Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

[Mod: Split topic from Politics forum - as a distinct topic]

I asked for one verse, not a whole book!
Can you show me a verse which contradicts "kill nonbelievers"?

Try reading the post Mel - it's shorter than a book and contains all the verses you require, in context. (Note this is the Politics section, not religion)

Edit:

shafique wrote: The religion forum has a number of threads on Islam and terrorism - let me know what confuses you in those threads. This one includes Quranic verses you requested:
philosophy-dubai/islam-and-terrorism-t39719.html#p320538

There is no verse in the Quran that says kill all non-believers, so there is no contradiction on this score. You really should know better!!

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:There is no verse in the Quran that says kill all non-believers, so there is no contradiction on this score. You really should know better!!

2:191

2:190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
002.191 : And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

As I said, no verse of the Quran says kill all non-believers.

'Those who fight you' does not equal 'all non-believers'

You really should know better.

Now... coming back to this thread's topic - the only extremists in this thread who don't condemn all acts of terrorism aren't Muslim. Interesting fact that.

Cheers,
Shafique

Do you know what is considered as fighting against Islam?

Simple answer, practicing other religions!

LOL.

Let me repeat:

'Those who fight you' does not equal 'all non-Muslims'. I cite the example of the Christian Kingdom of Abysinnia which was friendly to the early Muslims.

But, as I said - let's get back to this thread's topics. Weird interpretations of the Quran are best examined in the religion section.

Cheers,
Shafique

yaa let me repeat too:

melika969 wrote:Do you know what is considered as fighting against Islam?

Simple answer, practicing other religions!

Or not practicing Islam!

shafique wrote:'Those who fight you' does not equal 'all non-Muslims'.

It does!

Melika, people who are looking for an excuse to kill those who don't believe in Islam would pick out this passage. But it says "those who fight you" which is not people just going about their business practicing another faith.

kanelli wrote:Melika, people who are looking for an excuse to kill those who don't believe in Islam would pick out this passage. But it says "those who fight you" which is not people just going about their business practicing another faith.

How can you wage ware against allah and a dead man?:

005.033
YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

^Key words are:

Punishment

(for the crime of):
Wage War
Mischief through land (anarchy?)

and
List of punishments ranging from execution, through to exile.

Waging war against Allah and His Messenger - can literally only be fulfilled during the lifetime of the Prophet. Therefore, literally, this 'crime' (and their punishmentS) can't apply to those who wage war after the Prophet's death. Alternatively it can be viewed as the list of punishments of those that wage war and cause mischief in the land, and +also+ oppose 'Allah and His Messenger'. ('Allah and His Messenger' - is usually taken to be synonymous with 'Muslim State' in the commentaries I've read - and that makes sense to me.. but whatever it means, what the 'crime' is unambiguous.)

But how is this verse relevant to the question of whether the Quran says ALL non-Muslims should be killed?



Cheers,
Shafique

Waging war against Allah

Now, does the Koran explain how one wages war against Allah or that this verse has no relevance after prophet Muhammad's death?

How did non-Muslims know if they were waging war against Allah or not? Or was it one of those things where only the prophet had the secret decoder rings that allowed him to know who was waging against Allah and Allah would give him the green light to attack a particular tribe and make off with a number of captives and livestock?

And does the Iranian government know that 'waging war against Allah' is no longer relevant today?

^I've noticed that this a common 'smoke and mirrors' tactic when answers to the original topic can't be found.

I asked what the verse listing punishments for those waging war and creating mischief in the land has to do with the question whether the Quran says ALL non-believers should be killed. I guess it has nothing to with this false notion.

So, what are we left with? Yet another argument proposed by Islamophobes that has no basis in reality - the Quran does not say that all non-believers should be killed. This is only a fabrication by those who have over-active imaginations. If it wasn't, we'd have had the verse(s) quoted by now.

Given that none have been quoted (but we've asked to explain un-related verses about those who wage war etc) - I take it they have admitted defeat when it comes to showing a verse in the Quran which backs up the Islamophobe belief about Islam.

Cheers,
Shafique

Can't that be interpreted as those who are trying to eliminate others belief in Islam and create mischief in Muslim lands to that end, not those who simply practice another religion and leave Muslims to practice theirs..

<I'm so sorry K,my mistake!---Mel>

<Sorry Chocs, I was going to qoute your post, but I edited it by mistake, will try to put it like the original one!--Mel>

Mel, to be honest your attitude in this concerns me.Does the Koran not say for muslims to be tolerant of other religions? Does it not recognise the Christians and Jews and their Holy books? I think you'll find it does. Practicing another religion is not waging war on Islam and Muslims. All religions at their basic root teach exactly the same thing.

It's people who read what they want to into things that are the problem today.

Do some more research about parciting other religions and promoting them in Islamic laws , you can start with prophet's time! the only prophet who used sword to promote his religion!

^I refer you to the Christian kingdom of Abysynnia (again).

But we are straying from the point - the Quran does not have any verse which says that ALL non-Muslims should be killed. I think this central fact is now clear.

Other beliefs/myths about spreading the faith by the sword etc can be dealt with in other threads.

Cheers,
Shafique

Does the Koran not say for muslims to be tolerant of other religions? Does it not recognise the Christians and Jews and their Holy books? I think you'll find it does. Practicing another religion is not waging war on Islam and Muslims. All religions at their basic root teach exactly the same thing.

It's people who read what they want to into things that are the problem today.

Surely it does. But it also says that Islam is the final religion and it is the complete and correct one! If you want to be in God's way you should surrender to new religion.

ps. Quran is full of contradictions Chocs, if you saw one verse don’t rely on it!

shafique wrote:^I refer you to the Christian kingdom of Abysynnia (again).

But we are straying from the point - the Quran does not have any verse which says that ALL non-Muslims should be killed. I think this central fact is now clear.

Other beliefs/myths about spreading the faith by the sword etc can be dealt with in other threads.

Cheers,
Shafique

again! 2:191.

and look up fight in Islamic literature as well.

You said to refer to the treatment of non-Muslims in the time of the Prophet.

I referred you to the Christian Kingdom of Abysinnia. You do realise that the fact they weren't attacked - when states further away were attacked - undermines your whole argument that ALL non-Muslims should be killed (let alone attacked).

It is also funny that you are asking me to do research - when I referred you to a thread on the subject you wanted one Quranic verse! LOL

Anyway 2.191 has already been shown to be about fighting those who wage war - not all non-Muslims.

Cheers,
Shafique

LOL why should I go to Abysinna (which actually I'm not sure what you are talking about as your english spellings is not a very good guide!)

I already have muslims' attack to Iran in my hand!

2:191 is the verse which says kill all nonbelievers, and in the context in Quran they are numerous of punishments considered for nonbelievers, that s enough for me and those who dont support propaganda!

LOL indeed.

Your bluff has been called - you said 'start with the Prophet's time' - if you do so and look to see how the Christian Kingdom of ABYSSINIA (I checked the spelling this time) you'll find that it wasn't attacked because it was a friendly kingdom. (it is not spelled Abysinna as you wrote it )

As for your belief that the Quran says kill ALL non-believers, you haven't been able to provide one verse yet that backs this up (nor even a historical reference).

The question wasn't whether YOU believe Iranians kill all non-Muslims (they don't, obviously) or that Iranians think the Quran has these verses - but rather whether the Quran contains the verses you think exist.

They don't exist.

Cheers,
Shafique

Come on Shaf! in the time of prophet, go for his attack to Jews tribes. very good example indeed!

Sorry for misspelling of "Abysinnia", but if you could tell me the arabic word, then I would't misspell it.

and No in 2:191 its about all non muslims, you related it to 190 to support your arguement, and as I said earlier the meaning of fight is different in Islamic literature!

You see here's my big issue, people put so much 'faith' in the Koran and it's teachings, or in fact all the Holy books, but there is one fatal flaw - they were written by MAN! Which means that it could be real or it could be a load of old cods wollop.

Again, no religion is the best way to go in my book.

Chocs - you and I have different views on the benefits of religion vs no religion - but I agree with you that religion can be misused.

Mel - the Jews that fought the Prophet and broke truces with him and helped the Meccans who were trying to kill the Muslims, were indeed fought against. The Christians of Najran who visited the Prophet in Medina and were allowed to hold their service in his mosque, weren't fighting the Muslims.

The Abyssinian Kingdom gave refuge to Muslims.

All these incidents go to show that the practice of the Prophet, pbuh, was NOT to kill ALL non-Muslims.

But that is by-the-by - this thread is about whether the Quran commands Muslims to kill all non-Muslims or not. Your inability to find a verse that says this answers this question:

No such verse exists.

Cheers,
Shafique

Shaf, I think the basic teachings of all the religions are good, but that can just be put down to basic codes of humanity, morals and the way human beings should act towards one another within society, the religious part of it can be taken and thrown away as far as I'm concerned.

I think we are just looking at the same evidence from just different viewpoints.

I also believe that all religions have the same basic core values that are in total accordance with humanistic views - and are completely logical. I don't make the argument that you need religion to be moral or have views on human rights.

I do make the argument that religion at its core is compatible with human rights, but what distinguishes a religion from just a set of moral values is the spiritual aspect. The religion will present a path for self improvement or how we can improve ourselves spiritually, and this goes hand in hand with how we behave and think towards others and the environment.

Strip away the spiritual aspects of Islam, and the core principles of love, justice, kindness, fairness etc are indeed universal human values. The harm that has been done in the name of religion goes against these values - and therein lies the paradox - but it is a paradox and not a cause and effect.

Look at all the wrongs in the world - if you take away religion, none of these go away. Sectarian violence, intolerance, theft of land, demonization of others - all will still be with us - and we have many examples of these crimes being committed by those who don't use religion as their excuse.

But hey - as I said, I think we're just looking at the same set of data, but from slightly different perspectives.

Cheers,
Shafique

But you don't have to be religious to be a spiritual person, the two can be separated. I don't believe they go hand in hand. As you know I'm probably the least religious person you're likely to come across, yet I have an extremely spritual side.

^Agreed - you don't need to subscribe to a formal set of religious beliefs to be spiritual.

But that is what a religion offers - a set of guidelines to live your life by and improve your spirituality, as well as your day to day moral life.

If you want to be spiritual, you have a choice of what particular 'paths' to take - the various religions offer you alternatives, as well as the 'non-religious' paths to spirituality.

Get beyond the labels and look at what the paths are offering as ultimate destinations (in terms of personal development) and how they say we should get there (meditation/prayer, good works etc) and you'll find that the distinctions become blurred. At least in my experience.

I happen to practice Tai Chi, and in the past have practiced (Ki) Ai Ki Do and also Tae Kwon Do - and Tai Chi is actually meditation in motion, in the form of a slowed down martial art - it has spiritual as well as physical benefits. But the other martial arts also have a spiritual element once you get to the advanced stages.

Seeing the good in others (and other paths) is also a part of true religions, I'd argue.

Cheers,
Shafique

I agree. Which brings it back to people using religion as an excuse to cause harm to others, which I will never get my head around.

I am sure the number of crimes done using no religion as an exuse is far greater than using religion...