Where in the Qur'an does it say to hurt/kill nonMuslims?

[TashaN]

The passage discsses two groups of people:
1. Those who are your enemies, have aided yuor enemies, or are not holding to their part of an alliance. Attacke them now.
2. Those who are not your enemies, have not aided your enemies, and have held true to their allians with you. Wait until the months of alliance are over, then kill them.

Are you kidding me !!!

At that time the pagans all gathered and they were like if you are not with me so you are against me as Mr. Bush said once. So, all of them were against Mohammed (PBUH) ans his followers whether by fighting them or planning and helping the tribe who do fight.
Nevertheless, Allah is all mercifull that's why he ordered to kill the pagan who still fighting but to wait a little bit for the other tribes who were doing so in the past until they go out from the Muslims land.

BTW, pagans are pagans and the people of the book weren't included in that passage and you have no proof for your claim, as you used to say: SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

 

[Steve]

This I agree with, but the thing is, how many nations that are around today have not had some sort of campaign of conquest?

Your fogetting somthing very important, Islam is not a nation, it is a religion - one that many claim is peaceful and tolerant etc.
All you have to do is look at its history especially towards its beginnings and you will get an idea of what it really is.
For eg the crusades were a reaction to the Islamic Jihad..

The crusaders were reacting to over four centuries of relentless Islamic Jihad, which had wiped out over 50% of all the Christians in the world and conquered over 60% of all the Christian lands on earth – before the crusades even began..... Far from the crusaders being the aggressors, it was the Muslim armies which had spread Islam from Saudi Arabia across the whole of Christian North Africa into Spain and even France within the first century after the death of Muhammad..... These Muslim invaders destroyed over 3,200 Christian churches just in the first 100 years of Islam.
rest of article at - http://www.frontline.org.za/article...s_all_about.htm


But the intolerance didnt end there consider the following -
THE FORGOTTEN HOLOCAUSTS
Slavery, Terrorism and Islam documents hundreds of massacres of Christian populations by Muslim rulers. For example: In 1860 over 12,000 Christians were slaughtered in Lebanon. In 1876 14,700 Bulgarians were murdered by the Turks. 200,000 Armenian Christians were slaughtered by the Turks in Bayazid in 1877. And in 1915 the Turks massacred over 1.5 million Armenian Christians. As recently as September 1922 the Turkish army destroyed the ancient city of Smyrna with its 300,000 Christian population.

INTOLERANT AND INCONSISTENT
Despite Islam proclaiming itself as a religion of tolerance, no Muslim countries allow freedom of religion. Despite the Saudi Arabian government funding the building of thousands of mosques in Christian lands, no church or synagogue is tolerated in Saudi Arabia. Nor can any Saudi Arabian citizen be a Christian. Despite Muhammad being called a “prophet of peace”, he engaged in 47 battles and raids on caravans in his lifetime. It is inconsistent of Islam to insist on the cutting off of the hand of a thief when Muhammad and his successors, the Caliphas, engaged in wholesale theft, raiding caravans, kidnapping hostages for ransom and looting homes.

INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY
The persecution of Christians by Muslims has become a taboo subject in Western circles. Over thirteen centuries of religious discrimination and persecution, causing the suffering, oppression, murder and enslavement of countless millions has been buried under a thick whitewash of myths of “Islamic tolerance”. The deceit, cowardice and silence of all too many Western journalists and academics continues to facilitate the religious discrimination and persecutions of radical Muslims to this day.

The intellectual dishonesty of those Westerners who engage in academic gymnastics to justify the invasion of other people's lands; the looting, pillaging, raping, murdering and enslaving of whole peoples, needs to be exposed. The hypocrisy of those who justify the military aggression of Muslims, but condemn those who inflicted defeats upon these Muslim invaders needs to be challenged. The fiction that “Jihad has never been an aggressive, but only a defensive concept”, should be dismissed with the contempt that such deception deserves. What were Saudi Arabians defending in Spain?
rest found at http://www.frontline.org.za/news/end_of_islam.htm

You simply must be ignorant of history to claim that Jihad is defensive and that muhummed and his followers proclaimed peace and tolerance.. Perhaps willfully ignorant to maintain the whole "lets be tolerant of everything" attitude that has sweep over our cultures.

 

[JerryL]

I was not aware that nations were in the practice of "conquering" lands more than once... Why would one need to conquer a land after they already conquered it? It would be like the north attacking the south again in the US... the war is over..

The command was to kill idoloters wherever you find them. After the idoloter got sanctuary, was released, and did not convert to Islam, what would they be? Oh yes, an Idoloter. What was ordered to be done with idoloters? Kill them wherever you find them.

It has already been supported.... Or did you forget the earlier post?

It's a side-topic, and one I'm happy to debate on an appropriate thread.

You are the one who suggests that it means "All people who are not Muslim." I have submitted the english translation of pagan as my evidence... You suggest that this word is not the right translation, so please, post evidence of what the word really means. A good source would be the origional writings in the origional language and showing what the origional word means.

I agree. You shoudl start a thread on this topic.

The difference between being buried alive and just killed outright is a little different... The outcome is the same but the way you get there is pretty bad.

Also an interesting thread, but not the topic of this one.

Seeing as the "pagans" as we were told is in reference to the pagans in the area who were reported to bury their female children alive, i'd say it has alot to do with why arms were called up against them.

Wheter every pagan in Arabia was buying children alive is something you cannot support; but is also fair for another topic.

Not ever pagan... As stated, pagan group, and you are insulting my reading skills? I presented evidence that the pagan groups in the area practiced barbaric deeds such as burying female children alive. You apparently believe that they all did not do this but have presented no evidence for your position.

1. The Quran commands "kill idoloters wherever you find them? "
2. You say "that's OK, they buried their children
3. You just asserted that not every idoloter buried their children.
4. The Quran says to kill every idoloter.

This will be an interesting discussion if you open a thread on your two assertions:
1. All those the Quran discusses killing here were guilty of killing their children.
2. It's appropriate to kill of everyone because of this practice.

Yes, this passage says that when the treaties end, make war with them again. This seems to be a war against their morals (burying children alive) so what they want the soldiers to do is kill the pagan that will not listen to their values. Also, how exactly is this on topic? You have posted this passage to show that Muslims are called to kill all non-Muslims, and I am pretty sure I have already shown that A. pagans does not refer to all non-Muslims, and B. that this is not an outstanding order for Muslims to follow today, because it refered to the pagans that were around at that time.

You are adding a tense which I did not. You seem to really enjoy doing that. This is a passage where Muslims are ordered to hurt/kill non-Muslims because of their non-Muslim-ness. That is what the post asked for and that is what I provided.

Nope, as stated, the pagan cultures. Not every one =)

Then how did the Muslims manage to conquer the entire pennensula?

I have already stated that they were not to wipe them out (them being people) but to wipe the pagan practices out. Things back then were done with force, and you still have not shown how this passage shows that Muslims of today are called to kill all non-Muslims...

You may state all you like. I'm only interested in what you can support. The quran orders them to be slain and makes no mention of a reason or criteria other than being idoloters. Your assertion doesn't jibe with a plain reading.

 

[JerryL]

At that time the pagans all gathered and they were like if you are not with me so you are against me as Mr. Bush said once. So, all of them were against Mohammed (PBUH) ans his followers whether by fighting them or planning and helping the tribe who do fight.

So, you would support the invasion of France for not supporting US efforts?

Never-the-less, you've made a far stronger point than I was. According to what you just said, it would be incumbant on all Muslims to war against all non-Muslims for the purpose of converting them... after all, non-muslims are not with them, therefore against them, therefore aggressors.

BTW, pagans are pagans and the people of the book weren't included in that passage and you have no proof for your claim, as you used to say: SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

Christians are idoloters because they make idols. Do you not believe that the crucifix is an image of something in heaven or Earth? Is it not expressly a graven image under Muslim law?

 

[JerryL]

jerry l, i simply have a question. did you get this from the holy quran or from hadiths? cause there is a world of difference between them.

Quran, part 9. Where I got it from has been quoted repeatedly.

 

[Ryan2065]

Your fogetting somthing very important, Islam is not a nation, it is a religion

yet it started as an Islamic state... this is what is being referred to.

All you have to do is look at its history especially towards its beginnings and you will get an idea of what it really is.

I don't get this... How exactly does the history of a group of people dictate what they will do in the future? The Islam people who preach that Islam is a religion of peace are the ones who look at their own holy book and see it as something that preaches peace. Yet others who have never read the whole book seem to proclaim that they do not know what their own holy book means and then use different translations and mis-quotes from bigoted sites to try and say that the book actually does proclaim to go out and kill all non-muslims.

The crusaders were reacting to over four centuries of relentless Islamic Jihad, which had wiped out over 50% of all the Christians in the world and conquered over 60% of all the Christian lands on earth – before the crusades even began..... Far from the crusaders being the aggressors, it was the Muslim armies which had spread Islam from Saudi Arabia across the whole of Christian North Africa into Spain and even France within the first century after the death of Muhammad..... These Muslim invaders destroyed over 3,200 Christian churches just in the first 100 years of Islam.

And this shows that the Qur'an preaches violence? Hitler was christian, he comited mass genocide on the Jews... So the Bible must advocate a holy war on the Jews right?

You simply must be ignorant of history to claim that Jihad is defensive and that muhummed and his followers proclaimed peace and tolerance..

I never made the claim that Jihad is defensive. Also, by "muhummed's followers" are you saying that all that follow Islam do not proclaim peace and tolerance?

Perhaps willfully ignorant to maintain the whole "lets be tolerant of everything" attitude that has sweep over our cultures.

The debate here is "Where in the Qur'an does it say to hurt/kill Non-Muslims" I believe you are posting in the wrong thread...

The command was to kill idoloters wherever you find them. After the idoloter got sanctuary, was released, and did not convert to Islam, what would they be? Oh yes, an Idoloter. What was ordered to be done with idoloters? Kill them wherever you find them.

Again, as the passage reads...

If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.

Did you read the part "escort him to where he can be secure"?

Wheter every pagan in Arabia was buying children alive is something you cannot support; but is also fair for another topic.

As I stated already...

Also, while I would agree that it is hard to imagine that all pagan groups practiced female infanticide through Arabia, it would seem a great number of them did because historians are so ready to group pre-Islam Arabia people in the female infanticide group. Though now that I re-read it, it only says that they were tolerant of female infanticide... So while probably not everyone actually did this, they apparently did not question it.

I've already said that probably not EVERY pagan person practiced this, but they were tolerant of it.

1. The Quran commands "kill idoloters wherever you find them? "

Great job at mis-quoting, well more leaving out part of the quote. The command was basically "Fight and slay the pagans, but if they repent dont touch them"

2. You say "that's OK, they buried their children

No, I say that is a reason other than "God told us to do it." Which is the justification of many cities that the Jews destroyed in the OT.

3. You just asserted that not every idoloter buried their children.
4. The Quran says to kill every idoloter.

Again, says to kill all that do not repent. Also, those that did not bury their children did allow others to do this.

This will be an interesting discussion if you open a thread on your two assertions:
1. All those the Quran discusses killing here were guilty of killing their children.
2. It's appropriate to kill of everyone because of this practice.

Sigh... AGAIN, the actual command was to kill them if they do not repent... IE, kill them if they do not stop this practice of killing their children...

You are adding a tense which I did not. You seem to really enjoy doing that. This is a passage where Muslims are ordered to hurt/kill non-Muslims because of their non-Muslim-ness. That is what the post asked for and that is what I provided.

So your example of Muslims being commanded to hurt/kill non-Muslims is an order for Muslims to attack pagans around their cities when the book was first written? I am pretty sure the OP was looking for present day reference... But if your only evidence to show that Islam is not the religion of peace today because many many years ago they were commanded to kill pagans who killed their own babies...

Then how did the Muslims manage to conquer the entire pennensula?

I believe they did this as a Nation and not a Religion... Either way, as far as I know, there is nothing in the Qur'an telling them to do this...

You may state all you like. I'm only interested in what you can support. The quran orders them to be slain and makes no mention of a reason or criteria other than being idoloters. Your assertion doesn't jibe with a plain reading.

It switches between pagan's and idolters.. So seeing as they describe pagans as people who bury their female children, I would assume the actual word they used is not well translated into english... Anyone who is familar with the Qur'an know if there are any passages that describes what a pagan is?

Christians are idoloters because they make idols. Do you not believe that the crucifix is an image of something in heaven or Earth? Is it not expressly a graven image under Muslim law?

You switch between idoloters and pagans to suite your needs... Please either stick with one or realize that neither word probably means what they were actually trying to say in that passage but is just as close as english will get.

 

[JerryL]

Did you read the part "escort him to where he can be secure"?

Sure did. Where exactly would that be when you are to "slay idoloters wherever you find them"?

I've already said that probably not EVERY pagan person practiced this, but they were tolerant of it.

An assertion of fact. Open a thread and prove it.

Great job at mis-quoting, well more leaving out part of the quote. The command was basically "Fight and slay the pagans, but if they repent dont touch them"

Great job at mis-quoting, it tells you not to fight ones that mecome Muslims (they would not be Pagans then would they?) and also tells you to give sanctuary and release those who ask for it (though it does not proscribe you from killing them later as ordered under the "slay idoloters wherever you find them" rule).

No, I say that is a reason other than "God told us to do it." Which is the justification of many cities that the Jews destroyed in the OT.

An assertion of fact. Open a thread and prove it.

Again, says to kill all that do not repent. Also, those that did not bury their children did allow others to do this.

No mention of baby-killing this in Sura 9. (BTW, The Jews supposedly practiced this for quite some time). But feel free to open a thread on your claim regarding this and prove your claim.

Sigh... AGAIN, the actual command was to kill them if they do not repent... IE, kill them if they do not stop this practice of killing their children...

No mention of killing babies is mentioned. No exception for ones who do not kill babies is mentioned. There's no support that "repent" is in any way related to infantacide. Feel free to support your claim that it is.

So your example of Muslims being commanded to hurt/kill non-Muslims is an order for Muslims to attack pagans around their cities when the book was first written? I am pretty sure the OP was looking for present day reference... But if your only evidence to show that Islam is not the religion of peace today because many many years ago they were commanded to kill pagans who killed their own babies...

The modern attrocities being committed in the name of Allah were not asked for; only Quranic passages instruting the killing/hurting of non-Muslims.

I believe they did this as a Nation and not a Religion... Either way, as far as I know, there is nothing in the Qur'an telling them to do this...

They did it as a "nation of peace"? Interesting position.

It switches between pagan's and idolters.. So seeing as they describe pagans as people who bury their female children

Which part of the surah?

I would assume the actual word they used is not well translated into english... Anyone who is familar with the Qur'an know if there are any passages that describes what a pagan is?

Really? Cite.

You switch between idoloters and pagans to suite your needs... Please either stick with one or realize that neither word probably means what they were actually trying to say in that passage but is just as close as english will get.

My words are not all that important. What's important is what the Quran actually says. Support your definition.

 

[Popeyesays]

Are you kidding me !!!

At that time the pagans all gathered and they were like if you are not with me so you are against me as Mr. Bush said once. So, all of them were against Mohammed (PBUH) ans his followers whether by fighting them or planning and helping the tribe who do fight.
Nevertheless, Allah is all mercifull that's why he ordered to kill the pagan who still fighting but to wait a little bit for the other tribes who were doing so in the past until they go out from the Muslims land.

BTW, pagans are pagans and the people of the book weren't included in that passage and you have no proof for your claim, as you used to say: SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM.

The PAGANS referred to are the Mecca idol-worshippers, who threatened Muhammed with death and the death of His family and followers, drove them into the desert, pursued them to their sanctuary of Medina, constantly attacked Medina, even besieging it for a period of time. All with the threat of death against Muhammed and all who followed Him.

This was pursued over a course of years with yearly assaults against Medina.

Finally the idolators were beaten, driven back and Mecca fell to the army of Medina. Whereupon the idolators largely repented, and converted to Islam, the Qiblih was cleansed of the idols, and Medina and Mecca both became cities of Islam.

Faced wi9th the constant threat of death and destruction posed by the idolators of Mecca most of the rules of warfare demanded by the Qur'an were put in place. Warfare was righteous only in defense from attack and those who attacked Islam and its followers. This is what it is in this day and age as well.

Don't blame Muhammed or the Qur'an for the behavior of those who would warp and distort Islam in order to pursue political purposes. Anymore than one would blame Jesus and the Bible for the warping and distortion of those who would try to make the cause of Christ a political tool.

Regards,

Scott

 

[JerryL]

The PAGANS referred to are the Mecca idol-worshippers, who threatened Muhammed with death and the death of His family and followers, drove them into the desert, pursued them to their sanctuary of Medina, constantly attacked Medina, even besieging it for a period of time. All with the threat of death against Muhammed and all who followed Him.

"(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. "

Tell me about how the people who have not failed in their alliance, nor aided Mohammed's enemies were "constantly attacking" and "threatening with death"?

BTW, the same accounts about people threatening Muhammed with death have Muhammed ordering the assassination of others (interestingly, "assassian" is an arab word regarding a cult of Muslims)... but I digress.

Finally the idolators were beaten, driven back and Mecca fell to the army of Medina. Whereupon the idolators largely repented, and converted to Islam, the Qiblih was cleansed of the idols, and Medina and Mecca both became cities of Islam.

Those who converted religion were spared.

Don't blame Muhammed or the Qur'an for the behavior of those who would warp and distort Islam in order to pursue political purposes. Anymore than one would blame Jesus and the Bible for the warping and distortion of those who would try to make the cause of Christ a political tool.

I've only been discussing the Quran directly. I've not done any such blaming.

 

[Popeyesays]

If anyone would like a digital copy of Muhammed and the Course of Islam, by H. M. Balyuzi can download it as part of the Ocean Religious Research Library available for no cost at http://www.bahai-education.org/ocean/

This is from the introduction:
"The present writer believes in the God-given mission of Muhammad. Islam and its Holy Book, the Qur'án, he believes to have represented God's purpose and guidance for mankind. The power of Muhammad, he believes, did not reside in human ingenuity, not in the production of supernatural feats, nor in the arraying of angels on the battlefield, but in the fundamental fact of His being the chosen Messenger of God, the vehicle of the Logos. He could and did re-create the lives of men. He brought them the gift of second birth. On the basis of His teachings and by virtue of the enlightenment of His followers, there arose a civilization and a culture, which, though monotheistic, did not preclude pagan thought; which brought within their pale the philosophy and the science of ancient Greece, without giving the heritage of the past a supernatural aura and sanction. Even more, this civilization and this culture were not wrought by Arabs alone or;by Muslims alone. People of other creeds and many nations were partners in this great adventure. Tolerance was engendered by the Faith of the Muslims and was practised. 'Those who have 4 believed the Jews, the Christians and the Sabeans, who believe in God and the Day of Judgement, and do righteously, have their reward with their Lord; neither is there fear for them, nor are they to grieve' -- so unequivocal was the pronouncement of the Qur'án (ii, 59). The warning and the promise, which the following verse contains, should also be noted: 'Do not revile them who worship others besides God, lest they, moved by malice and ignorance revile God; thus have we adorned every nation with their own works, and unto God shall they hereafter return, and He shall inform them of that which they have done.'[1] (vi, 108.)"
(H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the Course of Islam, p. 4)

Regards,
Scott

 

[TashaN]

The modern attrocities being committed in the name of Allah were not asked for; only Quranic passages instruting the killing/hurting of non-Muslims.

You silly claim that Allah ordered the Muslims to kill all non-Muslims around is baseless and you are just trying hardly to prove somthing which dosn't exist, because the neighbor of prophet Mohammed(PBUH) at that time was by the way a Jew.

Get over it

 

[JerryL]

You silly claim that Allah ordered the Muslims to kill all non-Muslims around is baseless and you are just trying hardly to prove somthing which dosn't exist, because the neighbor of prophet Mohammed(PBUH) at that time was by the way a Jew.

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

This I agree with, but the thing is, how many nations that are around today have not had some sort of campaign of conquest?

Very few. I'm not judging, I'm just stating what I have learned.

Right, but how could Islam know about pagan groups "beyond" ? Also, while I would agree that it is hard to imagine that all pagan groups practiced female infanticide through Arabia, it would seem a great number of them did because historians are so ready to group pre-Islam Arabia people in the female infanticide group. Though now that I re-read it, it only says that they were tolerant of female infanticide... So while probably not everyone actually did this, they apparently did not question it.

They knew about pagan, Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian groups outside of Arabia because they regularly raided caravans and towns in the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, and they also traded with other peoples. All of this is irrelevant to the topic at hand, anyway.

I more think the female infanticide thing was the reason Islam was so harsh on the pagans. It is my impression that, while they did conquer other cities by non-pagan groups, they were not as harsh on those occupitants as they were on the pagan groups.

You are absolutely right, they were much harsher on pagan groups.

The Horde that invaded Russia was Muslim (I am pretty sure they converted to Islam before they invaded Russia)

They were?

and they would attack Russian cities and just destroy these cities. But one province of Russia basically told the Horde that they would submit to their rule and the Horde did not attack these Russians at all and even let them keep everything pretty much the same. It would seem to go with what these passages say about Islam..

I totally agree. The Qur'an does not call for indiscriminate slaughter any more than the Roman Empire's goal was the indiscriminate slaughter of the Gauls. What it does call for is domination and subjugation. Of course, that was then and this is now, and modern Muslims are free to adapt their traditions to the times just as Jews and Christians can.

YmirGF-- You have some very good points, but in all fairness, I did learn that Muhammad and his early followers were persecuted by Meccan tribal elites who saw him as a threat.

 

[Ryan2065]

Very few. I'm not judging, I'm just stating what I have learned.

Out of the powerful nations that I know, I am pretty sure that most of them have fought to conquer lands to make their empire bigger... Even the US did this, they fought the Indians for their land... I was just pointing out that one shouldn't really single out the nation of Islam for conquering lands many many years ago when pretty much every other nation on this planet has done it at some point in their history.

They knew about pagan, Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian groups outside of Arabia because they regularly raided caravans and towns in the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, and they also traded with other peoples.

Ah, good point.

They were?

Oh, sorry... Batu is the one who led the Horde when they invaded Russia. His brother who took over after Batu invaded Russia (and after Batu died) had converted to Islam, and it was about a hundred years after that until the Golden Horde (The part of the Horde established in Russia) actually converted to Islam.

 

[Ryan2065]

An assertion of fact. Open a thread and prove it.

I have already provided evidence for this during this thread. If you believe it to be wrong, prove it.

Great job at mis-quoting, it tells you not to fight ones that mecome Muslims (they would not be Pagans then would they?) and also tells you to give sanctuary and release those who ask for it (though it does not proscribe you from killing them later as ordered under the "slay idoloters wherever you find them" rule).

You see to be overlooking the part that says "and escort him to where he can be secure." If they are being escored to a safe place, surely they are SAFE in the safe place... Unless of course you are saying that the secure place they were to go to was not safe... If you are saying that, then PROVE IT.

An assertion of fact. Open a thread and prove it.

Uhh.. its in the Bible dude... Have you ever actually read either the Qur'an or the Bible? Numbers 30:50-56 is what I believe you are looking for... Here is a quick snip from those verses...

50. And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying,
51. Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan ;
52. Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places:
53. And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it.

No mention of baby-killing this in Sura 9. (BTW, The Jews supposedly practiced this for quite some time). But feel free to open a thread on your claim regarding this and prove your claim.

I have already given evidence that the pagans in the area of the nation of Islam did practice this... You seem pretty quick to debate any statement made...

The modern attrocities being committed in the name of Allah were not asked for; only Quranic passages instruting the killing/hurting of non-Muslims.

I am pretty sure that the OP was about all non-muslims... Not as narrow as you are stating "passages instructing the killing/hurting of non-Muslims from any time period" But if you are only debating that the Islamic people were ordered to wage war on the Pagans (as defined by the Qur'an) at that time, then I will not argue with you. Or are you suggesting that the Qur'an tells people to kill these pagans to present day?

They did it as a "nation of peace"? Interesting position.

I stated that they were a nation that had Islam as their main religion. The war that one nation commits that has Islam as their main religion does not necessarily reflect on the teachings of the religion, rather the mentality of the nation, and many political issues at that time.

Which part of the surah?

Sigh, I guess it doesn't say it directly. The Qur'an mentiones the baby killing that was happening (it doesn't say who did it, but history tells us the pagans of that era did it.) So the pagans around the area buried their female children alive, and the Islam people were well aware of it and did not agree with it.

Really? Cite.

Cite what?

Anyone who is familar with the Qur'an know if there are any passages that describes what a pagan is?

This is a question asking if there is someone who knows of passages that describe "pagan"

My words are not all that important. What's important is what the Quran actually says. Support your definition.

Support my claim that we probably don't have an exact word for what "pagans" and "idolters" are in the Qur'an?

You seem to be big on proving things Jerry yet you yourself have made many claims through this thread and have not supported them with a proof of any kind.

You are currently zero'ed in on one passage that does prove your point. There is a passage in the Qur'an that tells them to hurt/kill non-muslims. I was not aware that you were only debating that there was a passage in the Qur'an that told them to once upon a time kill people hundreds of years ago. When I read the OP I took it to mean that the OP was talking about any passages in the Qur'an that talk about current events, ie passages in the Qur'an that tell Muslims to hurt/kill non-Muslims today.

 

[JerryL]

I have already provided evidence for this during this thread. If you believe it to be wrong, prove it.

No, really, you have not. Feel free to open a thread on it and do so.

You see to be overlooking the part that says "and escort him to where he can be secure." If they are being escored to a safe place, surely they are SAFE in the safe place... Unless of course you are saying that the secure place they were to go to was not safe... If you are saying that, then PROVE IT.

No, I was discussing exactly that topic... asking where could be safe considering the mandate.

Uhh.. its in the Bible dude... Have you ever actually read either the Qur'an or the Bible? Numbers 30:50-56 is what I believe you are looking for... Here is a quick snip from those verses...

You are answering the wrong question. You said:

No, I say that is a reason other than "God told us to do it."


​

Please open an appropriate thread and prove that claim.

I have already given evidence that the pagans in the area of the nation of Islam did practice this... You seem pretty quick to debate any statement made...

You have asserted it. I agree that some did. What you have not established is that all groups did, nor that this was the reason for issung the command to slay them, nor that this is a valid reason.

I am pretty sure that the OP was about all non-muslims... Not as narrow as you are stating "passages instructing the killing/hurting of non-Muslims from any time period" But if you are only debating that the Islamic people were ordered to wage war on the Pagans (as defined by the Qur'an) at that time, then I will not argue with you. Or are you suggesting that the Qur'an tells people to kill these pagans to present day?

He's welcome to filter out or respond to anything he likes. It's not for me or you to debate his underlying intent for him.

I stated that they were a nation that had Islam as their main religion. The war that one nation commits that has Islam as their main religion does not necessarily reflect on the teachings of the religion, rather the mentality of the nation, and many political issues at that time.

Mohammed was in charge IIRC.

Sigh, I guess it doesn't say it directly. The Qur'an mentiones the baby killing that was happening (it doesn't say who did it, but history tells us the pagans of that era did it.) So the pagans around the area buried their female children alive, and the Islam people were well aware of it and did not agree with it.

But it never offers any connection between this act and the command to "slay them wherever you find them"... which is my point.

Cite what?

Cite support for your claim that your definition of the Arabic word is correct and that "anyone familiar with te Quran knows this".

This is a question asking if there is someone who knows of passages that describe "pagan"

Yes it is. Give yourself a cookie.

Support my claim that we probably don't have an exact word for what "pagans" and "idolters" are in the Qur'an?

No, support your claim that it means what you say it means.

You seem to be big on proving things Jerry yet you yourself have made many claims through this thread and have not supported them with a proof of any kind.

Claim: The Quran has a passage which instructs it's followers to harm/kill nonMuslims (because they are non-muslims).
Support: Sura 9.

Claim: The Muslims of the time did indeed engage in a war of aggression.
Support: They conqured the Arab pennessula. It's incredible to believe that everyone in the region "attacked them first".

You are currently zero'ed in on one passage that does prove your point. There is a passage in the Qur'an that tells them to hurt/kill non-muslims. I was not aware that you were only debating that there was a passage in the Qur'an that told them to once upon a time kill people hundreds of years ago. When I read the OP I took it to mean that the OP was talking about any passages in the Qur'an that talk about current events, ie passages in the Qur'an that tell Muslims to hurt/kill non-Muslims today.

I've addressed for pages and pages what question I am answering. It's hardly my concern that you have failed to notice.

 

[Ryan2065]

Cite support for your claim that your definition of the Arabic word is correct and that "anyone familiar with te Quran knows this".

I believe you are refering to this...

Anyone who is familar with the Qur'an know if there are any passages that describes what a pagan is?

Apparently you missed the day in english class where they taught you what a question mark is... I am saying it this way because I have already explained this question in my last post...

This is a question asking if there is someone who knows of passages that describe "pagan"

Claim: The Quran has a passage which instructs it's followers to harm/kill nonMuslims (because they are non-muslims).
Support: Sura 9.

Yay, now I can say it... Please prove that the Muslims were instructed by the Quran to kill nonMuslims because they are non-muslims.

If they were only trying to kill them because they were non-muslim, would they not have killed all those that did not convert? =) Also, as far as I can tell... the parts from Sura 9 did not say anything about the reason for attacking, as you have pointed out... So how did you all the sudden get a reason?

 

[JerryL]

Yay, now I can say it... Please prove that the Muslims were instructed by the Quran to kill nonMuslims because they are non-muslims.

Slay idoloters wherever you find them.

What do we know about them? They are idoloters.
What reasons could we have for killing them (this must come from what we know about them)... they are being killed because they are idoloters.

If they were only trying to kill them because they were non-muslim, would they not have killed all those that did not convert? =)

I suspect that they did. Certainly there are a couple facts which can be inferred from Sura 9; most notably: Those who had heard the word and rejected it were not covered under the sanctuary rule.

Also, as far as I can tell... the parts from Sura 9 did not say anything about the reason for attacking, as you have pointed out... So how did you all the sudden get a reason?

The only reason it offers is the trait itself... being idoloters.

 

[Peace]

To Muslims, and they are welcome to refute what I am saying but, there are no fabrications, inaccuracies or contradictions found within the Qu'ran, period.

Absolutely true YmirGF , the Quran have never been distroted and will never be corrupted for eternity, for it is protected by the Almighty One who revealed it down to Prophet Muhammad PBUH as a final message for humanity.

Peace be with you YmirGF,
Peace

 

[Peace]

:biglaugh: LOL!!!! you are real comedian material. HA HA HA! Thanks for giving me a good laugh.

"And the servants of (Allah) Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say, "Peace!" " 025.063