want to assert that there is NO secure place, even though it specifically says there is one, please offer more evidence than a bigoted view of a single verse.JerryL said:
So are you saying that there is no other reason listed other than they are Pagan, or are you agreeing that other reasons are listed later in the passage? Or are you saying that no reason is given because it was not pointed out to you until now?JerryL said:
It really would be nice for you to read more than ONE passage... all you had to do was read up to 009.008 to start getting the list of reasons... I just assumed you did that... Sorry for my mistake.
I'm sorry, what is this supposed to mean? So those that have not failed you in aught nor aided anyone against you... Yet they still did all the things that I have mentioned before... Or are you making the assertion that "Pagan" has two meanings here and is refering to two different groups of people?JerryL said:
Sorry, I think he more means in its origional language it will remain unchanged...JerryL said:
JerryL
Well-Known Member
Of course it does. It tells you to kill them because they are pagans. You've made some assertions *why* they would want to kill all the pagans, but you've not offered much in the way of support.
Other than "after the proscribed months", the command is given no timetable of which I am aware. The claim that the command expires is a positive one and carries a burden of proof; though it's not relevent to the topic.
If they are to be slain wherever they are found, the only safe place would be a place they could not be found.
The reasons given later for killing some of the pagans are not universially applicable. The Quran is very clear on this fact when it requires muslims to wait out their alliance before slaying the idoloters who have not committed these acts.
009.007 leads in to 009.008:
"How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for Allah doth love the righteous. "
This section is not talking about the same pagans who they made a treaty with and whom upheld their treaty:
"(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous."
For these, we see 009.005:
"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. "
You've not made your cases:
1. All pagans practiced or supported infanticide by burial alive.
2. This was the reason for slaying them.
3. This somehow changes the fact that it's a Quranic command to hurt/kill non-Muslims.
You have also, interestingly, painted yourself into a corner between justification and sanctuary. You've said that the Quran protects those who surrendered but did not convert... which means they can keep burying those babies without worrying about being slain for it.
Really? Seems to me that Imans all over the world are teaching a corrupted version of it (per your interpretation of it).
Ryan2065
Well-Known Member
?? Huh... Umm... it says kill the pagans... It does not say kill the pagans because they are pagan... Again, please quote the exact part of this passage that says "Kill the pagans because they are pagans"JerryL said:
Yet your claim is that the command doesn't expire... That carries a burden of proof... And I never claimed that the command expired, I merely stated that it could expire, but no talk of the command expiring was given.JerryL said:
Yet they are to be escorted there... So therefore they can be found there... Again, you have faulty logic.JerryL said:
Actually it is talking about the pagans they made a treaty with and whom upheld their treaty. The "treaties" they talk of making are with the ones who want to convert. It then reminds the people of Islam the bad things the pagans have done (ie, the reason they are at war with them) and then goes on to talk about why they cannot make treaties with the ones who don't want treaties... It also says if they convert, then they are your brothers in religion... hrm, what else is there... Oh, sorry, I got carried away. The passage is talking about all pagans in general. =)JerryL said:
I've given evidence... wether you say I havent or not. I have given both statements by a historian and by the encyclopedia that say that the pagan groups before Islam practiced infanticide. If you want to refute this claim, go ahead... But so far I am the only one who has offered any evidence on this matter.JerryL said:
I have only ever said this could be a reason...JerryL said:
Here they talk about evil deeds the pagans have done where they hinder people from His way. Are you saying there is no way this is talking about the females these pagans had buried (which we already know the writer knew about) Are you saying the evil deeds the pagans have done could not possibly mean female infanticide?
I have already stated that it is a Quranic command to hurt/kill non-Muslims awhile ago...JerryL said:
My position is that there is no Qur'an command that tells Islam people to hurt/kill non-Muslims that is in effect today. You are the one that seems hell bent to fight this crusade that the Qur'an does in fact tell them to hurt/kill non-Muslims... The problem is, there is no fight here if that is your only argument. If you are argueing that the passage is in effect currently, then we will have an argument. Whenever I respond it is to your distortions of the passage and trying my best to clear it up with my limited knowledge.Ryan2065 said:
How is this painting myself into a corner? And yes, that is what it means, though want to hear the kicker? If Islam conquers a land, then that land is under their rule... So I believe they are also under their laws (if the nation of Islam wants them to be under their laws.) So, if burying females is illegal, then its illegal to the pagans as well!JerryL said:
Did you even read what I looked up for you? I'll post it again... *sigh* this debate would go by much faster if you actually read things...JerryL said:
So a translation of the Qur'an does not equate to the Qur'an... If two things do not equal each other... then they are not the same... Right?
You have still not mentioned wether or not you are debating the only reason the nation of Islam attacked the Pagans is because they were pagan (per your claim)
Fatmop
Active Member
You're not making much sense. The default reason for it not saying "because they are pagans," without any evidence otherwise, is simply that that would be redundant. If the Quran does not provide any other clear reason to kill all pagans, then there probably isn't one, and it's an ad hoc justification to try to come up with some ambiguous interpretation.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
As pointed out by Fatmop, such a passage would be redundant and silly. If you wish to assert that there is a reason all the pagans are killed, then feel free to support one.
Emphasis mine. It's a negative claim (much like the claim that dwarves didn't make my cake). Further, I did not say that the instruction did expire, I said I am not aware of any timetable for it.
I might actually argue it more if it were at all relevent to the topic. It is not. But feel free to support your positive claim (that it expires) if you wish to and are capable of it.
"This command was written for people of Islam at the time the book was written." - You: Post 68
"Yes, it says to kill them wherever, not whenever. If you want to assume that the command is to kill both whenever and wherever then you have to back that up. Also, by your logic, if the command is for "wherever" then there is technically no "secure" place. Therefore, because there is also a command for "escore them to a secure place" one can logically assume that there is someplace where they are secure (ie the secure place) so they are not to be killed when they are there." - You Post 70
There are others quote by you on the subject... but again, it's off-topic.
Only if I concluded such a place existed. I merely offered up the only criteria I could think of that would not result in non-converts being killed. The fact that it's a practical impossability is unintersting.
Support this positive claim.
BTW, if so you are back to "kill all who don't convert".
It was a practice by some. I don't disagree with that. Your apologetic for this passage is far more specific.
Because they were told by the village dog "could" be a reason. Interesting to see you moving to hypotheticals.
Are you asserting that this is what being talked about? Prove it.
Are you asserting that this was the reason for the command to kill pagans wherever you find them? Prove it.
Then the topic post is asked and answered. What are you arguing about?
I have no idea if there is or is not. Certainly, you've not offered any scriptural reason to believe the command in 009 expired.
"I have already stated that it [Sura 009] is a Quranic command to hurt/kill non-Muslims awhile ago..." - Ryan 2065 post #72
How is positing on possible realitites clearing something up? You are discussing mostly unsupported material from entirely outside the text to argue a position you cannot support.
I'm statin that this passage is a qurannic command to hurt / kill non-Muslims. You've agreed "some time ago".
So then a logical command would have been "conquer pagan lands" not "kill pagans wherever you find them"... realize that "living under your rule" is somwhere they can be found... or are you also asserting that there were no Pagans living anywhere in Muslim lands at the time?
Same to you.
I have no idea what you are babblig about. Is an exact copy of the Quran the Quran, or is it a copy? Seems to me a translation would apply equally well or poorly.
The criteria for killing someone was "pagan" therefore they were killed *because* they were pagan. Now, if you want to discuss *why* the pagans were targeted, start a thread.
The Black Whirlwind
Well-Known Member
many do do such a thing, and claim their inspiration is the koran. There must be something wrong with the religion if that is how many act.Sunstone said:
The Black Whirlwind
Well-Known Member
There must be something fundamentally wrong with the islamic creed for many muslims to take the Koran, read some passages, and say, "allah condones me killing the infidel, so i will do so"
White people have no such creed, and all races have the potential do subjugate another.
White people have no such creed, and all races have the potential do subjugate another.
Fatmop
Active Member
Realize first that I don't condone the killing of innocents or 'infidels,' and that as an outside observer of religion, I'm a bit biased.
Still, it's easy to single out Islam for this little quirk. Perhaps there is too much ambiguity in the 'prophetic' words of the Quran, and extremists take out snippets to support their views; however, I would argue that it is more Islamic societal conditions than Islam itself that causes such radical extremism. All the major Judeo-Christian holy texts have the capacity to be interpreted as inciting violence; whether individuals do so or not depends on the conditions they live in.
The Black Whirlwind
Well-Known Member
We're not talking about Judaism or Christianity. Were talking about islam. While Christianity committed horrible atrocities in it's past, it has reformed, and stopped, many years ago. islam has never stopped, it is regressing.
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
Have you istened to Pat Robertson lately?Fat Kat Matt said:
Regards,
Scott
Fatmop
Active Member
And you're talking about it in a very biased way, which is why I responded with that post. I, personally, think there's something 'fundamentally wrong' with EVERY holy doctrine; I do not agree that Islam, out of all the others, is any more prone to inciting violence than any other religion.
You can pull just as many verses out of Christian doctrine to show that it, too, is filled with 'hate and evil.*' Does that mean all Christianity is a hate-filled and evil religion?
Plenty of people, left and right, are criticizing Islamic Fundamentalism. It is not all of Islam that has brought us these terrorists, just as it is not all of Christianity that brought us Hitler or any other myriad kooks claiming to work in God's name. You paint Islam as a whole with too broad a brush.
*Robertson does so all the time.
Popeyesays
Well-Known Member
Have you ever considered that the Qur'an was not written in English and the word translated by SOME as "friend" may have better meanings that do not have the connotation you fear?Fat Kat Matt said:
Here is the verse the twists your tail:
"51 O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
52 And thou seest those in whose heart is a disease race toward them, saying: We fear lest a change of fortune befall us. And it may happen that Allah will vouchsafe (unto thee) the victory, or a commandment from His presence. Then will they repent them of their secret thoughts.
53 Then will the believers say (unto the people of the Scripture): are these they who swore by Allah their most binding oaths that they were surely with you ? Their works have failed, and they have become the losers.
54 O ye who believe! Whoso of you becometh a renegade from his religion, (know that in his stead) Allah will bring a people whom He loveth and who love Him, humble toward believers, stern toward disbelievers, striving in the way of Allah, and fearing not the blame of any blamer. Such is the grace of Allah which He giveth unto whom He will. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.
55 Your guardian can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poordue, and bow down (in prayer).
56 And whoso taketh Allah and His messenger and those who believe for guardian (will know that), lo! the party of Allah, they are the victorious."
(The Qur'an (Pickthall tr), Sura 5 - The Food)
Yusuf Ali uses friends but adds "protectors" which is well-translated by "patrons" as does Palmer.
"51. O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
52. Those in whose heart is a disease, thou seest how eagerly they run about amongst them, saying: "We do fear lest a change of fortune bring us disaster." Ah! perhaps Allah will give (thee) victory, or a decision according to His Will. Then will they repent of the thoughts which they secretly harbored in their hearts.
53. And those who believe will say: "Are these the men who swore their strongest oaths by Allah, that they were with you?" All that they do will be in vain, and they will fall into (nothing but) ruin.
54. O ye who believe! if any from among you turn back from his faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom He will love as they will love Him, lowly with the believers, mighty against the rejecters, fighting in the way of Allah, and never afraid of the reproaches of such as find fault. That is the Grace of Allah, which He will bestow on whom He pleaseth: and Allah encompasseth all, and He knoweth all things.
55. Your (real) friends are (no less than) Allah, His Messenger, and the (fellowship of) believers, those who establish regular prayers and regular charity, and they bow down humbly (in worship).
56. As to those who turn (for friendship) to Allah, His Messenger, and the (fellowship of) believers, it is the fellowship of Allah that must certainly triumph."
Palmer likes the word "patron" alone.
"O ye who believe! take not the Jews and Christians for your patrons: they are patrons of each other; but whoso amongst you takes them for patrons, verily, he is of them, and, verily, God guides not an unjust people.
Thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a sickness vieing with them; they say, 'We fear lest there befall us a reverse.' It may be God will give the victory, or an order from Himself, and they may awake repenting of what they thought in secret to themselves. Those who believe say, 'Are these they who swore by God with their most strenuous oath that they were surely with you?'- their works are in vain and they shall wake the losers.
O ye who believe! whoso is turned away from his religion- God will bring (instead) a people whom He loves and who love Him, lowly to believers, lofty to unbelievers, strenuous in the way of God, fearing not the blame of him who blames."
(The Qur'an (E.H. Palmer tr), Sura 5 - The Table)
I am no scholar of Arabic, but I can see the problems caused by translation. No translation taken by itself can provide a PERFECT picture of the intent of the author in the original language. That's why parallel Bibles and Qur'ans are the best tool one can find for reading sacred text from another language than one's own.
Regards,
Scott