Continuing from my previous post an anonymous comment requested (lets just say requested) I explain verse 9:5.
From the video it reads:
Ouch eh? However this is taken way out of context, verse 9:4:
From the video it reads:
"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them"Once again this has been paraphrased the full translation:
"Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed then kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (prayer) and give Zakat (charity) then leave them their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful"Mushrikin are idolaters (pagans, Athiests, etc).
Ouch eh? However this is taken way out of context, verse 9:4:
"Except those of the Mushrikin with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfil their treaty to them for the end of their term. Surely Allah loves Al-Mattaqûn (the pious)"Basically if there is no treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims then Muslims are allowed to go to war with them. Before you jump your horses, there is a treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims, I'm not sure about the US but here in Australia the treaty goes something like this:
- From this time forward, under God,
- I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people,
- whose democratic beliefs I share,
- whose rights and liberties I respect, and
- whose laws I will uphold and obey.
(All new citizens have the choice of making the pledge with or without the words 'under God')
Thats a treaty, I have pledged my loyalty to Australia and its people, who's democratic beliefs I share, who's rights and liberties I respect and who's laws I'll uphold and obey.
If a Muslim breaks with that pledge then they are committing a sin, yes that includes everything from starting a war with non-Muslims to bloody well driving without a license, they are not upholding the laws hence are breaking a treaty they have made with the non-Muslims.
So put simply verse 9:4 isn't god blatantly asking Muslims to kill non-believers every chance possible, it's god giving the go ahead that if there is no treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims then war is an accepted possibility. However even then without a treaty it doesn't make war necessary, like I said, all things in Islam fall under the basic principle that if there is peace then it must not be broken. Hence there is always a treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims (i.e. peace), even if the pledge of allegiance in Australia was taken down Muslims wouldn't have a right to attack non-Muslims lest they want to face Gods punishment.
Of course there are those who support the enemy (i.e. support conservative governments to go to war in Iraq for instance) but that doesn't justify war with non-Muslims. They are not specifically targeting Muslims, they say themselves they are going after terrorists who are a threat to world peace. In large part I support their intent, yes, go for it, make the world peaceful, however I disagree with them on principle that they aren't going about it the right way. So what do I do? I uphold the laws of this country and vote in the elections :-P
So put simply verse 9:4 isn't god blatantly asking Muslims to kill non-believers every chance possible, it's god giving the go ahead that if there is no treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims then war is an accepted possibility. However even then without a treaty it doesn't make war necessary, like I said, all things in Islam fall under the basic principle that if there is peace then it must not be broken. Hence there is always a treaty between Muslims and non-Muslims (i.e. peace), even if the pledge of allegiance in Australia was taken down Muslims wouldn't have a right to attack non-Muslims lest they want to face Gods punishment.
Of course there are those who support the enemy (i.e. support conservative governments to go to war in Iraq for instance) but that doesn't justify war with non-Muslims. They are not specifically targeting Muslims, they say themselves they are going after terrorists who are a threat to world peace. In large part I support their intent, yes, go for it, make the world peaceful, however I disagree with them on principle that they aren't going about it the right way. So what do I do? I uphold the laws of this country and vote in the elections :-P
Posts
8 comments:
Have you read your own article ?
I mean come on. Agreed, you are saying what tolerant people expect you to say, but this is just stupid. You complain about taking out of context and then you go out and drag the constitution of australia with it. Talk about things that have nothing in common.
So you are only forced to slay people you do not have "a treaty with" ? Why I guess you'll have to (Quran 8:12) behead them then :
Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you:
give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers:
smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
I would really, really like it if you were right, but this just isn't realistic. Muslims fight, kill and beat, and that's exactly what the quran asks of them. Unfortunately. Tafseer confirms this, and, much, much worse, the hadith.
Muhammad is proud of being a racist (enslaved blacks) mass-murdering (banu qurayza and others) paedophiliac (fucked aisha at age 9, after having her parents cut off her clit, had aisha's mother drag her off the playground and into his bedroom, and had her mother give her her doll because she was crying) misogynist (like aisha said to him "women are just dogs to you !". He agreed) thief (just read the war chapters of the quran)
tomcpp, if Muslims did what you claim there wouldn't be a planet earth left to walk on, given there are 1.2 billion of them ;-)
Anyway, I'm talking about whats written in the Quran, how can the Australian pledge not be a treaty? I'm sorry if you think otherwise because it is in fact regarded as a treaty.
As for the rest of your points, well I can fairly say most of it is purely inaccurate (the part about Muhammed being racist is laughable at best). Anyway, like I said in my previous post that history has been skewed pretty badly which is why I'm only referring to the Quran, not what people say about Muhammad ;-)
I'm being an idiot here by replying to your crap about Muhammed forcing Aisha to have sex, the Quran specifically states that a woman cannot be forced into marriage against her will and that sex cannot be forced upon her ever.
I'd just like to add (cos I like these pointless debates).
Muhammed was not a rascist, a lot of people of varying colours were enslaved. Also slaves in Islam have quite a few rights, unlike what you might think they cannot be whipped or beaten, they cannot be humiliated or forced to carry out extremely hard labor against their will, there are other rights they have, one of the most ironic is that as the owner of the slave you have to let him/her eat from your own food at your own table.
Also might I remind you Muhammad has said himself that even if an abyssinian slave were made a leader of the Muslims he would have to be respected as a leader of Muslims.
Once again your opions are really warped and skewed, I still don't understand how the pledge of allegance in your mind has nothing to do with a treaty, it damn well better be because my citizenship isn't just a piece of paper you know.
Honestly I should have just stopped reading at the part "Muslims fight, kill and beat" because you obviously went to great lengths to ignore the points of the article and try to make my points as irrelevant as possible (even if in your mind).
Explain your opinions, don't just make empty unjustified claims that you read on the internet.
Ahmed,
I know you've brainwashed yourself into believing the koran. Cool.
Tell me. What about the Bible? Do you believe it to be accurate?
Hi Anonymous
I'd rather look at it in terms of you being brainwashed into thinking the Quran preaches evil, cool?
I guess the fact I'm posting verses within context kind of upsets you, well your problem, not mine. I just find it humorous that when I tell you I'm not violent because of my religion you claim I am wrong and I should be violent because of it. There are a lot of people like you out there with your unjustified and forced hate ;-)
To answer your second question, I believe certain parts of the bible may be true, however it is not in my place to decide which parts are or aren't since it has been re-written and has many different versions.
tomcpp
plz do not disresepect the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), when you don,t know anything about him. look at his life PROPERLY and then decide on you opinions.
plz it wil help u...
@Anonymous
Everyone has a right to their own opinion and their own interpretation of history as well as misunderstandings, deliberate or otherwise, knowledge of it and ignorance thereof.
tomcpp forgets a lot of facts and ignores a lot of points while also reading his history from a very peculiar source (whatever it may be). Whatever the case this post isn't about Muhammed, this post is about the Quran and one of its verses.
TOMCCP U INSULT THE PROPHET(PBUH) AND WILL SUFFER THE FATE OF ALL BUSHS ZIONIST CRUSADERS!!!!! DO NOT THINK THE BLASPHEMY WILL GO UNPUNISHED!!!!! WE WILL NOT TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!! UR TERRORISM IS THE INSULTINGS AGAINST MUHAMMAD (PBUH)THAT U CALL FREE SPEECH AND YOU WILL PAY FOR IT U JEWLOVERS!!!!!!!
Post a Comment