• 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!

Let's see if we can define 'Islamophobia'.

BrightShadow

Active Member
Verse 4:34 does NOT give a step by step process. It says to do all three: "As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them."


Anyone reading verse 4:34 will understand right away that it is a step by step deterrent but not you! Every English translation clearly states that "if they obey then do not seek ways to harm them" - but you disagree that it is a step by step process and say that all three needed to be done simultaneously.
Are you simply uncapable to understand plain text or are you purposely trying to misconstrue simple quotes? Ask any Muslim cleric and stop making up your own interpretations.

I already told you something on my post #53 on page 3 of this thread. I know you only read superficially because you are too eager to make your counter comments but take your time and read again if you really want to learn why you are not understanding the Quran and how you can change that.
Let me paraphrase and repost a part of it. Read it and try to understand.
Before you try to understand college level Calculus - you need a few years of high school level of mathematics (including trigonometry and logarithms) under your belt. That is the minimum prerequisite for learning calculus!

The prerequisite to even attempting to understand the Quran - is the fact that you need to have your heart at the right place! You need to believe in some sort of ONE God ideology! You need to have an idea about other religious dogmas so that you have some idea what to expect from the Quran as you can compare the narratives. Only then things will become clearer to you and you will begin to understand its message. The Quran emphasizes on the "oneness" of God and importance of faith in our everyday life and provides us moral guidance. The concept of monotheism is very important to God and if you don't even believe in any deity then your heart won't be in the right place to believe anything else that you read.
In other words - depending on - where your heart and mind is when you are reading the Quran and depending on what you are expecting to find - your eyes will show you what your heart desires! Your heart, your hearing and your sight could be covered as you could have been classified as a lost cause! [Quran 2:6-7]

Trying to sneak 5:32 past me while pretending 5:33 doesn't finish that command - and in a way much differently than you're trying to imply? Haven't you figured out by now that you can't get away with cheap tricks like that?

Here are verses 5:32 and 5:33 in full: "Therefore We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain, nor for corruption done in the land, shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoso gives life to a soul, shall be as if he has given life to mankind altogether. Our Messengers have already come to them with the clear signs; then many of them thereafter commit excesses in the earth. This is the recompense of those who fight against God and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement."

Now that it has been shown that killing is not prohibited, but in fact encouraged, the next step is to define who qualifies for righteous slaughter. The key is in understanding the meaning of "fasad". In its various forms (verb, noun, and participle) it appears 50 times in the Qur'an, and is variously translated as "corruption", "rottenness", and "mischief". Given that the entire Qur'an is based on delineating the difference between belief (Islam) and disbelief, and given the context in which 'fasad' is used throughout the Qur'an, it is obviously a synonym for disbelief. For example:

- Verses 2:8 through 2:12 speak of "disbelievers" and call them "corrupters".

- Verse 2:26 refers to "those who disbelieve" while 2:27 defines them as those who "cause corruption".

- Verse 8:73 not only ties 'fasad' to disbelief, but makes it synonymous with 'fitnah' (oppression) - all the while driving the wedge between believer and disbeliever ever deeper, "As for the unbelievers, they are friends of one another. Unless you [Muslims] do this [unite in friendship], there will be persecution [fitnah] in the land and great corruption [fasad]".

- Verse 16:88 is another that directly links 'fasad' to disbelief, "Those that disbelieve and bar from the way of God ... they were doing corruption [fasad]".

- Verse 38:28 is a rhetorical question meant to highlight that believers (Muslims) are superior to, and the opposite of, those who commit 'fasad', "Shall We make those who believe and do righteous deeds as [equals to] the workers of corruption [fasad] in the earth?".

You have made it very clear that checking and understanding the context is not your forte. You like to read superficially and understand whatever comes to your biased head. In layman's term - you have a close-fitting eyeglasses with orange lenses on and thus you are seeing everything orange and thinking everything is indeed orange. It is not!

Verse 5:33 comes after verse 5:32. In verse 5:32 the magnitude of "killing a life" or "saving a life" is explained. After that verse 5:33 is mentioned. So, the first thought to a normal human should be - the punishment mentioned in verse 5:33 MUST BE about some serious crime because it just said in 5:32 to not kill anyone and since different kinds of punishment are mentioned in verse 5:33 by using the word "or" between different descriptions - then the crimes indicated in verse 5:33 must be of a wide range of high to low severity.

So, obviously this verse is not simply a blanket statement and it doesn't apply to any single crime that you are suggesting. This is where your mind should tell you to investigate the context further and also seek historical connection to when the verse was revealed and why.
Did you do that? Nope! Instead you are concentrating on the word "fasad". So, if your doctor tells you to take Tylenol (Acetaminophen) for your pain - then would you come home and take 50 pills in one shot? Don't you need to know the dosage? So, why explanation is not needed to find out what kind of "fasad" this verse is all about?

This is where the importance of context becomes obvious because Muhammad's immediate followers knew the context and Muhammad also explained to his followers what kind of deadly crimes this verse is all about and every true Muslim can find the tafsir (explanation or interpretation with proper context) to that. No true Muslims read like you and think that this verse is about killing everyday simple disbelievers like you are suggesting. Your method of understanding seems to me worse than the terrorists because they actually have their reasons to hate a specific group of people who took their land. You don't hear them talking about Japanese nonbelievers... do you?

I know it is pointless to explain to you the context because you will either not read or continue with your own wrong position even after reading because it serves your agenda, I will try it once, just in case you take off your orange glasses! I believe I already explained it to someone else in another thread.

Since verse 5:32 is preceding verse 5:33 - any smart individual should realize that verse 5:33 is about some nasty and deceitful crime and thus an exception is made to punish that unique offender of that serious crime. Remember - you were just told that killing is bad!

But you ignore verse 5:32 and you think verse 5:33 is telling all Muslims to go and kill randomly... Right? You are wrong because countless verse in the Quran teaches otherwise. Even verse #32 teaches otherwise. So, common sense should tell anyone that -this verse (#33) must have a history behind it. It cannot be applied to all disbelievers in an universal form as you are claiming.

Anyhow, a slight check via google should suggest to you that this verse was revealed after some member of Urayna tribe men faked their desire to convert to Islam in order to steal from Muslims who helped them. They came and claimed to be ill from the weather and Muhammad and his men took them in and helped them recover and then after recovering they killed the host (Shepard) and stole all his possessions including Sheep/Camels and ran away. They did the killing and stealing after pretending to be converts and that means - it became a treasonous crime especially after they killed an innocent man who was helping them. What sort of punishment is justifiable in your eyes for someone like that? :shrug: What else were Muhammad men supposed to do? Just catch and release them? Wouldn't they come back and kill and and steal again? But regardless of all that possibility - the verse 5:34 suggest the ones who repent to be forgiven!

Even in the modern days treason can be considered punishable by death in many countries including USA. For capital offenses such as murder, treason, genocide and act of terrorism is open to death penalty. So, why would you have a problem with this verse after understanding the context?
Different kind of punishment is described based on that incident for different kind of severe crime from their high to low severity. For example just for stealing - killing the offender was not prescribed and for lessor crime - banishment could be used.
So, your whole point is moot because you are trying to paint disbelievers as candidates for such severe punishment when simply that is not true! God can and will punish disbelievers Himself verse 5:36 - God did not ask Muslims to kill anyone for disbelieving!

Surely you must know that I can give quotes that are direct commands to kill. Seriously, how can you tell such an easily exposed lie?

You are proven wrong each times!
So, the reality is - 99.9999999999% Muslims are not killing anyone - so according to you only a handful of people (the terrorists) are following the teachings of Islam?
How crazy is that?!?
Are living on earth or are you from another planet?
It is an irony that you are a firm believer of a false and wrong version of Quran but you refuse to acknowledge the correct explanation even when you are shown!
 

BrightShadow

Active Member
Read 9:111 again. Read what I quoted again.

I did not claim it says "killed OR be killed". Your book of peace and tolerance says "kill AND be killed".

I already explained to you the context in my post #84. It is not about randomly "kill AND be killed". I proved your position regarding this verse wrong in my post # 121 because your Asia Bibi was living and working in Pakistan prior to be accused of making derogatory remarks about the prophet. No one killed her. That show how wrong you are about assuming things.

Are you reading anything at all?

Let me repost what I wrote about this verse (9:111) ...

The verse was revealed when Muhammad and his men were facing a significant threat from two combined enemies who had at least a 33 times bigger army (romans empire and Christian governor of Busra). At the face of the threat the believers (Muslims) were having doubts about whether or not they can prevail such an encounter and some were looking for excuses to not participate in the defensive war and they were acting like hypocrites and that was weakening the morale of the remaining army as well and thus as a result "truth" that Muhammad was delivering was in danger from not getting it roots established -so, encouragement, affirmation and warning were needed for the probable deserters among the believers to stay the course and protect the truth from getting lost or overrun! In the end - the show of force of just 30,000 men (in the name of defense was suffice) against a potential army of over at least 200,000. No war was fought in this particular instance! But who knows - history could have been written differently if the war did take place!


In the past - the "truth" was corrupted repeatedly after the departure of other prophets! It was corrupted after Moses left, it was corrupted after Jesus left. It was our last chance. Truth had to prevail among at least some believers so that it could be passed on to the future generations! Quran needed to be compiled. Muhammad had to finish delivering the message.

Now Quran is delivered. Islam is well established. It will prevail whatever is thrown at it. So, no more worries!

Don't you think - you should quit talking about stuff that is already explained to you?


Yet again, you know that's simply not true. Verse 9:29 does exactly that.

You are wrong!
It says fight only those non-Muslims who do not pay jizya (the state tax) and make them pay. It doesn't say anything about killing anyone.
We all know that jizya is applicable only in an Islamic state. If you are not living in an Islamic state - no one can make you pay Jizya (state Tax).
Are you living in an Islamic state and not paying your Taxes but enjoying all the benefits and protections from the Muslims? If not then why are you pointing this verse out and why are you trying to falsely imply that it is about "killing" anyone at all?
No one is using this verse to fight and kill. Only you think that way because you have your glasses with orange lenses on and as a result - you are seeing everything as orange!


You never answered my question ... You keep pointing organizations and countries domestic rulings as pure Islamic teachings but you never answered the following question....

Do you believe people represent Islam or do you believe Quran represents Islam?:shrug:

99.9999999999% Muslims are not killing anyone - so according to you only a handful of people (the terrorists) are following the teachings?
Did I get that right?

Surely you don't really believe that - do you?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
If you want to retreat to the level of navel gazing where it is not more probable that a text is written by a human rather than being the timeless and uncreated word of god, that’s up to you.

Especially one that borrows from earlier literature, confuses a pagan with a pious monotheist, and reads like a text very much of its time and place.

You can’t “prove” that the OP isn’t the uncreated word of a perfect deity. Or the instruction booklet that comes with a pack of painkillers is not. You certainly don’t think that these are divine though.

I consider there to be sufficient evidence that it is reasonable to assume they were written by humans until demonstrated otherwise. That is the most reasonable position to assume based on a wealth of evidence.

I am highly confident that I will be right far more than I am wrong.

But perhaps we are all just brains in vats seeing we can’t prove otherwise and we are all being fooled.
It's again, a burden of proof fallacy you are making. You made a positive claim, so you should provide evidence. Insulting is no proof.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
99.9999999999% Muslims are not killing anyone - so according to you only a handful of people (the terrorists) are following the teachings?
Did I get that right?

Yet I showed that virtually the entire population of Pakistan wanted Asia Bibi to die for doing nothing other than defending her beliefs.

Your propaganda is stale and predictable. Yawn. And probably good bye.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Let's see if we can define 'Islamophobia'.
Islamophobia - "All Muslims are terrorists."
Gita contains far more verses stating that one can go to heaven by killing enemies. Bible obviously contains such.

Islamophobia is defined as prejudice against all people who belong to the religion of Islam and seeking to justify that prejudice by selective and caricatured broad brushing of their religious views and scriptures.
What about Moses, was he a Muslim or a Terrorist and or both, please, right?
What about Ashoka, was he a Muslim or a Terrorist and or both, please, right?
What about Krishna, was he a Muslim or Terrorist and or both, please, right?:

Krishna implores Arjuna to fight with the uncles and kith and kin.
"When the war is declared and the two armies face each other, Arjuna realises that he would have to kill his dear granduncle Bhishma and his respected teacher Drona. Despondent and confused about what is right and what is wrong, Arjuna turns to Krishna for divine advice and teachings. Krishna, who Arjuna chose as his charioteer, advised him of his duty. Krishna instructs Arjuna not to yield to degrading impotence and to fight his kin. He also reminds him that it is a war between righteousness and unrighteousness (dharma and adharma), and it is Arjuna's duty to slay anyone who supported the cause of unrighteousness, or sin. Krishna reveals his divine form and explains that he is born on earth in each eon when evil raises its head.[49]"
" Arjuna kills thousands of soldiers "
Kurukshetra_War

Right?

Regards
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

I'll start.

Islamophobia - "All Muslims are terrorists."

Not Islamophobia - Acknowledging that verse 9:111 tells Muslims to fight, kill, and be killed in exchange for Allah admitting them to heaven.


Any quibbles so far?
In any religion, you have interpretation. With any text, including religious texts, you have interpretation. You cannot use the religious interpretation of one subset to paint everyone in that religion. Nor can you use your own interpretation of a text to decide what someone else believes.

It's seems like your intent here is to use Surah 9:111 to argue that all muslims believe in violent jihad against non-muslims. You can't really do that. You need to ask individual MUSLIMS if they believe in violent jihad against non-muslims. And when you do that, you will find all sorts of Muslims who have no belief of that sort, especially among American Muslims.

Let me give you a non-Islam example of the same sort of approach as yours. The Torah has the following verse:
Exodus 31:14 "You shall keep the Sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among his people." There are probably far more Jews around the world who break the shabbat than keep it. Can you give me even a single example of a Jewish community today that puts sabbath breakers do death? If you tried to use this single verse as some sort of "evidence" that Jews execute sabbath breakers, you would be making a terrible horrible mistake.

Like many people, I have memories of 9-11 forever etched into my memory. One such memory was in the afternoon, when my daughter returned home from junior high. Her best friend at that time was a Muslim girl. She looked me in the eye with just the saddest face and said, "Mom, we were talking about it at recess, and Summer just cried and cried."

Another memory of that day was at an interfaith gathering of Christians, Jews, Muslims and others hosted by the Catholic Diocese. There was a wall where many people had written their thoughts and feelings. One comment said something like, "There are only two religions in this world. The religion of love. And the religion of hate." I watched as two women in hijabs read it, and remarked, "Oh that's so true."

Such people as that do not deserve your contempt, or your fear.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Let's see if we can define 'Islamophobia'.
Islamophobia - "All Muslims are terrorists."
Gita contains far more verses stating that one can go to heaven by killing enemies. Bible obviously contains such.

Islamophobia is defined as prejudice against all people who belong to the religion of Islam and seeking to justify that prejudice by selective and caricatured broad brushing of their religious views and scriptures.
What about Moses?
Moses killed/beheaded 3000 of his own people, please, right?:
"
כו וַיַּעֲמֹד מֹשֶׁה, בְּשַׁעַר הַמַּחֲנֶה, וַיֹּאמֶר, מִי לַיהוָה אֵלָי; וַיֵּאָסְפוּ אֵלָיו, כָּל-בְּנֵי לֵוִי.26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said: 'Whoso is on the LORD'S side, let him come unto me.' And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.
כז וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם, כֹּה-אָמַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, שִׂימוּ אִישׁ-חַרְבּוֹ, עַל-יְרֵכוֹ; עִבְרוּ וָשׁוּבוּ מִשַּׁעַר לָשַׁעַר, בַּמַּחֲנֶה, וְהִרְגוּ אִישׁ-אֶת-אָחִיו וְאִישׁ אֶת-רֵעֵהוּ, וְאִישׁ אֶת-קְרֹבוֹ.27 And he said unto them: 'Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel: Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.'
כח וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי-לֵוִי, כִּדְבַר מֹשֶׁה; וַיִּפֹּל מִן-הָעָם בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, כִּשְׁלֹשֶׁת אַלְפֵי אִישׁ.28 And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses; and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.
כט וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה, מִלְאוּ יֶדְכֶם הַיּוֹם לַיהוָה, כִּי אִישׁ בִּבְנוֹ, וּבְאָחִיו--וְלָתֵת עֲלֵיכֶם הַיּוֹם, בְּרָכָה.29 And Moses said: 'Consecrate yourselves to-day to the LORD, for every man hath been against his son and against his brother; that He may also bestow upon you a blessing this day.' "

Exodus Chapter 32:26-29 32 שְׁמוֹת


Was Moses a Muslim or a Terrorist and or both, please, right?

Regards
 
It's again, a burden of proof fallacy you are making. You made a positive claim, so you should provide evidence.

You don't assume it equally probable that gravity will or will not still function tomorrow until you have objective proof it is still working.

You don't go through life starting with the assumption it is equally probable that the cooking instructions on a box of pasta, or a post on RF are equally likely to be of miraculous, divine origin as they are to be written by humans until you have objective proof otherwise.

By definition, a miraculous origin is the least probable explanation for anything, and we have plenty of evidence of humans writing texts of all kinds.

So unless someone can provide compelling reason why you should assume a text is of miraculous divine origin, you assume it is of human origin. This is what pretty much every human does, and there is no compelling reason I've ever been presented with that the Quran is any more Divine than the Bible, Vedas, Iliad or the works of Shakespeare.

Feel free to make a case if you think there is good evidence for any of the above or any other book, song, post on RF or pasta cooking instructions.
 
No matter how much you Islamopropagandists spin, we keep getting stories like this:


Still unable to make a case that, for any significant period in history, Muslims have been more violent than other major civilisations of that era? Surely that should be easy given your claims about how violent the Quran must make all Muslims. Surely they must have been more violent than the post-Enlightenment West for example?

Your continued dodging of this perfectly simple request is noted. I wonder why it is you are dodging it? Hmmm, I can't possibly guess... ;)
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
You don't assume it equally probable that gravity will or will not still function tomorrow until you have objective proof it is still working.

You don't go through life starting with the assumption it is equally probable that the cooking instructions on a box of pasta, or a post on RF are equally likely to be of miraculous, divine origin as they are to be written by humans until you have objective proof otherwise.

By definition, a miraculous origin is the least probable explanation for anything, and we have plenty of evidence of humans writing texts of all kinds.

So unless someone can provide compelling reason why you should assume a text is of miraculous divine origin, you assume it is of human origin. This is what pretty much every human does, and there is no compelling reason I've ever been presented with that the Quran is any more Divine than the Bible, Vedas, Iliad or the works of Shakespeare.

Feel free to make a case if you think there is good evidence for any of the above or any other book, song, post on RF or pasta cooking instructions.
Well, I never made any claim about the existence of anything divine in this thread.

Burden of proof fallacy mate. Burden of proof fallacy.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
You don't go through life starting with the assumption it is equally probable that the cooking instructions on a box of pasta, or a post on RF are equally likely to be of miraculous, divine origin as they are to be written by humans until you have objective proof otherwise.
True..

By definition, a miraculous origin is the least probable explanation for anything, and we have plenty of evidence of humans writing texts of all kinds.
True..

So unless someone can provide compelling reason why you should assume a text is of miraculous divine origin, you assume it is of human origin..
Agreed.

This is what pretty much every human does, and there is no compelling reason I've ever been presented with that the Quran is any more Divine than the Bible, Vedas, Iliad or the works of Shakespeare.
..so you can't see it.
What book has been deemed of Divine origin, and what does it contain?

The Bible has been claimed to be Divinely inspired .. it's a collection of scrolls written by various authors.
Most Jews believe that the Torah is of Divine origin, given to Moses.
Historically, it is difficult to know whether it is in its original form. That requires more faith, than
a book that has a known single source of more recent origin.

..and of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating .. what does it contain?
Does it contain wisdom? Are its claims rational?

There has always been denial of truth .. which often doesn't suit people of status.
A lot of people rebel against its contents, as the ego claims to know better.
 

stevecanuck

Well-Known Member
Still unable to make a case that, for any significant period in history, Muslims have been more violent than other major civilisations of that era? Surely that should be easy given your claims about how violent the Quran must make all Muslims. Surely they must have been more violent than the post-Enlightenment West for example?

Your continued dodging of this perfectly simple request is noted. I wonder why it is you are dodging it? Hmmm, I can't possibly guess... ;)

LOL!

There's nothing quite as funny/phony as the faux 'gotcha' and the theatrics with which it is delivered.

Yes. Yes, I'm going to continue to ignore your silly attempt at shouting "SQUIRREL".
 
LOL!

There's nothing quite as funny/phony as the faux 'gotcha' and the theatrics with which it is delivered.

Yes. Yes, I'm going to continue to ignore your silly attempt at shouting "SQUIRREL".

Cognitive dissonance is a wonderful thing.

Keep on dancing ;)
 
That requires more faith, than
a book that has a known single source of more recent origin.

That it is “single source ” is debatable.

It might well be, and it likely is mostly from Muhammad, but a bit harder to demonstrate it definitively is with no additions or editing or even incorporation of earlier material.

Have seen lots of arguments on various (and contradictory) positions that sound persuasive, but I’m not really capable of judging between them as they are too technical.
and of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating .. what does it contain?
Does it contain wisdom? Are its claims rational?

My favourite religious text is the Book of Ecclesiastes.

That contains the most wisdom of any I’ve read, and never really seems to fit in with the rest of the Bible imo.

The Quran doesn’t translate very well imo, but sounds quite pretty in Arabic.
 
Well, I never made any claim about the existence of anything divine in this thread.

Then we can agree that is the more rational assumption for any text.

Divine origin would have an incredibly high burden of proof.

If you are aware of any texts that you think meet it then let me know.

If not we are in agreement.
 
Top