THIS IS ANOTHER in our series, Answers to Objections. I've never actually heard anyone say this in a conversation, but I've heard this said in writing many times. The person saying it usually thinks they know a lot about Islam, but they don't, and the objection is a great opportunity to give some really good information about Islam. Here is how I would answer it:
The Quran is considered by Muslims as Islam's most holy book. Sixty-one percent of the Quran is about non-Muslims. Writings about what Muslims should do is religious. Writings about what non-Muslims should do or how Muslims should deal with non-Muslims is political (read more about this distinction). Therefore, based on Islam's most holy book, Islam is more political (61%) than religious (39%).
There are 245 verses in the Quran that could be considered "positive verses" about non-Muslims. Every single one of those verses have been abrogated by later, negative verses about non-Muslims. Not one positive verse about non-Muslims is left.
In contrast, there are 527 verses of intolerance toward non-Muslims, and 109 verses specifically advocating violence towards non-Muslims. Not one of these verses has been abrogated.
Even if you completely ignore the Quran and only look at what Muslims actually do in the Muslim world, the conclusion is the same. Whenever Muslims get a large enough minority to seize the reigns of power and impose their will, they treat non-Muslims horribly, and eventually drive out non-Muslims or subjugate them, or set up conditions that cause non-Muslims to convert to Islam just to relieve the burden of dhimmitude.
The end result is 56 countries in the world that consider themselves Islamic (members of the OIC, the largest voting block in the U.N.) and that have ever-decreasing percentages of non-Muslims in their countries because non-Muslims flee, are killed, or convert to relieve the dhimmi burden.
So if I am "cherry-picking" verses out of the Quran, apparently Muslims around the world today, and Muslims throughout Islamic history, have cherry-picked in exactly the same way.
The fact is, every Muslim is commanded by Allah to follow the example of Mohammad, an example that was written down in great detail. The Hadith is an enormous written record of what Mohammad said and did. There are two versions of the Hadith, which are very similar, that are considered to be the most authentic by Islamic scholars and the Muslim world throughout its history, one by Sahih Bukhari and the other by Sahih Muslim.
If you count up all references to jihad in Bukhari's voluminous record of Mohammad's life, 97 percent of the passages refer to jihad as bloodshed and warfare against non-Muslims. Three percent of the references are about jihad as an inner struggle. So even if Muslims ignore the Quran completely and simply follow Mohammad's example, they would still be violent, aggressive, and intolerant, following the same course as would be described by "cherry-picking verses" out of the Quran.
But if this is all true, why are there millions of Muslims in this country who are not blowing things up? That answer can be found here: Objection Number 14.
Someone just emailed this comment:
ReplyDeleteYou left out the most important fact: The Koran is from Allah's mouth to your ear.
The Koran is the only religious book of a major religion that is the direct, unalterable, unavoidable word of god. You must obey every word, every mandate, or you are an apostate. Moslems are mandated to kill apostates, wherever they find them.
Any other religion allows you leeway, and personal interpretation. The Koran specifically forbids it, again with a gruesome death penalty attached.
Instead of thinking the Koran or Haddith said, think "Allah said". If you read the Koran, Haddith, and Sira as "Allah said", you begin to understand how a faithful Moslem thinks and acts. The terrorists are, for the most part, the only faithful and true Moslems.
PART I
ReplyDeleteCitizen Warrior said...
“Someone just emailed this comment:
You left out the most important fact: The Koran is from Allah's mouth to your ear.
The Koran is the only religious book of a major religion that is the direct, unalterable, unavoidable word of god. You must obey every word, every mandate, or you are an apostate. Moslems are mandated to kill apostates, wherever they find them.
Any other religion allows you leeway, and personal interpretation. The Koran specifically forbids it, again with a gruesome death penalty attached.
Instead of thinking the Koran or Haddith said, think "Allah said". If you read the Koran, Haddith, and Sira as "Allah said", you begin to understand how a faithful Moslem thinks and acts. The terrorists are, for the most part, the only faithful and true Moslems.”
^I have an objection with the above statement. You are indeed correct in saying the Koran is the only religious book-considering all Hadiths and Sunnah as just collections (however, their authority is equal to the Koran)-and you are correct in saying that it is believed, by Muslims, that the Koran to be unalterable and the unavoidable word of god, but more importantly, you are correct in saying that Muslims, as Muslims, are mandated to obey and believe every word and every mandate. But here’s where you go wrong…
You call true Muslims to be people who abide all mandates, but firstly, what makes Muslims that are not terrorists, not true Muslims? According to you(referring to the writer), it is the fact that me, my father, my mother, and people in my community and other communities do not follow all mandates. What mandates are we not abiding to? I can assume that you meant the “mandate” that mandates that Muslims must kill apostates or non-Muslims where ever we find them, my assertion being based upon the quote from your response:
“[Muslims] must obey every word, every mandate, or you are an apostate. Moslems are mandated to kill apostates, wherever they find them.”
However, where in the Koran is the killing of non-believers mandated? Most of you will now refer yourselves to (2:91) in the Koran where it does say in the verse, “And slay them wherever ye find them”, however I will have to reply saying that it has been taken out of context.
(You can take parts of the Bible out of context-google for biblical verses taken out of context-and it makes Christianity look evil. But what do the scholars of Christianity have to say to this? They emphasize that violent biblical verses must be taken in context-what a surprise! For some reason they don’t believe this holds true for the Koran, why? They don’t have a reason, and people who say saying something is out of context is not a strong enough argument against what they say, please supply, why?)
Due to character max I’ll have to split my comment into two.
PART II
ReplyDeleteIN CONTEXT:
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. ((190))
{And slay them wherever ye find them}, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. ((191))
But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. ((192))
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers. ((193))
In context, the meaning of “And slay them wherever ye find them” is now restricted to defensive purposes only, as it makes pretty clear in the words directly following them, and the verses immediately after it and the verse behind it.
My point? You(writer of the article) are cherry picking verses from the Koran, and yes some Muslims, *cough* terrorists, are also cherry picking verses from the Koran, which makes them, not Islam, but a small amount of people who follow it wrong, because they don’t correctly follow in the first place by not following the mandate to follow all mandates in the Koran. Technically, yes, terrorists aren’t violating this defensive mandate, but they are violating these:
“Do not argue with the People of the Book except in the nicest possible manner, except those of them who are oppressive, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is one, and we submit to Him” (Quran 29:46)
“if they lean toward peace, then lean toward peace” (Quran 8:61)
“Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of your religion, and have not driven you out of your homes, that you show them kindness and bring them justice; surely Allah loves the doers of justice” (Quran 60:7)
There are more, but for the sake of keeping this as short as possible. As for other verses taken out of context, put them in context and you’ll find that Islam is not so intolerable of non-Muslims.
So who are the true Muslims?... not so much the terrorists now are they?
Any who regard this as offensive, my apologies, my main goal was to disprove the statement:…
“I've never actually heard anyone say this in a conversation, but I've heard this said in writing many times. The person<-(me) saying it usually thinks they know a lot about Islam<-(I’d like to think I know a lot about the religion I believe in), but they don't, and the objection is a great opportunity to give some really good information about Islam. (info isn’t so “good” once you look at it with an open mind)
…and to remove the effectiveness of the following statement as it can’t be used against Islam as Islam forbids such actions, it is the fault of the people who commit such actions, not the ideology they follow.
“Even if you completely ignore the Quran and only look at what Muslims actually do in the Muslim world, the conclusion is the same. Whenever Muslims get a large enough minority to seize the reigns of power and impose their will, they treat non-Muslims horribly, and eventually drive out non-Muslims or subjugate them, or set up conditions that cause non-Muslims to convert to Islam just to relieve the burden of dhimmitude.”
Excuse me for any grammar or spelling mistakes.
Peace Be Upon You All!
Here is a problem I have. The Koran ( Pickthall translation) is not a difficult read. James Joyce IS difficult to read. The Koran has simple statements. I cannot see that much room for interpreting the meaning in a different way. I can see CW, for example with explicit ideas, culled from the Koranic texts. Simple, unambiguous statements. Which , I am sure was the intention of Mohammed. So that people could easily understand his message.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as someone tries to 'refute' a clear unambiguous statement, they go to great lengths to explain why this is not so, and that it has been interpreted incorrectly, or it is out of context, or you have to read the Arabic.
Mohammed made these texts very clear for a reason.
So the majority of people could understand them, and act upon them.
The quran being a holy book does not negate the fact that there is context.
ReplyDeleteAnd the fact that there is context does not negate the fact that the Koran over all and in particular is an ideology that is dangerous to non-Muslims the world over, and this fact has been demonstrated relentlessly since Islam's inception.
ReplyDelete