• 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!

Hate speech in the Quran and Bible. Should it be tolerated/accepted?

Should we oppose the hate-speech in the Bible and Quran?

  • I lean more towards yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I strongly feel we should

    Votes: 11 68.8%
  • I lean towards "No we should not"

    Votes: 1 6.3%
  • I strongly feel we should not

    Votes: 4 25.0%

  • Total voters
    16

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
KWED. Can you show me the word "non-muslim" in that verse? Lets see if where ever you took this verse from explains anything to you and you have mastered it.

Please go ahead.
The phrase that indicates it is addressing non-Muslims is "until you believe in Allah alone". By definition, anyone who does not believe in Allah alone is a non-Muslim.

Probably worth understanding that you don't always require a specific word to understand what is being referred to.
"Those who reject Islam" does not mention the words "non-Muslim", but it clearly refers to non-Muslims.

Hope this helped.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Can you tell me what these "Allahs words mean"?

Idhrab almaal.

Simple arabic very similar to the verse you are referring to and making claims about "unequivocal words of Allah". TO make such a claim you must be an expert.
Which passage are you referring to? Remember that context is all important.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
If you really want to practice male dominance in a family society, you will invent something on your own or misinterpret something somewhere. Trying to make it that simple is not simple, its too simplistic.
But a Muslim husband does not need to "invent something". Allah has already done that.
Individual Muslims and scholars can attempt to rationalise or mitigate Allah condoning domestic violence, but at the end of the day all their arguments mean nothing next to Allah's final, perfect and immutable message for all humanity. The modernist scholar can point to his 15 page essay and say, "I have explained in here why Allah didn't mean what he said", but the husband can simply point to the Quran and say, "But look, he said it".
I'm sure you can see the problem.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
You are welcome to try to put out God's light with your mouth,
God's light never existed. It has always been people claiming the candle is god's light.

God will only perfect it more though you maybe averse.
How can he do that? The Quran was his final message and Muhammad his final messenger.
And I thought it was already supposed to be "perfect"?
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
If you disobey God and follow arrogance and path of Iblis in rejecting his representatives and means to him - you deserve the best and compassionate being to be cruel to you and put you in hell forever.
Why?
Do you think that political parties should kill people who refuse to vote for them?
And if god really was "compassionate", he wouldn't torture people for the 'crime' of not being convinced by poor arguments and no evidence.

If you couldn't see the paths of God for who they are and falsely thought that it's acceptable to turn away from them and it is not something to take lightly that hell is not incumbent upon these people, you really are not thinking logically out of envy towards God's chosen, same problem Iblis had when he couldn't accept Adam.

This is because his representatives guide to the light and turning away from his doors leads to the darkness and darkness is to be hated and not tolerated. In this world, we do our best, to call people back to God but everyone is responsible for their own soul.

If almost of humanity disbelieves when the final Messenger comes (the Mahdi), then not only will they go to hell, but all their cities will be destroyed, while believers will be saved from them.
With all due respect, this is just standard, spittle-flecked religious dogmatic assertions of supremacism and vengeance. It is far from convincing as a rational argument for why your version of god exists.
Not only that, but it is a good argument for why your god does not deserve respect, even if he did exist!
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
President George W Bush gave a speech after 9/11 back in 2001. If someone 1000 years from now listens to that speech out of context when Bush said "You cannot hide in the caves - we will smoke you out and we will find you and blow you up" - it may seem like he talking talking about going to war with all Muslims.
No it wouldn't, because he specifically referenced "the terrorists responsible for the attacks".


Similarly some verses let's say -tells believers to go and get their revenge and kill those who raped their wives and killed their kids - are meant against a certain group of non-believers who did just that and that verse is not for future Muslims against all future non-believers! It was incident specific for the non-believers who harmed Muslims first!
Two problems with this.
1. There are passages that are general and universal (like 5:32-22)
2. Why would Allah include instructions about a specific historical event in his final, perfect, timeless and universal guide for all humanity - unless it had some relevance to future Muslims?

One who is reading these books in today's world needs to comprehend the setting in which those verses were written. If it is not feasible to understand the settings then why not simply concentrate on the good teachings and just go and help thy neighbor?
Historical and moral relativism doe not work with god's final, unchangeable message for all mankind. If "things were different then" applies to some passages, it must apply to them all.
 

Suave

Simulated character
Read my post #43

Amputations of limbs, crucifixion, pouring boiling water on heads, and burning people for all eternity is pure psychopathic cruelty no matter how you interpret.

Would you mind giving me an interpretation of those verses that is not painting God up to be a cruel, sadistic , hateful bigot?

Revelations have spiritual meanings rather than a literal physical meaning.

Spiritual Meaning of REVELATION 20:10


He is called "the Devil that seduced them," that it might be known that it was the dragon, because he seduced, as appears from (verses 2, 3, 7, 8) of this chapter). By "the lake of fire" into which he was cast, is signified hell, where are the loves of falsities and the lusts of evil (n. 835). By "the beast and the false prophet" are signified they who are in faith alone, both as to life and doctrine, both the unlearned and the learned; by "the beast" the unlearned, and by "the false prophet" the learned (n. 834). By "being tormented day and night" is signified to be interiorly infested continually, and by "for ages and ages" is signified to eternity. And because it is said that "they were cast into the lake of fire and brimstone," by which is signified where the loves of falsity and the lusts of evil are (n. 835), these are what they will be infested by interiorly; for everyone in hell is tormented by his own love and its lusts, for these make the life of everyone there, and it is the life which is tormented; wherefore there are degrees of torment there according to the degrees of the love of evil and thence of falsity.

REVELATION 20:15 This is simply metaphoric symbolism in reference to those who had not lived in accordance with the Lord's commandments in the Word and did not believe in the Lord being condemned by their rejection of our Lord.

Revelation 20:15 (King James Version); Exploring the Meaning of Revelation 20; Revelation 20 (King James Version)

Spiritual Meaning of REVELATION 14:15

AR 6445, 65, 170, 258, 342, 343, 344, 415, 465); here the angelic heaven, because it is said that he went out "from the temple," and by "the temple" is signified heaven as to the church (n. 191, 529, 585); for there is a church in the heavens equally as on earth.

AR 645642); that "to send His sickle and reap" signifies to make an end and execute judgment, see above (n. 642, 643). By "for the hour is come to reap" is signified that it is the end of the church. "For the harvest is dried up" signifies that it is the last state of the church; by "harvest" is signified the state of the church as to the Divine truth; the reason is, because from the harvest grain is procured, from which bread is made, and by "grain" and "bread" is signified the good of the church, this being procured by truths. That this is the signification of this passage, may be seen more clearly from those places in the Word where "harvest," "reaping" and "sickle" are mentioned, as in the following:--

I will sit to judge all the nations; put ye in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe; for their wickedness is great (Joel 3:12, 13).

Cut ye off the sower, and him that taketh the sickle in the time of harvest (Jer. 50:16).

The daughter of Babylon is like a threshing-floor; yet a little while, and the time of harvest will come (Jer. 51:33).

It shall come to pass "hen the standing corn of the harvest is gathered, and his arm reapeth the ears; in the morning thy seed flourisheth, the harvest shall be a heap in the day of possession, and desperate sorrow (Isa. 17:5, 11).

The husbandmen were ashamed, because the harvest of the field perished (Joel 1:11).

Jesus said to the disciples, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest, lift up your eyes, and look on the fields, that they are white already to harvest. I sent you to reap (John 4:35-38).

Jesus said to the disciples, The harvest is plenteous, but the laborers are few; pray ye the Lord of the harvest, that He will send forth laborers into His harvest (Matt. 9:37, 38; Luke 10:2).

In these passages, and also in (Isa. 16:9; Jer. 5:17; 8:20), the church as to the Divine truth is signified by "harvest." But all the things which are contained in these verses in this chapter, and also in the two chapters which follow, were foretold by the Lord in the parable concerning the sower and the gathering of the harvest; which, because it teaches and illustrates what they signify, shall be adduced:--

Jesus said, The kingdom of the heavens is like unto a man that sowed good seed in his field, but an enemy came and sowed tares; when the blade was sprung up, then appeared the tares also. The servants said, Wilt thou that we gather them up? but He said, Nay, lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up the wheat with them; let both grow together until the harvest, and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn; but gather the wheat into My barn. And the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Explain unto us the parable. Jesus said, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man (or the Lord); the field is the world (the church); the seed are the sons of the kingdom (the truths of the church); the tares are the sons of the wicked one (falsities from hell); the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the consummation of the age (the end of the church); the reapers are the angels (the Divine truths): as therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be in the consummation of the age (at the end of the church) (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43).

Spiritual Meaning of REVELATION 14:15
 
Last edited:

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Absolutely. So, now you will acknowledge that abolitionism was a Christian movement then?
No. Neither abolition nor retention were "Christian Movements". They were simply movements. It is wrong to ascribe religious motivation simply because the people involved were nominally followers of a particular religion.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
But a Muslim husband does not need to "invent something". Allah has already done that.

Lol. Since your understanding is so basic, let me try and take you to a different route.

Lets say "Allah has done that" and I give you that for this argument. Where do you get your morals from? Whats your epistemology?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
The phrase that indicates it is addressing non-Muslims is "until you believe in Allah alone". By definition, anyone who does not believe in Allah alone is a non-Muslim.

Yeah. But it doesnt say muslim. And you should know that the Quran also speaks of Christians, Sabians, Jews, and believers, etc as believers in "Allah".

So you are fundamentally wrong. ;) Maybe you should change the website or something.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
If you disobey God and follow arrogance and path of Iblis in rejecting his representatives and means to him - you deserve the best and compassionate being to be cruel to you and put you in hell forever. If you couldn't see the paths of God for who they are and falsely thought that it's acceptable to turn away from them and it is not something to take lightly that hell is not incumbent upon these people, you really are not thinking logically out of envy towards God's chosen, same problem Iblis had when he couldn't accept Adam.

This is because his representatives guide to the light and turning away from his doors leads to the darkness and darkness is to be hated and not tolerated. In this world, we do our best, to call people back to God but everyone is responsible for their own soul.

If almost of humanity disbelieves when the final Messenger comes (the Mahdi), then not only will they go to hell, but all their cities will be destroyed, while believers will be saved from them.
I don't disobey God. God never gave me any instructions.

Lot's of humans pretend to tell me what God's instructions are, but since they can't verify their claims, I see no particular reason to believe them, any more than you would do what I said if I made a similar claim.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Lol. Since your understanding is so basic, let me try and take you to a different route.

Lets say "Allah has done that" and I give you that for this argument. Where do you get your morals from? Whats your epistemology?
So you accept that 4:34 gives Muslim husbands the permission to beat their wives if they fear ill-conduct, under certain conditions.
So is your argument now that because Allah has permitted it, domestic violence must therefore be "morally acceptable"?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
So you accept that 4:34 gives Muslim husbands the permission to beat their wives if they fear ill-conduct, under certain conditions.
So is your argument now that because Allah has permitted it, domestic violence must therefore be "morally acceptable"?

I think you did not understand that sentence. It was a hypothetical posit. If you dont understand the logic behind it please clarify.

Lets say "Allah has done that" and I give you that for this argument. Where do you get your morals from? Whats your epistemology?

So if you try, you are probably capable of answering the question without using a strawman fallacy.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
Yeah. But it doesnt say muslim. And you should know that the Quran also speaks of Christians, Sabians, Jews, and believers, etc as believers in "Allah".

So you are fundamentally wrong. ;) Maybe you should change the website or something.
A pitiful attempt at equivocation.
Muslims sometimes claim Christians and Jews worship Allah. Christians and Jews reject this. And none of them regard Muhammad as god's final prophet. Allah doesn't seem sure about whether they are believers or disbelievers. Depends on which passage you look at.
And remember that Christians believe in the Trinity, which is not "Allah alone".

Also, Ibn Kathir explains that the passage refers to "disbelieving people" and "as long as you remain on your disbelief; we will always disown you and hate you".
"(until you believe in Allah alone,) meaning, `unless, and until, you worship Allah alone without partners and disbelieve in the idols and rivals that you worship besides Him".
So clearly referring to "non-Muslims".

However, if it makes you feel better we can approach the passage as if it is only calling for hatred and enmity against "people who do not believe in Allah as the one and only god".
Happy?
 
Top