Context and the Qur'an.

[Augustus]

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to take your trip to la-la land by yourself. You have no frigging idea what you're saying.

Really? It is the generally accepted (secular) scholarly consensus, as you should know if you have studied it for 20 years.

Are you really insisting that all of this from the OP comes from somewhere other than post-Quran theological texts and the analysis of these (i.e. The same ones that talk about splitting the moon?)

Every word in the Qur'an was revealed by Mohamed between 610 and 632 CE, and is associated with whatever was happening at the time. Therefore, every verse has situational context,

For example, surah 2 is actually the 87th revealed and 12 years into Islam's evolution.

Many verses, although stated for a specific reason, are worded in such a way as to make a statement of fact or to issue a general, on-going command.

For example, verse 9:111 was revealed in late 630 after Mohamed had taken an army north to Tabuk in a failed attempt to battle, and thereby start a war with, the Byzantines. As usual, the Arab Bedouin tribes (Hypocrites) had refused to join Mohamed's army, and the Qur'an was taking them to task for the umpteenth time for their reluctance to see blood spilled (especially their own).

Where do you actually think this comes from?

 

[stevecanuck]

I asked you that question because you were making some claims. If you dont know what that means, how could you make absolute claims about it?

Did you make claims without knowing anything about it? Please clarify.

Here's how that would work:

1. I would post x number of translations from all the most respected translators. I might even through in google's translation from the Arabic.
2. You would come back with a) "cut and paste", and/or b) "appeal to authority fallacy".
3. The above would then be followed by a condescending lecture.

See? We've played this game before. Not again.

Either you tell me what it means and we go from there, or we're done (I predict we're done. Surprise me).

 

[stevecanuck]

Really? It is the generally accepted (secular) scholarly consensus, as you should know if you have studied it for 20 years.

Are you really insisting that all of this from the OP comes from somewhere other than post-Quran theological texts and the analysis of these (i.e. The same ones that talk about splitting the moon?)

Where do you actually think this comes from?

You have a nice day.

 

[firedragon]

Here's how that would work:

1. I would post x number of translations from all the most respected translators. I might even through in google's translation from the Arabic.
2. You would come back with a) "cut and paste", and/or b) "appeal to authority fallacy".
3. The above would then be followed by a condescending lecture.

See? We've played this game before. Not again.

Either you tell me what it means and we go from there, or we're done (I predict we're done. Surprise me).

Irrelevant.

When the Quran speaks of Fee Sabeelillah, it is to say that you are doing something in the path of God following his ground rules. You cant translate it in one word or two words. That is why someone should have the humility to listen and understand. Especially when someone has no understanding of the language.

 

[Augustus]

You have a nice day.

Strange you can never give a straight answer to such a simple question and have to dance around it every time.

I wonder why...

 

[stevecanuck]

When the Quran speaks of Fee Sabeelillah, it is to say that you are doing something in the path of God following his ground rules.

Oh, you mean in exactly the way it's translated by all seven scholars in corpus.quran.com?????? EVERYBODY knows it means that.

What was your point?????

 

[firedragon]

Oh, you mean in exactly the way it's translated by all seven scholars in corpus.quran.com?????? EVERYBODY knows it means that.

What was your point?????

The point is, you have to behave in the path set out by God according to the Qur'an. That has the context of the Qur'an.

It is not that you are murdering people in the name of God. The Quran has already spelt that out very clearly. That is called Kaaloo thakaa samaa biullah. Killing innocent people "In the name God". Which is vividly prohibited, and they will only receive the death sentence for doing that.

Thus, when engaging in war, it has to be according to the rules already set out in the Qur'an. That is working in the path of God. No innocent can be killed in war. And war has its rules. Many.

Thats the point.

 

[stevecanuck]

The point is, you have to behave in the path set out by God according to the Qur'an. That has the context of the Qur'an.

Agreed.

It is not that you are murdering people in the name of God.

Yes it is. That is exactly what the Qur'an says to do.

The Quran has already spelt that out very clearly. That is called Kaaloo thakaa samaa biullah. Killing innocent people "In the name God". Which is vividly prohibited, and they will only receive the death sentence for doing that.

There's the whole point. Who is innocent? Verse 29:68, and several hundred like it, do indeed spell out who in NOT innocent. It describes people who refuse to accept Islam as the most guilty, "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him?".

Thus, when engaging in war, it has to be according to the rules already set out in the Qur'an. That is working in the path of God. No innocent can be killed in war. And war has its rules. Many.

Thats the point.

And rule number 9:29 starts with the command to, "Fight those who believe not in Allah ...". You want vivid? How's that for vivid.

 

[firedragon]

There's the whole point. Who is innocent? Verse 29:68, and several hundred like it, do indeed spell out who in NOT innocent. It describes people who refuse to accept Islam as the most guilty, "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him?".

29:68 does not say anything about killing people.

And rule number 9:29 starts with the command to, "Fight those who believe not in Allah ...". You want vivid? How's that for vivid.

9:29 is about those who have broken a treaty. Please try and read the beginning of that soorah and again, use the same verse you had quoted about "in the path of God" where the Quran as I have already told you about speaks of never killing an innocent person, only at the point of persecution etc etc the Quran stipulates over and over again.

There is no killing innocents in the "Name of God" which is vividly stipulated in the Qur'an as kaaloo thakaa samaa biullah. And they will receive a death sentence.

 

[firedragon]

Yes it is. That is exactly what the Qur'an says to do.

Thats false. The Qur'an states very clearly that killing people in the name of God, as I said Kaaloo thakaa samaa biullah only receives a death sentence. You simply cannot kill people in the name of God.

Maybe you have not read the book.

 

[stevecanuck]

29:68 does not say anything about killing people.

I never said it did.

I quoted it to show that not being a Muslim - rejecting Islam - was the worst thing a person could do, which therefore precludes them from being called innocent.

9:29 is about those who have broken a treaty.

Even if that were true, it's a perfect example of what the OP says. Regardless of the historical context that gives birth to a verse, it still says what it says. And what it says is, "Fight those who believe not in Allah ...". You can't white-wash your way out of that reality.

 

[stevecanuck]

9:29 is about those who have broken a treaty

Ok, @Augustus, time for your hadith lecture again.

 

[stevecanuck]

It is not that you are murdering people in the name of God. The Quran has already spelt that out very clearly. That is called Kaaloo thakaa samaa biullah. Killing innocent people "In the name God". Which is vividly prohibited, and they will only receive the death sentence for doing that.

Verse numbers please.

 

[Augustus]

Ok, @Augustus, time for your hadith lecture again.

AFAIK He doesn't believe hadiths generally reflect real history like you do.

He's talking about context from the Quran only.

 

[firedragon]

I never said it did.

I quoted it to show that not being a Muslim - rejecting Islam - was the worst thing a person could do, which therefore precludes them from being called innocent.

29:68 reprimands people for "creating lies about God". Kadhab. This particular verse is not talking about "rejecting Islam".

Even if that were true, it's a perfect example of what the OP says. Regardless of the historical context that gives birth to a verse, it still says what it says. And what it says is, "Fight those who believe not in Allah ...". You can't white-wash your way out of that reality.

So what you are saying is, within this verse, what a small portion says stands along without the Quranic context? Nope. Context. Again, read the beginning of this chapter. Just read.

Verse numbers please.

Going back to verses 27:48 and 49 it will clearly show you that those who cause corruption in the land are

• those who claim or pretend to believe,

• they swear by God (Allah) and murder people.

Their punishment is death.

And in the city were nine ruffians who were causing “corruption in the land” (Yufsidhoona fil ardhi), and they were not reforming. They said: “Swear by God” to one another that we will attack him and his family at night, and we will then say to his supporters: “We did not witness who murdered his family, and we are being truthful”

 

[firedragon]

Ok, @Augustus, time for your hadith lecture again.

Why are you going to ahadith? Read the chapter at least. The Qur'an.

 

[stevecanuck]

29:68 reprimands people for "creating lies about God". Kadhab. This particular verse is not talking about "rejecting Islam".

That is absurd. It couldn't be more clear. You're floundering.

29:68 - "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him? Is there not a home in Hell for those who reject Faith?"

"Rejecting the truth" could not possibly mean anything other than what 'Allah' bangs on about for 6,236 verses.

So what you are saying is, within this verse, what a small portion says stands along without the Quranic context? Nope. Context. Again, read the beginning of this chapter. Just read.

Words mean what they mean. "Al kafirina" are the subject of this verse. It is they commit the worst crime, which is to reject "the truth (Islam)". Again, how could it be more clear????

Going back to verses 27:48 and 49 it will clearly show you that those who cause corruption in the land are

• those who claim or pretend to believe,

• they swear by God (Allah) and murder people.

Their punishment is death.

And in the city were nine ruffians who were causing “corruption in the land” (Yufsidhoona fil ardhi), and they were not reforming. They said: “Swear by God” to one another that we will attack him and his family at night, and we will then say to his supporters: “We did not witness who murdered his family, and we are being truthful”

That had nothing to do with murdering people in the name of God. That was just regular murder.

 

[firedragon]

29:68 - "And who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects the Truth when it reaches him? Is there not a home in Hell for those who reject Faith?"

So you reject the part about making up lies. Correct. Only a small part of the verse, one verse, and in that verse a few words are picked from a whole book correct?

Words mean what they mean. "Al kafirina"

Nice. So what does Al Kafirina as you yourself has spelled out mean? Lets say a man puts a glove. Does that mean he is "Al Kafirina"? Please explain since you are making linguistic claims.

That had nothing to do with murdering people in the name of God. That was just regular murder.

Nah. You ignored everything. Strange that it was you who asked for it, but then you ignore it.

There is no way general murder can be done. Its impossible. Read the Quran. I mean the book.

Cheers.

 

[KWED]

Killing innocent people "In the name God". Which is vividly prohibited,
Thus, when engaging in war, it has to be according to the rules already set out in the Qur'an. That is working in the path of God. No innocent can be killed in war.

The usual get-out clause for apologists.
Who is "innocent"? According to Ibn Kathir, pretty much anyone who opposes, contradicts, disbelieves or disobeys Islam is not innocent.

Now, you may say "But on what authority does Ibn Kathir speak?", and it is indeed just the opinion of one scholar - but millions of Muslims refer to his tafsir for their guidance (either directly or through an intermediary), so his opinion is of great importance. And there are other examples illustrating this point. Not least Allah himself torturing people whose only "crime" was to not be convinced by Islam.

So we can see that the whole concept of "innocent" is a big, smelly, red herring. Which anyone who has read the Quran and any supporting literature in any detail would know.

And war has its rules. Many.

Actually there aren't than many in the Quran. It basically boils down to "only fight those who fight you" and "if they stop fighting, you stop".
However, those "rules" are pretty meaningless in the context of invading another's land, because they will obviously fight the invader, and they aren't likely to stop until the invader has been expelled or they are defeated.

Take Ukraine as an example, under Quran rules.
The Russian army crosses the border under the pretext of defending oppressed pro-Russians. They are not fighting anyone.
Some Ukrainian units fire on the invading Russians. The Russians are now being attacked so they can also fight.
The Ukrainians refuse to stop fighting while the Russians are occupying their land and fighting them. Therefore the Russians are justified in continued fighting.

Under the Quran "rules of war", what the Russians are doing (strategically) is justified and acceptable.
Even the death of civilians can be justified by Sahih Hadith (Muhammad approved the killing of women and children under the confusion of night attacks).

 

[stevecanuck]

So you reject the part about making up lies.

Ermmm, no. It's right there. I included it in the quote. Is this really all you have left? Telling a lie concerning Allah includes saying he has a son. Every single Christian who prays to Jesus is a Kafr who is committing the greatest crime in the world.

Only a small part of the verse, one verse, and in that verse a few words are picked from a whole book correct?

I made a claim about what the Qur'an says, and then I quoted a verse that shows exactly what I claimed. How can I do more than that?

Nice. So what does Al Kafirina as you yourself has spelled out mean? Lets say a man puts a glove. Does that mean he is "Al Kafirina"? Please explain since you are making linguistic claims.

If there's one thing that is crystal clear in the Qur'an, it's the division between believer and unbeliever. Literally hundreds and hundreds of verses spell that out in mind-numbing repetitious detail. You have zero defense.

Nah. You ignored everything. Strange that it was you who asked for it, but then you ignore it.

There is no way general murder can be done. Its impossible. Read the Quran. I mean the book.

Cheers.

What does that even mean????